- Tapa blanda: 256 páginas
- Editor: Harvard Univ Pr (1 de abril de 1999)
- Idioma: Inglés
- ISBN-10: 0674307607
- ISBN-13: 978-0674307605
- Valoración media de los clientes: Sé el primero en opinar sobre este producto
- Clasificación en los más vendidos de Amazon: nº251.840 en Libros en idiomas extranjeros (Ver el Top 100 en Libros en idiomas extranjeros)
Compara Precios en Amazon
+ Envío GRATIS
The Footnote: A Curious History (Inglés) Tapa blanda – 1 abr 1999
Los clientes que compraron este producto también compraron
Descripción del producto
"The Footnote" tells how all those interesting tidbits migrated to the bottom of the page.
Anthony Grafton has written a fascinating book about this important, though often maligned, scholarly apparatus...Historians of all stripes will profit from reading Grafton's history of historical research and writing (often called historiography) and especially from his detective work tracing history of the footnote, this vital academic detail which so many take for granted.
ÝAn¨ excellent book..."The Footnote" is the study of an appealing, rather overlooked aspect of intellectual and cultural history. Yet it is also much more: an investigation into the historical imagination, a quick tour of 'the culture of erudition' and, not least, the most recent intellectual entertainment from one of the most learned and enjoyable scholars now at work. -- Michael Dirda "Washington Post"
ÝIt's¨ hard to imagine a defense of the footnote by any historian with the least sense of style. Yet here it is: " The Footnote"author, Anthony Grafton, is an anomaly in the American historical profession: a deeply learned scholar known for exacting work on the transformations of classical learning in early modern Europe and a sprightly writer capable of communicating his enthusiasm to anyone willing to listen. Mr. Grafton not only defends the footnote as a guarantee of the value of the historical currency. He also portrays it as a bulwark against tyranny. -- Mark Lilla "Wall Street Journal"
The Footnote tells how all those interesting tidbits migrated to the bottom of the page.
[An] excellent book... The Footnote is the study of an appealing, rather overlooked aspect of intellectual and cultural history. Yet it is also much more: an investigation into the historical imagination, a quick tour of 'the culture of erudition' and, not least, the most recent intellectual entertainment from one of the most learned and enjoyable scholars now at work.
A curious history, indeed. Few accoutrements of scholarship have been as denigrated as the lowly footnote, as this lively and fascinating narrative demonstrates...The footnote, as [Grafton] correctly and convincingly points out, is critical to the scientific nature of historical writing and therefore reflects both the ideology and technical practices of the craft. "The footnote" confers 'proof' that the historian has visited the appropriate archives, dusted off the necessary documents, and consulted and exhausted the secondary literature. It is, in short, a badge of legitimacy. The reader familiar with Grafton's work will recognize the author's extraordinary range and familiarity with German, French, English, and Italian historical writing from the early modern period to the late 20th century. Grafton has, in fact, written a sly work of historiography, a kind of celebration of the gritty details of scholarly exploration, and not merely a chronicle of the despised footnote.
A witty and characteristically erudite book...Grafton's subject, apparently so trivial in itself and yet potentially so enlivening, offers cause for somewhat uneasy mirth. We may recall the toilers of "Gulliver's Travels", who sought to make sunbeams from cucumbers. Not surprisingly, the pages of "The Footnote" are peppered with human folly.--David McKitterick "New York Times Book Review "
Mr. Grafton has produced a delightful gem of a book that will appeal to many tastes. He displays an extraordinary level of erudition, is extremely readable, frequently witty and provides a guided tour across almost two thousand years in the development of Western scholarship. Needless to say, his own footnotes are a model of their kind. Above all, the author is neither boring nor pedantic.--Keith Windschuttle "Washington Times "
[An] excellent book..."The Footnote" is the study of an appealing, rather overlooked aspect of intellectual and cultural history. Yet it is also much more: an investigation into the historical imagination, a quick tour of 'the culture of erudition' and, not least, the most recent intellectual entertainment from one of the most learned and enjoyable scholars now at work.--Michael Dirda "Washington Post "
Reseña del editor
The weapon of pedants, the scourge of undergraduates, the bête noire of the new liberated scholar: the lowly footnote, long the refuge of the minor and the marginal, emerges in this book as a singular resource, with a surprising history that says volumes about the evolution of modern scholarship. In Anthony Graftons engrossing account, footnotes to history give way to footnotes as history, recounting in their subtle way the curious story of the progress of knowledge in written form.
Grafton treats the development of the footnotethe one form of proof normally supplied by historians in support of their assertionsas writers on science have long treated the development of laboratory equipment, statistical arguments, and reports on experiments: as a complex story, rich in human interest, that sheds light on the status of history as art, as science, and as an institution. The book starts in the Berlin of the brilliant nineteenth-century historian Leopold von Ranke, who is often credited with inventing documented history in its modern form. Casting back to antiquity and forward to the twentieth century, Graftons investigation exposes Rankes position as a far more ambiguous one and offers us a rich vision of the true origins and gradual triumph of the footnote.
Among the protagonists of this story are Athanasius Kircher, who built numerous documents into his spectacularly speculative treatises on ancient Egypt and China; Pierre Bayle, who made the footnote a powerful tool in philosophical and historical polemics; and Edward Gibbon, who transformed it into a high form of literary artistry. Proceeding with the spirit of an intellectual mystery and peppered with intriguing and revealing remarks by those who made this history, The Footnote brings what is so often relegated to afterthought and marginalia to its rightful place in the center of the literary life of the mind.Ver Descripción del producto
No es necesario ningún dispositivo Kindle. Descárgate una de las apps de Kindle gratuitas para comenzar a leer libros Kindle en tu smartphone, tablet u ordenador.
Obtén la app gratuita:
Detalles del producto
Si eres el vendedor de este producto, ¿te gustaría sugerir ciertos cambios a través del servicio de atención al vendedor?
Opiniones de clientes
|5 estrellas (0%)|
|4 estrellas (0%)|
|3 estrellas (0%)|
|2 estrellas (0%)|
|1 estrella (0%)|
Opiniones de clientes más útiles en Amazon.com
One caveat, which struck me at the start, is that surely footnotes would not have evolved solely form historical research, surely they would have surfaced in more useful contemporary documents, perhaps to do with legal or diplomatic professions.
That apart, Grafton takes the evolution of the footnote in historical scholarship as the evolution of `scientific' methodology in historical research. On the surface Grafton states that the `the text persuades, the notes prove'. Originally history was story telling by people who claimed to be present, and/or participants, in great events. As scholarship evolved, the fact that participants might have different motivations, points-of-view and/or explicit biases became increasingly apparent. "Ambassadors' reports - a great source of archival works - report on deliberations to which they did not have direct access and the intentions of monarchs who did not speak frankly". Therefore scholars began to quote their sources by use of footnotes to the main text.
Within this context, Grafton illustrates the distance some scholars will go to, in terms of selective quotation of some sources, the suppression of others and it is this which enlivens a topic which otherwise might have been deathly-dull. He acknowledges, with admiration, that some historians use footnotes to allow that there exist contrary interpretations of the thesis they are pursuing. However his work in the field allows him to allow him to add venom e.g. ` but often they (historians) quietly set the subtle, but deadly cf. (compare) in the footnote. This indicates, at least to the expert reader, both that an alternative view appears in the cited work and that it is wrong'. Grafton has worked in many European languages and this allows him to humorously include and compare the many differing ways that footnotes can convey bile - " The English do so with a characteristically sly adverbial construction `oddly overestimated'. Germans use the direct `ganz abwegig' (totally off-track); the French, a colder, but less blatant `discutable'".
The book traces the evolution of the `scientific' recording and interpretation of texts to convey historical scholarship through the work of historians of three centuries, and it is though this that Grafton exhibits great learning and humanity. The foibles, ambitions and disputes are clearly acknowledged as is their passion for their work. Grafton has clear sympathy for both. He is more grudging in acknowledging the contribution of philosophy - specially the work of Descartes and Voltaire - in the development of the uneasy concoction of art and science which is modern history.
This is a magnificent description of an exchange between Liebnitz and Bayle in the 1690's, where the latter's desire to document every mistake in historical writings available at the time, is called into question. Liebnitz instead argued that it would be more accurate and economical to pursue a project which documented the verified truth of historical research. Each project is, of course, infinite, though Liebnitz's is the more practicable.
While Grafton ranges widely though the historians of the 14th to the 19th Century
I feel that he reserves especially favour for Gibbon and von Ranke, Gibbon for his masterful confidence and literate authority - Grafton goes so far as to suggest that Gibbon reluctantly adopted the footnote, feeling that it broke the narrative flow. He favours Ranke for his zeal in perfecting the methodology of source quotation and interpretation as well as instituting the seminar for exposition and training of upcoming historians. Grafton points out, tellingly but humanely, that Ranke was not above self-delusion in his judgment of his own methodology, by showing that Ranke's own footnotes were less exact than the historian claimed.
The narrative,which can be quite detailed and wide-ranging, flows along thanks to Grafton;s style. Complex points are not simplified, but nor are the human details overlooked e.g. his laconic opinion of the medieval Letters of Aristeas is rendered as ` this fascinating book has the defect of being a forgery, but also the compensating virtues of beauty and clarity'.
There were some bits of wry humor in a few places, but considering the subject, there could have been much more.
The author assumes the reader has a very detailed knowledge of the academic pursuit of historical studies and that the reader shares the same love/hate relationship with the footnote as generations of historians have consummated.
Perhaps the book reads better in its original German. At any rate, I would pass on this one.
The book focuses exclusively on historical writing; I get the impression that the author, an academic historian, tried to reach a wider audience by pitching it as a history of scholarship in general without broadening the focus of the research, which is a grave error. And at times the author seems to forget that the subject is footnoting specifically, and not historiography generally (to say nothing of scholarship across the board). But if you simply recast the title in your mind to something like "Historiography and Source Materials", it becomes a very effective treatment of its actual subject. (Possibly not comforting if that's not the subject you wanted to read about, but on its own terms it's a good piece of work.) The author touches glancingly on other fields, but it's true he does not cover them adequately. For readers without a deep interest in the minutiae of professional-level historiography, the book can be heavy going, but still rewarding.
The writing is quite readable and often witty, though somewhat dense. At times it seems to garble the chronology of its subject, and in places it assumes the reader is more familiar with historiographic practices and figures than is appropriate for the general audience. But it is really not hard to follow, the material is rich, and the discussion is intelligent and interesting. (The author's theme of the "double argument" constituted by footnotes in conjunction with discursive text is insightful and provocative. His recognition that all scholarly writing serves some sort of agenda, and that footnotes are both tools in, and clues to, that practice, is a valuable analytical insight.) The subject is not exactly entertaining, but the author does a good job with it. (One pleasure in reading the book is identifying the off-hand quotes from popular culture that the author works in as sly jokes.)
The book is not without flaws. But it is an effective and engaging treatment of its (actual, not ostensible) subject, accessible to both academic and educated general readers. As a treatment of scholarly practice it is useful though not comprehensive; as a history of historiographic practice regarding source citations, it is very valuable; as a meditation on the uses and methods of scholarly discourse it is remarkably thought-provoking. Somewhat specialized, and not for everyone, but a good read nonetheless.