{"title":"编辑器的角落","authors":"Sarah H. Case","doi":"10.1525/tph.2023.45.2.5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Editorial| May 01 2023 Editor’s Corner: Complicating Authority Sarah H. Case Sarah H. Case Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar The Public Historian (2023) 45 (2): 5–6. https://doi.org/10.1525/tph.2023.45.2.5 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Sarah H. Case; Editor’s Corner: Complicating Authority. The Public Historian 1 May 2023; 45 (2): 5–6. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/tph.2023.45.2.5 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentThe Public Historian Search This issue brings several articles that explore the concept of authority in public history, an idea that has long shaped debates about how we define our field. The first, Michael J. Brown’s “Overlapping Origins, Diverging Paths: ‘Public History’ and the ‘Public Intellectual,’” examines how these two approaches to engaged scholarship (or more accurately, the labels identifying them) each emerged in response to larger social and academic trends in 1970s, but defined quite distinct approaches. Key to their differences were questions of authority. As Brown writes, “Whereas authorship and, thus, the authoritative voice have remained central for public intellectuals, public historians have rethought the nature of authority itself.…In public history, the processes of meaning-making and shared authority have moved to the center of the field.” The article provides an invaluable genealogy of our field, centering the meaning of authority squarely in its discussion. In her article, “Race, History, and the Politics... You do not currently have access to this content.","PeriodicalId":45070,"journal":{"name":"PUBLIC HISTORIAN","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Editor’s Corner\",\"authors\":\"Sarah H. Case\",\"doi\":\"10.1525/tph.2023.45.2.5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Editorial| May 01 2023 Editor’s Corner: Complicating Authority Sarah H. Case Sarah H. Case Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar The Public Historian (2023) 45 (2): 5–6. https://doi.org/10.1525/tph.2023.45.2.5 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Sarah H. Case; Editor’s Corner: Complicating Authority. The Public Historian 1 May 2023; 45 (2): 5–6. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/tph.2023.45.2.5 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentThe Public Historian Search This issue brings several articles that explore the concept of authority in public history, an idea that has long shaped debates about how we define our field. The first, Michael J. Brown’s “Overlapping Origins, Diverging Paths: ‘Public History’ and the ‘Public Intellectual,’” examines how these two approaches to engaged scholarship (or more accurately, the labels identifying them) each emerged in response to larger social and academic trends in 1970s, but defined quite distinct approaches. Key to their differences were questions of authority. As Brown writes, “Whereas authorship and, thus, the authoritative voice have remained central for public intellectuals, public historians have rethought the nature of authority itself.…In public history, the processes of meaning-making and shared authority have moved to the center of the field.” The article provides an invaluable genealogy of our field, centering the meaning of authority squarely in its discussion. In her article, “Race, History, and the Politics... You do not currently have access to this content.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45070,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PUBLIC HISTORIAN\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PUBLIC HISTORIAN\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1525/tph.2023.45.2.5\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PUBLIC HISTORIAN","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1525/tph.2023.45.2.5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
编辑| 2023年5月1日编辑角:复杂的权威Sarah H. Case Sarah H. Case搜索作者的其他作品:本网站PubMed谷歌学者公共历史学家(2023)45(2):5-6。https://doi.org/10.1525/tph.2023.45.2.5查看图标查看文章内容图表和表格视频音频补充数据同行评审分享图标分享Facebook Twitter LinkedIn电子邮件工具图标工具获得权限引用图标引用搜索网站引文莎拉h案例;编辑角:使权威复杂化。《公共历史学家》2023年5月1日;45(2): 5-6。doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/tph.2023.45.2.5下载引文文件:Ris (Zotero)参考文献管理器EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex工具栏搜索搜索下拉菜单工具栏搜索搜索输入搜索输入自动建议过滤您的搜索所有内容公共历史学家搜索这期带来了几篇探讨公共历史中权威概念的文章,这个想法长期以来一直影响着我们如何定义我们的领域。第一篇是迈克尔·j·布朗(Michael J. Brown)的《重叠的起源,不同的路径:“公共历史”和“公共知识分子”》,研究了这两种从事学术研究的方法(或者更准确地说,是识别它们的标签)是如何在20世纪70年代响应更大的社会和学术趋势而出现的,但它们定义了截然不同的方法。他们分歧的关键是对权威的质疑。正如布朗所写,“虽然作者身份以及权威的声音仍然是公共知识分子的核心,但公共历史学家已经重新思考了权威本身的本质。”……在公共历史中,意义创造和共享权力的过程已经移到了这个领域的中心。”这篇文章为我们的领域提供了一个宝贵的谱系,在讨论中直接集中了权威的意义。在她的文章《种族、历史和政治》中……您目前没有访问此内容的权限。
Editorial| May 01 2023 Editor’s Corner: Complicating Authority Sarah H. Case Sarah H. Case Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar The Public Historian (2023) 45 (2): 5–6. https://doi.org/10.1525/tph.2023.45.2.5 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Sarah H. Case; Editor’s Corner: Complicating Authority. The Public Historian 1 May 2023; 45 (2): 5–6. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/tph.2023.45.2.5 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentThe Public Historian Search This issue brings several articles that explore the concept of authority in public history, an idea that has long shaped debates about how we define our field. The first, Michael J. Brown’s “Overlapping Origins, Diverging Paths: ‘Public History’ and the ‘Public Intellectual,’” examines how these two approaches to engaged scholarship (or more accurately, the labels identifying them) each emerged in response to larger social and academic trends in 1970s, but defined quite distinct approaches. Key to their differences were questions of authority. As Brown writes, “Whereas authorship and, thus, the authoritative voice have remained central for public intellectuals, public historians have rethought the nature of authority itself.…In public history, the processes of meaning-making and shared authority have moved to the center of the field.” The article provides an invaluable genealogy of our field, centering the meaning of authority squarely in its discussion. In her article, “Race, History, and the Politics... You do not currently have access to this content.
期刊介绍:
For over twenty-five years, The Public Historian has made its mark as the definitive voice of the public history profession, providing historians with the latest scholarship and applications from the field. The Public Historian publishes the results of scholarly research and case studies, and addresses the broad substantive and theoretical issues in the field. Areas covered include public policy and policy analysis; federal, state, and local history; historic preservation; oral history; museum and historical administration; documentation and information services, corporate biography; public history education; among others.