The Historian's Role in Correcting the Silences

Trouillot does not focus on the goodness or badness of the silences, but rather how they come to be within the production of historical narrative.  Throughout the production process, silence is imposed by different actors (individual and collective) at different times based on their power to do so – and therefore no two historical narratives are the same.  To understand the relevance of a historical event, as well as discern the silences, Trouillot examines all aspects of the historical narratives, deconstructs the silences and the power that enabled them to successfully “alter” the story, and relates it to the present.  In this way, he hopes to achieve authentic history.

The area of strongest agreement between Trouillot and Townsend is in the role of the professional historian or guild, and the impact of public history.  Trouillot discusses the silence of the academic historian on issues that become popular or political, based on a desire to be un-biased, and a tendency to focus on the Past as a fixed, and separate world.  This in effect creates a silence, as other less qualified individuals step in to provide historical commentary on the issue of the day.  Townsend, in his discussion of hyper-specialization and academic focus of the American Historical Association, presents the academic historians as distanced from the other history workers – the teachers, archivists, society members.   Both Trouillot and Townsend recognized the public as actors, narrators and subjects in the production of the historical narrative and the risk of new silences.  Today, many of these public historians have the most influence on our historical knowledge and understanding of a historical event’s relevance.  They can and do apply power to create new silences and influence the historical narrative.