“Archivism” is not a word, basically ever, used as a pejorative and answer my fucking question you slimy goalpost shifting rat.
Replying to @freistory
If you’re too thick to distinguish between “archival research” (which most academics don’t do btw) and “archivism” why should I waste my time explaining myself?
Elaborate then, for me, what intellectual benefit the academic humanities would gain from abandoning archival research (which is dusty and a rabbit hole of niche irrelevance as you imply) in favour of Stewarding Beauty(tm)
Nothing is “normal” about him going on Gogglebox with a lab-made northern homunculus called “Steve Rotherham”. It’s actually clinically insane.
Sorry, the archiving of our civilisation’s otherwise lost works of poetry, history, and literature must stop. I’ve got to go teach “Lord of the Rings and Based Cromwell Edits 101”
All ILR reforms are defunct and illegitimate in light of their refusal to discriminate on expectations for different groups. It *is* cruel and an injustice to raise the threshold for Americans, Scandinavians, etc.
The overwhelming majority of British people have no engagement with ‘history’ in the emotional sense whatsoever. It is baffling, barmy, and knowing lots (or anything) about it makes you a bit of a wrong’un. The people are largely porcine and feel nothing for Nelson, good or bad.
The average person understands the work of an academic historian less than they do academic pure mathematics.
In Our Time has been unfortunately middling post-Bragg for the marked laziness and insecurity betrayed by production decisions. One new episode every two weeks (interspersed by an ‘archive episode’) and the needless decision to remove the entire archive from Spotify etc. —













