Owen Jones posed a good
rhetorical question last week. ‘How,’ he asked ‘ will history judge a media
which obsesses far more over what the leader of the opposition said under his
breath than the fact hundreds die on the streets of one of the wealthiest societies
on earth?’. The literal answer to this question, surely, is ‘it depends who the
historians are.’ And I imagine this is not the one he had in mind. The trope is
quite a common one. Whatever we think now, History, or historians, sooner or
later, will know better.
This is of course not
necessarily so. Aside from the diversity of the profession, which will always
include bad historians, even the general trends or attitudes might well turn
out to be ones we won’t like. Perhaps the profession will be dominated, as it
at times it has been, by arch Conservatives. Perhaps historians will be the
kind Nietzsche complained about, who wrote national histories which glorify the
existing order. Perhaps the story of our time will be written by the David Starkeys
of tomorrow, who probably won’t write the kind of stories we’d hope they
would. That will depend a lot on how the profession is funded and what
kind of a society we live in, as well as essentially random and unpredictable
endogenous developments and trends within academia.
Why, then, is this idea
so often invoked? On some level we want to imagine that future historians will
validate our current judgements. Perhaps this is similar to the way others have invoked the final
judgement of God: whatever happens now, however hopeless things seem God will
judge you. The idea of the future historian now fulfils that role. It is a kind of secular diety, which gives hope of an eventual vindication. It goes hand
in hand with a lingering belief in absolute truth that people who see
themselves as fighting ‘post-truth’ political forces.
Unfortunately, the
reality of both our political predicament and the way future generations might
see it is far less straight forward. The relationship between truth, propaganda
and a political reality which is in part subjectively constructed has an
extensive and growing literature, for the time being dominated by those who
would cast similar judgements to those Owen Jones hints at. What the future
holds, on the other hand, is unclear.
No comments:
Post a Comment