Register to read the introduction…
While Foucault identifies history with the past and the documents containing such information, Taylor (n.d) identifies history as a field correlated to the trauma that forms part of human existence. According to Taylor (n.d) history is part of human existence and it should be referenced according to the events that took part in the past years.
This means that it should never be separated in terms of durations of discontinuities, but it should rather form part of the existence. Unlike Foucault who associates history with the past, Taylor develops a correlation between the past and the present by making history to look like the determinant of the present. By describing history as a part of the present, the author develops a clear understanding of how history is the formal record of the past. While Foucault identifies the past based on the documentations and activities that took place then, Taylor generates a connection between the present and the past.
The approach by Taylor enhances the reader’s understanding of the historical events because she applies the concept of trauma to illustrate how the past re-connects with the present. Just as trauma re-visits and becomes part of the past, history reconnects the past to the present by bringing out issues that were influenced by …show more content…
Within these different interpretations, Foucault identifies history as part of an integrated topic containing the events and the reporters of the events, while Taylor identifies history as part of the present, with its impact being similar to that identified in trauma.
The two interpretations are different from that provided by Carla, who centres his argument and interpretations on sexuality and the connection with behavioural change. The similarities between sexuality and behavioural change can be associated with interpretations of history, which contain one independent variable that controls the rest of the entities (Freccero, 2007). Using the concept of queerness, the author describes history as a part of human process, within which all must conform.
By using music comparisons, Carla argues that history must form part of a specific period and individuals living within that period must be embraced to live according to the changes happening at that time (Freccero, 2007). This means that history is an indiscriminating event that embraces the population, events and activities by creating uniqueness and queerness that can later be used to describe it. The historical events are therefore identified according to their uniqueness and without any change to the uniqueness, history cannot be
This means that it should never be separated in terms of durations of discontinuities, but it should rather form part of the existence. Unlike Foucault who associates history with the past, Taylor develops a correlation between the past and the present by making history to look like the determinant of the present. By describing history as a part of the present, the author develops a clear understanding of how history is the formal record of the past. While Foucault identifies the past based on the documentations and activities that took place then, Taylor generates a connection between the present and the past.
The approach by Taylor enhances the reader’s understanding of the historical events because she applies the concept of trauma to illustrate how the past re-connects with the present. Just as trauma re-visits and becomes part of the past, history reconnects the past to the present by bringing out issues that were influenced by …show more content…
Within these different interpretations, Foucault identifies history as part of an integrated topic containing the events and the reporters of the events, while Taylor identifies history as part of the present, with its impact being similar to that identified in trauma.
The two interpretations are different from that provided by Carla, who centres his argument and interpretations on sexuality and the connection with behavioural change. The similarities between sexuality and behavioural change can be associated with interpretations of history, which contain one independent variable that controls the rest of the entities (Freccero, 2007). Using the concept of queerness, the author describes history as a part of human process, within which all must conform.
By using music comparisons, Carla argues that history must form part of a specific period and individuals living within that period must be embraced to live according to the changes happening at that time (Freccero, 2007). This means that history is an indiscriminating event that embraces the population, events and activities by creating uniqueness and queerness that can later be used to describe it. The historical events are therefore identified according to their uniqueness and without any change to the uniqueness, history cannot be