As we approach our methodological essay’s deadline, I am becoming more and more grateful that I chose subject matter a bit more specific to my project topic. I considered for a good bit whether to focus on something more basic, such as the differences between transnational history and comparative history – while this essay would have yielded some interesting points about the two distinctions, I am unsure of how pertinent this information would be to my project. By focusing on methodological issues that accompany the problematic (at times) concept of ‘nation’, I am engaging with more case study examples of nations outside Eastern Europe. The subject of French nationalism and ‘nation’ has always appeared to be a daunting path to go down as there is such a wide and rich range of literature and discourse on the matter. I am familiar with some of the basic tenets of the French model of nationalism but have thoroughly enjoyed exploring more – I do not know why I should be so shocked as I love watching Les Miserables just as much as everyone else. I digress – Exploring the relationship between the emergence of nationalism in France, largely as a result of the French Revolution, and the rise of Enlightenment ideals and philosophers has been quite useful in my research regarding postmodernism and conceptions of nation. Focusing on the issues of the ‘nation’ as a unit of analysis has tied in nicely with broader issues emphasized by postmodernist ideas; exploring what constitutes the character of a given nation while questioning the hierarchy of these views has tied in some of the key ideas of philosopher-historians such as Foucault and Lyotard – in particular, their views on power structures and metanarratives, respectively. Avoiding a too philosophical focus has proven to be a bit difficult considering its relevance to my current project and also how convoluted the language of some of the articles and books on these more theoretical topics. Although, I have found that focusing on the emergence of the concept of the nation as a unit of analysis has helped to uncover some of the anachronistic tendencies and oversimplifications of how even newer subsets of historical disciplines are being conducted today.
In regards to my project, I have struggled navigating the online platforms for primary Ukrainian and Belarusian sources. I have even encountered some Russian online sources being blocked by WiFi or just being completely shut down due to the current Ukrainian-Russian conflict. Sources on nationhood and nationalism have been easier to narrow down; I am currently reading Benedict Anderson’s Imagined communities: reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism (1983) to get a better grasp of how nationalism is disseminated. My flatmate is currently writing a paper on Chinese nationalism and recommended it to me. I am trying to be more conscientious about the authorship of these histories of nationalism but I have found a lot of the scholarship to be based on American education institutions. I think focusing on different realms of nationalism and nation outside of Europe might help to aid this issue.