skip to Main Content
The smarter way
to do assignments.

Please note that this is just a preview of a school assignment posted on our website by one of our clients. If you need assistance with this question too, please click on the Order button at the bottom of the page to get started.

I need help answering these question then after responding to propels post. 1. We typically think of fiction as being “narrated” from a “point of view”–but history? According to Nealon & Giroux, history is akin to literature because it is “narrated from a point of view.” It is comprised of “events” that “are chosen according to certain criteria,” and further that “those events are explained in terms of certain paradigms that promote particular visions of the past, present, and future”–what they suggest is interpretation or construction rather than “objective” reconstructions of past realities” (109). Break down and address the key terms and ideas in these quotes: 1) What does it mean to “narrate” history? 2) Where and why does this “point of view” originate? 3) How are “criteria of choice” developed, and by whom? 4) How are these “paradigms” that “promote particular visions” formed? 5) How does this process operate in altering our “past, present, and future?” As always, explain fully and draw on examples and illustrations to prove your point. 2. If historical narrative is, indeed, narrated, then it “is inescapably political in that it contains or reflects certain deeply ideological presuppositions,” according to Nealon & Giroux. In that sense, it “gives meaning to the otherwise random events of history,” creating what Jean François Lyotard called a “master narrative” (110). Thus, “historical meaning, like literary meaning, is actively produced rather than dispassionately uncovered or rendered visible” (111). What is the upshot here, in terms of our world history? Our national history? Our family history? Our current events? How are our lives, much less the history upon which our lineage is based, politically produced? Think of terms we’ve considered this far in your response (perhaps ideology, hegemony, false consciousness, interpellation, subject), and consider how your own personal “history” has been “narrated” to this point. As always: Examples and illustrations most welcome!3. Nealon & Giroux quote Walter Benjamin as stating that “the past can be seized only as an image which flashes up at the instant when it can be recognized and is never seen again” (108). The past, then, is always being “represented” (or, perhaps better, “re-presented”), and the events comprising it “need to be subjected to the same scrutiny as other ideological truth claims” (111). How does this process fit Benjamin’s notion of an “historical afterlife?” I’d suggest, too, that the implications for such an “historical afterlife” are extremely personal; why must we constantly reconstruct our own individual past, our own personal histories? How might we go about doing so honestly, genuinely, sincerely, authentically?4. Sherman Alexie’s “The Trial of Thomas Builds-the-Fire” certainly is a lesson in history, one that spins us through history and dislocates us from the present. Consider the following:How does Thomas’s ahistorical narrative, one that metaphorically combines his own life with that of a young Indian pony (96), the Yakama Chieftan Qualchan (98), and the Couer d’Alene warrior Wild Coyote (100), prove subversive?Why does Thomas’s appropriation of history so move those in the courtroom, even as he enrages the judge and ultimately finds himself guilty of a murder that happened one hundred years before he was born?How do you make sense of our narrator suggesting that Thomas held Eve Ford hostage with “the idea of a gun” (93), that Esther WalksAlong left her husband because Thomas had made a noise “that sounded something like rain” (94), and that Thomas asked the judge if this trail was “real justice or the idea of justice” (100), in terms of signifiers and signifieds, perhaps? “You’re the storyteller. Tell us some stories, give us the scoop,” says one of the men in the bus on the way to the penitentiary, but why are these men so interested in Thomas’s narratives, what value might they find in his stories, and how does their reaction reveal something about the power of story and the authority of the storyteller? Consider concepts we’ve covered in the past few weeks, such as hegemony, false consciousness, interpellation, ideological state apparatus (ISA), and repressive state apparatus (RS), and apply them (and others you may think of!) to this particular story.HISTORYAhistorical: a web-like, subjective and fragmented way of perceiving history as an expression or representation of forces on narrative-making as opposed to traditional linear understandings of history. Artifacts: elements of discourse from a particular period that serve to supplement and subvert the master narrative.Episteme: the underlying conditions of truth that define how a particular age views the world, thereby developing an accepted discourse that produces knowledge within a particular time and place. [Michel Foucault, The Order of Things (1966)]Historical: reference to the linear, objective and progressive perspective of the way in which time is traditionally thought to unfold, in contrast to contemporary ahistorical perspectives of space and time.Historical Afterlife: the continual ruination and reconfiguration of the past within the present, the meaning of any historical artifact or incident being an ongoing reconstitution and appropriation. [Walter Benjamin, “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction” (1935)]Master Narrative: a grand narrative told from a single cultural point-of-view which presumes to offer the only legitimate version of history, thus discounting marginalized versions that defy and subvert the privileged version. [Jean-François Lyotard, The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge (1979)]Thick Description: the accumulation of seemingly insignificant details, conceptual structures, and meanings, as well as commentary and interpretations, that reveal a culture. [Clifford Geertz, Thick Description: Toward an Interpretive Theory of Culture (1973)]once someone can help me Ill send the reading that goes with. I need the questions in one day but the respodnign to people you do once I get them and we have like 2 or 3 days but need done soonest ask those


Clicking on this button will take you to our custom assignment page. Here you can fill out all the additional details for this particular paper (grading rubric, academic style, number of sources etc), after which your paper will get assigned to a course-specific writer. If you have any issues/concerns, please don’t hesitate to contact our live support team or email us right away.

How It Works        |        About Us       |       Contact Us

© 2018 | Intelli Essays Homework Service®