In The Work of History: Constructivism and a Politics of the Past, Kalle Pihlainen pays tribute to Hayden White's work on narrative constructivism through a comprehensive and critical evaluation of his work. The book's seven chapters are based on previously published and reworked essays, starting with Pihlainen's 2013 essay on narrative truth and ending with his 2006 essay on the confines of the form. The Work of History is timely in light of some world political leaders’ apparent immunity to facts, their use of history, and the role of power, as Pihlainen also discusses the ethics and politics of historical constructivism (xiii). At the same time, the book is “a meta‐critical enterprise,” as White states in his foreword (x): it scrutinizes and explains White's work and its reception, including the debates on the production of knowledge, the ontological status of historiography, the various representations of history, and the kinds of audiences historians envision. Although narrative constructivism seems a bit passé, Pihlainen wants to further elaborate this theoretical approach to disentangle and explain some fundamental misconceptions about it that still exist among historians. One misconception is that constructivism inherently neglects the ethical impulse and supposedly lacks the potential for political engagement. Pihlainen urges historians and theorists to find ways of becoming politically committed in their writings and to challenge their readers to do the same.

中文翻译：

---

历史写作无休止

在《历史著作：建构主义与过去的政治》中，卡尔·皮莱宁通过对海登·怀特关于叙事建构主义的工作进行了全面而严格的评价，以表彰他的作品。该书的七章均基于先前发表和重编的论文，从Pihlainen于2013年发表的关于叙事真相的论文开始，以他在2006年发表的关于表格形式的论文结束。历史著作鉴于一些世界政治领导人对事实，他们对历史的利用以及权力的作用显然具有免疫力，因此是及时的，正如皮莱宁（Pihlainen）还在讨论历史建构主义的伦理学和政治学一样（xiii）。同时，正如怀特在其前言（x）中指出的那样，这本书是“一个超临界企业”：它审查并解释了怀特的工作及其接受，包括关于知识生产，史学本体论地位的辩论。 ，历史的各种表示形式以及历史学家所设想的各种受众。尽管叙事建构主义似乎有点过时，但皮莱宁希望进一步阐述这种理论方法，以解开纠结并解释一些历史学家对它仍然存在的基本误解。一个误解是，建构主义天生就忽视了道德冲动，据认为缺乏政治参与的潜力。皮莱宁（Pihlainen）敦促历史学家和理论家找到在其著作中做出政治承诺并挑战读者的方法。