🐈 The Laughing Executioners: Deciphering the Great Cat Massacre
The 1730s in Paris saw a bizarre and violent episode: a ritualistic massacre of cats by printing shop apprentices.1This event, far from being a random act of cruelty, became the focus of Robert Darnton's seminal 1984 essay, "The Great Cat Massacre," which used an anthropological lens to unlock the cultural and social codes of 18th-century French workers.2
Decoding a Cultural Text
Darnton's groundbreaking contribution lies in his treatment of the event as a cultural text. His central question was: Why was this incident, recounted with enormous hilarity by the perpetrators, funny to them? By seeking the answer, he illuminated the worldview of the lower classes, a perspective often lost in formal history.
The Event: Frustrated by long hours, poor food, and contempt from their master and his wife, printing apprentices staged a mock trial and brutal execution of local cats, including the wife’s beloved pet, la grise.
The Context: The masters and their pampered pets symbolized the arbitrary power and privilege of the elite. Meanwhile, the apprentices lived under precarious conditions, often sleeping in cold workshops and fearing the influence of their superiors.
The Symbolism: The cat, particularly the black cat (or the grey one in this case), was deeply associated with witchcraft, the Devil, and illicit sex in popular French folklore. By subjecting the cats to a formal trial and painful execution, the apprentices were symbolically enacting a witch-hunt against their master's wife, a figure they despised and feared as an abusive figure with "magical" control over their lives.
The cat massacre was thus a subversive, cathartic ritual of social inversion.3 It was a safe way for the workers to express the violence and resentment they felt toward authority through licensed misrule, drawing upon the traditions of Carnival where the social order was temporarily turned upside down.
The Importance of Darnton's Work 🧠
Darnton's article is foundational to cultural history and is widely taught in anthropology because of its methodology.4 It demonstrates how seemingly irrational or bizarre events can become perfectly rational and meaningful when decoded using the internal logic of the culture that produced them. It shifted historical focus from the grand narratives of political elites to the popular beliefs and mentalités (worldviews) of the common people.
Applying the Lesson: COVID-19 Social Distancing as a Cultural Text
Darnton's "Cat Massacre" teaches us that extreme, sudden societal changes often reveal underlying cultural tensions and create new rituals of inversion. We can apply this lens to the recent mandatory social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic:
The Event: The imposition of universal spatial barriers (2 meters/6 feet), the required wearing of masks, and the closure of public social spaces.
The Experience: For many, the compliance with social distancing was a necessary act of collective responsibility and public virtue—a shared "ritual" to defeat an invisible enemy. However, for others, it became a symbol of government overreach, loss of liberty, and distrust of official narratives.
The Myth/Subversion: The cat massacre was subversive laughter at the master's authority. During the pandemic, the non-compliant (those who mocked masks or gathered secretly) were the symbolic equivalents. Their defiance was a ritualistic act of social inversion against the "moral masters" (scientists, government, compliant citizens) who had enforced a new, restrictive social order. The anti-masker, like the apprentice, was expressing deep-seated distrust of authority and a desire to reclaim agency through a defiant, though dangerous, act of transgression.
By using Darnton’s methodology, we see that COVID-19 social distancing was not just a public health policy, but a cultural "text" that highlighted and amplified existing tensions between freedom and authority, individual choice and collective responsibility.
Brexit Through Cohen's Three Keys: Event, Experience, and Myth
The United Kingdom's decision to leave the European Union – Brexit – is arguably the most significant political event in modern British history. Like the Boxer Rebellion, it is not merely a collection of facts, but a complex phenomenon whose understanding has been shaped by its immediate unfolding, the diverse experiences of those involved, and the subsequent narratives constructed around it. Applying Paul A. Cohen's framework from History in Three Keys allows us to dissect Brexit's lasting historiography.
Key One: Brexit as Event
This key focuses on the verifiable sequence of actions and decisions that constitute Brexit. It's the factual chronology:
The 2016 Referendum: The political decision to hold the referendum, the campaign leading up to it, and the 51.9% vote to Leave.
Article 50 Trigger: The formal notification to the EU of the UK's intention to withdraw.
Negotiations: The protracted and often acrimonious negotiations between the UK and the EU regarding withdrawal terms, future trade relationships, and the Northern Ireland Protocol.
Withdrawal and Trade Agreements: The signing and ratification of the various treaties that legally separated the UK from the EU and established a new trading relationship.
Key Actors: The prime ministers (Cameron, May, Johnson, Truss, Sunak), EU officials (Barnier, Juncker, Von der Leyen), and their respective roles in the process. This key aims to provide an objective, factual account of "what actually happened" throughout the Brexit process, from its inception to its current legal and economic realities.
Key Two: Brexit as Experience
Beyond the bare facts, this key explores the deeply subjective and often emotional "experience" of Brexit for millions of individuals. It delves into the diverse ways people understood, felt, and responded to the changes:
Leave Voters' Experience: The feeling of reclaiming sovereignty, taking back control, escaping burdensome regulations, and addressing perceived issues like uncontrolled immigration. This often stemmed from a sense of being left behind by globalization and feeling unrepresented by the political establishment.
Remain Voters' Experience: The sense of loss, betrayal, concern for economic stability, loss of freedom of movement, and worries about the UK's international standing and future. This often included feelings of grief,anger, and alienation from their own country's decision.
Business Owners' Experience: Adapting to new customs checks, trade barriers, changes in supply chains, and labor shortages.
EU Citizens in the UK / UK Citizens in the EU: Navigating new immigration rules, residency applications, and anxieties about their future status and rights.
Northern Ireland: The complex and often painful experience of the Northern Ireland Protocol, impacting identity,trade, and peace. This key seeks to understand the lived realities, the personal stories, and the varied emotional landscapes that Brexit created, moving beyond aggregated polling data to the human dimension of the event.
Key Three: Brexit as Myth
This key examines how Brexit has been, and continues to be, interpreted, reinterpreted, and selectively remembered to serve various political, economic, and cultural agendas. These narratives often simplify complex realities into compelling,yet frequently divisive, stories:
The "Global Britain" Myth: Post-Brexit, a narrative emerged positioning the UK as a nimble, independent global player, forging new trade deals worldwide and free from the constraints of EU bureaucracy. This myth emphasizes future potential and national pride.
The "Broken Britain" Myth: Conversely, critics of Brexit frequently frame it as a catastrophic national error,leading to economic decline, reduced international influence, and societal division. This narrative often blames Brexit for a wide range of national challenges.
The "Will of the People" Myth: This narrative, often invoked by Brexiteers, asserts that the referendum result was an unequivocal expression of democratic will that must be respected above all else, often dismissing calls for closer ties with the EU.
The "Brussels Bureaucracy" Myth: A persistent narrative portraying the EU as an undemocratic, overreaching bureaucratic monster, justifying the need for the UK's departure. These "myths" are powerful, shaping public discourse, influencing political rhetoric, and cementing deeply entrenched identities (Leave vs. Remain). They represent not just history, but a contested future.
By applying Cohen's three keys, we gain a more nuanced understanding of Brexit, recognizing it not only as a series of political maneuvers but also as a profound societal rupture whose meaning remains subject to ongoing interpretation and reinterpretation.
Historiography: A Giant Puzzle Without Instructions
You might think history is just a bunch of "facts" that happened, or a storybook that's already written. But what if I told you that when historians study history, it's actually more like putting together a massive puzzle with thousands and thousands of missing pieces, and there's no instruction manual or reference picture to guide them? Wouldn't that sound interesting?
That's the core question that historiography aims to explore!
What is Historiography?
Simply put, historiography isn't about what happened in the past itself. Instead, it's about how historical knowledge is "created" and "understood." It's like studying "how was this historical puzzle assembled?", "why do different people assemble it in different ways?", and "what's the 'truth' of this puzzle anyway?"
Now, let's use this "giant puzzle without instructions" analogy to explain the challenges historiography faces:
Lots and Lots of Missing Pieces: History isn't something where everything is recorded. Many events, many people's voices, many details might have disappeared due to natural disasters (like floods, earthquakes), human-made calamities (like wars, book burnings), or just the passage of time, making them impossible to recover. So, the puzzle historians hold is incomplete from the start.
No Image to Follow: When you buy a puzzle, there's a picture on the box to guide you. But the history puzzle has none! Historians must infer and imagine the full picture of the past from these scattered fragments themselves. No one knows what the "truth of the past" truly looks like; historians can only try their best to reconstruct an image that's as close to reality as possible.
Don't Know if Pieces are from the Same Puzzle: Sometimes, the materials historians find might be from different eras or different cultural contexts. They need to determine if these pieces are truly related and if they can be put together to depict the same period of history. It's like finding some puzzle pieces but being unsure if they came from the same box.
Everyone Has a Different Idea of the Image (Based on Prejudice and Experience): Historians are also human, with their own backgrounds, cultural perspectives, values, and personal experiences. These act like a filter, influencing how they interpret the pieces and how they imagine the overall picture of the puzzle. So, different historians will have different interpretations of the same historical event based on their "prejudices" (here referring to preconceived notions or stances) and experiences.
Sometimes Pieces from Other Puzzles Get Mixed In: In historical research, you might encounter some materials that look like historical fragments but are actually misinterpretations or come from unrelated contexts. It's like accidentally mixing pieces from other puzzles into the one you're working on.
Someone Makes Up Fake Pieces: Even worse, some individuals might, for certain purposes (like political propaganda or personal gain), deliberately create fake historical materials or fabricate events. These are "fake pieces." Historians must possess detective-like skills to identify and exclude such fabricated information.
Politics Will Mess with the Real Images: Political power often interferes with the writing of history. Rulers or specific groups might distort, hide, or emphasize certain historical events to consolidate power, shape national identity, or achieve other goals, attempting to alter the "true image of the puzzle." This puts immense pressure on historians in their pursuit of truth.
This is what historiography deals with! It teaches us that history is not a simple compilation of "facts," but a complex, challenging field that requires constant critical thinking and verification.
Why is Learning Historiography Important?
Whether or not you want to become a historian in the future, learning historiography will help you:
Become a Sharp Thinker: You'll learn not to blindly follow, but to always ask when you encounter any information: "Where did this come from? Is it reliable? What's the author's stance?"
Understand the Complexity of the World: You'll discover that the world isn't black and white, and many issues have multiple angles and interpretations. This helps you understand the differences between various cultures and groups.
Develop Discerning Abilities: In the age of information overload, the ability to identify fake news and biased viewpoints is crucial. Learning historiography trains your "sifting" eye.
Realize that the Pursuit of "Truth" is Endless: History isn't a final answer, but a continuous process of dialogue and exploration. You'll understand that humanity's comprehension of the past is always evolving and being revised.
Conclusion
In short, historiography is about understanding the complex process by which history is constructed and reshaped. It's like teaching you how to be a smart puzzle player. Even when faced with a fragmented, instruction-less, challenging giant puzzle, you'll be able to strategically and critically attempt to reconstruct that past. Learning it will give you a deeper, more thorough understanding of history, and even of the world itself.
發表文章
