Good
afternoon to you all gathered here. The topic of my talk is Fudging Figures and
Twisting Facts. My talk features four points. First, Age and Time connected to
History. Second, Historians: The History Makers. Third, Truth v/s Power. And
Fourth, History from Below. So let’s begin with an introduction.
Introduction.
On
14th August 2011, Shoban Saxena a reporter published an article
‘Wrong Numbers’ on the Times of India. This article spoke about how government
and other agencies twisted facts and figures, exaggerated or cited out of the
context to prove their point or support their own agenda. Dear friends, if
things can be fudged and twisted in the here and now, it is good to ask
ourselves how much more of twisting and fudging of facts, figures and data must
have happened in the past? Stastical data, facts and figures of the present
situation can be cross checked and verified but how can one verify historical
accounts of past happenings when there is very little evidence to support it.
Science
has grown or progressed through trial and error method. But what about history,
if the historian gets it wrong in his history writing, he only multiplies
errors.
With
this I begin the First point...
1.
Age and
Time connected to History.
Every
philosopher’s reflection and insights are replies to the significant issues and
questions at that particular time and age. It may not make sense to a person
who is living in a very different time than that of the philosopher. So it’s
wrong to study philosophers in isolation from his times. Another wrong way is
to treat all philosophers as contemporaries. If we talk of history most of it
is told from one age to the next. And when it comes to the last person it comes
with added information. Past is past and it can’t be changed. Present and
Future can be changed. The evolving present has a great influence on people who
understand the past. A decision or action that was recently seen in positive
light could suddenly come to be regarded as an act of violence or oppression.
What till the other day was viewed as an act of barbarism could suddenly
because of changing perspective become an act of courage and heroism. Past is
not static or fixed but can change any time. One doesn’t really know and one
cannot even reasonably predict the ‘future of the past.’ By tradition history
has been narrated. Written history can have a stronger impact through which one
might be better able to focus on the activities of the individuals. The only
struggle is to meet the contingencies, whether it happened or not. To get facts
one must distinguish between many myths which are taken in consideration over
the course of time. For e.g. In the Christian Theology there has been a search
for historical Christ. Some historical figures are related to myths. The
problem now is can one separate myths from historical figures? Myths are not
necessarily the opposite of history. When one takes away the myth one does not
come closer to the truth. On the contrary, one ends up distorting the truth
about the person. One must be careful not to succumb to the temptation to
exaggerate while writing history, especially the history of religions and
religious figures. However, one has also got to accept that the myth is very
much an integral part of the person around whom it builds up.
Moving
to the 2nd point..
2.
Historians:
The History Makers.
Historians
are noted for their careful, meticulous and systematic study. In the past
before when the historians researched, they published their findings to the
public which was scrutinized, appreciated and criticized. Now the tag of
professionals is also given to write popular history. Nowadays history has
become popular through movies, novels and documentaries. As it looks more
attractive and has impact on the people. History is now no more boring but
entertaining. History is belittled by removing some part of it which makes the
people feel bored and a fictitious history is created which is exciting and
nice. This makes history impressive which makes the people feel attracted
towards it. Professional historians may say that the quality of history
communicated by these media may not be honest. These historical movies, novels
and documentaries may contain factual facts, factual fiction or even fictional
fiction but for people it’s the same. For e.g. Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown,
where the fictitious information was sold as historical fact to popularize and
sell the novel.
And
now the 3rd point...
3.
Truth v/s
Power.
All
history that is given to us is not just a historical account in isolation but a
historian’s personal pre-suppositions and biases. It’s difficult to deny the
historians pre-suppositions interests, value systems which influence history. A
lot of history is interpreted by the historians especially why things happened
in such a way. Historian’s version of history can never claim to completely
true because he doesn’t have access to all the facts. Historical accounts are
affected because of both the context in which the historian finds himself and
the limitedness of his perspective. Here we see that the truth is limited this
doesn’t mean that every historical truth claim is relative or subjective. It’s
possible to arrive at objective truth to a certain extent in history. The face
one doesn’t know everything doesn’t mean he knows nothing. What a historian
knows may be limited but what he knows is true to fact also. Since no
historians can study enough of a person or event from different perspective
historian needs to be open to dialogue between different historical versions so
that the truth can gradually emerge. Historians can create heroes from small
Lilliput’s to great Giants and vice-versa. This can be done innocently or
intentionally. Someone who has really done a great difference can be just
blanked out from the pages of history but someone who did something small can
be raised up as a great hero. History is
not concerned about how the person lived or what were his convictions but as
how the person meant to a particular group. E.g. Bhagat Singh for Indians was a
freedom fighter but for the British he was terror. Truth is a tool, a useful
fiction used by those in power to exercise control over others and manipulate
them. This may not apply to all historical writings but there’s no doubt that
such things are done by the powerful in economic and politics. E.g. Our P.M
Modi during the 2014 elections projected himself as a victim rather than an
accused in the Godhra riots where he appealed to the emotions of the majority
population. Thus, creating a fiction around the truth of the riots.
This
leads to the 4th point...
4.
History
from Below.
Before
I move to history from below let us first know about history from above.
History has usually focused on the deeds and achievements of important people
of kings and rulers, of politicians and statesman, of the wealthy, the famous
and the powerful. This history is referred as history from above. However, the
present time has seen historical attention shifting from these ‘extraordinary
people’ to more ‘ordinary people’ to the contribution and the deeds of the
common person. History from below is a movement which considers the story of
ordinary people, workers, immigrants, women and racial minorities. The case in
point is the crusade against corruption led by Anna Hazare, an ordinary
activist who mobilized mass support and forced the government to pass laws
against corruption. This movement has challenged traditional notions about who
the historian is and what history is about. It has attacked the presumption
that only professional historians are qualified to do history and on the other
hand it popularized the view that even ordinary people who are interested in
the past of their families and communities can make a big contribution to the
understanding of history. Internet has made ‘History from Below’ not only
popular but also exciting one. Here people can track back their ancestry and
build their family tree across generation. One can write his/her own story and
many people across the world can read and comment on it. History seems to have
closed eyes towards women. Robin Morgan, a journalist has coined the word ‘Herstory’.
This derives a very powerful message which shows the ignored life and
contribution of women. It has treated women as if they didn’t exist and they
seem to be a different species altogether. But over the years we see that
women's haven’t remained silent but they too have bounced back and created
histories which have become inspiration to many. E.g. The active role of women
in the French Revolution.
In
my talk I have spoken some of the important issues that ‘Philosophy of History’
needs to be sensitive to in our contemporary times. It is true that past events
are usually interpretations or personal constructs determined by the
historian’s perspective. And therefore this makes a Philosophical reflection on
history very important. And hence I end by saying ‘History is said to be given
but it doesn’t mean it can’t be questioned.’
Thank
you one and all.
No comments:
Post a Comment