New York Law School Magazine, Vol. 38, No. 2

Features: 2020 Strategic Plan Bookshelf: Professor Edward A. Purcell Jr.’s Antonin Scalia and American Constitutionalism: The Historical Significance of a Judicial Icon Looking West: Lincoln Patel ’12 Is Helping to Reshape Manhattan’s Far West Side Stories From South Africa: Ellmann Judicial Fellows Jennifer Kuhn 3L and Tammy Tran ’19 Share Their Experienceshttps://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/alum_mag/1021/thumbnail.jp

The Rock, Summer 2014 (vol. 83, no. 2)

https://poetcommons.whittier.edu/rock/1002/thumbnail.jp

Fantastic Extrapolations: An Exploratory Bibliometric Investigation into the Historic Development of English-Language Fantasy and Science Fiction Scholarship Through Fifty Years of Extrapolation

There are relatively few bibliometric or citation analysis historical studies of the scholarly literature of arts or humanities fields as compared with the science, technical, medical, or social science disciplines; many studies focus on the journal literature and use the formal works cited reference lists as captured by citation indexes as the basis for their conclusions. This study looks at aspects of the scholarship of the literary and media-based popular culture field of fantasy and science fiction (F&SF; aka: fantastic, fantastika) studies through the first 50 years of Extrapolation (December 1959-Fall 2009), the oldest continuing scholarly journal in the field, in three areas: -- History and editorial purpose, types of contributions, and recognition by general-, literature-, and F&SF-focused indexing services; -- Analyses of the 785 scholars published in the journal, by gender, co-authorship, affiliation and status (geographical, institutional, ranks, disciplines, awards), their referencing practices, and identification of the 55 most frequently published scholars; and, -- Analyses of more than 15,000 references given to 2,035 primary (creative) authors and more than 8,000 individual creative works, including collaboratively authored media, religious, and other titles, by gender and national affiliation, and by types of works. publication sources, language, and ages/dates, as found in 937 articles by 656 different authors. The primary references analyzed come not only from the traditional bibliometric locations in Works Cited lists, but also from Notes, and the references found in the rarely if ever studied informal locations (implicit citations), primarily within the text of the articles. The most frequently referenced primary authors and works are identified: 118 authors (20-563 references), beginning with Ursula K. Le Guin (563 references; 105 different works), Robert A. Heinlein (519; 90), and H. G. Wells (328; 52); 182 primary (creative) works (10-191 references), starting with Star Trek: The Original Series (191 references), Star Trek: The Next Generation (106), George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four (77), Wells’ The Time Machine (73), and Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein (71). This study should interest historians of arts and humanities scholarship, F&SF scholars, and librarians and archivists responsible for collection development and collections management in the areas of literature and media

Marx in the West and in the East : Reading Capital in the Divided Germany

Kysyn artikkeliväitöskirjassani, miten Marxin Pääomaa luettiin jaetussa Saksassa kylmän sodan aikana. Millaisia kysymyksiä erilaisissa yhteiskunnallisissa konteksteissa ja instituutioissa toimineet itä- ja länsisaksalaiset tutkijat esittivät tälle klassikolle? Vaikka Berliinin muuri erotti nämä tutkijat toisistaan, kielimuuria heidän välissään ei ollut. Millaisia ristiriitoja heidän välilleen muodostui? Siirtyikö vaikutteita muurin yli? Keskityn Länsi-Saksassa opiskelijaliikkeen ja Frankfurtin koulun piirissä syntyneeseen Pääoman lukemisen perinteeseen Neue Marx-Lektüreen (NML) ja kysyn, miten itäsaksalainen Marx-tutkimus on vaikuttanut sen syntyyn ja muotoutumiseen. Nämä Pääomaa lukeneet Theodor Adornon oppilaat ovat tunnettuja torjuvasta asenteestaan DDR:ää ja sen valtioideologiaa, marxismi-leninismiä, kohtaan. Marxismi-leninismi toimi NML:lle identiteettiä konstituoivana ”toisena”. Se tarjosi negatiivisen esimerkin siitä, kuinka Marxia ja hänen pääteostaan ei ainakaan tule lukea. Marxismi-leninismi ei nimittäin ole yksi Marxista ammentava koulukunta muiden joukossa. Kommunistisen puolueen yksinvaltaa legitimoineena ideologiana se ei perustunut kriittiseen argumentaatioon, vaan puolue valvoi sen puhtautta salaisen poliisin avustuksella. Väitän, että akateeminen Marx-tutkimus on kuitenkin erotettava – vähintään analyyttisesti – valtioideologia marxismi-leninismistä, ja osoitan, että ensin mainittu vaikutti NML:ään myös positiivisesti. Esitän akateemisen Marxin lukemisen DDR:ssä ristiriitaisena ilmiönä, sillä SED:n autoritäärinen yksinvalta samaan aikaan sekä mahdollisti että vaikeutti Marx- tutkijoiden työtä. Toisaalta tällaiselle tutkimukselle tarjottiin ennennäkemättömät resurssit. Toisaalta puolue vaikeutti tutkijoiden työtä puuttumalla sen sisältöön. Osoitan, että tutkijat kuitenkin kävivät kiinnostavia keskusteluita, joskin aina tarpeellisella jargonilla höystettyinä. Siksi itäsaksalaisten tutkijoiden keskustelut Marxista – ja heidän kommenttinsa läntisten kollegoiden teksteihin – avautuvat vain lukijalle, joka ymmärtää ne reunaehdot, joiden puitteissa keskustelu oli mahdollista. Keskustelunvapaus oli suurimmillaan vuonna 1963 alkaneiden talousuudistusten aikana. Samaan aikaan opiskelijaliike toi Marxin ajatukset uudenlaisella tavalla Länsi-Saksan akateemiseen keskusteluun. Keskityn erityisesti vuosiin 1967 ja 1968, jotka olivat länsisaksalaista yhteiskuntaa ja konservatiivista yliopistoinstituutiota ravistelleen opiskelijaliikkeen huippuvuosia. Vuonna 1967 molemmissa Saksoissa juhlittiin myös Pääoman 100-vuotisjuhlaa, ja seuraavana vuonna tuli kuluneeksi 150 vuotta sen kirjoittajan syntymästä. Niin idässä kuin lännessäkin vuosi 1968 merkitsi kuitenkin sekä yhteiskunnallisen uudistusliikkeen huippukohtaa että sen loppua. Neuvostoliiton miehitettyä Tšekkoslovakian Itä-Saksan konservatiivit saivat lopullisen selkävoiton talousuudistajista, jotka olivat ammentaneet myös Prahan kevään ajatuksista. Lännessä opiskelijaliike puolestaan hiipui nopeasti tämän dramaattisen vuoden jälkeen. Keskityn artikkeleissani NML:n keskeisiin teemoihin: Marxin arvo- ja fetisismiteoriaan. Väitöskirjan kaksi ensimmäistä artikkelia käsittelevät konferenssia, joka järjestettiin Pääoman 100-vuotisjuhlan kunniaksi Frankfurtissa vuonna 1967. Tapahtuma oli keskeinen NML:n synnylle ja oli samalla harvinainen tilaisuus, jossa itä- ja länsisaksalaiset tutkijat keskustelivat toistensa kanssa kasvotusten. Ensimmäisessä artikkelissa erittelen tämän kohtaamisen suurimpia teoreettisia kiistanaiheita. Toisessa selitän, miksi Marxin fetisismiteoria askarrutti Pääoman frankfurtilaisia lukijoita enemmän kuin hänen lisäarvoteoriansa, kun taas itäsaksalaisille ensin mainittu oli potentiaalisesti kiusallinen aihe. Kolmannessa artikkelissa osoitan, että DDR:ssä vallalla ollut tulkinta Marxin arvoteoriasta eroaa NML:n puolustamasta arvoteorian monetaarisesta tulkinnasta huomattavasti vähemmän kuin sen edustajat ovat myöhemmin väittäneet. Selitän tätä NML:n edustajien tietämättömyyttä omasta historiastaan kylmän sodan ajan ilmapiirin synnyttämillä ristiriidoilla. Neljännessä artikkelissa tarkastelen varhaisen Neuvostoliiton tärkeimmän Marx- asiantuntijan Isaak Rubinin ajatusten vastaanottoa jaetussa Saksassa. Osoitan, että itäsaksalaiset tutkijat tunsivat Rubinin kirjoitukset paremmin ja länsisaksalaiset puolestaan huomattavasti huonommin kuin on väitetty. Tätä sanojen ja tekojen välistä ristiriitaa selittää se, että Stalinin vainoissa teloitetun Rubinin ajatusten vastaanotto oli kylmän sodan aikana – ymmärrettävistä syistä – politisoitunutta. Meidän on hyvä tuntea Pääoman lukemisen historiaa 1900-luvulla niin idässä kuin lännessäkin, jotta osaisimme eritellä sitä, mitkä Marxin ”teoriana” pitämistämme ajatuksista todella ovat peräisin 1800-luvulta ja mitkä ovat pikemminkin 1900-luvun, marxismi-leninismin ja kylmän sodan aikakauden perua.The dissertation examines how scholars approached Marx’s Capital in the divided Germany during the Cold War. At the project’s core is a set of scholarly articles addressing the following constellation of specific questions: What kinds of problems did researchers from the East and the West tackle in their reading of this classic work? While the Berlin Wall separated East German researchers from West German ones, there was no language barrier between them, so did they communicate with each other? What types of conflicts, contradictions in approach, or tensions, if any, existed between these sets of scholars, who were working in very different social and institutional contexts? Did influences cross the wall? The focus is on the Neue Marx-Lektüre (NML), a tradition of reading Capital that began to take shape around 1968 among Theodor W. Adorno’s students, with the matter of how East German scholarship influenced its formation. Today, the NML is known for its resolute rejection of the GDR’s state ideology, Marxism-Leninism. As a negative example, concretising how not to read Marx, that ideology functioned as an identity-precipitating Other for the NML. Not simply another way of reading Marx; Marxism-Leninism was an ideology of legitimisation for the autocratic rule of the Socialist Unity Party of Germany (SED). As such, it was not based on critical reasoning; rather, its purity was maintained by the secret police. When drawing an analytical distinction between Marxism-Leninism and genuine Marx scholarship, one can, however, find serious East German scholarship also, work that influenced the NML ‘positively’. The dissertation explores these influences. A pillar of its argument is that scholarship on Marx in the GDR was a phenomenon replete with contradiction. The authoritarian rule of the SED simultaneously facilitated and hindered the work of those scholars who applied Marx’s ideas or prepared his original manuscripts for publication in an official complete edition (MEGA). The party intervened substantially in research, so genuine discussion in this field required application of cunning. Accordingly, the contributions that remain relevant today are usually spiced with Marxist-Leninist jargon. Deciphering the meaning and importance of those texts demands awareness of the limits within which the argumentation of East German scholars moved. The years leading up to 1968 proved pivotal for both Western and Eastern literature on Marx. The student movement brought Marx into West Germany’s academic establishment, and economic reforms that began in 1963 in the GDR ushered in greater intellectual freedom. The years 1967 and 1968 marked not only the peak of the student movement but the centenary of Capital and the 150th birthday of its author, respectively. Scholarship on Capital poured forth in both German states then. In both East and West, 1968 brought social upheavals to a climax and then an abrupt end. Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia (marking the conservatives’ decisive victory over economic reformers who had found inspiration in the ideas of the Czechoslovak reform movement). Before this chill, especially vivid in the East, came an event with dramatic consequences for the discourse at the heart of the dissertation project: a conference held in 1967 for the centenary of Capital at Frankfurt. This also offered a rare opportunity for face-to-face discussion between East and West German scholars. The first two articles contributing to the dissertation concentrate on this occasion, which proved central to the emergence of the NML. These tease apart the nuances of why East and West Germans had decisively different perspectives on two profoundly important theoretical questions: Marx’s theories of value and the matter of commodity fetishism. The third article deepens the discussion via attention to the sticky issue of the ‘monetary theory of value’, one of the fundaments of the NML’s thinking. The piece demonstrates that, in contrast against what representatives of the NML argue, it cannot be set in opposition to East German positions. There are understandable reasons for the ignorance of scholars cohering around the NML in this respect: several of them related to adversarial stances. The final article fleshes out the picture by examining the reception of the ideas of Isaak Rubin, the most important early Soviet expert on Marx, in the divided Germany during the Cold War. It lays bare a discrepancy between word and deed in both German states, a nexus of contradictions that may stem from the fact that the reception of his ideas was extremely politicised in the Cold War setting. If scholars of any stripe are to be able to approach questions related to the interpretation of Capital in an unprejudiced manner today, it is imperative for them to grasp the history of the work’s reception in East and West alike. Only by doing this can we unearth the real Marx, a classic thinker whose ideas remain largely hidden beneath the weight of Marxism-Leninism, the Cold War, and twentieth-century history more generally

Cultural reproduction in contemporary American fiction

This thesis traces the ways in which David Foster Wallace, Jonathan Franzen, Michael Chabon, Jennifer Egan, and Colson Whitehead react against the historical, institutional, and formal limits imposed upon contemporary fiction and culture. It argues that in order to counteract such constraints, they embrace and co-opt older forms and values as enabling for their fiction. To map these processes and relationships, I read these five writers as engaging with and reflective of the concept of cultural reproduction. Building largely from Raymond Williams’s definitions, the lens of cultural reproduction acknowledges what Williams terms the ‘limits and pressures’ of the contemporary – such as the inheritance of postmodernism, creative writing programs, technological changes, and commercial demands – but also how these writers display agency in reaction to such limits. Chapter One uses pragmatist philosopher John Dewey’s theories of habit to suggest Wallace’s work explores the way culture is reproduced habitually. Chapter Two contends that Franzen’s attention to these processes is distinctly melodramatic, and his writing embodies melodrama, rather than his stated realism. Chapter Three examines Chabon, Egan, and Whitehead as representative of the ‘genrefication’ of contemporary American fiction, and how each embrace genre forms to respond to different elements and processes of cultural reproduction

Samanid material culture and identity formation in Post-Soviet Tajikistan

This thesis investigates the Samanids (819-1005 CE), an Early Islamic, Central Asian dynasty, as subjects and objects of identity formation. It examines their complex material cultural heritage and the role this may have played in synthesising their pre-Islamic roots and new religion. Having invented their own traditions, today the Samanids are themselves invented traditions, functioning as foundation figures in contemporary post-Soviet Tajikistan, part of the new social order production through symbols of power. This thesis looks at how this past is referenced in museums, monuments and memorial culture, and how this points the way to Tajikistan’s future. Two of the chief means of state communication of power and legitimation, today, as in medieval times, are architecture and currency. It is this study ‘in the round’ of Samanid identity formation and exposition of the interplay of past and present that is this thesis’ unique contribution to knowledge. Analysing objects directly ascribed to the Samanids, including the Samanid Mausoleum, a portrait medallion and their coinage, suggests that they modified how they portrayed themselves dependent on audience. These objects produced at the Samanid centre are compared to those found at the Empire’s periphery, within the present borders of Tajikistan, such as the upper Zarafshan Valley minarets and the intricate and sophisticated carved wooden Iskodar Mihrab, columns and panels found in nearby mosques. Their anthropomorphic designs are unusual in an Islamic religious context. Comparison of centre and periphery demonstrates Central Asia’s complexity in 9-10th century; however, the Tajikistani government today is arguably trying to project back a desired monocultural present on a heterogeneous past. While the Samanids as national identity symbols have been discussed by political scientists, these have not focused on the architecture and materiality of the new state’s cultural creations and how this may (or may not) inculcate identity and produce social cohesion. The Somoni statue is centrally sited in Dushanbe, where Lenin once stood. An understanding of how the Soviet past continues to inform the present is key to current Tajik culture and identity formation. Tajik culture is seen as ‘socialist in form and national in content’, in the reversal of the famous maxim

Computer Aided Verification

This open access two-volume set LNCS 10980 and 10981 constitutes the refereed proceedings of the 30th International Conference on Computer Aided Verification, CAV 2018, held in Oxford, UK, in July 2018. The 52 full and 13 tool papers presented together with 3 invited papers and 2 tutorials were carefully reviewed and selected from 215 submissions. The papers cover a wide range of topics and techniques, from algorithmic and logical foundations of verification to practical applications in distributed, networked, cyber-physical, and autonomous systems. They are organized in topical sections on model checking, program analysis using polyhedra, synthesis, learning, runtime verification, hybrid and timed systems, tools, probabilistic systems, static analysis, theory and security, SAT, SMT and decisions procedures, concurrency, and CPS, hardware, industrial applications

Opothérapie : émergence et développement d’une technique thérapeutique (France, 1889-1940)

Launched by a communication from the famous Professor Brown-Sequard in 1889 on the effects of self-injection of testicular juice, organotherapy – a technique of care using the juice of glands – falls within a long tradition of animal medication. Publications of doctors and pharmacists have allowed us to establish how the new treatment is part of the landscape of medicine that became more scientific at the turn of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Opotherapy/Organotherapy, whose development depends on the development of knowledge on the endocrine glands, develops through therapeutic successes in thyroid and gynecological diseases and by making pharmaceuticals produced by industrializing pharmacists which provided medication in a form that eliminates a medical procedure, available to the public. Organotherapy, which stands out from hormone therapy by the use of natural misidentified drugs that have generated a great number of debates on their composition and mode of action, will know its greatest development around the First World War and will persist despite the development of hormone therapy based on synthetic molecules until the 1990s.Lancée par une communication du célèbre professeur Brown-Séquard en 1889 sur les effets de l’auto injection d’un suc testiculaire, l’opothérapie – technique de soin par le suc de glandes – s’inscrit dans la ligne d’une longue tradition de médication animale. Les publications de médecins et de pharmaciens nous ont permis d’établir comment cette nouvelle thérapeutique s’inscrit dans le paysage d’une médecine qui se scientifise au tournant du XIXe-XXe siècles. L’opothérapie, dont le développement est tributaire de l’évolution des connaissances sur les glandes endocrines, se développera grâce aux succès thérapeutiques enregistrés dans les affections thyroïdiennes et gynécologiques et grâce à la mise à la disposition du public de spécialités issues d’une pharmacie qui s’industrialise et qui fournit une médication sous une forme qui permet de s’affranchir d’un geste médical. L’opothérapie, qui se démarque de l’hormonothérapie par l’usage d’objets thérapeutiques naturels mal identifiés qui ont suscité de nombreux débats sur leur composition et leur mode d’action, connaitra son plus grand développement aux alentours de la Première guerre mondiale et persistera, malgré le développement de l’hormonothérapie s’appuyant sur des molécules de synthèse, jusque dans les années 1990