Food History Review November 19, 2009
Posted by jdresner in doing history, not homework.add a comment
Washington Post reviews three new books on food history: Chocolate, Curry, and Cheese. The books are really not groundbreaking, more a summary of existing research and lots of recipes, but food history is one of the subfields of history which gets a lot of popular attention these days.
Book Review: Criticism November 13, 2009
Posted by jdresner in doing history, hist 102 (Fall 2009), homework.add a comment
One of the last components of the book review is the criticisms: what’s wrong with your book? Are there sections that are unclear, or topics that should have been covered, or important questions that go unanswered, or below-average writing, or excessive detail, or unhelpful diagrams, or ….
You get the idea. The tricky bit is that this isn’t just a matter of opinion: you need to be able to back it up. WHY is this a problem? What could the author have done to make it better?
New WWI Photographs Discovered, Restored November 4, 2009
Posted by jdresner in doing history, military, not homework.add a comment
Hundreds of glass-plate pictures of British WWI soldiers have been discovered in France and published. The full collection can be seen here, perhaps the first time I’ve ever seen a LiveJournal account used for historical sources!
Book Context due Monday* November 4, 2009
Posted by jdresner in Schedule Change, doing history, hist 102 (Fall 2009), homework.add a comment
Under the category of “Context” the book review assignment says:
Context: What is the background of the author? Is their personal background relevant to the subject of the book? What is the historical context, the time period discussed by the book? What other books discuss the same kinds of things, and how does this book compare? Note that your textbook is an invaluable resource for comparisons and context.
Obviously, there are several different issues going on here, but they basically fall into two categories: Historical context and Historiographical context.
Historical context is about how the material in your book fits with the rest of what’s going on in the world at the time: if you’re writing about Japanese 19th century industrialization, for example (nobody is, unfortunately), you’d want to note that Japan was a late industrializer compared to other major industrial nations, that it was the age of unequal treaties, and that industrialization happened at the same time as the rise of nationalism, parliamentarianism, and imperialism.
Historiographical context, on the other hand, is about how the book fits with the rest of the books written on the same topic: what are the normal interpretations of this event and how does this book change that; who is this book arguing with, and why?
In both cases, your textbook is a good starting place, because it does look at the broader context, and because it represents a kind of “current consensus” on most issues. Sometimes the book itself will describe the context for you; sometimes you have to work at it a bit.
* Yes, the context assignment was supposed to be due Friday the 6th, but I forgot to mention it in class, so I’m pushing it back to Monday the 9th.
Historians Explain Murder? November 3, 2009
Posted by jdresner in current events, doing history, historiography, not homework.add a comment
How have historians dealt with questions of crime and punishment? Jill Lepore looks at new books on murder, with a special emphasis on explaining why the US looks different than economically and politically similar societies.
A few announcements October 21, 2009
Posted by jdresner in administrative, doing history, hist 102 (Fall 2009), homework, not homework.add a comment
Reminder: No class for either section on Friday the 23rd, due to the Presidential inauguration. Students are encouraged to attend — and see your instructors in academic regalia! — at the front of Russ Hall (or in Weede, if the weather is poor) at 2.
While I didn’t require resubmission of thesis statements that missed the mark this time, I’m adding an element to the next book review assignment, the discussion of the argument and evidence of the book: you must include a clearly marked, one sentence statement indicating what you think the thesis of the work is. This is quite important for the argument and evidence discussion: if you don’t know what the author is trying to prove, you can’t evaluate the effectiveness of the argument they make or the quality of the evidence they present.
As you try to summarize and discuss your chosen books, be careful of how you use the book and any related sources you may find. Obviously, using the actual words of a source — textbook, internet or otherwise — without quotation marks or other acknowledgement is clearly and blatantly plagiarism. Weak paraphrasing can constitute plagiarism: if you don’t thoroughly alter the language of your source, it is a form of intellectual theft. Even something fully paraphrased in your own words can be considered plagiarism if you don’t acknowledge your source(s) — this is what footnotes, endnotes and parenthetical citations with works cited pages are for. Plagiarism is academic dishonesty, theft of intellectual property, and a violation of University policy, and will not be tolerated in this course.
Finally, a little 19th century union history — the struggle between wage-earning workers and capitalist owners — in early baseball.
Food History: requires testing! October 18, 2009
Posted by jdresner in doing history, historiography, not homework.add a comment
Chris Bray passes on word of two experiences with early American food: Gingerbread cookies from Colonial Williamsburg and a pound cake taste test, pitting a modern recipe against a two-century old version which required an hour of hand-beating. See if you can figure out how “Pound Cake” got its name…
In other news, historical sea logs help climatologists.
Quick survey of the evolving uses of the term “socialism” October 15, 2009
Posted by jdresner in doing history, hist 102 (Fall 2009), not homework, resources.add a comment
At HNN, Walter Moss has a nice survey of some of the fuzzy language used by and about socialists, socialism, progressivism, etc.
History Club Meeting October 7, 2009
Posted by jdresner in doing history, not homework.add a comment
Not for extra credit — though the History Club events usually qualify — but a good group:
Greetings from the History Club here at PSU!
If you are a history major, minor, or are simply a student who is interested in learning more about history and participating in fun activities to that end, please come to our club meeting on Oct. 21st at 3pm in the History computer lab (306J Russ Hall).
We would love to see you all there! Please feel free to come and enjoy free food and drinks, as well as getting to know some of us in the club. We will be talking about upcoming events, as well as those that we would like to plan for the future.
See you on the 21st!
Also, I just got a flyer for the Pitt State Women’s Studies Club — all students welcome! — meeting Monday, October 12, 4:30pm in Grubbs 422. Again, not an extra credit opportunity in itself, but for interested folks.
A rough calculation of African Slave Trade September 18, 2009
Posted by jdresner in doing history, resources.add a comment
| Atlantic trade volume | Middle Passage mortality rate | Islamic Trade | |
| 15c-16c | ~2k/yr | ~50% | ~10k/yr |
| 17c | rising to 20k/yr | ~10k/yr | |
| 18c | 55k/yr | ~10k/yr | |
| 19c | 33k/yr (peaking early) | ~5% | ~10k/yr |
| total | 14M | ~25% | ~5M |
Sources include Bentley&Ziegler, Traditions and Transformations, McKay, et. al, and others
