During the creation of Constitution, each state had to approve it. During this time there were people who supported it, Federalist and who did not, Anti-Federalists. I am siding with Anti-Federalist since they were right in thinking they did not want to give all their power away to the national government. If you lived in a state separate from where government state is established, how would you get your problems in your state solved if you had a government who was telling you what to do but not really knowing what problems you had in your state. If I lived back in that time, and having just finished the war with Britain where we finally got our independence, I would remind people all the issues we had.
What is “event history” or “history from above?” What is “history from below?” Compare/contrast the two and discuss how this may affect one’s perspective of history. Event history is a record of the specific dates and times an event took place; this involves no theories, just facts. History from above is where the rich and powerful only were taken an interest to; everything they did was recorded and the stories and events associated with the lower class were deemed insignificant accordingly. History from below is the exact opposite; the lower class demanded to get recognized and recorded into history for what they were doing and what was happening to them as well. If one was to only read the history from above they would most likely think that everything was great in the world back then with just a few mishaps and that everyone was happy; were you to just read the
Historians can really change the way historic events are viewed by their personal choice of emphasis on specific details. Looking at an event through a positive and negative perspective, historians can choose whether they focus more on the negative view, or the positive view. Basically, it is the discretion of the historian to balance the different viewpoints so the individuals taking in the information can decide for themselves which view they want to focus on the most to grasp their overall feeling of the historic event. The problem with this however, is historians generally emphasize one point of view more than another which can direct individuals’ thoughts of historic events as a results of the historians viewpoint, and not their own. Furthermore, historians take history and document it with their own values and opinions in mind.
Memories are a way of recalling ones personal experiences. Whether a positive or negative nature they form who we are as individuals. History is the recorded experiences and events which have occurred in the past. There is a strong entwinement between history and memory and this allows the inconsistencies of personal memories to influence the credibility of human history. This is reflected in Denise Levertov’s poems’ ‘Ways of conquest’ and ‘In Thai Bin (peace) Province’.
It is a defense of studying each historical period on its own terms, and not imposing one's own moral and social standards on figures and situations that existed with, perhaps, a different set of ethical and cultural concerns. Butterfield’s text described historians who project modern attitudes on to the past, pass moral judgments on historical figures, and regard history as significant only to the extent that it labored to create the modern world. Such judgments are viewed as problematic because they tempt historians not to understand the past on its own terms. Butterfield argues that historians should write aesthetically rather than polemically, exercising "imaginative sympathy" in appreciating the lost worlds of the dead rather than seeking, or expecting, the vindication of their own current positions (92). The "Whig interpretation," as Butterfield calls it, sees history as a struggle between a progression of good libertarian parties and evil reactionary forces, failing to do justice to history's true complexity.
Background on the Autobiography of Malcolm X While autobiographies must necessarily be written while the author is alive, they are most often retrospective, providing the reader with a personalized view of some significant period in the author’s life. A real-time, unedited version of the author’s life is described as a journal. Biographies, on the other hand, may be written either during their subjects’ lives or after a subject has died. The biographical form allows an author a greater degree of objectivity on the life of the subject. An “as told to” autobiography provides the reader with the subject’s version of the truth of his or her life while the arduous task of writing is left to a professional writer.
The significance of this quote is that it displays us the feelings Gatsby has for his memories. This proves my main claim mainly because we can see that Gatsby want to revive the past, rather than to try and deal with what’s going on in his present. This also proves my thesis because we see Gatsby trying to achieve a concept of a dream but he’s struggling in the process because he’s trying to live in a past memory and bring it to the present. Also, we can see that Gatsby is even determined to do so. As we can see F. Scott Fitzgerald states, “I’m going to fix everything just the way it was before” (117) It’s easy to see in this quote that Gatsby is really serious about going back in the past, and try to bring a piece of happiness that made him happy back to the present.
British poet Samuel Butler once said, “God cannot alter the past, though historians can.” This sarcastic comment accurately reflects what historians so often do with the history of their respective civilizations. They are constantly searching for why things happened the way they did. However, the sooner after the event, the more romanticized it becomes in their hypotheses. War becomes a duty to uphold honor and human rights, and peace is a proverbial olive branch, created purely for its own sake. Then, historians analyze events many decades after their spawning and discover, especially in a capitalist country like the United States, that the true causes are less wholesome.
Rather problems in the past should be analyzed why they were solved one way and not the other. If the human race hopes to survive against itself it must not consistently look on the past’s morality or moral issues. Morality should only concern the present and the future, the two time periods which are still in fact malleable. Man must accept that the past cannot be changed, and instead study the actions taken, why it was taken, and consider all other possibilities so one can relate it to today’s situations. If one dwells on the “what-ifs” of the past, one would be looking backwards too often to make any progress
As Ira Irwin proposed; “The greatest discoveries have come from people who have looked at a standard situation and seen it differently” demonstrating that explicitly searching for a new landscape condemns an individual to a constrained area of discoveries. To make a true revelation an individual must not search; rather, they must look at their surrounds from a new perspective. The important discoveries, those that last, are ones which are not pursued but contrarily are a result of previous actions such as the widening of one’s lens and the way they view the world around them. William Shakespeare effectively demonstrates the notion of looking with a ‘new pair of eyes’ in The Tempest as does Darren Aronofsky in his psychological thriller Black