François Hartog

Chronos: The West Confronts Time by François Hartog and translated by S R Gilbert gives the reader so much to consider about time that it almost demands a second (and likely more) reading.

I say that not because it is confusing, it isn't, but rather that it offers so much to consider about the history of time and things I haven't generally considered from a time-centered perspective. With so much information that could alter some of my perceptions, I found myself going off on my own mental tangents. While that is a definite positive of the book, who doesn't enjoy a book that generates additional ideas, it also meant I sometimes lost the thread of what Hartog was saying. So I intend to digest this information and then reread the book in a few months.

As a history of time I think the book serves to place so much of our history along side how time is perceived and used. From that history comes the confrontation with our contemporary world and how our understanding of time plays into the many crises we face. It is this latter aspect that has me rethinking how I view time and also recasting some issues and ideas in a time-centric understanding. Am I thinking about time as Hartog does? I'm frankly not sure, but I do know that working to understand his ideas has helped me to gain a better understanding and appreciation of where we stand now.

I would highly recommend this to anyone interested in history in general as well as those who want to better understand where we have been, where we might be going, and how to place it all into some context.

Reviewed from a copy made available by the publisher via NetGalley.… (lisätietoja)

The merit of this book is that it makes Hartog's first book on historicity regimes more accessible: in this book, Hartog is making a lot of effort to formulate his theory more clearly and give it more background, and that is fruitful. Much more than in "Régimes d'historicité", the reader gains an insight into the evolution that perception of history (and time) as such and of historiography as a métier has undergone. Particularly the third and fourth parts of this book provide more concrete material: in the evolution of literature (third part) and of historiography (fourth part). But still, I continue to have problems with Hartog's strict three-way division in historicity regimes and in his opinion that today presentism dominates everything. See my review in my History account on Goodreads: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/1100098128… (lisätietoja)

The French historian Hartog deals with a really interesting subject, namely the very diverse relationship that people and societies have had with time: the past, present and future. His starting point is the concept of 'temporality' of the German historical theorist Reinhart Koselleck, and he transforms this into an even more abstract concept of 'historicity regime'. And though he tries to elaborate this concept, it remains a very elusive term, I think.

Hartog distinguishes 3 regimes: 1. the classic historicity regime where the gaze is mainly focused on the past and history serves for learning; 2. The modern regime in which the focus is on the future and everything is aimed at religious or non-religious utopias; and finally 3. Presentism, in which past and future are viewed purely and solely in function of the present. Hartog draws his examples mainly from literature and from French historiography, and that is a rather narrow basis, I think. Moreover, his strict separation between these regimes does not convince me, and especially his statement that we are today in a complete presentism (only the present counts), seems to me to be overrated. But that does not diminish the fact that this book offers many interesting incentives for further reflection.… (lisätietoja)