Hi all. Here are the readings from last week, week 5. All caught up!
Historical Scholarship of the Modern Middle East, Late Ottoman Empire
Topic: The Ottoman Empire and world capitalism
Emrence, Cem. “Three Waves of Late Ottoman Historiography, 1950-2007.” Middle East Studies Association Bulletin 41, no. 2 (Winter 2007): 137-151.
Summary: This study examines three waves in the historiography of the late Ottoman Empire. These waves are modernization approaches (1950s-1970s), macro models (1970s-1980s), and post-structural agendas (1990s-2007). The future of late Ottoman historiography lies is addressing two unanswered questions: that Ottoman studies has thus far been dominated by, first, mono-causal approaches (meaning that historians are still looking for a single cause for Ottoman social transformation in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, and, second, by “propensity accounts” (these emphasize the active and purposeful role of the Ottoman state and local elite in social formation).
Kasaba, Reşat. The Ottoman Empire and the World Economy: The Nineteenth Century. Albany: SUNY Press, 1988.
Summary: Kasaba challenges the traditional nineteenth century paradigm that looks at military decline and societal improvement during that period as disparate processes. The author brings these concurrent processes in relation to each other and demonstrates that they were intertwined, simultaneous aspects of broader process related to the integration of the Ottoman Empire into the capitalist world economy.
Pamuk, Şevket. “Institutional Change and the Longevity of the Ottoman Empire.” Journal of Interdisciplinary History 35, no. 2 (2004): 225-247.
Summary: Pamuk suggests that though the central bureaucracy of the Ottoman Empire was inherently pragmatic and flexible, as shown by its successful expansion and ability to survive into the modern period when others like it were not, its innovation was limited to those institutions that maintained the traditional order and Ottoman power. The result was that changes enacted by the state didn’t allow for its entrance into capitalist economic development or other new forms of economic organization. The inability of the empire to do this led to its disintegration.
Historical Studies of Women and Gender
Topic: History of manhood and masculinity
Beattie, Peter. “Beyond Machismos: Recent Examinations of Masculinities in Latin America.” Men and Masculinities 4 (2002): 303-308.
Summary: In this article, Beattie examines anthropological and literary studies of Latin American conceptions of masculinity and machismo. In his analysis of these studies, the author concludes that these works reveal how masculinity and machismo are “complex and malleable concepts that invite contestation and reinterpretation by individuals, groups, and scholars,” (303) charting new grounds in discussions of gender identity.
Basso, Matthew. Meet Joe Copper: Masculinity and Race on Montana’s World War II Home Front. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2013.
Summary: This works examines the home front World War II experience of copper miners in three mining towns in Montana. Through the author’s analysis of their actions, he posits that these coppermen actively challenged the sacrificial masculinity propagated by the federal government and instead clung to their white working class masculinity evidenced by their refusal to work with females and men of color. This (white) working man’s masculinity played a role in the formation of conservative post-war masculinities.
Ditz, Toby. “The New Men’s History and the Peculiar Absence of Gendered Power: Some Remedies from Early American Gender History.” Gender & History 16, no. 1 (April 2004): 1-35.
Summary: In this article, Ditz points out some of the problems male and masculinity studies have confronted since its inception in the 1990s – namely, that many studies of masculinity do not address the nature of gendered power that inherently creates male-ness in contrast to and in dominance over female-ness. She proposes five potentially problematic aspects of masculinity studies and then provides a historiographical overview of early American history showing the ways in which these problems can be avoided.
Sinha, Mrinalini. “Giving Masculinity a History: Some Contributions from the Historiography of Colonial India.” Gender & History 11, no. 3 (1999): 445-460.
Summary: Through a historiographical examination of colonial Indian historiography on gender, Sinha posits that this historiography offers a useful and necessary contribution to the study of masculinity. This is the case because historical studies of gender and masculinity during the colonial period put power at the center of its analyses, thus necessitating a reconsideration of bodily difference, making visible the relational construction of masculinity and the anxieties inherent to that construction, as well as its construction in relation to its ideological and material context.