The chapter is devoted to the relationship between power and the cultural arena. The importance of public discourse, its requirements and limits, is illustrated. Gramscis notions of hegemony and dominance are applied, with modifications, to our analysis of power. The role of the masses is discussed, together with the notion of totalitarianism and the importance of culture in dictatorial regimes such as the fascist and Nazi ones. Different notions of civil society, as contrasted to the state, and its role are considered, then religion as a charismatic-traditional form of power. Technocratic knowledge leads to a discussion of the role of the elites. Specialization is counterposed to general culture, recalling the debate on the two cultures (literary culture and social culture, Snow) or the three cultures (also including the humanities) and the importance of interdisciplinary culture and research. Positive and negative aspects of the new social media (Blogs, Twitter, WhatsApp, etc.) are illustrated, with cautions against the risks of corruption of the social discourse.

This chapter analyses the move of historians away from text and towards the interpretation of visuals. Starting with art history’s turn to the social and the cultural, it traces the interest of historians for an ever wider group of images, including popular images. It also highlights the emergence of perspectivalism and transdisciplinarity in the field of visual history. The main bulk of the chapter is taken up with presenting a range of examples showing how the visual turn in historical writing has contributed to deconstructing national identites, class identities and racial/ethnic identities. Ranging widely across different parts of the globe it also discusses the deconstruction of religious and gender identities through visual histories that have in total contributed much towards a much higher self-reflexivity among historians when it comes to the construction of collective identities through historical writing.