David Ransel - Academia.edu (original) (raw)

Papers by David Ransel

The Journal of Modern History, Mar 1, 1996

University of California Press eBooks, Dec 31, 1991

The American Historical Review, Oct 1, 1983

Slavic Review, 2012

ism" (56) make it difficult to follow the argumentation. I also find the abundance of endnot... more ism" (56) make it difficult to follow the argumentation. I also find the abundance of endnotes disruptive to the reading process. For instance, 48 notes interrupting the 12-page chapter on Szlegel do not help the reader appreciate the depth and flow of Shallcross's otherwise thoughtful analysis. I must also question the usefulness of Shallcross's application of postmodern critical tools in the context of Holocaust literature. For example, throughout the book, but especially in the chapters on the Jewish poets, Shallcross continuously refers to jouissance. She even names the section on the poets "On Jouissance." The term was coined by Jacques Lacan in the 1950s. Slavoj Zizek adapted its initial sexual and gender signification into spheres of ideology and politics, whereas Roland Barthes used it to indicate the (orgasmic) bliss of reading. Shallcross, however, never explains the intricacies of the term, using it rather as a synonym for 'joy." I would suggest that "macabre humor," "biting satire," "invective," or "bitter sarcasm" would better suit Shallcross's insightful readings of these poets. Another example relates to the ubiquitous presence of Georgio Agamben and other postmodern critics. Shallcross's preoccupation with Agamben culminates in a page-and-a-half-long dispute with the critic's perception of a Muselman at the end of the chapter on Borowski. While the references to the writers-survivors Primo Levi and Imre Kertesz on the subject are illuminating, I would argue that the importance attached to Agamben and to other postmodern critical theorists detract from the merit of this study. For a scholar as accomplished as Shallcross, these are unnecessary crutches.

Slavic Review, Sep 1, 1978

Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 1987

Ce document est protégé par la loi sur le droit d'auteur. L'utilisation des services d'Érudit (y ... more Ce document est protégé par la loi sur le droit d'auteur. L'utilisation des services d'Érudit (y compris la reproduction) est assujettie à sa politique d'utilisation que vous pouvez consulter en ligne. [https://apropos.erudit.org/fr/usagers/politiquedutilisation/] Cet article est diffusé et préservé par Érudit.

Princeton University Press eBooks, Dec 31, 1990

The Journal of Modern History, Sep 1, 1978

Yale University Press eBooks, Dec 31, 2017

Slavic and East European Journal, 2003

Motherhood, Misery, and Modernity "What's more important to you, your son or your cow?" asked the... more Motherhood, Misery, and Modernity "What's more important to you, your son or your cow?" asked the doctors. Praskovya Korotchenkova had just brought little Mikhail to the district hospital with double pneumonia, and the doctors told her to stay at the hospital and tend him. She recalled later, "Well, I told them that I couldn't do it. My cow was just about to calve." Seeing the doctors' shocked response, she had replied, "The cow is a second mother to me; she feeds everyone." She took the child back home. After all, she explained later, "How was I going to manage without the cow? What was I going to feed the children?" (p. 186). Praskovya and other Russian peasant mothers, and the agonizing choices they made in unbearable situations, are the subject of David Ransel's latest book. Well known as an authority on Russian family and childcare practices in the Tsarist era, Ransel has now leaped into the Soviet era. Taking full advantage of the heady atmosphere of freedom in the early 1990s, he interviewed seventy-four Russian and thirty Tatar women, whose ages then ranged from 39 to 94,

Canadian-American Slavic studies =, 1980

The American Historical Review, Oct 1, 1995

The Journal of Modern History, Mar 1, 1996

University of California Press eBooks, Dec 31, 1991

The American Historical Review, Oct 1, 1983

Slavic Review, 2012

ism" (56) make it difficult to follow the argumentation. I also find the abundance of endnot... more ism" (56) make it difficult to follow the argumentation. I also find the abundance of endnotes disruptive to the reading process. For instance, 48 notes interrupting the 12-page chapter on Szlegel do not help the reader appreciate the depth and flow of Shallcross's otherwise thoughtful analysis. I must also question the usefulness of Shallcross's application of postmodern critical tools in the context of Holocaust literature. For example, throughout the book, but especially in the chapters on the Jewish poets, Shallcross continuously refers to jouissance. She even names the section on the poets "On Jouissance." The term was coined by Jacques Lacan in the 1950s. Slavoj Zizek adapted its initial sexual and gender signification into spheres of ideology and politics, whereas Roland Barthes used it to indicate the (orgasmic) bliss of reading. Shallcross, however, never explains the intricacies of the term, using it rather as a synonym for 'joy." I would suggest that "macabre humor," "biting satire," "invective," or "bitter sarcasm" would better suit Shallcross's insightful readings of these poets. Another example relates to the ubiquitous presence of Georgio Agamben and other postmodern critics. Shallcross's preoccupation with Agamben culminates in a page-and-a-half-long dispute with the critic's perception of a Muselman at the end of the chapter on Borowski. While the references to the writers-survivors Primo Levi and Imre Kertesz on the subject are illuminating, I would argue that the importance attached to Agamben and to other postmodern critical theorists detract from the merit of this study. For a scholar as accomplished as Shallcross, these are unnecessary crutches.

Slavic Review, Sep 1, 1978

Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 1987

Ce document est protégé par la loi sur le droit d'auteur. L'utilisation des services d'Érudit (y ... more Ce document est protégé par la loi sur le droit d'auteur. L'utilisation des services d'Érudit (y compris la reproduction) est assujettie à sa politique d'utilisation que vous pouvez consulter en ligne. [https://apropos.erudit.org/fr/usagers/politiquedutilisation/] Cet article est diffusé et préservé par Érudit.

Princeton University Press eBooks, Dec 31, 1990

The Journal of Modern History, Sep 1, 1978

Yale University Press eBooks, Dec 31, 2017

Slavic and East European Journal, 2003

Motherhood, Misery, and Modernity "What's more important to you, your son or your cow?" asked the... more Motherhood, Misery, and Modernity "What's more important to you, your son or your cow?" asked the doctors. Praskovya Korotchenkova had just brought little Mikhail to the district hospital with double pneumonia, and the doctors told her to stay at the hospital and tend him. She recalled later, "Well, I told them that I couldn't do it. My cow was just about to calve." Seeing the doctors' shocked response, she had replied, "The cow is a second mother to me; she feeds everyone." She took the child back home. After all, she explained later, "How was I going to manage without the cow? What was I going to feed the children?" (p. 186). Praskovya and other Russian peasant mothers, and the agonizing choices they made in unbearable situations, are the subject of David Ransel's latest book. Well known as an authority on Russian family and childcare practices in the Tsarist era, Ransel has now leaped into the Soviet era. Taking full advantage of the heady atmosphere of freedom in the early 1990s, he interviewed seventy-four Russian and thirty Tatar women, whose ages then ranged from 39 to 94,

Canadian-American Slavic studies =, 1980

The American Historical Review, Oct 1, 1995