History of Economics Playground

Leakage as historiographic genre @ HES 2012

 

[This post was written three weeks ago on antiquated in to paper media and it has taken me this long to post it online. ]

If the meetings of European historians of economics are urbane and cosmopolitan, the meetings of American historians are, by contrast, frank and toilful. The setting is often rural. Our 2012 host was Brock University in Ontario’s wine country. We were treated to a liquid dinner at the concluding banquet. To my taste the wines were sweet and light, though my palate lacks the lexicon to report the experience in full.

Wine is not the liquid I want to write about. My topic is the fluid dynamics of ideas.

As a doctoral student I was encouraged to read Michel Foucault on the mandatory search for a framework for my research. So I read the Archaeology of Knowledge. One passage of the book stuck with me:

in the disciplines that we call the history of ideas, the history of science, the history of philosophy, the history of thought ..., in those disciplines which, despite their names, evade very largely the work and methods of the historian, attention has been turned, on the contrary, away from vast unities like “periods” or “centuries” to the phenomena of rupture, of discontinuity. Beneath the great continuities of thought, beneath the solid, homogeneous manifestations of a single mind or of a collective mentality, beneath the stubborn development of a science striving to exist and to reach completion at the very outset, beneath the persistence of a particular genre, form, discipline, or theoretical activity, one is now trying to detect the incidence of interruptions.

I now realize that Foucault’s opposition between continuity and discontinuity is not much of a historiographical distinction, but it was a useful mantra to get me on my way, breaking up the record in the mandated interruptions. My history training became to place signposts on the road and talk of how ideas change, fundamentally.

Perhaps today’s historiography has too much of discontinuity. At the Brock meetings it seemed, particularly in the plenary talks, that the mandate was to find continuity. The conference opened with Craufurd Goodwin speaking of the similarities between Walter Lippmann’s economic opinion and JM Keynes’ work. Samuel Hollander spoke of how Adam Smith’s views on the state are extensive with more contemporary ones. The same theme of continuity expressed itself in some of the sessions such as one on the brothers Polanyi (Karl and Michael).

Except that it is never merely continuity, or a simple matching of statements. Historians speak instead of notions that spill. Ideas drop their stain here and there and we get to see them against the light. At times the leakage of ideas seeps deeply and one can’t isolate the bit of text that carries the intruder. The historian has then to extract the essence, distil, thrice-filtered to show the connections.

I appreciate the craftsmanship of this kind of intellectual history. I confess I lack the patience to go through the fabric with the magnifying lens in hand or sit by the decanter reading and re-reading the text. My taste is more hurried and clumsy. I rather not probe, my taste is to assemble and puzzle over the record. It calls for an eye for composition and a peculiar sort of imagination. For me it is also, and still, a lot about interruptions. It makes for unbalanced narratives and summer headaches.  

Comments

+1

 

A few “hurried and clumsy” thoughts. For me the notion of leaking or spill in neither one of continuity nor discontinuity, but one of alteration, sort of an in between. From the moment it spills, it changes color, smell and substance, it mixes. The second point of your beautifully written post is which “it” you are discussing. I take it that you refers to rupture or continuities in ideas, but I wonder how we might think about facts, identities, and practices as well.

 

It's the rupture in facts that is most impressive and a priori unexplained (maybe facts, by construction, implie disruption): overnight, the black communities in LA or Pittsburg are rioting in 1963. One evening, you turn on the TV and you're watching the unbelievable fall of the Berlin wall, and although historians would later show “there were signs” and “time was ripe”, you've been raised with the idea that this wall would never break, in the same way that you've been taught the Euro cannot be undone. And still you might wake up on a cloudy morning of September 2012 and it will be gone.

 

My approach of ruptures in ideas, at the individual or collective level, is just the opposite. At first it seems to make sense that, in the middle of emigration, a personal or historical crisis you can throw the bottle to the wall. But then, yes, it spills, and you're never left with an unstained material to start anew. Historians since the 70s have worked hard, I feel, to balance the idea that they are “revolutions,” whether marginalists and keynesians. I personally see continuities and alterations more easily than breaks, and I'm always in awe when the contours of an “Age of Fracture” are drawn. Also, I'm interested in how, in the present situation of crisis, macroeconomists talk over and over again of Lucas's ideas ( the critique, the macro use of rational expectations) as if it was the latest great “break” in ideas.

 

I'm not sure how rupture (I assume this word embodies the representation of a quick and somewhat  brutal phenomenon) in identities can be envisionned, if not as suicide? Finally, I would be interested in your picture of breaks in practices, for it seems to me that alterations in individual and communities's practices, take very long to occur, and that “breaking away” is a notion that simply doesn't apply here. 

0

In my opinion, taking Foucault seriously is a bit misguided. I don't know of many writers on history or historiography(whatever that is), but there's got to be better people out there.
An interesting intellectual history project might be to explore the connections between post-Modernism, deconstruction and fascist or right-wing "thought" in France in the 1930s, a link I've heard about but don't know if it's been proven.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <blockquote> <br> <cite> <code> <dd> <div> <dl> <dt> <em> <h2> <h3> <h4> <img> <li> <ol> <p> <span> <strong> <sub> <sup> <table> <tbody> <td> <tr> <ul>
    Allowed Style properties: display, float, height, margin, margin-bottom, margin-left, margin-right, margin-top, width
  • You may insert videos using embed codes like these:
    • [video_large:KoqLu5CKx-o]
    • [popupvideo_mini:KoqLu5CKx-o right]
    • [lightboxvideo_mini:KoqLu5CKx-o]
    • [text_popupvideo:KoqLu5CKx-o nostart noicon|Click here to open the video.]
    • [text_lightboxvideo:KoqLu5CKx-o|Open this video in a lightbox.]
    To learn more, please click on the "More information..." link below.

More information about formatting options

Type the characters you see in this picture. (verify using audio)
Type the characters you see in the picture above; if you can't read them, submit the form and a new image will be generated. Not case sensitive.