New Research on Political Cartoons and 20th Century French Sinology

2007 ◽  
Vol 48 (2) ◽  
pp. 30-30
Author(s):  
Jona Pounds
2020 ◽  
Vol 98 (1) ◽  
pp. 54-61
Author(s):  
I. A. Burmistrova ◽  
A. G. Samoylova ◽  
T. E. Tyulkova ◽  
E. V. Vaniev ◽  
G. S. Balasanyants ◽  
...  

The review presents data on the frequency of detection of drug resistant (DR) tuberculosis mycobacteria (MTB) as well as on the change in DR patterns in Russia and abroad from the mid-50s of the 20th century till the present. Along with the well-known mechanisms for DR MTB development, it tells about new research describing mutations associated with drug resistance.


2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (117) ◽  
pp. 91-99
Author(s):  
Nýsýpova A.J. Sh. ◽  

The article examines a work based on the fate of the historical personality of Turar Ryskulov, a complex and full of struggle. We are also talking about the artistic and creative sphere of the writer, the essence of worldview and theoretical knowledge, methods and principles of the analysis of a work of art. Using a new approach, an overview of the life and creative path of T. Ryskulov, who lived and worked in the 20th century in the social world of Kazakhstan, is made. The article reveals the artistic solution of the work «Tamuk» («Underworld») by the writer who introduced a new trend in Kazakh literature, including Kazakh prose, sh. Murtaza. In addition, the formation of a writer as a writer and his new research in this direction, thematic-ideological, stylistic-linguistic, genre characteristics are considered in close connection with the literary process. The work «Tamuk» extensively analyzes the worldview of T. Ryskulov, his deep thoughts. В статье рассматривается произведение, в основе которого лежит судьба исторической личности Турара Рыскулова, сложная и полная борьбы. Речь идет также о художественно-творческой сфере писателя, сущности мировоззрения и теоретических знаний, способах и принципах анализа художественного произведения. Используя новый подход, сделан обзор жизненного и творческого пути Т. Рыскулова, жившего и творившего в 20 веке в общественном мире Казахстана. В статье раскрывается художественное решение произведения «Тамук» («Преисподняя») писателя, внесшего новое направление в казахскую литературу, в том числе и в казахскую прозу, Ш. Муртазы. Кроме того, становление писателя как писателя и его новые исследования в этом направлении, тематико-идеологические, стилистико-лингвистические, жанровые характеристики рассматриваются в тесной связи с литературным процессом. В произведении «Тамук» подробно анализируется мировоззрение Т. Рыскулова, его глубокие мысли.


Tapestry, the most costly and coveted art form in Renaissance and Baroque Europe, has long fascinated scholars. In the 19th and early 20th centuries, researchers delved into archival sources and studied extant tapestries to produce sweeping introductions to the medium. The study of tapestry, however, fell outside mainstream art history, with tapestry too often seen as a less important “decorative art” rather than a “fine art.” , Also, tapestry did not fit easily into an art history that prioritized one master, as the making of a set of large-scale tapestries required a team of collaborators, including the designer, cartoon painters, and weavers, as well as a producer/entrepreneur and, often, a patron. Scholarship on European tapestries in the Early Modern period, nevertheless, flourished. By the late 20th century art historians turned attention to the “decorative arts” and tapestry specialists produced exciting new research illuminating aspects of design, production, and patronage, as well as tapestry’s crucial role in the larger narrative of art and cultural history. In 2002, the Metropolitan Museum of Art’s landmark exhibition and catalogue, Tapestry in the Renaissance: Art and Magnificence, spotlighted the art form, introduced it to a broad audience, and brought new understanding of tapestry as art. A sequel, the Met’s 2007 exhibition and catalogue, Tapestry in the Baroque: Threads of Splendor, followed. Other major museums presented ambitious exhibitions, accompanied by catalogues with substantial new research. In addition, from the late 20th century, institutions have produced complete catalogues of their extraordinary European tapestry holdings, among them: the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York; the Patrimonio Nacional in Spain; the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam; the Art Institute of Chicago; and the Burrell Collection in Glasgow. At the same time, articles and books exploring specific designs, designers, producers, and patrons appeared, with some monographs published in the dedicated series, Studies in Western Tapestry, edited by leading scholars Guy Delmarcel and Koenraad Brosens, and produced by Brepols. Tapestry research has often focused on the works of well-known designers and their exceptionally innovative work, such as the artists Raphael (b. 1483–d. 1520) or Peter Paul Rubens (b. 1577–d. 1640). High-quality production at major centers, including Brussels or at the Gobelins Manufactory in France, has also captured scholars’ attention, as have important patrons, among them Henry VIII of England (b. 1491–d. 1547) or Louis XIV of France (b. 1638–d. 1715). Newer directions for research include the contributions of women as weavers and entrepreneurs, the practice of reweaving designs, and the international reach and appeal of Renaissance and Baroque tapestry beyond Europe.


2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 78-85
Author(s):  
Oleg I. Kulagin

The article attempts to outline new approaches to the study of the timber industry complex as one of the main instruments of interaction between the State and Karelia, as the Finno-Ugric region, during the second half of the 20th century. The aim of the study is to find the theories and concepts that could form the basis for the systematic analysis of the interaction. The urgency of the study is related to the fact that for many forest-producing regions of Russia, including Karelia, the result of the regional state social and economic policy during the studied period turned out to be largely negative. The research methodology is based on the use of modernization theory and the concept “center – periphery”. The article is based on the research of international and Russian scholars which interpret these concepts. The comparison of theoretical material with the historical experience of development of Karelia in the second half of the 20th century allows to draw a conclusion about the possibility of successful combination of the noted research approaches. Various interpretations of the theory of modernization made it possible draw a conclusion about the peripheral nature of the modernization processes in this region in relation to socio-economic development of Karelia. Using the concept “center – periphery”, according to which the unevenness of economic growth and the process of spatial polarization inevitably generate disparities between the so-called center and periphery, has shown its potential in the study of the peculiarities of interaction between the state and the Finno-Ugric region. Comparison of these two concepts makes it possible to draw a conclusion about the high degree of their mutual complementarity and the possibility in the long term to propose the realization of a center-peripheral model of regional modernization in the social and economic development of Karelia.


1995 ◽  
Vol 143 ◽  
pp. 669-676 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Shambaugh

1995 is the 35th year of publication of The China Quarterly. London has been the home of the journal throughout its existence and, as the world's leading scholarly journal on modern China, The China Quarterly has long been a distinguishing feature of British sinology. Since its inception The China Quarterly has been recognized world-wide as the journal of record on 20th-century Chinese affairs, publishing timely, reflective, informed and new research on a wide range of subjects. The journal's Quarterly Chronicle and Documentation (so ably compiled by Robert F. Ash since 1982) is a venerable history of all but the first decade of the People's Republic. The extensive list of books received and books reviewed (195 in 1994) are also histories of the China field in themselves.


Thesis Eleven ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 072551362110328
Author(s):  
Jeffrey C. Alexander

This essay provides an intellectual history for the cultural turn that transformed the human sciences in the mid-20th century and led to the creation of cultural sociology in the late 20th century. It does so by conceptualizing and contextualizing the limitations of the binary primitive/modernity. In the 19th and early 20th centuries, leading thinkers – among them Marx, Weber, Durkheim, and Freud – confined thinking and feeling styles like ritual, symbolism, totem, and devotional practice to a primitivism that would be transformed by the rationality and universalism of modernity. While the barbarisms of the 20th century cast doubt on such predictions, only an intellectual revolution could provide the foundations for an alternative social theory. The cultural turn in philosophy, aesthetics, and anthropology erased the division between primitive and modern; in sociology, the classical writings of Durkheim were recentered around his later, religious sociology. These intellectual currents fed into a cultural sociology that challenged the sociology of culture, creating radically new research programs in the late 20th and early 21st centuries.


2020 ◽  
pp. 113-126
Author(s):  
Józef PIŁATOWICZ

The aim of this paper is presentation some statistical data on Jews studying at the Lviv Polytechnic until 1939. Also, the question of Jewish women – students of the Lviv Polytechnic, has been examined. The Author have touched upon a completely new research area which is women’s education in the broadly-defined technical field at the turn of the 19th and 20th century.


Author(s):  
Alan M. Wald

At the start of the last century a modern tradition of literary radicalism crystallized with inspiring results. From 1900 onward, socialists and bohemians yoked their ideals to become a marathon of forward-thinking activist cultural workers. For the next three decades, writers and intellectuals of the Left, such as Max Eastman (1883–1969), were oracles of enchantment in a world increasingly disenchanted, initially by the international war of 1914–1919 and subsequently by a decline in popular political defiance as capitalism consolidated. Still, the adversarial dream persevered during the violence and later, often in little magazines such as the Masses, Liberator, Seven Arts, and Modern Quarterly. Since the 1920s, literary radicalism meant creativity in the service of an insurrection against political power combined with a makeover in human relationships. With the economic catastrophe of 1929 and the triumph of Nazism in 1933, what might have been a generational succession morphed into a paradigm shift. This previously self-governing literary radicalism was now multifariously entangled with Soviet communism during its most awful hour. An unofficial state of emergency escalated so that a range of journals—this time, New Masses, Modern Monthly, and Partisan Review—once more served as barometers of the depth and breadth of radical opinion. Bit by bit, a strange new ethos enveloped the literary Left, one that blended heroism, sacrifice, and artistic triumph with fifteen years of purge trials in the Soviet Union, mortifying policy shifts in the international Communist movement, and relentless domestic repression against the organized Left in the United States. By the end of this phase, in the reactionary post–World War II years, most adherents of communism (not just the pre-dominant pro-Soviet Communism, but the other varieties of communism such as Trotskyism and Bukharinism) desperately fled their Depression-era affiliations. The upshot was a blurring of the record. This occurred in ways that may have seemed clever for autobiographical concealment (by one-time literary radicals who feared exposure or embarrassment at youthful excesses) but became maddening for future scholars wishing to parse the writers’ former convictions. As literary radicalism passed through the Cold War, 1960s radicalization, the late 20th-century culture wars, and into the new millennium, the tradition was routinely reframed so that it faces us today as a giant puzzle. New research and scholarship emerge every year to provide insights into a very complicated body of writing, but there is a fretful ambivalence about its actual location and weight in literary history. Not surprisingly, most overall scholarly histories, chronicles, and anthologies do not include the category of literary radicalism as a well-defined, principal topic. This is because enthusiasts of the last twenty-five years brilliantly championed the tradition less under the rubric of “literary radicalism” than as the fertile soil for a blooming of gender-conscious, multicultural, and polycentric legacies connected to the Left but primarily rendered as eruptions of American literary modernity onto the world stage. These revisionist images came to us in discrete volumes about black writers, women writers, regional writers, children’s writers, Jewish writers, and so forth. Nonetheless, such celebratory portraits remained in competition with a dark double, a notion that nearly all literary radicals were wanting in artistic value. This skeptical appraisal was entrenched in an older scholarship, a point of view that is partly an aftereffect of the long shadow that the Communist imbroglio cast on its entire legacy.


Author(s):  
Romana Gloria Falcón Vega

During the formation of the Mexican nation, jefaturas políticas, or prefectures, as they will be called generically in this article, were basic institutions (1812–1917) for centralizing and organizing power and assuring governance. This was a vital task given the civil and international wars the country would endure. These powerful institutions were the mediators between the upper and lower political echelons and social classes. In the prefectures were vested an impressive range of diverse responsibilities—agrarian, fiscal, preserving order, military conscriptions, educational, medical and sanitary services, promoting the economy, elaborating statistics, mapmaking—which made modernization and administrative functionality very difficult. At the turn of the 20th century, this was an obstacle to the modernization and efficacy of the regime. Even though prefectures had responsibilities for all of Mexico, they also had an important degree of flexibility to attend to local needs. Therefore, laws and practices were adapted to the peculiarities of the different states, for example, regulating labor or conciliating rivalries that sprang from the application of liberal agrarian policies. Prefects governed specific political districts in which the states were divided and were generally appointed and removed freely by the governors as their personal representatives to enforce laws and policies and to control any opposition. They were remembered in popular imaginary, literary, and revolutionary historiography as brutal and corrupt functionaries loyal only to the upper classes and their clientelist networks. Contemporary studies have proved that these modalities—brutality and corruption—have a place in the prefect’s box of tools, but new research has widened the historiographic perspective and showed how differently these functionaries could act. In fact, they used most of their energy trying to negotiate with the whole range of social classes and political factions. But their repressive character led to its elimination: they fought the revolution of 1910, and when they lost they were suppressed in 1917.


2020 ◽  
pp. 095269512092717
Author(s):  
Kirsten Leng ◽  
Katie Sutton

The historiography of sexology is young. It is also expanding at a remarkable pace, both in terms of the volume of publications and, more notably, in terms of its geographical, disciplinary, and intersectional reach. This special issue takes stock of these new directions, while offering new research contributions that expand our understanding of the interdisciplinary and transnational formation of this field from the late 19th through to the mid 20th century. The five articles that make up this special issue stage historiographical interventions by challenging the tendency within sexological history to focus on the medical, the homosexual, the human, and the Western European at the expense of other disciplines, diagnoses, non-human subjects, and geographical locations. A particular strength of these contributions is their focus on mapping conversations among and between sexologists on both sides of the Atlantic in the early to mid 20th century – particularly in Germany, Britain, and the US – and between East and West in the early Cold War era.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document