History in the Marketplace of Ideas

The synthesized point I take from both Trouillot and Townsend is that history is transactional.  In Trouillot's words, "The value of a historical product cannot be debated without taking into consideration both the context of its production and the context of its consumption."  It is this transactional nature, where certain pre-existing beliefs or expectations can influence the entire process of historical production, that can lead to the creation of "silences" in history.

While Townsend did not explicitly touch on an idea similar to Trouillot's silences, I do believe that his concerns regarding increasing specialization and professionalism, and their potential negative consequences for the quality of the historical product were motivated by similar concerns. Throughout his book I perceived concern over a steady shift in control over the course of the historical enterprise from the producers to the consumers.

Over the course of these readings I kept thinking about the theoretical "Marketplace of ideas", which hypothesizes that rational people, free to make judgments based on their individual discernment of information presented in an open  and unbiased environment, will ultimately choose the best ideas, or for our purposes, the "true" history.  However, I think Trouillot would argue that neither historiography nor history take place within a true "marketplace of ideas", but rather there is a constant and dynamic influence of biases that effects both production and consumption of history.

After shaking off the quite pessimistic tone of these books, I now see them as a professional challenge and responsibility.  As Trouillot points out, historiography is far more than chronicling events, and as Townsend shows, it requires a high degree of professionalism.  These conditions set high expectations, both internally from our professional peers, and externally from those who benefit from and consume our historical products.  Both authors, but especially Trouillot, indicate threats to the relevance and timeliness of historical products especially given the existences of other sources of information via the mainstream and popular media who can produce informational products more quickly but with less concern for accuracy or an understanding of context, thus increasing the possibility of "silences".

As Trouillot points out, historians have often been absent from the dialogue of major events, instead ceding the marketplace of ideas to those less equipped or motivated to verify all the facts and set the context.  In the new information environment we must find ways to be more timely, understanding this might require us to be without all the facts and still developing a true understanding of events, but it is a better alternative to contributing to the silence.

Perfection is a noble but impossible pursuit.  With this understanding, and an appreciation for the negative consequences of silence, perhaps we in the history enterprise need to become more comfortable with engaging in the marketplace of ideas earlier in the development process before all the facts or context are known or understood.