This article brings the work of cultural theorist Mieke Bal and historian Hayden White into a conversation, inviting the reader to consider framing, re-framing, and un-framing as historiographical dispositions. The concept of framing was used as a substitute for context in cultural analysis. The article argues that the concept of framing could be adopted as a stance or could become one’s critical disposition in history writing, often coexisting, overlapping, and inseparable from context and contextualization. Time and chronology aren’t necessarily the only organizing principles in history. This is where context and contextualization come together in history writing and are inherently present within framing. History is never really free from context, but the concept of framing presents an opportunity to identify and enact the frames, putting the frames themselves to work. In framing differently, other contexts might emerge. The delicate balance between framing and context will continue to remain entangled in history writing, disrupting the way history tends to be written, and thus presenting an opportunity to really get beneath it, opening our own door to imagination.

中文翻译：

---

重新构架过去：构架作为历史写作的一种立场

本文将文化理论家Mieke Bal和历史学家Hayden White的工作进行了对话，邀请读者将取景，重新取景和取消取景视为历史学倾向。在文化分析中，框架的概念被用来代替上下文。文章认为，构架的概念可以作为一种立场，也可以成为人们在历史写作中的批判性态度，常常并存，重叠并且与上下文和上下文化密不可分。时间和时间顺序不一定是历史上唯一的组织原则。在这里，上下文和上下文化在历史写作中融合在一起，并固有地存在于框架中。历史从来没有真正摆脱背景，但是框架的概念提供了识别和制定框架的机会，使框架本身起作用。在不同的框架中，可能会出现其他上下文。框架和上下文之间的微妙平衡将继续纠缠于历史写作中，打乱历史的书写方式，从而提供了一个真正深入历史的机会，为我们的想象力打开了大门。