Scroll down to content
Methods - Fall & Spring 2015 - Laura Keith
Exploring the historiography of history...
RSS
Menu
  • Leave A Reply
Scroll down to content
February 6, 2015

Secondary and Primary Sources Reporting Week of 2.2 and 2.9

Laura / Uncategorized Researching Experiences /

Immersed in my research last week, I all but forgot to report on the secondary (and primary) sources I have discovered recently for my research paper. Last week, I unearthed War Dogs: Tales of Canine Heroism, History, and Love by Rebecca Frankel (more details can be found in a previous post). I also discovered Animal Reveille, a book published in 1944 that could arguably be seen as a primary source due to its relative proximity to World War I. This particular book is chock full of animal stories, a few specifically focused on dogs. The story of Stubby, a well-known war dog hero, is also included in this book. It reads as follows:

Then one night Stubby made dog history. It was an unusually quiet night in the trenches. Some of the boys were catching cat naps in muddy dugouts, and Stubby was stretched out beside Conroy. Suddenly his big blunt head snapped up and his ears pricked alert. The movement woke Conroy, who looked at the dog sleepily just in time to see him sniff the air tentatively, utter a low growl, spring to his feet, and go bounding from the dugout, around the corner out of sight. A few seconds later there was a sharp cry of pain and the sound of a great scuffle outside. Conroy grabbed his rifle and went tearing in the direction of the noise. A ludicrous sight met his eyes. Single-pawed, in a vigorous offensive from the rear, Stubby had captured a German spy who’d been prowling through the trenches. The man was whirling desperately in an effort to shake off the snarling bundle of canine tooth and muscle that had attached itself to his differential. But Stubby was there to stay. It took only a moment to capture the Hun and disarm him, but it required considerably more time to convince Stubby that his mission had been successfully carried out and that he should release the beautiful hold he had on that nice, soft German bottom.

Stubby

This week, I came across too many primary source newspaper articles to count. I was shocked to discover that there were so many reports on dogs in American newspapers during World War I, particularly due to our limited involvement. One particular article found in the Chicago Tribune in 1918, states, “Train Dogs for Red Cross” and tells of an effort by the American Red Cross to train homeless dogs to be useful for the war effort:

Train Dogs for Red Cross

 

I also found a United States Red Cross manual that is chock full of stories, first-hand accounts, and tips for training dogs for warfare. Published in 1925, I particularly enjoy the dedication: “May it aid us to learn the proper use of dogs in prepardeness for war, so that they, like the dogs of Attila, the King of Huns, may guard our camps and preserve our liberties and our rights, our lives and our honor.” What a powerful statement concerning dogs! Now, onto more British newspapers and more primary sources for the coming week.

 

Sources:

http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.lib.vt.edu/docview/100137537?pq-origsite=summon

http://www.theatlantic.com/static/infocus/wwi/wwianimals/

http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=nyp.33433067343735;view=1up;seq=9

Dempewolff, Richard F. 1944. Animal reveille. Garden City, New York: Doubleday, Doran & Company, Inc.

February 6, 2015

War Dogs – A Useful Secondary Source

Laura / Uncategorized Researching Experiences /

Frankel, Rebecca. War Dogs: Tales of Canine Heroism, History, and Love. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan Trade, 2014.

war dogs

Rebecca Frankel’s War Dogs: Tales of Canine Heroism, History, and Love is a book dedicated to those dogs serving in the military, both presently and in the past. Frankel intertwines historical accounts of dogs utilized during various American wars (including World War I) with modern day militarized dogs being used in Iraq and Afghanistan. Indeed, through her own experiences speaking with current dog handlers, Frankel explores themes of heroism, love, human war experiences and animal war experiences. Her primary questions include: how have militarized dogs been used in the past? What about the present? What relationships develop between man and dog during wartime? How? What do dogs contribute to man’s wartime experiences? Frankel, herself, has admitted that while she set out to write a book about dogs, what resulted was a book about people and the bonds that develop between handlers and their canines during a manmade experience that has historically not been wholly limited to human beings.

Recently published (in late 2014), I had a difficult time unearthing a good number of reviews of this particular book. Upon searching for book reviews, many times I came across Frankel’s own articles, webinars, or other endeavors involving Frankel promoting her new book. Nevertheless, I did discover a Washington Post review in which the reviewer states that, “It would be nice to think that this fine book will cause the military to keep the MWD program active, if necessarily smaller, and to continue research into the ways in which dogs can help us, but history — the history of the American military especially — leaves little reason to believe that will happen.”  Thus, while this particular reviewer can appreciate what a “fine” book this is, he does not believe that dogs will continue to be used during wartime despite research such as Frankel’s that prove their usefulness for man.

Furthermore, according to Google Scholar, this book has not yet been cited by any other academics. This is most likely due to its very recent publication and not due to its content, presumably.

Ultimately, I was unable to find any negative reactions to Frankel’s work. Interestingly, Frankel is not a historian, however. Rather, she is an editor for Foreign Policy (a self-purported global magazine) and has a weekly article dedicated to war dogs. Indeed, it seems Frankel took her primary interests and expanded her research in order to create a book about the militarized dogs of past and present. Frankel’s own experiences (as mentioned above) with present day handlers add an element of authenticity to her story as she experienced first-hand the intimate relationship between handlers and their dogs.

The intended audience for this book is a bit tricky to pin down. As Frankel is not a historian (as mentioned previously), the book is certainly intended for a more popular audience, perhaps those who are dedicated readers of her weekly article. It reads easily and is highly accessible. This is not to say it will not be useful for historians (including myself), however. Upon searching through the book’s sources, it becomes quite obvious that Frankel did her homework and thoroughly. She includes a variety of primary and secondary sources, many of which are academic. Thus, her work appears to be a mixture of popular reporting and academic researching.

In fact, many of the primary sources Frankel uses will prove useful for me as well. One source, Animal Heroes of the Great War, is a book published in 1925 after the conclusion of the war and is chock full of pertinent information related to my research paper. I surprisingly had not come across this highly useful source until reading War Dogs. Furthermore, Frankel’s discussion of Lieutenant Col. Richardson, one of the pioneers in the British war dog training movement, also is extremely pertinent to my paper. Indeed, Richardson himself wrote a training manual concerning the training of war dogs and I plan to use his book as one of my primary sources as well. Lastly, Frankel also includes some interesting insight into the psychology of dogs with thoughts from Charles Darwin in The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals. I never would have thought of looking more closely into the intricacies of animal psychology (and dogs more specifically) but I am finding Darwin’s thoughts highly interesting and potentially useful.

Ultimately, Rebecca Frankel’s War Dogs has and will continue to be an indispensable resource for me. I am grateful that I did not allow its journalistic slant or popular audience basis deter me from exploring what it has to offer.


Sources

Yardley, Jonathan. “‘War Dogs’ by Rebecca Frankel.” The Washington Post. Last modified October 17, 2014. Accessed February 6, 2015. http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/war-dogs-by-rebecca-frankel/2014/10/17/76594a86-4d54-11e4-8c24-487e92bc997b_story.html.

 

 

 

 

February 5, 2015

Questions of Dogs and Agency

Laura / Uncategorized Researching Experiences /

As I begin crafting the final research paper of my graduate career, I have been grappling with the questions I intend to answer through my research. So far, I have come up with a few possible questions that I will attempt to answer, at least to some extent:

How did militarized dogs contribute to the war effort of the opposing sides involved in World War I? (I may focus on Britain and the United States more readily due to the availability of sources but at this time this is not entirely decided).

How did dogs perform tasks which man proved unable to do as well as or as efficiently during World War I? 

How did relationships develop between man and canine during wartime? What did they mean for human and animal war experiences?

Why is it important to discuss dogs’ agency during this particular time period? 

These questions then lend themselves to the significance of my paper. Who cares about dogs in war? Few animals (if any) are as inextricably linked to human beings like canines. However, their contributions to World War I cannot be overlooked as a mere means to placate man. Rather, dogs chose to cooperate of their own accord and this is precisely where discussions of agency come into play: are dogs agents in a vein similar to humans? This is not an easy question to answer and it is this question that calls for more prodding into the subject of animal agency. Furthermore, a nostalgia for animals in warfare has emerged in the past few years with films such as War Horse and books such as Rebecca Frankel’s War Dogs (see next post). Certainly, the time appears to be ripe for more study into the human-animal war experience. Lastly, animals (including dogs) are proving that war is not simply a human affair. Instead, the historic use of animals during wartime proves that oftentimes, men were unable to battle one another alone.

w_34

Photo Source: http://www.theatlantic.com/static/infocus/wwi/wwianimals/

January 30, 2015

Exploring WorldCat

Laura / Uncategorized Reflections, Researching Experiences /

I decided to peruse WorldCat for my database search this week. I have used WorldCat before in the past but infrequently. Thus, I felt as if I was learning to use it again for the first time. My first search of (world war 1) (dogs) produced paltry results. Indeed, I found myself sifting through young adult or “juvenile” books concerning dogs used in warfare (which to me is somewhat odd, but nevertheless). I then decided to try world war one dogs and produced similar results. My next stab included (dogs) (agency) and here is where my efforts proved most fruitful. Indeed, the first result of this last search was a book entitled, Animals and Agency: An Interdisciplinary Exploration. This book is also fortunately available fully on the web much to my benefit. I am hoping that WorldCat will continue to uncover useful resources for me.

This is not my first researching rodeo. And yet, I am always surprised by what I learn each time I dip into an archive either in person or via the web. It is perhaps too early to tell at this time but so far my research has only reinforced the ideas I have formulated for my project. The research I have undertaken thus far, however, has steered towards one particular individual: Lieutenant Colonel Richardson, the man credited with the effective training of the first British war dogs used in World War I. I aim to make his musings on the subject (he published a manual in 1919) and the work he pursued a part of my final research project.

Researching is not easy. It is complicated, it can be tedious, and it can feel overwhelming. Furthermore, though it may seem that there are a plethora of resources out there just waiting to be mined through, they are not easily found. Indeed, often it is the right keyword combination that will make all the difference in unearthing valuable resources or those utterly irrelevant to your work. I will be the first to admit that I have not mastered the art of careful wording in research (though Presnell was certainly helpful!). I am, however, hopeful that each new search will only teach me more about researching and that I will continue to grow as both a researcher and a historian.

January 29, 2015

Interactive Reading & Note-Taking: A First Attempt

Laura / Uncategorized Reflections, Researching Firsts /

I was pleasantly surprised by Demystifying Dissertation Writing. Prior to reading it and after hearing briefly about interactive reading and note-taking, I was admittedly intimidated. After spending countless years in school including four years of undergrad and almost three post-grad, I was also wary of adopting a new study/homework technique. Nevertheless, I attempted to approach the interactive reading and note-taking method with an open-mind and give it my best shot.

I chose to re-read an article I was introduced to last semester by my advisor and then professor, Dr. Nelson. The article is entitled “Dogs, History, and Agency” and it will ultimately serve as one of the cornerstones of my research paper (presumably). Indeed, I will be taking Chris Pearson’s argument a step further and I hope to expand on the work he has already put forth. Thus, I felt this would be a good starting place for my interactive note taking and citeable notes endeavor.

It is worth mentioning: as I already had an advisor prior to the start of this class, it was not necessary for me to request a faculty member to supervise my research project at this time. I did, however, meet with Dr. Nelson to discuss my progress and the next steps I should take in my research. We met this past Wednesday for the first time in this spring semester. She steered me in a new direction, a bit away from agency. I am interested to see if agency will still be a large part of my research project or if it will only serve as one of its many pieces.

At first, I felt that I was reading an article just as I always do: I underlined various quotes and ideas as I made my way through it. I also jotted in notes in the margins and placed question marks where I had questions or was unsure of what Pearson meant. Ultimately, what struck me as most different from my normal reading was the much more careful attention to detail. After being in school for most of my life, I am used to zooming through nearly all of my readings. Interactive note-taking required me to slow down and fully engage with the reading and attempt to have a conversation with Pearson as if he was sitting right next to me as I read it. Furthermore, I also found it difficult at first to not take notes until the end. I have always been a multi-tasker and one of my favorite things to do while reading is to take notes. With interactive reading and note-taking, you are asked to get a feel for the work as a whole before taking notes. Nevertheless, once I gave the challenge a shot, I found that I learned a great deal more from Pearson’s article than from the first time I encountered it last semester.

A “citeable note” worth mentioning from Pearson’s work:

Pearson (2013): focuses on questions of agency concerning World War I dogs; one of the only works currently published that intersects the study of agency and that of militarized dogs 

As I now go forth with my research (and a lot of research will be had this semester), I feel that interactive note-taking and citeable sources will be two tools that I use to make the most of my time and to make myself a much more productive and efficient researcher.

January 21, 2015

A Unique Experience

Laura / Uncategorized Reflections /

As spring semester begins, it is perhaps appropriate that my first post of the new year include my research interests for the following semester (and my final semester, at that) and also the history department professors that I aim to have as a part of my committee. As part of my final set of studies, I will be working one-on-one in an independent study with Dr. Amy Nelson. As a result, Dr. Nelson has agreed to act as my adviser for my last semester. I will also have Dr. Kathleen Jones and Dr. David Cline as my other two committee members. I was only required to interview Dr. Cline as my other committee members were previously decided. Fortunately, as I have worked with Dr. Cline multiple times in the past three years, our interview was fairly short and to the point (i.e. he quickly agreed to be a part of my committee when asked).

My research interests have been narrowed greatly since the beginning of the fall semester: I am now focusing most readily on the use of dogs during World War I and the debates concerning such animals’ agency. I will be presenting my research at the Living with Animals conference in late March and will be accompanying Dr. Nelson to Kentucky to attend said conference.

How did I become interested in canine war heroes? I stumbled upon this topic quite unexpectedly. Indeed, although I have always been interested in World War I and World War II, I had never really considered the contribution of animals to either war effort. That is until I watched a documentary concerning both wars that explained the use of animals (and a variety of animals, at that). I immediately became fascinated with the idea of war animals and began researching the different types and various uses of animals in both world wars. What resulted was a plethora of information concerning war dogs, in particular, and a niche that appeared to need filling: the intersection of animal agency studies and World War I canine studies. Thus, I uncovered where I best believed I could make a contribution to the field of history.

As I am on a path quite different from my colleagues, I thought I would spend some of this post describing precisely how unique my experience has been. For starters, I will not be writing a thesis but rather a research paper on my chosen topic. I am also preparing for graduation this coming May while my colleagues are just beginning their second semesters at Virginia Tech. Lastly, I am dual enrolled in the history department and the education department. When I graduate in May, I will be graduating with two Master’s degrees and aim to begin a career in education. I have also spent three years at Virginia Tech, a year longer than my colleagues will ultimately spend in Blacksburg. Thus, my experience has been in many ways different from that of my colleagues and will continue to be so for this semester as well.

Lastly, I have been tasked with reviewing a former Virginia Tech history MA student’s thesis. I chose to read Kimberly Staub’s “Recipe for Citizenship: Women, Cookbooks, and Citizenship in the Kitchen, 1941-1945.” From the start of this thesis, it is easy to see why it became an award winner: Ms. Staub does an excellent job catching her readers’ attention from the start of the paper. Indeed, the topic itself is highly interesting and unique and food is a topic that we can all relate to quite effortlessly. The thesis is also well-written and clearly well-researched with a plethora of sources, including some images and advertisements. There are, however, some weaknesses to this thesis as well, a few that Ms. Staub recognizes herself within her work. For starters, I think this thesis could have benefited from a bit more comparison and contrasting between nations (if such sources are available). Also, if it had been possible, insight into the thoughts and feelings of these “kitchen citizens” themselves would have added greatly to Ms. Staub’s research and completed project. Certainly these are nit-picky issues with an overall fantastic piece of historical work. I can only hope that my own research interests will produce a similar product in the next few months.

November 26, 2014

Animals, Agency, and History

Laura / Uncategorized

I was hoping I would have something profound and poignant to say for my last (maybe?) post. However, as I anticipate good old fashioned Turkey Day tomorrow, I am not feeling too profound and my Thanksgiving break mind is feeling utterly not creative and fully on vacation. Nevertheless, I do feel I can still do an adequate job reflecting on our last set of readings, my favorite readings of the semester. These readings resonated with me especially due to my final paper and historiography project. Indeed, a few of this week’s articles make an appearance within my tracing of World War I animal history and agency history. One in particular, Chris Pearson’s “Dogs, History, and Agency” was especially useful as a framework for my own writing and Pearson does an excellent job weaving together both the history of dogs in World War I and the history of animal agency.

Interestingly, it is one of the last articles I read for this week and that I did not plan to include in my paper that most caught my eye. David Gary Shaw’s “The Torturer’s Horse: Agency and Animals in History” did an excellent job of describing what agency is precisely and I appreciated Shaw’s argument that “Ultimately, historical agency is likely always to involve human beings, but there is also space for animals to act with people” (146). I also enjoyed Susan Pearson’s “Speaking Bodies, Speaking Minds: Animals, Language, History.” This article, though not entirely relevant to my final paper, still proved to be highly interesting. I had never really considered the fact that there have been debates concerning animal language in the past and that many animal protectionists have argued that they are speaking for those who cannot speak for themselves. This article contributes to discussions of animal-human relations, a theme I have discovered while researching this past semester: are animals similar to humans? Can they be considered human-like in some aspects? Or are humans and animals distinctly different? Are humans inherently above animals on some sort of energy chain or scale?

This week’s readings also got me thinking about my own thoughts on animal agency for the first time (surprisingly enough). I am honestly not entirely sure how I feel about animal agency, even after all of the reading and researching I have done on the subject. It is incredibly difficult to know what animals are feeling or thinking and what their intentions are. Thus, humans must speculate when it comes to discerning such animal emotions. Nevertheless, I will often look at Robert and think I understand what is going through his little head. And yet, am I simply projecting human-like qualities onto him (anthropomorphism?) Or does he really have agency? Perhaps we will never fully know. Or perhaps historians, working with those outside of their field (including biologists and psychologists, among others) will be able to uncover an adequate answer to the questions surrounding animal agency in the very near future.

 

November 14, 2014

The Existence of Prehistory?

Laura / Uncategorized

I didn’t know quite what to expect when I discovered the focus of this week’s readings: History Meets Natural History/Science. Immediately, I was skeptical. Though we have previously discussed the intermingling of history with other academic fields (like anthropology, for example), never had I really considered the possibility of history working effectively alongside science. After reading Daniel Lord Smail’s On Deep History and the Brain and the articles assigned for this week, I am much more convinced of the possibility.

Indeed, one of the main themes of these readings proved to be the misconception of prehistory. The historians included in the AHR Forum, “Investigating the History in Prehistories,” put forth interesting claims arguing that there should be no distinction between prehistory and history. Instead, a continuity should be recognized between the two to the point that the idea of “prehistory” should be completely reevaluated and ultimately eliminated. In “History and the ‘Pre’,” Daniel Lord Smail and Andre Shryock argue that, “as a by-product of relentless boundary maintenance, the ‘pre’ does not constitute a historical era in its own right. Rather, it is a narrative space auto-populated by features that define temporal Otherness for the self-consciously modern observer” (713). Thus, prehistory is what modern individuals project onto the past, creating a division between prehistory and history, between a time when there seemingly is no concrete evidence to a time when there is.

Smail explores this idea in-depth in On Deep History and the Brain. He argues that although in the past many have lamented the lack of evidence in what has been deemed “prehistory,” there is in fact plenty of evidence to paint a vivid picture of the past, from the very beginnings of mankind. To properly unearth such evidence, however, historians must willingly work with other academics and be open to collaboration with fields once thought to be irrelevant to the study of history. He writes, “The reconstructions require careful triangulations between all the available and relevant evidence: morphological, archaeological, ethological, molecular, and linguistic” (195). This is a bit unsettling to someone like myself who typically believes in the firm separation of academic subjects: math and science go together much like history and english. But history and science? It seems like a leap but I can certainly see Smail’s point and I do believe there is merit in his argument. However, it is still not clear if historians, particularly those we studied earlier in the semester, in their stuffy offices and ivory towers, will be willing to work with those in academic fields much unlike their own. Smail argues, “For this to succeed, historians will have to become more scientifically literate, and biologists and physiologists, many of whom have ceased to be historically minded, will have to learn to think again with history” (73). Will this endeavor succeed? Time will only tell (just not prehistory).

October 16, 2014

[The Importance of] Gender: A [Highly] Useful Category of Analysis

Laura / Uncategorized

I have been looking forward to this week’s readings and getting the opportunity to delve headfirst into Joan Scott’s work again for quite some time. Indeed, this time last year, I was experiencing “Gender as a Useful Category of Historical Analysis” for the first time in Dr. Mollin’s class on gender in United States history. In that particular class, we utilized Joan Scott’s foundational text as a foundational text for our class and our extensive discussions concerning gender naturally fell back on her writing throughout the semester. Dr. Mollin’s class proved to be one of my favorite classes of both my undergraduate and graduate career so you can imagine my excitement in getting to read Joan Scott’s work again. For reference, I pulled out my notebook from my gender class and glanced at my notes to see some of my initial reactions. I also found Joan Scott’s “Unanswered Questions” that I also read last year and it was interesting to re-read both works again and compare notes.

This time around, I was pleasantly surprised to discover that I understood Scott more readily than before. In fact, I vividly remember feeling that Scott’s writing was dense last year (though after reading Foucault recently, how could I find Scott dense?!) and yet I did not get that impression this time around whatsoever. Perhaps it is because I understand her argument a bit better. I also enjoyed reading another work by Joan Scott, her piece on head scarves entitled, “Symptomatic Politics. The Banning of Islamic Head Scarves in French Public Schools.” I find her writing to be both captivating and transparent, she is remarkably clear in conveying precisely what she means to argue and say. Naturally, I appreciate that approach to historical writing (or really any writing for that matter).

I think what is perhaps most captivating about “Gender: A Useful Category of Historical Analysis” (other than the fact that it proved to be the most influential women’s history essay to date) is that it questions precisely what gender is to begin with. Is it simply (or perhaps not so simply) a construction? Is it a product of the binary opposition of male versus female? Is it completely unrelated to sex? Scott defines gender utilizing “…two parts and several subsets,” she writes, “…gender is a constitutive element of social relationships based on perceived differences between the sexes, and gender is a primary way of signifying relationships of power” (1067). Later she argues, “Gender, then, provides a way to decode meaning and to understand the complex connections among various forms of human interaction. When historians look for the ways in which the concept of gender legitimizes and constructs social relationships, they develop insight into the reciprocal nature of gender and society and into the particular and contextually specific ways in which politics constructs gender and gender constructs politics” (1070). Thus, gender is not a simple concept. It is multi-layered and multi-faceted and at times difficult to fully grasp. And yet, gender is a critical lens by which to view history and it is a category of analysis that is ultimately highly beneficial to historians and other scholars, alike.

October 9, 2014

Landscape for a [Good] Woman

Laura / Uncategorized

I will have to admit that I enjoyed Geoff Eley’s A Crooked Line a bit more this time around. In particular, I appreciated his insight into the history of history, in Germany and elsewhere. I like being able to explore the background of history and it is one aspect of our class that I am enjoying most readily. I also appreciated the fact that Eley gave a bit of background to Carolyn Kay Steedman’s Landscape for a Good Woman as I read Eley prior to reading Steedman. Eley laid the foundation for what I was about to read and I approached Landscape for a Good Woman with a basic understanding of what I was going to experience. Eley writes, “Steedman is better described as a historian who understands the theoretical and philosophical implications of doing historical work. She pushes edgily on the boundaries of what historians think they do, but she manages to combine social and cultural history without turning the results into some risk-free and reassuring middle way…This is what we should take away from reading Steedman’s work: between social history and cultural history, there is really no need to choose (180-181). Thus, I began reading Landscape for a Good Woman with an eye towards both social and cultural history.

And Steedman did not disappoint. In fact, what I experienced in reading Landscape for a Good Woman was not quite what I had expected. I fully expected a purely biographical account but this book is far from it. Instead, Steedman weaves her own story in with discussions of class, motherhood, feminism, childhood, and other analyses. What results is an interesting rollercoaster ride through Steedman’s life and mind.

Perhaps most surprisingly, Steedman is blunt and at times, coarse in Landscape for a Good Woman. She is unapologetic about the way she presents her own life and that of her mother. And as a result, her writing is at times captivating, the history she tells is both personal and impersonal, both social and cultural. For example, concerning her mother she writes, “There was nothing we could do to pay back the debt of our existence. ‘Never have children dear,’ she said; ‘they ruin your life.’ Shock moves swiftly across the faces of women to whom I tell this story. But it is ordinary not to want your children, I silently assert; normal to find them a nuisance” (17).

Furthermore, in discussing her father near the beginning of her book Steedman writes, “A father like mine dictated each day’s existence; our lives would have been quite different had he not been there. But he didn’t matter, and his singular unimportance needs explaining. His not mattering has an effect like this: I don’t quite believe in male power; somehow the iron of patriarchy didn’t enter my soul. I accept the idea of male power intellectually, of course (and I will eat my words the day I am raped, or the knife is slipped between my ribs; though I know that will not be the case: in the dreams it is a woman who holds the knife, and only a woman can kill)” (19).

Wait, what? What did I just read?

This is precisely what about Steedman is so captivating and yet so confusing. She often looks back on her childhood fondly, admiring her mother and father at varying times. And yet, there are other times in which (like above) she is blatantly displeased with the choices and actions of her parents and with their effects on her childhood (among other things). What results is a confusing and sometimes difficult story to follow. And yet, I still enjoyed this book to some extent. I enjoyed Steedman’s honesty and a look into a time and place quite different from my own. And also an approach to history that I am not quite used to experiencing. However, I still found myself somewhat confused by the end of the book. What precisely was Steedman attempting to accomplish? What was her purpose for examining her childhood? What was her argument (if there was one)? Perhaps I got too caught up in the stories at hand to be able to understand Steedman’s writing on a deeper level. I am hoping my colleagues will be able to answer my questions and that we will be able to traverse this landscape together through our upcoming discussion next Tuesday.

 

1 2 3 4

Recent Posts

  • Reflections on The Past Three Years
  • Reflecting on Research Methods
  • Reflections on Writing and Researching
  • Almost Done!
  • Lecture Critique

Recent Comments

  • dr.rositawati on Leave A Reply
  • Diwali HD Wallpapers on Leave A Reply
  • Josh on Leave A Reply
  • hoc nau an on Leave A Reply
  • Server Tanıtımı on Leave A Reply

Archives

  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014

Categories

  • Uncategorized

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org

Reflections on The Past Three Years

This past year, my third year at Virginia Tech, proved to be my first year full-time in the history department. It was challenging to juggle my assistantship positions, several courses, my on-campus job, and at times exhausting job search but I have had an overwhelmingly fulfilling year. Though often plagued with stress and anxiety, I […]

Reflecting on Research Methods

I thought I would dedicate this week’s post to my experiences writing my non-thesis research paper and taking the research methods course simultaneously. I will admit that at first it seemed I would not benefit from the class and I was a bit wary of having to write my paper while taking the course. It […]

Reflections on Writing and Researching

I thought I would dedicate a post to my overall writing and researching reflections including my thoughts on how I may use my experiences to teach my future students in my own classroom. Overall, as I have mentioned in other posts, the researching and writing process had its ups and downs for me. I have […]

Almost Done!

The final version of my research paper is due on Wednesday and I am almost finished! I am currently proofreading and making minor edits, winding the process down. For this last set of edits, I had to re-work my introduction again, much to my chagrin at first. I realized, however, after making said edits that […]

Lecture Critique

While attending the Living with Animals Conference at Eastern Kentucky University last month, I was able to attend a variety of talks, many of which were relevant to my research (thankfully!) I thought I would write about one here and give my opinion concerning its effectiveness (as a presentation and the information provided). This talk, by a visiting […]

Research Project Draft Reflections

As I did not have a thesis proposal draft to submit and reflect upon, I thought I would rather reflect upon the draft process for my research project now due in less than two weeks (!!). The analogy perhaps most appropriate to describe this past semester of researching and writing is that of a roller coaster: […]

Source Reporting Week of 4.6

While at the Living with Animals Conference a few weeks ago, I attended a talk concerning dog training techniques. One dog trainer discussed was a man named Konrad Most, a police commissioner for the Royal Prussian police. He headed efforts in the early 1900s to train dogs for police work. Ultimately, his techniques were applied to military […]

↑

© Methods - Fall & Spring 2015 - Laura Keith 2022
Powered by WordPress • Themify WordPress Themes