Search

Revisiting the remarkable experimental work of the pioneering early twentieth‐century psychologist Mary Cheves West Perky (1875–1940), this article argues for the historiographical significance of her counterintuitive findings concerning the human imagination and the phenomenon of "reverse hallucination." By means of an exhaustive and forensic archival inquiry, this article reconstructs Perky's heretofore (essentially) unknown biography, providing new insights into the context and broader importance of her research, both with respect to the history of the human sciences and in relation to the history of American artistic modernism. At the same time, these pages recursively deploy her distinctive perspective on the way the perceptual experiences of reality inosculate with projective fantasy, activating her findings as a component of a nontraditional disciplinary practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study delves into the intersection of post-2000 Romanian criticism and historiography with global theoretical discourses, emphasizing the application of posthumanism in metaliterary contexts. It employs theories of Hayden White, Andrei Terian, and Cary Wolfe to navigate the narrative aspects of the critical imagination, examining how posthumanism is manifested in recent discourse in terms of its historical, ideological, and methodological dimensions. The research includes a diverse range of sources, such as the anthology Posthumanism, literary historical chapters by Mihai Iovănel, academic articles by Bogdan Vișan and Andrada Strugaru, and monographs by Radu Vancu. This exploration reveals that these sources mostly align with contextualist arguments, tracing a literary and metaliterary historical trajectory structured by liberalism, as well as by elements of radicalism and conservatism. The articles, essays, book chapters, and monographs cited here often approach these ideas with an empathetic stance towards theoretical adaptation. By utilizing Cary Wolfe’s analytical framework, the study identifies a dominant trend of humanist posthumanism and posthumanist humanism influencing critical perspectives. However, it also highlights a lack of studies that fully acquire posthuman(ist) epistemologies and protocols as they are manifested in Western academia and activist fields. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Japanese Journal of Image Arts & Sciences / Eizogaku is the property of Japan Society of Image Arts & Sciences and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Early China is the property of Cambridge University Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Er(r)go: Teoria, Literatura, Kultura is the property of Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Slaskiego and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Presenting the outlines of the postmodern philosophy of historiography as it shapes the theoretical background for the analysis of the historical novel, this study aims to render that the recent understanding of history and its reconceptualization in decolonizing fictional (re)writings still provides the "re-visionary" stance seen in contemporary postcolonial narratives. After the introduction of postmodern innovations in theoretical and imaginative writing, there has emerged a rather newfangled view of the historical novel and an increasing inclination for narratives that attempt to reimagine historical moments and chronicles they integrate into their fictional worlds to pursue a re-visionary questioning. The critical frameworks of postcolonial historical fiction and speaking subalterns have moved on in postmillennial historical novels and political novels. Considering that postcolonial literary theories and fictional (re)writings attempt to deconstruct homogenous discourses and the Eurocentric (history) writing of the colonizer, it is claimed that, for the sake of textual decolonization, recent works of postcolonial historical writing intersect in several ways with the newfangled view of the historical novel. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To better understand how a particular community understands its story, we look at the philosophy, aesthetics, and historical–cultural contexts of those who have written its history. This article analyses an example of colonial era historiography entitled The Progress of Dogma written by Scottish evangelical theologian James Orr. It critically evaluates how Orr’s historiographical approach is at once an asset and a liability for evangelical Christians in the postcolonial era. Orr argued for the cohesiveness and continuity of historical orthodox doctrine, particularly as it stood over against the liberal, deconstructive approaches that were gaining traction in his day. In this sense, Orr’s work may be considered an asset to evangelical Christians today as they attempt to defend a foundationalist reading of history over against that of postfoundational philosophers such as Michel Foucault. There is a concern, however, with Orr’s adaptation of the historical methodology presented by GWF Hegel. This dialectical, linear approach has had a disastrous effect on the evangelical interpretation of doctrinal history. Rich traditions have been ignored or lost, Eurocentrism has prevailed, and many Christians whose home or origin is in the Global South continue to struggle with what they perceive as the residue of the colonial enterprise. This article argues that Evangelical historiography must be reconstructed. In the conclusion, new lines of enquiry are presented that may allow evangelicals to affirm the historical cohesiveness and continuity of their doctrine, while at the same time giving serious consideration to postcolonial sensibilities.

This article draws on the intersection of the metahistorical, corporeal and material turn in contemporary cultural theory, with a focus on Emma Donoghue's novel The Pull of the Stars (2020), incidentally written to commemorate a centenary of the Spanish flu in Britain, and suddenly appearing prophetic of the COVID-19 situation in 2020–2021, with unintentional, but poignant parallels. The methodological framework used for the article is transmodern metahistory, as well as new materialism, with its important concepts of transcorporeality (Alaimo) and intra-action (Barad). The article examines women's (bodily) lives in 1918 Dublin as depicted in the novel, against the tempestuous political and military historical context furnishing the background for the material, temporal and discursive entanglements and shared vulnerabilities, which are the centre of the narrative. It also touches upon topical issues and processes characterizing the present-day world, such as the global COVID-19 pandemic, #MeToo and BLM movements, social injustice and intersectional feminism, as well as silenced traumatic historical phenomena, such as the cruelty and abuse of Irish and Canadian residential institutions, and the larger issue of livable lives—a crucial topic for women writers today. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Ploutarkhos is the property of International Plutarch Society and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article aims to shed light on Hayden White's thoughts and notions in terms of the usage of historical narrative. The article touches on White's assumptions that history is like narrative, or history resembles literature and fiction when it comes to the techniques used in constituting it. Hayden White presents several strategies, which he believes that historians use in their writing of historical texts. First, he concentrates on the rhetorical aspect of history writing which is considered a poetic act. This prefigurative act consists of four tropes of figurative language, which are metaphor, metonymy, synecdoche, and irony. Second, Hayden argues, historians use in their texts certain modes such as romance, tragedy, comedy, and satire to determine the type of the texts; these modes are called explanation by formal argument. Third, and lastly, White concentrates on the type of closure of the historical narratives that the historians use, this mode is called explanation by ideological implication where historians show the influence of the period that was imposed on them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Haydon White's Metahistory (1973) interprets representations of history as inherently reflecting historians' subjectivity. That is, the modes in which historians represent history are significantly determined and grounded by their ideological commitments. In this article, I offer a metahistorical analysis of the modes of doing history undertaken by the African Islamic intellectual historians Ousmane Kane and Souleymane Bachir Diagne. I critically evaluate the consistency between the object of history as they assume it to be and the discourses they (re)produce, taking account of their ideologically grounded mode of realizing their chosen object of history. Taking the general object of history for the African intellectual to be the resistance of the colonial library, I argue that, in their pursuit of this object of history, Kane and Diagne fall short owing to their use of the Islamic library to assert the existence of an African intellectual history. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many connections between history and film may spring to mind as we consider the title of Eleftheria Thanouli’s History and Film: A Tale of Two Disciplines. No, this book is not about the history of film or about films as historic artefacts, but it deals with those films that provide us with an interpretation or explanation of history; in short, Thanouli addresses the representation of history in film. Over the course of her book, the author develops a carefully constructed argument about the status of cinematic history and the merits of history in film, as well as a taxonomy for the analysis of representations of history in film. Accordingly, the book is organised into two parts, each comprising three chapters.

It is said that the relationship between history and theory is like “the deaf dialog”. It means that there are incongruous interests between them, and maybe the interpretation itself, causes an inconsistent relation between historians and theorists. The present paper explains that every historian needs to have a theoretical base for writing and studying history. Then, it emphasizes that to criticize the historical works the critics must be aware of the theoretical base they criticize, and they themselves have to adopt a specific theoretical base. So, every theoretical base is pertinent to the metahistorical field, and it means that the historians who theorize have to attend to necessaries more than facts gathering. Therefore, the most necessary debate is an explanation of the relationship between the critique of history and metahistory. The paper analyzes different levels of historical knowledge to explain the relationship.

There has been sustained discussion of the narrativist approach in the Western tradition of theory of history, and it has focused especially on the work of Hayden White. While the reception of White's work in the non‐West has resulted in multiple translations of his oeuvre into Chinese and other languages, there has, as of yet, been no attempt to apply his tropological theory of discourse in a detailed study of non‐Western historiography. Any such future endeavor would require assessing the extent to which White's theory is culturally specific to the inside of the Western cultural tradition and determining which elements may be applicable to the outside of non‐Western discourse. In this vein, the article pries open a possibility for an outside in the narrativist study of history. It establishes a European family tree of White's tropological theory of discourse by first tracing its acknowledged intellectual ancestry to Peter Ramus's rhetorical reductionism and Giambattista Vico's poetic logic. It then extends the genealogy of White's tetragrammatical analysis further back into a European ancestry by identifying its roots in the patristic and medieval exegetical traditions of the four senses of scripture and the four words of Saint Paul. The analysis reveals that White's narrativist method of tropology belongs to a particular refraction of mythic consciousness having an identifiable beginning, middle, and end in the Western cultural tradition. Any methodological step beyond this consciousness would require reading the tropological spectrum of another cultural lineage of myth. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article first describes Reinhart Koselleck's interpretation of the modernity of historical thought and then discusses the specific meaning‐orientation of this thought. This description is done in a perspective that follows the question of whether modernity is only an epoch in Western history or covers general, universal history. Then, it discusses three problem areas of this conception of modernity: (1) whether there is an alternative to Koselleck's model, (2) whether this model applies only to Western historical thought, and (3) what problems it raises. Afterward, it offers suggestions for how Koselleck's list of "counter‐concepts" can be expanded to include further provisions. Finally, it identifies and discusses the criteria of meaning that are decisive for the expanded conception of basic historical‐anthropological concepts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article on Teju Cole's Open City I distinguish and make apparent the various temporal levels on which the novel operates in terms of plot, story, and narrative structure. I illustrate how the novel links the coordinates of temporality and spatiality via the trope of (not only physical) movement and how movement invokes notions of the ostensibly unmarked flâneur, as well as the gendered, racialized, or disabled body. In its complex treatment of trauma, memory, and history, I furthermore highlight how the novel exemplifies different metahistorical positions that can be brought in conversation with current debates in Black and Atlantic studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Maximilian is the tenth historical legend written and published by Ireneo Paz in 1899. For its author, it is "a little recreational work, aimed rather at making familiarly known some of the most notorious sides of that great farce". Why does he call it a legend and not a novel? Is it possible that the Mexican writer intends to make the clash between liberals and conservatives legendary? A purpose for this work would be to demonstrate the construction of an historical legend, based on The Simple Forms by André Jolles. From Hayden White's Metahistory, we will try to demonstrate that Paz constructs his legend using procedures similar to those of the nineteenthcentury European Romantic historians: a metaphorical style, a novelescromantic narrative and a formistic mode of argumentation; all in order to mythologize an otherwise complex historical process and thus contribute to the support of the victorious triumphant liberalism, at the cost of fictionalizing and uniquely characterizing the main actors of the Second Mexican Empire. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article asks about narratives in/of religious education research by distinguishing between two perspectives: the view of narratives as the object of research and the view of narratives that shape research in an academic subject. To this end, an example will be used to analyse the underlying narrative in interreligious learning/education research and, related to this, which 'blind spots' are thereby given. Even if 'blind spots' cannot be avoided, since it is not possible not to take any perspective, perspectives can be broadened through the meta-reflection of the narratives of one's own discipline. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article's principle interest is in the "structures of repetition" that characterize supposedly singular events. The starting point for the analysis is Reinhart Koselleck's discussion of the event in "Structures of Repetition in Language and History." Koselleck perceived events as arising from metahistorical structures that characterize all human histories regardless of the eras in which they took place and are narrated. This article scrutinizes Koselleck's understanding of the event as well as the underlying "structures of repetition" shaping it. In considering the question of the temporality of the event, this article distinguishes three strata of repetitive structures. First, it examines a seemingly trivial historiographical structure of repetition of the event, which is the iterative proclamation of the return of the event. It then analyzes Koselleck's foundational, yet rarely truly appreciated, "Structures of Repetition in Language and History" and maps out the fundamental structures of repetition, which are the conditions of possibility of events. Finally, it hints at a further linguistic stratum of repetitive structures. In light of growing interest in Koselleck's work in both German and Anglophone historiography, this article systematizes the manifold structures of repetition against the backdrop of current explorations of the event's temporality, thus surveying a facet of Koselleck's pioneering work that is too often forgotten. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Social Sciences Bulletin / Sociālo Zinātņu Vēstnesis is the property of Socialo Zinatnu Vestnesis and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Thomas More's History of Richard III is a metahistory, rich in factual and fictional details. I will discuss More's concept of historiography as a rhetorical art and how his presentation of history transformed details of what was imperfectly known about Richard III into a polemic about what should be believed as an irrefutable truth. More's conception of history is much more amorphous than modern theories. He incorporated classical myths, literature, history, and philosophy along with phantasies, dreams, and oral testimonies to recreate his historical Richard III as a tragic figure. More saw patterns of immoral behavior deeply rooted in the histories of the Plantagenet kings from the twelfth century to 1485 as if the sins of the fathers are repeated by their children. More used his sources, the antiquarian John Rous, the historian Polydore Vergil, and the oral history of Archbishop/Cardinal John Morton to prove that the immorality of the Plantagenets, embodied in Richard III, was a curse that will be purged from England by the ascendance of Henry VII. William Shakespeare copied and embellished More's tragic vision of Richard III. Their historical facts and fictions enhanced their moral signification of the rise and fall of Richard III in English history. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents the workflow and the main concepts that led to the 2020 exhibition focusing on the recent history of the Hungarians in Romania, titled The Present of the Past Tense. The title is a reference to Reinhart Koselleck’s metahistorical work and suggests that remnants of the communist heritage and of the regime change that occurred in 1989 still persist and effect our present in many ways. The project’s website and the exhibition were designed by a team commissioned by the Eurotrans Foundation, thus outside of a museum or an institutional context, and the result is exhibited in Romanian cities inhabited by Hungarians in special architectural contexts: within the iconic buildings of the communist regime. The text consists of the reflections written by the members of the team: a historian, an artist, a researcher of visual culture and a researcher in the field of cultural studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article intends to place Hayden White's reflection on the basic principles of meaning‐construction in history into the historical context of modern historical studies. It first presents the self‐understanding of professional historians in which they emphasize the academic (wissenschaftlichen) character of the discipline. In this way of reflection, the traditional (premodern) interpretation of history as a part of rhetoric was pushed back and replaced by methodological argumentation about the rules of research (with an emphasis on source critique). Historiography, or the presentation of the results of research in a narrative form, was not completely neglected, but was not widely recognized. After the analytical insight into the narrative form of historical knowledge, significant discussion of the principles of historical thinking dramatically changed from the issue of research to that of representation (historiography). Hayden White's Metahistory (1973) marked this change paradigmatically. It turned the shift from rhetoric to science in its contrary direction: a new turn to rhetoric was proclaimed. This new anti‐turn set off a hitherto unanswered question as to how research methodology should be treated. Source critique was not refuted but did not attract significant attention. The research procedure of interpretation, in contrast, was met by a new understanding and interest: it was identified as representation by the linguistic procedures of meaning‐construction. Its role as a part of historical method, however, was completely ignored. The article ends with a still unresolved problem of metahistory, namely the relationship between interpretation and representation. They are not identical, but are closely related. Their synthesis and their differences have to be systematically inquired into and reflected upon if metahistory is to step forward and engage in this task. Then the merits of White's return to rhetoric will be appreciated as well as its one‐sidedness criticized, before a further step is taken. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article argues against the still-dominant idea that Polish Stalinism must be interpreted in “exteriority” and “rupture” due to the Soviet Union’s political grip over the country. The period of Stalinist rule constitutes a particularly dense and fecund time in Polish history, one that can only be understood within the framework of Poland’s past and present: the period's origins and metahistory. The discursive gesture of depriving certain historical actors of their legitimate agency echoes the struggles over ethnicity and politics within Polish socialist circles at the turn of the twentieth century. There is, however, a disturbing paradox in the historical outcome of this distant debate: The ones who carried out the project of a Polish mono-ethnic state were the disciples of Polish revolutionary internationalists.

The English translation of Jörn Rüsen's Historik is a major event in the global community of the theory of history. Few contemporary thinkers in this field have been so systematic and comprehensive as Rüsen. This book, rendered as Evidence and Meaning , is the outcome of a whole life devoted to the renewal of German historicism. Rüsen's contribution mirrors the great debates held in West Germany since the 1960s about the theory of history (Historik), discussions that prompted a conjoint reassessment of the old dispute between historicist academia and Marxist or Weberian sociologism, including the consequences of the linguistic turn. Rüsen has opened the German historicist tradition toward spaces of compromise with the Western "scientific" or more generalizing history. Furthermore, Rüsen's synthetic historicism, with its insistence on praxis, might be taken as a case of convergent evolution between German and American syntheses of historical life and historical knowledge. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, I analyse the play Clinique d’un roi by the Belgian author Antoine Pickels as a metadrama, i.e., drama about drama. I concentrate on the most important textual manifestations of its metadramatic dimension. I also read it as a form of metahistorical reflection. Clinique d’un roi can be regarded as a “negative historical drama” that questions its own claims to historicity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The participants in the seminar consider from different perspectives the issue of man in secular and church history. Yulia Balakshina focuses on the new approaches to the role of person in history in the age of “big narratives” collapsing. Grigory Goutner analyses Heidegger’s concept of correlation between man and history. Vitaly Cherkasov addresses the philosophical understanding of man and history in Karl Jaspers’ works. The final presentation by the Rev. Prof. Georgy Kochetkov opens new theological approaches to this issue. The participants set their sights on the strategies of personal standing tall as well as on the practices by which people make themselves personalities, despite the pressure of the totalitarian states in the XXth century.

How to write the history of philosophy of history? This article argues that a discursive approach, focused on the use and meaning of such essentially contested concepts like “history” and “objectivity,” is more appropriate for the field at hand than, for example, an institutional approach. By way of example, the article provides a brief history of “metahistory” – the title word of perhaps the most influential study in philosophy of history since R.G. Collingwood’s The Idea of History. It argues that Hayden White’s understanding of the term closely resembles that of Christopher Dawson, a British Roman Catholic author on whom White wrote a lengthy article in the late 1950s. Evidence suggests, moreover, that White actually borrowed the term from Dawson or, more broadly, from a mid-twentieth-century, European, religiously inspired tradition of historical thought. In sum, this article suggests a new genealogy of “metahistory” and, in doing so, advocates a discursively oriented mode of writing the history of twentieth-century philosophy of history.

Copyright of Sudia Litteraria et Historica is the property of Polish Academy of Sciences, Institute of Slavic Studies and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Over the last five decades, Hayden White has always been associated with important historiographical debates and disputes. The undeniable relevance and extent of his legacy elicited ambiguous reactions and controversies and gave rise to a vast literature produced by his commentators and analysts. This article aims to analyze two moments (1980 and 1998) of the reception of the book Metahistoy (1973), Hayden White's main work, in the pages of the prestigious History and Theory. This journal, an inescapable reference in the field of theory and philosophy of history, played a decisive role in structuring a set of reflections and analyzes on the relevance of the theoretical assumptions in White's seminal book. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It has recently been argued that the philosophical study of professional history constitutes a subfield of epistemology. Consequently, the philosophy of history is cast as only one particular species of the general study of the relationship between evidence and theory in scientific practice. This view is based upon an absolute separation between substantive and critical philosophy of history. By such a separation, substantive philosophy of history is dismissed as speculative metaphysics, while critical philosophy of history is vindicated as a respectable branch of epistemology. The attempt to delineate a strictly epistemological realm of history was a central part of the programme for analytically styled philosophy of history in the 1950–1970s era. This programme has been resurrected by contemporary empiricist trends. In this essay, I will argue against the basic ideas of this programme through a reassessment of Hayden White’s so-called narrativist philosophy of history. As I will show, criticizing the distinction between metaphysics and epistemology in history is an essential and important feature of White’s contribution to the philosophy of history. This feature has, I claim, been overshadowed by formalist interpretations of White’s ‘narrativism’. In conclusion, I argue that White’s concept of prefiguration will fundamentally question the viability of current attempts to develop a purely epistemological philosophy of history. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

ABSTRACT: This essay will argue that the traditional opposition between narrative and theory in historical sciences is dissolved if we conceive of narratives as theoretical devices for understanding events in time through special concepts that abridge typical sequences of events. I shall stress, in the context of the Historical Knowledge Epistemological Square (HKES) that emerged with the scientization of history, that history is always narrative, story has a theoretical ground of itself, and scientific histories address the need for a conceptual progression in ever‐improved narratives. This will lead to identification of three major theoretical levels in historical stories: naming, plotting (or emplotment), and formalizing. We revisit Jörn Rüsen's theory of history as the best starting point, and explore to what extent it could be developed by (i) taking a deeper look into narratological knowledge, and (ii) reanalyzing logically the conceptual strata in order to bridge the overrated Forschung/Darstellung (research/exposition) divide. The corollary: we should consider (scientific) historical writing as the last step of historical research, not as the next step after research is over. This thesis will drive us to a reconsideration of the German Historik regarding the problem of interpretation and exposition. Far from alienating history from science, narrative links history positively to anthropology and biology. The crossing of our triad name‐plot‐model with Rüsen's four theoretical levels (categories‐types‐concepts‐names) points to the feasibility of expanding Rüsen's Historik in logical and semiotic directions. Story makes history, theory makes story, and historical reason may proceed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For whom and about what? The Polin Museum, Jewish historiography and Jews as a “Polish cause” The article presents main threads of the ongoing debate around the permanent exhibition of the Polin Museum of the History of Polish Jews in Warsaw. Analyzing differences between two fields of research, Jewish studies and studies on Polish-Jewish relations, the article makes the case that many of the critical voices in this debate stem from a lack of understanding of the differences between these two fields of research; these in their turn arise from the current state of affairs in Poland, and the pressure of nationalism and ethnocentrism, exerted also on Polish historical debates. If the telling of the 1,000 years of the history of Jewish life in Poland were to concentrate on the attitudes of the majority population towards Jews, as the critics seem to suggest, should be the case, the Museum’s narrative would run the risk of falling into a teleological fallacy, whereby all previous events and processes are interpreted as mechanically leading to the Holocaust, and of omitting all of these elements of Jewish history which are not relevant from the perspective of the Holocaust and of antisemitism studies. Making anti-Jewish hatred or the attitudes of the general majority towards Jews into the central axis of Jewish history could deprive Jews of their own historical subjectivity. At the same time, the article points out where and how the narrative of the Polin Museum indeed insufficiently includes the subject of antisemitism as an important factor of Jewish experience and of Jewish history in Poland. Renewing the dialogue between representatives of Jewish studies and Polish-Jewish relations studies is crucial from the standpoint of the current situation in Poland, in which the Polin Museum can be used by various actors in their attempts to build highly biased, politicized and uncritical versions of the history of Poland generally and of Polish attitudes towards the Jews specifically. This kind of understanding between the fields of Jewish studies and Polish-Jewish relations studies and their representatives’ common struggle against such attempts require an understanding of the autonomy of and differences between these two fields of research. Dla kogo i o czym? Muzeum Polin, historiografia Żydów a Żydzi jako „sprawa polska” Artykuł ten przedstawia najważniejsze wątki krytycznej debaty wokół treści wystawy stałej Muzeum Historii Żydów Polskich Polin. Analizując różnice między dwoma polami badawczymi – studiami żydowskimi i studiami nad relacjami polsko-żydowskimi – autor broni tezy, że wiele krytycznych głosów w debacie wynika z niezrozumienia różnic między przedmiotem badań tych dwóch pól, po części wynikającego z obecnej sytuacji – panującego nacjonalizmu i etnocentryzmu, wywierających wpływ również na polskie debaty historyczne. Domaganie się od wystawy opowiadającej tysiącletnią historię Żydów na ziemiach polskich, aby koncentrowała się głównie na stosunku społeczeństwa większościowego do Żydów, grozi popełnieniem błędu teleologii, to jest interpretowaniem wcześniejszych wydarzeń i procesów jako nieuchronnie prowadzących do Zagłady, a także pomijaniem wszystkich tych elementów dziejów żydowskich, które z perspektywy Holokaustu i badań nad antysemityzmem nie mają znaczenia. Tego rodzaju postulaty i stojące za nimi metahistoryczne założenia grożą pozbawieniem Żydów roli podmiotów w ich własnej historii. Z drugiej strony autor tekstu wskazuje na elementy narracji wystawy stałej Muzeum Polin, w których rzeczywiście w niedostateczny sposób uwzględniona została problematyka antysemityzmu jako ważnego elementu żydowskiego doświadczenia i kluczowego czynnika dziejów Żydów w Polsce. Przywrócenie rzeczywistego dialogu i komunikacji pomiędzy przedstawicielami studiów żydowskich i badaczami relacji polsko-żydowskich, przy zachowaniu autonomii tych dwóch pól i zrozumieniu różnic pomiędzy nimi, jest też istotne z punktu widzenia niewątpliwych zagrożeń w postaci prób wykorzystania Muzeum Polin w budowie upolitycznionych, bezkrytycznych wizji historii Polski i stosunku Polaków do Żydów.

A lot of different historical issues were discussed during many centuries. As a result, the philosophy of history was established as an independent academic discipline. However, nowadays there are so many philosophies of history that we have to ask ourselves where this development leads us to, and whether they have anything positive to give to science. The question is as follows: "Can there be a credible philosophy of history?". Nevertheless, we still need to find out the significance of its credibility. To perform this task, we need to examine the very concept of the philosophy of history and to study the history of the philosophy of history. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ang akdang ito ni Herman Paul ay isang kritikal na pagsasakasaysayan(historicization) ng mga ideya ni Hayden White na maibibilang sapinakamahahalagang pilosopo ng kasaysayan ng kontemporaryong panahon.Si White ay tanyag bilang simbolo par excellence ng postmodernistang kasaysayan na reaksyon laban sa noo’y, at hanggang ngayo’y, namamayaning positibistang pananaw (na inuugat sa Alemang historyador ng ika-19 na dantaon na si Leopold von Ranke). Noong Dekada ’50 pa lang, masusulyapan na ang pagsalungat ni White sa tradisyong positibista nang tawagin niya si Ranke bilang “kawawang nilalang na nagkandabulag sa paghahanap ng ‘kung ano ang tunay na nangyari’”(Paul, 2011, p.105). Para kay White, ang nakaraan per se (bilang nakaraan) ay isang “walang-kahulugang katotohanan” (meaningless reality) lamang. Binibigyang kahulugan ng mga historyador ang nakaraan sa pamamagitan ng mga naratibo na siyang humuhugis at nagtatakda sa kahulugan. Sa magnum opus ni White na pinamagatang Metahistory: The Historical Imagination in Nineteenth-Century Europe (1973), inilalatag niya ang ibat-ibang pagbabanghay (emplotment) at tropos (tropes)na implisitong sinusundan at sinasandigan ng mga (positibistang) historyador upang magkaroon ng makatotohanang naratibo.

“Historical consciousness” category, according to German historian and philosopher Jörn Rüsen, refers to a historical sense generation theory in which historical memory stands as the historical consciousness main component, both aiming for the creation of historical culture. This historical culture is defined by the set of functions through which an individual or society creates an active relationship with the past via a temporal experience that should be perceived and interpreted before becoming the way to orientate and motivate human life. This paper intends to describe the “historical consciousness” category.

This article notes the proliferation of stereotypical images of the Chinese unleashed by the problematic assumption of their economic and social relations to the Filipino. How does the Filipino-Chinese writer perceive this challenge, and how is it transmuted in his/her literary work? Are the stereotypes duplicated, or are there attempts to undermine these negative images? How does one remember one’s ancestry and heritage? How does one illustrate the dynamics of generations – i.e., the men from the east, with the new breed of Filipino Chinese men and women experiencing a sense of alienation and exclusion from the old country? In Charlson Ong’s Embarrassment of Riches (Centennial Prize Winner,* 2nd place) there is a double invocation in the crafting of fiction as history: while it is a novel about the Philippines, it is also about Victorianas, a metafictive double of a nation that had its own share of hauntings and cancers generated by colonialization, dictatorships, and other development afflictions. Using this double invocation, this paper opines that the work is an effective example of how to confront the “haunting of the Filipino writer,” previously articulated by Resil Mojares. Civil society’s role in the continuing narrative of the Filipino nation is also invoked in Ong’s fiction.