Pub Date : 2020-08-10DOI: 10.1515/9783110669398-015
L. Meneghello
We can now see with sufficient distinctiveness the two great facts which afford a complete refutation of Malthusianism. The first is, that the limit of Population, in any country whatever, is not the number of people which the soil of that country alone will supply with food, but the number which the surface of the whole earth is capable of feeding; and it is a matter of demonstration, that this limit cannot even be approached for many centuries. The inability of England alone, or of Ireland alone, to supply her teeming population with food, is a fact of no more importance in the world’s economy , than the inability of the city of London alone to supply her two millions of people with farm-produce from her own soil. London taxes all the counties of England for her sustenance; England taxes all the countries of the world for her sustenance; – I cannot see any difference between the two cases. (Bowen 1870, 140, emphasis mine, italics in the original)
{"title":"Cultural History, Science Studies, and Global Economy: New and Future Approaches","authors":"L. Meneghello","doi":"10.1515/9783110669398-015","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110669398-015","url":null,"abstract":"We can now see with sufficient distinctiveness the two great facts which afford a complete refutation of Malthusianism. The first is, that the limit of Population, in any country whatever, is not the number of people which the soil of that country alone will supply with food, but the number which the surface of the whole earth is capable of feeding; and it is a matter of demonstration, that this limit cannot even be approached for many centuries. The inability of England alone, or of Ireland alone, to supply her teeming population with food, is a fact of no more importance in the world’s economy , than the inability of the city of London alone to supply her two millions of people with farm-produce from her own soil. London taxes all the counties of England for her sustenance; England taxes all the countries of the world for her sustenance; – I cannot see any difference between the two cases. (Bowen 1870, 140, emphasis mine, italics in the original)","PeriodicalId":447488,"journal":{"name":"Futures of the Study of Culture","volume":"114 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122030382","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-08-10DOI: 10.1515/9783110669398-002
{"title":"Collaborative Research in the Study of Culture","authors":"","doi":"10.1515/9783110669398-002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110669398-002","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":447488,"journal":{"name":"Futures of the Study of Culture","volume":"69 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129612594","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-08-10DOI: 10.1515/9783110669398-004
A. Langenohl
{"title":"The “Future Sense” and the Future of the Study of Culture","authors":"A. Langenohl","doi":"10.1515/9783110669398-004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110669398-004","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":447488,"journal":{"name":"Futures of the Study of Culture","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127775689","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-08-10DOI: 10.1515/9783110669398-013
D. van
It is astonishing how much the ranges and spaces of history have changed and extended in the past generation of historical research. In what follows I will present, and attempt to explain, some key categories of recent historical writing in ‘the West.’ In hindsight, they document a tendency toward spatial concepts and disciplinary boundaries becoming more and more liquid. These are, in order of their appearance: the history of everyday life, the comparative history of nations, international history, history of international organizations, history of globalization, colonial history, transnational history, entangled history, global history, universal history, area studies, glocalization, and finally big history. My discussion will be conducted from a Central European viewpoint, and, I admit, this may narrow or confine my scope. To conclude, I will add some observations about the intersections of general and cultural histories, and will dare to look upon what appears to be relevant in the near future with regard to methodology and to contents.
{"title":"Liquid Spaces in Modern Historiography","authors":"D. van","doi":"10.1515/9783110669398-013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110669398-013","url":null,"abstract":"It is astonishing how much the ranges and spaces of history have changed and extended in the past generation of historical research. In what follows I will present, and attempt to explain, some key categories of recent historical writing in ‘the West.’ In hindsight, they document a tendency toward spatial concepts and disciplinary boundaries becoming more and more liquid. These are, in order of their appearance: the history of everyday life, the comparative history of nations, international history, history of international organizations, history of globalization, colonial history, transnational history, entangled history, global history, universal history, area studies, glocalization, and finally big history. My discussion will be conducted from a Central European viewpoint, and, I admit, this may narrow or confine my scope. To conclude, I will add some observations about the intersections of general and cultural histories, and will dare to look upon what appears to be relevant in the near future with regard to methodology and to contents.","PeriodicalId":447488,"journal":{"name":"Futures of the Study of Culture","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123353349","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-08-10DOI: 10.1515/9783110669398-006
Isabel Capeloa Gil
The great antagonist in J.R.R. Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings, Sauron, is metonymically described in the novel and visualized in Peter Jackson’s cinematic trilogy as the ‘great eye.’ The ‘Eye of Sauron,’ the ‘red eye,’ and the ‘great eye’ are epithets that arguably connote an embodied feeling to the penultimate villain in Tolkien’s trilogy. This is reported in a letter sent by Tolkien to his friend Mrs. Eileen Elgar on October 3, 1963: “[...] in a tale which allows the incarnation of great spirits in a physical and destructible form their power must be far greater when actually physically present. [...] Sauron should be thought of as very terrible” (Carpenter 1981, 246). Throughout the saga, the thought of Sauron trumps the character’s materiality. Sauron is less an active driver of antagonistic action than he is a sensation of danger and fear. He is less a character than an ambiance conveyed through the terror of pervasive, continuous, absolute, and totalitarian observation. The Lord of the Rings trilogy, written roughly between 1937 and 1949, substantiates, in Sauron’s eye, a particular twentieth-century panopticophobia: the fear of universal control via sight, at a time when the tools to expand the capacity for control over populations were starting to grow exponentially. As the century unfurled, visual control widened and became pervasive, from the improvement of weapon target accuracy via optics, to the introduction of visual technologies in the public sphere.1 In fact, the very project of modernity in its dual dimension of progress on the one side, and violent exploitation on the other, is a byproduct of the Enlightenment project equating the progress of reason to the widening of a politically controlled system of images. If anything is common to the projects of late and early modernity, it is the organization around plans of total visuality. They encompass simultaneously utter control and utter sight, defined by Nicolas Mirzoeff as the mandate to see and control everything, everywhere, all the time (Mirzoeff 2015, 20). This plan of total visuality hence becomes a strategic driver in the organization of the social and in the partition of the sensible, as well as an overhaul in the wider production of meaning. As such, a twenty-first-century agenda for the study of culture will unavoidably deal with visuality beyond modes of mediation and representation to ask how and under which conditions the pro-
托尔金(J.R.R. Tolkien)的《指环王》(Lord of The Rings)中的大反派索伦(Sauron)在小说中被转喻描述，在彼得·杰克逊(Peter Jackson)的电影三部曲中被形象化为“大眼睛”。“索伦之眼”(Eye of Sauron)、“红眼”(red Eye)和“大眼”(great Eye)这些绰号，可以说是对托尔金三部曲中倒数第二个反派人物的一种具体感受。1963年10月3日，托尔金在写给朋友艾琳·埃尔加夫人的信中写道:“……在一个允许伟大的灵魂以物质和可毁灭的形式化身的故事中，当他们实际存在时，他们的力量一定要大得多。[…索伦应该被认为是非常可怕的”(卡朋特1981,246)。在整个传奇故事中，索伦的思想胜过了这个角色的物质性。与其说索伦是敌对行动的积极驱动者，不如说他是一种危险和恐惧的感觉。与其说他是一个人物，不如说他是一种氛围，这种氛围是通过无处不在的、持续的、绝对的和极权主义的观察所传达的。《指环王》三部曲大约写于1937年至1949年之间，在索伦看来，它证实了一种特殊的20世纪全景恐惧症:在扩大控制人口能力的工具开始呈指数级增长的时候，人们对通过视觉控制全球的恐惧。随着本世纪的展开，视觉控制扩大并变得普遍，从通过光学提高武器目标精度，到在公共领域引入视觉技术事实上，现代性的项目本身，一方面是进步的双重维度，另一方面是暴力剥削，是启蒙运动项目的副产品，它把理性的进步等同于政治控制的图像系统的扩大。如果说晚期和早期现代性的项目有什么共同之处的话，那就是围绕整体视觉计划的组织。它们同时包含完全的控制和完全的视野，尼古拉斯·米尔佐夫将其定义为看到和控制一切的任务，无处不在，所有的时间(米尔佐夫2015,20)。因此，这种整体视觉的计划成为社会组织和感性划分的战略驱动力，以及更广泛的意义生产的彻底改革。因此，21世纪的文化研究议程将不可避免地超越调解和再现的模式来处理视觉性，以询问如何以及在何种条件下实现
{"title":"The Global Eye or Foucault Rewired: Security, Control, and Scholarship in the Twenty-first Century","authors":"Isabel Capeloa Gil","doi":"10.1515/9783110669398-006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110669398-006","url":null,"abstract":"The great antagonist in J.R.R. Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings, Sauron, is metonymically described in the novel and visualized in Peter Jackson’s cinematic trilogy as the ‘great eye.’ The ‘Eye of Sauron,’ the ‘red eye,’ and the ‘great eye’ are epithets that arguably connote an embodied feeling to the penultimate villain in Tolkien’s trilogy. This is reported in a letter sent by Tolkien to his friend Mrs. Eileen Elgar on October 3, 1963: “[...] in a tale which allows the incarnation of great spirits in a physical and destructible form their power must be far greater when actually physically present. [...] Sauron should be thought of as very terrible” (Carpenter 1981, 246). Throughout the saga, the thought of Sauron trumps the character’s materiality. Sauron is less an active driver of antagonistic action than he is a sensation of danger and fear. He is less a character than an ambiance conveyed through the terror of pervasive, continuous, absolute, and totalitarian observation. The Lord of the Rings trilogy, written roughly between 1937 and 1949, substantiates, in Sauron’s eye, a particular twentieth-century panopticophobia: the fear of universal control via sight, at a time when the tools to expand the capacity for control over populations were starting to grow exponentially. As the century unfurled, visual control widened and became pervasive, from the improvement of weapon target accuracy via optics, to the introduction of visual technologies in the public sphere.1 In fact, the very project of modernity in its dual dimension of progress on the one side, and violent exploitation on the other, is a byproduct of the Enlightenment project equating the progress of reason to the widening of a politically controlled system of images. If anything is common to the projects of late and early modernity, it is the organization around plans of total visuality. They encompass simultaneously utter control and utter sight, defined by Nicolas Mirzoeff as the mandate to see and control everything, everywhere, all the time (Mirzoeff 2015, 20). This plan of total visuality hence becomes a strategic driver in the organization of the social and in the partition of the sensible, as well as an overhaul in the wider production of meaning. As such, a twenty-first-century agenda for the study of culture will unavoidably deal with visuality beyond modes of mediation and representation to ask how and under which conditions the pro-","PeriodicalId":447488,"journal":{"name":"Futures of the Study of Culture","volume":"39 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124867734","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-08-10DOI: 10.1515/9783110669398-fm
{"title":"Frontmatter","authors":"","doi":"10.1515/9783110669398-fm","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110669398-fm","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":447488,"journal":{"name":"Futures of the Study of Culture","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128024806","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-08-10DOI: 10.1515/9783110669398-012
U. Wirth
{"title":"After Hybridity: Grafting as a Model of Cultural Translation","authors":"U. Wirth","doi":"10.1515/9783110669398-012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110669398-012","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":447488,"journal":{"name":"Futures of the Study of Culture","volume":"33 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121229708","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-08-10DOI: 10.1515/9783110669398-007
Richard A. Grusin
{"title":"No Future: The Study of Culture in the Twenty-first Century","authors":"Richard A. Grusin","doi":"10.1515/9783110669398-007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110669398-007","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":447488,"journal":{"name":"Futures of the Study of Culture","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129312148","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-08-10DOI: 10.1515/9783110669398-001
Doris
{"title":"Futures of the Study of Culture: Some Opening Remarks","authors":"Doris","doi":"10.1515/9783110669398-001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110669398-001","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":447488,"journal":{"name":"Futures of the Study of Culture","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121084327","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-08-10DOI: 10.1515/9783110669398-008
Hubertus Büschel
In the year 1989, Lynn Hunt proclaimed nothing less than the beginning of a new cultural history (Hunt 1989, 10) and pleaded for consequential anthropological theoretical receptions. Already eight years prior, Natalie Zemon Davis wrote, “anthropology can widen the possibilities, can help us take off our blinders, and give us a new place from which to view the past and discover the strange and surprising in the familiar landscape of historical texts” (Davis 1981, 275). In Germany in 1984, Hans Medick published his legendary – and subsequently updated – article Missionaries in the Rowboat? stating that anthropological knowledge and theories could help enlighten the “complex mutual interdependence between circumstances of life and the concrete practice” of historical actors – their “experiences and modes of behavior” (Medick 1995, 43). All three authors, and many other cultural historians, argued against socio-historical approaches that they considered deficient, particularly due to their theoretical framework. During the late 1980s and early 1990s, new cultural history, as well as historical anthropology (a specific German version of cultural historical approaches), were coined by the constant pleas for an injection of anthropological theories and methods into historical theoretical and methodological approaches. Anthropology might help, the argument went, to see the past as a “strange foreign territory” and the everyday life of historical actors akin to those of “‘primitive’ or ‘archaic’ societies” (Davis 1981, 272). With this approach,
{"title":"Beyond the Colonial Shadow? Delinking, Border Thinking, and Theoretical Futures of Cultural History","authors":"Hubertus Büschel","doi":"10.1515/9783110669398-008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110669398-008","url":null,"abstract":"In the year 1989, Lynn Hunt proclaimed nothing less than the beginning of a new cultural history (Hunt 1989, 10) and pleaded for consequential anthropological theoretical receptions. Already eight years prior, Natalie Zemon Davis wrote, “anthropology can widen the possibilities, can help us take off our blinders, and give us a new place from which to view the past and discover the strange and surprising in the familiar landscape of historical texts” (Davis 1981, 275). In Germany in 1984, Hans Medick published his legendary – and subsequently updated – article Missionaries in the Rowboat? stating that anthropological knowledge and theories could help enlighten the “complex mutual interdependence between circumstances of life and the concrete practice” of historical actors – their “experiences and modes of behavior” (Medick 1995, 43). All three authors, and many other cultural historians, argued against socio-historical approaches that they considered deficient, particularly due to their theoretical framework. During the late 1980s and early 1990s, new cultural history, as well as historical anthropology (a specific German version of cultural historical approaches), were coined by the constant pleas for an injection of anthropological theories and methods into historical theoretical and methodological approaches. Anthropology might help, the argument went, to see the past as a “strange foreign territory” and the everyday life of historical actors akin to those of “‘primitive’ or ‘archaic’ societies” (Davis 1981, 272). With this approach,","PeriodicalId":447488,"journal":{"name":"Futures of the Study of Culture","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129963758","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：