Jfk (1 Viewer)

[yellow_sub]

a quick questionaire...

debate/s used: cuba and khruschev

historians: sorensen, reeves, dallek and laskey for both debates

pages written: 11 and 11

i didnt have enough to write about on just one debate so pulled in khruschev to give me a few extra pages.
nice source, easily adapted. i argued that yer different interpretations should be used to gain a greater idea of the past, but ultimately the past is unrecoverable (the postmodernist that i am.) first half on cuba and differing interpretations with intergration of historians, and 2nd half much the same with khruschev. i completely forgot the name of the book i used so just called them all "kennedy" which hopefully wont cost me too much.

 

[zaqwerty]

debate/s used: Cuba, Khrushchev.

historians: Schlesinger, Reeves, Hersh, Freedman, Dallek and documentary The Fog of War

pages written: 12 (and I think 10 for question one)

I basically went through the sub-debates within the main debates and displayed how each historian had built upon what was written with new evidence, or how they had refuted what was previously accepted. I ended by saying that we will never reach an ultimate conclusion.

 

[7noo7y]

Debates: Man vs Myth/ Kennedy vs Khrushchev

Historians: Schlesinger, Sorenson, Burckhardt / Reeves, Hersh, White

No Pages: 7 and 8

Yes, i know thats a small amount of pages, but i have microscopic writing. i can reach 2000 words within 4-5 pages. The source material was easy to understand and could be interpretated to favour the modern historians. I felt pretty confident with JFK but Historiography is very average. :rofl: Very Nervous!

Just have to play the waiting game!