Essay Outline

Although I am admittedly a day late, here is my essay outline:

1. Theory on historical publication on the internet

A brief overview of the theory of historical publication online. This will be drawn specifically from my reading of articles by Roy Rozenwig and Jerome De Groot. Ideas explored will include the validity and reliability of online publication and the 'public' historian (a character with which Irving is clearly aligned).

2. Who is David Irving?


A very brief look at who Irving is and what historical issues he deals with. Here I will briefly look at the trial (using my knowledge from reading Evans and Lipstadt). I also hope to deal with the idea of revisionism, a school to which Irving subscribes, and also cite Derrida's postmodernist theories.

3. David Irving's online publication


Here I will look predominately at his selection criteria, use of rhetoric and citing of evidence online. The easiest way to do this is to choose three passages (yet to be finalised) and analyse them for selection, rhetoric and evidence. I will also refer to my personal correspondence with him and the outcome of the Lipstadt-Irving trial, which support my claims. I will prove that Irving is misusing history, to show that he is not publishing historically valid ideas but merely alternative opinion.

4. Causation for his online publication


I will deal with why Irving needs to publish online, referring to two main ideas. Firstly, as my discussion of internet/history theory will display, the internet provides a place for alternative and often flawed historians to publish, claims can go unsubstantiated and there is no defined community which can call you up on it. Irving clearly relies on the lack of fact-checking to publish his message. Secondly, as Evans notes, Irving has been all but shunned from the mainstream historical community, and so he publishes on a platform which can remained unchecked and allows for the proposing of alternative historical ideas. Also, does Irving use his online following to propogate his own pecuniary interests, that his the promoting of his publishing business, Focal Point Publishing?

How does this look? Does it look like I am forming an argument?

I am still working on a thesis, will be online tonight.