Case (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
case) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
fandomsecrets2013-02-04 06:41 pm
case) wrote in fandomsecrets2013-02-04 06:41 pm
[ SECRET POST #2225 ]
⌈ Secret Post #2225 ⌋
Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.
01.
__________________________________________________
02.
__________________________________________________
03.
__________________________________________________
04.
__________________________________________________
05.
__________________________________________________
06.
__________________________________________________
07.
__________________________________________________
08.
__________________________________________________
09.
__________________________________________________
10.
__________________________________________________
11.
__________________________________________________
12.
__________________________________________________
13.
__________________________________________________
14.
__________________________________________________
15. [repeat]
__________________________________________________
16.
__________________________________________________
17.
__________________________________________________
18.
__________________________________________________
Notes:
Secrets Left to Post: 04 pages, 084 secrets from Secret Submission Post #318.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 1 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ], [ 1 - take it to comments ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.
no subject
(Anonymous) 2013-02-05 12:42 am (UTC)(link)no subject
The problem is a lot of not-very-good history books get released. The kind that are playing up a certain agenda, a certain image of the past that might not be at all accurate. Books with footnotes/endnotes imply that the author actually had to look at primary sources and is willing to have other experts check their work.
A good example is one of Stephen Ambrose's later books, which you can read about here.
Stephen Ambrose had a hell of a reputation. If an actual trained historian with decades of experience is so sloppy when not held to a high standard, what are you going to get from a nonhistorian?
Of course there are excellent books written without footnotes. Barbara Erenreich, who was a historian before the whole Nickle and Dimed thing, released a political history without footnotes so as not to alienate readers. She did however put all her references in the back of the books listed by page number--basically she snuck her sources in. Other histories without references can also be good. But if the writer isn't working with primary source material be really careful. Read reviews by actual experts in the field. Know that popular history is often blatant propaganda with a tweed jacket on. There's nothing wrong with liking it but always check up on it.
OT
(Anonymous) 2013-02-05 01:07 am (UTC)(link)But Stephen Ambrose! I love him. I used a sizable amount of his (earlier) work in my thesis, and subsequently had to defend my choice to cite a discredited historian's work (sigh).
Re: OT
How'd you defend yourself? Was it Citizen Soldiers?