Saudan G
Gesnerus. 1993;50 ( Pt 3-4):242-63.
Biography, long shunned in the universities, has taken a dazzling revenge since the early 1980s--against the "Annales", to be sure, but also under the influence of "new history". As regards the history of medicine, the situation remains ambiguous. Biography, marrying ethics and progress, has always enjoyed a special place in the hearts of traditionalists; the partisans of "problem history" consider the genre pre- or ahistoric. However, for the last twenty years several authors, fascinated by the richness of individual destinies and anxious to transcend their irreducible singularities, have opened up new paths to reconciling the individual with anthropological and social history.
传记在大学里长期受到冷落，但自20世纪80年代初以来却进行了令人瞩目的逆袭——无疑是针对《年鉴》派的，不过也是在“新史学”的影响下。至于医学史，情况仍然不明朗。传记将伦理与进步相结合，在传统主义者心中一直占有特殊地位；“问题史”的支持者则认为这种体裁是前历史的或非历史的。然而，在过去二十年里，几位作者被个人命运的丰富性所吸引，并急于超越其不可简化的独特性，开辟了新的道路，以调和个人与人类学和社会史的关系。
