![\"\"](\"https:\/\/dh-wordpress.ramapo.edu\/discovering1920s\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/image-2.png\")
<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n Noggle points readers to the historical events such as World War II and the New Deal that came after the 20s, both of which expanded on the idea of an isolated decade in interesting ways. Noggle ends the passage by quoting historian Arthur S. Link calling the 20s a frontier, saying that the 20s are now being studied with sources, rather than the memory of the decade that pervaded the minds of historians for decades. [2]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Fronc is a historiographer who wrote \u201cThe 1920s\u2014A Historiographical Survey\u201d in 2018. Fronc treats the 1920s much differently from how Noggle had previously treated it, as there were many new revisions and updates to the historiography of this decade. Fronc begins by quoting Noggle on the idea of 50s historians following the idea of the 1920s as an isolated decade. Fronc turns to the modern era, where there is a multicultural approach used in the 20s, unlike what was published before. Fronc includes multiple examples of writings from the 21st<\/sup> century that cover women\u2019s suffrage, which was left out of the old historiography. Fronc includes the idea of the \u201cnew woman\u201d, a relatively new concept that is present in all modern-day studies of the 1920s.[3]<\/a> \u00a0Additionally, Fronc turns to African American history as another previously unexplored avenue during the mid-20th<\/sup> century. <\/p>\n\n\n The Harlem Renaissance is the focus of Fronc, including examples from texts such as When Harlem was in Vogue <\/em>and Black Women and the Re-Construction of American History.[4]<\/strong><\/a> <\/em>Lastly, Fronc moves to immigration history, where much of the marginalization of immigrants was left out of the historiography previously. One common theme among the topics in Fronc\u2019s paper is their controversial nature, as representation of marginalized groups had made little progress during the writings of historians like Noggle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is a clear difference between the writings of historians from the 20th<\/sup> and 21st<\/sup> centuries. Probably the most important distinction between the two is the approach of the two, with historians from Noggle\u2019s writing covering the mystified culture of the 20s, while the writings from Fronc\u2019s writing covering marginalized groups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [1]<\/a> Noggle, Burl. \u201cThe Twenties: A New Historiographical Frontier.\u201d\u00a0The Journal of American History<\/em>\u00a053, no. 2 (1966): 300<\/p>\n\n\n\n [2]<\/a> Noggle, Burl. \u201cThe Twenties: A New Historiographical Frontier.\u201d\u00a0The Journal of American History<\/em>\u00a053, no. 2 (1966): 314<\/p>\n\n\n\n [3]<\/a> Jennifer Fronc. “The 1920s\u2014A Historiographical Survey.” 17<\/p>\n\n\n\nFronc<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/dh-wordpress.ramapo.edu\/discovering1920s\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/image-1.png\")
<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\nConclusion<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n