Unconference feedback

I found the exercise of pair writing very challenging, and there might be several reasons for that. Firstly, as I am still in the process of very early research for my essay, I felt that my ideas were not  formed enough to have anything to write. I still managed to get a few hundred words down: even though I don’t like them, the exercise has taught me that there is always something to write, and the sooner the better. Secondly, I think I was a bit too concerned about what my co-writer would think and understand, which prevented me from being as productive as I could have been. An additional challenge for me was language, as my first drafts are usually written in a kind of ‘frenglish’ which I did not want to impose on my co-writer. 

Despite these challenges, I found the process of discussing my work with George very interesting as he would ask quite simple questions to which I had not thought of, and which helped me to be more precise with my definitions and intentions.

I would now like to offer some feedback to George.

First of all, I feel like your project is on the right path: your question is well defined, and you already have a quite clear idea of your methods and sources. I find your idea of using an anthropological approach especially relevant in the context of this transnational history class. Indeed, it will enable you to ‘play with the scales’, focus on the individual or small community level and connect them to broader patterns, while freeing yourself from the national level. The national could still be included, but only as an element of context informing your analysis.

Secondly, about your fear of being too Eurocentric, I do not think that this is too much of an issue. Even though there is a tendency in the historiography to study other geographical regions, Europe is still a relevant topic of inquiry with a lot to be explored. However, as we said during our discussion, it might be a good idea to study peripherical European regions, such as Turkey or Russia, which could unveil some unknown connections or patterns that usually go unnoticed in studies about Western European countries.

Lastly, it would be interesting for you to reflect on the ‘added value’ of your project. By added value I mean, what does demonstrating that patterns of fears existed across different European countries tell us? What do you make of it? How can you use this conclusion to enlight our understanding of a particular period, geographical area, historical issue? You might have already thought about it but, if not, I feel that it would add a lot of strength to your project.

Here is an article I just found about the study of climate change from a people’s perspective: Pallavi V. Das, ‘People’s History of Climate Change’, History Compass, 16:11 (2018), pp.1-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/hic3.12497

Even though climate change is not exactly your topic, I thought it might still be useful to understand how Das goes about researching and writing about people’s perceptions and fears.