On Detail in Historical Writing
This Comment considers the role of detail in historical writing, inflected through my own experience of writing ‘trade’ books for a general rather than specialist readership. I argue for the value of the detail that is slightly recalcitrant, that is more than just flesh on the bones of an argument or evidence marshalled to make a point. Detail is itself a kind of argument and thus, since beauty and elegance in writing derive from economy, a way of making a point without belabouring it. The gratuitous fact can be seductive, suggesting that the world has a randomness and overabundance that can't easily be rounded up into a dataset. Details, in their singularity and idiosyncrasy, point to the capaciousness of human experience. They correct our tendency to fixate on one story, to focus on the eventful at the expense of the marginal, and to invent a false unity of experience that erases social differences. With their obdurate specificity, they can shatter our presumptions about the past. I explore these ideas with reference to modern literature (Flaubert, Chekhov), the Mass-Observation archive and examples from my own work in contemporary cultural history and family history.