Ronald Ross wrote:
>Good point. Why is Aries used? Or maybe more importantly, who uses him,
>and when. Why does his work seem to turn up incessantly while his
>critics seem to vanish without a trace outside of academia? I don't
>*know* why, but I'm going to speculate a little, and see what people
>think.
>
>First of all Aries is good at reinforcing popular misconceptions and
>beliefs. He tells people what they already think they know. He then uses
>this basis to build up to other themes or concepts which may be more
>contoversial, partly perhaps of his political agenda. People are willing
>to accept these in part because they have fewer preconceived opinions on
>more complex issues, and in part because Aeries has made them feel good.
>"We believe him because he's a good bloke, because he believes what we
>do".
>
>Another main factor is that Aries is elegant. His work is presented in
>skilful French (and is well translated into English). His books have
>good production values (covers, binding, page layout, illustrations and
>photos). And presentation influences perception. Style becomes more
>important than substance.
>
>The third factor I see is that Aries really isn't targetting an academic
>audience. He is after the average or lay reader, understanding that few
>people in most societies are really critical thinkers. The trouble is
>that most undergraduates fall into that catagory as well. I fight a
>constant battle with my students to get them to look critically at
>sources, and to get them to evaluate an author's arguements.
>
>And finally, Aries is well marketed. He (and his cohorts) have a real
>knack for getting works into bookshops. They target key publishers, and
>use their reputation to get work out.
>
>
>--
I agree with Dr. Ross about the above, but there is another factor involved
as well. I have encountered a number of academic medievalists who treat
Aries not as an historian, but as a theoretician, with the same kind of
authority as, say, Foucault now enjoys in the humanities. When I point out
to them (usually in the context of his work on death) that Aries was almost
invariably WRONG in what he says about the middle ages, they simply reply,
"Oh, but his ideas are so stimulating!" The problem, of course, from my
perspective, is that Aries' ideas are stimulating rather dull work, while
suppressing novel approaches to the history of death or childhood.
However, that critique never seems to go over very well . . .
Megan McLaughlin
Associate Professor of History and Women's Studies
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
309 Gregory Hall, 810 S. Wright St.
Urbana, IL 61801 U.S.A.
Phone: 217-244-2084
Fax: 217-333-2297
E-mail: [log in to unmask]
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|