The Landscape of History by John L. Gaddis Book Analysis

In the book The Landscape of History by John L. Gaddis, Gaddis presents the reader with a deconstruction of the analysis of history and the way which a historian relays the information. He takes the reader on a journey through time and space in order to deliver several important ideas and concepts, the forefront of these being ‘Historical Consciousness’. As well as the more in depth processes and particulars of History. The first three chapters are of primary importance here, a close textual analysis is necessary to properly describe Gaddis’ concepts, tackling the balance of accuracy and abstraction and the general stability of the historian assumption.

Historical Consciousness as a concept is first introduced in Chapter 1 almost as a red herring, not explicitly explained yet but dropped in to pique the interest. In a larger quote being said “I should like to use it here to summon up something more personal, which is my own sense— admittedly idiosyncratic—of what historical consciousness is all about”(1). Here it is, the first taste! As the chapter carries on, Gaddis remarks on several things: the idea of historians having to place some confidence in their ability to assume things, and then to build off a solid assumption is the best approximation of historical reality one can do, another is his view on experience and how it does not necessarily constitute a truth because it happened. He takes the example of a time machine versus a trove of well documented and varied data, the time machine offers the ability to “give us a “feel” for a particular time and place: the novels evoke the denser forests, clearer air, and much louder singing birds of medieval Europe”(3), but the downside to this is that it is an individual experience and Gaddis does not believe that forms a whole picture but a picture that only approximates the individual experience. Compare that to a collection of data brimming with first and secondary sources of all accounts and walks, regardless of how tattered or even incomplete they may be, they still form a more complete and whole picture of the average reality. There is no capacity for greater analysis through one pair of eyes, you must jump from time and place, crisscross and zig zag through history to grab what is relevant and what is not. Gaddis himself declares that “You’re not likely to take the time to contrast conditions in fourteenth-century France with those under Charlemagne or the Romans, or to compare what might have been parallels in Ming China or pre-Columbian Peru”(4). There is a level of abstraction and detachment from events that are necessary for proper analysis.

On page 12 there are two paintings, one is an excruciatingly accurate and photorealistic painting of a couple being married, the hairs are visible, the textures of wood and even the painter himself is replicated in the mirror behind them and yet all it shows us the very specific and individual scene of someone in 15th century Netherlands, contrast that with the second painting, The Lovers by Picasso, now what does this one say? One could impose almost anything on it related to the act of sex and love, the details are there to give a general understanding but vague enough that it is universally understood. There are no clothes, no apparent skin color, no name and not even any facial features that are special. It is so universally understood that anyone can create a metaphor or comparison to it, that is, in essence how Gaddis believes history should be conveyed, perhaps not to Picasso-esque degree of complete abstraction but enough abstraction and detachment that it is easy to metaphorize and understand. Which leads back to the term of Historical Consciousness.

There is a continuous battle between abstraction and accuracy in the Historian, abstraction and accuracy must reach a state of parity for the historian to give us the best representation. In Chapter 2, page 28, we are shown three photographs, each having The Bill of Portland in them. “The Bill of Portland, barely visible in the first image, shows up as a small peninsula in the second and in detail in the third”(28), all three of these images are accurate and true but what does that mean if one is looking for a photo of The Bill of Portland, the obvious answer is that the 3rd photo is “correct” for this situation, the others do not provide a proper representation to the situation. Accuracy is subjective in terms of its implementation in historical analysis and it is Historical Consciousness where that parity is observed, where one is both detached and dislocated from the event, to say “No expert on the Napoleonic Wars has ever heard the sound of the cannon at Austerlitz”(35) contributes to greater accuracy in a way because Historical Consciousness does not require hearing or seeing the artillery, it allows the collected evidence and the varied past to be compiled into a valid, almost frankenstein, but useful display of history. Historical Consciousness is using humanity's collected realities and applying them to history, it is being aware of the thread that connects everything. It is striking the balance between truth and reality.