How and why has the history of the Titanic been continually rewritten over time? This is where the historiography is, so I’m hoping that this makes up the bulk of your argument! However, I’m also hoping that you don’t just focus on why the history of the Titanic is rewritten – but why history is rewritten in general (using the Titanic as a case study)!
A study of the benefits and detriments of mythology Oooo sounds interesting! to the original historical event.
They were trapped in the biting Atlantic chill, venturing into the unknown; assailed by the uproar of the wild wind, waves and rain, until doom, darkness and death would soon settle over all the lives of 1500 victims. Little did they know, what appeared to be the end of a disaster, was in fact the birth to a century of fascination, discussion, discourse and mythology. Who said this? Great quote, but you need to reference.
The Titanic’s meta-narrative of the Titanic’s sinking continues to captivate the attention of historians and the hearts of responders to this day and beyond.
This reads clunky, which isn’t great, especially since this is your opening sentence. I think the main problem is the repetitiveness of the word ‘Titanic.’ I get that that is the topic, but I still think you need to rephrase. Along with this you are sounding a bit dramatic, particularly the “to this day and beyond.” Remember that this isn’t a speech, it is an academic essay, and your language choices should reflect that. The story
Narrative rather than story – tiny point but just sounds more sophisticated. of Titanic has filtered
Not sure if filtered is the best word here. Developed? Evolved (maybe even perhaps Devolved?) into a cultural historical mythology, swaying public perceptions of the tragedy from its various interpretive allusions.
Is it swaying them from various interpretive allusions – as in away from them? Or is it swaying public perception THROUGH various interpretive allusions? The term ‘rewritten’ can be defined as presenting in a different form or manner.
It would be nice if you provided a few reasons as to why history in particular is rewritten, rather than immediately jumping into the Titanic. In relation to the Titanic, this connotes the various mediums that have been produced about
In regards to - just sounds better than 'about' the event. In order to examine how the history of the Titanic has been continually rewritten over time, several cultural myths and significant texts including Walter Lord’s non-fiction account A Night to Remember (1958) and James Cameron’s blockbuster film Titanic (1997) will be analysed according to the historical backdrop of their respective contexts.
Go further than this. What are their methodologies? Their socio-philosophical beliefs? What is their historiographical context (ie. Postmodernist, social history, empiricism, etc. etc). According to critics including Steven Biel, Michiko Kakutani, Aneta Karagiannidou and Vagelis Siropoulos, the history of the Titanic has been continually rewritten over time to enhance our understanding of the cultural paradigms, ideals and beliefs of the contexts in which they were created.
Were they written to enhance our understanding? Or do they just enhance our understanding, as in understanding is the by product not the intent? Thus, in turn, this has shaped the way composers present history. The history of the Titanic has also
Rather than putting “has also”, which looks less sophisticated, maybe just start this sentence with “Furthermore” been reworked due to the fascination of responders with its notion of death, disaster and mystery. The benefits and detriments of mythology to the original historical event will also be drawn.
Sounds clunky, consider rephrasing. This last bit just kinda sounds like a list of what you will discuss, which isn’t the purpose of a synopsis (I’m assuming that is what this paragraph is) Benefits will be examined through its ability to accommodate to individuals
? not really sure what you mean. Rephrase, and detriments through the sensationalism and glorification of the Titanic which has caused responders to lose sight of the reality of the incident. Ultimately, however, whilst the process of mythologising a historical event can be both enriching and damaging, the benefits are more advantageous than harmful, outweighing the detriments. Thus, the Titanic possesses textual integrity from its differing historiography which still remain relevant to contemporary responders, enabling it to withstand the test of time.
The Titanic, according to American society of the 1910s, would stand for a great future. Complemented with wide optimism in relation to their view of the future, technology continually advanced
advancing? Your tenses in this sentence need revising.; aircraft was built and electric light was relished. The Titanic symbolised the technological triumph of its time and the utmost mythical object of desire. In addition to this optimism, journalists have portrayed the ship as a social microcosm since its sinking, displaying the class barriers that divided and defined European society at the time, particularly in Great Britain.
Can visualise a really interesting discussion emerging through a look at these historiographical concepts; Social History, History from the Bottom Up, Great Men History, Marxist conception of HistoryThe societal division of classes is evident when Irish journalist Filson Young stated only two weeks after the Titanic sunk: “rulers were on top, surrounded by the rich and the luxurious, enjoying the best of everything.” The social norms and status on the Titanic also ties to the mythology surrounding the sinking with its cultural myths of first-class, white, male sacrifice.
GREAT MEN HISTORY!!!! TOP DOWN APPROACH! Mention this stuff explicitly, it is the conceptual links that make it a history extension essay and not just a history essay. On May 4, a funeral was held for John Jacob Astor IV, supposedly the richest man on the ship when it sank. Cultural historian Steven Biel argues that he was the first part of the cultural myths that arose from the Titanic disaster, referring it to “first-cabin male heroism” which occurred from the class divisions that dominated society at the time. Further, records show that only 25 percent of steerage passengers survived the sinking, compared to 62 percent of first-class passengers. Despite these statistics, much of the media, particularly newspaper stories, artificially glorified only first-class male passengers as heroes to reinforce the significance of societal division. Evident in a 1914 Sydney Morning Herald article, the bravery of these men “must force even the most unsympathetic to recognise the heroism which sent the women and children of all classes away in the only boats available,” further strengthening the concept of gender bias and heroism only being associated with first-class males. Thus, cultural myths of the Titanic have arose as a result of the values of optimism, class and status; encapsulating that the construction and representation of history is predominantly shaped to illustrate the ideals and beliefs of their respective contexts.
I really think you need to at least mention a few of the concepts above. The Bottom Up approach/Marxist conception of history supports the notion that we need to be looking beyond the “rich white men,” and instead focus upon other groups in society as well – the voiceless (lower classes in this case). If you need any help with this let me know, as the bottom-up approach was a significant component of my major work.
The Titanic reemerged in the 1950s after World War II, clearly prompted by the appearance of Walter Lord’s non-fiction account A Night to Remember (1955) and the film it inspired with the same title later in 1958 directed by Roy Baker.
Not a very strong opening statement – where is the judgement? Conceptual framework of the paragraph? This is reading like a narrative. Lord’s significant rewriting of the history of the Titanic has been long regarded as the high point by historians and survivors alike for its accuracy as it was written in accordance to interviews he conducted with 63 survivors, including steerage passengers whose stories were ignored in 1912. Moreover, Lord established the disaster as the end of an era; as a transition from the past to the modern age paradigms of uncertainty, tumult and disillusionment evident in the 1950’s.
Great but where are the concepts? What historiographical concepts and issues are present in this discussion? Objectivity? Empiricism? You need to identify and link these. Lord begins his account with lookout Frederick Fleet gazing from the crow’s nest just before the moment of disaster, however before the iceberg is introduced, the focus of the story shifts to the experiences of collision for first-class passengers.
Is his account written as a narrative? This is important. Could link Hayden White and the concept of trope nicely. Postmodernist interpretation of history in general also. Following the description of the Titanic’s stern disappearing into the ocean, Lord interferes with the narrative by providing a broader historical perspective on the disaster. He proceeds to note the sinking of the Titanic as a representation of the end of an era, arguing that uncertainty during his respective context had replaced the belief in a steady, orderly civilised life. Ultimately, Lord’s non-fiction account enabled responders to first become aware that the Titanic symbolised a transition from the past to modern values of dismay and apprehension.
Hmmmm, just agreeing with a historian and their interpretation is too easy. Is there anything that you can critique him on? Take a look at his methodologies.The success and significance of A Night to Remember also ties to its reveal about 1950s America alive to the threat of nuclear attack and the Cold War, as it did about the Titanic itself.
Check your grammar and expression here. Quite confusing. Again avoid being narrative in your topic sentences (avoid being narrative in general – but here especially. You should always start with a judgement) Literary critic Michiko Kakutani noted that Lord treated the Titanic sinking as “a watershed event, an epochal dividing line between the certainties of the 19th century and the confusions of the 20th”
So he used the historiographical concept reductionism? Does he utilise a teleological perspective?, questioning what made Lord’s nostalgia for the lost era of Titanic so contagious. Kakutani answers as Biel perceives it in his cultural historic book Down with the Old Canoe (1996), stating that the Titanic nostalgia had “a lot to do with cold war anxieties: compared with the horrors of a nuclear war, the Titanic came to be seen as a ‘quainter kind of disaster’, a symbol of lost innocence.” Moreover, Lord’s Titanic, according to literary theorist Roland Barthes, holds a status as an open, “writerly” text, which is amendable to all sorts of idiosyncratic, individualized readings. Many commentators agree that Lord, who refers to the Titanic as an “unsinkable subject” writes that his book has made the appeal seem universal; to social historians
YAY! Mention this early. it is microcosm of the early 1900’s, and to nautical enthusiasts it is the ultimate shipwreck. Among these commentators, Kakutani strengthens this notion, arguing that the Titanic can be read as metaphor for the end of the Edwardian Age of confidence and the beginning of the modern age of anxiety, or rather, interpreted as an anti-suffragist narrative justifying traditional gender roles for men and women. Ultimately, Lord’s relatively
Relatively? Relativism 
another concept you could maybe integrate accurate representation of the Titanic has evidently enhanced our understanding of the cultural values of the 1950s, illuminating how composers’ depiction of history is largely influenced by their context.
The Titanic resurfaced decades later, predominantly triggered by James Cameron’s hugely successful blockbuster film Titanic (1997).
This is still reading narrative. I feel like you are providing me with the “history of the interpretations of the titanic” rather than presenting me with a historiographical dissection of the interpretations – where is your judgement? Many Hollywood historical films including Cameron’s claim to historical authenticity through its extensive background research, however, as it appears, most remain loyal to the “Hollywood standards of glossy aestheticism.”
THIS SHOULD BE YOUR JUDGMENT! To what extent can historical fiction ever elucidate truth? When Hollywood disaster movies, horror movies and thrillers presents trauma, it does so in ways that ‘de-emphasise’ the effect.
I’m confused, you need to explain this more. What do you mean by ‘de-emphasise’? Is this only historical disaster movies/horror movies/thrillers etc, or just any movie under that genre? According to critics Aneta Karagiannidou and Vagelis Siropoulos, the mise-en-scenes of contemporary thrillers such as Twister (1996) and The Perfect Storm (2000) employ a “visual plentitude in order to glamorize the traumatic event” by exchanging “horrific absence with glossy presence.” The Titanic (1997) is no different, rewriting the history of the original event by following such strategies paradigmatically. As Cameron stated himself, he “wanted to place the audience on the ship, in its final hours, to live out the tragic event in all its horribly fascinating glory.” There should not, however, be any fascination or glory for the victims who lost their lives on the night of the disaster.
Why? Don’t make blanket statements. Despite the breakthrough of advanced digital technology during Cameron’s time, he does not take advantage of this, as his film can be considered as one that ignores the human suffering through his representation of a “glorious death.”
How does this relate? How does Cameron ignoring human suffering mean that he isn’t taking advantage of advances in digital technology? Karagiannidou and Siropoulos strengthen this notion by arguing that despite Cameron’s frequent focus on the fear and agony of the victims’ faces, the suffocation and dismay of the dismemberment of bodies is never captured. Panoramic shots of falling bodies and elaborate camera angles are used instead, magnificently displaying the water bursting in from everywhere and sweeping the human beings away like inanimate objects. The most significant moment of the ship sinking is accompanied with heavenly lighted, angelic sounds, ultimately conveying the film’s narrative structured in a way to ‘de-emphasise’ the effect of the traumatic event.
Additionally, Cameron rewrites the history of Titanic from his sense of demand for antiquated Hollywood romanticism in the modern age of casual sexuality, choosing to portray the film with the greatest love of all “against the backdrop” of the “absolute catastrophe”
I really think that taking a look at Hayden White's 'tropes' could be a really good idea.. Cameron successfully meets this grand demand for love by writing an old-fashioned love story in a nostalgic manner which still captures many responders today through its sentimental extravaganza.
Lovely sentence. The focus of love is also supported by critic Edna Lim, who notes that the pace of the scenes depicting the sinking of the Titanic is much faster than preceding scenes, marked with a shorter duration of shots, rapid editing and action, particularly those scenes featuring protagonists Jack and Rose. Despite subtle shifts in the narrative from the romance to the sinking, they are the focal point of the narrative and the audience is engaged in their experiences at all times. Hence, although the narrative is present, Cameron’s Titanic (1997) does not accurately engage with the story of the Titanic and the experiences of other passengers and crew. Rather, Cameron focuses on elements of Hollywood to a greater extent as opposed to an accurate historical depiction of 1912 and the original event.
Hmmm my question is - is that necessarily a bad thing? Titanic is a fiction movie - it doesn't claim to be history, just that it has historical elements imbused through the narrative. I think you are lacking a discussion upon the role and significance of historical fiction as a whole, that is important in order to support your argument.Thus, Cameron rewrites the history of the Titanic by remaining loyal to the classic Hollywood style and responding to the significant value of love during the 1990’s, reinstating that composers present history in relation to their respective contexts.
Not just contexts though - he's a film maker. He has a purpose.In addition to composers rewriting the history of the Titanic over time due to the influence of the prevailing cultural paradigms of their contexts, another motive can be linked to neurologist Sigmund Freud and his study on the human compulsion to repeat.
Oooo sounds interesting! Historians and individuals today continue to go back to the Titanic, despite its activation
activation?of the trauma of loss and grief associated with it. As it appears, the fascination of Titanic’s history from responders ultimately comes from its notion of death, disaster and mystery. After observations of patients suffering from various post-war traumatic incidents, Freud concluded that there is an inherent human tendency towards repetition of painful situations. Freud had divided the human instincts into two categories: the life instincts and the death instincts; with the death and “all its relative states” being a structural part of human existence which is compulsively repeated in various ways. Hence, Titanic’s luring nature and our continual fascination with its story is evidently not with itself, but rather, with the notion of death within it.
I enjoyed this paragraph. I didn't feel like this was narrative in comparison to your other paragraphs. I'd love you to delve into this more.Another principal intention of rewriting the Titanic history can be explicated through its ability to educate and encapsulate the cultural values and knowledge of a society in which it was created.
Great judgement. More like this please! Myths, according to psychologist Mark Goddard, bestow meaning, teaching people “who they are and where they belong”, freeing them from a “sense of meaningless isolation.” It is evident from the above analysis of several significant examples of Titanic myths and texts that creators are naturally inclined to manipulate and customise their work in accordance to the responders of their context, illustrating the ideals and beliefs of the time. This customisation, especially evident in Cameron’s film, enriches more interest and appeal to past responders. For present responders, it can be considered a valuable way to connect with the past, to teach history, to gain knowledge of history and how it has been presented and interpreted over time. Hence, the rewriting of the original Titanic event ultimately enables a matter of objectiveness to be turned into a subjective manner as it fits into our desired ideals.
Lovely! Again a much stronger paragraph that I would love you to delve more into. Great conceptual framework. I would love some more historiographical theory NOT related to the titanic though, where you are forced to make the connections. Makes your essay (and your role as a historiographer) look stronger.A benefit of the mythology of the Titanic to the original historical event is predominantly its immense capability to accommodate for every individual.
hmm is that a historiographical benefit, or a literary benefit?Many commentators make clear that the Titanic story has something for everyone, serving as a “storytelling crucible for consumers.” Numerous informants from Brown’s, McDonagh’s and Shultz’s research of Titanic as an ambiguous brand have comprised adaptions of Titanic’s disaster to their personal circumstances. Some refer to the loss of life and relate it to sudden deaths of their loved ones through accident or disease, whilst some view it as an “emblem of their ambitions, aspirations, and hopes in unsuccessful attempts to forge careers, build businesses or attain educational qualifications”. Some treat the story as a “precedent and template” for human catastrophes of the like, such as 9/11, Hurricane Katrina or the Fukushima earthquake. Some view the tragedy in an optimistic light, arguing that Titanic is an inspirational, important reminder to live life to the fullest and make the most of every moment as death and disaster may be lurking right around the corner.
Not too keen on you just listing different ways people can connect to the story of the titanic. Where is the analysis? Evidently, myths are amendable to and enable various individualised interpretations and readings. Thus, it is evident that the rewriting of the history of Titanic possesses an advantageous nature as it accommodates with and procures the experiences that best articulates each and every individual.
I don't think you have argued that it is advantageous, more so that it just is if that makes sense. Like I don't necessarily get the sense that this "accomodation" is a good thing.There cannot be discussion of the benefits of the mythology of the Titanic without simultaneous mention of its detriments. Despite the success of innumerable movies, musicals, documentaries, plays, poems and many more that have been created about the Titanic, the damages of mythology to the original historical event are apparent. The sensationalism and glorification in differing interpretations of the Titanic over time has caused responders to lose sight of the reality of the incident. This is clearly evident when individuals today are asked about their thoughts or knowledge about the Titanic, as many only seem to be able to recount the events which took place in Cameron’s film. Markedly, the general public or the younger generation should remember or be taught history differently. The media, Hollywood and the public have blatantly capitalised upon the tragedy, manipulating responders into believing the film is an accurate representation of which the line of events occurred. Hollywood’s sensationalism of the historical event purely for entertainment purposes has its colossal audience engrossed in the fictional story, consequently resulting in responders losing sight of the fundamental basis on which the movie has built. Hence, this has also caused the inconsideration and disrespect for the families and friends of those who lost their lives in the tragedy. After conducting methodological research of how Titanic has become an ambiguous brand meaningful to millions of consumers, opinions of scholars including Stephen Brown, Pierre McDonagh and Clifford J. Shultz found that for the vast majority of their informants Titanic means Cameron’s film, not the historical event. They argue that their understandings are “cinematically shaped” and that their “interest in the latter is a consequence of the former”:
Moderator: Are you familiar with the Titanic?
Group: The movie? Ah, okay. You mean the boat that sank? The movie?
Moderator: Titanic for you is the movie?
Group: Yes, it means Leo DiCaprio … (laughs).
Cameron’s movie has, ultimately, become the baseline for the Titanic “brand”. Nowhere was this more clearly illustrated than by the sinking of Italian cruise liner Costa Concordia in January 2012, where many media reports drew “unprompted parallels with the Titanic – Cameron’s Titanic – in their accounts of the tragedy, as did the passengers themselves. This was further proved when Cameron’s blockbuster was rereleased in 3D to acknowledge the centenary of the sinking, where many teenage viewers were unware that the film was, in fact, based on a historical event. Thus, it is clear that due to the variations in each construction and representation of the history of Titanic over time, this has consequently resulted in detriments to the original historical event.
A stronger paragraph, but I'd like more of a discussion of why. Why is society so enamoured by cinematic constructions. Don't just refer to Titanic, look at the broader picture.Despite the ongoing myths and differing representations of the Titanic over time, however, the benefits of mythology to the original historical event ultimately outweigh the detriments as it endures to be worthwhile for creators and responders to continue writing and discussing the event, enabling it to withstand the test of time. The creation of these differing interpretations on the Titanic have acted as a catalyst for discussion about the event between individuals today, and in a way, has kept it alive.
Interesting point - however is keeping alive a false narrative still good? Are any interpretations not false (postmodernist route) This, in itself, can be considered as a valuable way to pay respect to those who lost their lives in the tragedy and to their loved ones who have suffered as a result. The historiography of the Titanic through its innumerable retellings and interpretations, have, ultimately, enabled it to withstand the test of time.
Upon drawing an analytical comparison of the myths produced by each respective context
I don't think there was enough discussion of the impact of context - not just about titanic, but on a broader level. Why does context matter?, it becomes evident that the history of the Titanic has been rewritten over time to enrich our knowledge and understanding of the cultural paradigms, ideals and beliefs their respective contexts. As a result, this has influenced how composers form and present historical depictions. During the time of the Titanic’s sinking, cultural myths arose from their values of optimism, class and status, whilst Lord’s non-fiction account revealed cold-war anxieties of the 1950’s and the transition to modern age paradigms of uncertainty, tumult and disillusionment. Furthermore, Cameron’s rewriting of the Titanic’s history encapsulates the significant values of Hollywood and love during the 1990’s. The Titanic has also been revised in its representation as a result of Titanic’s luring nature of death, disaster and mystery. The benefits of the original historical event include its attainability to various individualised interpretations and readings.
Hmm, i don't think your conclusion should be so list-y. Like I know you want to sum up your argument, but I think you can do that in a more sophisticated way than just listing your paragraph topics. In contrast, the detriments of mythology are conveyed through the sensationalism and glorification of the Titanic, consequently shaping responders to neglect the trauma and reality associated with the disaster. Despite the damaging effects of mythologising the Titanic, however, the benefits outweigh the detriments as it enables creators to add ‘colour’ into ‘black and white’ history. Thus, continual and differing historiography of the event has ultimately facilitated enduring discussion, discourse and fascination of the Titanic for responders.
Home
Help
Search
Login
Topic: History Extension Essay Marking Thread (Read 24678 times)