Pub Date : 2020-06-23DOI: 10.5250/femigermstud.36.1.0113
Katharina Gerstenberger, M. Mccarthy
Abstract:In response to demands for scholarly innovation and a younger generation’s research approaches, collaborative work has become increasingly common on American campuses. Against the backdrop of the neoliberalization of higher education and the concomitant emphasis on quantifying research productivity, we reflect on the meanings of collaborative work for us as feminist scholars and teachers working within the humanities. In particular, we draw attention to the varying and often overlooked emotions academic collaborations can provoke as we work with others across hierarchies and disciplines. While collaborative work may take already-familiar forms like coediting or co-teaching, we must develop ways to value (and to evaluate) more radical forms of collaboration, such as blending multiple voices in essays or books, that challenge notions of individual achievement. Successful collaborative work cannot be mandated. Yet we each might want to consider what forms we can embrace and how we can help create the space for those collaborations aimed at bringing about meaningful institutional change.
{"title":"Mapping Out the “Co” in Collaborative Work: External Pressures, Institutional Responses, and Individual Affects","authors":"Katharina Gerstenberger, M. Mccarthy","doi":"10.5250/femigermstud.36.1.0113","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5250/femigermstud.36.1.0113","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:In response to demands for scholarly innovation and a younger generation’s research approaches, collaborative work has become increasingly common on American campuses. Against the backdrop of the neoliberalization of higher education and the concomitant emphasis on quantifying research productivity, we reflect on the meanings of collaborative work for us as feminist scholars and teachers working within the humanities. In particular, we draw attention to the varying and often overlooked emotions academic collaborations can provoke as we work with others across hierarchies and disciplines. While collaborative work may take already-familiar forms like coediting or co-teaching, we must develop ways to value (and to evaluate) more radical forms of collaboration, such as blending multiple voices in essays or books, that challenge notions of individual achievement. Successful collaborative work cannot be mandated. Yet we each might want to consider what forms we can embrace and how we can help create the space for those collaborations aimed at bringing about meaningful institutional change.","PeriodicalId":53717,"journal":{"name":"Feminist German Studies","volume":"29 1","pages":"113 - 127"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2020-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89317279","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 : 2020-06-23DOI: 10.5250/femigermstud.36.1.0128
Carrie Smith, Maria Stehle, Beverly Weber
Abstract:In this essay we seek to both discuss and exemplify the transformation from collaborative work and dialogue to collective thinking and action. We offer a manifesto for building feminist coalitions at a historic moment when these appear to face growing obstacles. We argue that it remains as urgent as ever for those who are in a position to do so to forge networks and to build spaces for action. Ultimately, we call for the political potential of polyvocal and polyamorous collaborations that reach across disciplines, time zones, and borders and that take the flexible and creative shape of gatherings.
{"title":"Intimate Collaborations and Feminist Gatherings: A Manifesto for a Coalitional Academy","authors":"Carrie Smith, Maria Stehle, Beverly Weber","doi":"10.5250/femigermstud.36.1.0128","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5250/femigermstud.36.1.0128","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:In this essay we seek to both discuss and exemplify the transformation from collaborative work and dialogue to collective thinking and action. We offer a manifesto for building feminist coalitions at a historic moment when these appear to face growing obstacles. We argue that it remains as urgent as ever for those who are in a position to do so to forge networks and to build spaces for action. Ultimately, we call for the political potential of polyvocal and polyamorous collaborations that reach across disciplines, time zones, and borders and that take the flexible and creative shape of gatherings.","PeriodicalId":53717,"journal":{"name":"Feminist German Studies","volume":"49 1","pages":"128 - 143"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2020-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83000188","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 : 2020-06-23DOI: 10.5250/femigermstud.36.1.0166
Helen Stuhr-Rommereim, Mari Jarris
Abstract:Recently, feminist and queer theorists have looked to utopianism to revive debates on gender and sexuality under capitalism initiated by Marxist feminists in the 1960s. In this article we take up this discourse not by turning to Marx and Engels but instead to a novel by one of their contemporaries, Nikolai Chernyshevsky’s What Is to Be Done? (1863). We contextualize this work, acclaimed as Russia’s most consequential nineteenth-century novel, in international socialist thought to contribute to historical understandings of the entangled German and Russian leftist traditions as well as to contemporary queer and feminist theory. Through an analysis of the novel’s representation of collective labor, “fictitious” marriage, and its utopian dream, we demonstrate that in What Is to Be Done? gender relations are not merely conceived of as a Nebenwiderspruch; rather, women emerge as the revolutionary subjects who create the conditions for the radical transformation of society through collectivity.
{"title":"Nikolai Chernyshevsky’s What Is to Be Done? and the Prehistory of International Marxist Feminism","authors":"Helen Stuhr-Rommereim, Mari Jarris","doi":"10.5250/femigermstud.36.1.0166","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5250/femigermstud.36.1.0166","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:Recently, feminist and queer theorists have looked to utopianism to revive debates on gender and sexuality under capitalism initiated by Marxist feminists in the 1960s. In this article we take up this discourse not by turning to Marx and Engels but instead to a novel by one of their contemporaries, Nikolai Chernyshevsky’s What Is to Be Done? (1863). We contextualize this work, acclaimed as Russia’s most consequential nineteenth-century novel, in international socialist thought to contribute to historical understandings of the entangled German and Russian leftist traditions as well as to contemporary queer and feminist theory. Through an analysis of the novel’s representation of collective labor, “fictitious” marriage, and its utopian dream, we demonstrate that in What Is to Be Done? gender relations are not merely conceived of as a Nebenwiderspruch; rather, women emerge as the revolutionary subjects who create the conditions for the radical transformation of society through collectivity.","PeriodicalId":53717,"journal":{"name":"Feminist German Studies","volume":"6 1","pages":"166 - 192"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2020-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86697348","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 : 2020-06-23DOI: 10.5250/femigermstud.36.1.0100
Miriam Rainer
Abstract:This essay elaborates the entanglements among various manifestations of collaboration, friendship, gender, comedy, and language(s) as they are addressed and complicated by Hannah Arendt in a television interview with Günter Gaus from 1964. After having witnessed her German intellectual friends’ collaboration with the Nazi regime, Arendt deliberately broke with the academic milieu that these friends had been associated with. She describes these friends as elitist collaborators who fell in line with Hitler out of conviction rather than necessity. What emerges from her account is a feminist conceptualization of intellectual work as a sociopolitical rather than a solitary praxis. In light of the monologic of Gleichschaltung (cooperation with Nazism), Arendt counter- drafts dialogical, plurilinguistic intellectual practices: working together as working across differences. As I will trace through the analysis of narrative, phonetic, and etymological movements, she gestures toward a reinvention of the intellectual milieu through associetal collaborations, with associety understood as the communal refusal to replicate societal structures of oppression.
{"title":"Associety","authors":"Miriam Rainer","doi":"10.5250/femigermstud.36.1.0100","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5250/femigermstud.36.1.0100","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:This essay elaborates the entanglements among various manifestations of collaboration, friendship, gender, comedy, and language(s) as they are addressed and complicated by Hannah Arendt in a television interview with Günter Gaus from 1964. After having witnessed her German intellectual friends’ collaboration with the Nazi regime, Arendt deliberately broke with the academic milieu that these friends had been associated with. She describes these friends as elitist collaborators who fell in line with Hitler out of conviction rather than necessity. What emerges from her account is a feminist conceptualization of intellectual work as a sociopolitical rather than a solitary praxis. In light of the monologic of Gleichschaltung (cooperation with Nazism), Arendt counter- drafts dialogical, plurilinguistic intellectual practices: working together as working across differences. As I will trace through the analysis of narrative, phonetic, and etymological movements, she gestures toward a reinvention of the intellectual milieu through associetal collaborations, with associety understood as the communal refusal to replicate societal structures of oppression.","PeriodicalId":53717,"journal":{"name":"Feminist German Studies","volume":"10 1","pages":"100 - 112"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2020-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85210846","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 : 2020-06-23DOI: 10.5250/femigermstud.36.1.0040
Laura A. Mclary
Abstract:This article details the creation of a humanities collaborative in the College of Arts and Sciences at the University of Portland as an active response to counteract the so-called humanities crisis. Beginning as a low-budget endeavor in 2016, the Humanities Collaborative focused in its first two years on gathering interest and participation from faculty colleagues by hosting lunch discussions throughout the semester and a writing retreat in the spring. Collaborating across disciplines and departments resulted in a reinvigorated engagement with the humanities. In 2019–20 the CAS Humanities Collaborative hosted a campus-wide public humanities project focusing on the centennial of women’s suffrage in the United States that includes a student-faculty fellowship program, the Public Research Fellows. The success of the Humanities Collaborative allowed the founders to attract internal funding and to apply for external funding to support the Public Research Fellows programming.
{"title":"It’s Still about Relevance: The Founding of a Humanities Collaborative as a Confident Response to the Humanities Crisis","authors":"Laura A. Mclary","doi":"10.5250/femigermstud.36.1.0040","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5250/femigermstud.36.1.0040","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:This article details the creation of a humanities collaborative in the College of Arts and Sciences at the University of Portland as an active response to counteract the so-called humanities crisis. Beginning as a low-budget endeavor in 2016, the Humanities Collaborative focused in its first two years on gathering interest and participation from faculty colleagues by hosting lunch discussions throughout the semester and a writing retreat in the spring. Collaborating across disciplines and departments resulted in a reinvigorated engagement with the humanities. In 2019–20 the CAS Humanities Collaborative hosted a campus-wide public humanities project focusing on the centennial of women’s suffrage in the United States that includes a student-faculty fellowship program, the Public Research Fellows. The success of the Humanities Collaborative allowed the founders to attract internal funding and to apply for external funding to support the Public Research Fellows programming.","PeriodicalId":53717,"journal":{"name":"Feminist German Studies","volume":"22 1","pages":"40 - 53"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2020-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88128462","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 : 2020-06-23DOI: 10.5250/femigermstud.36.1.0054
K. Baker, A. Bergerson, L. Fahnenbruck, Deborah Parker, Benjamin Roers
Abstract:This article showcases a collaborative multimedia digital humanities project, Trug&Schein, in order to reflect on the process of history writing. The coauthors draw on their experiences creating and producing a documentary play based on the correspondence between the two everyday Germans whose letters form the basis of Trug&Schein. Having co-created several kinds of materials in multiple media in support of the English and German versions of their play, the coauthors opened themselves to further collaborations with theater practitioners, citizen and academic scholars, and audiences at the stagings and at workshops. As various groups interacted with the diverse documents and artifacts that make up the project, the coauthors became increasingly aware of metanarrative analogies between their source materials and the texts, videos, and discussions they were creating. They found that collaboration, intermediality, and multivocality enabled them, and many of the other participants, to recognize the participatory character of historical work.
{"title":"The Ongoing Rewards of Collaboration, Intermediality, and Multivocality in the Humanities: Reflections on the Multimedia Project Trug&Schein","authors":"K. Baker, A. Bergerson, L. Fahnenbruck, Deborah Parker, Benjamin Roers","doi":"10.5250/femigermstud.36.1.0054","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5250/femigermstud.36.1.0054","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:This article showcases a collaborative multimedia digital humanities project, Trug&Schein, in order to reflect on the process of history writing. The coauthors draw on their experiences creating and producing a documentary play based on the correspondence between the two everyday Germans whose letters form the basis of Trug&Schein. Having co-created several kinds of materials in multiple media in support of the English and German versions of their play, the coauthors opened themselves to further collaborations with theater practitioners, citizen and academic scholars, and audiences at the stagings and at workshops. As various groups interacted with the diverse documents and artifacts that make up the project, the coauthors became increasingly aware of metanarrative analogies between their source materials and the texts, videos, and discussions they were creating. They found that collaboration, intermediality, and multivocality enabled them, and many of the other participants, to recognize the participatory character of historical work.","PeriodicalId":53717,"journal":{"name":"Feminist German Studies","volume":"60 1","pages":"54 - 70"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2020-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86615057","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 : 2020-01-03DOI: 10.5250/femigermstud.35.0110
Simone Pfleger
Abstract:This article focuses on Hans-Christian Schmid's 2009 documentary Die wundersame Welt der Waschkraft as an example of how subjects are exposed to, embedded in, and exploited by global capitalism. Building on Jasbir Puar's concept of debilitation, the article examines the types of subjectivities that emerge in the narratives and material conditions produced by regimes of neoliberalism, as exemplified by Schmid's film. It illustrates how intimate social relations become pivotal sites where discourses of recognition, value, and resources converge. The film demonstrates that the increased access to consumer goods and services and the breakdown of national borders in Europe expose certain individuals to precarious labor conditions and render them barely legible as proper—or proper enough—subjects vis-à-vis the ideal Western subject hailed by heteronormative power structures. Workers in the film, such as Beata and Andrzej, experience increasingly precarious conditions and exemplify how certain individuals are forced to endure, bear, and sustain the impact of sociocultural discursive ideals of which individuals matter in what ways.
摘要:本文以汉斯-克里斯蒂安·施密德(Hans-Christian Schmid) 2009年的纪录片《世界的奇迹》(Die wundersame Welt der Waschkraft)为例，探讨了全球资本主义是如何暴露于、嵌入其中并被剥削的。本文以贾斯比尔·普瓦尔的衰弱概念为基础，考察了新自由主义政权所产生的叙事和物质条件中出现的主体性类型，例如施密德的电影。它说明了亲密的社会关系如何成为认识、价值和资源的话语汇聚的关键场所。这部电影表明，消费品和服务的增加以及欧洲国家边界的崩溃使某些人暴露在不稳定的劳动条件下，使他们几乎无法辨认为合适的——或者足够合适的——主体，而-à-vis是被异质规范的权力结构所称颂的理想的西方主体。影片中的工人，如贝娅塔和安杰伊，经历了越来越不稳定的环境，并举例说明了某些人是如何被迫忍受、承受和维持社会文化话语理想的影响的，这些理想以何种方式影响着个人。
{"title":"The Right to Debilitate: The Workings of Global Capitalism and the Precaritization of Subjects in Die wundersame Welt der Waschkraft","authors":"Simone Pfleger","doi":"10.5250/femigermstud.35.0110","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5250/femigermstud.35.0110","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:This article focuses on Hans-Christian Schmid's 2009 documentary Die wundersame Welt der Waschkraft as an example of how subjects are exposed to, embedded in, and exploited by global capitalism. Building on Jasbir Puar's concept of debilitation, the article examines the types of subjectivities that emerge in the narratives and material conditions produced by regimes of neoliberalism, as exemplified by Schmid's film. It illustrates how intimate social relations become pivotal sites where discourses of recognition, value, and resources converge. The film demonstrates that the increased access to consumer goods and services and the breakdown of national borders in Europe expose certain individuals to precarious labor conditions and render them barely legible as proper—or proper enough—subjects vis-à-vis the ideal Western subject hailed by heteronormative power structures. Workers in the film, such as Beata and Andrzej, experience increasingly precarious conditions and exemplify how certain individuals are forced to endure, bear, and sustain the impact of sociocultural discursive ideals of which individuals matter in what ways.","PeriodicalId":53717,"journal":{"name":"Feminist German Studies","volume":"18 1","pages":"110 - 134"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2020-01-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88274670","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}
{"title":"Christa Wolf: A Companion ed. by Sonja E. Klocke and Jennifer R. Hosek (review)","authors":"Susanne Rinner","doi":"10.1353/fgs.2019.0012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/fgs.2019.0012","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":53717,"journal":{"name":"Feminist German Studies","volume":"5 8","pages":"147 - 148"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2020-01-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/fgs.2019.0012","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72387835","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 : 2020-01-03DOI: 10.5250/femigermstud.35.00ix
Alexandra M. Hill, Hester Baer
It is our great pleasure to introduce Issue 2 of Volume 2023 of the Proceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies (PoPETs). PoPETs is a journal that publishes articles accepted to the annual Privacy Enhancing Technologies Symposium (PETS). To contribute to the free availability of scientific publications, PoPETs is published under the open-access Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercialNoDerivs license. PoPETs/PETS uses a hybrid conference-journal model, one that has since been adopted by many other conferences in the field. In this model, articles are published throughout the year at regular intervals, and the papers for the year are then presented at an annual conference. Reviewers can request revisions of submitted articles, which may then be revised and resubmitted in the same year. PoPETs publishes four issues per year. By enabling resubmission across these issues, PoPETs provides a high-quality peer-review process that enables authors and reviewers to work together to produce and recognize significant scholarly contributions. The PoPETs double-blind peer-review process is similar to other top-tier computer-security publications. The process includes initial review by the Editors-in-Chief for rules compliance and in-scope content, written reviews by multiple independent reviewers, author rebuttal, discussion among reviewers, and consensus decisions with disagreements resolved by the Editors-in-Chief. The output of the review process is a set of reviews, a meta-review summarizing the reviewers’ opinions after discussion, and one of the following decisions: Accept, Accept with Minor Revisions, Major Revisions, Reject and Resubmit, and Reject. Reviewing by the Editorial Board is performed in two rounds. In the first round, the Editors-in-Chief assign two reviewers from the Regular Editorial Board and a meta-reviewer from the Senior Editorial Board to all papers, and at the end of the round early decisions are made to reject certain papers that have two reject scores (Reject or Reject and Resubmit) from the reviewers. The remaining papers receive additional reviews in the second round for a total of four reviews (in a few cases, submissions received fewer or more reviews). The meta-reviewer guides and summarizes the discussion into a meta-review and a decision recommendation to the Editors-in-Chief after the first or second round of reviewing. Many articles had an external review drawn from a pool of junior experts nominated by the community1. Further external experts were invited to review certain articles. All reviews were sent to the authors of papers that proceeded to the second round of review,
{"title":"Editors' Introduction","authors":"Alexandra M. Hill, Hester Baer","doi":"10.5250/femigermstud.35.00ix","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5250/femigermstud.35.00ix","url":null,"abstract":"It is our great pleasure to introduce Issue 2 of Volume 2023 of the Proceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies (PoPETs). PoPETs is a journal that publishes articles accepted to the annual Privacy Enhancing Technologies Symposium (PETS). To contribute to the free availability of scientific publications, PoPETs is published under the open-access Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercialNoDerivs license. PoPETs/PETS uses a hybrid conference-journal model, one that has since been adopted by many other conferences in the field. In this model, articles are published throughout the year at regular intervals, and the papers for the year are then presented at an annual conference. Reviewers can request revisions of submitted articles, which may then be revised and resubmitted in the same year. PoPETs publishes four issues per year. By enabling resubmission across these issues, PoPETs provides a high-quality peer-review process that enables authors and reviewers to work together to produce and recognize significant scholarly contributions. The PoPETs double-blind peer-review process is similar to other top-tier computer-security publications. The process includes initial review by the Editors-in-Chief for rules compliance and in-scope content, written reviews by multiple independent reviewers, author rebuttal, discussion among reviewers, and consensus decisions with disagreements resolved by the Editors-in-Chief. The output of the review process is a set of reviews, a meta-review summarizing the reviewers’ opinions after discussion, and one of the following decisions: Accept, Accept with Minor Revisions, Major Revisions, Reject and Resubmit, and Reject. Reviewing by the Editorial Board is performed in two rounds. In the first round, the Editors-in-Chief assign two reviewers from the Regular Editorial Board and a meta-reviewer from the Senior Editorial Board to all papers, and at the end of the round early decisions are made to reject certain papers that have two reject scores (Reject or Reject and Resubmit) from the reviewers. The remaining papers receive additional reviews in the second round for a total of four reviews (in a few cases, submissions received fewer or more reviews). The meta-reviewer guides and summarizes the discussion into a meta-review and a decision recommendation to the Editors-in-Chief after the first or second round of reviewing. Many articles had an external review drawn from a pool of junior experts nominated by the community1. Further external experts were invited to review certain articles. All reviews were sent to the authors of papers that proceeded to the second round of review,","PeriodicalId":53717,"journal":{"name":"Feminist German Studies","volume":"117 1","pages":"ix - xviii"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2020-01-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79433644","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}
{"title":"Passing Illusions: Jewish Visibility in Weimar Germany by Kerry Wallach (review)","authors":"Richard W. Mccormick","doi":"10.1353/fgs.2019.0014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/fgs.2019.0014","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":53717,"journal":{"name":"Feminist German Studies","volume":"32 1","pages":"151 - 152"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2020-01-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81116141","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：