Everything fits together!
One of the things I've really loved so far this semester is how well the things I'm learning in my classes are fitting together. Take my EASIA graduate seminar and EASIA 101 (which I'm TAing)- for the seminar, I've read Orientalism, "The Invention of Tradition," and a number of other texts that form basics for studies of East Asia. In 101, these concepts are coming up in an easier format for the undergrads, but they're still there. It's kind of fun to be an expert on this stuff since I read the texts for another class, and then get to teach frosh about it. It works the other way around too- since 101 is a basic overview of China, Japan, Korea, and Vietnam, ideas such as the Mandate of Heaven for China and Marx's Oriental Despotism are proving to helpful to know for my grad seminar.
My historiography course is even better, simply because the readings we're doing are fitting together so well. The course is looking at different forms of cultural historiography, with each week taking a different theme. The fun thing is how all the readings are building on each other. For example, last week we were reading a book on language in the French Revolution by William Sewell, but it pulls a lot of stuff from a Keith Baker reading that we had just a few weeks before. This week we're reading Joan Scott's "Gender and the Politics of History," and it's already drawn on four different readings we've had before. Several of these works I've read before, but only now am I really getting them, mainly because I now have all the background necessary to understand them better. And since I'm coming from a Japanese history background in a mainly Eurocentric class, I'm able to bring in things like Orientalism and other East Asia-centric texts when discussing the various forms of historiography. It's fun!
Marx still sucks though, and I still don't get him.
My historiography course is even better, simply because the readings we're doing are fitting together so well. The course is looking at different forms of cultural historiography, with each week taking a different theme. The fun thing is how all the readings are building on each other. For example, last week we were reading a book on language in the French Revolution by William Sewell, but it pulls a lot of stuff from a Keith Baker reading that we had just a few weeks before. This week we're reading Joan Scott's "Gender and the Politics of History," and it's already drawn on four different readings we've had before. Several of these works I've read before, but only now am I really getting them, mainly because I now have all the background necessary to understand them better. And since I'm coming from a Japanese history background in a mainly Eurocentric class, I'm able to bring in things like Orientalism and other East Asia-centric texts when discussing the various forms of historiography. It's fun!
Marx still sucks though, and I still don't get him.