ISSUE110 历史学家是讲故事的 求拍，【有拍必回】

爱上千年的猫UID: 2476232

110.
"When we concern ourselves with the study of history, we become storytellers. 因为Because we
can never know the past directly but must construct it by interpreting evidence, 所以exploring
history is more of a creative enterprise than it is an objective pursuit. All historians are
storytellers."

9：43~10：28
reason:can never know the past directly but must construct it by interpreting evidence
result:     a creative enterprise than it is an objective pursuit. All historians are storytellers."
1.main idea: fundamentally agree, however, should be limited in reasonable realm
2. +1): history can not be replayed, there only left evidence, have to piece together evidence to imagine the history: the dinosaur
3. +2): historian do not need to be objective pursuit, they are not archivists. they should provide stories which help people understand
4.-): however, creative should not cross limitation, otherwise, they not novels or fictions
5. summary

I fundamentally agree with the speaker's assertion that history is a creative work rather than an objective pursuit, which are told by historians as story. This is due to the unavailability of human being to replay the history. However, even if creative work plays a significant role in exploring history, it should not cross certain limitation. Otherwise, history loses its fundamentally function and will be mess up in the sea of artworks.

As mentioned above, it is the reality which human beings can not replay history that determines we can only "construct" history by interpreting evidence, rather that know the past directly. For example, we can not directly see what life of dinosaurs was like in the prehistory time. But it does not necessarily mean that historians can do nothing but leave this period of history blank. Instead, they can use evidence left, like fossils of dinosaurs' footprints and skeletons, to "picture" the living condition of that time. The human history can be "constructed" in a similar way. Consider the time of World War II. It is entirely impossible to let the war happen again to understand how generals made certain commands. However, by interpreting the letters and news during the wartime, historians still can piece these evidence together to tell us the stories that result in certain campaigns. In sum, although the past can not be know directly, historians can use evidence left to retell the history like storytellers.

Besides it is impossible to tell history directly, it is also unnecessary for historian to work like archivists. Archivists' fundamental work is to record every history events in their time literally, as an evidence to provide to latter historian for telling a more accurate history story. They have to record the events objectively, without putting in their own emotions and comments. Compared with archivists, historians' function is to inform the latter generation about what happened in the past, why it would happen, and what result certain history event had. The attitudes towards certain history event may differ in various genres of historian, according to their own position and interpretation of evidence. Such difference in attitudes results in different history stories told by these historians. Therefore, it is more likely to treat history as story told by historians, rather than literal record of archivists.

Although we admit that exploring history involves creative activities, it is unfair to generalize the conclusion to a limitless one. Unlike artworks, like novel and fictions which can "create" evidence to make the story more compelling, history has to base on the existing evidence and then make reasonable imagination about the past. Compare the novel Gone with Wind and the history of that time in the U.S. The novel creates a character, Captain Buttler, who trade gunfire during the war. However, in the real war time, such merchants may exist but historians can never tell that a man called Captain Buttler trade gunfire to save the country.  This comparison also reflects that the aims of the two types are quite different. History concerns more about the real circumstances in certain past time, while artworks focus on making people feel the inner emotions of the people in certain past.

In sum, history can not be an objective pursuit of the past and it does not need to be. For one thing, we are not able to replay the history. For another, archivists can serve well in recording past literally.  However, "constructing" history has its own limitation, that is, it should not create evidence to fabricate history in the purpose of entertain history readers.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
已拍以下板油文章，欢迎大家指教：
2-7：issue153 ~求指导~留下链接的一定回拍~
2-7：ISSUE 130 第一次写ISSUE 求拍，有拍就回
2-7：ISSUE 56有拍必回，请留下连接
2-23：argument 53限时失败，求拍
2-23：ISSUE118 BY SadPy 求拍
2-25：ISSUE73 想象力与知识，最后一周求指教 by pluka
2-27：ISSUE171 我的第二
2-28:【big fish】2月27日issue11---by Jenius
3-1:issue208第三 argumen145t第三 马上就考 大家看看