Marshall Brown’s “Periods and Resistances” is an application to the study of history of the idea that constraints can be productive. By drawing temporal distinctions, we create “necessary fictions,” in David Perkins’ words (311), that allow us to organize the uninterrupted flow of time in order to make sense of it. Concepts are, after all, assertions of difference, demarcations without which thought is impossible. Necessarily, then, we periodize when we think about the past. As Brown writes, “We cannot rest statically in periods, but we cannot rest at all without them” (312).
Yet as the above quotation suggests, constraints have their limitations, and it can be dangerous to simply assume their validity, without holding out the possibility of their revision. Applying this principle to periods, Brown states, “Period labels threaten understanding when they claim definitive status” (311). Drawing distinctions between the present and the past can be just as useful or as harmful as drawing distinctions between different cultures. In fact, I would argue that, as easy as it is to slip into thinking in stereotypes about current-day, foreign cultures, it is even easier to make unfounded claims about antecedents of one’s own culture because the former can respond, while the latter cannot.
However, I wonder about some of the particulars of Brown’s defense of periodization. For one, he mentions “the danger of fetishizing the beginnings and endings of centuries” (313). I agree that this particular kind of post-hoc periodization can create distortions and inaccuracies, but if this type of fetishization is dominant in the culture at the time, as the art of fin de siècle France testifies, creating periods around such themes may prove useful.
More broadly speaking, I think some pressure could be applied to the idea that periods, or concepts in general, cannot claim definitive status without threatening understanding. The most immediate example to my mind is that of religion, whose believers have been inspired to commit atrocities, create sublime works of art, and perform acts of charity. Perhaps the widely varying results of such inspiration suggest that for a concept (and therefore, for a period) to “claim definitive status” does not mean that it inevitably closes off the possibility of understanding.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
"In fact, I would argue that, as easy as it is to slip into thinking in stereotypes about current-day, foreign cultures, it is even easier to make unfounded claims about antecedents of one’s own culture because the former can respond, while the latter cannot."
ReplyDeleteBravo!
Marshall