What does 'historic' mean?

[Pete]

In another thread, Amanda said:

May 26, 2008 8:49:46 GMT amanda said:

I've just been reading Sky online news (life doesn't get better than this!) They report that the Phoenix Mars contraption has landed. Apparently it hurtled through the hostile Martian atmosphere at over 12,000 mph and then popped out a parachute to slow itself down. Easy.

It also took a photo of one of its leg's on the planet's surface.

This post made me look this up on BBC news (because I am interested in that sort of thing, not because I was looking for posting material). The BBC's first paragraph was "A Nasa spacecraft has sent back the first historic pictures of an unexplored region of Mars".

What is the meaning of the word 'historic' in this context? I think it means that the photograph will be seen to be historically significant, in which case the BBC reporter is prejudging the issue. If he (or she) means that the photograph has bever been taken before, so it is 'historic' by being the first, then every photograph is historic, even those I took with my mobile phone at our Eurovision party on Saturday! And it certainly isn't historic by being the first close-up photograph of Mars, since there have been several previous landings.

[Pete]

Also, should it have been "NASA", not "Nasa"?

[Geoff]

What is the meaning of the word 'historic' in this context? I think it means that the photograph will be seen to be historically significant ...

In this context, I think historic = it will go down in history.

Pete, Is that the same as your 'historically significant'.

[Barry]

Ah, Pete, the good old 'filter of history' argument!

It's tempting to cavil at remarks like this, and yes, I agree, that, on a personal basis, any moment can be considered 'historic'. Certainly, there are some points in the world's past that only become 'historic' in retrospect, and it could certainly be argued that 'historic' is always subjective (there are, I am sure, incidents in the history of, for example, Cambodia which no-one knows about, or sees as significant except Cambodians).

I think it's fair to say, though, that there are moments that we can be certain will always be regarded as 'historic', and I'd argue that photographs of a previously unmapped part of another planet fall into this category. Yes, it can be regarded as 'subjective' (there are probably people on our planet for whom the exploration of space is an irrelevance), but then, the news report is being made to a culture that would regard such an event as 'historic'.

In short, yes, it's all subjective, but within context.

[Paul Doherty]

Many news reports are "subjective" in that sense, and would be very dull if they weren't. Talk of a major tragedy might be alleged to be pre-judging the issue, for example.

I'm happy with Nasa, although I have a vague memory Nasa itself is not.

[Barry]

... and would be very dull if they weren't

Indeed. Do you remember the New Statesman competition shortly after The Independent (a newspaper, initially noted for its strenuous efforts to be as non-partisan [and boring] as possible) was launched? The competition requested submissions for a report by The Independent of a historical event. My favourite was something along the lines of:

The St Valentine's Day Massacre
Yesterday, seven friends of Mr Alphonse Capone attended a party to celebrate St Valentine's Day. There were no survivors.

[Rajesh Valluri AKA Raj]

I know this one. "Historic" is something that is going to have a profound impact on the future, though may not be known so at present. For example, "that battle turned out to be a historic one, as it has turned the tide against the Germans and led to the eventual surrender of Hitler's officers'.
"Historical", on the other hand, is simply an event or a fact from history that may or may not be siginificant or important. For instance, "historical data suggests that the economic measures put in now would take atleast a decade before their benefits are reaped by the ordinary people.

[Pete]

May 28, 2008 4:29:55 GMT Rajesh Valluri AKA Raj said:

I know this one. "Historic" is something that is going to have a profound impact on the future, though may not be known so at present. For example, "that battle turned out to be a historic one, as it has turned the tide against the Germans and led to the eventual surrender of Hitler's officers'.
"Historical", on the other hand, is simply an event or a fact from history that may or may not be siginificant or important. For instance, "historical data suggests that the economic measures put in now would take atleast a decade before their benefits are reaped by the ordinary people.

My issue with the article was the presumption or prejudgment that the photograph concerned was historic. It wasn't a particularly special photo, there have been many previous photos and there have been several previous Mars landers. So why did the journalist assume that this particular photo was historic?

I agree with you as to the meaning of the words, but I do not think that the writer was in a postiion to know whether the photo would turn out to be historic.