Narrative History and Theory

Abstract

I am a narrative historian. By narrative, I mean the telling of a story to explain and analyze events and human agency in order to increase understanding. As a narrative historian, I have not made extensive use of theory in my analysis of past events. In fact, in the past I consistently rejected theory, considering it more of a hindrance than a help.The historian Geoffrey Roberts stated, “History is frequently labelled an idiographical discipline as opposed to a nomothetic one, that is, a discipline whose knowledge objects are particular, individual, and specific rather than classes of phenomena which are abstracted and subsumed in generalisations about trends, patterns and causal determinations.” In this vein, it was my view—as Peter Burke noted—that history examines particulars and “attend to concrete detail,” while theory attends to “general rules and screen[s] out the exceptions.”

Ada apa dalam "Hutan Melayu"? Naratif fizikal dan spiritual hutan Melayu di zaman British-Malaya

“…Pendekatan naratif adalah baik bagi penceritaan sejarah. Menurut Tamura (2011), penyampaian bahan sejarah secara naratif, dapat meningkatkan kefahaman pembaca seperti penceritaan mengenai sesuatu peristiwa dan perihal diri manusia. Penulis bersetuju dengan Roberts (2006), Tamura (2011: 150) yang menyimpulkan bahawa sejarah dilabelkan sebagai disiplin yang bersifat ideografik, iaitu penelitian secara mendalam terhadap suatu peristiwa sejarah yang dikaji.…”

“…Ahli sosiologi sangat mementingkan penggunaan teori sosial dan keadaan ini memisahkan mereka dengan ahli sejarah. namun begitu, menurut Tamura (2011), ahli antropologi sosial seperti Geertz dan sahlins mula menggabungkan kaedah antropologi dengan sejarah dan garis pemisah akibat disiplin yang berbeza sejak 50 tahun lalu berakhir setelah kemunculan disiplin baharu yang dipelopori oleh Foucault, Bakhtin, Bourdieu serta beberapa ahli falsafah lain (Tamura, 2011: 150-157). Oleh yang demikian, kemantapan kajian ini diperlihatkan melalui hasil gabungan autoetnografi dan juga kaedah naratif untuk menganalisis penceritaan hutan Melayu oleh pegawai dan sarjana Barat.…”

A szovjet pszichológia amerikai interpretációja az emigránsok visszaemlékezései alapján

“…A topik a narratíva általam meghatározott tematikai fókuszát jelöli, mely a pszichológia alkalmazott jellegét helyezi előtérbe a kérdezők szándékai szerint. A narratíva oktatástörténetben való felhasználása az elbeszélés mód- jára, közvetetten az emberi szándékok és érdekek (human agency) megismerésére helyezi a hangsúlyt (Tamura 2011), a hazai neveléstudományban több példa van már a hasonló megközelítésre (Balog-Szabolcs 2019).…”

Is a theory of media and communication history possible (and necessary)?

“…However, theoretical generalizations have also been described as a bridge towards a non-historical, empirical, and theoretical core of a discipline by specialized historians who consider themselves as part of another scientific community (Tamura, 2011;for media history: Arnold, 2008;Saxer, 1987). Therefore, the use of theory can be both a factor of differentiation and closure, and an indicator of heteronomy in relation to other disciplines.…”

“…While authors from other specialized historical disciplines have reviewed metahistorical literature and discussed its application to their fields (e.g. Roberts, 2006;Tamura, 2011), historians of communication and the media have only casually referred to this discourse. Of course, there have been many theoretically oriented publications in media history or contributions advocating the use of theories (cf.…”