Academic historians fret about not reaching the public. It's not enough to say (even if true), "I'm doing such important & interesting work." It's about writing.
First, accept that work that doesn't signal that it's for academics only can still be cutting-edge scholarship.
1/5
First, accept that work that doesn't signal that it's for academics only can still be cutting-edge scholarship.
1/5
There are conventions for journal articles & monographs that serve a professional purpose, & signal that they are for fellow scholars. That's fine! But historians should embrace serious work that doesn't follow these conventions. It's not dumbing down to depart from them.
2/5
2/5
Second, academic historians who want a wide audience need to read fiction & compelling nonfiction journalism, & ask why it's appealing. It's not about color, an anecdote, an important fact. It's about giving the reader a reason to go on to the next page—the next paragraph.
3/5
3/5
My go-to short handbook on writing narrative is David Lodge's collection of columns, "The Art of Fiction." He defines the propulsion mechanism as raising questions in the mind of the reader & delaying the answers. That goes directly against academic conventions. But it's key.
4/5
4/5
There's a lot more to it than that, but that's the basic point. It works for argument as well as narrative. Sometimes you know the ending—how do we get there? Sometimes you don't know what will happen or be revealed. Make the reader want to find out.
Thus endeth the lesson.
5/5
Thus endeth the lesson.
5/5
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
