In musing upon how much to include in a blog post, I recently read an article from Mantra about what to and what not to include in conversations and on blogs. While most of the advice is helpful, I also remember reading from Dan Cohen’s book, Digital History, about how Public Historians are not into controversies that traditional historians are. I agree fully with Dan Cohen. I like presenting the information, and I’m not normally into making things rock, splash, or otherwise changing things unless they need changing. Half the time, I do not think that it is my call about whether things need changing because I am a student.
I have to admit, though, that whenever I told a professor at the AHA meeting that I was a student, they never treated me badly. Most of them actually wanted my opinions on things until I admitted that I probably knew a lot less about a given subject than they did. There was a particular Chinese historian who was simply fabulous who actually asked me why I had not gone directly into a doctoral program. When I told her my course of career and study, she commended my abilities to see the economy for the way it is and for attempting employ-ability in keeping my options as open as I could. apparently she is a retired teacher, and I would love to talk with her more.
Since starting graduate school, I have never felt so small and simultaneously had people who actually took my opinions seriously before. I am a serious person by nature, but that is due to the opposition that I normally face from literally every side for years. Gives a person strong muscles in the tenacity department. That said, I do not like being a controversial person but it seems the only way for distinction here. That is not a good enough reason for me to become that way. I like the ways of the nostalgia associated with gentility. I do not hurt others, and wish the same in kind. Peace is my goal, but I seek not for riches and honors of men but simply being good with God. Talking about religion openly on a blog seems something that is expressly controversial. Politics? Not so much into it, but I do not want representatives that treat people badly and I am sick with the inter-laced corruption divesting the people of any rights while other groups add to the band wagon. Conspiracy theorists argue such things for years as:
I will not take a stand on either issue here. But I do know I want to learn more, gaining my own opinions on things, and dig down to the truthful heart of a matter. There are biases ranging everywhere driven by frequently septic purposes. I wish to remove the nasty, crude-oil layer of filtration and find out what really is happening. Maybe I am more like traditional historians than I think. That said, I want to facilitate and allow the people to crunch their own numbers and to do their own history. I see history as being an “everyman’s game” and not held by an elite class of people educated for the one purpose of educating more people in their way. I want history to matter to an individual specifically. That is the point of teaching it. Making a difference in someone’s life paradigms is what it is all about. Here’s to controversial soap box posts.
The GenealogyDr–More genealogical posts coming up.