Jan
28
A young historian reflects on Howard Zinn and A PEOPLE'S HISTORY
2010 at 9pm Posted by Rebecca Joines Schinsky
I’ve known Paul McQuiston since my family moved to Kansas City in 1991 and began attending the same church his family attended. We were in second grade then, and by the time we were in sixth grade, I had a huge crush on him, and as far as I’m aware, this is the first he’s hearing of it. (Or he’s about to tell me he knew all along and was kind enough to pretend he didn’t…but it’s okay, I know 11-15 weren’t my best years.) I can confess to this now because I’m married and Paul has a beautiful girlfriend (I know this thanks to Facebook), and these things are funny this many years later. Right? Bueller?
Anyway, Paul and I lost touch in middle school, around the time it stopped being cool to attend youth group functions, and we just reconnected on Facebook within the last year or so. Gotta love that social networking. I’ve been thinking a lot about Howard Zinn’s death and the amazing legacy he’s left us, but I couldn’t quite find the way to write about it. Then I saw Paul say this on his blog: This man changed the way I thought about history. If I have a career in this field, it will be because of him.”
And a guest post was born.
Paul is currently pursuing a Master of Arts degree in European History, and I’m thrilled to be sharing this young historian’s reflections on a man who changed the way we all think about history.
Howard Zinn died this week.
Ambitious and stubborn, the man’s influence on what popular history could represent continues to be felt everyday through works from authors such as Mark Kurlansky ( Salt, Cod, etc.). Zinn’s most popular work, A People’s History of the United States, sold millions of copies, went through dozens of reprints and adaptations into other media as varied as graphic novels and movies.
But this isn’t about his works as an author. It is what his work represents for both the historical community and to society at large.
Zinn belonged to the historical school that came out of the Second World War that turned their attention away from the great, imposing, untouchable figures which loom so large in the popular history of the United States and the world. These historians, many of whom were first-generation college attendees and came from the working class, instead focused on the people from which they came. Students coming from the working class, made up of the children of immigrants and minorities, did not care to learn about the Great Men they learned about in primary school. They wanted to learn about those who shared their background and with whom they could relate.
Zinn, the son of Jewish immigrants who moved to Brooklyn, believed that those people oppressed throughout history deserved their own time in the spotlight. Beginning with the landing of Columbus in the fifteenth century, leading up to the modern day, Zinn showed how the policies of first the European colonialists and latterly the American government discriminated against, and sometimes completely wiped out the native people of North America. Published in 1980, People’s History presented the first popular, general history of the injustices of the American empire. For many people, the book opened their eyes that what they learned in school represented half the story of America’s greatness.
I am of two minds in regards to Zinn. As a reader, his writing style comes across fluidly without flair. That is to say that he lets his facts carry the story, something most scholarly historians fail to achieve. Given the subject material, this is the easiest, yet most appropriate method. His words are enjoyable to read, even if the disheartening facts he related were not.
I am not looking at Zinn’s work as only a reader, however. I am in the midst of postgraduate work in history and my master’s thesis. One of the earliest ideas taught to myself and my fellow graduate students was to identify whether an author was making a valid argument and what bias their argument belied. This was done by examining the sources used and the language used.
With Zinn his bias is so obvious, so blatant that is difficult to take People’s History as a serious work of scholarship, even if the source material is accurate. In the past few days I have read many who complained that he focused too much on the negative aspects, ignoring the positive contributions to society that the European and American policy makers made. This argument is hardly new and other scholars have defended Zinn’s approach with the logic that objective argumentation favored those in power more than the oppressed in scholarly discourse.
It’s the idea of what Zinn’s work represented, however, and not the work and its scholarly strengths and weaknesses that inspired me. After reading some of Zinn’s work, my beliefs on history and its telling changed dramatically. Zinn caused me to change my own scholarly focus. Even if I am drawn more to academic (read: dry/boring) history than its popular (and very necessary) counterpart, the idea that that history can give voice to those unheard before that Zinn helped bring to light remains powerful.
Zinn remained outspoken throughout the rest of his life, crying out against what he deemed injustices by those people who held power. My relationship as a reader with Zinn remains complicated. As a figure and an idea, he will remain inspirational. As a (hopeful) scholarly historian, his contribution and methods will continue to be murky to me. As a member of the vanguard which widened the scope of historical study, his impact continues to be felt and will continue to do so in the future. With (and perhaps because of) the imperfect nature of Zinn’s impact on me, his loss caused me deep sadness. But I know that whatever future course my own career takes, Zinn’s work and ideas will continue to inspire me to give voice to the previously silent.
Thanks to Paul McQuiston, historian extraordinaire to be, for sharing these thoughts. Please make him feel welcome with your own comments and reflections (and help me make up for potentially embarrassing him with my adolescent confession!), visit him on his newly minted Tumblr blog for all things literary, or say hi to him on Twitter.
Related posts:
















What a wonderful guest post … you got more from your old crushes than I ever did!!! I’ll try to stop by when I have bit more time.
I really enjoyed this post. I discovered Howard Zinn after seeing Good Will Hunting, which came out during my formative high school years. Also, I didn’t know you lived in Kansas City! We moved away in 1991, but it’s still home to me.
I live in Richmond now, but I was in KC from 1991-2001, and my parents still live there.
I’ve never read Zinn, although A People’s History sat on my bookshelf for years. I’m now regretting letting it walk away at some point.
What really stands out in Paul’s post is his willingness to accept the importance of popular history, along with the traditional studies. I took one class towards a Master’s degree in History (then I dropped out so I could read books I wanted to read), and I was appalled at how many of the students bought into the idea that it’s not history if it isn’t a serious academic tome.
So yay for Paul! And good luck with that thesis!
The whole idea behind Zinn’s work here is to offer a different point of view- and the fact is, all history is biased one way or the other. Zinn is really best read alongside traditional or standard histories so that the reader understands both sides of the stories. He offers an alternative point of view that will only expand and enlarge one’s understanding of US history.
[...] A young historian reflects on Howard Zinn and A PEOPLE’S HISTORY [...]