The Unwritten Rules of History

Canadian History Roundup – Week of April 1, 2018

Painting depicting individuals outdoors making maple sugar, Lower Canada 1837

“Making Maple Sugar, Lower Canada ca. 1837” Phillip John Bainbridge, LAC 2834638

The latest in blog posts, news, and podcasts from the world of Canadian history.

 

Welcome back to the Roundup! Our fearless leader, Andrea, is away this week, so I’ll be doing the roundup for the first time. Here we go!

Missed last week’s roundup? Check it out here.


That’s all for this week! I hope you enjoyed this week’s roundup. If you did, please consider sharing it on the social media platform of your choice! And don’t forget to check back on Tuesday for a brand new Historians’ Histories. See you then!

Liked this post? Please take a second to support Unwritten Histories on Patreon!

4 Comments

  1. Donna Sacuta

    “…how difficult it is to find information on women in the advent of the digital era due to their mischaracterized roles – photos of women would be labelled as a “receptionist” or “assistant” when in fact they were much more integral to the project…”

    Why is it alright to disparage receptionists and assistants? Is this not perpetuating stereotypical view of women’s traditional roles as being unimportant because they are “just” receptionists? Not fair.

    • Andrea Eidinger

      Hi Donna. Thanks for your comment! I don’t think that anyone intended to disparage receptionists and assistants. I know very well how hard and important their work is. I think the point that the Mar Hicks was trying to make was that, in some archives and archival collections, female scientists and engineers were often mis-identified as receptionists in photographs. Mar Hicks explains more here (https://twitter.com/histoftech/status/974394162668810240) that this is largely because they were women, and this type of work is usually seen as stereotypically feminine. Hicks is arguing that this mis-identification has largely erased the work of female scientists and engineers. Though I do think a larger problem here that Hicks doesn’t address is that receptionists, assistants, and secretaries were just as vital to these projects as scientists and engineers, regardless of gender. Their contributions were, and are, overlooked and undervalued, largely due to, as you mention, gendered stereotypes. So I absolutely agree that this is an area we need to do better in.

  2. Joseph Gagné

    “The Université de Montréal blog released this fascinating post on how horses facilitated the urbanization of the city.”
    Not going to lie, my active imagination immediately came up with a mental image of an architect horse holding up blueprints.

    • Stephanie Pettigrew

      Well, if that were the case, that would certainly qualify as fascinating.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

© 2024 Unwritten Histories

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑