My dissertation and first book, completed at KU under Adrian Lewis’ direction, was also an operational history and I too have had several opportunities, both within traditional academia and in the PME world. Rob Citino, perhaps the current Dean of operational history who, admittedly does it at a very high level, has had a number of opportunities both within and outside of the academy. I was simply suggesting that scholars interested in operational history should not avoid it because they believe it is unmarketable. I pursued a minor field in environmental history, not because I thought the intersection between military and environmental history would become a growth area, although it has, but because I had a genuine interest in the subject. I did not mean to imply that operational military historians should blithely ignore trends and turns within the field-that would defeat the entire purpose of mastering the historiography. I appreciate Alexandra and David's comments. Because if you're doing what you love and doing it well, there will be opportunities for you. My advice to aspiring military historians is: Don't try to trim your sails to the fickle winds of the field, but do what really interests you and trust that things will work out. Leggiere, rather than your friendly neighborhood re-enactor or war buff?" Īnd Citino's comments were echoed by Hess in his acceptance speech for the Tom Watson Brown Award in the link above. The profession needs to ask itself, wouldn't it be preferable if that “someone” were a scholar of Showalter's or Browning's stature, or one of the dozens of other fine operational scholars currently active, such as Megargee, Geoffrey Wawro, Adrian R. Millions of people continue to read these books, and someone is going to be writing them. Moreover, the sustained popularity of military literature places a certain demand on the entire historical profession. It would be strange indeed if a scholarly field with such broad interests did not make room for analysis of war and battle-surely not the least significant of human undertakings. Ī decade ago Rob Citino wrote: " Operational history remains a vital part not only of military history, but of history at large. Traditional (including operational) military history may currently be out of favor within the subfield of military history, but that doesn't mean it isn't important, as Earl Hess' recent prize-winning work demonstrated.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |