Gaddis proposed several different ways to view history, whether it is the recognition that there is never a single independent variable in historical study, or a single cause of a war or catastrophe, social movement or triumph in history. The rule of thumb not to look to the future to understand history, or use history to definitively predict the future is another way we can “see” history.

Gaddis’ use of Friedrich’s painting, The Wanderer above a Sea of Fog, and Shakespeare In Love’s Viola are the metaphors he uses to explain historical study that stood out the most to me. Interpreting a piece of artwork, or predicting what lies in someone’s future relies on the same strategies as when analyzing a historical artifact. You can ask, what is the context? Why did the creator choice to create the piece that they did? What has the piece come to symbolize? All of it is a bit of a guessing game, with more than one answer. However, artistic interpretation, rather than scientific conclusion is what Gaddis suggests is the sound way to analyze history. And if history is meant to be approached with interpretation rather than by conclusion, than “seeing like a historian” means that there must be several different lenses to aid vision. For, no two historians are going to see exactly alike, just like one viewer may be watching Viola walk towards her future, or the wanderer brace for what is to come, another may be see her in the past, or the wanderer survey one last time, the land he has already conquered.

As someone who is drawn to art more than science, I find Gaddis’ use of art as metaphors particularly useful as an approach to my own analysis and study of history. I have noticed that during the past several weeks working with an Dickinson Archives collection that I have used a similar interpretative approach without realizing it until now, as I reflect on Gaddis’ thoughts.