First draft for proposal

Proposal for History Extension Project

by Audrey Marsh

Description of preliminary research

Having learnt of David Irving’s work through discussion in class, my initial source of research was through the internet, predominately utilising Wikipedia, providing me with a very basic understanding of Irving’s work. Mr Wright then lent me a book Lying About Hitler  by Richard J. Evans, which I later bought along with Deborah Lipstadt’s book History On Trial. These books provided me with a detailed insight into the Lipstadt-Irving trial, in particular the use and misuse of history and Irving’s flawed methods of historical investigation. However, when my topic narrowed to in fact, include the trial in only a very minor way, the nature of my investigation changed. 

My new topic was interested in the use of the internet to facilitate the publishing of historical investigation. Thus, my research reverted to a more preliminary phase, to gain an understanding of history in the media. Carl Smith’s essay Can You Do Serious History on the Web?, raised some interesting questions that related very closely to the work of David Irving on his website  “Is the format of a web site inherently shallow, best suited to displays of sight and sound that seduce the senses without engaging the mind? Has the unregulated culture of the Internet made cyberspace a bloated refuge for work of questionable value that otherwise couldn't–and shouldn't–see the light of day?”. While I was able to locate a page of academic essays from the George Mason University website, resources were limited on this very modern historical issue and much of my research relied on my own analysis of Irving’s website.

Irving’s work is published online on his own website Focal Point Publishing, and my research on this website involved the analysis of passages he has posted. Such analysis allowed me to locate bias, rhetoric, lack of evidence and his attempts to promote his own interests, such as his publishing company. I also looked at his Twitter account, and posts he had made on the Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust (CODOH) website and the Institute for Historical Review (IHR) website. CODOH and IHR are both part of the ‘revisionist’ wave of historical investigation, interested in what they deem to be “real history”. Irving subscribes to this school of history, and knowledge on the revisionist movement allowed me to analyse his websites, looking for ‘revisionism’ in his work.

Another area I researched was the link between postmodernism and Holocaust denial, which was dealt with in the book Is History Fiction? by Ann Curthoys and John Docker. They argued that the work of deconstructionists had allowed dubious historical investigation, such as Irving’s, to come to the foreground. Postmodernist theorists such as Derrida and his idea that “truth is plural” allowed all interpretation to be considered seriously, and removed the grounds for historians work to be simply dismissed. 

Enquiry questions

Initially my interest area related to the trial between Deborah Lipstadt and David Irving, but after some preliminary research and discussions with Mr Wright, I realised that this broad topic, on which Evans and Lipstadt had written whole books, would not be dealt with sufficiently in my far shorter History Extension project. Having visited and discussed Irving’s ‘Action Report’ website, discussions with Mr Wright and my fellow students led me to narrow my question to Irving’s use and misuse of history via the modern means of the internet. The question that resulted from my prior research into the trial and my current research into Irving’s use of the internet, “What does David Irving's website allow him to do that a book or other publication doesn't? And how is it further evidence he is a flawed historian?” was published on my blog on January 19th 2011.

Class-based discussion shed light on the issues with this question, I was entering the work under the assumption that Irving was a “flawed historian” without having shown this to be the case. On February 3rd 2011 I blogged my new question, “Evaluate David Irving's use of the internet for historical publication”. The simplicity of this question allowed me to discuss all the issues surrounding Irving’s historical publications online, encompassing many facets of my research. The focus questions I now hope to deal with are:

• How does Irving select the material for his website? Is there an emerging pattern in regards to material selection?

• What rhetoric techniques does he employ?

• Are his claims substantiated? Does he cite evidence properly? Is the evidence he provides able to be proven as reliable?

• To what extent are aspects of his historical investigation used to propagate his publishing company (Focal Point Publishing)?

Research intentions in relation to areas/texts to examine?

As my final question has only been recently developed, and focuses so heavily on evidence from the internet, my next challenge is to locate books that deal with this topic. Roy Rosenwig has written a book Clio Wired, The Future of the Past in the Digital Age which is previewed on Google Books. I will also complete my reading of the essays available on the Centre for History and New Media website.

I will also continue to specifically analyse posts made on Irving’s website, looking for bias and unsubstantiated claims. I have also emailed Irving through his website, hoping for direct correspondence to use as a primary source in my work.

The use of ‘new media’ in the publication of historical investigation is a very new area of historiography, and so I will rely very heavily on my own primary analysis of Irving’s online work, continually posting my progress online.

Research intention in relation to methodology

My History Extension project primarily deals with the use and misuse of history and history in the media (particularly focusing on the internet). It deals with the change of construction and recording of history over time, even in the smallest sense, between Irving’s publication of books and his employment of a website. I intend to uncover the reasons why Irving had to change his medium of historical publication from book to online through my research.

I intend to continue my analysis of Irving’s website, and reading of the books and websites mentioned in the above section. Once my research has sufficiently answered the question, “Evaluate David Irving’s use of the internet for historical publication”, I will write an essay plan, and finally bring all my research and analysis together in an essay covering my four focus questions and culminating in the evaluation of his work online.