In this post (and, perhaps, in some follow-up posts) I want to examine some of the methodological choices of Lizabeth Cohen’s Making a New Deal (1990). This is not a review of the book, nor is it an assessment of the book’s argument. This isn’t even a book summary. Instead, this is a practical inquiry into how this Bancroft-winning monograph can shed some light on how historians grapple with the most prosaic aspects of that capacious term historiography; I want to use Cohen’s book as a way to discuss the craftsmanship of writing history.* Continue reading
All text (including posts, pages, and comments) posted on this blog on or after August 7, 2012, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. More information here
This blog is © 2007-2014 Society for U.S. Intellectual History.
- L.D. Burnett on Cherchez la Femme: Week 2 of “The Group”
- Brian A. Graham on Adam Gopnik’s Plaint: A Philosophy of What History Isn’t
- Dan Wickberg on Adam Gopnik’s Plaint: A Philosophy of What History Isn’t
- Robin Marie on Adam Gopnik’s Plaint: A Philosophy of What History Isn’t
- Tim Lacy on “Mrs. Satan” and the Passion for the Real: Towards a History of the Cultural Worker, Part Two