What’s at Stake in Doing (Critical) IR/IPE Historiography? The Imperative of Critical Historiography

Author(s):  
John M. Hobson
Author(s):  
Navid Gohardani

Historiography marks a relatively unexplored research domain in architecture. Despite the obscure nature of this subject matter, architectural historiography equally illuminates a hidden pathway to the historical interaction of architecture with art or literature. Critical historiography adds another dimension to this emerging research topic that further encapsulates multiple levels of criticism. In recognition of a growing interest for historiography, it can be argued that the critical aspects of historiography may serve as crucial instruments for an enhanced understanding of architectural historiography. In this article, the realm of architectural historiography is investigated through a multidisciplinary perspective that revisits architectural criticism, critical historiography, modern architecture, phenomenology, and a number of aspects of architectural historiography in the Swedish Million Homes Program.


Philosophy ◽  
1981 ◽  
Vol 56 (217) ◽  
pp. 365-385 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen Bann

A British historian might be excused for looking slightly askance at any collection of recent books relating to the philosophy of history. This is because we have been told, several times over and by distinguished members of the profession, that such speculative and analytic activity has little, if anything, to do with the actual business of historiography. One of the most forthright warnings was delivered on the very first page of Professor G. R. Elton'sThe Practice of History(1967), when we were advised that: ‘Every new number ofHistory and Theoryis liable to contain yet another article struggling to give history a philosophic base, and some of them are interesting. But they do not, I fear, advance the writing of history’. For Elton, therefore, there could be little point in granting his colleague in another discipline the right to assess the cognitive claims of historiography. The historian himself, and he alone, was qualified to determine, for all practical purposes, the aims and applications of historical method. It was left to the late Arnold Toynbee to diagnose (inToynbee on Toynbee, 1974) the dangers in this protectionist approach. He claimed that Elton was ‘trying deliberately to create a closed circuit of “professional” historians’ which was, in his opinion, ‘fatal to any form of study’. But of course Toynbee's own lack of standing within the historical profession could be put forward as a telling index of the dangers of transgressing the barriers between history and philosophy.


Author(s):  
Margarita Díaz-Andreu ◽  
Marie Louise Stig Sørensen

Gender archaeology has by now become a relatively well-established research topic within archaeology. Recent years have seen the publication of a number of edited volumes, a rapidly expanding number of papers, and even a few journals and newsletters dedicated to this subject. It is, therefore, very surprising that in this literature the historiographic analysis of women archaeologists has played only a minor part. Likewise they are hardly acknowledged in the ‘folk’ histories of the discipline (Lucy and Hill 1994: 2). The need to understand the disciplinary integration of women, to appreciate the varying socio-political contexts of their work, to reveal the unique tension between their roles as women and their academic lives, has become obvious and is strongly felt in many areas of the discipline. The insights yielded by such analysis will have significance at many levels and will be of paramount importance for the intellectual history of archaeology. In particular, such insights will necessitate a much-needed revision of disciplinary history by revealing its mechanisms of selecting and forgetting, and will play an important role in the analysis of archaeology’s knowledge claims. Histories of archaeology have broadly accepted, and spread, a perception of archaeology as being male-centred, both intellectually and in practice. These accounts, written by male archaeologists such as Glyn Daniel (1975), Alain Schnapp (1993), and Bruce Trigger (1989), are inevitably androcentric in their conceptualization and reconstruction of the disciplinary past. Their versions have, however, recently begun to be contested, as concern with critical historiography has grown, and a few explicit historiographical accounts of women archaeologists have appeared. So far, with regard to the role of women, the most extensive contributions are the edited volumes by Claassen (1994) and du Cros and Smith (1993). While providing an important beginning, these publications show that there is still a long way to go. In particular they demonstrate a gap in research coverage, as no investigation of the contribution of women outside the USA and Australia exists.


Design Issues ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 20-30 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Göransdotter ◽  
Johan Redström

Design history tends to focus on designers and design outcomes, primarily objects. In contrast, historical accounts and analyses of designing are rare. This paper argues for the need of design histories that also address the origins of our design methods with respect to contexts, values and ideas in order to understand what these actually bring to the contemporary design situation. To illustrate what such a historical approach to design methods might bring, we present a study on the origins of Scandinavian user-centered design. In particular, we discuss the Home Research Institute's (HFI) development of methods for investigating and reforming everyday life and domestic work in mid-1940s Sweden.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document