Customer Reviews

What Is History?

5 star:		(8)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(4)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Some of the direct answers Prof. Carr gives to this stimulating question are (1) "to enable [us] to understand the society of the past" and (2) "to increase [our] mastery over the present. Discovering how he arrives at these answers is a reward in itself for anyone who cares in the least bit about the past, the present, or the future. This slim book, burgeoning with exposees and suggestions for thought, is a must-read for anyone who thinks he or she knows what history is, what it means, and what its implications are. The first lecture, "The Historian and His Facts", is a wake-up call for those who define history as a great-big collection of facts, the significance of which resides exclusively in the facts themselves. "Wie es eigentlich gewissen" was, as Prof. Carr explains, an untenable philosopy of history, since so much of what actually happened (and especially what it meant) in the past is dependent upon the biases of those involved in the actions and those involved in attempting to explain them. The five remaining lectures build on each other and make for wonderfully stimulating and interpretive reading. Built of the clarity and intermittent humor of Prof. Carr's prose, the structure of the book is well-conceived and tries to include as many of the central issues as possible, while presenting as fairly as one man can the views of those who do or did cling to conceptions of history which Prof. Carr discredits.

Although this book is difficult to understand in places (purely by virtue of it being an academic text that has obtained deserved popularity) it is a must for anybody interested in history as a discipline. Debates in historiography have moved on a great deal since Carr wrote this text, and the advent of post-modernism has complicated many of the issues that Carr raises. However, before trying to run, one should walk, and Carr provides the basic skills needed to become a good historian. I would recommend Richard Evans 'In Defence of History' for a modern perspective.

Though published more than forty years ago, this book has contemporary relevance. A series of lectures given by the author at Cambridge University, it covers topics such as "The Historian and His Facts" and History as progress." The author rejects the notions of Hegal and Marx that history automatically has transcendent meaning. On the other hand neither it it series of random events. He tells us that all history is rinsed through the background filters of those who write it. Therefore "revisionist history" is not an occasional accident produced by over zealous observers, it is the only kind of history available to us. This a good read, perhaps marred slightly by over generalizations. The group discussion in which I participated was simulating.

Carr explores many crucial questions in the study of history including subjectivity, point of view, and the limitations sources pose in the construction of the past itself. It's clearly written, concise, and plain-spoken, even as those reading it may be preparing to pursue history into the non-concise, un-plainly spoken world of academia. "The serious historian is the one who recognizes the historically conditioned character of all values, not the one who claims for his own values an objectivity beyond history." Highly recommend.

For a book on historiography, it's not gonna get any better. It really makes a big difference on how you see other historical writings and such. I don't know if this will help, but it's part of a report I did on the book:
The study of history offers new interpretations to the historian and the scholar, because it helps the historian understand his job and how to overcome problems, and it teaches the scholar to read history with a greater understanding. Just by reading Edward Carr's book, the student learns that when reading a history book, he shouldn't be concerned with just the facts in the book, but also the author and the time period in which the book was written. To fully grasp the work of the historian, he must first understand the circumstances under which the work was written. It is also beneficial to the historian himself, as Carr says, "the historian who is most conscious of his own situation is also more capable of transcending it, and more capable of appreciating the essential nature of the differences between his own society and outlook and those of other periods and other countries, than the historian who loudly protests that he is an individual and not a social phenomenon."

Carr does not delve into ways to approach history, except for simply and sporadically. He seems to feel that history should always be studied in the same way. The only "new method" he mentioned was time itself, changing peoples perspectives and expectations of history. New historians can base their studies off of the evidence and materials of the old, and in this way, history can progress. Carr says that over time, "Nothing...occurred to alter the inductive view of historical method...first collect your facts, then interpret them."

I was surprised at how much I enjoyed the book. While I wouldn't read it again, I would recommend it to any history student, because it changes the perspective on history. The book started out very strong- everything pointed to the one looming question, what is history?, but as the book progressed, Carr seemed to lose track of the point, and focus more on whether history is a science or not, rather than defining the word. The book was easy to read, and was full of examples- sometimes humorous- that made Carr's ideas understandable. Carr constantly quoted other historians, or used simple sayings, like "which came first, the chicken or the egg?" At first Carr was convincing, but as he lost track, I lost interest, and his later points did not convince me at all. Even so, the book was readable, informative, and recommendable.

I've read a lot of history but this book reminds me that I haven't read enough books ABOUT history. This is a fascinating collection of essays well worth reading. My copy was in the marvelous Penguin classics series in the very cool orange-banded cover design. At AU$10 these little paperbacks are a real gift to the reading public.

Edward Hallet Carr makes a meticulous analysis and untired exploration around the meaning of the historian and his real role as interpreter . He must consider the story as a musician playing the score becoming in a kind of vanished bridge linking the history and the reader . The subjectivity is very hazardous , but the historian can not just be isolated from the emotion . This delicate balance between the reason and the passion is highlighted with interesting points of view of brilliant authors in this theme .
Absorbing and fundamental reading.

Carr's work has endurance. For the more simply oriented historians, who just want to tell their story and are not interested in political agendas, you will come away from this book gratified and inspired. Carr gives meaning to the study of history, and he does it in an entertaining way. There is little leftist trapping -- although I was initally put off by the fact that Karl Marx has more entries in the index than "truth." I gave him a chance, and I was not disappointed.

Perhaps the greatest test is that of the three books I had to buy to study historiography, I kept this one and sold the other two.

Quite provactive, and quite interesting. Allows one to see history in a different light.

The writing in this book is crisp and clear. Carr has clearly spent time thinking about what he wants to say and says it well. This book is made up of six lectures. Lecture I, The historian and his facts: History isn't written by first collecting facts and then interpreting them. There are almost always too many facts to read them all: one needs provisional interpretations to guide what facts one uncovers. Carr says that when he is working he reads a few principal sources to get ideas, and this directs his search for facts, which may then modify his ideas, and so on. "The facts speak only when the historian calls on them: it is he who decides to which facts to give the floor, and in what order or context." (p. 5) Carr then quote's Pirandello's "Six Characters in Search of an Author": "a fact is like a sack- it won't stand up till you've put something in it" (Original: "Ma un fatto è come un sacco: vuoto, non si regge"). An historian must also be critical of their sources, which were all written for reasons. The reason might be a desire to give good information to later generations, but even then the historian should ask what the writer thought was good information.

Lecture II, Society and the individual: It's not possible to write history from an objective point of view, because an historian is part of history and their way of thinking depends on the society in which they live. Also, the people the historian studies should not be viewed as timeless, but as people acting in a context. There are great people who are worth studying, but we must study them as living in their society. What was it about their society that let their particular type of greatness flourish?

Lecture III, History, science and morality: Is history a science, and how important is this question?

Lecture IV, Causation in history: If we don't think of events as having causes then the past is a meaningless jumble of events that don't have a story and thus aren't even interesting, aside from being useful. "The world of the historian, like the world of the scientist, is not a photographic copy of the real world, but rather a working model which enables him more or less effectively to understand it and to master it. The historian distills from the experience of the past, or from so much of the experience of the past as is accessible to him, that part which he recognizes as amenable to rational explanation and interpretation, and from it draws conclusions which may serve as a guide to action." (pp. 97-98) There are significant accidents in history like Lenin's early death, but the historian is only interested in what can deepen their understanding, not cataloguing inexplicable accidents.

Lecture V, History as progress: History is more interesting when it's a trajectory from the past into the future, rather than just stopping in the present.

Lecture VI, The widening horizon: How self-conscious are people of themselves as rational beings who are part of history?