![]() ![]() However, Hayden White is noticeably absent, and there is only a brief mention of Foucault. The title suggests that a heavy dose of Foucault would be contained with the work. It would appear Evans is not a postmodernism expert, but he does possess specific preferences and opinions. Ĭlearly, these alleged disparities are critiqued mercilessly. To this extent, postmodern critique has not only been successful but also liberating. What has happened, undeniably, is that is has lost, or is in the course of abandoning, its universalizing claim to be the key to the whole of historical understanding. Evans writes:ĭespite all the various pronouncements of its demise by postmodernists, social history is not dead. The book suggests there are various versions, if you will, of postmodernism. Evans` In Defense of History intends to protect the mainstream belief of historiography, as historian Lawrence stone proclaims, to call “upon historians to arm themselves to repel the new intellectual barbarians at the disciplinary gates.” Moreover, the focus is upon the Lacanians, semioticians, Foucaudaldians, etc. Evans - In Defense of HistoryĢ0171_HIST_6030_01_1: Graduate Historiography ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |