This weeks class could be described as gearing up for the long haul. I feel as if Dr. Sacco could have easily scared several people from completing this honors program. When I decided to enter the history honors program, I was fully aware that it was going to become difficult with time. Honestly, I thought that history 307 was going to be more difficult. All in all, Dr. Sacco was very informative about what we are going to be facing in the next year of our academics. I am fully dedicated to completing this and look forward to the challenge.

I also think Dr. Sacco brought up a good point about my perspective topic. While I am honing in on the 1960s Vietnam War protest in the Knoxville area, it might be worth while to look in to possible race relations at this time as well. For instance, was the historically black Knoxville College more prone to protest than the historically white UTK. I think this is a very worthwhile challenge. Currently, I am hoping I can easily find a professor who thinks these topics are as interesting as I do.

The main problem presented is the finding of sources. Are the Knoxville are archives going to suffice for my information? I would think they probably would. I am also hoping the UTK special collections are going to be of assistance to my topic.

In class we also discussed the importance of backing up our files. The immediately makes me think of the horror stories we read in Historians in Trouble. I think backing up one’s files is merely a task most everyone should do upon completing any assignment of any significance. When it can be as easily done as purchasing and using a flash drive, there is no excuse to not back up your files. The digital pictures that Dr. Black showed were also eye-opening. Utilizing a digital camera in the archives, with no flash, may eventually become a very important tool. 

Of course, his perfection guerrilla warfare came short. This is clearly evident in his failure in Bolivia. Regarding the issue in Bolivia, the picture of Guevara laying down with his captors hovering over him was striking. To me, it reminded me of some-Vietnam era photo.

As far as my topic goes, I feel like this class has helped me trim down my options. While living in Knoxville, it makes great sense to begin researching Vietnam protest in Knoxville. The comment was made that maybe there was no protest in this neck of the woods. While I find that hard to believe, it could definitely be possible. This could possibly deflect my topic in to another direction, the lack of Vietnam protest in the city of Knoxville. But going back to my initial topic, with UTK and Knoxville College both being quite active during this time, I am sure protest took place. If anyone has any suggestions, I am definitely open to all. I am looking forward in to progressing in the History Honors coursework and I am looking forward to hearing Dr. Sacco.

The time line from the George Washington University sight regarding Guevara was very informing. By chronologically setting up Guevara’s journey to Bolivia, it allowed the reader to grasp the situation. Without the firm structure, it would have been easy to get bogged down with dates and countries. I was somewhat disappointed that the time line did not mention any of Guevara’s dealings while in Africa. It seems to me that Guevara’s time in Africa goes somewhat unnoticed. For instance, I never knew Guevara had crossed any river in Africa which boosted his reputation. This could have easily fit in the GWU time line.

Continuing with our discussion on Wednesday, I would like to affirm the point that I would not ride my bike through east St. Louis at any time of day. I understand crime occurs most everywhere, but certain places are more prone to this crime. This is simply my opinion.

I have read several books regarding Guevara and I am fascinated by his life as a whole. While reading, I attempt to read authors with varying opinions of Guevara’s life. Tackling the challenge of Jon Lee Anderson’s biography is a tall task. If anything, Anderson definitely did his homework and wrote a thorough biography of any and most information he could garner regarding Guevara. On the other hand, I read another book by Humberto Fontova. Fontova does not reach nearly the intellectual level of Anderson on any facet of his anti-Che Guevara book. While Anderson’s biography seems much more respectable, Fontova does happen to have been born in Cuba at the time of the Cuban Revolution. To say he is anti Castro and Guevara is a severe understatement. He views Guevara as a murderer and liar. He claims that Guevara never received his Doctoral degree from any institution. While I am no means an expert on the subject, I would say Fontova is overreaching at times. Guevara graduated from the University of Buenos Aires quite a long time ago and I could not be confident that paperwork could be simply lost.

To the testament that Guevara is a murderer, I would have to agree. But agreeing to this fact is such a broad stroke of the brush. Guevara was a “professional revolutionist”. I would not expect him to be a peaceful ambassador to half the world. Much like General Cornwallace or President George Washington, he participated in a revolution to further a cause he felt was just. Though this cause happens to be the much misused term of Communism and/or Socialism, it was what Guevara thought as just. Coming from Guevara’s background, I understand why he would believe in the concepts of Communism and Socialism. The purest form of each would result in a better life for people with childhoods similar to Guevara.

Firstly, in Cha-Jua’s article, she mentions the usage of Infrapolitics. By definition, it is transcripts hidden in the form of songs or folklore. Cha-Jua describes it as a good way to voice one’s resentment and thus, it is a weapon of the weak. While many times we read about this folklore, I never have heard it described as Infrapolitics. In regards to the history of slavery and disenfranchised people, Infrapolitics plays an extremely important role. The African-American community of Macon County, Illinois is a prime example. I infer that when Cha-Jua describes it as a weapon of the weak, she is directly referring to disenfranchised people. In regards to Infrapolitics being a decent source, I am doubtful. I would assume people know that over time, stories change depending on who is narrating. Similar to rumors being spread throughout a community. In essence, I believe Infrapolitics provides an interesting alternative perspective, but I would be skeptical of most any Infrapolitics I would be studying. Moreover concerning Cha-Jua, she also stated a fact that caught me off guard. She noted that lynching was ignored for nearly a century. I really cannot grapple my mind around why such a compelling topic would be avoided for so long. While it is a sensitive area, one would think that people would want to learn more about why people would be compelled to lynch a person. Clearly, racism played a center role. But why lynching? What happened to tar-and-feathering? Yet people felt it unnecessary to dive in this topic for several years.

I picked Histories of the “Local” because I believe local histories are much more compelling than much anything else. Local histories shape communities, people, and environments for long after the initial action has taken place. These histories can be sacred to the specific community. And these reasons are why I am naturally attracted to these  specific local histories.

In the previous post, I am sure we can all sense the passion of the addressed issue. We are all in school and we understand the importance of our schooling. With the budget cuts on the horizon, we are all facing limits regarding the choice of classes and probably much more. So then I present the question of what we, as students, should do. I am by no means an expert on the budget issue. I have seen small scaled protests and signs/chalk all around campus. The fact is, I simply do not have time to protest at this point in my life. Whether this is because I classify myself as a democrat, as implied by the earlier post, I highly doubt. But everyday seems to have a full load of school, study, work, and the small remainder is usually for personal time which has been known to become more study time. I understand money is tight. I had a 1,500$ scholarship disappear when the economy dried up. This was depressing among many other things. If you wish to protest and give “the man” hell, more power to you and I think it is awesome. But if I wish to study or go to work, please don’t criticize my political affiliation or my life.

I believe the most entertaining reading was the Rethinking History by Jenkins. The first couple paragraphs automatically reminded me of the first day of class when we were asked to define History. The discussion between truth and fallacy was also very interesting. It was, without a doubt, mind-blowing to think if there is no truth, then there is no falsehood either. Jenkins also revealed quite a bit when discussing that the past and history were not necessarily stitched together. All of these caused me to think about what I wrote on that first day of class. I would never have thought that history and the past were not stitched together.

All of the categories could possibly be used while analyzing the Seville excerpt. I am also a little concerned involving the synchronic and diachronic classifications. I understand synchronic is a study at one specific time whereas diachronic is across time. I feel as if any study, for example, Reagan’s Abortion book could be classified as both. I would consider the Seville excerpt to be classified as diachronic. The readings over Seville could also be classified as both quantitative and qualitative. Even though I would consider it more so quantitative (the # of orphans, the orphan schools), it also had some “pleasure-reading” aspects to it. Reading the Seville excerpt was not pain-staking awful like many quantitative readings could very easily be. The categories continue with examples such as conflict vs. consensus and ideationalist vs. materialist. I find it difficult to classify the Seville excerpt in to these due to the lack of information on the actual categories.

Gauderman’s work, A Loom of Her Own, covered multiple facets. While it covered specific Latin history, it also covered an important aspect of woman’s history. She did an excellent job examining Quito and, in fact, we had a difficult time noticing any material that could be considered a mistake. The structure of this article was exceptionally good as well. She set up a firm foundation and then brought us into her topic. We knew a little about Quito before she began examining the textile production in Quito. Setting up such a foundation helped us non-educated in this particular field understand the topic much better. Quito was also a magnificent story in the tale of the history of women. I understand there are exceptions, but for the most part, women were culturally restrained during this time period. While women were being made care for the children and not much else, Quito was the setting where women could invest with interest in particular fields of the economy. This is unheard of across much of the world at that time. In a sense, the fact that women were so actively involved in the economy is more than many countries can boast today.

Picking a historical monograph for me was not an easy task. The Craft of Research, though dull at times, shed a light on a possible topic. While the step-by-step directions seem elementary, they aided someone who was completely lost without direction. Narrowing your question down is very important. Equally important is forming critical questions. Both of these facts are extremely critical when writing one’s paper. Often times, when I write a paper I begin to get distracted and I wander. Having a document such as this one minimized in order for reference can keep one focused and keep one from wandering in the middle of the paper. I fully expect to utilize it often times when writing these “big boy” papers.

Reagan’s book was extremely interesting. I have read the book in full and believe it is better when read entirely. Her examination of abortion in Chicago is interesting. If I were told some of here conclusions prior to the book, I could have easily dismissed them as ridiculous. The fact that married women are more likely to seek an abortion is astonishing. After thinking for a minute, it make a lot of sense. The size of an average family in the 19th century is far greater than the average size of today’s family. The massive size of the family was burden that fell directly on the back of the mother/wife. This pressure had to be overwhelming at times. This can easily be one of the multiple reasons 19th century women sought abortions in such quantity. The astonishing facts continue throughout the entire book. As we discovered, the weakness of the book could be the sources of some of these statistics. Most, if not all, of Reagan’s statistics derive from the coroner’s office. Obviously, not many success stories come from the coroner’s office. This definitely has the ability to slope one’s findings.

Frankly, I did not find Rossinow’s work nearly as interesting as Reagan’s book. I did believe the first part of Rossinow’s work was much more entertaining than the second. Rossinow’s findings are just as surprising as Reagan’s. I am taken aback that a lack of sincerity would drive the younger generation to “Christian Existentialism”. I think it’s safe to assume the majority of people believe the governments has severe issues. Yet, I do not sense this same group of people is flocking to a religious sect. I think it kind of sounds cult-ish. If people are currently being drawn to religion, I am missing it. Rossinow did put liberalism in perspective. He stated that liberalism was not a reaction Marxism, but rather it was a reaction to the social stains. This, in my opinion, was the best part of Rossinow’s work.

Both writers were persuasive if nothing else. I was more sold on Reagan’s writing due to her style being more interesting. The coroner’s office being prevalent in her work was a bit disappointing. Yet, I thought it was interesting nonetheless. These works were different in style but both were informative.

Needless to say, there are multiple assaults against the “Statement on Standards of Professional Conduct” shown throughout Wiener’s book. I will begin with the excerpt “They do not fabricate evidence. . .”. This rule is completely ignored in the case of John Lott. Allegedly, Lott never performed surveys for his gun-related topic. This is problematic due to the fact Lott claims to have performed such surveys. If Lott were to be innocent it would be his fault for not keeping records or evidence of the surveys he claimed to have performed. Another rule clearly broken is that of “leaving a clear trail for subsequent historians to follow”. The standard was broken Allen Weinstein. By offering money for exclusive access he violated ethical conduct for a historian. Not only did Weinstein pay for exclusive access, he also demanded the people interviewed give no one else the same access. This in a sense is covering one’s tracks. It is absolutely ridiculous to hide the information which was found. It is vital for the history profession to be able to check and verify work. I believe this is how the profession evolves.

These were two glaring violations of the AHA’s standards. Historians in Trouble offered many more offenses which were equally repulsive. For the sake of repetition, I will limit the examples. I would like to point out that much of what is stated in the AHA’s standards is simply common sense. Any professional, regardless of profession, should realize most of these standards are correlated with having morals. It does not take a professional historian to realize fabricating evidence and discriminatory access is wrong.

It was stated during class that Wiener appeared to come off as biased and partisan. At first glance, this made me think less of his work as a whole. After reading the AHA’s standards, I completely recant any thought I had concerning Wiener being less of a reliable source. The standards clearly state a historian can practice history with integrity and have a specific point of view. This makes the profession much more interesting. Multiple and conflicting perspectives will attract people to the field of history. History being diverse is important for the field to grow.

The impact that the 24 hour media has on our culture cannot be stressed enough. Multiple aspects of our culture have changed and disappeared since this media has surfaced. Does the internet really break down our communities? The answer is in a gray area. There is little “standing by the water cooler”. Many of these conversations now take place on a message board. This is just one aspect that has been altered. Clearly, newspapers have been damaged. 24 hour media is also spawned by the internet in general. It can be argued that the internet has damaged our communities. It has been well-documented that dating has forever changed. Furthermore, people can shop online and then diagnose themselves in a short period of time. All of these, including our 24 hour media circus, are a product of the internet. The internet in turn is a product of Capitalism. And Capitalism and technology go hand in hand. This is not necessarily saying non-Capitalistic states cannot achieve technology. But when money and personal gain are at the end of a goal, the goal is much more easily reached. As discussed in class, money is a driving force in our community.

The internet has clearly changed our society as a whole. Whether for better or worse, it is a world we must deal with. Though our water-cooler discussions might be an outdated form of communication, our society has also benefited from the internet and technology. The archives are much more accessible than ever before. As learned, archives are the most important aspect of a historian’s career. Moving on, we are completely saturated with news. The 24 hour news is always looping on multiple channels and can always be accessed via the internet. Is this too much? I believe it is. But our society thrives with excess everything. If one wanders through their cable plan, they discover they has five religious channels, a golf channel, and a few Spanish channels. These, much alike 24 hour news media, are simply not necessary.