Ayers/Thomas American Historical Review article

From: William G. Thomas (wgt9m@virginia.edu)
Date: Wed Oct 31 2001 - 14:07:25 EST

  • Next message: William G. Thomas: "article note"

    Dear Friends:

    I'd value your thoughts on the first electronic article for the American
    Historical Review that Ed and I are writing. The article's direction has
    changed in recent showings to colleagues. One of the most difficult issues
    for historians is the concept of authorship and narrative--subjects that we
    touched on briefly today in the seminar. Few historians would consider the
    Valley project web site to be a "narrative" and instead consider it an
    "archive." Many of our colleagues might consider this article a
    compilation of evidence that offers no "story" or "narrative" direction.

    We've moved in this direction on purpose--you'll see that we have not
    "ordered" our findings--someone can enter our argument at various points
    and move to evidence and historiography and then on to other findings
    (arguments). The "Summary" will be an order narrative of the findings.
    The "Narrative" is a story, traditionaly told with metaphorical language
    and footnotes. Earlier versions of the article had no "Narrative" but
    instead a set order to the findings. We've liberated the findings and
    included a narrative and summary, in essence each a step of abstraction and
    authorial direction.

    The current draft is at:

    http://lincoln.vcdh.virginia.edu/middle.html (click Article)

    The frontpage will differ and include a yet to be finished Flash map of the
    region. The summary section is a mess but nearly everything else is
    stable--I'll be updating the summary soon.

    There will also be a Commentary section on the same level as Historiography
    and Evidence and it will include comments in our release version from Lloyd
    Benson and others. The comments will also be able to be sorted and will
    link to specific findings or historiography, when they finally work.

    The old version for your reference is at:

    www.vcdh.virginia.edu/AHR/article.html

    It has a more linear argument built into the analysis and we've since
    decided to cut loose from that and structure that section differently.

    Thank you so much for looking at this.

    I'd welcome your thoughts, comments, suggestions, and, if your inclined,
    encouragement!

    Best,

    Will
    William G. Thomas
    Director
    Virginia Center for Digital History
    Alderman Library
    University of Virginia
    P. O. Box 400116
    Charlottesville, VA 22904-4116
    804-924-7834
    www.vcdh.virginia.edu



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Oct 31 2001 - 14:03:13 EST