Traditional Sources Or Forms Of History
All over the world, every individual, groups and or a community have their ways of how they experience history to make them understand their present state in a wider scope of their lives. Music is one way how people do think about their past and embrace it instead of reliance on other sources of history. Just like the national anthem, music forms a big part of our lives. Whether it is the music we listen to on our way to work, or that we hear in a masterpiece or film, they always bring up our moods, tells us the story and can also bring us down (Lecture 11/17). Music has since touched the diverse cultures all over the world since early times in human history.
In history, music has been seen as a form of entertainment performed especially in gatherings and traditional occasions or in remembrance. Today, looking at the times when we stand or kneel down when the national anthem is being sung, people have started to think beyond just entertainment but about the history of their mother nation. That is, what is being relayed by the contents of the national anthem make them feel like one whole, how to defend their beloved country from any form of aggression and to other perspective remember those who fought for their independence. That happens without necessarily reading about their history in documented history in the archives (Lecture 11/17). In this way, music brings a healing sense to the whole nation hence an explosive expression of humanity because that history part of it touches us other than what most politicians are advocating for today by banning music in the name of restoring order in our societies.
Musical rhythm and harmony would always find their ways into our inner souls by taking the strongest hold upon it and bringing with them an imparting grace (Lecture 11/17). Meaning, it is the overwhelming kinesthetic responses that music evokes in our lives that enables it such a possible influence on our behaviors morally and our beliefs. That would explain why music is different from literature and painting concerning our history.
As the (Lecture 11/16) argued in his articles, John of the Salisbury does complain that some exceptional music that was sung in the parish cathedral did at some points lead to the titillation between the legs other than the sense of devotion in the people’s brains. Such sentiments may better explain why different people have their reasons for not embracing music as their sources of learning history.
Regarding the national anthem, various people have expressed mixed reactions as to why they don’t recognize it. Some argued that they sing it just as a formality, others because they like its rhythm or its beats, but in a real sense, they don’t understand the meaning it contains. During many occasions, some people have eluded their national anthem being sung either by just sitting down or by conducting their duties as usual while the national anthem is being sung. The reasons they always give incline to what their communities experienced during their struggle for independence or some of them being killed for such struggle. In that context, music brings to some people painful past experiences, some things they don’t want to remember (Lecture 11/17). Consequently, music as those of national anthem is limited to those who can talk and hear what is being sung but not to the deaf who are still illiterate.
Such limitations of music as a source of our history may have been what prompted the Orthodox Patriarch of Moscow to order the burning of all musical instruments that were perceived to be of those who were contradicting their belief of paganism (Lecture 11/16).
The binding factor of the lecturer’s three subjects, the history of wars, the public life history, and the long and deep history is that what all that people and societies are facing and experiencing today are as a result of our history. That is the wars and public lifestyles that characterize the current world state originated from our past big and dark history of the world history (Lecture 11/16). The lecturer argued that we who are living in the present, we did not create the violence and hatred we are experiencing today. Rather it is that violence and hatred from our past that has since created the current states of the wars, hatred and social injustices among the current societies.
The reasons why nations turn against each other are products of what happened in those nations history just like the lecturer is talking about the holocaust which for many decades been remembered by the Jews all over the world in all generations. In the temple discretion in the pre-modern India, we can learn that the Indian social lives changed but not as far greater benefits that the Englishmen had brought to Indians in a little half a century than what the Muslims has produced in the past five centuries (Bernal, p. 35). The writer Elliot is trying to portray how Indians leaders have since done nothing to bring change to the people’s lifestyle much better than what the British wanted just like have been the norm of many world leaders who have continued to rule without adding any significance to people’s lives.
Today we can use the Indian language karma as a common theme that would better explain how various interpretations can influence the present and the future. Karma describes actions and work but contains the spiritual principles of any cause and its effects. It explains that any individual’s intents and actions may influence or causes his likely effects. Hence how you perceive the experience and the percent may dictate what you become and behave.
The history of the present tries to evaluate the relationship between the past and current which are often taken for granted by the majority of historians. In the case of South Africa’s truth and reconciliation commission deploys a genealogical inquiry and the unearthing of the hidden conflicts and backgrounds as a way of examining the value of modern phenomena (Lecture 11/16). The committee attempted to allow the South Africans to free themselves from their past by healing the scars from apartheid. What transpired in South African could be equated only to that of Nazi Germany. After its ending, many of the perpetrators wanted amnesty while the victims wanted justice leading to the formation of the commission with the aim of paving the way for a peaceful future.
The public life of history for the South African case can as well describe the contemporary history of the recent injustices people have experienced in the recent past. The commission recorded statements of more than 22,000 victims’, received over 7,000 amnesty application, heard about 2,500 pardon cases but granted only 1,500 amnesty awards (Lecture 11/16). In this case, the commission made a history by bringing justice to the victims as well as the perpetrators which today is considered as the present history because of the way they conducted their work and the outcome of their findings.