WHO OWNS HISTORY?: RETHINKING THE PAST IN
A CHANGING WORLD
By Eric Foner
The study of history is all about keeping things in perspective. In the
United States, which has a tendency to turn the past into a religion that
includes a founding myth of radical newness, this isn’t always easy. In an age
of sound bites and manufactured dissent it can even approach the ridiculous.
Introducing this collection of essays, Eric Foner tells of how he was approached
by an "eager young reporter" during the history standards debate (a
skirmish in the now institutional "culture wars") to explain when
historians stopped relating facts and started "all this revising of
interpretations of the past."
"Around the time of Thucydides," he replied.
Of course there is nothing about the "new" historicism that is
threatening or, for that matter, even very new. We know that certain things
happened in the past, but what happened isn’t what we mean by history.
"History" is what gets written down, and historians can’t avoid
being subjective about their work. Every culture selects what it thinks is
important to remember about the past, leaving other parts to be forgotten.
Interest groups use history as a tool for propaganda and ideology, while changes
in our understanding of the world - from new facts to new intellectual paradigms
- force us to reinterpret the interpretations of others.
Foner begins by quoting James Baldwin’s remark that history is always
within us, "literally present in all that we do." This is true,
but one thing the "culture wars" brought to our attention is the
corollary. We are unconsciously controlled by history, but we also control it.
We might even be said to "own" it. But who are "we"?
In his first two essays Foner provides a biographical response by looking at
his own career as a historian and that of Richard Hofstadter. In the second
group of essays he looks at how our understanding of history changes in a
changing world. In the best of these - "American Freedom in a Global
Age" - he shows how even the language has shifted under foot. As Lewis
Lapham once observed, if you ask Americans what they mean by "freedom"
today, nine out of ten will say money. The "free market" - an
end-of-history ideology that may have little connection to freedom even in the
economic sphere - dominates the way we think about such concepts. What Martin
Luther King Jr. meant by letting freedom ring would probably now require some
kind of a gloss to be made intelligible to today’s students of history. In the
final section, Foner concludes with a series of essays using the Reconstruction
era (his own area of specialization) as a case study in the way history edits,
reinterprets and sometimes simply neglects the past.
Of the three approaches to history that Nietzsche spoke of, the monumental,
antiquarian and critical, Foner is clearly in the critical camp. Politically on
the left, he is no ideologue. His writing is commendably (remarkably, for an
academic) forthright and lucid, allowing for little of the ambiguity that has
lead to so much mental decay. In Who Owns History? we get to watch a
first-rate mind operating on history, revealing the vital circulation that
exists between past and present.
Notes:
Review first published online June 5, 2002.
BACK