I came across an article today (at Booktwo.org) that I think has some really interesting ideas in it…
…But I do believe that we’re building systems that allow us to do this better, and one of our responsibilities should be to design and architect those systems to make this explicit, and to educate.
One of the ways to do this might be to talk more not only about history, but about historiography. History not as a set of facts, but as a process, and one in which, whether we agree or not with the writers, our own opinions and biases are always to be challenged
I talked about Wikipedia because for me, Wikipedia is a useful subset of the entire internet, and as such a subset of all human culture. It’s not only a resource for collating all human knowledge, but a framework for understanding how that knowledge came to be and to be understood; what was allowed to stand and what was not; what we agree on, and what we cannot.
As is my wont, I made a book to illustrate this. Physical objects are useful props in debates like this: immediately illustrative, and useful to hang an argument and peoples’ attention on.
Very worth while reading the whole article!
- History, historiography and Wikipedia (simoncollister.com)
- On Wikipedia, Cultural Patrimony, and Historiography | booktwo.org (booktwo.org)
- The Iraq War: Wikipedia Historiography (texturadesign.com)
- Archiving Iraq: One Wikipedia Entry’s Edit Wars, Printed in 12 Volumes (readwriteweb.com)
- History of the Iraq War through Wikipedia edits (flowingdata.com)
- The Story Behind a Wikipedia Entry (bits.blogs.nytimes.com)
- Journalist publishes the 12,000th draft of history (geeksaresexy.net)
- Wikipedia Entry Turned Into Actual Encyclopedia (news.slashdot.org)