To help you establish field
knowledge in an area, text, concept, or method that intersects with your own
interests, I will ask you to develop 2 assessments of “secondary” sources over
the course of the semester, selecting from our article list. Each
of these assessments should thoroughly address the article, providing a 1-2 page (single-spaced) summary and a
1-page (single-spaced) reflection on how that article would shape someone’s reading if they
read it before ever encountering the “primary” text(s) it discusses. While you may
turn them in earlier, the first assessment is due no later than February 28, and the second assessment is due no later than April 11. Please submit
them via BB Assignments.
As part of your assessment, consider
how the author attempts both history and historiography in the space of a
single argument—that is, consider how the authors re/construct narratives or
enact specific methodologies while also drawing attention to the foundations on
which their narratives and methodologies rest. One binary relationship we hope
to disrupt is thinking of “histories” only as deeply described contexts, and
thinking of “historiographies” only as ways of re-reading (or
revising) these contexts. In practice as well
as in theory, these are two dimensions of a much more generative process. Ideally,
you would mention 1 or 2 other sources in our field journals (or in related
field journals) that you think could enhance the discussion your author takes
up, discovering and articulating germane connections you think are worthwhile.
The key word here is “discovery.”
