The View From Here: Lisa Jardine
Sure enough, writing in The Times this week, Jonathan Clark berates popular historians for the "bland agreeableness" of the messages they are currently disseminating to general readers. The trend in mass-marketed history books is, he tells us, "the historical equivalent of Hello! magazine". These are feel-good-about-ourselves books, books that endorse our contemporary preoccupation with money-making and consumerism. They are so much pap, today's opium for the masses. Real historians, meanwhile, according to Clark "think of the past as a body of evidence of which they ask hard questions and demand important answers".
It would be easy to suggest that there was an element of sour grapes about this kind of pronouncement. When his best-selling Citizens: A Chronicle of the French Revolution was savagely attacked by historians within academic journals, Simon Schama demanded to know why the disparaging remarks made by professors should carry more weight than the enthusiastic response of well-informed general readers. Norman Davies might ask the same question following an extremely ungenerous review by Theodore Raab of Europe: A History in the New York Times Book Review, which had absolutely no effect on sales (still booming) - particularly in view of the fact that the editors of the New York Times Book Review themselves subsequently selected Europe: A History as one of their "books of the year".
What we seem to be seeing is growing numbers of readers making their own attempts, by assembling a diverse body of imaginatively presented historical work, to make sense of a past that is being reshaped at an alarming rate. If you stand in a quality bookshop you'll see history readers selecting their new purchases three or four at a time. I don't believe for one moment that those who are prepared to buy books with 500 to 1,000 pages imagine that they are going to get cut-and-dried answers to resolve all current uncertainties. I do think that thoughtful members of the general public know that the history they were taught - and history is generally rather well taught at school - no longer encompasses or can account for the world they inhabit. We are unsettled, unsure of ourselves; we turn to history for understanding and reassurance.
Which means that the knee-jerk hostility to "popularising" that we get from the likes of Clark and Raab is fundamentally retrograde in its comfortable conviction that only traditional academic historians can set the agenda of "hard questions" that need answering. They have failed to consider that those hard questions may also be the wrong questions, irrelevant to our current predicament. They have not noticed that answers that seemed important 10 years ago now seem partial and imprecise.
Instead of castigating authors such as John Brewer (whose information- packed new book The Pleasures of the Imagination: English Culture in the 18th Century was the subject of Clark's outburst), academic historians should look around them, and then take another look at their own "recondite research". Perhaps that, too, is worth writing up in a form in which non- initiates may be tempted to try reading it. Only a couple of years ago, the same doom-mongers were telling us that the book itself was dead, that reading was a thing of the past. Instead we find that, almost talismanically, the written word seems to offer more in the way of solace than the TV or computer screen. In my experience general readers are prepared to have a go at understanding almost anything - as long as they are not told patronisingly, in advance, that it's too hard for them.
The current mood is for diversity, for histories and world views that embrace the widest possible range of contexts and types of experience. If 2 May 1997 was the beginning of a new era for Britain, let's give those fortunate enough to be in pursuit of enlightenment about our past, in this country, at the end of the 20th century, a ranging book-learning worthy of those newly enlarged horizons and ambitions.
New Labour, New History
The writer is professor of English at Queen Mary and Westfield College, University of London.
Martha Stewart accuses Snoop Dogg of 'smoking for four hours' during Justin Bieber Roast
April Fools' Day 2015: The best hoax news stories from around the internet
April Fools' Day 2015 live: The best pranks and fake stories from around the world
University of Cambridge: Remains of 1,300 scholars are found under building
Turkey power cut: Prime Minister says nationwide blackout could be caused by terrorists
Ukip supporters are 55 or older, white and socially conservative, finds British Social Attitudes Report
Street preacher quoting from the Bible fined for calling homosexuality an 'abomination'
Woman filmed launching racist tirade against men on the Tube for speaking in 'own lingo'
Katie Hopkins attacked me on Twitter — so I reported her to the police for inciting racial hatred
The West has it totally wrong on Lee Kuan Yew
David Cameron calls Labour 'hopeless, sneering socialists' while announcing 7-day NHS plans
- 1 Katie Hopkins attacked me on Twitter — so I reported her to the police for inciting racial hatred
- 2 I might be an MP, but that doesn't stop me fighting sexism with my breasts
- 3 Martha Stewart accuses Snoop Dogg of 'smoking for four hours' during Justin Bieber Roast
- 4 Google April Fools': company unveils backwards search engine and huggable digital assistant
- 5 April Fools' Day 2015: The best hoax news stories from around the internet
£25,880 – £28,610 per annum: Imperial College London: Imperial College London ...
£26,976 - £31,614 per annum: University College London: UCL Information Servic...
£30 - 32k (DOE): Guru Careers: We are seeking an Instructional / e-Learning De...
£30500 per annum: Recruitment Genius: A Schools Education & Careers Executive ...