You are not logged in. Login Now
 0-12   12-36   37-61   62-86   87-89      
 
Author Message
25 new of 89 responses total.
ty
response 12 of 89: Mark Unseen   Jul 23 22:24 UTC 1991

My history major is a stepping stone.
mac
response 13 of 89: Mark Unseen   Jul 25 00:31 UTC 1991

Everything is a stepping stone, even an engineering degree.  What are you
planning to step onto next?
arabella
response 14 of 89: Mark Unseen   Jul 26 07:32 UTC 1991

My specialties are Art History and Music history (I have a BA in the former,
and am embarking on a masters degree program in the latter).  I find
it interesting to learn about the history of civilization *through* the
history of the arts of mankind.  I'm also very interested in learning
about the links between art, music, architecture, literature, and t he
social history of specific times and peoples.

Oh, and speaking of economic history, did the Panic of 1893 have something
to do with the government dropping the silver standard?  I've read some
about the history of Colorado silver-mining communities, and would love
to know more.
angi
response 15 of 89: Mark Unseen   Sep 10 00:10 UTC 1991

The more I think about what I'm going to do when I go back to scool,
the more I want to dive right into Greek and Latin so I can get into
a program of Classical Studies someday.  
reach
response 16 of 89: Mark Unseen   Oct 10 21:29 UTC 1991

I was never, nor will I ever be, a history major.
crimson
response 17 of 89: Mark Unseen   Oct 10 23:46 UTC 1991

'Tis a pity.
steve
response 18 of 89: Mark Unseen   Oct 11 01:34 UTC 1991

   It *is* fun.  What you have to do, is get over the horrid presentation
that was pummled into you in school.  Rare is the school that does anything
other than turning people off history, from what I've been visited.
arthur
response 19 of 89: Mark Unseen   Oct 11 04:10 UTC 1991

   I was lucky, my first year in college, to take a course in
ancient Greek history that breezed over the points of agreement, 
and spent most of its time considering the current academic
controversies about the period.  I've been interested ever
since, 'though my sense of Greek history after the Peloponnesian
War is a bit confused.  Not enough controversies, I guess.
reach
response 20 of 89: Mark Unseen   Jun 19 14:15 UTC 1992

        "Very few things happen at the right time and the rest do not
         happen at all. The concientious historian will correct these
         defects."
davel
response 21 of 89: Mark Unseen   Sep 11 02:24 UTC 1992

On the high-tech vs. liberal-arts question, my experience runs just counter
to what some of you expressed - in a way.  A few years back it seemed that
half the people I knew were music (many), philosophy, or English majors/grad
students who'd become computer jockeys of one sort or another.  The common
reason was the job market.  (Many had gotten entry-level computer jobs to
support their schooling & found it impractical to switch after schooling was
over.)
jeffk
response 22 of 89: Mark Unseen   Sep 15 04:32 UTC 1992

Maybe I missed a point somewhere, but what kinds of work can you find with a
degree in History?  I *love* history, but don't know where to apply it.  I'm
currently a computer programmer, which is cool, but my 2nd choice is history
stuff.  What's up?
davel
response 23 of 89: Mark Unseen   Sep 15 10:30 UTC 1992

The skills developed by the more technical academic disciplines (e.g.,
history) are quite useful in many other fields.  Programming is indeed well-
suited; the ability to systematically view a problem and to weigh conflicting
considerations clearly applies.  (In my opinion, also, a historian who's not
rigorous isn't much of a historian, and this also is a key in programming.)
There are many other fields of which this could be said.  But as far as
the kind of qualifications that employers like to see on your resume ...
you can go to grad school (to prepare to teach, or to postpone the issue);
or you can look for something in politics or a think tank or something like
that, as someone's research assistant.  (RA to a writer of historical fiction?
I doubt it; I suspect they started as frustrated historians themselves.  But
add "write historical novels".)  I can't think of much else off hand.

Unless academic history (or philosophy or whatever) - which translates as
teaching with your own research added as well - is a real possibility, you
may as well admit that you're self-indulgently taking this stuff because
you LIKE it, maybe because you hope it will make you a more well-rounded
person.  That's fine, although it's an expensive hobby with tuition where it
is.  No doubt this is socially useful, and in a truly enlightened culture we'd
all be philosopher-kings at $1.2M per year ... although Plato's view of the
philosopher-king didn't involve any personal luxury, rather the opposite if
anything.
arthur
response 24 of 89: Mark Unseen   Sep 17 10:37 UTC 1992

   Hate to rain on your parade, but the only person I know
doing anything with history is getting his PhD.  And facing
imminent unemployment because his thesis topic isn't
particularly trendy (the War of the Roses, peasant rebellion
during). It makes a much better avocation than a vocation.
davel
response 25 of 89: Mark Unseen   Sep 17 14:07 UTC 1992

Did I say there were huge openings in any of them?  If you can afford to take
it because you enjoy it, IMHO it's likely to improve the world in a small
way, but it's an expensive way to have fun.
kentn
response 26 of 89: Mark Unseen   Jun 21 22:15 UTC 1993

Too bad we're not supposed to talk about battle and military encounters.
Lately I've been reading a lot about Custer.  Does anyone know if there's
anything worth seeing in that regard in Monroe, MI?
rcurl
response 27 of 89: Mark Unseen   Jun 22 05:16 UTC 1993

There's a statue.
jep
response 28 of 89: Mark Unseen   Jun 23 02:40 UTC 1993

View hidden response.

vidar
response 29 of 89: Mark Unseen   Jan 2 00:55 UTC 1994

Very Interesting.
spartan
response 30 of 89: Mark Unseen   Aug 2 22:44 UTC 1994

Sorry to change the subject, but has anyone recently seen "Forrest Gump"? If
so, how do you all feel about the way it portrayed the events he  fairly
accurate, or did Robert Zemeckis really screw up? Just curious." ."
tnt
response 31 of 89: Mark Unseen   Aug 3 05:47 UTC 1994

 Accurate in terms of what, the book?  

        There are apparently ( idon't know for sure, as I'm not into dumb
but 'cute' storylines like FG) a lot of differences between the book & the mov
movie -- even his IQ!  In the book it is 70, & the movie it is apparently 75.

        This is per a brief piece in last week's USN&WR.
spartan
response 32 of 89: Mark Unseen   Aug 3 19:49 UTC 1994

Well, actually I meant in terms of historical accuracy, not in relation to the
book. You know, like the Vietnam sequence, for example.
rcurl
response 33 of 89: Mark Unseen   Aug 4 05:59 UTC 1994

Well, Forrest *wasn't* present for all those newscast sequences of
former presidents.....(just in case anyone was fooled?).
spartan
response 34 of 89: Mark Unseen   Aug 6 05:29 UTC 1994

OK, forget I asked. No one one seems to have understood what I meant.
Frankly, I don't think I know what I was really getting at, either.
rcurl
response 35 of 89: Mark Unseen   Aug 6 05:40 UTC 1994

That probably explains it.
tnt
response 36 of 89: Mark Unseen   Aug 10 08:20 UTC 1994

 Explains what?
 0-12   12-36   37-61   62-86   87-89      
Response Not Possible: You are Not Logged In
 

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss