#corrections welcome; i'm not a professional translator; etc. etc.

[sternbilder]

User Concert Q&A Excerpts, Part 1

(Part 2 here)

Not sure if folks out there are aware, but there was a "User Concert" last September where the director and cast of Buried Stars answered various questions about the development of the game, characters, etc.

There was originally supposed to be a live Q&A section at the end, but they ended up canceling it due to the pandemic and asked fans to submit their questions online instead. The ones that they answered are all compiled here.

I haven't seen an English translation out there so I thought I'd take a crack at it myself! I only picked out questions that I personally thought were interesting (because the whole thing is like 37 pages long and there maybe 4.5 of you out there who are going to see this anyway L O L) but if anyone has any questions/requests (like if there are any mentions about X or Y) I'd be happy to answer them!

This got long as hell, so I'm splitting this into 2 parts and putting it under a cut, but here's part 1, which are questions related to the main game as well as any post-game speculations.

Obviously, #spoiler warning for Buried Stars below.

Q. 무대 붕괴 사건을 겪지 않았다면, 진범은 살인자가 되지 않았을 거라고 생각하시나요?

If the stage collapse incident had never happened, do you think the true culprit would have still committed murder?

A. 아니었겠지만, 어쩌면 살인자가 되는 경우도 있었겠습니다. 대상은 자신이겠지만… Probably not, but it's possible that they could still have become a murderer. Though I suppose the victim would be themself…

Q. 신승��� PD가 이규혁에게 "그 제안"을 한 이유는 무엇일까요?

Why did PD Shin Seungyeon make “that proposition” to Gyu-hyuk?

A. 이규혁이 진상을 알고 있는지 떠봄과 동시에 자신이 통제하려는 시도였을 것입니다. 이규혁의 거절 이후 신승연의 마음에는 의심이 자라나기 시작했습니다. 협박장 역시 이규혁의 짓으로 생각 했고, 끝내 사고 현장의 그 발언이 나오게 되었습니다. She was trying to feel out whether Gyu-hyuk knew the truth, and at the same time, attempt to control him. After Gyu-hyuk’s refusal, doubt began to grow in Seungyeon’s heart. She mistook the blackmail letter as Gyu-hyuk’s doing, and in the end she ended up saying what she did at the accident site.

Q. 베리드 스타즈를 플레이하며 스토리에 인간의 선과 악, 이면 등의 철학적인 고찰을 담았다고 느꼈습니다. 이에 디렉터님이 생각하시는 "인간"은 어떤 존재인지 궁금합니다.

While playing Buried Stars, I felt that the story contained reflections on things like the virtues and evils of humanity, duality, and other philosophical topics. I'm curious as to the director's thoughts on what the nature of "humanity" is.

A. 베리드 스타즈의 등장인물들을 빌드하며 한 생각으로 국한한다면, "가면을 쓰고 자신을 감추지 만 동시에 가면 아래를 내보이길 바라는 존재"인 것 같습니다. If I had to limit it to what I had in mind when creating the characters of Buried Stars, I think that a human being is "something that wears a mask in order to hide itself, yet at the same time wishes to reveal what's underneath."

Q. C 루트에서 "그것"은 이규혁의 모습으로 현신했습니다. 한도윤이 바라던 것이었다는 이유였지 요. 그렇다면 민주영, 이규혁, 오인하, 장세일, 서혜성, 신승연의 경우 "그것"은 무엇으로 나타났을 까요?

In the C route, "That" appeared in the form of Gyu-hyuk. The reason being that that was what Do-yoon wished for. If that's the case, what form would "That" have taken in the case of Juyoung, Gyu-hyuk, Inha, Seil, and Hyesung?

A. 한도윤이 이규혁을 본 것은 "자신이 배신자가 아님을 증명해줄 사람"을 간절히 바랐기 때문입 니다. 잔해에 파묻혔을 때 생각했던 것처럼요. 그 외에 TOP 5 이규혁에게는 한도윤이, 오인하에게 는 민주영이, 민주영에게는 비러브드 멤버들이, 서혜성에게는 어머니가, 장세일에게는 신승연이, 신승연에게는 자기 자신이 보였을 것입니다. The reason that Do-yoon saw Gyu-hyuk was that he desperately longed for "a person who is proof that he is not a traitor," just as he was thinking when he was buried under the rubble. Gyu-hyuk would have seen Do-yoon, Inha would have seen Juyoung, Juyoung would have seen the BELOVED members, Hyesung would have seen his mother, Seil would have seen Seungyeon, and Seungyeon would have seen herself.

Q. C 루트가 이규혁 시점이었다면 한도윤의 전화 내용은 어떤 것이었을까요?

If C route had been from Gyu-hyuk's POV, what would a phone call with Do-yoon have been about?

A. 한도윤 자신을 “절대 믿지 말았어야 했다”고 했을 것입니다. 동시에 "믿지 말아야 했다고 이야 기하는 자신"을 끝까지 믿어달라고 빌기도 했을 것 같네요. Do-yoon would have said, "you never should have trusted me." But at the same time, I think he would have also begged him to please "trust in him until the end, even though he himself told him he shouldn't have."

Q. 서혜성과 이규혁이 둘 다 살아남는 엔딩이 없는데 혹시 계획했다가 빠진 거라면 이유를 알고 싶습니다.

There's no ending where Hyesung and Gyu-hyuk both live, but if there was one planned and it was cut, I'm curious as to why.

A. 이규혁과 서혜성이 둘 다 생존하는 엔딩은 최초부터 계획에 없었습니다. 둘은 서로 양립할 수 없는 존재이며, 이규혁이 본격적으로 탈피하는 계기가 서혜성이기 때문입니다. 다만… 그게 아냐 에서는 모두 생존합니다. 죄송합니다… …. From the start, we hadn't planned on any endings where Gyu-hyuk and Hyesung both survive. This is because the two cannot coexist; Hyesung is a catalyst for Gyu-hyuk to truly shed his skin, so to speak. If only that weren't the case, then everyone would have survived. I apologize…

Q. 모 인터뷰에서 한도윤에게는 "커뮤니케이션"과 "햄릿"이라는 키워드가 있다고 본 기억이 있는 데, 혹시 다른 인물들에게도 그런 키워드가 있는지 알고 싶습니다.

In a certain interview, I recall seeing that "communication" and "Hamlet" being listed as keywords for Do-yoon, and I'm wondering if the other characters have similar keywords as well.

A. 계열은 다르지만 레귤러 조연은 진상에 맞추어 내면을 대변하는 정서가 하나씩 설정되어 있었 습니다. 이규혁은 "자기혐오", 민주영은 "분노", 오인하는 "공포", 서혜성은 "수치심", 장세일은 "열등감"입니다. Each of the supporting cast has a specific emotion that represents their inner selves according to their own realities. Gyu-hyuk's is "self-hatred," Juyoung's is "wrath," Inha's is "fear," Hyesung's is "shame," and Seil's is "inferiority complex."

Q. 오인하는 민주영을 "빛이 나는 사람"이라고 생각하는데, 그렇게 생각한 첫 순간이나 이유는 무엇이었을까요?

Inha called Juyoung “someone who shines brightly”; what was the moment or reason that made her think this?

A. 먼저, 오인하는 옛 비러브드 팬-그중에서도 민주영의 팬-이었을 것입니다. 키워드 대화에서 민 주영을 오래전부터 알았던 티가 나지요. 오디션에서 만나 대놓고 티를 내진 않았겠지만, 항상 주 목했을 것입니다. 또한 "변화"를 위해 쇼의 지시에 복종했던 오인하와 달리, 민주영은 아니라고 생각한 일에 반대를 표명하며 대립했을 것입니다. 이런 점들이 오인하에게 더 깊은 인상을 남기 지 않았을까요? First, Inha was a former fan of BELOVED—and of Juyoung especially. In the keyword discussions, there are some hints that she’s known about Juyoung for a long time. When they met during the audition, she didn’t show it, but she always paid special attention to Juyoung. In addition, unlike Inha who always obeyed the show’s orders in order to “transform,” Juyoung would have objected to things that she didn’t like and opposed/confronted them. Wouldn’t this have caused her to leave an even deeper impression on Inha?

Q. 신승연이 서혜성을 조금이라도 사랑했긴 했나요? 단순히 가지고 논 건 아닐지 궁금합니다.

Did Seungyeon love Hyesung even a little bit? Or was she truly just toying with him?

A. 기본적으로 "가지고 놀았다"고 생각합니다. 가끔 인상적인 면을 발견하기도 했겠지만, 일단 시작부터 잘못됐습니다. 학폭 건이 불거졌을 때 신승연은 해명조차 듣지 않고 결별을 선언했고, 이 에 서혜성도 해명을 포기했을 것입니다. 신승연은 오디션 쇼에 안타깝게 매달린 서혜성의 영혼을 한 번 더 부숴버린 사람이겠습니다. Fundamentally, I think she was “just toying” with him. She may have discovered some aspects of him that impressed her, but it was a bad relationship from the start. When the school violence scandal was exposed, Seungyeon broke up with him immediately without even hearing his explanation, and Hyesung gave up trying to explain from his side as well. I suppose for Hyesung, who was hopelessly clinging to the audition show, Seungyeon was someone who crushed his spirit twice.

Q. 서혜성의 부친은 이혼했거나 죽은 건가요? 학폭 사건 이전의 서혜성은 어떤 아이였을까요?

Are Hyesung’s parents divorced or deceased? What was he like as a kid before the school violence incident?

A. 서혜성은 외동이며, 아버지는 일찍 돌아가셨습니다. 장세일의 뒷조사에서 보신 대로 어머니는 시장에서 ��어물 가게를 하고 있습니다. 혜성이는 쭉 시장 상인들 틈에서 자랐을 것입니다. 퇴학 전에는 말썽꾸러기지만 인사성 바른 아이였겠지요, 학폭 사건 후에는 시장에 발길을 끊었으리라 생각합니다. Hyesung was an only child, and his father passed away at an early age. As seen in Seil’s investigations, his mother was a dried fish vendor at a fish market. Hyesung would have grown up with the vendors at the market. Before his expulsion, he was seen as a mischievous but polite and friendly boy, but after the incident he stopped going to the market altogether.

Q. 서혜성의 말투만 유독 나이 들어 보이는데 이유가 있습니까?

Hyesung’s particular speech style makes him sound older, is there a reason for this?

A. 서혜성은 시장 상인들 틈에서 자라 갓 스물치고 고색창연한 구석이 많은데요. 아마 시장 어른 들은 어린 서혜성을 예뻐했을 것이고, 우정과 놀이를 중시하는 성정도 여기서 비롯되었을 것입니 다. 어릴 때는 말하는 게 웃긴다며 인기도 있었겠지만... 고등학교에 진학해 송건욱을 만나며 많은 게 바뀌고 말았습니다. Hyesung grew up amongst the market vendors, so though he’s only twenty he has a lot of aspects to him that are old-fashioned. The elders at the market likely doted on him as a child, and this was probably where his emphasis on friendship and playful nature came from as well. When he was younger, his funny style of speech probably made him quite popular...But after entering high school and meeting Song Kun-Wook, everything changed.

Q. 구조 직전 분장실에서 신호 불량으로 PlugHole의 메시지가 끊기는데, 원래 이어질 내용은 무 엇이었나요?

Just before the rescue, PlugHole’s messages are interrupted due to a failed signal, but what would have been the next message?

A. "사실 나는" 뒤의 내용은 "진실보다도 네가 무사히 나오기만을 바라.” 였을 것 같습니다. After “Actually, I...” I think the next message would have been “want you to get out of there safely, even more so than I want the truth”.

Q. 신승연이 장세일이나 오인하에게 건넸다는 위로들은 진심으로 한 말이었을까요?

Do you think Seungyeon’s words of comfort to Seil and Inha were in earnest?

A. 신승연은 장세일에게도, 오인하에도 진심을 말했다고 생각합니다. 다만, 순간의 진심일 뿐이라 얼마 뒤에는 기억도 하지 못했을 것입니다. I think her words to both Seil and Inha were in earnest, yes. However, it was only in the moment, so she probably didn’t even remember them after a little while.

Q. 신승연은 마지막에 제 명을 재촉한 느낌인데요. 왜 위기의 순간에 그런 말을 했을까요?

It feels to me as though Seungyeon really dug her own grave in her final moments. Why would she say something like that in a moment of danger?

A. (범인도 마찬가지로) 패닉 상태였던 것과 더불어, TOP 5는 자신을 거역할 수 없다는 생각이 기 본으로 있었기 때문입니다. 신승연은 "금수저" 이규혁의 실체를 알고 있었기에 먼저 찌르고 들어 가면 자신을 구할 수밖에 없을 거라고 보았겠지요. 어쨌든 저는 당시에 둘 다 패닉 상태였을 거 라 생각합니다. 정상적인 판단이 가능했다면 말에도, 행동에도 분명 수위 조절이 있었겠지요 (Just like the culprit), she was panicking, and she also fundamentally believed that the TOP 5 were incapable of disobeying her. Since Seungyeon knew the truth about “Silver Spoon” Gyu-hyuk, she thought that if she came in with the offensive Gyu-hyuk would have no choice but to rescue her. In any case, I believe that at that moment both of them were in a state of panic. If they were in a situation where they retained their normal sense of judgment, then of course both their words and their actions would definitely have had more restraint.

Q. 오인하의 관계도 이벤트를 보면 부친을 신고했을 때 "웃고 있었다"는 본인의 대사와 달리 겁 에 질린 이미지가 등장합니다. 이 차이를 넣은 의도는 무엇인가요?

In the rapport conversation with Inha, she claims that when she reported her father she “was laughing,” but the image that’s displayed contradicts this by depicting her as fearful. What was your intention with this disparity?

A. 제 이야기를 할 때 솔직해지지 못하는 사람의 심리와 더불어, 담담한 듯이 이야기하는 오인하 가 그때 얼마나 두려워하며 한 발을 내디뎠는지를 부각하기 위한 설정이었습니다. I was trying to depict the psyche of someone who can’t be honest when talking about themselves. Despite how calm she acted when telling the story, I wanted to emphasize how terrified Inha must have been when taking this first step.

Q. 오인하와 서혜성은 언제부터 사이가 나빴나요? 나중에 사이가 나빠진 거라면 초반에는 서혜성 이 오인하를 누나라고 부른 적도 있을까요?

When did Inha and Hyesung stop getting along? If it wasn’t right away, was there a time when Hyesung called Inha “noona”?

A. 서혜성이 오인하를 누나라고 부른 적은 없었을 것 같습니다. 또한 둘은 서혜성이 민주영에게 공손하게 (?) 굴지 않은 사건에서 본격적으로 티격태격을 시작했을 거라 생각합니다. I don’t think there was any point when Hyesung called Inha “noona.” In addition, I think that the incident where Hyesung refused to be polite (?) to Juyoung was when they really started quarreling.

Q. 무대 붕괴 사건이 일어나지 않은 상태에서 이규혁이 신승연 PD의 비밀을 알았다면 어떤 선택 을 했을지 궁금합니다.

What would have happened if Gyu-hyuk had discovered Seungyeon PD’s secret in a situation other than the stage collapse incident?

A. 적어도 죽이진 않았을 것입니다. At the very least, he wouldn’t have killed her.

Q. 이규혁이 어렸을 때 ���모에게 학대를 당했나요? ��어나지 말았어야 할 자신 탓에 수모와 고통 을 당했다는 표현을 보니, 혹시 어렸을 때 직접 들은 말을 옮긴 것인지 궁금해졌습니다.

Was Gyu-hyuk abused by his birth mother as a child? Considering his saying that he never should have been born and that he was the cause of her humiliation and suffering made me wonder if maybe that’s something that he heard her say when he was young.

A. 육체적 학대는 없었습니다. 친모는 이규혁에게서 계속 이병희를 떠올리고 그 그림자를 좇았을 것입니다. 이규혁은 제 존재로 친모가 이병희에게서 벗어나지 못했다고 생각해왔습니다. He was never physically abused. For his mother, Gyu-hyuk was a constant reminder of Lee Byung Hee, and she spent her life chasing after that shadow. Gyu-hyuk came to believe that it’s because of his existence that his mother could never be free from Lee Byung Hee.

Q. 이규혁이 넉넉하지 않은 가정환경에도 실용음악과를 선택한 이유가 궁금합니다!

I’m curious as to why Gyu-hyuk chose to major in applied music even though he didn’t grow up in a well-do-to household.

A. 친모가 그것을 강하게 바랐기 때문입니다. That’s because those were the wishes of his birth mother.

Q. 이규혁이 가족과의 관계를 "서로 기댄다", "의지한다"는 어휘로만 설명하는 것은 의도인가요? 관계도 이벤트에서의 과거 설명과 특정 후일담에서 "힘들면 기대라, 서로 의지하며 살아가자"고 한 부분이 유사하게 느껴집니다. 이런 스크립트 어휘에 세세하게 신경 쓰신 건지 궁금합니다.

Was it intentional that Gyu-hyuk only describes his relationships with his family using words like “depending/leaning on one another”? His story about his past in his rapport events and in particular his epilogue where he said “If you’re having a hard time, lean on me. Let’s live life depending on one another” feel very similar to me. I’m curious if using these particular words in the script was a deliberate detail.

A. 맞습니다. 이규혁은 "비슷한 처지가 서로 의지하는 형태"의 관계만을 쌓아왔기 때문입니다. That’s right. This is because to Gyu-hyuk, relationships where “people in similar circumstances depend on each other” are all he’s ever known.

Q. 장세일이 베스타 탈락부터 스탭 일을 할 때까지 부모님과 어떤 관계였을지 궁금합니다.

What was Seil’s relationship with his parents like after being eliminated from Bstars and before he started working as a staff member?

A. 장세일은 군인 가족으로, 오디션 이후 특히 아버지에게 수치스러운 자식이 되었을 것입니다. Seil comes from a military family, so after the audition his father especially saw him as a shameful son.

Q. C 루트에서 ???가 "돌이키기에는 늦었다"고 하는데, 이 "늦은 타이밍"이 무엇에 대한 것이었는 지 생각하신 바가 있었나요?

In C route, ??? says that “it’s already too late to turn back”, but do you have any thoughts on what they mean by “too late”?

A. 한도윤의 마음 안에서는 "배신", 즉 “마스커레이드가 이미 끝났음을 인정한 순간”을 되돌릴 수 없다는 의미였을 것입니다. It means that in Do-yoon’s mind, it’s impossible to undo the “betrayal,” i.e., “the moment he acknowledged that Masquerade is already done for.”

Q. 한도윤은 유독 1달 넘게 병원 신세를 지는데요. 어쩌다 혼자만 그렇게 다친 걸까요?

Do-yoon is the only one who stayed in the hospital for over a month. Why was he the only one who was hurt?

A. 한도윤은 시작 시점부터 잔해에 파묻히는 큰일을 당했습니다. 정상적인 몸 상태는 아니었을 거 라 생각합니다. 구조되고 나서야 자신이 얼마나 다쳤는지 알았을 것 같습니다. At the very start of the game, Do-yoon suffered an accident where he was buried under the debris. His physical condition wasn’t exactly normal because of this. It was only after his rescue that he realized how badly he was hurt.

Q. 트루 엔딩 이후 한도윤은 마스커레이드에 다시 복귀했을 거라고 생각하시나요?

After the true ending, do you think that Do-yoon would ever return to Masquerade?

A. 개인적 의견이라면, 돌아가지 않는 길을 택하지 않았을까 합니다. 신승연의 말처럼 "이미 마스 커레이드는 끝났다"는 사실을 본인도 스스로 인정했기 때문일 겁니다. My personal opinion is that he would probably choose not to go back. The reason is that, as Seungyeon told him, “Masquerade is already done for,” and he himself already internalized that truth.

Q. 트루 엔딩 후 한도윤은 밴드 멤버들과 영원히 척을 질지, 몇몇과는 연을 이어갈지 궁금합니다.

After the true ending, will Do-yoon continue to be on bad terms with the other band members forever, or will he continue to have relations with some of them?

A. 꽤 시간을 가진 뒤에 결국 모두와 연락하게 되지 않았을까 생각합니다. I think that after quite some time has passed, he would reach out to all of them eventually.

Q. 트루 엔딩 이후 오인하와 민주영은 이규혁에게 찾아갔을까요?

After the true ending, do you think Inha and Juyoung would have gone to see Gyu-hyuk?

A. 민주영은 퇴원하고 재참가를 위해 다시 상경한 무렵부터 이규혁을 방문했을 거라고 생각합니 다. 오인하에게는 조금 긴 시간이 필요했을 것 같네요. I think that Juyoung would have paid him a visit around the time that she left the hospital and came back to Seoul for her re-entry in the next season. As for Inha, I think it would take her quite some time.

Q. 서혜성이 안타깝습니다. 정들어버릴 때쯤 가서 더 그래요. 살려내도 결국 바뀌는 게 없는데 이 친구가 행복한 엔딩이 있을까요?

I feel bad for Hyesung. Especially because he was killed right as I warmed up to him. Even if we save him, things don’t ever change for him, so is there such thing as a happy ending for him?

A. 서혜성은 베스타 쇼에서 만난 기회를 통해 성급히 자신의 길을 찾으려 했지만, 그가 택한 방법 을 통해 행복을 찾을 방법은 없었던 것 같습니다. 생존 루트에서는 이런저런 시도 끝에 남의 비 밀을 폭로하는 것으로는 반등할 수 없음을 알게 되고, 반대로 제 두려움을 드러내고 가해자 송건 욱과 맞부딪히는 게 진짜 반등의 시작임을 깨닫지 않았을까 합니다. 진짜 싸워야 하는 대상은 거 기 있으니까요. 나중에는 생존한 장세일하고도 만나보지 않았을까요? 퇴원한 한도윤까지 세 사람 이 만나는 일이 분명히 있었을 것 같습니다. Hyesung recklessly tried to find his own path through the opportunity that Bstars afforded him, but my thought is that there was no way to find happiness through the method he chose. I think that in the route where he survives, he comes to realize after various attempts that exposing others’ secrets won’t help him rebound, and on the contrary, that facing his fears and confronting his assailant Song Kun-Wook is the real start of his comeback—because that’s where his true fight awaits. Later, I wonder if he also would have met with fellow survivor Seil? I definitely think the two of them plus Do-yoon would meet again at some point.

Q. 후일담 (3)의 오인하는 언젠가 꿈을 이룰까요? 그 무대에 오르는 한도윤이 있을지 궁금해집니 다.

Will the Inha from epilogue (3) ever reach her dreams? I wonder if Do-yoon will be one of the people to perform on one of her stages.

A. 오인하는 끈기 있게 노력해 꿈을 이루었을 것입니다. 크루 멤버들로 시작해 언젠가는 민주영과 한도윤의 무대도 만들어냈기를 바랍니다. Through patience and hard work, Inha will achieve her dream. She starts with her crew members, and my hope is that eventually she gets to work with Juyoung and Do-yoon as well.

Q. 이규혁은 항상 누군가와 유대감을 느끼려는 것 같고, 강하게 의지하며 살아가기를 바라는 것 같은데요. 트루 엔딩 시점으로 출소하게 된다면 또 누군가와 강하게 의지하며 살아갈까요?

Gyu-hyuk seems like he’s constantly looking for someone to feel a connection with, and wishes to live life leaning heavily on them. If he’s ever released in the true ending timeline, will he once again live his life depending on someone?

A. 트루 기준으로 출소하게 된다면 이젠 누군가를 의지하거나 도피처로 삼지 않고 홀로서기를 할 수 있게 되었길 바랍니다. My hope is that if he is released post-true ending, he becomes the kind of person who doesn’t need to rely on or turn to others for refuge, and can instead begin standing on his own.

Q. 트루 엔딩 이후 한도윤은 음악 자체를 포기하나요?

After the true ending, does Do-yoon give up on music altogether?

A. 혼란에서 벗어나 자신이 행복해지는 길을 찾았으리라 믿고 있습니다. 거기엔 아무래도 음악이 있었을 것 같네요. I believe that Do-yoon is able to free himself from the chaos and find a path that leads him to happiness. I feel that whatever that path is, music must be a part of it somehow.

Q. 트루 엔딩 후 오인하와 민주영은 계속 연락을 하며 지냈을까요?

After the true end, do Inha and Juyoung keep in touch?

A. 자주 연락했을 것입니다. 인하가 "만들어���겠다"던 무대의 약��은 민주영에게도 마찬가지일 테 니까요. They would keep in touch fairly often. The promise Inha made to "make [Do-yoon] a stage" would naturally also have extended to Juyoung.

Q. 하수창과 한도윤은 트루 이후로 좀 친해질까요?

Will Suchang and Do-yoon become friends after the true ending?

A. 전 친해졌을 거라고 생각하지만 어느 쪽이든 도윤이가 좀 행복해졌으면 좋겠네요. 제가 도윤이 에게 선빵을 날렸다고요? 그건 그렇지요… I think that they will, but regardless, I do wish Do-yoon can be a little happier somehow. Are you saying that I’m the one who sucker-punched him? Well, that’s true, but…

[akathecentimetre]

Hey there, so I really like history as a subject, and I'm pretty good at it. The thing is, I don't know what my career options would be if I studied it, or if I would be able to make money. My parents are heavily discouraging me from taking it as a major. As a 'historian' in training' what's your take? Thank you

Hi there! Sorry for the delay, ‘tis the hectic season…

Oh man, I have so many thoughts for you. Full disclosure: this is something I have worked on a LOT over the course of my graduate career both at my uni and on a national level; most of my advice, however, comes from a PhD candidate’s perspective and may not be directly helpful to an undergraduate, and I should also emphasize that everything I can say on this is very firmly based on the U.S. market only. That being said, a lot of what I can say can be universally applied, so here we go - 

The number of history undergraduates in the U.S. has plummeted in the last decade or so, from it previously being one of the most popular majors. There are many interacting reasons for this: a changeover from older to younger, better-trained, energetic professors who draw in and retain students has been very slow to occur, partly because of a lack of a mandatory retirement age; the humanities have been systematically demonized and minimized in favor of the development of STEM subjects, to the occasional benefit of students of color and women but to the detriment of critical public discourse and historical perspective on current events; with many liberal arts colleges going under financially and the enormous expansion of academic bureaucracy everywhere, resources are definitely being diverted away from social and human studies towards fields which are perceived to pay better or perceived, as mentioned in the article above, as being more ‘practical.’ (We do need a ton more healthcare workers/specialists, but that’s a different conversation to have.) But now I feel like quoting a certain Jedi Master: everything your parents say is wrong. Let’s dive into why being a historian is a positive thing for you both as a person and as a professional - 

You will be a good reader. As you learn to decipher documents and efficiently and thoroughly read secondary literature, you will develop a particular talent for understanding what is important about any piece of writing or evidence (and this can go for visual and aural evidence as well). This will serve you well in any position in which you are collecting/collating information and reporting to colleagues or superiors, and evaluating the worth of resources. Specific example - editorial staff at publishing houses either private or academic, magazines, etc. 

You will be a good writer. This will get you a good job at tons of places; don’t underestimate it. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve been astonished (not in a punitive way, of course, but definitely with a sense of befuddlement) by how badly some of my Ivy-league students can write. Good writing is hard, good writing is rare, and good writing is a breath of fresh air to any employer who puts a high premium upon it in their staff. History in principle is the study of change; history in practice is presenting information in a logical, interesting, and persuasive manner. Any sort of institution which asks you to write reports, summaries, copy, etc. etc. will appreciate your skills. 

You will be a good researcher. This sounds like a given, but it’s an underappreciated and vital skill. Historians work as consultants. Historians work in government - almost every department has an Office of the Historian - and in companies, writing company histories and maintaining institutional archives. A strong research profile will also serve you well if you want to go on to work in museum studies and in libraries public or private/academic. As a historian, you will know not just where to find information, but what questions you have to ask to get to the answer of how to tackle, deconstruct, and solve a problem. This is relevant to almost any career path. 

You will provide perspective. Historians react to current events in newspapers and online - not just on politics, but culture as well (my favorite article of this week is about the historicity of The Aeronauts). Historians act as expert witnesses in court proceedings. Historians write books, good books, not just meant for academic audiences but for millions upon millions of readers who need thoughtful, intelligent respite from the present. Historians work for thinktanks, providing policy analysis and development (a colleague of mine is an expert on current events of war in Mali and works for multiple thinktanks and organizations because of it). Historians work for nonprofits or lobbying groups on issues of poverty, environmental safety, climate change, and minority and indigenous rights. In a world when Texas school textbooks push the states’ rights narrative, historians remind us that the Civil War was about slavery. Historians remind us that women and people of color have always existed. In this time and world where STEM subjects are (supposedly) flooding the job market, we need careful historical perspective more than ever. We need useful reactions to the 2016 election, to the immigration travesties on display at the southern border, to the strengthening of right-wing parties in Europe - and history classes, or thoughtfully historical classes on philosophy and political science, are one of the few places STEM and business students gain the basic ability to participate in those conversations. [One of my brightest and most wonderful students from last year, just to provide an anecdote, is an astrophysics major who complained to me in a friendly conversation this semester that she never got the chance to talk about ‘deep’ things anymore once she had passed through our uni’s centralized general curriculum, which has a heavy focus on humanities subjects.]

You will be an educator. Teaching is a profession which has myriad challenges in and of itself, but in my experience of working with educators there is a desperate need for secondary-school teachers in particular to have actual content training in history as opposed to simply being pushed into classrooms with degrees which focus only on pedagogical technique. If teaching is a vocation you are actually interested in, getting a history degree is not a bad place to start at all. And elementary/high schools aside, you will be teaching someone something in every interaction you have concerning your subject of choice. Social media is a really important venue now for historians to get their work out into the world and correct misconceptions in the public sphere, and is a place where you can hone a public and instructive voice. You could also be involved in educational policy, assessment/test development (my husband’s field, with a PhD in History from NYU), or educational activism. 

If some of this sounds kind of woolly and abstract, that’s because it is. Putting yourself out there on the job market is literally a marketing game, and it can feel really silly to take your experience of 'Two years of being a Teaching Assistant for European History 1500-1750’ and mutate it to 'Facilitated group discussions, evaluated written work from students [clients], and ran content training sessions on complex subjects.’ But this sort of translation is just another skill - one that can be learned, improved, and manipulated to whatever situation you need it to fit.

Will you make money? That’s a question only you can answer, because only you know what you think is enough money. That being said, many of the types of careers I’ve mentioned already are not low-paying; in my experience expertise is, if you find the right workplace and the rewarding path, usually pretty well-remunerated. 

Specific advice? Hone your craft. Curate an active public presence as a historian, an expert, a patient teacher, and as as person enthusiastic about your subject. Read everything and anything. Acknowledge and insist upon complexity, and celebrate it when you can. 

And finally - will any of what I’ve said here make it easy? No, because no job search and no university experience is easy these days. It’s a crazy world and there are a lot of awful companies, bosses, and projects out there. But I do very firmly believe that you can find something, somewhere, that will suit your skills, and, hopefully, your passions too. 

Resources for you: the American Historical Association has a breakdown of their skills-based approach to the job market, reports on the job market(s) for history PhDs collectively called ‘Where Historians Work,’ and a mentorship program, Career Contacts, which could connect you with professional historians in various workplaces. There is a very active community of historians on Twitter; search for #twitterstorians. For historians who identify as female, Women Also Know History is a newer site which collates #herstorian bios and publications to make it easier for journalists to contact them for expert opinions. ImaginePhD provides career development tools and exercises for graduate students, but could probably be applied to undergrads as well. The Gilder Lehrman Institute is one of the premier nonprofits which develops and promotes historical training for secondary school teachers and classroom resources (U.S. history only). Job listings are available via the AHA, the National Council on Public History, and the IHE, as well as the usual job sites. And there’s an awful lot more out there, of course - anyone who reads or reblogs this post is welcome to add field-specific or resource-specific info. 

I hope this helps, Anon, or at least provides you with a way to argue in favor of it to your parents if it comes to that. Chin up!