Share this story
Close X
Switch to Desktop Site

What history should record of the Boston bombings

Just as memorable as the Boston bombings was the shared, collective response. Yet the focus remains on divisions, such as classifying the bombers by their background and motives. Isn't the display of shared humanity just as important?

A moment of silence in honor of the victims of the Boston Marathon bombings is observed April 22 on Boylston Street near the race finish line, exactly one week after the tragedy.

AP Photo

About these ads

Perhaps more than recent mass killings in America, the Boston Marathon bombings caused quite a common and massive response – of togetherness.

In the days after the bombings, federal, state, and local police as well as local residents displayed incredible cooperation in the capture of the suspects, Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. Thousands of videos, tweets, and other bits of information from citizens came together in a wealth of evidence and reporting.

Then thousands of people turned out for a healing service held by multiple faiths and attended by three levels of government – the mayor, the Massachusetts governor, and President Obama.

And on the one-week anniversary of the blasts, throngs of Boston-area residents joined in a moment of silence near the bomb site and elsewhere. People are still bonding in a “Boston Strong” campaign, such as soliciting donations for the victims and their families.

These displays of a shared humanity, however, haven’t received nearly as much attention as speculation over how different the Tsarnaev brothers were from the people they attacked. The two have become categorized either as disgruntled immigrants, jihadists, loners, or assorted other psychological “types.” For journalists and politicians, this “us versus them” divide is an easy sell while the other news – the collective response – is more fleeting and perhaps even boring. 

For David Cannadine, a Princeton University historian and the author of 14 books, this sort of fixation on divisions is a big problem. In his latest book, “The Undivided Past,” the professor takes to task a tendency among scholars and others (not least the media) to focus on the “allegedly impermeable divides” between people. He pleads that we focus more on the sweep of history that shows just how united we all are.


Page:   1   |   2

Follow Stories Like This
Get the Monitor stories you care about delivered to your inbox.