The review of the historiographical essay
With 20+ inches of snow outside, and no sign of it letting up, and the kids busy playing and what not, there’s not much else to do but homework.
So I buckled down and wrote out the review to the essay this afternoon. It was actually a great exercise for learning what’s going on in the field, and will definitely benefit me on this paper. The article was about what makes Nazi science Nazi, or what’s the difference between the science done in Nazi Germany versus at other times in Germany, and even in other nations.
Volker Remmert describes three issues in the current (article was written in 2004, so pretty current) trends of writing about science in Nazi Germany. The first is that of organization. Historians like to discuss how the Nazis were or were not able to congeal a general policy and practice in regards to their science and technology. Current thinking, shows Remmert, is that the Nazis were very capable. He points to the many Allied agencies that swept into Germany post-WWII and took all of their scientists, engineers, research and projects. I’m most familiar with the United States’ Project Paperclip, and taking Wernher von Braun for their rocket development.
Second is about how Nazi science and technology practices, ideology, and policies were developed well before the National Socialists came to power. Some historians will contend even before World War I.
Lastly is the issue of Entgrenzung, or dealing with the issues of ethics and morality in scientific research, and whether scientists and researches knew their work was tested in inhumane conditions or not.
That’s my three pages in a nut shell.
I also found a few primary sources for the paper. Several books popped up on worldcat.org by doing a search for “wirtschaft AND tech*” and limiting the time frame to 1920-1940. What I really need is a bunch of popular magazines and newspaper articles that talk about science and technology in Weimar Germany. Particularly with some reader comments, would be nice.
Anywho, that’s were I stand on that.
Aaarg – finding an historiographical essay
So the next assignment for the Research Seminar is to find a historiographical essay related to our topic, and then write a three page summary of the article. After a nice day of work and with only three hours for study tonight, I finally found one… after looking for an hour and a half!
I started out looking in JSTOR for ‘historiography German aviation’, and found a few possible leads on the historiography of aviation history in general (which means US aviation history). I could fit that in, comparing US and German aviation, or something like that, but I thought I should search elsewhere.
So then I went to Project Muse to see if they had anything better. They had the same stuff. But I did rethink an article that came up in both. I figured a historiographical essay on science in Nazi Germany was about as close as I can get. So I’ll be writing three pages on this article: Volker R. Remmert, “What’s Nazi about Nazi Science? Recent Trends in the History of Science in Nazi Germany,” Perspectives on Science 12, no. 4 (2004): 454-475.
Changing plans already
I needed to rethink my proposal for my paper. The comments I got back were “too vague,” “too broad,” “need focus,” and “what aspect.” Yeah, I knew that already. But when you write the new proposal 30 minutes before you turn it in, and 10 minutes after you think it up… well, it don’t look pretty.
So I’ve had some more time to think about my topic, and have searched for sources, and I think I have a better grasp on what to do.
Now the paper will be on science and technology in the Weimar period. More specifically, I’ll look at how popular, political and scientific attitudes about science and technology influenced German leaders going into World War II. Germany had some pretty incredible technology in World War II. They had the first jet aircraft, the first ballistic missile, and this awesome airplane (I have posted about before)!
I also found an interesting quote from Hitler, where he supposedly said “Germany’s technology, industry, and morale were sufficient to fight an indefinite war.” So was there something in the Weimar period that lead Hitler to believe this. Certainly he did, as did the scientists and researchers who were so innovative.
So now I’ll come up with a better one paragraph proposal, and I might feel comfortable enough about it to post it. And now it’s on to find sources (primary and secondary) about popular, political, and from the field itself, attitudes about science and technology in Weimar Germany! I’ll start by looking in the field of aviation, since that is my passion, if I have such a thing.
Graduate Research Paper
Not that I really have time to blog as I do it, but… I feel like I need to do something historical here… So why not.
So this is my last class before embarking on my dissertation. The Graduate Research Seminar should hopefully tie up any loose knots in our historical writing abilities. It’s a course on honing our skills. The syllabus looks great, and I’m excited for the class. One initial question I had was, why are we learning how to write like historians until the very end? Why don’t we learn how to write at the beginning or even in the middle? Well, there is a course or two on that, but nothing like this one proposes to be. We’re apparently going to learn all the behind-the-scene techniques and tricks to the trade. I’m actually really excited for it. Our Professor is great.
So for this class we’re supposed to write a 25-30 page paper that will hopefully become a chapter (or at least a bulk of one) of the dissertation. If nothing else, it can be a publishable paper. On the very low end, it will at least teach us something we don’t want to do for a dissertation.
My dissertation, as it stands now, is on Nazi Tunnels. The Nazis, towards the middle of the war, decided that they needed to move much of their war manufacturing underground. So they designed and built huge underground bunkers and tunnel systems for factories and depots. Go ahead, google it. There’s not much out there. Add the keywords, ‘melk ebensee’ and you’ll get a few more responses. The only scholarly works that I know of on this topic are two German books. One is an excellent work by Hans Walter Wichert, Decknamenverzeichnis deutscher unterirdischer Bauten(at Amazon, already have one), which lists practically all of the underground building sites during Nazi Germany. The second work is a dissertation by Bertrand Perz, Projekt Quarz: Steyr-Daimler-Puch Und Das Konzentrationslager Melk, Industrie, Zwangsarbeit und Konzentrationslager in O?sterreich (at Amazon if anyone wants to buy it for me), which is an in-depth look at one of these underground projects in Melk, Australia.
Anyhow, there are totally no sources available, to my knowledge, that I can use for the current project. That’s part of my dissertation work, is to dig up all of those sources. It should be fun. It’s also not manageable in a semester’s time. So for this semester’s project I had several ideas.
First, I thought about doing a micro-study on just one of the tunnels. Unfortunately, in the two or three hours of looking for sources, I couldn’t find any. I haven’t checked with the library, yet, but I’m not hopeful. So my second idea is to look at a more broad topic that touches the issue of the tunnels. One obvious one is, why did they build them in the first place (the answer is to protect them from Allied bombings). But a deeper question begs, why did they think they could do that in the first place. It was a huge undertaking to move so many factories underground. They must have though they could do it. So a deeper question would be, why did the Nazi’s think they could undertake such a big job. Now let’s step back a bit, say, 30-50 years, and apply this question to Germany as a whole in the form of, what did German’s think of their technical and scientific abilities? So that will be my basis of inquiry for this semester’s project. I will look at what German citizens, German scientists, and German politicians thought about German science and technology from 1900 until the end of World War II. I post more on this as I think it through and find sources.
So, basically, I’m hoping to keep up the blog as I write the paper and take the class. I’ll post the methodology that I learn, and the troubles and trials, the triumphs and tackles about writing a historical paper.
First off, I feel completely unprepared because I have no sources. That’s the first thing to tackle.
Poster Session at the History of Ed
At the beginning of the year I was asked to participate in a poster session for the History of Education Society’s Annual Meeting. I have done a few things with maps, so I was asked to share resources and ideas for using maps with teaching history.
Not too many people came by, so I only spoke with two people. I had this list of resources for working with and teaching with maps:
History and Maps
Selected Websites
http://chnm.gmu.edu/worldhistorysources/unpacking/mapsmain.html (CHNM’s site on using maps in the classroom)
http://echo.gmu.edu/search/node/map (A list of map resources on the web, collected by GMU’s Echo project)
http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/gmdhtml/ (Library of Congress Map Collections)
http://www.besthistorysites.net/Maps.shtml (A long list of map related websites for teaching history)
http://explorethemed.com/Default.asp (Historical Atlas of the Mediterranean)
http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/ (Tons of maps sponsored by University of Texas at Austin)
http://www.flu.gov/whereyoulive/healthmap/ (US Gov. Flu Map)
http://www.unc.edu/awmc/index.html (Ancient World Mapping Center)
http://strangemaps.wordpress.com/ (Hundreds of posts about strange maps. Very good discussion starters.)
Selected Bibliography
Brown, Lloyd Arnold. The Story of Maps. New York: Dover Publications, 1979.
Bruckner, Martin. The Geographic Revolution in Early America: Maps, Literacy, and National Identity. Chapel Hill: Published for the Omohundro Institute of Early American History and Culture by University of North Carolina Press, 2006.
Field Museum of Natural History, and Newberry Library. Maps: Finding Our Place in the World. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2007.
Knowles, Anne Kelly, and Amy Hillier. Placing History: How Maps, Spatial Data, and GIS Are Changing Historical Scholarship. Pap/Cdr. ESRI Press, 2008.
Pickles, John. A History of Spaces: Cartographic Reason, Mapping, and the Geo-Coded World. London: Routledge, 2004.
Turnbull, David, and Deakin University. Maps Are Territories: Science Is an Atlas: A Portfolio of Exhibits. University of Chicago Press ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993.
Virga, Vincent, and Library of Congress. Cartographia: Mapping Civilizations. Little, Brown and Company, 2007.
And this Keynote playing on my laptop:
Categories
Recent Comments
Recent Posts
- The review of the historiographical essay
- Aaarg – finding an historiographical essay
- Changing plans already
- Graduate Research Paper
- Poster Session at the History of Ed
- Multiple PHP Instances With One Apache
- 40th anniversary of the moon landing
- Convert WP to static HTML – part 2
- Nazis in the news
- Blast from the past
- The history of abandoned things
- Weekly Tips, Tricks, Gadgets and Goodies #5
- Finished 1989 Flash Map
- Major Update to Multiple SVN Wordpress Installs
- Zotero’s code_swarm



