The major assignment for this course is an historiographical project. This will be different from your typical term paper in that you will not examine what actually happened. Instead, you will examine how historians have interpreted what happened.The project will consist of several components:
A) First, identify a significant question that has been debated by historians of modern America (American history since the Civil War).The first part may prove to be more difficult than it seems. You need to pick a question that is broad enough that it is considered in detail in several different works, and on which historians have disagreed to at least some extent with each other. You will have a lot of difficulties if your topic is too narrow, or if the question is a purely factual one on which nobody disagrees ("when was John Kennedy shot?"). On the other hand, you don't want to pick a question that is too broad (such as "how did American politics change in the 1960s?") or one that has been argued about by vast numbers of people (such as "was John Kennedy's assassination the result of a conspiracy?"); if you do, you will never be able to master the literature in the time available.
Some possibilities may be suggested to you by the issues posed in your textbook or other books that you have read. You may find it helpful to come see me in my office to discuss ideas.
Then, locate some scholarly works that engage this question. You may find it easiest to locate the most recent scholarly work on this question and then to work backward from there (what other works does this historian discuss?) A particularly valuable search method is to use the "America: History and Life" database, which is available through the library's website. This database lists virtually all the history articles published in significant scholarly journals; it also lists book reviews, and thus will direct you to relevant books.
Click here: http://norman.lib.uconn.edu/NewSpirit/Databases/DatabaseInfo.cfm?ID=506
On Thursday, Feb. 13, submit a brief description of the question under consideration, along with a list of at least four scholarly articles or books that examine this question. If you can't frame your topic in the form of a question, you need another topic.
B) On Thursday, Feb. 27, submit two scholarly essays (or two excerpts from books -- such as a chapter or an introduction from each) that are significant in this historiography, along with a two or three page paper in which you explain the thesis of each of these two scholarly essays and compare the way in which the authors supported their arguments.
C) Optional. Deliver a class presentation in which you describe the debate, with reference to specific works -- three to five articles or books. Aim for your presentation to last 10 minutes, 15 at most. (Practice your talk in advance to get a sense of how long it will take). In your presentation, please follow this format:1) Clearly state your specific subject of inquiry. What question are you exploring?
2) Tell us what articles and books you will be discussing.
3) Briefly identify the most important differences among them.
4) Then, and only then, go into a more detailed discussion. It's up to you to decide how best to structure this last part of your discussion.
5) Be ready to answer questions.
Here's the schedule:
April 17: Faith, Vicky, Luke(?)
April 24: Jack, Joe, Bryan, Emilie, Laurie, Dave
May 1: Claire, Laura, Ryan, Rob, Chris, Taghira
D) Write an essay of about 7 or 8 pages in which you discuss historians' debate on this topic, and explain why the works that you have chosen are the most important. Focus on three to five articles or books. Remember: your focus is on the debate, not on the historical reality.Try to follow this format:
1) In your introduction, clearly state your specific subject of inquiry. What question are you exploring?
2) Also in your introduction, give some initial indication of the works that you will be examining. You don't have to give the full information about each work right away. You can just say something like this:
"These questions about the origin of disco are explored in three scholarly works, by the eminent historians Barry Gibb, Donna Summer and John Travolta." (Then wait until the appropriate place later in the essay to give the title of each work).Or your introduction could provide the brief titles, without the subtitles. For instance:
"This issue of presidential obesity is the subject of four recent histories: Chet Arthur's Presidential Potbellies, William Taft's `The Search for a Larger Bathtub,' Ike Eisenhower's White House Heart Attack, and W. J. Clinton's `Fast Food Washington'." (By the way, remember to put book titles in italics and article titles in quotations).
3) Also in your introduction -- if you can do it quickly -- indicate the main differences or distinguishing features of the works that you will be discussing.
"Arthur's study provides a detailed but somewhat tedious overview of presidents' struggles with obesity. The monographs by Taft and Eisenhower are narrowly focused polemics that seem to exaggerate the extent to which weight issues affected certain administrations. Clinton, a revisionist, argues that a full figure has historically benefitted the commander in chief ; he closes with an impassioned demand for a Krispy Kreme on Pennysylvania Avenue."
4) It is probably easiest to organize your essay by discussing first one book and then another. However, this is not required; if you want, you may organize your essay topically instead.5) Pay attention to when your chosen texts were published. In many cases, it will make the most sense to discuss the older works before you discuss works published later. This is particularly true if the later works directly respond to what is said in the earlier works.
6) Sometimes one or two works are much more important than the others; it's OK to devote a little more space to examining them than to examining the lesser works. (For instance, if everyone seems to be responding to something asserted by Chet Arthur, you should give a full description of what Arthur writes).
7) In the body of your paper, provide the following information about each work as you begin discussing it: author's name, full title of the book or article, date of publication. For example, you could write this:
"The dominant work in the field is clearly Chet Arthur's 1983 tome, Presidential Potbellies: Power and Physicality in the Executive Branch."
Or, you could write this:"In contrast to Arthur's balanced consideration of the issues, Taft adopts a much more strident tone in `The Search for a Larger Bathtub: Health and Hygiene since the Fillmore Administration' (1992)."
8) A good historiographical essay goes beyond merely describing the content of each book or article. You may choose to comment on the various works as you would in a book review. For instance, you may want to consider such questions as the following:a) Are there flaws in the author's reasoning?
b) How well does the author address opposing arguments raised by the other authors?
c) Is the book or article adequately supported by its evidence? What is the evidence?
d) How well does the author handle conflicting evidence?
e) In sum, is the book or article persuasive?9) In your conclusion, if not before, you may wish to comment more broadly on the works that you have discussed. Does it seem to you that one author has proven the others wrong? (Why? You should explain carefully). Does it seem to you that the issue is still unresolved? (If so, what kind of further research might be able to settle the question?). Or, does it seem to you that all the writers are missing an important point that would have cast more light on the issue?
10) Provide full footnotes or endnotes. (All quotations must have footnotes or endnotes). Follow this format in your footnotes:
For Books:11) Provide a bibliography. Follow this format in your bibliographic entries:Author, Title (Place of publication: press, date of publication), page number
Chet A. Arthur, Presidential Potbellies: Power and Physicality in the Executive Branch (New York: Customshouse Press, 1983), 73.For Articles:Author, "Title," Name of Journal Volume number (Year of publication): page number.
William H. Taft, "The Search for a Larger Bathtub: Health and Hygiene since the Fillmore Administration," Journal of American History 79 (1992), 997.
For Books:Author's last name, author's first name. Title. Place of publication: press, year of publication
Arthur, Chet A. Presidential Potbellies: Power and Physicality in the Executive Branch. New York: Customshouse Press, 1983.For Articles:Author's last name, author's first name. "Title." Name of Journal Volume number, issue number (date of publication): page numbers.
Taft, William H. "The Search for a Larger Bathtub: Health and Hygiene since the Fillmore Administration." Journal of American History 79, no. 3 (Dec. 1992): 996-1020.