In the words of rural and regional historian, Joseph A. Amato, people of every place and time deserve a history. It is Amato’s mission to clarify misconceptions that academia, and to some extent the public may have towards the local historian and his or her craft. Local history serves more than personal desire and individual nostalgia, however. It meets group’s collective yearning to bring back to life departed people, places, and times. Amato argues that academics and others only see the surface of local history when evaluating it. Amato himself is quoted in saying that local history was the stepchild of the profession. Furthermore, Amato delivers a course of action for remedying issues that outsiders may have towards the field. …show more content…
Subsequent chapters address literature and business. The author often looses focus to present a case of studying local history. At times it seems like Amato is delivering a history of the prairies of Minnesota, not making a case for local history. He does circle back to the concept of local history; however, I do not think that it is as strong as it should be. Taking both the positive and negative aspects in consideration, I believe that his argument was moderately effective. As mentioned above, I think he could have made a stronger effort to connect his ties to Minnesota to local history. While he uses strong evidence, I believe that his focus was lacking. Joseph A. Amato’s, Rethinking Home: A Case for Writing Local History, he achieved moderate success in examining his research questions. He successfully showed a historic change over time by using the Minnesota plains as a case study against local history. Amato fell short of writing for his target audience, the academic historian. Amato wrote in a way that may appeal to a wider audience or even a community of local historians themselves. Despite its shortcomings, Rethinking Home: A Case for Writing Local History was