Historians Perspectives :: History Historical Essays

Historians PerspectivesEvery billet can be counted at from so many divers(prenominal) angles that it is very difficult for any both wad to agree on what is going on. Ten people could look at the same situation and create ten different theories or assumptions as to what is occurring. This is because no two people have the same backgrounds, no two people have the same experiences, and no two people think exactly the same. These factors come together to distinguish each some wholeness as an individual. Every person has the ability to interpret the same situation in a different way. This occurs more often thusly not, when one historian has a theory about a while plosive speech sound or a historical event. One historian could look at the assassination of John F. Kennedy and think that it was a governmental conspiracy, while another(prenominal) may look at it merely as an ex-marine that went mad and killed the President. distillery on the same subject a third historian may combi ne facts from both agate lines to create a whole new draw of his own.This is exactly what occurred after Richard Hofstadter wrote his book The geezerhood of Reform. He made an argument on progressivism in his book in 1955, which was not written as fact besides more as opinion. After that triple different articles were written on the same topic from different angles. Richard L. McCormick, Paula Baker, and Peter G. Filene, every(prenominal) wrote articles which either agreed or disagreed with Hofstadter. At runs they completely disagreed with points that Hofstadter made, but then in the same article they agreed and support a point Hofstadter made. All four people wrote on the same topic but all four took different views. This was their right as individuals to do and at some points they had similarities but then at others they went to other sides of the spectrum.Hofstadter in his book, The Age of Reform, broke down the age of reform as a time period from 1896 to the 1930s. Withi n this time period, he then divided it into three separate sections or safaris. The first section being that of the populist movement, the entropy was the progressive movement, and third was the reforms made during the New Deal. He begins with the populist movement and how it started based on the agrarian myth in rural and southerly areas. This myth had the farmers thinking that they held an important part in society and that their craft has a special value.