The late historian Barbara Tuchman makes a convincing case
for what she calls factual storytelling over academic writing. She is calloused against charges that she
lacks credentials to be an historian and is instead, simply a writer. Never, she tells us, did she want to write
for academics. “Too often,” she writes,
“scholarly history is written in terms of ideas rather than acts.” She cites no less an authority than George Macaulay Trevelyan, distinguished professor of modern history at Cambridge, who
“stressed writing for the general reader as opposed to writing just for fellow
scholars because he knew that when you write for the public you have to be clear and you have to be interesting and these are the two
criteria which make for good writing.”
As for her critics, she uses the tart retort for which she is
known: “My own form is narrative, which
is not every historian’s, I may say—indeed, it is rather looked down on now by
the advanced academics, but I don’t mind because no one could possibly persuade
me that telling a story is not the most desirable thing a writer can do.”
Tuchman’s goals as a writer
and historian are clear: the writing has
to be real and has to interest a wide audience.
The reader must feel compelled to turn the page. The best writer-historians do this. They are not historians or scientists first,
but storytellers. If she were alive
today, Tuchman might single out the work of Robert Caro, William Manchester,
John McPhee, and Gary Wills as examples of storytellers and historians. This desire
to write for common people is a thread running through her book, Practicing History: Selected Essays (Ballantine Books, 1982).
I found Tuchman’s work at an
opportune moment. For the last few
months, I have been involved with writing longer research pieces for a graduate
program in which I am involved, and after four or five “academic” papers, I am
finding that the writing takes a backseat to the credentials of the academics I
quote from and list in my bibliography.
There is a tone in the work from the “ivory tower” that I, on other
occasions, would strenuously avoid in my writing. I don’t want to write for the ten other
academics interested in some esoteric subject.
My work experience is in factual writing appealing to an audience of
common readers, everyday people who look to books, magazines, newspapers, and
online sources to inform and explain. I
am firmly convinced that good writing that appeals to the intellect and the
human need for a story is not some sort of lesser animal to the obtuse and
often incestuous academic paper. In Tuchman,
I find much validation and a kindred soul.
So I have been reading everything I could find, in print and out of,
from her and others like her.
Barbara Tuchman was born on
January 30, 1912 in New York City, and died on February 6, 1989 at the age of 77. She lacked an academic title or a graduate
degree, and was, in fact, a housewife when she picked up her pen and began to
research and write history. Over the
years, she came to believe that an academic background might actually inhibit
her writing ability. She wrote for The Nation, which her father at one
point owned, and traveled extensively before settling down to marry physician Lester
R. Tuchman in 1940. Two of her books won
Pulitzer Prizes: The Guns of August (Presidio Press, 1962) and Stilwell and the American Experience in China 1911-1945 (Grove
Press, 1971). Her death resulted from
complications of a stroke.
Practicing
History is
about writing, although there is plenty of history in it. Tuchman states her position for this book
clearly: “I am a writer first whose
subject is history, and whose purpose is communication. I am very conscious of the reader as a listener
whose attention must be held if he is not to wander away.” She defends herself as a woman writer in a
male-dominated field: “Women are a
particularly good source for physical detail.
They seem to notice it more than men or at any rate to consider it more
worth reporting.” This book collects
together shorter pieces of history, lectures, and Tuchman’s ruminations about
writing history. She avoids what she
calls “political passions of the moment” in favor of stories with a hard or
factual subject matter. Books written by
journalists often fall into these political passions, but Tuchman is an
advocate for pure history as story, the compelling narrative of the world and
its people often in moments of tension and great importance. Her books took time to germinate—six or seven
years of on-and-off work to produce her first book, Bible and Sword: England and
Palestine from the Bronze Age to Balfour (Ballantine Books, 1956).
Practicing
History is
divided up into sections: “The Craft,” “The
Yield,” and “Learning from History.” In
the first section, the essay “In Search of History,” contains valuable advice
for the young historian, whom she hopes will write only about a subject that is
dear to him or her. The essay is drawn
from a Phi Beta Kappa Address at Radcliffe College in 1963. Students must write about imagery and fact for
which they care passionately, and not “because your department has suggested it
as an original subject.” In Tuchman’s
view, a writer of history must be fascinated by his subject and follow it
wherever it leads. She speaks of her own
struggles against the parameters of her writing ability. On the mechanics of writing, she councils
that “short words are always preferable to long ones; fewer syllables the
better, and monosyllables, beautiful and pure like ‘bread’ and ‘sun’ and ‘grass’
are best of all.” Of particular interest
is her research technique of making notes on index cards because this keeps the
writer from being tied down to a desk.
She could take her cards and work anywhere. A good researcher must also know when to stop
because research is “endlessly seductive; writing is hard work.” She goes on to say in another essay that “Research
provides the material, and theory a pattern of thought, but it is through communication
that history is heard and understood.”
This circles back to her theme that to write is to instruct, but to also
tell a compelling story.
Tuchman believes that
creative writing is not just poetry and fiction, but factual writing as
well. She provides an artist’s laundry
list of necessities for fiction and nonfiction forms: “first, the extra vision with which the
artist perceives a truth and conveys it by suggestion. Second, medium of expression: language for writers, paint for painters,
clay or stone for sculptors, sound expressed in musical notes for
composers. Third, design or structure.” These aspects are what’s needed for art, and
therefore they are imperatives for the historical writer.
“The Yield” contains Tuchman’s
shorter historical pieces, many first published in The Nation. She also
includes some book reviews from The New York Review of Books. Her writing in
this section on Israel illuminates and identifies the roots of the continuing conflict
in that region today. Her grandfather
was Henry Morgenthau Sr., and she provides an especially insightful profile of
him in this section, as she also does with Henry Kissinger, of whom she was not
related.
In “Learning from History,”
she affirms history’s subject as humanity.
“History is the record of human behavior,” she writes, “the most
fascinating subject of all, but illogical and so crammed with an unlimited
number of variables that it is not susceptible of the scientific method nor of systematizing.” Of the cliché of one who does not remember
history is doomed to repeat it, she says:
there are “two ways of applying past experience: one is to enable us to avoid past mistakes
and to manage better in similar circumstances next time; the other is to enable
us to anticipate a future course of events.”
She believes fervently in history as illumination of the present, but it
requires a 25-50 year perspective because history cannot be written as it
happens. That is better left to diary,
memoir and journalism. The past tells us
what the present and the future are all about.
Barbara Tuchman in her time
was a force to be reckoned with, and her work stands up today almost as well as
it did when first published. She is the
historian for common folk, eschewing the trappings of academia. Her work is a testament to craft, and indeed
inspires us to turn the page, book after book.
Practicing History contains
the added bonus of her writing about writing.
Many of her generation have passed, and we are at a loss to replace
them. Few writers, from the academy or elsewhere,
are writing history for people today.
Howard Zinn—gone; William Manchester—gone; Stephen Ambrose—gone; William
Shirer—gone; John Toland—gone. A
woman-historian is a rarer creature in the crowd of 20th century
factual storytellers. So Barbara Tuchman
is a gem. Her stories are rooted in time
and place, but her style is timeless.
Wonderful post.
ReplyDeleteI have always believed, in my own humble and academically limited way, that story is everything; if your reader isn't turning the pages of your work with eagerness to get to the next sentence, you have, in some fundamental manner, failed him/her. Your erudition or c.v. does not, Mr. Author, relieve you of the responsibility to engage your reader with, simply, a well-told story.
I read Ms. Tuchman's book "The March Of Folly" many years ago, and while I remember little of it, I recall it to accessible, in a way that much "scholarly" work is not. I am not an educated man, so for me, this is paramount in anything I read. John Toland's "The Rising Sun" comes to mind, or one of my favorites, David McCollough's "Truman", both books of history that are by no means the dry, uninteresting drone that others of the genre tend to be.
I didn't know Ms. Tuchman's father was the owner of The Nation magazine; as a political moderate, it makes her suspect in my mind. (Just kidding.) But the fact of her family's liberalism should reveal something of her background as an author, but for the life of me, I can't say what that is.
I'm going to reread "Folly"; thanks for the excellent essay.
Your favorite neighbor,
John
Pope, sir:
ReplyDeleteTuchman actually discusses an historian's bias in one of the essays, especially how no writer can compose without something of her bias slipping in, but one should try to limit it at all costs.
Also, you reminded me about David McCullough. I inadvertently left him out. When the John Adams miniseries aired, I saw a documentary about him and how he researches and writes. He has a small shed in his backyard where he works. Very interesting and insightful doc.
And the range of your knowledge always astounds me when I read your blog. If some of the Catholic popes were as gifted, they would not have waited until the 1990s to determine that Galileo was on to something and lift his excommunication.
Thanks for reading and commenting.