wcaleb’s avatarwcaleb’s Twitter Archive—№ 10,102

              1. 1. Though often opposed rhetorically, I think macro-histories and micro-histories have a dialectical relationship.
                Permalink On twitter.com Twitter logo wcaleb’s avatar ♻️ 2 Retweets ❤️ 5 Favorites Mood 0
            1. …in reply to @wcaleb
              2. That is, a spate of "big" histories usually generates a round of criticism that shows the renewed need for "small" histories.
              Permalink On twitter.com Twitter logo wcaleb’s avatar ❤️ 1 Favorite Mood -1 🙁
          1. …in reply to @wcaleb
            3. For example, recent "big" histories of slavery by @Ed_Baptist, Johnson pivot on the experience, testimony of the enslaved.
            Permalink On twitter.com Twitter logo wcaleb’s avatar ❤️ 2 Favorites Mood -4 🙁
        1. …in reply to @wcaleb
          4. Criticisms of that work (both fair & unfair) express skepticism about claims re: individual testimony & experience.
          Permalink On twitter.com Twitter logo wcaleb’s avatar Mood -2 🙁
      1. …in reply to @wcaleb
        5. The result is a renewed imperative to do the micro historical recovery work seen in books like that of @arothmanhistory.
        Permalink On twitter.com Twitter logo wcaleb’s avatar ♻️ 1 Retweets ❤️ 1 Favorite Mood +2 🙂
    1. …in reply to @wcaleb
      6. Macro- & micro- approaches to history of slavery are "antithetical," then, in the dialectical sense not the logical sense.
      Permalink On twitter.com Twitter logo wcaleb’s avatar ❤️ 3 Favorites Mood -3 🙁
  1. …in reply to @wcaleb
    7. Indeed, maybe the better way to see "microhistory" and "macrohistory" is as "call" and "response."
    On twitter.com Twitter logo wcaleb’s avatar ♻️ 2 Retweets ❤️ 4 Favorites Mood +2 🙂