Bauer's History

To be honest, I read quite alot of fiction that is based around the zeitgeist of certain periods. Even though I read some classics in spare time, I also appreciate contemporary works of fiction set in the past. As an professionally trained historian I am fully aware that what I read is not history, but neither pure fiction since such books in some ways atleast claim to mirror the past to some extent.  The latest such book I read was Helena von Zweigbergks 1979 - Johanna and Ingrid (sv. 1979 - Johanna och Ingrid) that is described as a family saga throughout the 20th century. Whilst this book do not claim to be "historical" in the sense that it is aiming at describing a certain time period fully correct, it still sets itself into a form of historical fiction. The book is part of a series were two titles have been released, with the previous one being set in the 1950's. What both books have in common is that they adress the role of women in Swedish society during the period...

 A couple of day's ago I stumbled on Lee Edelmans book No Future: Queer Theory and the death drive. This book is originally formulated as a way to create queer contention towards current society, but what I came to think about was it usage of archetypes. In Eldemans book it is clear that politics often revolves around a concept of the Child, which is an archetype that is considered as pure and innocent. Furthermore, the Child also represents the idea of societies future, since it eventually is our children that will pave the way for society. According to Edelman this creates a problem in politics, were no sane person can claim to not act on the interest of the Child, since this would also mean not acting on the interest of the future.  Even though this only a passage in Edelmans writing, it came to be quite interesting in regard to my previous research on children and childhood. When writing my dissertation I was rather fond of a theoretical concept such as "the swede" or...

 As a PhD-student I came in contact with the writings of Lynn Hunt, whose writings actually helped me overcome some problems brought forth by the more post-modern perspectives. In short these perspectives sometimes highlight that we really can not know anything, since knowledge in itself is a social construct and a outcome of power relations. As a young researcher this was a rather depressing insight; since if all we ever produce is just social constructs then why is research worth it? The solution to this problem was presented in the writings of Lynn Hunt's book "History: Why it matters" which highlights that science can produce temporary truths. These truths can be seen as state of the art on what we can claim to know about the world right now, but that these truths are also subject to change. Therefore, we never make a claim that can last for centuries.  This is a conclusion that I have drawn in to my teaching and in the current course I teach on the history of childho...

One of the many perks with being a university teacher is that you get to read alot of various scientific literature. This semester I have been assigned to teach course about the history of childhood, which actually aligns rather well with my research interests on the history of families and migrant children. However, teaching also requires to read through the course literature and in this case a key-book was Colin Heywood's "a history of childhood".  As a standalone book it works rather well as an introduction to both the history of childhood and, in a wider sense, social constructionism. What I however have struggled with when incoorporating it to teaching is these three aspects: a) The structure which is divided thematically rather than chronologically  b) The books overestimation of the social; whilst also underestimating human evolution c) The approach where the past is presented as a one-way route to an enlighted, contemporary Europe or western world  Starting with m...