Die begrip "people's history" en die betekenis en toepassing daarvan in die Suid-Afrikaanse konteks

Abstract

English: People's history as part of radical social history is part of a movement known as the "new history". The "new history" is a reaction against traditional historical writing that deals particularly with the political aspects of the past and the lives of so called important persons. In reaction to traditional historical writing, people's history deals with the subjective life experience of ordinary people in the past. Who and what the ordinary people are, depends on the country and context in which people's history is written, but includes groups like workers, women and blacks. Ordinary people are usually those who have either little power or no power and who are frequently being exploited or oppressed. People's history is a rather vague term, but this vagueness brings about freedom in the writing of history. Influences on the development of "people's history" include: the rise of the mass political movements especially sine the nineteenth century, radical-liberal and Fabian interest in the livelihood of ordinary people, and the French "Annales"-school's emphasis on total history. In spite of influences from many countries, people's history developed to its full potential in Britain, under the guidance of Marxist inspired historians. From 1966 with the establishment of the first History Workshop in Britain, people's history spread to countries like the USA, Germany, where "people's history" is called "Alltagsgeschicte", and to South Africa. In all of these countries people's history shows a distinctive character. A debate over the role of structuralism versus human agency divided Marxist historians in various countries into two groups. The structuralists were of the opinion that the real life experience of ordinary people in the past is of no importance to the study of history. People's history accuse structuralists of placing too much emphasis on abstract impersonal factors. Writers of people's history advocate an empirical method through which human agency will be acknowledged. In South Africa, people's history developed, in the late seventies, as on the one side a reaction against structuralist radical history and on the other side as a reaction against Liberal and Afrikanernationalist history writing. The revolutionary climate of the eighties helped to establish "people's history as a historiographical tradition in South Africa. People's history is of the opinion that historians are always influenced by their personal ideological beliefs and value systems and will therefore reflect wittingly or unwittingly on their work. The emancipation of ordinary people from exploitation and oppression is a political aim to which "people's history" would like to make a deliberate contribution. Presentism is often the result of people's history's involvement with contemporary political issues. Certain postmodernist tendencies like the rejection of the grand narratives and the modernization theory as well as the need to decentralise history, are all part of people's history. Particularly the rejection of the base-superstructure model, through the prominence given to n-on-class factors such as culture, ideology et cetera, is a rejection by people's history of rigid Marxism. Except for people's history's political motives within the broader society, it also aims at democratising the subject of History and its writing. The history workshops, attempts to decentralise knowledge of the past and the encouragement of different groups to write people's history, is an important contribution towards the democratisation of History. Creativity and imagination, for instance the use of oral history, is necessary for people's historians to discover sources on the past of ordinary people. People's history makes use of qualitative rather than quantitative sources and methods to show best what role the ordinary people played in the past. In essence people's history is a rejection of the idea of objectivity, and therefore rather advocates radical plurality in history as a starting point for a discourse on the complexity of the human past.

Afrikaans: "People's history" as deel van radikale sosiale geskiedskrywing vorm deel van 'n beweging bekend as die "nuwe geskiedenis". Die "nuwe geskiedenis" is 'n reaksie teen tradisionele geskiedskrywing wat veral handel oor die politieke aspekte van die verlede en die lewe van sogenaamde belangrike persone. In reaksie teen tradisionele geskiedskrywing, handel "people's history" oor die subjektiewe lewens van die gewone mens in die verlede. Wie en wat gewone mense is hang af van die land en konteks waarin "people's history" geskryf word, maar sluit onder andere groepe soos werkers, vroue en swartes in. Gewone mense is gewoonlik diegene wat weinig of geen mag het nie en dikwels uitgebuit of onderdruk word. "People's history" is 'n betreklike vae begrip maar hierdie vaagheid bied juis vryheid in hierdie geskiedskrywing. Invloede op die ontwikkeling van "people's history" is onder andere: die opkoms van die politieke massa bewegings veral sedert die negentiende eeu, radikaal-liberale en Fabiaanse belangstelling in die lewensomstandighede van gewone mense en die Franse "Annales"-skool se klem op In totale geskiedenis. Ten spyte van invloede uit vele lande het "people's history" tot sy volle potensiaal in Brittanje onder leiding van Marxisties geïnspireerde historici ontwikkel. Vanaf 1966 met die totstandkoming van die eerste geskiedeniswerkswinkel in Brittanje, het "people's history" versprei na lande soos die VSA, Duitsland - waar "Alltagsgeschicte" die ekwivalent van "people's history" is, en na Suid-Afrika. In al hierdie lande het "people's history" In eiesoortige ontwikkeling getoon. 'n Debat oor die rol van strukturalisme versus menslike agentskap het die Marxistiese historici in verskeie lande in twee groepe geskeur. Die struktruraliste was van mening dat die ware lewenservaringe van gewone mense in die verlede onbelangrik is vir die bestudering van die verlede. "People's history" beskuldig die strukturaliste daarvan dat hulle te veel klem op abstrakte onpersoonlike faktore plaas. Beoefenaars van "people's history" bepleit 'n empiriese benadering waardeur menslike agentskap erken word. In Suid-Afrika het "people's history" in die laat sewentigerjare ontwikkel enersyds in reaksie teen strukturalistiese radikale geskiedskrywing en andersyds teen liberale en Afrikanernasionalistiese geskiedskrywing. Die tagtigerjare se rewolusionêre klimaat het "people's history" in Suid-Afrika help vestig. "People's history" is van mening dat historici altyd deur hulle persoonlike ideologiese oortuigings en waardestelsels beïnvloed word en dit sodanig bewustelik of onbewustelik in hulle werk reflekteer. Emansipasie van die gewone mens teen uitbuiting en onderdrukking is 'n politieke doelwit waartoe "people's history" in hulle werke 'n bewuste bydrae willewer. Presentisme is dikwels die gevolg van "people's history" se betrokkenheid by kontemporêre politieke kwessies. Bepaalde postmodernistiese tendense soos die verwerping van die metanarratief en die rnoderniserinqsteorie asook die behoefte om geskiedenis te desentraliseer is deel van "people's history". Veral die verwerping van die basis-superstruktuur model, deur prominensie aan nie-klasfaktore soos kultuur, ideologie, ensovoorts te verleen, is 'n verwerping van rigiede Marxisme deur "people's history". Behalwe dat "people's history" politieke motiewe in breër sarnelewinqsverband het, stel "people's history" sigself ook ten doel om die vak Geskiedenis en die beoefening daarvan te demokratiseer. Die geskiedeniswerkswinkels, pogings tot desentralisasie van kennis oor die verlede en die aanmoediging van verskillende groepe om "people's history" te skryf, lewer 'n belangrike bydrae tot die demokratisering van Geskiedenis. Kreatiwiteit en verbeeldingrykheid, soos die gebruik van mondelinge geskiedenis, is 'n vereiste vir "people's"-historici om bronne oor die verlede van gewone mense op te spoor. "People's history" maak veral van kwalitatiewe eerder as kwantitatiewe bronne en metodes gebruik om die rol wat gewone mense in die verlede gespeel het, die duidelikste na vore te bring. "People's history" is in wese 'n verwerping van die gedagte van objektiwiteit, maar bepleit veel eerder radikale pluraliteit in geskiedskrywing as 'n vertrekpunt vir 'n diskoers oor die komplekse menslike verlede.