Letter to the Editor

THE PRESIDENT'S CORNER by Eugene Genovese O tu — A, .mong the endless current absurdities, spiced with flagrant mendacity, few match the wonderful assertion that a focus on "the people" rather than on elites has emergedfrom the Left and necessarily serves its ideological purposes. Those who long ago demanded the integration ofsocial history into political, intellectual, diplomatic, and military history intended to deepen, not replace, those standard subjects. They properly defended the centrality of politics, which cannot be understood without knowledge ofthe exigencies ofeveryday life. They were right, but that is only halfthe story. From Herodotus to Gibbon, thegreat historians paid attention to the social and cultural conditions and political influence ofthe lower and middle classes. Gibbons illuminating ifacerbic account ofthe rise ofChristianity and its impact on the Roman Empire alone belies the droll notion ofexclusive concern with elites. The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire provides a model for those who would trace the influence of"the people" on the most historic ofshifts in political and socialpower. Iustice CO the giants on whose shoulders we stand is. however, not the primary issue. The historical profession has solemnly assumed that social historv and the study ol popular culture must necessarily serve particular political and ideological interests. Allegedly, they are the creations and handmaidens of the Left, much as political, intellectual, diplomatic and military history haw been the creation and handmaidens of the Right. How anvonc could U dumb enough to think that only leftwingers could write labor, women's, and Afro-American historv honestly and well defies imagination. And vet. so deeply has this curious notion pervaded the profession that \w find precious few conservatives who work on these subjects and find a great many who Dear Historical Society, condemn them out-of-hand. The fault cannot be laid wholly on the latter-day McC arthyites who have closed the doors of, say, women's studies programs to those who IV)CCt feminist ideology. 1 he Right has done us U-st do perpetuate the myth of inherent leltwing bias in the subject matter, and it h.is. il inadvertently, thereby aUttcd it. I he early demands for programs in Afro-American studies, women's studies, and other subjects had a rational and constructive foundation. The virtual exclusion of blacks and women from the curricula meant, first and foremost, a debilitating distortion of historv. and it cried out for correction. But because the demand came from people perceived—not always fairly —as wanting to transform campuses into continued on page 5 I would like to commend all those who produced Historically Speaking. It was highly informative and extremely well written. The "Job Crisis" was the clearest statement of the problem and the most cogent set of solutions I have ever read. I enjoyed Richard Schneirov's introduction of the "Labor History Panel" and wished there had been a summary of the panel discussion as well. As our discipline fragments, this kind of article is important in keeping us up to date. I found President Eugene Genovese's address characteristically thoughtful and witty. I think he captured the hopes that many of us have for the new organization. I am sorry I missed the conference. I am proud to be a member of THS and when I finish my dissertation will take a more active role in advancing its goals. Donald B. Connelly Ph.D. Candidate, University ofHouston 3 ¿.· The Profession 1 Presidents Corner 3 tive Director 7 Viewpoint: The Future ofHistory 7 Viewpoint: it Is Globalizat 9 The Practice ofHistory 12 THS s Firsr Convention 15 Regional Reports 17 THS in the News 21 THS National Conference Program 23 Recent Publications 29 Awards 32 Announcen 35 Membership Form 39 ...