Near the Bookshelf: Ancestors and Relatives

In 2013,  Eviatar Zerubavel's book Ancestors and Relatives: Genealogy, Identity, and Community was released in paperback. This interview is from Rutgers University, where Zerubavel is a professor of sociology. 

I remember the book caused a bit a stir on genealogy lists when it was first published in 2011. I quickly added the book to my "to read" list. I was intrigued by his premise that "[r]ather than simply find out who our ancestors were and identify our relatives, we actually construct the genealogical narratives that make them our ancestors and relatives." As an immigration historian I am all about constructing identity. I was equally fascinated by the complaints that genealogists had about it. One that sticks in my mind was that he hadn't spoken to any actual genealogists. This seemed odd to me because, in my experience, sociologists are all about talking to people. Sociology and history, particularly in migration studies, have many similarities and reach many of the same conclusions with one big exception. Sociologists study the living and historians study the dead.

I still haven't managed to read Ancestors and Relatives, but after reading this interview, it has moved up the list considerably.  

Thoughts on Nicholas Kristof and Professors

@NickKristof

On my long list of life goals is to "bridge the gap between the armchair and academic historians." I haven't pursued this goal as ardently as perhaps I might, but I hope that my two blogs and public speaking engagements go a small way across the bridge. So, it was with great interest that I read Nicholas Kristof's recent op-ed "Professors, We Need You!" published in the New York Times on 15 February 2014.

In this piece, Kristof calls for greater public engagement on the part of academics, particularly those in political science. He decries the lack of activity of academics in social media and laments the "turgid prose" of their journal articles. The reason for this inactivity, he argues, is the publish or perish system. Being popular and understandable is death to promotion.

One of the fields which is an exception, according to Kristof, is history. Since this is my field, I agree. There are excellent writers among the followers of Clio (of course, there are others that just aren't). In my experience, however, those that are most successful address issues that the public is already interested in, namely topics like Civil Rights, Presidents, the American Revolution and World War II. Additionally, their research topics have or lend themselves to a strong narrative say a famous individual or significant battle. Historians that write elegant and engaging accounts of lesser known topics, Tang Dynasty China for example, may find that their books languish on the shelves unread.

Visit Nick Kristoff's Twitter and Facebook pages to find rejoinders, ripostes, and replies to his column. To find historians on Twitter search for #twitterstorians or visit Historians Who Tweet from History News Network or Historians on Twitter from Active History. Also visit the National History Center whose aim is to make history an essential component of public discussions of current events.

In the meantime, remember that "historians are great." Nick Kristof said so and he's a smart man.

Who Do You Think You Are (UK) - Analyzed

Between 2008 and 2010, Anne-Marie Kramer, then at the University of Warwick, was engaged in a research project to investigate the cultural status of genealogy in the United Kingdom. She quickly realized that her project had to take into account the phenomenon that is Who Do You Think You Are? (WDYTYA?). The program, which premiered on the BBC in 2004, has spawned family tree software, a monthly magazine, 'how-to' books, and an annual family history fair. This is in addition to similar programs on other networks and franchised version of WDYTYA? in Australia, Canada, France, Ireland, South Africa and the United States.

Part of her study included a mass observation in which she sent out a questionnaire to 525 volunteer writers on the subject of family history. Of the 224 replies, over half mentioned WDYTYA?.

The responses and Kramer's analysis include the reaction to the use of a "celebrity guide," the affective impact of the show on the participants (e.g. how they had to cope, on camera, with the trauma of their ancestor's lives), the ability of the celebrities to be their authentic self, and the use of a celebrity to tell the stories of everyday people.

Ainsley Harriott's episode illustrates each of these points. (Harriott, a celebrity chef, participated in Season 5. I haven't seen it; Kramer uses it extensively in here article.). As in the US version, Harriott, and the other celebrity guides, are the hook that baits the audience. Very few people would tune in to watch a show about Joe Smith's or Amanda Epperson's ancestors.

Harriott's family history quest took him to Jamaica where he learned that one ancestor was a slave, while another was a slave owner. The affective impact of this was clear to the audience when Harriott visited a church in which there was a memorial to John Davy, who had owned one of Harriott's ancestors.

The range of emotions experienced by Harriott - being his authentic self - is one of the aspects people enjoyed most about the series. Several respondents, however, wondered if these reactions were authentic - they are actors after all.

Finally, while Harriott might be famous, his ancestors were not. Telling the story of his family, enables him and the audience to connect a personal past with the larger historical narrative. Oftentimes, the celebrities' personal past is in conflict with the "official" historical narrative.

One interesting point made by Tristan Hunt (here) is that WDYTYA? is really about "an interest in identity," not about history. He writes, as quoted by Kramer, that people used to study the past to learn from it, but now people turn to history to find out about themselves.

While I agree with Stephen Fry that family history is a great way for people to connect with a larger national or global historical narrative, I find Hunt's point intriguing. What does it say about me and my new interest in my Scandinavian ancestry? What family lines are you actively tracing and which are you ignoring and what might that say about your identity in the present?

*****

Kramer, Anne-Marie. "Mediatizing memory: History, affect and identity in Who Do You think You Are? European Journal of Cultural Studies 14 (August 2011): 428-445.

An abstract is available here. You can access it at this site for $25, but I wouldn't recommend spending that much on the article. It is not yet available to download at the main journal archives (JSTOR or Academic Search), but perhaps a librarian can help you track down a copy of the volume through inter-library loan. It is an interesting article.

FYI: American Historical Association's Annual Conference

At about the same time the "flurry" of activity on the APG list was swirling around cyberspace, thousands of historians were gathering in Chicago for the 126th Annual Conference of the American Historical Association. Why do I mention this? Because one of the topics in several of the APG posts was the AHA itself.

This year's conference was covered by social media in ways it hasn't been before. Then again, perhaps I just didn't notice in previous years. What I can say, is that seeing  Facebook posts and Tweets about the conference made me a wee bit sad I was not able to attend.

The Broadside has an archive of Twitter hashtags of interest to historians here, including #AHA2012. You can either click on the links to see the archive or search the hashtag of your choice on Twitter.

An excellent round-up of blog posts, articles, interviews, and more about/from the conference is here at AHA Today, the blog of the Association. Of particular interest is the interview with Jim Grossman, Executive Director of the AHA with Rick Kogan of WGN radio. Grossman and Kogan touch on many aspects of history, including genealogy and local history, in this 19 minute piece (available here to stream or download in mp3 format).

Happy Reading and Listening!

Definitions of History

It would be impossible to write a definitive definition of history, especially in a blog post. However, I thought it might be useful to share some definitions and thoughts on "what history is" from a variety of sources. The following definitions, quotes and discussions, make clear that history is connected to the past, but also that the concept of history is complicated and the practice of history even more so.

Dictionary definitions of history are here (Merriam-Webster) and here (Dictionary.com). Note that these entries have at least four definitions for the word history. The least I've ever seen is three. The uses of the word run from a tale or story to the academic pursuit of history.

Quotes from the great and the good about history are here and here. I particularly like the ones by Malcolm X, Frederick Jackson Turner, and Cicero.

The Writing Center at UNC Chapel Hill has a good introduction to academic history here. Another good analysis of history is here at the blog Understanding Society. I particularly like the list of types of questions historians ask and their methods for finding answers.

Issues of historical methodology are discussed here, from UMass Amherst. I think this page does a good job of describing history as "science" and history as "propaganda."

My favorite discussion of what history is, is the book The Landscape of History: How Historians Map the Past by John Lewis Gaddis. He argues is that history is like a map. To make a map of Los Angeles exactly like Los Angeles would be crazy. Instead we make maps to represent certain aspects of a city - like hiking trails, public transportation routes, or highways. Historians do the roughly the same thing with the past; they represent certain aspects of it. There is, of course, more to the book than this argument and I recommend it. It's not "academic" in tone and is aimed at the beginner as well as the professional historian.

What Might Happen at the Historian's Family in 2012

It's early January and I, not unlike most people at this time of the year, am full of ideas and ambition about what can be accomplished in the upcoming year. At the top of the list is devoting more attention to The Historian's Family by blogging more about history and my search for ancestors. Of course, the latter is dependent upon my actually doing some research; but, fear not, I have a plan.

History, the academy and genealogy: At the close of 2011 a member of the APG posed a few interesting questions (I must admit I don't even remember what they were) and the responses and ensuing conversation totally exploded - like an algae bloom or supernova - into several different threads and topics. The deluge of messages streaming into my inbox had three major themes: the future of the APG, professional v. amateur, and genealogy's relationship to the academy. While the first two topics were interesting (and I do have some thoughts on the pro v. amateur debate), I was inspired by the genealogy v. academic thread. I was reminded that of the missions of both my blogs: to bridge the gap between professional and armchair historians. To this end, I had even proposed a lecture to NGS entitled "Looking at the Ivory Tower: Understanding and Using Academic History." Like so many lecture proposals, this one too was "rejected, refused, rebuffed, and repudiated" (to quote my favorite line from Gigi). In the midst of the APG debate, it occurred to me that I can blog about this topic here instead. In 2012 look for posts on how academic history "works", how it has changed in the past 50 years, ways in which academics use genealogy, and more.

Swedish Ancestors: For most of my life I have been very uninterested in my Scandinavian ancestors. For better or worse I have been "angry" with all of Scandinavia because my great-grandparents, Carl Nordstrom and Magdalena Larsen, both died when my grandmother was a teenager. Additionally, while my mom was growing up it was the Scottish side of her ancestry that was stressed. This continued during my childhood, with the exception of my grandmother's Norwegian baking (mmmmm... cardamon). For some reason, my attitude over the past year has changed. Perhaps because Troll beads are so trendy, because I've been stalked by Sweden, or maybe because of the blog. To be sure I get something done, I signed up for a three month subscription to ArkivDigital. The clock is ticking ....

52 Weeks of Personal Genealogy & Family History: There were many prompts in this series that I did want to post about. I even have drafts for two of them. But I just never did anything about it. So, maybe I'll do some of them this year.

Birthdays: I also have this idea about posting biographies/snippets about ancestors on their birthdays. On the other hand, reading about other people's ancestor's can (but not necessarily) be quite boring. Then again, I have pictures of many of them, so it could be quite neat. Realistically, however, this might just be too much and send me over the edge of the blogosphere.

Who knows what else will turn up in the ensuing year? Who knows, if I'll even accomplish what I've set out here? Stay tuned for further developments...

An Immigrant's Tale from Patheos

Little Italy, Manhattan. 2006.

I occasionally read the Historical Society, a blog "devoted to history for the academy and beyond."  A few days ago it led me to the blog of Professor John Fea, The Way of Improvement Leads Home, which then led me to post Fea had written for Patheos. In An Immigrant's Tale, Fea, who teaches a course called "Immigrant America", relates his experiences conducting an oral history interview with his 100-year-old grandfather, who came to America from Italy in 1913.

I don't know if Professor Fea would admit to being interested in "genealogy," but that is essentially what he did when he interviewed his grandfather. It's nice to know I'm not the only historian who has a foot in both camps. 


image credit: Alextrevelian 006