Yo the McPherson criticism of the 1619 project both ignores the nuances quite present in the work itself, but is really focused on what Hayden White famously described as the ethical and aesthetic frameworks undergirding all historical narratives.
-
-
For sure. And historians should argue that out for years to come. It just seemed like from the circulating answer, he didn’t like the moral conclusions and narrative emphasis, not the underlying facts themselves.
-
And perhaps that the work is driven by present politics (tho if you write a whole book about why the Civil War still matters, maybe you’re doing that too!)
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.