My Canadian History course is historiographical in nature. One of the essay options is to pick an era in the twentieth century and outline the historiography about that period. I'd suggested to my prof that I could do Canada in the 1960s (because I've taken a course on that specific subject, and that decade was the focus of my honours paper). She got very excited about my ideas, wondering if she could convince me to move my topic forward a decade, as she and a colleague might be putting together a conference on Canada in the 1970s, and I could assist them on it next year.
And now I am more torn than you can ever imagine.
1960s:
- I've already dealt with the decade a lot (and this semester is all about staying close to my areas of expertise, for survival purposes).
- I have a lot of ideas about how the popular and academic history really overlaps regarding this decade.
- I can do a lot of cultural-type history.
- It's really fun.
- There is a lot written about this subject. (This might actually be a "con" on the list, because the 1960s in Canada is a huge topic: the fight over nuclear armament, the Quiet Revolution, flare-ups in Canadian-American relations regarding the Cold War, Baby Boomers, social protest, Trudeaumania, Canada's Centennial...) Seriously, it's out of control.
1970s:
- This is a possible collaboration opportunity, and a way to keep myself involved in the Canadian history field.
- I could read beyond what I have read already, which would probably be good, considering that Canadian history will be one of my comps lists (and this could be a good way to get a whole whack of material out of the way).
- Less is written on this subject, but it's really centred on Trudeau, oil and the FLQ crisis. No, I'm exaggerating. You also have debates about federalism, the Royal Commission on the Status of Women, and all the civil rights issues.
- This prof is really awesome and it would be fun to work with her on something.
As I was blogging this out, Chris called on his lunch break and we talked this out quickly, too. And I think this means I'm doing Canada in the 1970s. I think the whole "I could get a bunch of my comps list out of the way" issue is too big to ignore. Because, really, I've already read all the major books about Canada in the 1960s. How would that help me?
Fine. I'll do more research on the 1970s. Even though that means I have to do more reading about oil. And I have a serious aversion to that.
6 comments:
Important event in Canadian History: Janny Marie is born. That's all you really need to know.
(In the voice of Lane)
BOOOORING!
I think you should bust out of the '60s! It's an exciting opportunity for you-- and on top of it, you're not leaving the '60s behind! You know as a historian that these markers are just for convenience-- and your background information leading into the '70s could help you to develop some interesting layers that people who have been focusing on the '70s for so long won't be able to see.
DO IT!
I agree with kristiface. I think it's a totally awesome idea to start exploring the 70s, especially knowing that it will help with your comps. Go for it!
Oh, I'm so glad you'll be working on the 70s. It sounds like a terrific opportunity for you. And besides, the fashions were even more egregious in that era.
Also, a bit of trillwing trivia: my first (of only two!) visits to Canada came in the 1970s. Of course, I was learning to walk at the time, so I don't remember much of it. But Montreal, baby, Montreal, 1976. Wish I could recall all the Francophone, late-hippie goodness. I was there to watch my aunt medal in rowing--she lost the gold to a HUGE East German, I think, who was probably on some kind of IV steroids when she wasn't on the water. So there's a bit o' history for ya. Enjoy!
Thanks, everyone! I'm all excited about doing something different, now. Even if it entails learning more about the National Energy Policy.
And Trillwing? Your Montreal experience is awesome.
Post a Comment