This paper aims to explore some of the strategies and issues associated with writing historical research to meet the demand for social “relevance” and to appeal, and be accessible to, a broader audience of readers.
The paper uses Brown and Hackley as a foil for identifying the key differences between traditional academic writing and writing to get noticed. These differences are then analyzed to identify the issues for academic historians.
The paper highlights distinct uses of rhetoric, metaphor and theory in Brown and Hackley that make their paper stand out from typical academic history papers and raises concerns about this style of research and writing.
The paper identifies and opens the debate on some key issues in historical writing and explanation that arise when academic historians take seriously the demand to seek greater contemporary relevance and public support for their research.
