80 new of 89 responses total.
On the other hand, I know liberal arts undergrads who decided to get their engineering training in graduate school. I think that order works very well.
One might not like engineering after seeing the way it works. It is not necessarily a 'flunking' effect. I studied engineering, completed my studies, got my degree, worked at high tech companies. I still don't like the human factor in the engineering field, that is the engineers' attitude. May be it is the lacking human approach, and clumsiness in human relations. I am not saying I changed it for better, after all, I studied engineering after high school. That shapes you somewhat.
My history major is a stepping stone.
Everything is a stepping stone, even an engineering degree. What are you planning to step onto next?
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.
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.
I was never, nor will I ever be, a history major.
'Tis a pity.
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.
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.
"Very few things happen at the right time and the rest do not
happen at all. The concientious historian will correct these
defects."
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.)
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?
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.
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.
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.
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?
There's a statue.
Very Interesting.
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." ."
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.
Well, actually I meant in terms of historical accuracy, not in relation to the book. You know, like the Vietnam sequence, for example.
Well, Forrest *wasn't* present for all those newscast sequences of former presidents.....(just in case anyone was fooled?).
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.
That probably explains it.
Explains what?
(I think I know what spartan was trying to get at! I do! I do!) (I think he was asking if the events that were depicted in Forrest Gump could have played out the way the movie suggests!) (beam)
I think I saw on TV the other day that Nixon was out of the country on the night of the Watergate break-in, whereas in the movie he wasn't.
Yeah, I think carson's got it.
hello everyone out there in cyberspace. i've been out of school for some time now, and doing the mothering thing but my political science/history background keeps my mind busy. It was worth however many thousands of bucks it cost me. I've been doing some thinking about imperialism lately. Have you ever read the original Babar The Elephant King books? (as a mom I am now looking for relevance in children's literature). Notice how Babar, a perfectly normal unclothant becomes king bquit taalk ntalk talk jeeny[ caht[ chat jenny ntalk jenny@grex.cyberspace.org help talk do you see me? who chat ntalk
I hope you're OK now. Yes, I've read the Babar books, also because of having children. So, what's with imperialism, in Babar-land?
o.k., I'm o.k. now...I'm new at this, so thank for your patience. anyway, Babar dresses and acts like a human (Westerner) so the other elephants crown him king. Then he goes on to build "Celesteville"--with little bungalows in little straight rows (ala the Europeans in their colonies in Africa, India, etc.) So was Laurent de Brunhoff pro or anti imperialist? These are things I think about while nursing my baby, making lasagne, etc. Good stuff, this history, any thoughts from any of you out there?
I didn't read any cynicism or sarcasm into the stories, so I'd have to take the stories at face value, but not necessarily "imperialism". Why can't Babar just learn other ways, and implement them? No one was forcing him to (as I recall). [By the way, have you sorted out how to respond to a "talk" when you're in the middle of something?]
I would like to discuss Civil War history? Is there anyone else?
You should enter an item. The last book about the civil war I read was called "Lincoln at Gettysburg", a detailed description of the cultural and personal foundations of the Gettysburg address.
The Civil War fascinated me in grade school. I'm not nearly as up on it right now, but I wouldn't mind trying. oh, lsee, if you don't mind my asking: why are you so eager to discuss the Civil War, of all things?
Carson and Mike-I am a Civil WAr reenactor and am interested in seing if there are others out there who do this thing. Have some esp. experience i n the field.. (literally). Interested in continuing--Civil War history--all fields--let's give it a go.
The way to give it a go is to enter an item about it. Type "enter" at the Ok prompt.
will do--thanks
re:Babar musing: Edward Said would *love* your observation. John M MacKenzie would love it more. What's the publication date on those books? It could tell you a lot about it. The author may or may not have been pro- or anti-imperialist, but imperialism still shapes the views that emerge in a book, even a children's book (MacKenzie would posit: *especially* in a children's book!)
I sugest for anyone interested in the imperial roman empire the book "The First Man In Rome" it is a master piece of literature.
I would add a recommendation of Gibbons' _Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire_, even if from an earlier scholarship.
I'm currently working on my master's in German literature, but my thesis has a lot to do with how accurately some documentary works portray historical events (more specifically, what the Church did or did not do during the Third Reich). Sound like an interesting topic to anyone?
Specifically that topic: Yes it sounds interesting. Also interesting is the insight you may have into the different influences on the way history is recorded in general gained through your work. I think there will always be a significant difference between a compressed, or comprehensive, history and the facts as gained through detailed study of a certain event or set of circumstances. I've learned that a final "truth" or ultimate telling of a history is an illusory goal, but the insights gained in the consideration of the fine details of history are well worth their pursuit.
For anyone interested in Imperial Rome, but does not want something too heavy, try _I, Claudius_, or _Claudius the God_ by Robert Graves. They are both fiction, but they are well researched, and the give a good impression of what the times were like.
Is anyone interested in this conf anymore? I was a history major in school as well and I think the number of historical topics, such as the debate over the atomic bomb, belie the current condition of this conf. I'd love to see this conf become active again. Maybe it just needs a jump-start!
OK. Go ahead, and plug it in and throw the switch!
Right--the way to revive a slow conference is to start entering stuff in it.
Like this: someday it will be history.
Kerouac- what area of history did you study? (I'm thinking that there was one area that interested you more then others...)
My particular area was contemporary american history. I did my senior thesis on certain elements of the watergate scandal. What area did you think interested me?
My mind recognizes Watergate as history, but my heart wants to think of "history" as that which happened before I was born, like the Battle of Bull Run.
Kerouac- I guess I had better explain myself a little clearer. I was trying to say that because history is such a huge subject- people generally study one area in particular. I wasn't saying that I had an area in mind tha tI thought you studied. :)
exit
Hi to anyone still interested in this conference. I'm interested in Military History in general, like the Civil War, WWI, WW2. Political history is also interesting, past Presidential Elections. Here's something new, what do people think of the recently released video of the Zapruder film? Has anyone seen it yet? Would you buy it? Should everyone have a copy in their video collection?
I'm interested in history (hell, I have a BA in it) but I'm not into Military history. :( IU'm more into social. (We're talking Medieval and Renassaince Europe)
Oh, I'm interested in other general history as well, though I focus alot on the Western civilization side. I had what they called a "concentration" in history, besides my BA in Journalism. Not quite a minor in the field. I'm currently re-reading William L. Shirer's *The Collapse of the Third Republic*, his chronical of the social, political and military factors that led to the quick fall of the French to the Nazis in 1940.
Hmm, sounds interesting. As I said, I tend to go back a few hundred years, or more. ;)
any body 'sides me ever read any john prebble? i'm looking for a cupple of his books...
Yeah, I've got to go back and check out some older periods, I've been focusing too much on the 19th and 20th centuries lately.
Whoa...dead conf. =)
Well, it IS the HISTORY conference, like in, "It's History".
This is a pretty old conference so I don't know if anyone is still reading it. I am working on my bachelors in computer science and have always loved history. The community college I went to is in Omaha, Nebraska. It is the former army fort Fort Omaha. It is from t his fort that the soldiers that went to relieve Custer after the little big horn left. The old stables are now the school automotive repair lab. I had programming classes in the old headquarters building. I used to think about that a lot when we were studying C++. President Grant and General Sherman both stayed there at one point in time. General Crook was in charge back then. The trial of Chief Standing Bear took place in Omaha and it is there that they imprisoned him and his followers. If you recall, this is the trial where Native Americans gained status as American citizens. At one point the base was the main American balloon observation post. During the Second World War it was a prison camp for Italians. Anyway, it is a very interesting place that has a history museum on site as well as historical markers all over the campus. It was a great place to go to school. It is one of the most beautiful campuses I have ever seen too. Well, that is it for now I guess. For a guy like me that loves computers and loves history, this is a great place. P.S. They say the old campus is haunted. I have heard that on certain nights you can see soldiers in World War I uniforms marching on the north side of the campus. They also say the old officers barracks is extremely haunted and even in the daytime you can hear voices and footsteps when there are no people there. I did some work study in these buildings and it did seem pretty weird.
Do you believe that any place can be "haunted"? I would think that would be antithetical to an interest in truth in history.
rcurl, many people believe that there is more information included in the term "truth" than you do. Your belief system excludes a lot of information that others try to take into account in coming up with "the truth".
You make "truth" sound pretty fungible. That is convenient for supporting one's own personal beliefs as "truth", but it isn't "truth" that can be tested and verified by objective means. The word "truth" loses all meaning when it can be anything one wants. I suggest using the term "personal belief" when the word "truth" is inappropriate. I used the phrase "truth in history". There is only one "truth in history", which is an accurate record of events.
Then there's no "truth in history". History is written by the winners, not the truth-tellers.
And exactly whose eye-witness account is the "only one 'truth in history'"?
Those that are historically correct. Actually, while some history may be written by the winners, over time history is corrected by the scholars.
You're obviously forgetting that scholars can disagree on many points. Not everyone has to have your black and white view of everything.
As I said *over time* history is corrected by scholars. What disagreement today is there about the history of Eqypt that is not caused by lack of information? The only "black and white" perspective I have on history is that *there was only one course of history*, and it is only our ignorance that leads to disagreements about it.
The term "history" is also used not only for specific descriptions of what happened but also for generalizations about what happened, and discussions of why it happened, etc. -- these are fertile ground for disagreements. And of course, the one course of history looks different from different places while it's running, and no written history can include all the different views. As for "haunted", I would just wonder what jerrybriardy meant by "did seem pretty weird." He didn't claim the place was haunted, only that it was alleged to be.
As this conference seems to be haunted... It does rather amaze me to run across comments I made 10 years ago. Often ghost stories can provide useful bits of history- and as is mentioned in #82- if someone truly says 'it's said that this place is haunted' they're speaking the truth. However that doesn't mean the place IS haunted.
History is *corrected* by scholars? I don't buy that. Events are told through generations and facts and figures are skewed over time. You can try to explain what the assassination of JFK was like but its not going to be the same story told by someone that hears 2nd hand. Several generations later, you're stuck with Oliver Stone's rendition.
Maybe after several millennia, we'll be stuck with Oliver Stone's rendition because somebody saved it as a horrible example of something. But for the nearer future we'll continue to have other versions, no two identical.
I'm not sure we'll ever be stuck with just Oliver Stone's version- there are too many other movies and so on that try to tell the same story- odd are those will survive as well.
I hope I can contribute and put a little life back into this conference. Of course, I have no idea how much traffic Grex gets these days.
It gets a bit, and from time to time it's possible to breathe new life into the conferences. :)
Grex History Conference I've dug down through decades of backlogged posts and found the History conference! This looks interesting, especially since it now preserves the history of discussions of history. resp:26 Not history, but I was interested by a recent review of ARMSTRONG by H.W. Crocker III, a humorous alternate history about Custer. https://ww w.theamericanconservative.com/birzer/what-if-custer-were-a-lone-surv ivor/ resp:40 resp: 42 These posts are a gem of a time capsule! Thousands for a college degree? I think today in-state tuition will set you back several tens of thousands, and out-of-state and private colleges over one hundred thou. Imperialism? As we now know in this enlightened 21st century, of course it's always about imperialism! And sexism, racism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, islamophobia, and whatever other evil the dead straight Christian white men have been conspiring in. ;) resp:61 Isn't "contemporary history" an oxymoron? I know it's an actual thing, but to me it seems that if it's contemporary, it's really just news -- history takes at least a few decades/generations to digest. resp:73 and onward. Interesting 2005 discussion of ghosts and the nature of truth in history.
You have several choices: