Pitch a Show! (Summer ’10)
BackStory invites you to propose a topic for our summer season and let us know why you think it would make for a compelling hour of radio (or half-hour of podcast). Which concerns facing Americans today could use historical unpacking by the History Guys? (Or, thinking ahead, what do you predict will be on everyone’s minds when autumn rolls around?) What are the most important questions surrounding your proposed topic?
If you’ve never listened to BackStory, spend some time in our archive of past shows to get a sense of what we’re all about. Or, you can read what others have pitched in the past here, here, and here. To find out how we use your input, check out this post. Basically, we’re looking for topics we can trace over the entire course of American history, rather than single episodes or chapters from history. So….
The Civil Rights Era = Bad Topic
The History of Activism = Good Topic
The Gold Rush = Bad Topic
Boom & Bust in American History = Good Topic
To suggest a topic, either “Join the Discussion” below OR send an email to backstory@virginia.edu.
33 Responses
Trackbacks & Pingbacks
-
Pitch a Show! (Winter/Spring ’11) | BackStory With The American History Guys :
[...] what we’re all about. Or, you can read what others have pitched in the past here, here, here, and here. To find out how we use your input, check out this post. Basically, we’re looking for topics we [...]
Quote -- October 13, 2010 @ 9:23 am
Offshore Drilling – Obama just signed an ok to do it off the Atlantic and eastern Gulf of Mexico shores. The Pacific Ocean and parts of Alaska have been exempted – Why? Do the monied / environmental interests there hold greater sway – if so, why? The gains are so miniscule while the destruction it will cause to FL tourism is so great – why do energy concerns win out over tourism dollars (#1 industry along the Emerald Coast)?
QuoteGiven the recent US Supreme Court ruling on campaign finance and corporations I encourage you to look at the history of the corporation. A recent post at Harvard Business review may be a place to start http://s.hbr.org/baMUTR Also a few years back a couple of writers from The Economist published a short book on the history of the corporation – Micklethwait, J., & Woolridge, A. (2003). The company: A short history of a revolutionary idea. New York: The Modern Library.
If time allows, it may be interesting to look at the role of the corporation in society, what its responsibilities are what people expect of them.
QuoteWith the interest to reducing our carbon footprint and our reliance on foreign non-renewable resources, I would like to hear a report on the plusses and minuses of 20th century methods of transportation (from the inception of the horse drawn coach, passenger train, automobile (steam, diesel, gasoline, electric and hybrid), to the bus). Until the transporter is operational e humans will need a better way to physically travel across the nation or across town to work. Were newer modes actually better for the public in general? For example, were buses actually better for the public from a cost and convenience standpoint? Marketing tells us that buses are better than trains or trolleys as buses do not:
Require tracks, are not a huge initial capital investments, go anywhere a road existed, and have unlimited stops to pick up and drop off customers.
Buses do:
Require ongoing maintenance and repeated investment in new assets,
have a frequent maintenance schedule (fluid changes, ongoing replacement of parts (brakes, engines, tires), repairs and decreased reliability within a few years.
Are prone to operator error (accidents).
A common belief from conspiracy theorists is that the automobile makers can make a better product but is not willing to do so at the expense of profit.
The end argument could be a comparison of light rail versus buses. It seems there is not limit on the amount of pro and anti light rail information available on teh internet. I would like to know which is actually better and in which circumstances.
QuoteThanks,
Chris
See the following::
http://www.lightrailnow.org/myths/m_mythlog001.htm
The Revolutionary War, Civil War and World War II all seem to be huge topics of historical study both in school and as topics for a number of films, books, and other media formats.
What were colonials using as an example of warfare during their era? Did they make reference to England’s 100 years war? Did they still discuss the crusades era?
Between the Revolutionary War and Civil War, what was the largest area of war study? Were they only focused on the topics related to the revolution? Was the French-Indian war becoming a topic of great interest?
Between the Civil War and World War II, how did the establishment and development of the Veterans’ Affairs department within the government change the meaning of being a war veteran among the population? Did the lessons of the Civil War become ingrained in the military services as World War I and World War II were fought? Was it largely ignored as a different war and a different time?
Why are we still looking back at iconic wars as such large symbols of our patriotism? Why do we still revere the veterans of our past? What are we still learning from the Vietnam War and Korean War before that?
Several television shows and movies gave a pseudo insider look at the lifestyle of soldiers, both enlisted and officers. What drives such an interest? Modern shows are not giving the same perspective of soldiers taht are veterans of the Gulf War or of the current Iraq War and war in Afganistan. What has changed about these wars that doesn’t lend to such an involved look through film and television? One such example is Grey’s Anatomy and Mercy which are showing veteran in the medical field after they have returned and must deal with the civilian life. Is it possible that a show more like MASH will not reproduce the same interest? Is it due to changes in the way that warfare and veterans of war are portrayed, or is it because the changes in media do not lend space for the political and philosophical themes that were presented in MASH?
War and veterans surely is not a very new topic for historical study, I’m curious if there has been a significant cultural change in how long we as a nation wait to review our wars and for how long they remain in a key place in our thoughts. WWII is still very present, but the Korean War is not given the same attention; the Gulf War has received very little cultural attention while the Iraq War is already being presented in pop culture even in small ways, including the drama “Army Wives”.
QuoteHumor in America
QuoteI think a story about sectionalism would be neat. I am a US History teacher. I live in Fayetteville, NC; but am originally from Washington State. There are SOOOO very many cultural differences all over the USA. I think a discussion on sectionalism would be enlightening. For the 18th & 19th century guys, sectionalism is pretty cut and dried; but in the 20th/21st century sectionalism isn’t just Plantation v. Industry its so much more. Cultural ideals, status symbols and the way business is done is very different.
Not only am I nerdy enough to discuss this in my free time, but I also think it would be neat to have a podcast to share with my students regarding sectionalism in the 20th/21st century.
I hope you run with it!
QuoteDeanna
In light of the Texas Board of Education’s recent proposals to rewrite their history text books to reflect a more “rightist” view of history, how Americans have viewed and taught the history of the country? Have our popular views and feelings toward the history of America changed? What about having it reflect a certain viewpoint?
Also, the relationship between business and the government. It has been fascinating watching people’s reactions to the government bailouts. The relationship between the government and business, large and small is one that has vasty changed over the years. How has it changed? How has that relationship affected the country as a whole?
QuoteHow about a show on the History of Halloween? I just finished watching the movie _Meet Me In St. Louis_ for the first time, and was struck by the very dark film noir-like Halloween scene. How much of that was director Minelli’s imagination and how much was based in what people actually did on Halloween at the turn of the century? Was that scene as weird to the people who saw it in when the movie came out in 1944 as it was for me and my husband tonight? Or did it seem fairly normal to them? If that was more or less true to Halloween in the very early 20th century, would a respectable middle class family have allowed their two young girls out by themselves when violent shenanigans were to be expected? That scene (if it was true to life) exemplified the trick aspect of Halloween; when did treats come into the picture? Also, I have a vague memory of hearing somewhere that before people carved pumpkins, they carved turnips. True? You all have done some terrific holiday shows–I’d love to hear one on Halloween. Ah-hah! I see that the two words that I am supposed to type in to prove that this post is coming from a human being and not a Web-cruising robot are “separate madness.” Should we take that as a sign? :^)
QuoteWhat about how americans vacationed, staycationed, recreation, became tourists, and traveled throughout our history?
QuoteElaine, check out last year’s episode, “American Idle: A History of Leisure.” http://backstoryradio.org/2008/08/american-idle-a-history-of-leisure-2/
One of our guests, Cindy Aron, discusses the American “self-improvement vacation.” (See also the extended interview with Aron.) This is such a rich and fun subject–wish we had more than an hour to cover it! A show about “the tourist” in American history could be great…
QuoteA Survey of Suppressed Rebellions in the US – My mother often spoke of her grandfather’s participation in Coxey’s Army in 1894. I am now reading Howard Zinn’s “People’s History of the United States” and noting the numerous rebellions BEFORE the Declaration of Independence.
There is an impression that the forces of propriety are suppressing reports of the rebellions in the same way that political and military forces suppressed the popular actions.
I am asking for a TimeLine of popular rebellions, accompanied by the number of participants and the number of citizens killed and jailed by the government.
Was anyone there in 1970 when the Ohio Governor arranged to have troops armed with live ammunition at a student gathering which opposed the Viet Nam War? Not farmers with pitchforks, but citizens protesting government actions and policies.
QuoteHave you guys done a show on language laws? I moved back to California from China last year and was surprised at how many people are still upset about how many people speak non-English languages.
Here in Southern California there are so many non-native English communities, but regular, monolingual white people often have no idea as to why they only speak English. There seems to be an assumption that English has always been the language of “America”, including all the area currently subsumed by that term.
Most people, including myself, have little sense of how long all these Spanish named places, like California, Los Angeles, Cerritos, San Diego, etc. have been predominantly English-Speaking.
Now that English-Only legislation is once again being proposed as a way of maintaining tradition as opposed to establishing it, it would be useful for more people to understand how English has spread over our land.
QuoteYou are “looking for topics we can trace over the entire course of American history…” This subject, which we discussed on the phone back on September 17th of 2008, can certainly be traced over the entire course of American history. It begins with the very first amendment proposed in our Bill of Rights (never ratified) and continues every decade with the population census and the reapportionment of representation in the federal House.
As you know, Congress has limited the number of Representatives in the U.S. House to 435 for nearly a century. In 1928, when congress was preparing to vote for legislation arbitrarily fixing their number at 435, this challenge was posed by Representative Lozier:
“The bill seeks to prescribe a national policy under which the membership of the House shall never exceed 435 unless Congress, by affirmative action, overturns the formula and abandons the policy enunciated by this bill. I am unalterably opposed to limiting the membership of the House to the arbitrary number of 435. Why 435? Why not 400? Why not 300? Why not 250, 450, 535, or 600? Why is this number 435 sacred? What merit is there in having a membership of 435 that we would not have if the membership were 335 or 535? There is no sanctity in the number 435 … There is absolutely no reason, philosophy, or common sense in arbitrarily fixing the membership of the House at 435 or at any other number.”
In order to understand the principal problems that result from oversized congressional districts, and how we can return political power to the citizenry through representational enlargement, please read “Taking Back Our Republic”, which can be downloaded from this page: http://www.thirty-thousand.org/pages/TBOR.htm. This pamphlet also provides a considerable amount of new and compelling information regarding the consequences of failing to maintain a truly representative democracy as envisioned by our nation’s Founders.
For an excellent scholarly perspective on this subject, read “A House of Our Own or A House We’ve Outgrown? An Argument for Increasing the Size of the House of Representatives” in the “Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problems” (1992). That article, along with many others by a variety of authors, can be downloaded from this page:
Quotehttp://www.thirty-thousand.org/pages/resources.htm
As we approach the ten year anniversary of the contested election of 2000, why not explore the history of electioneering? While this subject has been touched on in a previous episode, I feel that 2000, taken as a prelude to the first decade of the century, illustrates the tension in our current state of affairs: Partisan politics, third party movements, yellow journalism, and the continued adjustment of moral questions in uncertain times.
Better yet, how about a show that looks at the first ten years of the 21st century from an American perspective?
Thank you for bringing us this fantastic program.
QuoteTHE GENESIS & EVOLUTION & FUTURE(?) OF “THE AMERICAN DREAM”.
Compelling…Because it is and always was a myth. But sense we largely believe in “it”, it has driven much of American life and politics sense the phrase was coined. (Idunno when that was).
Here is what i believe (think I know
). America’s post WW II boom was an anomaly brought about by the confluence of several events & facts. As such, it cannot be sustained (as we are seeing), and it was always fated to peter out as the world began to “level”.
Since I’m not a scholar & not near getting paid here, let me list & let others make it sing or sink.
1. We WON! & more than that, we were the ONLY major participant left largely unattacked (I know I know; Pearl Harbor). Our primary and secondary infrastructure was not only unscathed but improved because of war needs. (Roads, Rail, Medicine, Communications, every kind of research).
2. The old Peaceful Borders & Oceans of DMZ cushion.
3. Tremendous domestic (cheap) natural resource deposits. And what we didn’t have enough of was easily bought from our broken global neighbors with the coveted American Dollar.
4. A huge, young, domestic consumer market AND virtually no foreign competition…see #1 (this allowed bosses to pay folks more than enough to buy the stuff they were making).
Ask yourselves, what is still true? Maybe #2…MAYBE.
Now, the AHGs have to go further back to make the full case but there it is.
Thus, the notion of The American Dream is premised on a confluence of historical coincidences.
QuoteSports in America…but not really the specific sports. Rather focus on how it helps to shape America and how it changes. I find it interesting that different generations have followed and respected different sports. I don’t know about the colonial days, but just throughout my lifetime I’ve seen different sports ebb-and-flow: BOWLING – COLLEGE TRACK – BOXING – NBA – WNBA – NASCAR – HUNTING – SOCCER – RACQUETBALL. They all seem to rise and fall…but why? Does the sport change or what people are looking for in watching a sport? Baseball was played during the civil war and was popular into our generation…what about it was so long lasting? Boxing was the sport of kings but not so much today…why? Is there a reason that soccer is finally becoming a part of the American sports scene when it’s been wildly popular around the world for decades? And why ISN’T badmitten, squash, rugby, or cricket as popular here as it is in other parts fo the world?
QuoteHow about a history of technology and its impact on our country throughout its history? Are we really the most innovative culture in the world? Who came before us, and what did we learn from them? Is there a “race” to see who’s the “most innovative” in the world? I listened to your podcast on Climate Control, and it reminded me of the very old Ice House in one of my former home towns, Bethlehem, PA. It used an ammonia cycle cooling system, with the Lehigh Canal as its heat sink, to actually make ice all year round, possibly before conventional refrigeration was available. (I couldn’t find specific years of operation.) Even older is Bethlehem’s Old Waterworks, which might just be the first pumped water system in the colonies. Much to my surprise, it began operation in the 1750′s, and ran into the 1830′s (http://www.nps.gov/nr/travel/delaware/wat.htm). Does all this tech stuff really go that far back? Finally, all this compels me to give a nod to Edward Tenner and his fabulous book, “Why Things Bite Back – Technology and the Revenge of Unintended Consequences.” What have been the unintended consequences of technology for America? (Cotton gin, anyone? How about a suburban assault vehicle?)
QuoteHow about a history of childcare? I’m a PhD student living in the south and have been searching for reliable care for my daughter– I’m struck by how racialized care is in the South, and also how difficult care is to find in our country in general, compared to European countries. Obviously women have entered the full time workforce relatively recently– but previously employed nannies, wet nurses, etc., and the social acceptance of these things has changed with the times (note the current climate surrounding breastfeeding and how this has changed from 50 years ago)…
QuoteTwo ideas:
Could you do a show on money? Actual, physical money? For example, early in America’s history each state printed its own currency, right? And not too long ago, larger bills were changed to include security strips and holographic images, as anti-counterfeiting measures. Also, why do we have a different mix of bills and coins compared to, say, Europe? How did we get a $1 coin when nobody seems to like it? What’s with the weird denominations like 50-cent coins and $2 bills?
Central banks? From the colonial times, when presumably we were under the English banking system, through the early, bitter fights over the Bank of the US, the Great Depression, to today, when everybody is painfully aware of how huge financial institutions affect our daily lives, but is perhaps less aware of the origins of those institutions.
QuoteNEW TOPIC – Historic Catastrophic Weather Effects in the US
I was reading about a new volcano in Indonesia and remembered the \Winter of No Sun\ in Russia after a volcano. How many times has the US suffered truly catastrophic weather effects?
I don’t remember any, so I suspect ours have been of a much lesser scale than others (Russia). Please include some non-US references for scale if you pursue this.
ThosMason
QuoteHow about the history of the meaning of the words – CONSERVATIVE & LIBERAL?
Politically & socially neither as currently used – even by most academics, journalists & thought leaders – has very much to do with the DENOTATIVE or ROOT or original meaning.
T.R. (Republican) the greatest presidential conservator? Would he recognize or even be welcomed by today’s GOP?
William F. Buckley referring to Bush’s Iraq expedition: “definitively not conservative”.
The Liberal Tradition : Having to do with self improvement through self denial & DISCIPLINED, rigorous study.
QuoteThe social contract & the two sided performance necessary for it to work…Not just an entitled body politic.
See explanation of Classical Liberalism:
Quotehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism
To learn why “liberal” in the modern sense has come to mean the opposite of its classical meaning, read “The Road to Serfdom”.
I would like to hear about two things: money and representation.
Money – similar to Kirsten suggestion. I would be interested in the history of the banking system, gold standards, paper money, local currencies, and general investment tools available to the mass public, monetary policy, and national debt. What with the down economy and banking issues now, I think it would be fitting.
Representation – I would be interested in hearing about the development of congressional representation from the initial 1 congressman per ~40,000 constituents to the current ratio of 1 per 800,000. I would like to hear about how often people voted out their own congress person, and their satisfaction with congress versus their satisfaction with their own congress person. The events leading into and effects of the election of senators. And the movement away from the electoral college and more towards popular voting.
QuoteI see now I was agreeing with Jim, and not Kirsten, on money – as names are below the posts and not above.
QuoteTony, please see my posting above at 7/18/2010 at 12:05 pm, and reference the links posted therein. You may find that interesting. I also provide the reelection data you mention. As it turns out, there is a nearly perfect correlation between congressional district size and tenure in office.
QuoteCompare the Tea Party to the Know Nothing Party in the mid 1800′s, the KKK in the early 1900′s, and any other party that you think would make an interesting comparison. The anti-immigrant element seems to carry through all three. The religious element seems to carry over, with Islam being the Tea Party whipping boy as opposed to the Catholics for the Know Nothings and the Jews for the KKK. Fiscal policy is very important to the Tea Party, but I don’t know how that fit into the earlier parties.
In other words, teach me a little of the history.
Thanks
QuoteTo someone on the outside of America, it seems like food is a big part of your self-identity. I mean, whether it’s all-you-can-eat salad bars, or breatharians, or consciousness raising about the politics of food, eating comes up all the time. People eat too much, or the wrong thing, or from the wrong place and a lot of effort seems to go to figuring out what it means to Eat Right by a lot of different (incompatible) metrics.
This has been going on for as long as I can remember, but has it always been like this? And why? I mean, we’re all human, so we’re all obsessed with food
. But food– whether it’s health food, mass-produced convenience foods, astronaut food, state-specialties or “all American” food– comes up again and again in relation to gender, or race or region or class. Has it always been a flash point for these other issues (like I say, gender, immigration, regionalism come to mind)?
QuoteHow about the history of substance abuse in america? One could look at alcoholism, the introduction of alcohol to native americans, the inclusion of alcohol and opium in cure-all “snake oil” drinks (and cocaine in certain cola drinks), the founding of Alcoholics Anonymous, Prohibition, the criminalization of certain drugs and restriction of alcohol to minors.
Or you could shift the emphasis slightly to the War on Drugs, and focus on the american legal system’s increasing regulation and criminalization of substances of abuse, and how this was impacted by america’s involvement in the international drug (and alcohol) trade. This could be balanced by the effect gangsters have had on this problem, from bootleggers to drug cartels, and the increasing dangerousness of the substances being used–from “reefer” and alcohol to highly pure LSD, heroin and cocaine.
QuoteDavid- Great idea for a show! We have been discussing the possibility of doing a show on drugs, so be on the lookout for that one in the future. In terms of alcohol, back in 2008 we did a show called “Tolerance: A History of Drink,” in which we discussed prohibition among other aspects of the history of alcohol. You can check it out at http://backstoryradio.org/tolerance-a-history-of-drink/ or by looking in the archive section of our website.
Thanks for the ideas! Keep them coming!
QuotePeriods and places outside history. Why are some periods treated as part of the American national story and other are not? Eg, who in the general public knows any stories of most of the 17th century and 18th century to 1763? In the general narrative, America begins at Plymouth Rock, with a grudging nod to Jamestown. Then there are the Salem witch trials, and then the Seven Years War. Did nothing happen in between? Other settlements are at most of local interest, and I’m not even sure of that interest: when I was growing up in SE Pennsylvania, the state story began with Penn, not the Finns and Swedes who had settled the New Sweden Colony nearly half a century earlier (and which included all the land of my school district). Similarly, outside the Mississippi Valley does anyone incorporate into ones’ account of American history anything about French exploration and settlement before the Lousiana Purchase (a tale that tends to leave out the Spanish)? That Canada and Mexico are not part of “American” history probably goes without saying.
QuoteI would like to know your thoughts on the level of dissent to America in WWI; I think therer is more to say about this and perhaps there was more opposition than just a few “reds/socialist, who Wilson ordered silenced.
QuoteAn appropriate tie-in could be American pacifism before WWII, the America First Committee, ambivalence about Korea War, and the mostly negative view of most Americans to the Vietnam War protesters
@dale: Thanks for your suggestion. If you haven’t already, you might want to take a listen to one of the interviews towards the end of our recent show about national debt. Historian Julia Ott talks about the key role of the government’s war bond campaigns in tamping down vocal opposition to WWI, which, as you say, was significant and widespread. You might also be interested in another interview from our second show EVER, in which novelist Nicholson Baker talked about pacifism in the WWII era. That can be found about 23 minutes into the show, which is archived here: Thanks again for your note.
Quote