| 1. |
-
Populism, Democracy, and the Humanities : Interdisciplinary Explorations and Critical Enquiries
- 2022
-
Samlingsverk (redaktörskap) (refereegranskat)abstract
- In this volume, twelve Sweden-based researchers reflect on the phenomenon and concept of populism in relation to democracy and the humanities from the multiple vantage points of various disciplinary backgrounds: philosophy, history of ideas, media and communication, journalism, political science, gender studies, organization science, education theory, popular culture, and literary studies. While the study of populism has attracted a lot of attention in political science, this topic has been rarely explored by scholars in the humanities. Rather than contribute to the already established area of populism studies in social and political sciences, our authors take a more open and exploratory stance through which they attempt to open up new fields and directions for inquiry from an interdisciplinary humanistic perspective.
|
|
| 2. |
- Thalén, Peder, 1957-, et al.
(författare)
-
Introduction : Populism and the Humanities
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Populism, Democracy, and the Humanities. - Lanham, Maryland, USA : Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. - 9781538160916 - 9781538160923
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Söderhäll, Bengt
(författare)
-
Belönat storverk : Bok i dag
- 1992
-
Ingår i: Gefle Dagblad. - 1103-9302. ; 25 november
-
Recension (populärvet., debatt m.m.)
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
- Cananau, Iulian
(författare)
-
Constituting Americanness : A History of the Concept and Its Representations in Antebellum American Literature
- 2015
-
Bok (refereegranskat)abstract
- This book is based on my PhD dissertation, entitled Representations of the Concept of “Americanness” in the Canon of Antebellum American Literature. It is a work in cultural history and literary theory that suggests a fresh and potentially fruitful approach to the old notion of Americanness, an idea that lay at the foundation of American studies in mid-twentieth century, only to be exposed as “ideological fiction” by the New Americanists. Surprisingly, neither its advocates nor its critics have made the scholarly effort necessary to theorize or conceptualize Americanness. The subtitle indicates what is distinctive about this project: this is a study of the concept of Americanness. Thus, following Reinhart Koselleck’s history of concepts (Begriffsgeschichte), I propose that “Americanness” is not an ordinary word, but a concept with a broad, albeit historically specific, semantic field. Thus, in the three decades before the Civil War, the semantic field of “Americanness” was constituted at the intersection of several concepts, in different stages of their respective histories; among these, nation, representation, individualism, sympathy, race, and womanhood. By tracing the representations of these concepts in literary texts of the antebellum era, paying attention to their overlapping with the rhetoric of national identification, I uncover some of the meaning of “Americanness” in that period. As far as literary history writing is concerned, Begriffsgeschichte has a double potential: first, to explain the source of confusion between historically different semantic loads of the same concept and, second, to check the critic’s tendency to relativize concepts and therefore make the past a little too familiar. The concept-focused close reading of literary works of the past involves a reformulation of the text/context binary so as to account for contingencies without diminishing the importance of exegesis (a crippling tendency in contemporary literary studies); ultimately, this work aims to reconsider the relationship between history and literature.To lay out the meaning of “Americanness” I analyze a wide range of antebellum texts by Emerson, Melville, Thoreau, Douglass, Whitman, Stowe, Jacobs, Hawthorne, Poe, and Fuller, against the background of critical reception and recent scholarship. Thus, to college students and faculty, this book offers a period study of major American writers of the antebellum era.
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
- Kalinnikova Magnusson, Liya, 1962-, et al.
(författare)
-
Социальная политика в отношении детской «дефективности» в военно-революционный период и первую декаду Советской власти (1914–1927 годы) : [Social policy of child "defectivity" during the war-revolutionary period and the first decade of Soviet power establishment (1914-1927)]
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Vestnik SAFU. Serija Gumanitarnye i sotsialnye nauki. - Archangelsk : Vestnik of Northern (Arctic) Federal University. - 2227-6564. ; 1, s. 157-166
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Social policy in the field of child “defectivicy” during the war and the first years of Soviet power formation (1914-1920) was performed in conditions of the severe socio-political disaster. Multimilliondemographic losses of the future human resources in forms of bad health children, a high rate of child mortality, potentially not born children in the future decades etc. – are standing in the line with the other facts of the war-revolutionary circumstances of the historical period in focus. Analysis of the texts of the number of historical documents, which are relevant to the dominant political and scientific areas in this field, allowed to identify the essence of the social doctrine of the country of Soviets and its role in understanding the key actors of a new social policy in the field of “defective” childhood. The definition of child “defectivicy” got a rather wide interpretation. Among the traditional understanding of “defective/ sick child”, a new category of "defective” children has appeared – they were disadvantaged and homeless/street children and teens. Philanthropic and private forms of social care of “defective/sick” children, supported by the social policy of the Russian Empire, were nationalized. Instead those “new institutions” were established: the first prototypes of the soviet internat institutions (schools communes for morally-defective). Traditionally “defective/sick” and “new defective” children and teens were united in the “single army of morally-defective”. A new social doctrine of the country of Soviets, expressed by the principle of socialistic humanism, in practice (by different reasons), didn’t protect the right of the most socially vulnerable group of children to become full members of the new society. A scientific discourse of “care taking” appeared inside Curative pedagogy and Pedology. Defectology, took the place of scientific philanthropy and established the foundation of the scientific knowledge about “defective” children, becoming a crucial regulator of social political discussions of "care taking" about them during upcoming decades of the Soviet era.
|
|
