Call for Papers Volume 8

Have you written a great essay and want to get it published?

Do you want to gain experience of the peer review process?

History in the Making is a student-run journal that aims to showcase the best historical research being undertaken by history students across Australia. Students at all levels can get involved in this project by submitting their work or volunteering to review and edit articles.

The journal is open to all undergraduate and postgraduate students currently enrolled at an Australian University. We are currently inviting all students to submit articles for publication. These can be on any topic in the wide gambit of historical study.

If you would like to be considered for the next edition, please submit your article, a short biography, and a 200 word abstract to contact@historyitm.org by Friday 15th August 2020.

To find out more, please join us on Facebook (www.facebook.com/historyitm) or email us at contact@historyitm.org.

History in the Making author in focus: Matthew Kelleher

Matthew KelleherImage supplied by Matthew Kelleher 

Matthew Kelleher is the author of Human Rights: Act of Idealism or Pragmatism? The Curious Case of Ramon Colon and the New York State Division of Human Rights recently published in Volume 7, number 1 of History in the Making.

As part of our fourth instalment of our ‘author in focus’ blog series for 2020, Matthew discusses his research and writing practices and has some excellent advice for other history students interested in submitting their writing for peer review.

How did you come to the topic for your History in the Making article?

I originally began my project as an assignment for a 3rd year history course at the University of Sydney, also called ‘History in the Making’. We were given a large degree of creative control as to the scope of the essay, the only requirement being that it must focus on a primary source. During the first half of the course, we spent time discussing cultural histories, and some particular historians with very engaging writing styles; Robert Darnton, Natalie Zemon-Davis, Clifford Geertz. I have always had an interest in human rights and international law in history, and a project like this allowed me to write from the perspective of an individual caught in an uncertain time for the enforcement of human rights. My goal was to right something as thought-provoking as Darnton’s The Great Cat Massacre. While I don’t think my piece is nearly as impressive, writing about a man who had his rights violated by a human rights organisation seemed as compelling to me as 18th century Parisians massacring cats!

What’s your writing process?

Personally, I like to begin writing almost straight away. One of my biggest problems when I first began studying history was perfectionism – pouring hours into every sentence so to ensure my first draft was ‘perfect’. Now, I like to read and write at the same time. During my research process, if I find an interesting idea I could incorporate, I try to write four or five sentences of an argument, rather than dot points. I then arrange all of these short paragraphs into a structure, creating a road map for my essay. This process also helps inform the overall argument. It is very difficult to come up with a highly nuanced thesis without having written anything first, nor is it likely to remain the same throughout the writing process. You should always be prepared for the scope of the argument to shift, and reading widely will only get you so far. My advice: write as much as you can, and certainly more than you need. It will certainly reflect in not only how concise your arguments end up, but how expansive your ideas appear in short spaces.

What did you learn from the peer review process?

Do not be surprised if a reviewer does not see your argument the same way as you do. This does not necessarily mean you need to make every change that is suggested; it is important that your writing maintains a strong sense of authorial integrity. However, be honest and open with yourself when reading and considering critique. Weigh up the positives and negatives of changes – will they fundamentally reshape my arguments, do they synchronise well with my writing style? Personally, I did not need to make many major fixes, but it was suggested in some paragraphs I change my argument emphasis. It is important to keep in mind that the peer review process exists to make your essay better. But never blindly make changes because someone has told you too – consider them carefully and apply any critique to the extent you believe it to be appropriate.

What advice would you give to someone considering submitting an article to History in the Making?

Submit! You have nothing to lose from trying and everything to gain if your article is accepted. Publication, in my mind, is the highest honour a writer can receive because it tells you that there are interested readers who really enjoy your work. The whole point of original research is to show the world something fresh, expressing a viewpoint on a particular topic that no one has before. Do not be afraid to tell the world – the worst that can happen is that someone disagrees, debate ensues, and everyone comes out the other side having learnt a little more. From my perspective, that is the joy of learning summarised as concisely as possible!

Do you have any advice for history students trying to study and conduct research during the COVID19 pandemic?

Learn how to use digital databases such as interactive museums and libraries, and if you have access, text and data mining tools. Nothing excites a historian more than being able to access original documents that are virtually priceless and centuries old. However, as all types of sources are becoming increasingly and exclusively digitised, it is important, particularly if you are a modern historian, to familiarise yourself with online research skills. It will save you time and travel in the future, and may open new avenues of thought not attainable via conventional research methods.

Where would you like to take your research next?

I am still deciding whether to begin Honours in History next year or move on to the next stage of my law degree. My interests in human rights history and international law mean I have some flexibility in this regard, however the focus would be markedly different depending which route I decide to follow. Nevertheless, I still, and always will, love writing. That will never change, and I hope to continue to write and publish articles for many years to come.

 

History in the Making author in focus: Alvine Mulligan

Alvine Mulligan

Image supplied by Alvine Mulligan

Alvine Mulligan is the author of Martin Sharp, Heritage Activist, recently published in Volume 7, Number 1 of History in the Making.

As part of our third instalment of our ‘author in focus’ blog series for 2020, Alvine discusses her research processes and practices and has some excellent advice for history students who are trying to conduct research during the Covid-19 pandemic!

How did you come to the topic for your History in the Making article? 

The topic for my HiTM article came out of having to generate a project idea for one of my undergraduate units at the University of New England, ‘Researching and Applying History’My very sage lecturer suggested that I take inspiration from the immediate world around meThe inspiration was a poster outside my office -a Martin Sharp poster for a Tiny Tim concert.  It’s a long story, but in the early 2000’s Martin generously donated a signed poster to my son’s special needs school, and he also sent one home for me.  Since Sharp’s death in 2013 his body of creative works have been celebrated alongside his faith and never-ending support of the Luna Park ghost train fire victims.  I wanted to look at Sharp’s relationship with Luna Park in a new light – I wanted to see if I could define his work at Luna Park not just as a mere quirky obsession, or as a piece of commissioned work, but as a true and successful form of advocacy for an important popular culture site in Sydney.  

 What’s your writing process? 

Bringing together your research into a cohesive and engaging piece of writing is the fulfilling, and sometimes difficult (for me), part of studying history.  I work best when making plans before writing – although the plans always get revised and reworked as the research and writing progresses!  I tend to document my research vigorously through short annotations on the value of how each source can be used to support my thesis When I was an undergraduate, I always completed the research before writing, but as I progress through honours, I am quickly learning that writing as you go is probably a more effective process.  I have a set time and place for writing each day – I throw on the headphones (Mozart’s Requiem is high on rotation), try to let go of my perfectionism and produce some form of writing each day. 

 What did you learn from the peer review process? 

The peer review process was not as daunting as it seemed.  Each reviewer gave valid and directional remarks on how I could improve my paper to ensure it reached the publishable standardof the journal. The process was a rewarding learning experience which improved my writing and academic skills.  

 What advice would you give to someone considering submitting an article to History in the Making? 

Sharing your research and writing is what history is all about so if you’ve written a great piece of original historical research – go for it! There are three important tips that I can give to potential HiTM authors. Firstly, edit your research paper into an article that meets the journal guidelines. Secondly, transform your paper from a great university essay into an outstanding journal article. And lastly for your own sanity, view peer review feedback as invaluable advice – not negative criticismOnce my article had been reviewed, the HiTM editorial team were extremely supportive and encouraging – whichconsidering our new life during Covid, shows the exceptional dedication the team have in creating a space for history students to share their work 

 Do you have any advice for history students trying to study and conduct research during the COVID19 pandemic 

I am currently mid-way through Honours part-time at the University of New England. Admittedly have found transitioning to researching and writing in the Covid-epoch difficult.  I am fortunate that a large proportion of my primary sources have been digitised, however that small amount sitting in the archives may have to wait for another project. Maintaining communication with both my supervisor and university community have been invaluable support mechanisms. These, together with setting achievable daily writing goals are keeping me on the path to getting that thesis written!  

 Where would you like to take your research next? 

This year I will be completing my honours. My research continues to focus on how we value our shared spaces – but I’m taking it back to the late-nineteenth century and exploring the experiences and responses of Sydneysiders who spent leisure time in the parks and bush land of the city’s southern fringes. 

History in the Making author in focus: Liz Heffernan

Liz Heffernan photo

Image supplied by Liz Heffernan

Liz Heffernan is the author of Civilian Women and War Trauma in World War I Britain, recently published in Volume 7, Number 1 of History in the Making.

As part of our ‘author in focus’ blog series for 2020, Liz reflects on her research and writing practices and has lots of helpful advice for other history students interested in participating in the peer-review process.

How did you come to the topic for your History in the Making article?

My article was originally written as part of an Honours history seminar on war and trauma at the University of Sydney in 2019. The parameters for the essay were broad but I decided to focus on World War I history, as that was also my area of study for my thesis. I wanted an approach different to that of my thesis, however, which focused on Australian soldiers and the environments of the First World War. Studying British civilian women in the war was certainly a refreshing difference!

As a long-time lover of literature, approaching the history from that angle was also an exciting new method of analysis that I thoroughly enjoyed. Historical research is never a hardship, but the novels I had to read to write this article were a nice change from the academic texts I’m used to.

What’s your writing process?

I like to finish as much research as I can before diving into the writing as it gives me a much more solid footing when it’s time to construct my argument. I usually map out my main ideas and paragraphs in handwritten dot points first, then write the essay from start to finish on my laptop. The introduction I begin with isn’t usually the one I end with, but I prefer having something there in the beginning than nothing at all.

After the first draft has been written, I print the essay to annotate it by hand and read it to myself aloud – the best ways I have found to pick up continuity errors or odd turns of phrase. I then make my edits on my laptop, sometimes just rewriting out entire paragraphs until I’m happy with them and have read them aloud so many times I could recite them off by heart! I usually try to find at least one other pair of eyes to look over the finished product to pick up anything I might have missed – I find it’s best to use someone with very little experience in your field of research, as they are able to make sure the argument is as clear as possible.

I also tend to fully reference my footnotes throughout the drafting process, as I have learned from past (painful) experience that going back to tidy everything up at the end can take a lot longer when you can’t remember which source your reference comes from!

What did you learn from the peer review process?

It’s a cliché, but be prepared to kill your darlings. Not everything you write will agree with everyone who reads it, and it’s important to realise that nothing is immune from the firm hand of the editor. The peer review process exists for a reason! And my essay, as I’m sure is true of all essays submitted to this issue, is the better for it.

What advice would you give to someone considering submitting an article to History in the Making?

Don’t be afraid to submit! You’ll lose nothing from the experience and will probably gain quite a bit. Be proud of what you’ve written but be prepared to make some changes if your article is accepted. Don’t take the critiques too much to heart – the peer review process is there to help you, not to harm.

Do you have any advice for history students trying to study and conduct research during the COVID19 pandemic?

Try to accept that some things – access to archives, meetings with supervisors – will be completely out of your control for the time being. Do the best that you can with the resources you can access but remember that this is an extraordinary event and you can’t be expected to not be impacted by it. Don’t be too harsh on yourself if you don’t accomplish as much as you would have liked on any given day – these times are stressful and unpredictable, and taking care of yourself if the most important thing. And enjoy your study and research as much as you can! History is a vibrant, exciting discipline, especially now.

Where would you like to take your research next?

Though I finished my Bachelor of Arts (Honours) last year I have not ruled out a possible PhD in the future! In the meantime, I write blog articles for the Royal Australian Historical Society and have been applying for jobs in the public history sector. I would love to explore yet another aspect of WWI history – or any kind of history! – in any manner I can.

History in the Making author in focus: Mark Pashley-Partridge

Mark Partridge

Photo supplied by Mark Pashley-Partridge 

Mark Pashley-Partridge is the author of “Silence in Australian Folkore: The 1804 Escape Attempt From Castle Hill and Why the Irish are Silent“, recently published in Volume 7, Number 1 of History in the Making.

To kick-off the beginning of our 2020 ‘author in focus’ series, Mark reflects on his research, his creative processes, his experiences of the peer review process and provides some timely advice for history students conducting research during the COVID19 pandemic.

How did you come to the topic for your History in the Making article?

Ever since primary school I have been interested in Australian colonial history influenced by a trip to Old Sydney Town and after watching Against The Wind. I was aware of the 1804 Castle Hill rebellion but did not understand the full magnitude of the event until further reading revealed that this was the first example of an organised armed rebellion in the colony; the first example of martial law being instigated and many other firsts. What surprised me was the lack of commemoration of such a monumental event in Australian culture.

I have always been drawn to the subaltern view of history, the “history from below” view, and sought to explain the silence linked with this event. It was my wife that mentioned the Irish folk tradition of memory in song which resulted in me diving down the rabbit hole of silences in folk tradition – thanks Kate.

What’s your writing process?

Structure is extremely important with a clear indication of submission dates. I utilise a whiteboard as a visual aid to keep me on track with the fundamental question I am attempting to answer. Research is critical and it is important to leave myself sufficient time to find and read all necessary sources. I only commence a rough structure after reading all available source material before I commence writing. Once I start writing I force myself to write every night (I was working full-time during my postgraduate studies so discipline was essential).

What did you learn from the peer review process?

It is always an apprehensive feeling opening your work to potential criticism by academics rather than simply submitting a paper for grading but it was an interesting experience to receive the feedback from others that did not know you or your work prior to the review process. Fresh eyes can surely only be a positive process as the researcher is sometimes too close to the work they have completed. The peer review feedback was supportive of my overall thesis and it was encouraging to receive some fantastic guidance to improve the quality of my paper. I wish I had this level of feedback before submitting this paper for grading.

What advice would you give to someone considering submitting an article to History in the Making?

As a budding historian you need to be passionate about your work. History is about challenging the established views in order to expand our thinking and this best way to open your work up to academia is to seek publication of your paper. Do not take any peer review comments personally and treat the process as a means of professional development on your course to becoming an historian in your chosen field. The team at HITM have been great throughout the process so overall it has been an enjoyable experience.

Do you have any advice for history students trying to study and conduct research during the COVID-19 pandemic?

I graduated from my Master of History in June 2019 prior to the madness that is COVID-19 but I studied via the University of New England as an external student. As such, my mode of study was predominantly online. The online mode of study required discipline and the ability to prioritise with often conflicting assessment dates. My research did require a few days at the Mitchell Library, Sydney enjoying delving into primary sources. This would be difficult in the present circumstances but thankfully the majority of libraries have now digitised a large portion of their primary source material making it possible to conduct your research online. I think resilience and persistence are the key to conducting research at the moment.

Where would you like to take your research next?

I have been asked this question a lot since I have graduated. My goal when I enrolled in my Master’s was to write a research paper that added to the historiography of Australian colonial studies and to have that research paper published. After working full-time and taking 3.5 years to complete my award it’s time for a well-deserved break before I determine whether there is a PhD in me. I think my wife would kill me as it is her turn to study next.

Issue Launch: Volume 7, Number 1

We are excited to announce that the latest volume of History in the Making has now been published! This process has been difficult, but incredibly rewarding and we are excited to share the product of this hard work with you.

The journal committee would like to extend our sincere thanks to everyone involved in producing Volume 7. In particular, we’d like to thank Isobelle Barrett Meyering and Matthew Varley who not only trusted us to take over the journal, but provided immeasurable support and advice.

To our authors, thank you for your hard work in not only submitting your pieces but working with our team to develop your research. We hope you have found the process as fulfilling as we have.

To our peer reviewers and our editors, thank you for your diligence and perseverance in developing these pieces. Your contributions to the journal are invaluable.

While this is only our first volume as a team, we are excited to continue developing History in the Making into not only a journal but a community of researchers.

Call for Papers for Volume 7 2019

Have you written a great essay and want to get it published? Do you want to gain experience of the peer review process? History in the Making is now accepting submissions for Volume 7.

We aim to showcase the best historical research being undertaken by history students across Australia. The journal is open to all undergraduate and postgraduate students currently enrolled at an Australian University and we are currently inviting all students to submit articles for publication. These can be on any topic in the wide gambit of historical study.

We are also looking for students who may want to review and assist in the editing of submitted papers.

If you would like to be considered for the next edition please submit your article to contact@historyitm.org by Monday 16th September.


Don’t forget to join our Facebook page to stay updated on all things History in the Making! 

 

History in the Making author in focus: Michelle Staff

Michelle Staff is the author of “‘Herstory’ and Biography: Recovering the forgotten woman’s voice”, recently published in Volume 5, Number 1 if History in the Making.

Michelle has shared her writing process and her plans for future research, and her experience of the peer review process.

What historical period would you like to visit?

There are so many interesting times and places I would love to time travel to, but if I had to choose one historical period to visit I would definitely go for the early years of the twentieth century in Britain. I’m studying women’s suffrage at the moment so it would be really interesting to be able to see all the protests, demonstrations and controversies first hand, to really get a sense of what this whole movement was actually like for women at the time.

How do you juggle your studies and the rest of your life?

I think it’s so important to have a really good balance between studies and other aspects of life, particularly as you don’t want to burn out in the process of getting your work done. I try to be really productive when I sit down to do my work – my best time is in the morning and early afternoon, so I get up and do as much as I can then, without distractions, and let myself unwind come the evening. I think that taking time out for other activities, whether that means part-time work, exercising or going out to see friends, ends up being more beneficial for your wellbeing and your studies than trying to sit at your desk 24/7. There’s no point staring a computer screen but achieving nothing, and sometimes a break might let you come back fresh and ready to work hard and produce your best work.

Why do you think the study of history is important?

I really think history is an important discipline. Even though it may at times seem quite removed from the present, in fact so many things that we study about the past have direct implications for or parallels with the issues of today, so it is certainly of relevance for us now. In a broader public context, narratives about the past are continually communicated and referred to – in museums, on television, in bookshops, in school curriculums, by politicians – and I think that historians need to have a central role in contributing to these stories in ways that try to truthfully represent people’s experiences in the past.

What did you learn from the peer review process?

I found the peer review process really helpful for refining my writing to improve both the style and clarity of my article. It’s always really useful to have someone else read over your work to tell you what’s working and what’s not. Editing your own writing can be really difficult, especially if it feels like the hundredth time you’re reading over it, so a fresh perspective is so useful. The peer review process allows you to reconsider your structure and approach, which is always a good thing.

What’s your writing process?

Writing and communicating stories is probably the part of history that I find the most interesting and rewarding. There always come a point in the research phase where I become so overwhelmed with masses of information that I find it really useful to put pen to paper to start to make sense of it all. I am a big fan of making plans before I write, as that process really starts to get ideas flowing and allows you to see where you are headed. The writing process itself then allows you to be more creative with how you present your ideas and, of course, involves lots and lots of rewriting, editing and re-editing.

Where would you like to take your research next?

I’m currently doing my Masters in the UK, working on women’s suffrage and feminist movements in the early twentieth century. I’d love to continue down this route of women’s and gender history, as there is so much more to explore. In particular I’d like to look at different people, issues and experiences from around the world related to this “first wave” of feminism.

Better the devil you know?: a millennial’s perspective on the Fujimori Legacy

The legacy of Alberto Fujimori is controversial. While he has numerous supporters across Peru and abroad such as our previous interviewee Ella Carkagis, among Peruvians born in the 1980s and 1990s in particular, opposition is common. In this profile, Alexis Castro Robles interviews Carkagis’ eldest daughter, Marianella, who gives us an insight into the ‘other side’ of Fujimori’s regime and also how she perceives Peru’s future now that Alberto Fujimori has received a ‘humanitarian pardon.’

Screenshot 2018-03-02_08-42-34

Alberto, Kenji and Keiko Fujimori (Image courtesy of ‘Peru 21’ newspaper) 

Marianella, although you were in your teenage years during the late 1990s, do you remember what politics was like at that time from your family and school?

At that time, everyone was afraid of everything. Our parents sent us to school with fear, because the terrorists chose targets randomly. I remember that the street lights blew up and that we stayed in the dark. There were always candles in my house. There were soldiers in the streets and curfews quite often. We could not leave the house after 7pm. I remember the terror that we felt walking past a car that looked suspicious in the street, because it could be a ‘coche bomba’ (car bomb). At school they taught us to be prepared at all times. We simulated emergency situations. They also taught us to shout a warning if we heard a very loud sound, because it could be a bomb.

Your mother was supportive of Fujimori’s measures in granting the military extensive powers to challenge ‘terror’ by arresting suspected rebels and trying them in secret military courts with few legal rights. What are your thoughts?

Terrorism was so bad in the 90s that the government had to declare war. We believed that there was a good side (the state) and a bad side (the terrorists) but we were wrong. The country was consumed by a witch hunt. Any man could say that his neighbor was a terrorist and without evidence the military could take him from his house in the early morning and ‘disappear’ him. Villagers were taken from their homes by soldiers and executed. They raped the women. The buses that went to the provinces were dangerous for this reason. We were terrorised both by the terrorists and by the military, who far from protecting us, took advantage of the power granted them to torture, rape and kill.

Do you believe Peruvians recognise the human rights violations committed by Fujimori and the military? If not, what impedes this recognition?

Fujimori was a showman. He went on national television with boots, helmet and carrying cement to every school he built. He appeared to help with everything, while also robbing his people and murdering us. He did many works to keep us quiet. His government was bloodthirsty. We Peruvians are so poor in education that we are not able to understand that “the lesser evil” is not good. “That he who steals but does work” is not good. We are not used to thinking about our neighbor. We think only of ourselves and our hunger. There are many people who know what Fujimori has done and do not care because they were “necessary deaths”. No death is necessary. Homicide is a crime.

What do you think about the mass forced sterilisation that affected around 300 000 Indigenous Peruvian women, many of them without anaesthesia, in the late 1990s?

It was simply inhumane. There are people like my mother who say it was necessary. Machismo did not allow women to make the decision to no longer have children and many thanked the government for having sterilised them. But many women without children and very young were also sterilised, without anaesthetics and without knowing what was being done to them. They were treated like cows. When my mum says it was necessary, I answer: What if it had been your daughter? What if it had been me? She remains silent. Those people who were mistreated could be any of us and we should all repudiate a fact as execrable as that. The solution was and is in education for all. Machismo exists because there is no education.

Screenshot 2018-03-02_08-48-12

Peruvian women march against Keiko Fujimori, drawing attention to women’s rights, Keiko’s political ties with her father and her questionable human rights stance. (Image courtesy of ‘Diario UNO’ newspaper)

Fujimori’s sterilisation of women was highlighted by opponents during the presidential campaign of Alberto Fujimori’s daughter, Keiko. For example 30 000 protesters in Lima expressed their discontent in April 2016. Do you think these protesters feared a possible return to her father’s dynasty? 

Yes indeed. The same people who were with [Alberto] Fujimori, are also on the side of Fujimori’s daughter. Her government would be a terrible blow against democracy.

Do you think the protests were a response of the Peruvian Left? Or just those who supported for the current Peruvian President, Pedro Pablo Kucyznski (‘PPK’)?

‘PPK’ won the elections thanks to Keiko Fujimori. He won because we were against her winning. He did not win on his own merit. The PPK government is another mistake to avoid the greater evil. He is a president who has done nothing for us like so many others. Our streets are infested with criminals.

Lastly, Alberto Fujimori has received the ‘humanitarian pardon’ for his ailing health by Kuczynski in December 2017. What do you think about this decision?

‘PPK’ sold our country when he pardoned Fujimori. He did not care about the hundreds of mothers who still cry for their unborn children. Nor the disappeared parents who could not raise their children. Not even the hundreds of women who were harmed and mistreated by the regime. Kuczynski was on the verge of losing the presidency for a fujimorista coup d’etat. He betrayed every Peruvian by pardoning him.

Alexis Castro Robles