Stefan Tanaka

History without chronology

Over the past decade or so, time has become an important topic in history, properly so. But popularity has also brought the use of what one might call a casual use of the nouns time and temporality. Too often, despite this move toward a reflective understanding, time and temporality still operate within a notion of Newtonian absolute time; they merely denote the past, sequence, or history (with all of its ambiguity and generality) within an absolute time. Such work reaffirms the epigraph from Certeau that chronology is the “alibi of time,” an unreflected-on category of the discipline of history. Linearity and taxonomy continue—barely modified, at best.

New Media and Historical Narrative: 1884 Japan

Electronic technologies have been opening up new possibilities for the study and production of history over the past decade. We have increasingly rich databases and libraries from which we can draw data and images, and search systems that mine these archives have become more sophisticated. Numerous projects seek to take advantage of these new systems to better deliver the content of history. These projects are certainly critical to the preservation of our artifacts as well as ensuring that they remain accessible. The possibility that I find in New Media for history is the opportunity for new ways of knowing about pasts. As scholars increasingly explore the interplay between visual, material, and textual materials in the writing of history, the inquiry often opens into questions about the past itself – how we know about the past, indeed, what the past is, and, how it relates to our understanding of the present (see for example, Ethington, Klein, and Thomas & Ayers). I have been struck by the similar goals of New Media with some of the more critical (dare I say critical theory) modes of inquiry in the humanities over the past two decades. Both interrogate the centralizing and homogenizing tendencies of existing frameworks, and emphasize some form of distribution, heterogeneity, and difference. Moreover, both have led to a re-examination of the past, of existing structures and practices that had often been considered as natural or common sense. This essay has developed from what began as what I thought would be an interesting, but straight-forward project, employing hypertext in the writing of history. Many have probably experienced this journey: my exploration began with an idea, 1884 Japan, which could be published electronically; it then leads to an inquiry into new possibilities; and then gradually shifts to the very frameworks of our current modes of scholarship. Jerome McGann hinted at the dual role of technology in this process in his meditation about the building of the Rosetti site. He writes, ‘The simplicity of the computer is merciless. It will expose every jot and tittle of your thought’s imprecisions’ (McGann 2001: 142). McGann identifies a fascinating characteristic of digital media, as we explore the utility of computer technologies for history (and the humanities more broadly), we are learning that digital media not only facilitates existing practices, it also often exposes the assumptions embedded in our current practices. I have reduced this problematic down to two basic issues that interrogate the basis of history: the hitherto unquestioned linkage between history (as the objective, chronological, replicable past); and narrative (a linear causal narrative). First, the simplicity of electronic media opens up questions about how we know about the past. The enhanced ways that we can now record and use information expands our archival and interpretive fields, but in doing so, we quickly learn that the numerous metrics of new technologies make us aware that time is a