Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
Periodically reviewing developments in a subject area and reflecting on the past and future directions of a discipline can be useful and instructive. In the case of Modern Greek Studies, this has rarely been done, and most of the reviews of the field come from USA.1So I take this opportunity to offer some thoughts on what has propelled changes in the field over the last forty years, on the fruitful (and occasionally trenchant) dialogue between Neohellenists inside and outside Greece and on the future of modern Greek studies as an academic discipline. During this period modern Greek studies have flourished with a number of new trends, debates and scholarly preoccupations emerging. At the same time many research students received their doctorates from departments of Modern Greek Studies, particularly in the United Kingdom, and were subsequently appointed to teaching posts at Greek, Cypriot or other European, American and Australian universities. Modern Greek departments in the UK have often been the driving force behind the discipline since the early 1980s. New approaches were introduced, challenging ideas were debated and influential publications emerged from those departments, which shaped the agenda for the study of modern Greek language, literature and culture. It should be noted that the influence of those departments in shaping the direction of modern Greek Studies has been out of all proportion to the number of staff teaching in them.
Periodically reviewing developments in a subject area and reflecting on the past and future directions of a discipline can be useful and instructive. In the case of Modern Greek Studies, this has rarely been done, and most of the reviews of the field come from USA.1So I take this opportunity to offer some thoughts on what has propelled changes in the field over the last forty years, on the fruitful (and occasionally trenchant) dialogue between Neohellenists inside and outside Greece and on the future of modern Greek studies as an academic discipline. During this period modern Greek studies have flourished with a number of new trends, debates and scholarly preoccupations emerging. At the same time many research students received their doctorates from departments of Modern Greek Studies, particularly in the United Kingdom, and were subsequently appointed to teaching posts at Greek, Cypriot or other European, American and Australian universities. Modern Greek departments in the UK have often been the driving force behind the discipline since the early 1980s. New approaches were introduced, challenging ideas were debated and influential publications emerged from those departments, which shaped the agenda for the study of modern Greek language, literature and culture. It should be noted that the influence of those departments in shaping the direction of modern Greek Studies has been out of all proportion to the number of staff teaching in them.
SUMMARY: В статье рассматриваются взаимоотношения между теориями расы, националистическими идеями и политическими взглядами венгерских и румынских интеллектуалов – подданных Австро-Венгерской империи – в период с 1880 по 1918 гг. Мариус Турда считает, что именно в этот период возникают новый политический язык и практики, основанные на признании расового начала и социал-дарвинистских представлений об общественно-политической динамике. В первой части статьи рассматривается институциализация антропологии в Венгрии как научной дисциплины, в контексте которой отдельные этнографические интерпретации были интегрированы в проекты “археологии” и сохранения этнических сообществ. В растущем интересе венгерских исследователей к фигуре внутреннего “Другого” автор усматривает антропологизацию концепции “идентичности”, которая должна была соответствовать национальному пониманию. С этой точки зрения в статье рассматриваются культурные и исторические теории расы, предложенные такими венгерскими этнографами и антропологами, как Антал Херманн, Паул Ханфлви, Золт Бьеси и Михаль Режи. Адаптацию европейской антропологии к конкретным условиям Австро-Венгерской империи М. Турда локализует в двух парадигмах: либеральной (Херманн, Ханфлви и Бьеси) и “национально-дарвинистской” (его в статье представляют румынский националист, антрополог Аурель Поповичи и венгерский националист Михаль Режи). В отличие от австрийской антропологии, венгерская либеральная традиция устанавливала факт культурного превосходства венгров и их исторического права на политическое доминирование на землях “короны Св. Стефана”, конструируя свою дисциплину как национальную венгерскую. Радикальные националисты типа Поповичи или Режи отвергали такой либеральный национальный дискурс мирного сосуществования в рамках венгерского государства, противопоставляя ему жесткий расовый социальный дарвинизм, оказавшийся востребованным в ходе поствоенного урегулирования.
This article focuses on the current proliferation of ethnographies written by nonprofessional ethnographers, a mode of cultural production I call "popular folklore." My task in this work is twofold. First, I discuss the function of professional folklore and anthropology as well as of the cultural commodification of ethnicities in the United States in reconfiguring the "common people" from objects of ethnography into legitimate ethnographic authors. Second, I discuss the value of a metaethnographic perspective on popular folklore for the discipline. I do so by undertaking a close analysis of the politics of a feminist popular ethnography of the "folkness" of Greek America. My reading makes a case for the productive cross-fertilization between the metaethnography of popular folklore and professional ethnography. The circulation of popular folklore, I suggest, opens a discursive space for a tactically interventionist folklore ethnography that engages in a critical dialogue with its nonprofessional counterparts. This proposed research agenda seeks to enlarge the universe of alternative meanings about the social constitution of selves or collectivities while raising acute questions about the ways to enhance the public resonance of critical folklore scholarship.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.