Comment: Codes and Confessions.

Part of a roundtable discussion on revisionism. It is time to consider why the revisionist challenge to totalitarian thinking provoked such an angry response. Part of the reason has to do with the power of a Cold War consensus that can seem incomprehensible to those too young to remember it. Care...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Slavic Review Vol. 67; no. 3; pp. 711 - 716
Main Author: Getty, J. Arch
Format: Article
Published: American Association for the Advancement of Slavic Study Fall2008
Subjects:
Online Access:View this record in EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=509862810&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ssf
    uiTerm: 509862810
    longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson)
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00376779
        SLA
      jtl: Slavic Review
      issn: 00376779
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Fall2008
      vid: 67
      iid: 3
      pid: 14
      pub: American Association for the Advancement of Slavic Study
    artinfo:
      ui:
        509862810
        10.2307/27652947
      ppf: 711
      ppct: 5
      formats:
      tig:
        atl: Comment: Codes and Confessions.
      aug:
        au: Getty, J. Arch
      su:
        Historical revisionism
        Scholarship & politics
        Historiography
        Soviet Union
      sug:
        subj:
          Soviet Union
          Historical revisionism
          Scholarship & politics
          Historiography
      ab: Part of a roundtable discussion on revisionism. It is time to consider why the revisionist challenge to totalitarian thinking provoked such an angry response. Part of the reason has to do with the power of a Cold War consensus that can seem incomprehensible to those too young to remember it. Career as well as beliefs has a stake in the prevailing discourse. Many of the revisionists were trained or employed outside the Harvard and Columbia centers where the prevailing discourse has been defined and defended since World War 2. Social difference may also have been a factor. Revisionist social historians stressed class differences, social support from below, and resentment against privileged people. The revisionist insistence that the Soviet Union could be studied using the usual tools of analysis, including source criticism, social and political history, regional and micro-history, touched a nerve. Revisionists denied that the Soviet Union was a unique or special case, and this aroused the ire of totalitarians.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: N
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N