莱斯利·沃特斯,2022。移动中的边界:1938-1948年匈牙利斯洛伐克边境地区的领土变化和种族清洗。罗切斯特,罗切斯特大学出版社(东欧和中欧的罗切斯特研究)。

IF 0.2 Q4 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Hungarian Cultural Studies Pub Date : 2022-07-19 DOI:10.5195/ahea.2022.469
Balázs Ablonczy
{"title":"莱斯利·沃特斯,2022。移动中的边界:1938-1948年匈牙利斯洛伐克边境地区的领土变化和种族清洗。罗切斯特,罗切斯特大学出版社(东欧和中欧的罗切斯特研究)。","authors":"Balázs Ablonczy","doi":"10.5195/ahea.2022.469","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The history of the Hungarian-(Czecho)Slovak border-area in the twentieth century has already received much attention in Hungarian historiography, in memory politics and in local history, but until recently the presentation of this history has been mostly ethnographic and Hungaro-centric, focusing on the the post-World War II period of 1945-1948 and based mainly on Hungarian sources. In 2012, Leslie Waters completed her doctoral dissertation at UCLA, titled Resurrecting the Nation: Felvidék and the Hungarian Territorial Revisionist Project, 19381945, which probably prepared and equipped her for her new work of a decade later. Waters's perspective on the problems of this border region, especially its eastern half, helps readers to break out of the overly Hungaro-centric paradigm that all too often governs the study and discourse of the period and the region in question. Waters boldly draws heavily on Hungarian, Czech and Slovak sources as well as on ego materials such as memoirs written or recorded orally from Slovak, Hungarian and Jewish persons by the USHMMM and the USC. Even more importantly, she finally puts the history of this border region into a theoretical framework that breaks with the decades-long discourse of the suffering of the two nations and, basing herself on more recent genocide and borderland studies, she places the bloody 1940s decade of the Hungarian-Slovak borderland within a comprehensive, internationally informed and comparable framework. Yet, Waters would not impose this newer theoretical framework at all costs. For example, when she disagrees with other researchers on the issue of the possibility to create an ethnically homogeneous nation-state as opposed to one with a hegemonic majority, she is able to challenge her disputants, relying not only on historical documents but also on Slovak and Hungarian works of and about language and literature. Following a thorough theoretical Introduction, Waters divides her study into four major units: the 1938 territorial reoccupation, the wartime policies toward minorities and – as an issue unto itself – anti-Semitism, the Holocaust, and the postwar period of population exchange/expulsion. Waters is thorough and careful in her handling of a vast amount of available sources and is thus able to survey the political conditions of the region in the period under study,","PeriodicalId":40442,"journal":{"name":"Hungarian Cultural Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Waters, Leslie. 2022. Borders on the Move: Territorial Changes and Ethnic Cleansing in the Hungarian-Slovak Borderlands, 1938-1948. Rochester, University of Rochester Press (Rochester Studies in East and Central Europe).\",\"authors\":\"Balázs Ablonczy\",\"doi\":\"10.5195/ahea.2022.469\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The history of the Hungarian-(Czecho)Slovak border-area in the twentieth century has already received much attention in Hungarian historiography, in memory politics and in local history, but until recently the presentation of this history has been mostly ethnographic and Hungaro-centric, focusing on the the post-World War II period of 1945-1948 and based mainly on Hungarian sources. In 2012, Leslie Waters completed her doctoral dissertation at UCLA, titled Resurrecting the Nation: Felvidék and the Hungarian Territorial Revisionist Project, 19381945, which probably prepared and equipped her for her new work of a decade later. Waters's perspective on the problems of this border region, especially its eastern half, helps readers to break out of the overly Hungaro-centric paradigm that all too often governs the study and discourse of the period and the region in question. Waters boldly draws heavily on Hungarian, Czech and Slovak sources as well as on ego materials such as memoirs written or recorded orally from Slovak, Hungarian and Jewish persons by the USHMMM and the USC. Even more importantly, she finally puts the history of this border region into a theoretical framework that breaks with the decades-long discourse of the suffering of the two nations and, basing herself on more recent genocide and borderland studies, she places the bloody 1940s decade of the Hungarian-Slovak borderland within a comprehensive, internationally informed and comparable framework. Yet, Waters would not impose this newer theoretical framework at all costs. For example, when she disagrees with other researchers on the issue of the possibility to create an ethnically homogeneous nation-state as opposed to one with a hegemonic majority, she is able to challenge her disputants, relying not only on historical documents but also on Slovak and Hungarian works of and about language and literature. Following a thorough theoretical Introduction, Waters divides her study into four major units: the 1938 territorial reoccupation, the wartime policies toward minorities and – as an issue unto itself – anti-Semitism, the Holocaust, and the postwar period of population exchange/expulsion. Waters is thorough and careful in her handling of a vast amount of available sources and is thus able to survey the political conditions of the region in the period under study,\",\"PeriodicalId\":40442,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Hungarian Cultural Studies\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Hungarian Cultural Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5195/ahea.2022.469\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hungarian Cultural Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5195/ahea.2022.469","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

二十世纪匈牙利-(捷克)斯洛伐克边境地区的历史已经在匈牙利史学、记忆政治和地方历史中得到了很多关注,但直到最近,这段历史的呈现主要是以民族志和匈牙利为中心的,主要集中在1945年至1948年的第二次世界大战后时期,主要基于匈牙利的资料。2012年,莱斯利·沃特斯在加州大学洛杉矶分校完成了她的博士论文,题为《复兴民族:felvid和匈牙利领土修正主义计划,1938 - 1945》,这可能为她十年后的新作品做好了准备和装备。沃特斯对这一边境地区问题的看法,尤其是对其东半部的看法,帮助读者打破了过于以匈牙利为中心的范式,这种范式经常支配着对这一时期和该地区的研究和论述。沃特斯大胆地借鉴了匈牙利、捷克和斯洛伐克的资料,以及USHMMM和USC写的或口头记录的斯洛伐克、匈牙利和犹太人的回忆录等自我材料。更重要的是,她最终将这一边境地区的历史纳入了一个理论框架,打破了长达数十年的关于两国苦难的论述,并基于最近的种族灭绝和边境研究,她将匈牙利-斯洛伐克边境血腥的20世纪40年代置于一个全面的、国际化的、可比较的框架中。然而,沃特斯不会不惜一切代价强加这个新的理论框架。例如,当她不同意其他研究人员关于建立一个种族同质的民族国家的可能性的问题,而不是一个霸权多数的国家时,她能够挑战她的争论,不仅依靠历史文献,而且依靠斯洛伐克和匈牙利的语言和文学作品。在进行了全面的理论介绍之后,沃特斯将她的研究分为四个主要单元:1938年的领土重新占领,战时对少数民族的政策,以及作为一个问题本身的反犹太主义,大屠杀,以及战后人口交换/驱逐。沃特斯在处理大量现有资料时十分彻底和谨慎,因此能够调查研究期间该区域的政治情况。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Waters, Leslie. 2022. Borders on the Move: Territorial Changes and Ethnic Cleansing in the Hungarian-Slovak Borderlands, 1938-1948. Rochester, University of Rochester Press (Rochester Studies in East and Central Europe).
The history of the Hungarian-(Czecho)Slovak border-area in the twentieth century has already received much attention in Hungarian historiography, in memory politics and in local history, but until recently the presentation of this history has been mostly ethnographic and Hungaro-centric, focusing on the the post-World War II period of 1945-1948 and based mainly on Hungarian sources. In 2012, Leslie Waters completed her doctoral dissertation at UCLA, titled Resurrecting the Nation: Felvidék and the Hungarian Territorial Revisionist Project, 19381945, which probably prepared and equipped her for her new work of a decade later. Waters's perspective on the problems of this border region, especially its eastern half, helps readers to break out of the overly Hungaro-centric paradigm that all too often governs the study and discourse of the period and the region in question. Waters boldly draws heavily on Hungarian, Czech and Slovak sources as well as on ego materials such as memoirs written or recorded orally from Slovak, Hungarian and Jewish persons by the USHMMM and the USC. Even more importantly, she finally puts the history of this border region into a theoretical framework that breaks with the decades-long discourse of the suffering of the two nations and, basing herself on more recent genocide and borderland studies, she places the bloody 1940s decade of the Hungarian-Slovak borderland within a comprehensive, internationally informed and comparable framework. Yet, Waters would not impose this newer theoretical framework at all costs. For example, when she disagrees with other researchers on the issue of the possibility to create an ethnically homogeneous nation-state as opposed to one with a hegemonic majority, she is able to challenge her disputants, relying not only on historical documents but also on Slovak and Hungarian works of and about language and literature. Following a thorough theoretical Introduction, Waters divides her study into four major units: the 1938 territorial reoccupation, the wartime policies toward minorities and – as an issue unto itself – anti-Semitism, the Holocaust, and the postwar period of population exchange/expulsion. Waters is thorough and careful in her handling of a vast amount of available sources and is thus able to survey the political conditions of the region in the period under study,
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Hungarian Cultural Studies
Hungarian Cultural Studies SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊最新文献
Narrating the Danube Swabian Identity and Experience from Women's Perspective Pánczél Hegedűs, János. 2022. Nem forradalom, hanem szabadságharc: Mindszenty József 1956-os helyzete és tevékenysége (Not a Revolution, but a Fight for Freedom: The Position and Activities of József Mindszenty in 1956). Budapest: L’Harmattan. 390 pp. Translanguaging in Family Communication Possibilities for a New Social Model? Materiality and Making Meaning
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1