by S.W. Connor

Created on: May 16, 2008

A photograph is a detailed image taken at the very moment of an event. A historian, in writing about a historical event, strives to present every detail accurately and objectively. However, many would argue that this is an impossibility. History is, by its very nature, subjective. It is the interpretation of the events of the past, and therefore, much more like a painting.

It is one of the main tasks of the historian to be as objective as possible, but most good historians know that this can be a tough task. Any one event, or period in history, can be described from numerous perspectives and none will be perfectly accurate. For example, the history of the United States' western expansion can be described in a positive light for many Americans; but what of the Native American or Mexican perspective? I think you'd find that their interpretation of events is quite different.

Historians often attempt to imbue the "feeling" of a certain era or event on the reader. This is also much more like the act of a painter. Earlier historical works, such as the stories we were told as children in school, were generally idealized versions of actual people, places and ideas. As children we're told of the amazing discovery of America by Christopher Columbus and later the arrival of the peace-loving Pilgrims and Puritans. The story of the first Thanksgiving is a famous example of this as well. We rarely hear, until much later, of the disease the Europeans brought that killed off the majority of the population, or the fact that Columbus and his men virtually enslaved the population of the island of Hispaniola (Haiti and the Dominican Republic) in order to help the Spanish build settlements.

Painters generally have an agenda when creating their work, whether it be to express a certain emotion or idea. They want an emotional reaction from the viewer. A photographer, in the sense of a recorder of an event (a snapshot in time), may also want to express a specific emotion or idea, however the photograph will show it exactly as it is while a painting will show the artist's interpretation.

Attitudes also change over time: people revolt and new leaders are elected. Through these new eyes, history can be re-written. The opinions of the conquistador Hernan Cortes, for example, have varied from idealizing to condemning depending on if the writer was for, against, or ambivalent towards colonialism.

Winston Churchill once said, "History is written by the victors". Events can be romanticized or slanted in such a way as to cause whatever reaction the writer had while studying them. This is often not intentional but merely a reality. No one grows up having the same experiences and reference points and these experiences will color, in some way or another, what the historian discusses. Recently, historians have actively tried to show more than one perspective or interpretation of events, but no matter how much they desire to be a photographer, the painter will always be there.

Learn more about this author, S.W. Connor.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.