On the book that
redefined an entire profession—and then went even further.
The development
of American historiography is a complex and multi-part story, and would
certainly have to include mid-19th century pioneers such as Francis Parkman, the 1884 founding of the
American Historical Association, and the turn-of-the-century popularization
of scholarly history by figures such as Frederick Jackson
Turner and Charles and
Mary Beard, among many other moments and figures. So it’d be crazy of me to
suggest that one historiographical book stands out as both the single most
significant turning point in the profession and the best reflection upon its
prior inadequacies, right? Well, then you’re going to have to call me crazy,
because I would describe Du Bois’s Black
Reconstruction in America (1935) as both of those things.
Even if we knew
nothing of the half-century of American historical writing that preceded Du
Bois’s book, its strengths and achievements would be clear and impressive. In
an era when extended archival research was almost impossible for most scholars,
especially those not supported by wealthy institutions (which Du Bois had not
been for decades by the time he published Black
Reconstruction, having worked
primarily at Atlanta University), Du
Bois produced a work of history that relied entirely on archival and primary
documents, materials he used to develop original, thorough, and hugely sophisticated
and convincing analyses of Reconstruction’s efforts, effects, successes, and
shortcomings in every relevant state and community. Moreover, since
that prior half-century of historical writing, at least on Reconstruction and
related themes, had been almost entirely driven by established narratives and
myths, Du Bois could not do what virtually every other historian since has
done—build on the work done by his or her peers, add his or her voice to
existing conversations. He had to invent that work and those conversations, and
did so with unequivocal brilliance.
That’d be more
than enough to make Black Reconstruction
a must-read, but in its final
chapter, “The Propaganda of History,” Du Bois added two striking additional
layers to the book. First and foremost, he called out that half-century of
historiographical mythmaking, creating a devastatingly thorough and convincing
critique of the historians and works that had combined to produce such a false
and destructive narrative of Reconstruction (one echoed and extended by pop
cultural works such as Thomas Dixon’s novels,
The Birth
of a Nation, and, a year after Du Bois’s book, Gone
with the Wind). Yet at the same time, decades before Hayden White, Du Bois
uses this particular case to analyze the subjective and political contexts that
inform even the best history writing, recognizing the limitations of the
concept of “scientific” scholarship well before the profession was able or willing
to do so. On every level, a book ahead of its time—and still vital to ours.
Next Du Bois
readings tomorrow,
Ben
PS. What do you
think?
No comments:
Post a Comment