Treść książki

Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
“[A]singledropofinkforamirror”
33
nomicorsocialstructures;and,finally,thereisthe“historyofevents”
(Clark1990:182).Braudelgivesprioritytostructures,whichbecomea
foundationforanalyzinghistoricalchanges,andcomparesevents“todust
orfoamonthesea”(Hunt1989:3).
Theperiodbetweenthelate1920sandlate1940sisusuallyidentified
asatimeofstruggleagainstthetraditionalhistoryofevents,whereasthe
periodfromthe1950stothe1970sisseenasthetriumphofhistory“àla
Braudel”ormodernisthistory(Wrzosek1994:10).AsHuntindicates,
however,Braudel’sfollowers,orthethirdgenerationofAnnaleshistori-
ans,concentratedmoreoneconomicandsocialhistorythanonthegeo-
graphicaldimensionoflonguedurée,whichbecamemerely“akindof
formulaatthebeginningofeachstudy,not(...)aguidingspirit”(Hunt
1989:3).SocialhistorywaschallengednotonlybyMichelFoucault,but
alsobyfourth-generationAnnalistes,whofollowFoucaultintheirclaims
thattherearenonaturalanduniversalconcepts(likemadness,thestate)
thatcouldprovidefixedandstablefoundationsforthehistorian’swork,
andwhoseesuchconceptsratherasculturalconstructs,theproductsof
discursivepractices(Hunt1989:7).Theyproposedanewhistoryofcul-
ture,which“canneitherbereducedtotheproductofsocialandeconomic
transformationsnorreturntotheworldofideascutfreefromthem.(...)
Socialhistoryhasbroughtustothebrinkofanewhistoryofculture,
wheresocietymaynotbeprimaryafterallandculturemaynotbederiva-
tive”(O’Brien1989:26).Theyturntheirinvestigationtoculture,whichis
notseenasexternaltosocialissuesnorasamereproductofsociety,but
isunderstoodinananthropologicalsenseasreferringtoeverysphereof
man’sactivity,includingeconomicandsocialrelations.
Theshiftfrompoliticalhistorytosocialhistoryandculturalhistory
resultedinaburgeoningofnewmethodsandnewtopicsforhistorical
investigation.Ratherthanbeingtheendofhistory,assomescholars
claimed,thetwentiethcenturysawaproliferationofhistories.Domańska,
forinstance,rejectsFukuyama’sideaoftheendofhistoryasthefulfil-
mentofanevolutionaryscheme(2006:46-47),andproposesinsteadan
understandingoftheendasareachingoftheborderthatmarkstheex-
haustionofagivenvisionofthepast(2006:37).Theendofhistoryis,
thus,merelytheendofaparticularconceptofhistory.Newunconven-
tionalmodesofpracticinghistorydefinethemselvesinoppositiontotra-
ditionalmodels(stillpracticedwithintheacademia),andconstitute“the
other”ofconventionalhistory(cf.Domańska2006:53,66).