|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
191609
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Redressing the dearth of women’s voices in the historiography of international thought is a process now well underway. This worthy recipient of the Joseph Fletcher Prize for Best Edited Book in Historical International Relations in 2021 is the most recent, and one of the most powerful contributions to this enterprise. It furnishes the discipline of International Relations (IR) with accounts of eighteen women who contributed to the history of the international. Moreover, in incorporating these voices into the history of international thought, the volume necessarily introduces contentious methodological claims about what ‘international thought’ is, and how the discipline of IR carves out its intellectual terrain. Owens’ and Rietzler’s volume then, delivers twice—not only by providing a rich historical account of women’s international thinking, but also by showcasing the wide array of practices, locations, forms and modes through which the international has been constructed and contested, thereby challenging long held disciplinary assumptions and intellectual traditions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
095258
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2009.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The article seeks to do an audit of the state of International Relations theory (IRT) in India. It examines three facets of IRT in this connection. The first relates to the possibility of a tradition of thinking on issues of universal theoretical significance. The second pertains to an exploration of scholarly reflection on an important principle of Indian foreign policy, namely, non-alignment and the limits of theorizing it. The final facet examines the concerns that inform theorization by Indian scholars since the 1990s. In regard to the first facet, the article argues that there exists an Indian tradition of thinking on issues of order, justice and cosmopolitanism, even though it may not have been expressed in the language of IRT. With regard to non-alignment, the article argues that while it did not result in broader theoretical formulations, it raised a number of first order issues for further theorizing. Finally, it suggests that recent IRT invocations by Indian scholars reflect a more receptive conjuncture for such work, both in terms of India's own changing stature in the world system as well as an acknowledgement of more eclectic methods and possibilities in the broader world of the social sciences
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
141081
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article inquires into the cultural and political nexus of secular (stage) magic, modernity, and Orientalism at the turn of the twentieth century. It argues that these three arenas interacted in important and special ways to both shape and reflect the politics of knowledge of the period. In doing so, it draws attention to the ways in which secular magic has been overlooked as a historical phenomenon and highlights its utility in furthering our understanding of the great problematics of modernity and Orientalism; in particular, it suggests that magic actually provides an unusually vibrant and clear lens through which to view the politics of the Other and through which to explore issues of tradition and the modern. Focusing on two historical cases—the ‘Indian Rope Trick’ challenge issued by the Magic Circle in the 1930s and the astonishing ‘duel’ between the ‘Chinese’ magicians Chung Ling Soo and Ching Ling Foo in 1905—this article considers the ways in which discourses of origination, popular ideas about esotericism and the ‘mystic East’, and questions of technical competence interacted and competed in the culture politics of the early twentieth century.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
068098
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Berkeley, University of California Press, 2004.
|
| Description |
ix, 425p.Pbk
|
| Standard Number |
0520245369
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 050926 | 909/SZA 050926 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
114975
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2012.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
A new casting of diasporas, exiles and returnees as potentially transformative agents in post-conflict polities is the topic of this article. 'Return of Qualified Expatriates' programmes have recently been launched by international agencies in a number of post-conflict countries in an attempt to promote better capacity-building within post-conflict states institutions. This article argues that the ostensible technical orientation of these programmes is misleading, and they have a political significance which is noted and contested locally. In political terms, they represent attempts to smuggle Western hierarchies of knowledge into post-conflict reconstruction efforts under the cover of ethnic solidarity, to the detriment of local participation and empowerment. The article argues further that this is always contested by interested parties locally, often by mobilising alternative capacities, labelled 'authentic', in opposition. As such, strategies that attempt to use ethnic ties to overcome this local contestation are placing a significant burden on ethnic categories that are slippery, malleable and contested in post-conflict contexts. These points are demonstrated with reference to the cases of Cambodia and Timor-Leste.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
185929
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article’s premise is that war is ontological devastation, which opens up questions as to how to write about it. The paper contends that even critiques of war, whether critical-geopolitical analyses of global structures or ethnographies of the everyday, center war in ways that underscore erasures of non-war life, and therefore risk participating in that same ontological devastation. Engagement with extra-academic conversational worlds, both their social lives and their intellectual ones, is ethically necessary in writing war. To that end, this article examines poetic production from one front in the US-led “Global War on Terror”: Swat Valley, Pakistan. Poets in Swat have produced an analysis of war as ontological devastation, but also protest their reduction, in the minds of others and themselves, to the violence-stricken present. This intervention is not an intellectual critique alone. Focusing on a new genre of “resistance” poetry, this article shows how poets resist war by maintaining worlds partly beyond it. In this, the critical content and the social lives of poetry are inseparable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|