Christianity and national identity in twentieth-century Europe. Conflict, community, and the social order. Edited by John Carter Wood. (Veröffentlichungen des Instituts für Europäische Geschichte Mainz, 111.) Pp.211 incl. 3 figs. Göttingen–Bristol, Ct: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2016. €65. 978 3 525 10149 0

2018 ◽  
Vol 69 (3) ◽  
pp. 684-685
Author(s):  
Hugh McLeod
2015 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia Moses ◽  
Eve Rosenhaft

According to the sociologists Ulrich Beck and Anthony Giddens, modern societies have become increasingly preoccupied with the future and safety and have mobilized themselves in order to manage systematically what they have perceived as “risks” (Beck 1992; Giddens 1991). This special section investigates how conceptions of risk evolved in Europe over the course of the twentieth century by focusing on the creation and evolution of social policy. The language of risk has, in the past twenty years, become a matter of course in conversations about social policy (Kemshall 2002). We seek to trace how “risk” has served as aheuristic toolfor understanding and treating “social problems.” A key aim of this collection is to explore the character of social policy (in the broadest sense) as an instrument (or technology) that both constructs its own objects as the consequences of “risks” and generates new “risks” in the process (Lupton 2004: 33). In this way, social policy typifies the paradox of security: by attempting literally to making one “carefree,” orsē(without)curitās(care), acts of (social) security spur new insecurities about what remains unprotected (Hamilton 2013: 3–5, 25–26). Against this semantic and philological context, we suggest that social policy poses an inherent dilemma: in aiming to stabilize or improve the existing social order, it also acts as an agent of change. This characteristic of social policy is what makes particularly valuable studies that allow for comparisons across time, place, and types of political regime. By examining a range of cases from across Europe over the course of the twentieth century, this collection seeks to pose new questions about the role of the state; ideas about risk and security; and conceptions of the “social” in its various forms.


2005 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-106 ◽  
Author(s):  
Doug Rossinow

AbstractA vigorous Protestant left existed throughout the first half of the twentieth-century in the United States. That Protestant left was the left wing of the social gospel movement, which many historians restrict to the pre-1920 period and whose radical content is often underestimated. This article examines the career of one representative figure from this Protestant left, the Reverend Harry F. Ward, as a means of describing the evolving nature and limits of social gospel radicalism during the first four decades of the twentieth century. Ward, the main author of the 1908 Social Creed of the Churches, a longtime professor at Union Theological Seminary (UTS) in New York, and a dogged activist on behalf of labor and political prisoners through his leadership of the Methodist Federation for Social Service, sought a new social order from the early years of the century through the Great Depression of the 1930s. This new order would be the Kingdom of God on earth, and, in Ward's view, it would transcend the competitive and exploitative capitalism that dominated American society in his time. Before World War I, Ward worked to bring together labor activists and church people, and, after the war, he shifted his work toward less expressly religious efforts, while continuing to mentor clerical protégés through his teaching. Ward's leftward trajectory and ever-stronger Communist associations would eventually bring about his political downfall, but, in the mid- 1930s, he remained a respected figure, if one more radical than most, among American Protestant clergy. Organic links tied him and his politics to the broader terrain of social gospel reform, despite the politically driven historical amnesia that later would all but erase Ward from historical memory.


Author(s):  
Ken Hirschkop

Chapter 1 focuses on the distinctiveness of the ‘linguistic turns’ of early twentieth-century Europe, differentiating them from nineteenth-century work on language and insisting on the need to think of these multiple turns as a whole, as a constellation across Europe. That there is such a constellation, demanding our attention, is the first of the book’s three organizing claims. The second is that language draws such a crowd because crowds have become a problem: in the linguistic turns of the early twentieth century, language is a metonym for problems of social order and social division, democracy and consent, nationality and difference. Hence the third claim: that the distinguishing feature of these linguistic turns is a commitment to some version of ‘language as such’, a force or structure within language that can provide the vitality, the order, the lucidity, or some combination of these, necessary to cure language of its present ills.


2015 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 241-251
Author(s):  
Katie Fry

Leaving (2007), the first play written by Václav Havel since the start of his political career in 1989, is a theatrical tour de force that categorically defies generic classification. In this article Katie Fry draws on methodologies of theatre semiotics and intertextuality to elucidate the semantic complexity of Havel’s highly unconventional play. Leaving is analyzed in terms of its engagement with intertexts, its incorporation of ‘real-life’ material from Havel’s political and artistic careers, and its subversion of theatrical conventions. Katie Fry is a PhD Candidate at the Centre for Comparative Literature, University of Toronto. She has worked as a translator and dramaturg for independent theatre projects in Madrid and Toronto. Her dissertation project examines the attribution of religious import to theatre, opera, and literature in nineteenth- and early twentieth-century Europe. She holds a doctoral fellowship from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.


1997 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. 442-467 ◽  
Author(s):  
Afsaneh Najmabadi

Modern nations have often been explicitly imagined through familial metaphors. In particular, the construction of the national community as a brotherhood (a fraternity) has pointed both to the centrality of male bonding in the production of nationalist sentiment and to the exclusion of women from the social contract. Within that contract not only were women “subject to men's power; it also implied complementary bonds between men;… women had no place in the new political and social order except as markers of social relations between men.”Hunt's observation recalls Sedgwick's analysis of how male bonding is mediated through the figure of woman. In nationalist discourse representing the homeland as a female body has often been used to construct a national identity based on male bonding among a nation of brothers.


Author(s):  
Hunter H. Gardner

This chapter addresses the tradition of plague writing in antiquity and outlines the innovations that Roman epic poets have made within the discourse. It observes a distinction between eyewitness accounts of plague and the relatively fictive representations of epidemic disease in Lucretius’ De Rerum Natura, Vergil’s Georgics, and Ovid’s Metamorphoses. The plague narrative experiences a revival in the late Roman Republic, prompting an investigation into the ideological work such narratives perform: why did the Romans of this period favor epidemic disease as a way of illustrating the collapse of the social order? How were epic accounts of plague informed not only by political rhetoric tethering the language of pestis (“plague”) to the chaos of the late Republic, but also by epidemic diseases discussed in medical writers, didactic treatises, and historical anecdotes? After identifying characteristics that accompany notices of “real” plague in the late Republic, the chapter examines twentieth-century theorists whose work addresses those characteristics: Artaud (1958), Foucault (2003), Sontag (1988), and Girard (1974). While no single theory explains the features of Latin plague, collectively these thinkers address bodily decay and liquefaction, the opportunities for state intervention in the context of an outbreak, and the friction between individual and collective concerns that define Roman treatments of epidemic disease. Perhaps most significantly, the work of these theorists underscores the alternatingly corrosive and purifying power of plague, which gestures toward a new order, while also dwelling on the aftermaths and remainders of the old.


This chapter provides a detailed introduction to the thought of Carl Schmitt that incorporates insights from law, the social sciences, and the humanities. It is also an intervention in its own right, seeking to decenter the study of this most hyped thinker of the twentieth century by advancing two interconnected arguments. First, we argue that the motif of order is a powerful yet insufficiently utilized heuristic device for making sense of Schmitt’s thought. By placing the motif of order at its heart, we contradict the popular belief that no unifying thread runs through the jurist’s oeuvre. Second, we argue that a trinity of thought is discernable in Schmitt’s writings comprising his political, legal, and cultural thought. We establish intellectual connections across these three bodies of thought and trace the mutually constitutive relationships that exist among them. Schmitt’s thought, we find, amounted to a network of ideas about the sources of social order, the cement of society.


2014 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 209-224 ◽  
Author(s):  
DENNIS SWEENEY

It is hard not to be struck by the continuing interest in the concept of ‘modernity’ or ‘the modern’ for making sense of the economic, cultural and political transformations of twentieth-century Europe. Seemingly laid to rest by the early 1980s for its association with modernisation theory, modernity as a concept was revived during the late 1980s and 1990s largely by European historians working on countries, especially Germany and Russia, with nineteenth- and twentieth-century histories that modernisation theorists deemed models of developmental backwardness or case studies in the failure to modernise and its consequences. But, like its striking re-appearance in scholarship on those areas of the world – especially Asia and Africa – written off as the most irredeemably un-modern or ‘traditional’ by modernisation theorists, this renewed interest in modernity derives from very different interventions in post-structuralist theory and cultural and postcolonial studies, which have generated new definitions, and critiques ‘modernity’ and its ‘dark side’ from the vantage point of ‘postmodernity’.


1998 ◽  
Vol 51 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa Deam

AbstractThis essay shows how scholarship on fifteenth-century Flemish panel painting became intertwined with efforts at national identity-building in nineteenth and early twentieth-century Europe. Paintings such as Jan van Eyck's Ghent Altarpiece were not only dispersed across regional and national boundaries, but were intellectually appropriated for competing national programs. The paintings consequently became a site of conflict between the Latin and Germanic traditions. These conflicts are clearly visible through the shifting terminology of this art, variously claimed as “Flemish” and “Netherlandish.” Such nationalist discourses shaped future scholarship on Flemish painting and contributed to its perceived inferiority vis-à-vis the Southern artistic tradition.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document