Writing History in the Global Era

by Lynn Hunt

Leading historian Lynn Hunt rethinks why history matters in today’s global world and how it should be written.

Globalization is emerging as a major economic, cultural, and political force. In Writing History in the Global Era, historian Lynn Hunt examines whether globalization can reinvigorate the telling of history. She looks toward scholars from the East and West collaborating in new ways as they share their ideas. She proposes a sweeping reevaluation of individuals’ active role and their place in society as the keys to understanding the way people and ideas interact. Hunt also reveals how surprising new perspectives on society and the self offer promising new ways of thinking about the meaning and purpose of history in our time.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, World History, School, Philosophy, Social Science, Essays

209 pages, Kindle Edition

First published September 15, 2014

About the author

Lynn Avery Hunt is the Eugen Weber Professor of Modern European History at the University of California, Los Angeles. Her area of expertise is the French Revolution, but she is also well known for her work in European cultural history on such topics as gender. Her 2007 work, Inventing Human Rights, has been heralded as the most comprehensive analysis of the history of human rights. She served as president of the American Historical Association in 2002.

Reviews

[Sense of History]

Lynn Hunt (b. 1945, University of California, LA) has a long track record as a specialist in European cultural history (particularly the French Revolution) and gender history, which you will definitely notice in this book. Hunt extensively discusses the Cultural Turn, which, in line with postmodernism, shook history studies to its foundations at the end of the last century. She acknowledges that the Cultural Turn went too far, especially because it suggested (and sometimes explicitly stated) that there was no relationship between (past) reality and the narrative about it (because there really isn't such a thing as a past reality), and that as a consequence historical studies were actually based on quicksand. The turmoil about this created a wasteland that the historians of Global History have been only too happy to fill since the 1990s.

Hunt then also points out a few shortcomings to those globalists, because they placed too much emphasis on economic relations and sometimes held too much on to a macro view. In her final essay, she opposes this with alternative options of her own. For example, she points to the importance of sociocultural elements, views and practices, which played at least as important a role in human history as the economic ones. The use of tea and other stimulants, for example, from the 17th and especially the 18th century, brought about far-reaching changes in mentality as well as in economics and politics, because people (well-to-do citizens actually) learned that they could make their own choices, thereby strengthening their individuality, also on a political level. Hunt's focus here is on the development of the self, an almost unexplored area in historical studies. She rightly concludes: “Much remains to be done in explaining how self and society expanded and how that expansion relates to globalization and to democracy as a way of life. Cultural studies in all their varieties have much to say about these questions, and so too do many other forms of inquiry, ranging from economic history to neurohistory. History writing in the global era can only be a collaborative form of inquiry, whether between types of approaches or between scholars from different parts of the globe. We are not just interconnected but also interdependent.” An additional nuance of the global history approach!

[Marc Lamot · Rating 3 out of 5]

Four long essays that outline the state of affairs in history studies at the beginning of the 21st century. Lynn Hunt gives a balanced overview of the successive evolutions. Naturally, she sets her own accents, with a particularly striking plea to take social and cultural aspects seriously. This is a clear criticism of the Global History movement, which, certainly in its initial phase, viewed history too much from an economic point of view. These essays may require some prior knowledge, but in any case, they are among the better works in overviews of recent historiography. More on that in my History account on Goodreads: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show....

[Merry · Rating 4 out of 5]

A readable introduction to the major theoretical trends/paradigms in 20th/21st century historiography, rounded off by some good (but not exhaustive) ideas about how the field will change in the future in the wake of the shift towards the global.
I will say that Hunt's last chapter on globalization as a new paradigm falls a bit short (especially in the light of other resarch on global/entangled/connected history I've read), but overall the book is defintely a useful introduction that I can see myself assigning (in parts) to students, too.

[Samuel · Rating 3 out of 5]

While the writing in this book has its merits, the overall conclusion seems a little flat: the post-1990s world is global, interconnected, and interdependent and so too should historians be. However, to her credit, Lynn Hunt does the work of mapping out the major paradigms in history following the end of World War II offering succinct descriptions, critiques, and new directions. From Marxism to modernization to the Annales school to identity politics to globalization (the final of which seems to be the most problematic and most difficult to nail down and define), Hunt offers concise understandings of the aims, shortcomings, and interpretations of these post-1945 historical paradigms in an attempt to offer a state of the field essay in 150 pages. There are a good number of names and studies cited and referenced to give a sense of what's out there without being too overwhelming, and yet this method does give one the sense that specialization in history will continue and collaboration--though necessary and somewhat inevitable--seems to be difficult and unexplained in how it will work. "Globalization" is a slippery term that feels as slick as ever at the end of the book; as a paradigm it remains an unresolved problem along with past contenders. The book is worth reading if only to understand the discontents and problems faced by historians writing about the 20th century.

[Rachel]

Did I understand this book? No. Am I still counting it as read bc dammit I put the work in? Yeah

[Andrew Carr · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is an entertaining review of the broad intellectual trends in Western history since the 1960s. Hunt poses four main paradigms pre-1960: Marxism, Modernization, the Annales school (long-term social trends) and Identity Politics. She then charts the critiques of cultural/postmodern theorists against these views. Her argument is that as valuable as their critiques and the histories their adherents produced are, they were better and knocking down rather than building the necessary narratives history ought to produce. Hunt suggests (though far from explicitly advocates) that globalisation, viewed as a bottom-up interconnection and interdependence process could be the new paradigm that addresses the concerns of the post-1960s movements, while offering a greater foundation for research and the production of useful knowledge (however defined).

Writing History in the Global Era is really a longish essay, that seems to have begun life as a series of speeches and bears those birth marks. It is an excellent, highly readable and engaging review of the debates about modern historical thought. But the ending never quite delivers on the promise of showing how Globalisation is a superior way forward in a detailed and prescriptive manner.

I found this a very useful companion to Richard Evan's In Defence of History and John Lewis Gaddis's The Landscape of History. All three spring from historians grappling with the intellectual challenge of post-1960s cultural/social theorists. This book is the most sympathetic of them, but perhaps also because it's also the most recent (2014), the author is able to recognise the tide has effectively broken and feels less need to defend the ramparts from its barbarians.

[char · Rating 1 out of 5]

That was one of the driest books I've ever read, and we already did Le Roy Ladurie earlier in the semester. It was hard to find an argument beyond "globalism is good let's do it!" and her focus on discussing Western theorists and historians like Foucault and Braudel doesn't help. Also, for a book that was written 2 years ago, I wish she could have highlighted some recent successful examples of global writing, instead of focusing so damn much on the 1960s-70s.

[Kaylee Woolman · Rating 4 out of 5]

honestly the most helpful book i’ve read as a history major

[Mike Clinton · Rating 3 out of 5]

I agree with the other reviewers who came away disappointed with this book. My own sense echoes what someone else put rather well, that: "For all Hunt's talk about globalization and the elimination of Eurocentrism, she doesn't seem to have found a way to do that...." It's certainly a clarifying exposition of Hunt's reading of key historiographical perspectives, though, which is worth consideration.

[Cynthia · Rating 2 out of 5]

Maybe I'm just feeling grumpy, but I really disliked this book. For all Hunt's talk about globalization and the elimination of Eurocentrism, she doesn't seem to have found a way to do that in her writing.

[José Angel Hernández · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fascinating set of lectures on the writing of history...ideal for graduate seminar or upper division course...

[Devin Creed · Rating 3 out of 5]

Unsatisfying.

[Joseph Meltreger · Rating 4 out of 5]

Why is history important? Who is it for? What is history to the individual, the society, humanity? Fundamental answers are constantly tested in the 21st century and Hunt emphasizes the breakdown of historical writing in the twenty-first century. The book serves as a launchpad for the potential of new paradigms concerning historical thought, posing certain perspectives to better understand the narrative of human behavior and change. Tracking first the development of historical thought from Marx through the advent of social history and identity politics in the twentieth century, Hunt sets the stage for he proposal. The picture is not complete when considering the social history of societies and largely discredits the self and those transnational forces and networks. Where the social history brings no Truth (w/ a capital T) but rather its antithesis, there is no truth. To Hunt, this is a challenge to all historians: to fill in the cracks of previous works, examining those obscure factors that a 21st century view can fulfill. Great for students in history and understanding how historical thought came to be complex and buzzing but no concrete answers.

[Erika Hope Spencer · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was an incredibly helpful overview of the historical landscape, historical theory and historiography, especially the first few chapters. I wish I had read it in my undergraduate years studying history because it maps it all out in tidy fashion. Especially helpful for me personally because Lynn Hunt is a French historian so she adds a good deal about France just based on her background knowledge (the Annales school, Derrida and Foucault). It's so refreshing when a scholar is trying to help you understand rather than just trying to mark out their bold new theory as the next best thing as compared with whatever came before. She delivers a concise critique of the history of scholarship and of how Eurocentric it has been/is. She has interesting thoughts about the cyclical relationship between National pride and identity, academic scholarship, and the role of education as a means of creating that national (nation-state) story or narrative. Who is left out? How can they be brought in? But when she talks about it, it makes much more sense than that.

[A. B. · Rating 5 out of 5]

How has the writing of history changed in particular historical periods? And how should we write history in the new era of globalization? Lynn Hunt explores these and other fascinating questions in this short but compelling volume. She concludes that away from the skepticism towards meta-narratives exhibited by cultural theory; we need a new grand meta-narrative in the era of globalization- based on how the society and the Self expanded throughout history. She charts an overview of how the concepts of the 'Self' and 'Society' developed throughout history. She also explores how we moved from primarily classical history to social theories based on identity politics to 'post-modern' cultural theory. Globalization is the new phenomenon contemporary history-writing should account for.

[Andy Stager · Rating 5 out of 5]

If the title was "A Usable Past for the Global Age," the book would have been closer to the title and scared off negative reviewers while still impressing its true target audience. As a lover of history and theory, this book was a delight. Hunt manages to give an entire history and theory course in 100 pages and a proposal for integrating paradigms in the present era in 50 more. Math is hard, so I'll just estimate that the remaining 30 pages are fairy dust.

[Ariel · Rating 3 out of 5]

I don't hate this book, but I didn't feel like I got anything out of this. Defines and covers cultural theories pretty well, and I like that she uses something older like the start of teahouses as an example for globalization before the 20th century. But the conclusion seems kind of...flat. The world is interdependant, so historians should be multidisciplinary. We did just finish reading The Landscape of History though, so after that, this book does seem boring and repetitive.

[Zach McSwain · Rating 3 out of 5]

This will give history writers a quick introduction to the paradigms of historical analysis, but the main focus is on our current era of global history. The best takeaway from this book is the necessity for a "bottom-up" approach to history. Enjoyable at times, but not my favorite book on historiography.

[PerpetualPinkSlippers · Rating 3 out of 5]

Read this as a textbook, but this was a wild ride from start to finish.
Feels like too much information is presented at the surface level though. Could benefit from deeper analysis of fewer examples.

[Hillary Borders · Rating 2 out of 5]

Read for Historiography

[Naked Fish · Rating 4 out of 5]

前两章清晰有用，后1.5章有些不知所云。最后似乎回转到一个杂糅的paradigm：casual explanation+taste/culture+self/emotion+globalization.

[Ellen Bobellen]

my professor about this book: “let not the thickness of the tome fool you”
which is so real

[mutinashi · Rating 5 out of 5]

Yazar "Tarih ne işe yarar?" sorusuna 19. yüzyıldan 21. yüzyıla kadar geçen süre içerisinde değişen konjonktürü de dikkate alarak cevap aramaya çalışmış. Faydalı bir eser.

[Derek Kompare · Rating 4 out of 5]

A short but useful overview of the state of historiography today. Hunt is one of our best historians, and she knows well how the field has changed over the past few centuries. She explains the four major approaches of the twentieth century in the first half, and then explores how globalization, and changing conceptions of the society and self, are, and should, change how we perceive and write about the past. There's a lot here that would have been unpacked in detail in a longer overview, but this is an intriguing gloss on some big ideas, and a provocative challenge to the established schools of historical thought.

[Dan Gorman · Rating 4 out of 5]

Concise, thorough overview of historiographic developments in the late nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Hunt wants authors to explore both social and cultural history, but within a transnational framework. Hunt once advocated for cultural theory; now she has seen the limits of the cultural turn - too much relativism, for one thing - and she views the transnational approach as the next step forward for historians. I was with her until she said all historians should explore society and "the self." Society, sure, but Hunt does not define what a history of "the self" is. So - pretty good overall, but Hunt's preferred historical topics going forward are not fully persuasive.

[Matt · Rating 4 out of 5]

It's a great book for those interesting in how different theories shaped history writing during the 20th century, and it speculates about what paradigms will be guiding history writing in the future. I found the introduction and first chapter, the last chapter, and the bibliography the most helpful for my own research, as I prepare to examine history writing and digital writing spaces. The middle chapters I felt were underwhelming.

[Whitney O'Halek · Rating 1 out of 5]

Not terribly interesting, definitely a disappointment. Probably had some valid points, but they must have been buried in the fluff.

[Gretchen · Rating 3 out of 5]

A literature review of key theoretical frameworks in historical writing of the last century. Good to revisit this stuff now and then.

[Alexander Asay · Rating 1 out of 5]

ISU: Senior Thesis (History)