History Extension Trial 2012

Question 2
In stating that revision is a historian’s only obligation to history, Wilde proposes a view that suggests history is indeed an endless
continuum of historicisation and rehistoricisation. However, in suggesting “revising” is a historian’s only role, this discounts the
rise of many revisionist histories as evidenced in the case study of JFK, which aim to directly subvert and undermine previous
views of history as opposed to simply revising them. This is best evidenced in evaluating the historians Theodore Sorensen,
Clarence Lusane and Robert Dallek, each of whom propagate unique purposes of history in regards to the representation of JFK.

Clarence Lusane’s purpose as best evidenced in his ‘Black History of the White House’, is to illuminate the marginalised voices of
African Americans in particular, and in doing so, decentre the dominant view of a “cleansed” and “filtered” American history,
and to further undermine JFK’s heroic representation as the President who supported the Civil Rights movement with entirely
altruistic motives. Lusane’s philosophy is heavily influenced by that of post-colonialism and he Civil Rights movement of the
1960s. Thus, as opposed to ‘revising’ previous histories, his purpose is to discredit hagiographical representations of JFK through
illuminating the voices of the ‘peripheral’ including servants and slaves at the White House, through the used of vignettes. Thus
Lusane subverts the traditional structure, instead inverting the pyramid structure and drawing on the Foucauldian concept that
power emanates from the people in society, and in this case, the bottom of the social structure. Lusane ultimately aims to create
a more total history which does include elements of revision, but ultimately subverts and undermines the Camelot
representations as opposed to simply ‘revising’ them.

Through evaluating Sorensen, it is evident that his purpose was not revision, bur rather, construction. His personal context
which implicated his close relationship with JFK as his primary speech writer and counsel, coupled with his own philosophies,
engendered his hagiographic construction (as opposed to revision) of a representation of JFK that was ultimately reflective of his
own philosophies. Sorensen states in his 1965 book ‘Kennedy’ that his purpose was to write the biography which Kennedy never
wrote. However, its tone of extreme admiration and loyalty, which were undoubtedly shaped by a positive and nostalgic post-
assassination context, suggest Sorensen’s purpose of constructing an image of a admirable and respectable JFK, albeit
subconsciously. Furthermore, Sorensen’s philosophies which were very much influenced by that of twentieth century liberalism
had a profound impact on his purpose. Sorensen’s progressive and left winged ideologies had the opportunity to be projected
onto his construction of JFK, in order to propagate his belief that justice would ultimately prevail, leading to the universalisation
of American ideals. Furthermore, the ‘projection’ of his own philosophies through JFK is reinforced in his reliance on personal
accounts, recollections, and his memory, and thus the absence of footnotes. The unaccountable nature of such sources which
could hardly be corroborated, allows for historians to project their own philosophies onto their construction and purposes of
history, thus necessitating revision and also subversion and correction.

In analysing post-revisionist Robert Dallek, one is able to see the necessity of the continual revision of history, as suggested by
the statement. Dallek’s purpose is to recreate the “real man” that is JFK, and to maintain a balanced assessment of his failures
and triumphs. Dallek aims to humanise and normalise JFK, depicting him as neither ordinary or extraordinary. However, his
approach is empiricist in nature, as revealed in his statement that his work on JFK ‘An unfinished life’ is the most authoritative
account to date. Furthermore, he focuses on the use of primary archival sources, including new, previously undisclosed medical
records and telephone and Oval office tapes. This access to new historical information thus necessitates the revision of history.

Thus it is evident through analysis of these three historians that the purpose of history is indeed endless revisions, however, this
is not the only purpose as many new histories directly subvert and undermine those previously written. This is particularly
pertinent to this JFK case study as the appearance of new material has necessitated endless revision.