The Privilege of History

In 1963, Victor Gollancz, the British leftist press, published E.P. Thompson’s The Making of the English Working Class. Most readers are likely more familiar with the revised edition published by Penguin’s Pelican division in 19681, and those of my vintage are most likely to have the 1980 edition, with its new Preface. 1980 was the year in which I began undergraduate studies at Memorial University. Within a few years, Greg Kealey had arrived, bringing his enthusiasm for the social history associated with Thompson and the many other great historians of the left who were transforming our understanding of Anglo-American history. The Making, for students interested in social history, became immediately influential for a number of reasons. Thompson’s prose, sparkling with clarity and vigour, made the book a pleasure to read. More important, the democratization and empowering implications of his emphasis on agency in class relations was a breath of fresh air to students otherwise exposed to stodgy, older forms of political and economic history. As well, the influence of Thompson was obviously coursing through the pages of the influential journals of social history, and we were proud that one of these, what was then called Labour/Le Travailleur, had found its home at Memorial. On the 50th anniversary of the first edition of The Making, it is fitting to think about the many contributions of Thompson’s text. It has inspired a huge volume of work, which has in turned resulted in an even greater volume of criticism. My purpose is not to try to comment on all of this, but rather to point out essential lessons I learned through my reading of Thompson. The elements of these lessons are embedded in the key concepts of the books’ title: “making,” “English,” and “class.” In bringing this together, Thompson advanced an argument for the privileged place of history in a politically engaged pursuit of knowledge. The most important part of Thompson’s title is “class,” the working class in particular. It is difficult to imagine that anyone would be unfamiliar with Thompson’s Marxist roots, but his emphasis on class may not be simply explained as an ideological preference. Rather, it was a choice required by the ubiquity of the experience of class. Common to every form of society has been the need to produce. What must be produced to ensure a particular society’s reproduction over time varies considerably as did the social relations arising from access to the means of production. The obviousness of productive relations, however, was problematic because of the temptation to explain history deterministically as arising from particular structures of production. Thompson chose to emphasize the importance of the specific social

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.