The Forgotten Dreams of History-from-Below

IF 0.6 2区 历史学 Q1 HISTORY
P. Satia
{"title":"The Forgotten Dreams of History-from-Below","authors":"P. Satia","doi":"10.1093/jsh/shad056","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n In his 2003 essay, “On Agency,” Walter Johnson faulted the way scholars’ focus on agency presumed a “unidirectional trade between past and present,” treating “history writing as a mode of redress.” It marginalized “human-ness lived outside the conventions” of a “liberal notion of selfhood.” Restoring agency to the enslaved made the scholar feel better about themselves without making the world any better: “therapy rather than politics.” Looking back on this pivotal assessment of social history from the vantage of twenty years, its criticisms seem relevant to the use of agency in its time (and ours) more than to the concept’s original invention in the era of decolonization after World War II. In that time, drawing on anticolonial thought, history-from-below emerged precisely to contest liberal notions of selfhood and reform the existing, whiggish two-way trade between past and present. Revisiting that turn reminds us that questions raised by the category of “agency” were present at its making and that it is unlikely that academic scholarship can fulfill more than a therapeutic function without affiliated struggles to remake the academy and popular politics. Reminding us of history-from-below's foundational commitment to building up “the present-life of the past” and challenging the individuated ideal of selfhood, this essay notes the continued urgency of recovering alternative subjectivities as we face the planetary crisis created by dominance of Enlightenment notions of history and selfhood. Though scholarship in the academy may not be capable of the political impact Johnson imagined, it nevertheless furthers history’s actual end of internal transformation.","PeriodicalId":47169,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Social History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Social History","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jsh/shad056","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In his 2003 essay, “On Agency,” Walter Johnson faulted the way scholars’ focus on agency presumed a “unidirectional trade between past and present,” treating “history writing as a mode of redress.” It marginalized “human-ness lived outside the conventions” of a “liberal notion of selfhood.” Restoring agency to the enslaved made the scholar feel better about themselves without making the world any better: “therapy rather than politics.” Looking back on this pivotal assessment of social history from the vantage of twenty years, its criticisms seem relevant to the use of agency in its time (and ours) more than to the concept’s original invention in the era of decolonization after World War II. In that time, drawing on anticolonial thought, history-from-below emerged precisely to contest liberal notions of selfhood and reform the existing, whiggish two-way trade between past and present. Revisiting that turn reminds us that questions raised by the category of “agency” were present at its making and that it is unlikely that academic scholarship can fulfill more than a therapeutic function without affiliated struggles to remake the academy and popular politics. Reminding us of history-from-below's foundational commitment to building up “the present-life of the past” and challenging the individuated ideal of selfhood, this essay notes the continued urgency of recovering alternative subjectivities as we face the planetary crisis created by dominance of Enlightenment notions of history and selfhood. Though scholarship in the academy may not be capable of the political impact Johnson imagined, it nevertheless furthers history’s actual end of internal transformation.
被历史遗忘的梦想
沃尔特-约翰逊(Walter Johnson)在其 2003 年的文章《论机构》中指责学者们对机构的关注假定了 "过去与现在之间的单向交易",将 "历史写作视为一种补救模式"。它将 "生活在常规之外 "的 "自由自我概念 "中的 "人性 "边缘化了。恢复被奴役者的权力让学者自我感觉良好,却不会让世界变得更好:这就是 "治疗而非政治"。站在二十年后的视角回望这篇对社会史的关键性评价,它的批评似乎与其说与二战后非殖民化时代最初发明的 "代理 "概念有关,不如说与那个时代(以及我们这个时代)对 "代理 "的使用有关。在那个时代,借鉴反殖民主义思想,"自下而上的历史 "的出现正是为了质疑自由主义的自我概念,改革现有的、辉格主义的过去与现在之间的双向交易。重温这一转折提醒我们,"机构 "这一范畴所提出的问题在其形成过程中就已存在,如果没有重塑学院和大众政治的附属斗争,学术研究就不可能发挥更多的治疗功能。这篇文章提醒我们,"自下而上的历史 "的基本承诺是建立 "过去的现在-生活 "并挑战自我身份的个体化理想,当我们面对启蒙运动的历史和自我身份观念所造成的地球危机时,恢复替代性主体性的紧迫性依然存在。尽管学术界的学术研究可能无法产生约翰逊所想象的政治影响,但它仍然推动了历史内部变革的实际目的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
57
期刊介绍: The Journal of Social History was founded over 30 years ago, and has served as one of the leading outlets for work in this growing research field since its inception. The Journal publishes articles in social history from all areas and periods, and has played an important role in integrating work in Latin American, African, Asian and Russian history with sociohistorical analysis in Western Europe and the United States.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信