Abstract

The history wars are far from over—the question is, do they resonate beyond the limited public sphere in which they play out? What do Australians think of their history in light of these politicised historical debates? By way of answer, this paper examines the enduring public contest over the past and then investigates more elusive, but no less significant, everyday conversations about Australian history around the country. By proposing a method of ‘oral historiography’ to gauge contemporary historical understandings in Australia, it brings a critical new perspective to these ongoing debates. It offers ordinary people a chance to contribute to national discussions about Australian history and it challenges some of the more simplistic and troubling assumptions of the history wars.

Highlights

  • When John Howard lost the Australian federal election in 2007, a number of politicians and commentators predicted the end of the ‘history wars’

  • Unlike the 2007 election, for example, Australian history played no visible part in the 2010 campaign.[3]

  • The question is, does any of this resonate beyond the limited public sphere in which it plays out? What do Australians think of their history in light of the history wars? By way of answer, this paper examines the enduring public contest over the past and investigates more elusive, but no less significant, everyday conversations about Australian history around the country

Read more

Summary

Introduction

When John Howard lost the Australian federal election in 2007, a number of politicians and commentators predicted the end of the ‘history wars’. Despite Kevin Rudd’s prior insistence that divisive historical debate should itself be a thing of the past, the curriculum has been a flash point for political and public discussion.

Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call