Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 10

The Past and Present Society

The Dilemma of Popular History


Author(s): William Beik
Source: Past & Present, No. 141 (Nov., 1993), pp. 207-215
Published by: Oxford University Press on behalf of The Past and Present Society
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/651034 .
Accessed: 20/06/2014 19:06

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Oxford University Press and The Past and Present Society are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve
and extend access to Past &Present.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.129 on Fri, 20 Jun 2014 19:06:28 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
DEBATE
THE DILEMMA OF POPULAR HISTORY
The studyofpopularhistory is undergoing renewedmethodologi-
cal and ideologicalscrutiny.In a worlddeeplyinfluenced by the
collapseof the Communist regimesof easternEuropeand the
reverberations of the conservative policiesof theera of Ronald
ReaganandMargaret Thatcher, it is perhapsunderstandable that
historians are redirectingtheirattentions towardsrulingelites,
free-market mechanisms, and theindependent influenceofideas
and individuals. Approaches involving social or economic causa-
tionand subordinate are
groups beingreplacedby textual criti-
cismand culturalanalysis.'Scepticism is increasinglydirectedat
all social history,especiallywhen it is tied to the needs and
aspirations of ordinary people.In thishistoriographical climate
therecentcomments by Gerald Strauss on the dilemma ofpopular
history seemto callfora response.2 Straussexpresseshismisgiv-
ingsina refreshingly directmannerandraisesissuesthatarewell
worthconsidering.3 But,howeversincere,hisquestioning ofthe
motivesof the practitioners of history"from below", risks
encouraging thosewho wouldliketo forgettheadvancesof the
pasttwenty yearsand pushsocialhistory and sociallymotivated
history backto a marginal status.I wouldliketo respondwitha
modestdefenceof thegenre.4
*This essay benefitedfromthe expertcriticismof MargotFinn, Millie Beik and
JamesMelton.
1Some of these issues
emergein the contributions of Lawrence Stone, Patrick
Joyce,CatrionaKelly and GabrielleSpiegel to the debate on "Historyand Post-
Modernism",Past and Present,no. 131 (May 1991), pp. 217-18; ibid.,no. 133 (Nov.
1991),pp. 204-13;ibid.,no. 135 (May 1992),pp. 189-208;and in GabrielleM. Spiegel,
"History,Historicism and theSocialLogic oftheText in theMiddleAges", Speculum,
lxv (1990), pp. 59-86.
2 Gerald Strauss,"The Dilemma of Popular History",Past and Present, no. 132
(Aug. 1991), pp. 130-49.
3 Strauss has himselfmade importantcontributionsto popular historyin his
ManifestationsofDiscontent in Germany on theEve of theReformation(Bloomington,
1971), and Nuremberg in the SixteenthCentury(New York, 1966), both of whichI
have admiredand used formanyyears.
4 My work on the culture of protest in seventeenth-century France would
undoubtedlyplace me in the camp Strauss is criticizing,althoughI have also
approached history"from above": William Beik, "The Culture of Protest in
(cont.onp. 208)

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.129 on Fri, 20 Jun 2014 19:06:28 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
208 PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER 141

Straussdescribeswhathe calls"a distinct practicaland moral


predicament". He acknowledges thathistorians cannotandshould
not be entirely objective,but he confessesthat,whenhis own
researchon theeffectiveness ofsixteenth-century Lutheranedu-
cationled himto thediscovery thatordinary peoplehadsuccess-
fullyresistedindoctrination by adheringto traditional formsof
popularreligiosity, he found himself inexplicablycheeringfor
thepeople.Wasthisspontaneous partialityappropriate?Accused
by StevenOzment of romanticizing superstitionin Luther's
House
ofLearning, Strauss began to wonder whether his infatuation
with
folkloricresistance was in factconsistent withtherevulsionhe
feltforpresent-day popularculture.5Was it rightto revelin
sixteenth-century resistancetoeducation whiledeploringhisown
students'lackofpreparation? Couldonecelebrate charivaris
while
deploringmotor-cycle gangs? Indeed, might excessivewhite-
washingof popularactivities notbe a commonproblemamong
thepractitioners ofpopularhistory, manyofwhomhad political
positionson theleft?
Stimulating as theirworkswere,such celebratedfiguresas
NatalieDavis, PeterBurke,Carlo Ginzburg,MikhailBakhtin,
E. P. Thompson,Christopher Hill and EricHobsbawmhadper-
haps made too muchof "these carnivalpranks,villagefeuds,
charivarisand cattle-bewitchings, thesemoreor less identical
specimensof adolescentrowdyism, urbanrioting,visionmon-
geringand peasantpig-headedness".6 Perhapstheyweremerely
perpetuating theprejudicesoftheirintellectual predecessors, the
emigre socialcriticsof theFrankfurt school,commentators like
TheodorAdorno,Max Horkheimer and HerbertMarcusewhose
sneering repudiation oftwentieth-century massculture - especi-
allyAmerican, capitalist -
massculture "shouldsensitizeus to
thecontradiction centrally inherent in ourpenchant forboosting
thesignificance ofpopularlifein thepast,whilebeingunableor
unwilling to overcomeourdistasteforcommonwaysin ourown
day".7 ObliquelyevokingcurrentAmericandebatesover the
(n. 4 cont.)
Seventeenth-Century French Towns", Social Hist., xv (1990), pp. 1-23; William
Beik,Absolutism France:StatePowerandProvincial
and Societyin Seventeenth-Century
Aristocracy in Languedoc(Cambridge,1985), pp. 179-97.
Gerald Strauss,Luther'sHouse of Learning:Indoctrination of the Youngin the
GermanReformation (Baltimore,1978). The reviewby StevenOzmentis in Jl. Mod.
Hist.,li (1979), pp. 837-9.
6 Strauss,"Dilemma of PopularHistory",pp. 137-8.
7 Ibid.,p. 144.

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.129 on Fri, 20 Jun 2014 19:06:28 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
THE DILEMMA OF POPULAR HISTORY 209
merits ofmulticulturalism, Strausswondered whether theremight
even be validityin the concernsof scholarslike Gertrude
Himmelfarb that"history frombelow"maypresenta realthreat
"to theverysurvivalofourintellectual inheritance" by exalting
thecommonplace and demeaning theexceptional.8
Straussis courageousto raisethesequestionsand forthright in
presenting the evolution of his own thinking.He never endorses
theconservative critique,although hisideasseemto tendin that
direction.His statedobjectiveis simplyto highlight theambival-
enceand possiblehypocrisy of scholarly reactionsto lower-class
rusticity.Wouldwe wantMennocchioto marryour daughter?
Would we like MartinGuerreto sit in our classroom?9 The
dilemmalies "in my choosing(or havingbeen conditioned to
choose) to see things from above in the the
latter, contemporary,
instance,and frombelowin theformer, thehistorical:in other
words,status-induced bias in one case,imaginative escapefrom
it in theother".10
Straussbaseshis argument on the conceptof "valorization".
Mostofthecelebrated authors,he asserts,use approacheswhich
"valorize"populargroupsor movements bybringing themonto
thehistorical stage,takingthemseriously andmakingthemsound
important. Theyconferon theirsubject"a dignity, a weightand
a significance thatare intendedto changeour perceptionof it
fromsomething ... conventionally labelled'backward','unchan-
ging', 'passive','naive', 'irrational'and 'violent'to something
thatcan fairlybe describedas 'flexible','innovative', 'mindful',
'ordering','artful','critical'and 'vital' .11Thereis an implied
criticism here.Strausssuspectsthatsomeoneis paintinga rosy
pictureof essentially unattractive peopleor applaudingconten-
tiousforceswhich,thoughuplifting to thesocialcritic,are not
reallyverysignificant. Is popularhistory thenescapismforhistor-
ians?Is thesubjecttrivialand itspursuitan abdicationof sound

8 Ibid., 138. One discussionof these


p. issues, includingcommentsby Gertrude
Himmelfarb and JoanWallachScott,is TheodoreS. Hamerowet al., "From the Old
Historyto theNew", Amer.Hist. Rev., xciv (1989), pp. 654-92.
9These are my own formulations. The referencesare to the miller in Carlo
Ginzburg'sThe Cheeseand the Worms:The Cosmosof a SixteenthCenturyMiller,
trans.Johnand Anne Tedeschi (New York, 1982), and to the leadingcharacterin
Natalie Zemon Davis, TheReturnofMartinGuerre(Cambridge,Mass., 1983).
10Strauss,"Dilemma of
PopularHistory",p. 145.
n Straussis Natalie Davis here: ibid.,p. 133-4.
paraphrasing

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.129 on Fri, 20 Jun 2014 19:06:28 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
210 PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER 141

academicvalues?Shouldwe be sidinginsteadwiththeeducated
and enlightened?
Let me pointout firstthatthereis nothing necessarilywrong
with"valorization". Historians regularly valorizeleaders,move-
mentsor regimesby studying themsympathetically and, even
whentheydo not sympathize, theyvalorizeby theveryact of
givingthemseriousattention. If it is valid to decide thatthe
majority ofthepopulation meritsconsideration - and thisis the
kindofvaluejudgement thathistorians cannotavoid- thenone
shouldcertainlyapplaud studieswhichbringgroupsof such
personsontothe stage,analysetheirrangeof possibleactions,
seekouttheirmotives andassesstheirinfluence. Suchan approach
may be based on the conviction that the groupin questionwas
important by virtue of having influenced historicalprocessesin
some significantway not previouslyunderstood.Marcus
Rediker'ssplendidpanoramaoftheuniverseofmerchant seamen
might be a case in point.12Or the historian be
may actingon the
beliefthata particular"story" is not complete without a portrayal
of the contributions made by subordinate populationsthrough
theirwork,theirsuffering ortheirdistinctive forms ofexpression.
We cannotproperly discusswarfare or forcedmassmigration or
plague, one might argue, without making clear theirimpact on
thevictims, evenifthelatterwereunabletochangetheconditions
underwhichtheywereliving.Thus popularhistory is intended
to extendand deepenunderstanding. No one believesthatwe
shouldstudyeveryday foiblesinstead ofworksofartor criminals
insteadof leaders.
Goinga stepfurther, we mightconcludethatvalorization in
the sense of focusingattentionon a previouslyignoredbut
important and influential
category ofthehumanexperience is in
factsurelya usefulaspectof thehistorical enterprise. Women's
historyand genderhistoryare certainly the productsof such
and beforethemtherewas labourhistory,
valorization, business
the
history, history of scienceand so To
forth. be sure, author
the
has the responsibilityof demonstrating the importance of the
subject,either
as a factor influencing otherssignificantlyas an
or
aspectof thehuman drama thatis enoughorimportant
interesting
enough to warrant attention- and again these are necessarily
value judgements. The analysismustalso be well argued.If a
12
Marcus Rediker,BetweentheDevil and theDeep Blue Sea: MerchantSeamen,
Piratesand theAnglo-American
MaritimeWorld,1700-1750(Cambridge,1987).

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.129 on Fri, 20 Jun 2014 19:06:28 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
THE DILEMMA OF POPULAR HISTORY 211

readingof"nightbattles"or the"bodilylowerstratum"is badly


formulated or poorlydocumented, or if the authoris ignoring
evidencethatundermines his or her argumentor buildingan
unwarranted case on clues thatare too fewor too ambiguous,
thenthereis everyreasonto criticize.13 But Straussdoes not
makethatcase. His concernis aboutpointofview.He confuses
valorization withbias and impliesthatthosewho appreciatethe
importance of the lowerclassessomehowpromotetheircause
unduly.
To valorize,it mustbe stressed,is notnecessarily to endorse.
Whilethereis nothingwrongwithfeelingsympathy forshoe-
makersor midwives, examining their sphere of action is notthe
sameas advocatingtheirmethods.Whengood socialhistorians
seekout thehumanity of peoplesdifferent fromthemselves the
resultis muchmorethan"imaginative escape". It is hard to see
why Strauss thinks David Sabean is making a "heroine" out of
thirteen-year-old Anna Catharina Weissenbiihler in Power in the
Bloodforposingas a witchand refusing to be re-educated.'4 His
point is notto her
glorify defiance, butrather to use her manipula-
tionof theidiomsof witchcraft, foodand the "word" to show
howthecommunity madeuse ofthemto expresspowerrelation-
ships. Sabean's ultimate purpose,to reveal "the connections
betweenthevillageandthestate,betweenthecultureofthelocal
community and thatof the religiousestablishment", fartran-
scendsany immediatefascination withvillageeccentricity, just
as Le Roy Ladurie's recreationof familyand community in
Montaillougoes beyondgossipconcerning the sexualhabitsof
fourteenth-century shepherds.'5
Strauss'sanalysisis also builtupona falsedichotomy between
"elite" and "popular"culturewhichallowshimto suggestthat
hiscommentators are glorifyingone at theexpenseoftheother.
It is truethatthe terminology conveysan idea of opposition
between"upper" and "lower". But all recentcommentaries
13
The referencesare to Carlo Ginzburg,NightBattles: Witchcraft
and Agrarian
Cults in the Sixteenthand Seventeenth Centuries,trans. Johnand Anne Tedeschi
(London, 1983),and MikhailBakhtin,RabelaisandHis World,trans.Helene Iswolsky
(Cambridge,Mass., 1968).
14 Strauss,"Dilemma of Popular History", pp. 139-40; David WarrenSabean,
Powerin theBlood: PopularCultureand VillageDiscoursein Early ModernGermany
(Cambridge,1984), pp. 94-112.
15 Sabean,Powerin theBlood,p. 110; EmmanuelLe Roy Ladurie,Montaillou:The
Promised Land ofError,trans.BarbaraBray(New York, 1979).

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.129 on Fri, 20 Jun 2014 19:06:28 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
212 PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER 141

stresstheinteraction
ofpopularandeliteinfluences and,analytic-
allyspeaking,theinterestliesmorein theinteractionthanin the
distinctiveness
of "high" and "low" culture.16
Furthermore sympathetic validationis nottheonlyapproach
to popularculture,and Straussslantshis case by leavingout
popularhistorians who have a different pointof view. Yves-
Marie Berce's wonderful descriptions of the croquants of
Aquitaine, forexample,emergefroma conservative andpaternal-
isticapproachthatis builtupon the idea thatpeasantrebels
respondedto stateintervention in theirlivesbyre-enacting age-
old ritualsbasedon unchanging popularmyths, withtheaim of
defendingthe solidarityof their communities.17Robert
Muchembledemphasizespreciselythebrutality and violenceof
early modern individualsin order to underline the wrenching
severityof the subsequent"civilizingprocess".'8CraigCalhoun
the
explores reactionary, defensive ofpopularradic-
implications
alism.9MichaelSonenscher re-examines exactlythetypeofcom-
munitarian assumptionsabout artisansthat Straussmightcriticize,
and does so by lookingforevidencebeyondcontextsthatfocus
on guildsolidarity.20
In fact,contraryto theimpression givenin theessay,all good
popular historiansdevelop connections betweentheirsubjects
and largerprocesses,rarelysuccumbingto naive populism.
Strausshimselfpointsout thattheMarxistshe citestakepains
to situatethe massesin a criticaltheoryof developingclass
relations,and oftencriticizesocialhistorians who lose sightof
thatobjective.21Otherhistoriansmakethesamekindsofconnec-
PopularCulturalUses
16
For example,RogerChartier,"Cultureas Appropriation:
in EarlyModernFrance", in StevenL. Kaplan (ed.), Understanding PopularCulture
(Berlin,1984), pp. 229-53; Roger Chartier,"Culturepopulaireet culturepolitique
dans l'Ancien Regime: quelques reflexions",in Keith Michael Baker (ed.), The
PoliticalCultureoftheOld Regime(The FrenchRevolution and theCreationofModern
PoliticalCulture,i, Oxford,1987), pp. 243-58.
17 Yves-Marie Berce, Histoiredes croquants:etudedes soulevements populairesau
XVIIe siecledans le sud-ouestde la France,2 vols. (Paris, 1974); abridgementtrans.
AmandaWhitmore,as HistoryofPeasantRevolts:The Social OriginsofRebellionin
EarlyModernFrance(Ithaca, 1990).
18 Robert Muchembled,L'invention de l'hommemoderne:sensibilites, moeurset
comportements sousl'AncienRegime(Paris, 1988), pp. 15-82.
collectifs
19Craig Calhoun, The Questionof Class Struggle:Social Foundations of Popular
RadicalismduringtheIndustrial Revolution (Chicago,1982).
20Michael Sonenscher,Workand Wages:NaturalLaw, Politicsand theEighteenth-
Century FrenchTrades(Cambridge,1989).
21 Straussgives such a sensitiveappreciationof E. P. Thompson'sworkthatit is
hard to see wherethe problemlies, if his "great literaryskill virtuallyassureshis
(cont.onp. 213)

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.129 on Fri, 20 Jun 2014 19:06:28 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
THE DILEMMA OF POPULAR HISTORY 213
tionsin different ways.They seek out evidenceof varietiesof
forms
sociability, ofviolence,complexes ofbeliefs,
typesofresist-
ance,systems ofgesturesor rituals,and hiddenformsofpower,
in orderto learnaboutpoliticalaction,socialorganization, the
operation ofgenderor thetransformation ofreligion- in short,
theylinkpopularformsof comportment to systems of meaning
whichconnectpopularforceswithbroaderaspectsof change.If
thepointis onlyto applaudthepeople,or if thesubjectmatter
is merelyanecdotal,thenit is notgoodpopularhistory. But this
is seldomthe case. More commonis the problemthatearly
modernevidenceis alwaysindirect and mustbe tiedtogether by
abstractionsthatmayseemfarremovedfromanything imagined
by the subjectsthemselves, and thatconsequently it may be
to
subject challenge and debate.
In theend,though,itis Strauss'sreactionto thecontemporary
worldthatwilldisappoint dedicatedpopularhistorians. His allu-
siontotheviewsofsocialcritics likeWalterBenjamin andHerbert
Marcuseas an exampleofthedangersofromanticizing thepop-
ular communities of the past lookslike an attemptto discredit
different generations of Marxistsby implicating themin some
commonideologicalfailing.Criticalas theymayhave been of
Americanmass society,the membersof the Frankfurt School
werehardlysocialhistorians, andtheirconnection to theresearch
ofGinzburg, HobsbawmorThompsonis tenuous.Invoking them
allowsStrausstoconfuse"popularculture"(theforms ofthinking
andactingofpolitically oreconomically subordinate groups)with
"mass culture"(culturedisseminated by modernformsof mass
mediawhichare not generallycontrolledby populargroups).
The rudiments of "mass culture"existedin earlierages, and
manifestations of "popularculture"continuetoday,butthedis-
tinctiondoes not come down to "quaint and folkloric"in the
past versus"ignorantand tasteless"in thepresent.In factthe
criticaldistinction between"mass" culture,"popular" culture
and the trivialdetails of everydaylife needs to be better
explored.22
(n. 21 cont.)
readers' identification
with the strugglesof ordinaryfolk": Strauss,"Dilemma of
Popular History",pp. 136-7. See also E. J. Hobsbawm, "HistoryfromBelow -
Some Reflections",in FrederickKrantz(ed.), History fromBelow: Studiesin Popular
Protestand PopularIdeology(Oxford,1988), pp. 13-27.
22 These distinctionsare too complex to discuss in a briefcomment.A useful
introduction
interdisciplinary to the subject whichreprintskey essays is Chandra
(cont.onp. 214)

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.129 on Fri, 20 Jun 2014 19:06:28 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
214 PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER 141

Whydoes Strausstrivializecontemporary popularhistory by


insistingthatthecounterpart of lookingforhiddenmeaningsin
the"mostordinary privateactsand socialfunctions" ofthepast
is to "findcomparable and dignity"in televisedsoap
significance
operas("Dallas"), tabloidnewspapers (theNationalEnquirer),or
"pornographic" rap concerts(2 Live Crew)?23These are pro-
grammed, profit-making mediaevents,notwindowsintoother-
wise obscuredaspects of popular comportment. Comparable
modernsubjectsshouldhavethepowerto unlockmeaningwith
thesamesuccessas thecriminal interrogations and festiverevel-
lingsexploitedby earlymodernists. It is thisrevelatory power
thatdistinguishes earlymodernevidence,not its quaintnessor
typicality.However,contemporary historians do nothavetolimit
themselves to thequaintgleaningsenjoyedby earlymodernists
becausetheevidenceis so vast.Theirproblemwillnotbe whether
one cheersforthisgroupor that- indeed,someof the most
interesting subjectswouldbe phenomena withwhichone had no
sympathy - butwhether thesources in questionafford thebest
approach to thequestionsbeing asked and whether theycan tell
us something of generalsignificance.As formassculture,it too
demandscarefulstudy,butusingdifferent methodsand without
thebarrier ofStrauss'salarmat "trivialandcheap,andsometimes
threatening, massbehaviour".24
Indeed, Strauss's own perceptionsof contemporary culture
seemironically as bitteras thoseof theimmigrant intellectuals
he criticizes.How manyhistorians ofthecurrent generationreally
believeanymorein an absolutedistinction betweentheclassical
cultureof "good taste"and thevulgarcultureoftheuneducated
or tasteless? To be sure,thereare different waysofappreciating
different forms.But the old distinction betweenhighand low
culture,whichoftencoincideswiththe distinction betweenthe
greatEuropeantradition and thoseof the workingclasses,the
ethnically different or thenon-European, is blurring.Few ofthe
historians I knowthinktheyhave to choosebetweenBach and
reggae,MoliereandSpikeLee, Stravinsky andtheRollingStones.
Straussassumesthatwe willjoinhimin condemning contempor-
arypopularcultureand therefore shouldrethink ourreactionto
(n. 22 cont.)
Mukerji and Michael Schudson (eds.), Rethinking Popular Culture:Contemporary
in CulturalStudies(Berkeley,1991).
Perspectives
23 Strauss,"Dilemma of PopularHistory",p. 140.
24Ibid., 140.
p.

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.129 on Fri, 20 Jun 2014 19:06:28 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
THE DILEMMA OF POPULAR HISTORY 215
the popularculturesof the past. Manywill,in fact,assertthe
opposite:thattoday'spopularculture,properlydefined,is of
centralimportance; thatmass culture,thoughdifferent, is also
and that,if we are goingto takethepopularmove-
significant;
mentsof thepastseriously, we shouldtakethoseof thepresent
seriouslytoo.25
Earlymodernpopularhistory is certainly
vulnerableto criti-
cism,but Strauss has not been the
asking rightkindsofquestions.
To a degreeunmatched by most otherareasofresearch, popular
culturalsourceshave to be approachedobliquelyand searched
forhiddenmeanings. Survivingevidenceis alwayscircumstantial
and lendsitselfto a rangeof interpretations, dependingon the
waytheresearcher reconstructsan extra-textual
set of symbolic
meanings.26 It is possibleforpopularhistorians to fallintothe
trapofassuming toomuchor readingin a desiredoutcome.How
do we distinguish betweena plausiblereconstruction of a lost
worldandan overlyimaginative of
reading improperly perceived
symbols? Once we haveacceptableconclusions, howcan theybe
relatedto otherdisparateglimpsesof popularculture,and what
do theytell us aboutthe largerpicture?Indeed,whatkindof
largerpicturedo we want?
Thereis muchto scrutinize in therealmof cat massacresand
wormycheese, but the problemis not our infatuation with
people'sordinary lives.GeraldStrausscanresteasy:thestudyof
popularhistoryis alive and well, and appreciating - even
liking- commonpeople presentsno dilemma.

EmoryUniversity WilliamBeik
25 These remarkswere written beforethe Los Angelesriotsof April 1992 but, in
the aftermath of those events,the Americandiscussionof videotaping,rap music,
televisionviolence,youthand gun culture,racismand urbanpovertyunderlinesthe
centralityof the studyof bothpopularand mass culturein the 1990s.
26 See forexamplethe critiqueof RobertDarntonin Harold Mah, "Suppressing
the Text: The Metaphysicsof EthnographicHistory in Darnton's Great Cat
Massacre", HistoryWorkshop Jl, no. 31 (Spring 1991), pp. 1-20; Suzanne Desan,
"Crowds,Community and Ritualin theWorkofE. P. Thompsonand NatalieDavis",
in Lynn Hunt (ed.), The New CulturalHistory(Berkeley,1989), pp. 47-71; Robert
Finley, "The Refashioningof Martin Guerre", Amer. Hist. Rev., xciii (1988),
pp. 553-71.

REPLY
I am gratefulto WilliamBeik forhis helpfulresponseto my
essay,but I wishhe hadn'tframedit witha caveatabout the

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.129 on Fri, 20 Jun 2014 19:06:28 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi