Results by title

This book offers a series of probing reflections on issues at the heart of recent debates in philosophy, literary theory, and intellectual history. In ten powerfully articulated essays, Richard Wolin calls into question the implied radicalism of the so-called postmodern turn, exposes the unstated agenda of neoconservative cultural theory, and provides a major reinterpretation of Walter Benjamin’s place in contemporary cultural studies. 

At the center of the book lie the peculiar and troubling affinities between two groups of cultural critics usually seen as antithetical: the radical conservative thinkers of Germany’s Weimar Republic and the French poststructuralists who came to the prominence in the aftermath of the May 1968 uprising. 

Wolin concludes the volume with a cogent reappraisal of “antihumanism” as a leitmotif of postwar French intellectual culture, along with a reassessment of the “de Man affair” and its implications for the poststructuralist interpretation of fascism. 

In the immediate decades after World War II, the French National Railways (SNCF) was celebrated for its acts of wartime heroism. However, recent debates and litigation have revealed the ways the SNCF worked as an accomplice to the Third Reich and was actively complicit in the deportation of 75,000 Jews and other civilians to death camps. Sarah Federman delves into the interconnected roles—perpetrator, victim, and hero—the company took on during the harrowing years of the Holocaust.

The Covid pandemic has put all modern societies to a serious test of resilience. The interdisciplinary research on which this book is based examined how four European governments behaved in these circumstances. During the months of the crisis, the team of experts coordinated by the editors of this volume took a close look at the decision-making processes in the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, and Slovakia – the so-called Visegrad Four.

The inquiries focused on experiences from the academic, health, economic and social fields. The methods of comparison included surveys, interviews, discourse analysis, for which the adaptive leadership theory provided the conceptual framework.

The conclusions are both academic and practical. Aside the description of the pandemic responses, the research had a formative dimension: how can an adaptive leadership approach better help societies manage the health and societal impacts of similar challenges? The spectrum of emerging anti-democratic tendencies in the region provided the specific context of the exercise. The four states face varying degrees of democratic backsliding as well as illiberal influences that have affected their response to the pandemic, which gives this research on the Visegrad Four a worldwide resonance.

The contributions to this volume not only indicate the intellectual vibrancy and diversity of cutting-edge research in Holocaust studies but also reflect multiple approaches to the necessary work of expanding the canon of research in the field and of adopting varied disciplinary perspectives, engaging with global perspectives as well as local studies.

This collection’s chapters manifest three broad categories: history, literature, and memory; at the same time, however, as the interdisciplinary nature of these chapters indicate, these categories should not be regarded as mutually exclusive or discrete. On the contrary, they overlap and intersect in compelling ways, demonstrating the dynamic character of contemporary Holocaust studies, which views history, narrative representation, and commemoration as mutually informative. Further, the contributors continue the recent trend in Holocaust studies whereby specific regional and national narratives are integrated into a more global approach to the event: Newer studies have continued to incorporate what was once termed the periphery into a more global examination of the experiences of Jewish refugees in flight to Latin America, Africa, and the Soviet Union. At the same time, very specific local studies deepen our knowledge of the mechanics of genocide, along with the experiences of refugees in flight, and the subsequent dimensions of Holocaust memory and representation. 

From the congressional debate over the “fall of China” to the drama of the Army–McCarthy hearings to the kitchen faceoff between Richard Nixon and Nikita Khrushchev, the political history of the early Cold War was long dominated by studies of presidential administrations, anticommunism, and foreign policy. In Liberty and Justice for All? a group of distinguished historians representing a variety of disciplinary perspectives—social history, cultural history, intellectual history, labor history, urban history, women's history, African American studies, and media studies—expand on the political history of the early Cold War by rethinking the relationship between politics and culture. How, for example, did folk music help to keep movement culture alive throughout the 1950s? How did the new medium of television change fundamental assumptions about politics and the electorate? How did American experiences with religion in the 1950s strengthen the separation of church and state? How did race, class, and gender influence the relationship between citizens and the state? These are just some of the questions addressed in this wide-ranging set of essays.

In addition to volume editor Kathleen G. Donohue, contributors include Howard Brick, Kari Frederickson, Andrea Friedman, David Greenberg, Grace Elizabeth Hale, Jennifer Klein, Laura McEnaney, Kevin M. Schultz, Jason Scott Smith, Landon R. Y. Storrs, and Jessica Weiss.

This book of thirteen conversations introduces us to the life of an exceptional person—theatre critic, Germanist, and long-time chair of the Open Lithuania Fund board—Irena Veisaitė. The dialogue between Lithuanian historian Aurimas Švedas and a woman who reflects deeply on her experiences reveals both one individual’s historically dramatic life and the fate of Europe and Lithuania in the twentieth century.

Through the complementary lenses of history and memory, we confront with Veisaitė the horrific events of the Holocaust, which brought about the end of the Lithuanian Jewish world. We also meet an array of world-class cultural figures, see fragments of legendary theatre performances, and hear meaningful words that were spoken or heard decades ago.

This book’s interlocutors do not so much seek to answer the question “What was it like?” but instead repeatedly ask each other: “What, how, and why do we remember? What is the meaning of our experiences? How can history help us to live in the present and create the future? How do we learn to understand and forgive?”

A series of Veisaitė’s texts, statements, and letters, presented at the end of the book suggest further ways of answering these questions.

Until the previous decade, constitutionalism in Eastern Europe was considered to be an outmoded concept of the nineteenth century. Changes in the region, however, have brought back the fundamental question of the need to restrict government power through social self-binding.

This book discusses the mechanisms of such restriction, including different forms of the separation of powers and constitutional review. It relates the theoretical and practical importance of the issue to the present world-wide discontent with majoritarian democracy and the growing disrepute of parliaments. Increasing executive efficiency is, however, a threat to fundamental rights, and the battlecry of efficiency is often only a means to new despotism and inefficiency. A careful re-evaluation of the concept of constitutionalism assists in the search for a useful balance between majoritarianism and rights, and in the avoidance of all forms of public tyranny.

Written in non-technical language and using the most important English, American, French, and German examples of constitutional history, the book also examines East European (in particular, Russian) and Latin American examples, in part to illustrate certain dead-ends in constitutional development. It is intended to be an introduction for all those concerned with liberty.

Le titre est, bien entendu, inspiré par Althusser (“Lire Le Capital”) – mais de façon polémique. Par “lire Marx” j'entends lire Marx et non pas Engels, Mao, Gramsci, Lukács, Marcuse, Althusser et ainsi de suite. En d'autres termes : le but de ce cours est, avant tout, de délibérément désintriquer la pensée de Marx de la pensée marxiste. Une polémique avec certains marxistes sera ainsi menée en sous-main, par des allusions ponctuelles. Un tel programme véhicule trois implications majeures : Qu'il y a effectivement une différence de pensée entre Marx et le marxisme. Ce premier point sera établi à travers une lecture philosophique de Marx : l'hypothèse étant que ce qui se trouve de plus original dans Marx, ce n'est ni sa pensée politique, ni sa pensée sociologique ou économique, mais bien sa charpente philosophique. Cette charpente philosophique détermine et situe ses autres théories. La seconde implication, c'est qu'un clivage entre Marx et les marxistes existe comme tel, qu'il peut être défini par certaines caractéristiques générales, et que ces caractéristiques générales différent de la pensée originale de Marx ou la restreignent. Il s'agit là d'un sujet passablement complexe, voire compliqué ; mais on peut résumer ce clivage en disant que le marxisme

a surtout retenu de Marx les éléments utiles à l'action politique dans une situation donnée, urgente. Une théorie de la “praxis révolutionnaire” a donc pris la place de la philosophie. La troisième implication est la précompréhension qui préside à l'approche du texte. Un texte est quelque chose d'imprimé : il représente comme tel un objet clos, constitué, fini. Mais nous n'en obtiendrons de réponses décisives que si nous le soumettons à des questions décisives. Et la question décisive que soulèvent les marxistes, c'est l'urgence d'une situation révolutionnaire (qu'elle existe de fait ou doive être réalisée). Leur question est donc généralement homothétique à celle de Lénine : “Que faire ?” C'est la question de ceux qu'Althusser appelle les “intellectuels militants” (pour Marx 24), et qui participent directement aux luttes de la classe ouvrière. Une telle “ lecture” de Marx est stratégique. Or, je tiens que la lecture stratégique ne peut que rester aveugle, de par sa nature même, au questionnement philosophique. Notre précompréhension des textes de Marx n'a, par conséquent, rien de stratégique ; elle est bien plutôt qu'ils proposent une réponse à la plus ancienne question de la philosophie occidentale : ti to on, savoir : qu'est-ce que l'être ? ou : qu'est-ce que la réalité, ainsi que son corollaire : qu'est-ce que la vérité ? Donc : Marx versus marxisme ; le concept de “praxis” comme étant le concept différenciant Marx du marxisme ; une double théorie des textes. Développons plus avant ces trois points

Winner, 2022 Society of Midland Authors award for Biography/Memoir

Evan S. Connell (1924–2013) emerged from the American Midwest determined to become a writer. He eventually made his mark with attention-getting fiction and deep explorations into history. His linked novels Mrs. Bridge (1959) and Mr. Bridge (1969) paint a devastating portrait of the lives of a prosperous suburban family not unlike his own that, more than a half century later, continue to haunt readers with their minimalist elegance and muted satire. As an essayist and historian, Connell produced a wide range of work, including a sumptuous body of travel writing, a bestselling epic account of Custer at the Little Bighorn, and a singular series of meditations on history and the human tragedy.
 
This first portrait and appraisal of an under-recognized American writer is based on personal accounts by friends, relatives, writers, and others who knew him; extensive correspondence in library archives; and insightful literary and cultural analysis of Connell’s work and its context. It also illuminates aspects of American publishing, Hollywood, male anxieties, and the power of place.

Highlighting efforts to address today’s most pressing social challenges through the study of texts in languages other than English.

Literature for Change examines how the study, production, circulation, and reception of literary texts in languages other than English contribute to addressing contemporary social challenges. Through eleven case studies across diverse languages and cultures, it analyzes the real-world impact of literary research, showing its relevance to sectors such as museums and heritage, the environmental and medical humanities, and the digital sphere. Combining hermeneutic and aesthetic approaches, the chapters demonstrate the value of varied methods, including theoretically grounded creative inquiry, and the connections between literary studies and other disciplines. The book affirms the importance of the field of modern languages and the continuing role of literary texts in shaping social and cultural life.