Andras Kornai, in an elegant comeback, agrees that history is a non-
linear process, but still maintains his modified Ford thesis, i.e.,
that "history is bunk" or, at least, that the past is largely irrelevant
in understanding the present:
> I submit that the whether 10 years ago is completely irrelevant for
> predicting the weather tomorrow: all the information that there is about
> the weather is already contained in the corrent state. If weather
> doesn't carry _forward_ for more than a week, ten days on the outside,
> before chaos takes over the predictions, it is obvious that it doesn't
> carry _back_ more than 10 days.
If we use weather as a metaphor for history's flow, then the analogue of
historical myths (or should they be hysterical myths?) is not so much
the shifting air masses -- which are indeed random and chaotic -- but
the shapes of the mountains and continents. Historical myths, along
with social conventions, and "national character", have a kind of
persistence that seems to survive the play of shifting historical
currents. Like mountains and continents, they shape the weather, and are
shaped by it, but they evolve on a far slower time scale. Witness the
reappearance of the political reflexes and the rhetoric of the Kadar era
in present-day Hungary (often in the mouth of so-called "right-wing"
party leaders), or the similar reappearance of the political reflexes
and rhetoric of the pre-WWII era during the previous electoral cycle.
The truly interesting question is how much these two strands of
tradition have in common (a lot, I think) and why.
> ... current people's current thoughts, aspirations, fears, hopes matter.
> Sure they do. But it is rather immaterial whether the battle actually
> took place, whether it took place the way it is remembered, etc. What
> matters is today's myths, which are often only loosely based on
> yesterday's reality.
Yes. Maybe it does not matter what in fact happened; what matters is
the myth that grew out of what happened. Still, the genesis of this myth
is also part of history: perhaps the most interesting kind of history
there is. If the historical myth is important for understanding
the present, then the history of how the myth was born, and how it
survived and changed over time, is also important. So you must at
least grant that *this* part of history is far from bunk.
Majusban voltam Gyorben es mielott mentem kerestem E-mail
osszekottetest es ezt a cimet kaptam
Zalka Ernotol: , valoszino szakiskolas es csak akkor
talalod, de nem art megprobalni. Sok szerencset. Kulonben szeretnem
tudni hogy eltel-e gyorben '56 elott mert en is es a ferjem is gyori.
Erdekes lenne ha ismerosok lennenk.
Varom a valaszodat