Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa

Aurora, Nemesis and Clio

  • J. R. R. Christie (a1)

This essay offers some preliminary and general considerations of big picture historiography of science, attempting an introductory specification of the topic by means of narratological analysis. It takes no strong, substantive position either pro or contra big pictures themselves, preferring an approach which is more diagnostic and heuristic in nature. After considering what may be meant by a term such as ‘big picture’ and its cognates, it interrogates the kind of desire which could lie behind the wish expressed by the conference title ‘Getting the Big Picture’: namely, that a big picture may be worth getting. It proceeds by way of a limited enquiry into what seems to be felt as a relative absence of big picture works in contemporary historiography, criticizing one very general historicocultural thesis which accounts for such an absence, advancing instead evolving features of the professional history of science community over the last thirty years as reasons for this relative absence. Concludingly, it turns the issues raised thus far on their head, in some measure at least. In trying for a more precise specification of the contemporary historiographical formation, we will discover eventually a situation not so much of relative absence of big pictures, rather one where there exists both frame and title for the picture, together with some distinguished painters' names; but where the canvas is only minimally marked, a partial and shadowy sketch, stylistically disjoined. Although this sounds paradoxical, a concrete paradox is not intended. The existence of frame and title enclosing mainly empty canvas indicates only the limitations of the pictorial metaphor for describing complex and developing sets of historiographical practice. What is instanced concludingly is less a theoretical paradox than an intelligible sequence and form of development which issues in a potential problem of practice.

Hide All
C. Hakfoort , ‘The missing syntheses in the historiography of science’, History of Science (1991), 29, 207–16.

Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture (ed. C. Nelson and L. Grossberg ), London, 1988.

P. Galison , ‘History, philosophy and the central metaphor’, Science in Context (1988), 2, 197212

G. Gutting , Michel Foucault's Archaeology of Scientific Reason, Cambridge, 1989, ch. 1.

M. Rudwick , The Great Devonian Controversy: The Shaping of Scientific Knowledge among Gentlemanly Specialists, Chicago, 1985.

A. Ophir and S. Shapin , ‘The place of knowledge: a methodological survey’, Science in Context (1991), 4, 1516.

B. Barnes , The Nature of Power, Oxford, 1988

S. Aronowitz , Science as Power: Discourse and Ideology in Modern Society, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 1988

S. Turner , ‘Depoliticizing power’, Social Studies of Science (1989), 19, 533–60.

H. W. Paul , From Knowledge to Power: The Rise of the Science Empire in France, 1860–1939, Cambridge, 1985

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

The British Journal for the History of Science
  • ISSN: 0007-0874
  • EISSN: 1474-001X
  • URL: /core/journals/british-journal-for-the-history-of-science
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *


Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 5 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 74 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 26th September 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.