Trouillot and Silent History

Trouillot takes the position that history is “produced” and subsequently this production is riddled with silences. These silences present in history are a byproduct of narrative. When historians take a narrative for their work they utilize facts to make their case. These facts in turn silence other facts. Narrative imbues certain facts with more power and strips others of theirs. Understanding that silence enters narrative during fact creation (sources), fact assembly (archives), fact retrieval (narratives), and retrospective significance is the only way, in Trouillot’s mind, of escaping these historical inaccuracies or “fakes”. Trouillot also takes this to another level in showing how the understanding/narrative of the past dictates the present. The narrative of history is thus an actor of history itself. “The realization that historical production is itself historical is the only way out of the false dilemmas posed by positivist empiricism and extreme formalism.”

Townsend, like Trouillot, is concerned with silences in history. However the degree to which he is concerned is only the tip of the iceberg Trouillot describes. Townsend mentions the field of history moving from the “historical enterprise” of “gentlemen historians” towards one of the current professional discipline. Through it, Townsend details how each of these professions widened their base creating the possibility of more and more narrative. Trouillot would most likely agree with Townsend that a wider base of multiple narratives (including sources, archives, etc.) helps to better history; however it doesn’t negate the power present in the production of history. Only through understanding the necessity and limits of narrative and the silences it creates can one begin to understand the flawed conception of The Past/pastness and thus the production of history.

The reason Townsend isn’t as interested in the silences of history as compared to Trouillot probably comes down to the differences present in their conditions. Townsend being an American writer who is writing to an American audience is attempting to detail the evolution of the historical discipline in the U.S. At several points in this work he nods towards the concept of silences without detailing them as a specific aspect of his work. Trouillot however, is a Haitian writing for a U.S., French, and (perhaps even) Haitian audience. One of the most important events of Haitian (and even French) history has been forgotten and silenced over the years. Perhaps then, the silences present in history are more directly tangible and relevant to Trouillot than they would have been towards Townsend who is writing with a slightly different purpose. Simply put, Townsend (as an American historian) may be considered a product of the defining narrative while Trouillot (as a Haitian historian) is a product of the alternate/silenced one.