Illicit Ecologies: Queer Animacy and Epistemological Erasure in History of Wolves

Meliora ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Esther Goldberg
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Knowledge ◽  
Knowledge Production ◽  
Life Forms ◽  
The Novel ◽  
Christian Science ◽  
Scientific Knowledge Production ◽  
History Of

This thesis attends to the slippages between life and nonlife in Emily Fridlunds 2017 novel History of Wolves. It traces the matter that is granted life or animacy, as well as the matter that is devitalized. Through the protagonist, Linda, the novel investigates the role of both scientific knowledge production and Christian Science in placing arbitrary biological limits on life forms, making some visible and others unseeable and unsayable. The thesis fleshes out the characters’ climate denial as yet another erasure of the animate agents. Ultimately, the thesis asks: if we can expand what is worthy of life, can we, in turn, expand what agents, actors, and matters are deserving of care?  

The history of science and the history of bureaucratic knowledge: Saxon mining, circa 1770

2018 ◽  
Vol 56 (4) ◽  
pp. 403-431 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sebastian Felten
Keyword(s):  
Early Modern ◽  
Scientific Knowledge ◽  
Knowledge Production ◽  
Distributed Cognition ◽  
Modern Science ◽  
Ore Deposit ◽  
Scientific Knowledge Production ◽  
History Of ◽  
High Ranking Official ◽  
Knowledge Claims

This article looks into mining in central Germany in the late eighteenth century as one area of highly charged exchange between (specific manifestations of early modern) science and the (early modern) state. It describes bureaucratic knowledge as socially distributed cognition by following the steps of a high-ranking official that led him to discover a rich silver ore deposit. Although this involved hybridization of practical/artisanal and theoretical/scientific knowledge, and knowers, the focus of this article is on purification or boundary work that took place when actors in and around the mines consciously contributed to different circuits of knowledge production. For the sake of analysis, the article suggests a way of opposing bureaucratic versus scientific knowledge production, even when the sites, actors involved in, and practices of that knowledge production were the same or similar. Whereas the science of the time invoked consensus among equals to conflate competing knowledge claims, bureaucracies did so by applying a hierarchy among ranked individuals.

Between the Lab and the Field: Plants and the Affective Atmospheres Of Southern Science

2021 ◽  
pp. 016224392110551
Author(s):  
Sandra Calkins
Keyword(s):  
Molecular Biology ◽  
Scientific Knowledge ◽  
Knowledge Production ◽  
Scientific Collaboration ◽  
Scientific Work ◽  
Scientific Knowledge Production ◽  
Biology I ◽  
Term Field

In view of persistent global inequalities in scientific knowledge production with clear centers and peripheries, this paper examines a lingering concern for many scientists in the Global South: why is it, at times, so hard to have scientific insights from the South recognized? This paper addresses this big question from within a long-term field immersion in a Ugandan–Australian scientific collaboration in molecular biology. I show how disciplinary hierarchies of value affect the distribution of labor between Uganda and Australia and thematize the role of place and its affective atmospheres that texture the quotidian scientific work in this project. Unsurprisingly, they tend to devalue Ugandan sites and contributions, and turn Uganda into a rather unlikely site for new insights to emerge. However, in spite of doing devalued and outsourced “menial” labor such as fieldwork, Ugandan biologists’ fieldwork involves affective encounters with their experimental banana plants that thereby become differently thinkable. The paper argues that attending to affective atmospheres that infuse research sites offers clues about scientists’ position in global hierarchies and at the same time can help make room for insights that emanate from unexpected places.

Patriotic hygiene: Tracing new places of knowledge production about malaria in Vietnam, 1919–75

2013 ◽  
Vol 44 (3) ◽  
pp. 423-443 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michitake Aso
Keyword(s):  
Malaria Control ◽  
Scientific Knowledge ◽  
Knowledge Production ◽  
Industrial Hygiene ◽  
Nation Building ◽  
Medical Doctors ◽  
Racial Hygiene ◽  
Building Projects ◽  
Scientific Knowledge Production ◽  
History Of

This article examines knowledge production about malaria in colonial and postcolonial Vietnam. During the 1920s and 1930s, medical doctors cooperated with plantation managers in order to develop industrial hygiene techniques consisting of environmental modification and quinine use. By the 1930s, changing motivations, in particular racial hygiene and patriotism, drove malaria control efforts. The wartime pressures to control malaria between the 1940s and 1975 further encouraged patriotic hygiene. This history of malaria science in Vietnam highlights the tension between change and continuity and shows the importance of place in the conjunction of scientific knowledge production and nation-building projects.

Re-examining the early history of the Leiden jar: Stabilization and variation in transforming a phenomenon into a fact

2018 ◽  
Vol 56 (3) ◽  
pp. 314-342 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cibelle Celestino Silva ◽  
Peter Heering
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Production ◽  
Current Knowledge ◽  
Early Period ◽  
Electrical Circuit ◽  
Early History ◽  
Primary Sources ◽  
New Device ◽  
Scientific Knowledge Production ◽  
History Of

In this paper, we examine the period that immediately followed the invention of the Leiden jar. Historians of science have developed narrations that emphasize the role of grounding during the process of charging the jar. In this respect, this episode shows significant aspects that can be used to characterize science, scientific knowledge production, and the nature of science. From our own experimentation, we learned that grounding was not necessary in order to produce the effect. These experiences inspired us to go back to primary sources. In doing so, we came to a new understanding of the early period after Kleist’s and Musschenbroek’s initial creation of the effect. From our analysis, we conclude that it is not the grounding which was perceived as a major innovation (as well as a challenge) during this early period of the discussion but the concept of an electrical circuit. This understanding was fundamental in characterizing the Leiden jar as a new device challenging the then current knowledge of experimental practices in the field of electricity.

Tom Jones

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henry Fielding
Keyword(s):  
Eighteenth Century ◽  
Public Sphere ◽  
The Novel ◽  
Fourth Edition ◽  
Tom Jones ◽  
History Of

Fielding's comic masterpiece of 1749 was immediately attacked as `A motley history of bastardism, fornication, and adultery'. Indeed, his populous novel overflows with a marvellous assortment of prudes, whores, libertines, bumpkins, misanthropes, hypocrites, scoundrels, virgins, and all too fallible humanitarians. At the centre of one of the most ingenious plots in English fiction stands a hero whose actions were, in 1749, as shocking as they are funny today. Expelled from Mr Allworthy's country estate for his wild temper and sexual conquests, the good-hearted foundling Tom Jones loses his money, joins the army, and pursues his beloved across Britain to London, where he becomes a kept lover and confronts the possibility of incest. Tom Jones is rightly regarded as Fielding's greatest work, and one of the first and most influential of English novels. This carefully modernized edition is based on Fielding's emended fourth edition text and offers the most thorough notes, maps, and bibliography. The introduction uses the latest scholarship to examine how Tom Jones exemplifies the role of the novel in the emerging eighteenth-century public sphere.

Deliberative Democracy and Science

2018 ◽  
pp. 639-654
Author(s):  
Alfred Moore
Keyword(s):  
Deliberative Democracy ◽  
Scientific Knowledge ◽  
Science Studies ◽  
Public Officials ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Consensus Conferences ◽  
Scientific Knowledge Production ◽  
Science And Politics ◽  
Emergence Of Institutions

What might a deliberative politics of science look like? This chapter addresses this question by bringing together science studies and the theories and practices of deliberative democracy. This chapter begins by discussing the importance of considering the role of deliberation within scientific communities and institutions, particularly as it bears on the production of scientific judgments and decisions at the boundary between science and politics. The chapter then discusses the emergence of institutions for communicating scientific knowledge to policy-makers, public officials and citizens, which include not only expert tribunals but also the development of citizen panels, consensus conferences, and other forms of mini-publics. Finally, the chapter considers the role of “uninvited” ’ participation in science, emphasizing the role of social movements and critical civil society in both challenging and informing scientific knowledge production.

scholarly journals The First Production of The Brothers Karamazov on the Russian stage in the Mirror of the Press (Based on the Collections of the Vladimir Dahl State Museum of the History of Russian Literature)

2020 ◽  
pp. 219-241
Author(s):  
Pavel E. Fokin ◽  
Ilya O. Boretsky
Keyword(s):  
Russian Literature ◽  
The Novel ◽  
Theatrical Production ◽  
Distinctive Features ◽  
The Brothers Karamazov ◽  
The Press ◽  
State Museum ◽  
History Of ◽  
Brothers Karamazov

The first Russian theatrical production of Dostoevsky's novel The Brothers Karamazov premiered on the eve of Dostoevsky’s 20th death anniversary on January 26 (February 7) 1901 at the Theater of the Literary and Artistic Society (Maly Theater) in St. Petersburg as a benefit for Nikolay Seversky. The novel was adapted for the stage by K. Dmitriev (Konstantin Nabokov). The role of Dmitry Karamazov was performed by the famous dramatic actor Pavel Orlenev, who had received recognition for playing the role of Raskolnikov. The play, the staging, the actors’ interpretation of their roles became the subject of detailed reviews of the St. Petersburg theater critics and provoked controversial assessments and again raised the question about the peculiarities of Dostoevsky’s prose and the possibility of its presentation on stage. The production of The Brothers Karamazov at the Maly Theater in St. Petersburg and the controversy about it became an important stage in the development of Russian realistic theater and a reflection of the ideas of Dostoevsky’s younger contemporaries about the distinctive features and contents of his art. The manuscript holdings of the Vladimir Dahl State Museum of the History of Russian Literature includes Anna Dostoevskaya’s collection containing a set of documentary materials (the playbill, newspaper advertisements, reviews, feuilletons), which makes it possible to form a complete picture of the play and Russian viewers’ reaction to it. The article provides a description of the performance, and voluminous excerpts from the most informative press reviews. The published materials have not previously attracted special attention of researchers.

scholarly journals The First Production of The Brothers Karamazov on the Russian stage in the Mirror of the Press (Based on the Collections of the Vladimir Dahl State Museum of the History of Russian Literature)

2020 ◽  
pp. 219-241
Author(s):  
Pavel E. Fokin ◽  
Ilya O. Boretsky
Keyword(s):  
Russian Literature ◽  
The Novel ◽  
Theatrical Production ◽  
Distinctive Features ◽  
The Brothers Karamazov ◽  
The Press ◽  
State Museum ◽  
History Of ◽  
Brothers Karamazov

The first Russian theatrical production of Dostoevsky's novel The Brothers Karamazov premiered on the eve of Dostoevsky’s 20th death anniversary on January 26 (February 7) 1901 at the Theater of the Literary and Artistic Society (Maly Theater) in St. Petersburg as a benefit for Nikolay Seversky. The novel was adapted for the stage by K. Dmitriev (Konstantin Nabokov). The role of Dmitry Karamazov was performed by the famous dramatic actor Pavel Orlenev, who had received recognition for playing the role of Raskolnikov. The play, the staging, the actors’ interpretation of their roles became the subject of detailed reviews of the St. Petersburg theater critics and provoked controversial assessments and again raised the question about the peculiarities of Dostoevsky’s prose and the possibility of its presentation on stage. The production of The Brothers Karamazov at the Maly Theater in St. Petersburg and the controversy about it became an important stage in the development of Russian realistic theater and a reflection of the ideas of Dostoevsky’s younger contemporaries about the distinctive features and contents of his art. The manuscript holdings of the Vladimir Dahl State Museum of the History of Russian Literature includes Anna Dostoevskaya’s collection containing a set of documentary materials (the playbill, newspaper advertisements, reviews, feuilletons), which makes it possible to form a complete picture of the play and Russian viewers’ reaction to it. The article provides a description of the performance, and voluminous excerpts from the most informative press reviews. The published materials have not previously attracted special attention of researchers.

How Population Became an Environmental Problem

2018 ◽  
pp. 49-77
Author(s):  
Jade S. Sasser
Keyword(s):  
Land Use ◽  
Scientific Knowledge ◽  
Knowledge Production ◽  
Environmental Problem ◽  
Environmental Problems ◽  
Political Advocacy ◽  
Environmental Sciences ◽  
Population Politics ◽  
History Of ◽  
A Site

Chapter 2 explores the history of how population came to be known as an environmental problem, emerging through debates about eugenics, war, geopolitical stability, and land use. I begin the chapter by exploring how population was first identified as a central problem of state-making and security, and its role in the evolution of ecological sciences. Next, I trace the ways the environmental sciences and population politics have entwined and overlapped in subsequent decades. Throughout, I analyze the ways knowledge production linking population to environmental problems moved between political advocacy motivated by concerns about war and geopolitical security, concerns about planetary limits, and a site of scientific knowledge development and struggle.

Nietzsche Reads Dostoevsky: Chronology and Reception Material

2021 ◽  
pp. 210-232
Author(s):  
Igor A. Ebanoidze ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Friedrich Nietzsche ◽  
The Novel ◽  
History Of

he study, based on the analysis of the correspondence, notebooks of Friedrich Nietzsche and other sources from his closest circle, is devoted to the history of the acquaintance of the German thinker with the Dostoevsky’s books and it’s reception in the works of Nietzsche. There are three documented stages of this reception: the end of the winter of 1887, the spring of 1887, and the turn of 1887–1888. The results of the study suggest, first of all, the importance for Nietzsche of acquaintance with the story “Notes from the Underground” (despite the fact that Nietzsche read a French compilation from “Notes” and “Hostess”), as well as the role of the novel “Demons” in the concept of Nietzsche’s “Antichrist”.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document