8 thoughts on “rewrite”

1. 

   April 28, 2003 09:15

   royby

   Historians rewrite the past with monotonous regularity, and often it is done to explain the present, but only in the terms that the present demands. In that case, the then IS negated by the now.

   Reply
2. 

   April 28, 2003 10:54

   Norman

   There was a time when a good historian was one who attempted to get closer to what advances in knowledge seemed to indicate as the most likely explanation of past events.
   Now, it often becomes a contest to see who can paint the best possible picture supporting interpretations “historians” believe “ought” to be true. A simplification? Of course — but not, regretably, unfair or an oversimplification.

   Reply
3. 

   April 28, 2003 12:39

   Lars

   Now doesn’t negate then. Then is contained within now.

   Reply
4. 

   April 28, 2003 13:46

   Lisa

   A change in present circumstances does not mean a person was not happy then.

   Reply
5. 

   April 28, 2003 15:13

   jon

   The past is brittle
   And the present, too.
   Thru words both worlds merge
   But only for a slippery moment
   because the now becomes
   the past the moment you write and
   read even this.

   Reply
6. 

   April 28, 2003 18:03

   dan

   Isn’t it called ‘remembering’?

   Reply
7. 

   April 30, 2003 06:51

   royby

   Ah.. remembering. Interestingly, (for me at least) I have just used this quote in a research task that I am busyily preparing.
   ‘Thinking holds to the coming of what has been, and is remembrance.’
   Martin Heidegger ñ The Question Concerning Technology

   Reply
8. 

   February 10, 2005 21:11

   Anonymous

   You are invited to check the pages about- Tons of interesdting stuff!!!

   Reply