njs Posted January 27, 2009 Report Share Posted January 27, 2009 (edited) I have just started planning my Historical Investigation and I have some problems with choosing two good sources to analyse and compare. Firstly, do the sources have to be in stark contrast to each other? Secondly, can I compare a picture or a photo with a written source, i.e. an extract from a diary or an article? Do You know whether there is any specified demand to choose the sources from the same / different period? Is it better to compare two opinions of the politicians from the same year or a contemporary article with an old original speech etc.? And finally, can I use only original sources, like an extract from Hitler's speech or can I use some articles tackling the same problem as my investigation as a source? I know that we are not allowed to use the encyclopedia - is that because is to obvious, to objective or to general? I have read many HI guidelines, still I have no clue how to deal with the problems described above. Thanks for help. Edited January 27, 2009 by njs Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scade Posted January 27, 2009 Report Share Posted January 27, 2009 I guess this is not really relevant, but I wouldn't call encyclopedia too objective On the actual questions. I don't think the sources have to be in stark contrast to each other, but it does help if they're a bit different. Makes your job easier. You can very well compare a picture with a written source, I thinkt hat would actually be pretty good. I'm doing my IA on the portrayal of February revolution in Eisenstein's film October and a history book and my teacher seemed rather pleased with it. The sources can either be from different periods or the same period, doesn't really matter. And I believe that using many original sources is fine. Although I'm a bit wary of the term original. In the end, aren't all the written sources done by someone so how can they be original? Although have to take into account what is meant by original, if you use a speech for purposes of looking at the methods Hitler used to evoke images or something along those lines, then maybe it is original. As a general method I would recommend you to have at least something different. I mean it is easier to do the IA that way, because you'll have more to comment on in the various sections. If the two sources have a similar approach, the evidence they use might easily be rather similar too. In source evaluation it seems more meaningful to analyze two different kinds of sources and in the analysis you definitely have more to talk about if the sources are different (although in my IA I actually end up saying that they do have striking similarities, but that is a bit different since the movie is generally thought to be biased). Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
njs Posted January 27, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 27, 2009 (edited) [quote]I guess this is not really relevant, but I wouldn't call encyclopedia too objective [/quote] Well, it can be called 'too objective' in respect of the IAs requirements. If we choose a source to analyse it in detail it shall have some limitations to write about. [quote]Although I'm a bit wary of the term original. In the end, aren't all the written sources done by someone so how can they be original? Although have to take into account what is meant by original, if you use a speech for purposes of looking at the methods Hitler used to evoke images or something along those lines, then maybe it is original.[/quote] I guess I oversimplified or used a wrong word. What I meant by original was an authentic, direct quotation of Hitlers speech, not a description of the speech made by someone who had not witnessed the event by himself. [quote]As a general method I would recommend you to have at least something different. I mean it is easier to do the IA that way, because you'll have more to comment on in the various sections. If the two sources have a similar approach, the evidence they use might easily be rather similar too. In source evaluation it seems more meaningful to analyze two different kinds of sources and in the analysis you definitely have more to talk about if the sources are different (although in my IA I actually end up saying that they do have striking similarities, but that is a bit different since the movie is generally thought to be biased).[/quote] Sounds convincing, but difficult to put into use in my case. I have chosen a topic: To what extent was Architecture in Nazi Germany used as a tool of propaganda? It is so obvious that it was, that it seems that there are no sources that would undermine that. Edited January 27, 2009 by njs Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scade Posted January 27, 2009 Report Share Posted January 27, 2009 Sorry, I was being a bit difficult there I guess I've read too much on the theoretical side of history, hence my claims about objectivity and original By objective you probably mean the fact that it is more plain facts less interpretation, therefore more objective, when it actually just doesn't attempt to form an argument. Even in that way, I wouldn't use the word objective. And by original, yes I got what you were saying, just being a smart ass and playing with the concepts. If you use his speech it might serve as original source for some purposes, but for most not. If I get overtechnical even the fact that it would be a quotation (probably translated also) would mean that it is not original. But all this is just theoretical banter, so not really that relevant here . Well, if I were you I would change the question a bit. As you stated it obviously was used, so not really point in trying to answer the question in that way. Maybe "In what ways was the Architecture used as a tool of propaganda?" would be better, or something along those lines. If you want more advice you could tell what have you planned to write about and what sources you have or have planned to use. Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
njs Posted January 27, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 27, 2009 [quote name='Scade' post='34847' date='Jan 27 2009, 10:01 PM']But all this is just theoretical banter, so not really that relevant here .[/quote] And that is why we sometimes use oversimplifications! [quote name='Scade' post='34847' date='Jan 27 2009, 10:01 PM']Well, if I were you I would change the question a bit. As you stated it obviously was used, so not really point in trying to answer the question in that way. Maybe "In what ways was the Architecture used as a tool of propaganda?" would be better, or something along those lines. If you want more advice you could tell what have you planned to write about and what sources you have or have planned to use.[/quote] Well, that would be much better, but can we formulate it this way? Isn't it going to be a narrative essay? If we should primarly investigate, wouldn't that be inappropriate? Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scade Posted January 27, 2009 Report Share Posted January 27, 2009 Well, it depends on the way you do it. I don't really know about your specific topic so my advice isn't very well informed. But for example if you were to say that he ordered certain kinds of places built to build a certain influence or whatever, it would be analytical. Or maybe if you want to talk about the way he wanted to transform Berlin and everything (that's about all I know ) to reflect the Nazi ideology. If you can say which specific sources you plan to use I guess I can offer more help. Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
njs Posted January 27, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 27, 2009 [quote name='Scade' post='34849' date='Jan 27 2009, 10:19 PM']Well, it depends on the way you do it. I don't really know about your specific topic so my advice isn't very well informed. But for example if you were to say that he ordered certain kinds of places built to build a certain influence or whatever, it would be analytical. Or maybe if you want to talk about the way he wanted to transform Berlin and everything (that's about all I know ) to reflect the Nazi ideology. If you can say which specific sources you plan to use I guess I can offer more help.[/quote] I think you are right, it could be done. Thanks for offering more help, but as 'the historical investigation must be the candidate's own work.' I think it's enough. Thanks for all your replies, they helped me much. Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scade Posted January 27, 2009 Report Share Posted January 27, 2009 Yeah, sure. Well I mean by more help just giving some tips as to how to direct it or narrow it down. I'm quite satisfied with the amount of work I already have You're welcome. Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
njs Posted January 31, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2009 (edited) [quote name='Scade' post='34855' date='Jan 27 2009, 10:37 PM']Yeah, sure. Well I mean by more help just giving some tips as to how to direct it or narrow it down. I'm quite satisfied with the amount of work I already have You're welcome.[/quote] I know, I know, just a matter of form. Edited January 31, 2009 by njs Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.