While Gaddis makes several points in his concluding chapter, a part I found interesting was how Gaddis summed up history as a tension of opposites. He furthers this point later in the chapter by mentioning how freedom cannot exist unless it is compared alongside oppression. It is an interesting concept, as most, if not all, of our ideas and expected social norms are defined by what they are not. The same goes for historical narratives, and it is important to remember narratives are constructed retellings, but they mean nothing if they have no comparison or background. However, I would be lying to claim I understood this entire chapter to its fullest extent. The chapter seemed a bit convoluted, and I struggled to follow all of his arguments. Many of them seemed circular, and I do not fully grasp his oppressor/oppressed argument enough to create a valid analyzation. I certainly attempted, although it was a thinly veiled garbage, so I deleted it and fully admit that my understanding of the conclusion is considerably weaker than the rest of the text.

However, the title of the last chapter, “Seeing Like a Historian,” does cause me to reflect on several of his major themes. For one, historical narratives are reconstructions of the past, created by interpretations of evidence, although it is impossible to completely recreate events. In order to be a historian, one must recognize and even embrace these limitations. Additionally, Gaddis stresses throughout the book that history is multi-causal, and an individual is not thinking like a historian if they attempt to locate a independent variable. Thus, history is not linear, and Gaddis leaves the work of attempting to predict the future to social scientists, as historians recognize the futility of these actions. Throughout the novel, Gaddis compares history to the natural sciences, and draws interesting parallels, as history is just as methodological as the sciences. Lastly, a vital skill of seeing like a historian is the ability to recreate historical possibilities in their mind, much like how experiments are performed in laboratories. While these ideas are not all encompassing, they are important aspects in thinking as a historian, and are necessary while creating history.