Comments on: Charles Maier: The Question of Meaning

By: Craig

Craig — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Nice commentary here. Reading the first paragraph where you mention the use of the “revisionist” label, I would encourage you to cut him some slack. I’m sure that the term lacked the perjorative tone that it carries today when Maier used it in the 1970s. I’m sure you are aware of this. I wonder if he still uses the term today, and if so, in what way. But with the meaning of the term in the context of its former, more sterile, freshness, is Maier’s criticism of the revisionists not a balanced one? I don’t know, since I haven’t read the book.

By: Muninn

Muninn — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Yes, I think you are right. He also uses the term in different ways and different groups. In his 1978 essay, it refers to neo-Marxist scholars motivated by Vietnam. In his “Unmasterable Past” he uses it to refer to conservative German historians who either deny the Holocaust or which to deny its unique and “un-comparable” status in modern history.

I don’t know enough about the issues at hand in the ’78 essay to fully evaluate Professor Maier’s critique so I shouldn’t say too much. I look forward to reading more of his work. In his “Unmasterable Past” he seems particularly concerned by the extent to which postmodern history trends can unravel things, but he importantly notes that these new approaches can serve both the right and the left.

By: Muninn

Muninn — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

I have read more of Maier now, and I have lots more to say on this. My portrayal of his thinking isn’t really accurate, at least not for his more recent stuff….so much more to read…