This article examines the administration of rescue operations to save people from drowning and the distribution of rewards to rescuers in Bohemia during the 1780s and 1790s. Based on documented interrogations and official records, the article looks at the investigatory process, the conditions rescuers had to fulfil in order to apply for a reward from the Bohemian Gubernium, and the role of other actors in this process, such as witnesses and doctors. The study departs from the concept of biopolitics developed by French philosopher Michel Foucault and shows how the state authorities tried to foster mutual solidarity among town dwellers. While Enlightenment thinkers continued to stress the role of "love for human beings" (Menschenliebe), i.e. universal interpersonal solidarity, the elites held the view that the biggest motivation for anyone to save a person from drowning was monetary reward. The aim of the enlighteners, however, was to encourage people to embrace the ideal of "Menschenliebe" and to fully identify with it - hence their emphasis on cases of selfless acts, especially in newspapers and popular literature. Besides that, the article analyses the trend towards the medicalization of society in the Enlightenment period and changes in attitudes to death., Ondřej Hudeček., and Obsahuje bibliografické odkazy
The study deals with the content and transmission of “images” connected with forced displacement and the relating processes in two three-generation families. The families were chosen based on the oldest generation´s personal experience with the forced displacement after World War II (a family of “deported” Germans living in Germany today and a family of German origin remaining in Czechoslovakia after 1945). The analysis focusses on family memory, whereby the authors ask not only about the content of memories of persons who are part of the “generation of experience”, but also about the transmission of these contents down to the generation of children and grandchildren, as well as about in which way the follow-up generations came to terms with the experience of the oldest generation. The authors point out the importance of family memory to create the identity of persons participating in that memory, and they demonstrate one of possible types of family remembering, whereby the youngest and the oldest generation are its major participants (transgenerational remembering).
Autor načrtává fragment z politické biografie předního komunistického intelektuála a politika Zdeňka Nejedlého (1878–1962), v němž usiluje vystihnout jeho roli v kulturní politice Československa po roce 1945, zvláště po roce 1948, a propojit ji s pohledem na osobní stránky jeho života. Úvodem ho představuje jako respektovaného historika a hudebního vědce, účastníka uměnovědných i politických polemik, který se v meziválečném období stále silněji sbližoval s radikální levicí a získal si značnou autoritu svou účastí v boji proti fašismu, především jako člen exilového vedení KSČ v Moskvě (vstoupil do ní zde v roce 1939). Tomu odpovídala jeho pozice v poválečném Československu, kde vystřídal funkce ministra školství, ministra práce a sociálních věcí, prvního předsedy Československé akademie věd atd. Nejedlý po roce 1945 vystupoval nejednou jako přední tvůrce koncepce kulturní politiky Komunistické strany Československa a její úspěšný propagátor, nebyl však tak silným mocenským hráčem jako ministr informací Václav Kopecký (do roku 1952) a jeho hlavní konkurent na tomto poli, vedoucí kulturního a propagačního oddělení Ústředního výboru KSČ Gustav Bareš, v jejichž rukou spočívaly hlavní kompetence a mechanismy řízení kulturní politiky. Představy Zdeňka Nejedlého o kultuře byly poměrně prosté – měla být lidová, aktuální, realistická, programová a měla se opírat o národní tradice, které ovšem interpretoval selektivně (s důrazem na husitství a národní obrození) a politicky účelově (v duchu ideologické indoktrinace společnosti. Právě díky úsilí o zachování zřetelnější kontinuity „budovatelské“ kultury s minulostí, jejímž zdrojem měly být „pokrokové“ osobnosti a dílo Bedřicha Smetany, Aloise Jiráska a dalších obrozenců, se přiklání autor k těm interpretům (Alexej Kusák), kteří zařazují Nejedlého spíše mezi umírněné politiky komunistické strany, představující po únoru 1948 určitou alternativu těm proudům, které hlásaly radikální „očistu“ kulturního dědictví. Vzhledem ke svému slabšímu postavení v mocenské hierarchii a také kvůli silné loajalitě vůči platnému stranickému kurzu se však k veřejnému střetu s radikály v komunistické straně odhodlal jen výjimečně (například když se vzpíral mechanickému přenášení „sovětských zkušeností“ do československého školství). Autor se v této souvislosti dotýká Nejedlého vztahů s některými umělci a politiky (zejména Václavem Kopeckým) a přináší svědectví o projevech devótnosti vůči jeho osobě, přijímaných zřejmě s požitkem. Zaobírá se také jeho vážnými zdravotními problémy v padesátých letech, které limitovaly Nejedlého vliv na, kulturní politiku, a psychickým stavem, poznamenaným depresemi a úzkostí z případného vlastního zatčení. V závěrečné části se autor zamýšlí nad tím, proč se dílo Zdeňka Nejedlého v šedesátých letech minulého století nestalo inspirací pro snahy o reformu socialismu v duchu národně specifického vývoje, jež vyvrcholily hnutím „pražského jara“ v roce 1968. Kromě toho, že Nejedlého pozdně obrozenecký hodnotový a estetický svět v té době již beznadějně zastaral, působila patrně především skutečnost, že Zdeněk Nejedlý počátkem padesátých let pomáhal zdůvodnit politické procesy a byl tudíž vnímám jako jeden ze symbolů nejhorších projevů stalinského režimu. Nikdy rovněž nevytvořil alternativní koncepci, která by se v podstatných rysech vymykala oficiální stalinské doktríně kultury a kulturní politiky., The article is an outline of a fragment of the political biography of the leading Communist intellectual and politician Zdeněk Nejedlý (1878–1962), in which the author tries to depict Nejedlý’s role in making Czechoslovak policy on the arts and culture after the Liberation in May 1945 and, particularly, after the Communist takeover of February 1948. He then seeks to link this role with the personal side of Nejedlý’s life. He presents Nejedlý as a respected historian and musicologist and as a participant in debates on politics and the arts, who in the interwar period had increasingly inclined towards the radical leftwing and gained considerable authority owing to his participation in the struggle against Nazi Germany, particularly as a member of the Communist leadership-in-exile in Moscow (having joined the Party in 1939). A consequence of this was his position in post-war Czechoslovakia, where he held a number of posts, including Minister of Education, Minister of Labour and Social Affairs, and the first Chairman of the Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences. After the Liberation Nejedlý was often a leading maker of Communist policy on the arts and culture in Czechoslovakia and its successful propagandist. Nevertheless, he was not as strong a player as Václav Kopecký, Minister of Information, who stayed in power till 1952, or Gustav Bareš, Head of the Cultural and Propaganda Department of the Central Committee of the CPCz, Kopecký’s main competitor in the field, both of whom had the main jurisdiction and controlled the mechanisms for determining cultural policy. Nejedlý’s ideas about culture and the arts were relatively simple – it should be “of the people” (lidová), relevant to the times, realistic, part of a programme, and based on national tradition, which, however, he interpreted selectively (with an emphasis on Hussitism and the National Revival) and with a political purpose (in the spirit of the ideological indoctrination of society). Owing to Nejedlý’s efforts to maintain a clearer continuity between the culture of the “builders of Socialism” (budovatelská kultura) and the past, the source of which was supposed to be “progressive” figures and the works of the composer Bedřich Smetana, the novelist Alois Jirásek, and other Revivalists, the author of the present article shares much with interpretation of scholars like Alexej Kusák, ranking Nejedlý among the moderate politicians of the CPCz, who after the February 1948 takeover represented a certain alternative to those pushing for a radical “purge” of Czech cultural heritage. In view of his weak position, and in the power hierarchy and, on the other hand, his strong loyalty to the Party line, Nejedlý only rarely clashed with Party radicals publicly (for example, when he opposed the automatic transfer of “Soviet experience” to the Czechoslovak school system). The author, in this connection, touches upon Nejedlý’s relationships with some artists and politicians, particularly Kopecký, and provides evidence of displays of devotion towards Nejedlý, which he seems to have welcomed. The author also discusses Nejedlý’s serious health problems in the 1950s, which limited his influence on making policy in culture and the arts, and his psychological state, which was marked by depressions and anxiety about his possible arrest. In the last part of the article the author reflects on why Nejedlý’s work in the 1960s had not inspired the attempts at the reform of socialism in a specifically Czech form, which resulted in the “Prague Spring” of 1968. Apart from the fact that Nejedlý’s late Revivalist values and aesthetics in this period had become hopelessly outdated, this was so, he argues, probably because Nejedlý had helped to justify the show trials in the early 1950s and was therefore perceived as a symbol of the worst excesses of the Stalinist régime. Nor did he ever come up with an alternative concept that would have essentially diverted from official, Stalinist doctrine on the arts and culture.
In the summer of 2016, black, disabled, and gay 14-year-old Jerika Bolen announced her decision to die. The public conversation surrounding Bolen’s decision, launched through a series of newspaper articles announcing a ‘last dance’ prom, offers a case-study through which to explore how pain frustrates an analysis of the biopolitical formations that shape both right-to-die discussions and decisions. In doing so, this article offers two interventions. It reveals how dominant views of pain and disability shape and limit how we make sense of Jerika’s life and death. It also highlights the analytical leverage that this critical approach offers by reading Bolen’s death as a form of what critical theorist Lauren Berlant calls ‘slow death’ or the gradual wearing out of populations. In this way, I extend conversations within critical theory that seek to trace the slower and more sustained impacts of structural oppression. In looking at the convergence of the biopolitics and necropolitics of disability, race, class, gender, and sexuality, I suggest Bolen’s death and the ‘last dance’ that launched an international public conversation about it function as a celebration of slow death facilitated, in part, by dominant views of pain and disability.
The mobility of scientists that is the subject of this article is part of the broad scale of flows of people, objects, and knowledge in the contemporary world. These flows occur in multiple ways: from relocation and settlement in another country, to everyday pendulating mobility back and forth across boarders. In this article, the author is concerned with academic mobility and particularly mobility tied to long-term post-doctoral fellowships. She sets out to explore the gender dimension of long-term academic mobility and observe how scientists organise their professional and personal lives around movement between academic institutions. She argues that mobility at this stage of the academic trajectory involves the production of new (re)configurations of partnerships, while at the same time the fact of being in a partnership is constitutive for establishing an academic career., Alice Červinková., Téma: Feministická reflexe globalizace, Obsahuje bibliografii, and Anglické resumé
In this paper we explore the impact of the economic recession of 2008 on gender inequality in the labour force in Central and Eastern European countries. We argue that job and occupational segregation protected women’s employment more than men’s in the CEE region as well, but unlike in more developed capitalist economies, women’s level of labour force participation declined and their rates of poverty increased during the crisis years. We also explore gender differences in opinions on the impact of the recession on people’s job satisfaction. For our analysis we use published data from EUROSTAT and our own calculations from EU SILC and ESS 2010., Beáta Nagy, Éva Fodor., and Obsahuje seznam literatury