Journal articles on the topic '1896-1940 Criticism and interpretation'

Abstract For the past 150 years, American art and art criticism have undergone important cultural and ideological transformations that are explanatory both of their historical evolution and of the possibility of being divided into several stages. In my interpretation, art criticism cuts across the historical evolution of art in the United States, according to the following cultural and ideological paradigms: two predominant cultural ideologies of art between 1865-1900 and 1960-1980, respectively; two other aesthetic and formalist ideological shifts in the periods between 1900- 1940 and 1940-1960, respectively, and one last pluralist approach to the arts after 1980. Even if this conceptualisation of art criticism in America might seem risky and oversimplifying, there are conspicuous and undeniable arguments supporting it. In a previous study published by American, British and Canadian Studies, I provided conceptual justifications both for the criteria dividing the cultural and the ideological within the overall assessment of American art by art critics and for the analysis and interpretation of the first two important temporal periods in the field of art criticism, 1865-1900 and 1908-1940. The present study continues by analyzing the cultural and ideological stances of American art criticism after 1940 and argues for certain paradigmatic shifts from one period to another.

For forty years a debate has raged in Petronian studies between the moralists and, for want of a better term, the anti-moralists. From Highet in the 1940's to Bacon and Arrowsmith in the 1950's and 60's, the moralists held a certain advantage. Whatever important divergences there were among these critics, all agreed on a Petronius who stood in some critical relation to his society. The dissenting voices have grown much louder of late. Ironically, the literary brilliance of Arrowsmith's New Critical reading of the Satyricon helped to turn the tide against the moralist viewpoint. The more apparent the literary sophistication of the Satyricon has become, the less willing late twentieth century readers have been to see a programmatic moral critique as its main purpose. Sullivan's view of Petronius as a ‘literary opportunist’ has come to dominate the field.With Graham Anderson's book, Eros Sophistes: Ancient Novelists at Play, the retreat from the position of Highet is now complete. We have finally reached the logical, New Critical conclusion that the Satyricon is an entirely self-contained literary game without any message whatsoever; in effect we are told that, like any serious piece of literature, the Satyricon ‘should not mean, but be’. Anderson is eager to disavow ‘the unproven conviction that every work must have a message, however diffusely or perversely expressed’.

According to the traditional (or ‘whig’) interpretation of history, sometime in the seventeenth century science was born in the form that we know today, in a new spirit that can best be summed up by the motto of the Royal Society: nullius in verba, take nobody's word for it. In the next few centuries this new critical way of looking at reality was instrumental in the creation of a coherent view of the world, and of that world's history, which was found to be increasingly at odds with traditional claims, most famously in the case of Charles Darwin's theory of evolution. By the end of the nineteenth century, the divide between science and religion was described by means of words such as ‘conflict’ and ‘warfare,’ the terms used by John William Draper and Andrew Dickson White in the titles of their respective books: History of the Conflict between Religion and Science (1874) and History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom (1896).

Pavle Stefanovic (1901-1985) is one of the most prominent Serbian music critics and essayists. He created extensive musicographic work, largely scattered in periodicals. A philosopher by education, he had an excellent knowledge of music and its history. His style was marked by eloquence, associativity and plasticity of expression. Between 1938 and 1940 he published eighteen music reviews in The Music Herald, the longest-running Belgrade music magazine in the interwar period (1928-1941, with interruption from 1934 to 1938). Stefanovic wrote about concerts, opera and ballet performances in Belgrade, performances by local and eminent foreign artists. His reviews include Magda Tagliaferro, Nathan Milstein, Jacques Thibaud, Enrico Mainardi, Bronis?aw Huberman, Alexander Uninsky, Alexaner Borovsky, Ignaz Friedman, Nikita Magaloff and many other eminent musicians. Th is study is devoted to the analysis of the Stefanovic?s procedure. Pavle Stefanovic was an anti-fascist and left ist. He believed that the task of a music critic was not merely to analyze and evaluate musical works and musical interpretations. He argued that the critic should engage in important social issues that concerned music and music life. That is why he wrote articles on the occasion of German artists visiting Belgrade, about the persecution of musicians of Jewish descent and the cultural situation in the Third Reich. On the other hand, Stefanovic was an aesthetic hedonist who expressed a great sense of the beauty of musical works. Th at duality - a socially engaged intellectual and a subtle ?enjoyer? of the art - remained undisturbed. In these articles he did not go into a deterministic interpretation of the structure of musical composition and the history of music. And he did not accept the larpurlartistic views.

This article reconstructs the theoretical views of a literary historian and critic Ahapii Pylypovych Shamrai (1896—1952) in the context of perception of Oleksandr Potebnia’s philological and linguistic heritage — and at the same time in the context of the development of the formal method and sociological approach in Ukrainian literary criticism in the 1920s. The study offers a detailed analysis of Shamrai’s early work “O. Potebnia and the methodology of the history of literature” (1924) in the connection with Russian formalists’ critical approach to Potebnia’s theoretical ideas. In his early work, Shamrai calls for a rethinking of Potebnia’s theory of the ‘inner form of the word’ and some of his other ideas, which, in his opinion, could be the basement for the further development of Ukrainian and Russian literary theory. Particular attention is paid to the study of a reader (audience) as a major component of literary analysis and interpretation. The idea of ‘studying a reader’ was crucial when Ukrainian scholars tried to combine two theoretical approaches — the formal and sociological methods. One of the best examples of such ‘synthetism’ in Ukrainian literary studies of the 1920s was Shamrai’s textbook “Ukrainian Literature. Brief overview” (1927, 1928), which is discussed in this article. The paper also argues that “synthetism” was inherent to the Ukrainian literary criticism of the 1920s in general. It was a theoretical framework used by many Ukrainian literary scholars, Oleksandr Biletskyi and Borys Jakubskyi being among them. Providing a historical context for Shamrai’s theories, the article also examines the historical and philological ideas of his older contemporary Oleksandr Biletskyi and estimates their influence on the development of Ukrainian literary criticism of that time

The publication presents previously unknown letters to Sergey Ozhegov of the late 1940s – early 1960s, which reveal facts of his scientific biography. The aim of this work is to introduce into scientific discourse rare archival documents on the history of Russian linguistics, and also to study linguistic polemics in the USSR in the era of the onslaught of the Marrism of the end of the 1940s. The main methods of studying the material are historical-linguistic, lexicographic, sociolinguistic and linguistic source analysis (search, decoding and commenting on archival texts). In the course of the research of documentary materials, the author has revealed new facts testifying to the change of a vector of scientific views on explanatory lexicography as a whole which, unlike the previous dictionary projects, was not adapted to academic needs, and first of all solved practical problems of explaining the actual lexicon of the 20th century. The article notes that one of the key issues of the dictionary work of that time was the interpretation of Sovietisms, on the one hand, and religious words and expressions, on the other. The archaic vocabulary (“merchant” and church elements) became the object of fierce criticism of Ozhegov’s opponents. Scholars and non-philological readers, polemicizing with Ozhegov, paid special attention to reviews and analysis of semantic, stylistic and cultural-historical realities of dictionary entries. Ozhegov’s respondents also discussed the difficult fate of the dictionary. The published letters contain semi-official reviews from both famous scholars (A.P. Evgenieva, Ya.M. Endzelin, R.R. Gel’gardt, J.V. Loja) and ordinary readers of The Dictionary, they reveal Ozhegov as a person of special gift loving his native language. These letters provide valuable material for the analysis of linguistic homeland studies of the period of struggle between the two ideologies in science. The letters reveal new facts of Ozhegov’s editorial work, discuss the criticism of the publication in the press, note its strengths and weaknesses. The article emphasizes the sociocultural aspect of Ozhegov’s interpretations and the ambiguity of their perception by contemporaries. The Dictionary is included in the context of general linguistic ideas by D.N. Ushakov and L.V. Shcherba. The high pedagogical value of this source is indicated. The published archival materials confirm a unique fact in the scientific practice of the mid-20th century: the emergence of a popular explanatory dictionary reflecting the cultural constants of the time and serving as a reliable tool for self-education. The article is of interest to historiographers of science, lexicologists and lexicographers, linguaculturologists, sociolinguists.

The aim of this research is to show the economic activity of the Priangan people during the rule of the Netherlands Indies Government between 1900-1940. The research focusses on the economic policies and discussions from the Netherlands Indies Government in reforming “native” economic life and its response by Priangan society. This study uses the historical method with four research stages, namely heuristic, criticism, interpretation, and historiography. The result of this research shows that state intervention in the local economic life was a failure, evidenced by the number of Priangan people in poverty. In the early twentieth century, sikep (landlord) became major reformers due to a new perspective that valued capital more than land . They succeeded to use their capital to develop micro industries, influencing the economic life of Priangan society. The society was able to creatively adapt to the new policy of economic liberalism. Based on their local wisdoms, the Priangan people created a new form of liberalism supported within their socio-cultural, economic, and political structures. This local liberalism formed the pattern of dynamic economic behaviour and nurtured the entrepreneurial spirit amongst the Priangan society.

Changes in the Visual Form of Aaro Hellaakoski’s Poem ”Vieras” (”The Stranger”) The present article shows how genetic criticism (critique génétique) can enrich our understanding and interpretation of visual poetry by examining the manuscript, proofs and published versions of the poem ”Vieras” (” e Stranger”) from the typographically experimental collection Jää- peili (”Ice Mirror”, 1928) by the Finnish poet Aaro Hellaakoski (1893–1952). e collection is regarded as a forerunner of Finnish modernism, and particularly its experimental typography got successors only as late as in the 1960s. Besides omitting punctuation and upper case letters, Hellaakoski experiments with the auditory and visual dimensions of ”Vieras” by dividing metrical stanzas and line units into typographically separate groups. In his later selected poems Valitut runot (”Selected poems”, 1940) and Runot (” e Poems”, 1947), Hellaakoski stripped ”Vieras” from these experimental features. e examination of the manuscripts and proofs of ”Vieras” shows that Hellaakoski’s later revisions actually revert the poem to a form closer to its early, visually more traditional, manuscript versions. e article suggests, that it was probably the integrity of Jääpeili as a modernist collection that motivated Hellaakoski into the experimental typography and ortography of ”Vieras”. ese features became dispensable when the poem was released from the context of the collection.

The article examines the attitude of philosopher, poet, and aesthetician Aleksandr Gorsky to the personality and legacy of A.M. Gorky. It outlines the main directions of Gorky’s perception and interpretation by Gorsky. The article argues that Gorsky highlights vitality and projectivity of Gorky’s creative thinking, and considers him a consistent immortalist. The focus is on Gorsky’s unpublished work “Overcoming Faust” (1939–1940), a typical example of philosophical criticism that uses philological methods of analysis. Gorsky examines Faustianism through the prism of the rejection of individualism, which is specific for Gorky’s work. Considering the desire for knowledge and action as the defining feature of the Faustian consciousness, Gorsky notes that this desire is constrained and limited by the fact of human mortality and the recognition of the omnipotence of nature. The fact that Faustianism does not aim at overcoming death and eventually comes to terms with with it, allows Gorsky to see Faustianism as a bourgeois type of consciousness. Instead, Gorky, by standing against petty-bourgeois passivity in his work, raises the question about the means to overcome death. Gorky’s early fairy tale “The Girl and Death” is interpreted by Gorsky in the context of the development of life-affirming consciousness that overcomes death by the power of love and devotion to the common cause.

The article under studies is a critical survey of the activities of a Swiss scholar Juozas Eretas (1896–1984), one of the founders of Lithuanian Literary Studies, whose origin is closely related to the revival of the Lithuanian State (1918 р). Raised on the principles of the so-called Fribourg School, J. Eretas may be regarded as a vivid example of a catholic scientist. He emphasized the importance of the connection between research and thinking. In the 20-30s, having mastered the Lithuanian language, under the influence of the first translations of the world literary works into Lithuanian, Eretas laid the foundation of analytical criticism. He also took up the translation and, at the same time, became the founder of Lithuanian Germanic Studies, paying most of his attention to the Medieval German Literature, the heritage of mystics, the literature of “storm and drive”, particularly the works by Goethe and Schiller. In addition, Eretas made a considerable contribution to Lithuanian Theory of Literature: “Creating Philosophical Criticism in Literature” (lecture, 1922), “Philosophy and Poetry” (1924), “Methods of Literary Analysis” (1929). Eretas’ approach to German Literature was purely conceptual and rested on the idea of its universal nature (especially concerning Goethe): monographs “Young Goethe” (1932) and “Goethe Hundred Years Later” (1933). It is worth mentioning Eretas’ attitude to Goethe’s “Faust”. He interprets the main character typologically, as an eternal image of the world culture, pointing hereby to the increased attention to this image during the epoch of “storm and drive”. Eretas’ interpretation of the images of Faust and Mephistopheles, which present the idea of “dual world” that is so peculiar for Romanticism, seems very interesting and promising. Besides, Eretas was first in Lithuanian Literary Studies to refer to Goethe’s “Wilhelm Meister’s Apprenticeship” as to the novel of upbringing. Another significant subject of Eretas’ research was the History of World Mystics (the work “From the History of Mystics”, as well as the monographs on Tauler, Eckhart and Suso).

U sjeni Bojničićeva rada, obilježenoga iznimnim prinosom hrvatskoj kulturnoj povijesti i pomoćnim povijesnim znanostima, ostala je Gramatika madžarskoga jezika (1888., 1896., 1905., 1912.) koja je na razmeđu dvaju stoljeća, u vrijeme smjene filoloških škola (zagrebačke školom hrvatskih vukovaca), doživjela nekoliko izmijenjenih izdanja. Gramatiku je – točnije njezino prvo izdanje – kao udžbenik odobrio Odjel za bogoštovlje i nastavu Kr. ugarskoga ministarstva, potom ju nagradio 1889., a naposljetku je ipak negativno ocijenjena, i to u službenom glasilu istoga Odjela koji ju je i nagradio, u Nastavnom vjesniku, a gotovo jednako ocijenit će ju i neki mađarski izvori početkom 20. stoljeća.Pritom je riječ o kritikama koje su se mahom odnosile na (hrvatski) metajezik gramatike, donošenje netočnih pravila te na njezino, po sudu određenih kritičara, nesustavno oblikovanje, a samom se Bojničiću zamjerala nedostatna filološka naobrazba. Upravo ju stoga ti kritičari između ostaloga opisuju kao priručnik neprikladan za nastavnu uporabu. Od navedenih četiriju izdanja gramatike – iako konzultirani hrvatski i mađarski izvori ustvari ne donose nedvosmislen podatak o tome koliko je točno izdanja gramatika doživjela – spomenutoj je filološkoj ocjeni također podlegnulo samo prvo, a autor je poneke ispravke uklopio u kasnija izdanja svoga gramatičkoga priručnika.U ovom se radu uspoređuju četiri izdanja Bojničićeve gramatike, utvrđuju se jezične, nazivoslovne i leksičke mijene njezina polaznoga (hrvatskog) jezika te se propituje u kojoj su mjeri potaknute objavljenim kritikama te koliki je odraz smjene filoloških škola vidljiv u pojedinim izdanjima. U sklopu tumačenja mijena što ih izdanja gramatike sadrže, posebice se ističu jezične osobitosti svojstvene normi zagrebačke filološke škole, čime se pak nastoji potkrijepiti činjenica kako je riječ o obilježjima koja su prisutna u svim četirima izdanjima gramatike neovisno o vremenu njihova izdavanja te jezično-političkim okolnostima i utjecajima pod kojima su nastala.U konačnici se nastoji potvrditi (ne)opravdanost negativne recepcije koju je gramatika imala u dijelu filološke javnosti svojega vremena. Drugim riječima nastoji se dati odgovor na pitanje valja li Bojničiću pridružiti epitet autora čiji rad – pa tako ni njegova gramatika – u odgovarajućoj mjeri nije stručno potkovan ili mu pak, bez obzira na njegovu naobrazbu i upućene kritike, valja odati priznanje zbog neospornih prinosa što ih je dao u području hrvatsko-mađarske gramatikografije.In the shadow of Bojničić’s work marked by exceptional contributions to Croatian cultural history and auxiliary historical sciences remained the Hungarian Grammar (1888, 1896, 1905, 1912), which at the turn of the century, at the time of change of philological schools (Zagreb philological school was supplanted by the school of Croatian Vukovians), saw several modified editions. This grammar book (to be exact, its first edition) was approved as a textbook by the Royal Hungarian Ministry of Worship and Education and awarded by the same institution in 1889. Eventually, the grammar was nevertheless negatively reviewed in Nastavni vjesnik, the official gazette of the same Ministry, which had previously awarded the grammar, and was almost equally evaluated by some Hungarian sources at the beginning of the 20th century.The criticism mostly concerns the grammar’s metalanguage (Croatian), deriving incorrect rules, and its unsystematic format (according to certain critics), and Bojničić himself was criticized for his deficient philological education. This is exactly the reason why those critics, amongst other things, describe it as a handbook inadequate for school use. Of the four above-mentioned editions of the grammar – although the consulted Croatian and Hungarian sources do not explicitly state exactly how many editions the grammar had – only the first edition received the above-mentioned philological evaluation, and the author made some corrections in the later editions of his grammar book.This paper compares the four editions of Bojničić’s grammar, identifies linguistic, terminological, and lexical changes in its source language (Croatian), and examines the extent to which they had been motivated by the published criticism and the extent to which the change of philological schools is reflected in individual editions. Within the interpretation of the changes made in the different editions, linguistic features characteristic of the norm of the Zagreb philological school are highlighted, in an attempt to corroborate the fact that these features are present in all four editions of the grammar irrespective of the time of their publication as well as the linguistic-political circumstances and influences under which they came into existence.Ultimately, the present paper seeks to confirm the (un)justification of the negative reception the grammar had in a part of the philological public of its time. In other words, we seek to answer the question of whether Bojničić is to be given the epithet of an author whose work – including his grammar – is to a certain extent not professionally grounded, or, regardless of his education and the criticism toward his work, he has to be given credit for his indisputable contribution to the field of Croatian–Hungarian grammaticography.

Quantum Mechanics is a fundamental physical theory about atomic-scale processes. It was built between 1920 and 1940 by the most distinguished physicists of that time. The accordance between the predictions of the theory and experimental results is remarkable. The physical interpretation of its mathematical constructs, however, raised unprecedented controversies. Ontological, semantic, and epistemic vagueness abound in the orthodox interpretations and have resulted in serious misunderstandings that are often repeated in textbooks and elsewhere. In this work, we identify, criticize, and clarify the most spread ones.

This paper aims to present an analysis considering the works “The Lawless Roads” (1939) and “The Power and the Glory” (1940) by Graham Greene from the perspective of perceptions and representations of the Mexican people constructed by the author. In order to do so, the paper is grounded on theories of post-colonial literary criticism and travel literature, specially regarding topics on identity, otherness and hybridism, in order to make a brief observation on the perception and representation of the Mexican by Greene, particularly regarding the role of the eyes of the Mexicans, with the purpose of outlining his personal point of view that is universalizing towards the native and of framing how he characterizes the Mexicans from a Eurocentric and colonial perspective. This research adopts qualitative, interpretative and documental methods in the proposed analysis and points towards the prevalence of perceptions and representations of the Mexicans that set forth a hostile gaze over the Mexican natives.

The article deals with the portraying “Roaring Twenties” which marked a legendary and unprecedented period in the history of American society. Though this era goes back to the beginning of the 20th century, it has never stopped arousing deep common interest because of its uniqueness. Having been abundantly reflected in numerous pieces of art and literature, “Roaring Twenties”, synonymously named “The Jazz Age”, go on provoking public discussion and reevaluation. If viewed in literary terms, this epoch is certainly linked with the name of Francis Scott Fitzgerald (1896-1940) and with his best known novel “The Great Gatsby” filmed five times. The writer is considered to be one of the best chronicler of the American 1920s. Fitzgerald’s masterpiece had embodied many symbols and icons of America which travelled though one hundred years and still feature contemporary society. The articles attempts to outline extra-lingual information and data that shape the temporal and cultural background of the novel. It aims at providing the readers with sufficient additional information that may significantly enlarge on the novel context grasping. It proposes a detailed description and interpretation of symbols and markers of the American 1920s which typically feature “Roaring Twenties” and the ways they are projected onto Fitzgerald’s story. In particular, the focus is made on American Dream doctrine, New York of the 1920s, the conflict between “the old money” and “the new money”, feminism and fashion, alcohol and crime, music, cars. Some parallels between the author’s life story and his characters are also specified.

Since the Restitution of Land Rights Act 22 of 1994 came into operation, courts have come to attach considerable significance to historian expert testimony when ruling on land claims that made it to court. Therefore, a universal approach had to be adopted. Over the years the Supreme Court of Appeal and Constitutional Court have developed tried and tested methodologies to aid the courts in determining the weight and admissibility of a witness' testimony. In the Salem Commonage case, both the Land Claims Court and the majority of the Supreme Court of Appeal deviated from these precedents by adopting arguably a broader interpretation of the Act than intended. The case is unique in the sense that the dispute involves a commonage that was subdivided via a court order in 1940, resulting in the removal of the remaining black African population from that land. The question therefore was whether or not this group of people fulfilled the requirements for a valid claim as set out in the Act. The Land Claims Court and Supreme Court of Appeal felt that it had. The landowners applied for leave to appeal to the Constitutional Court. The application was granted, but in his judgment, Edwin Cameron agreed with the rationale of both courts, and held that there was a valid claim. This was despite the fact that the testimony of the claimants' 'star witness', Msile Nondzube, was heavily criticised by the landowners as well as a Supreme Court of Appeal judge. The Constitutional Court emphasised that the Act was an extraordinary piece of legislation and had to be interpreted in such a way so as to address the injustices of the past. This included provisions of the Act which dealt with how oral and expert evidence would be dealt with.

Abstract: Mechanisms, strategies and taboo topics of Soviet censorship in Estonian theatre Since theatre in the Soviet Union had to be first of all a propaganda and educational institution, the activity, repertoire and every single production of the theatre was subject to certain ideological and artistic prescriptions. Theatre artists were not subject to any official regulations regarding forbidden topics or ways of representation, thus the nature of censorship manifested itself to them in practice. Lists of forbidden authors and works greatly affected politics related to repertoire until the mid-1950s but much less afterwards. Research on censorship is hampered by the fact that it was predominately oral, based on phone or face-to-face conversations, and corresponding documentation has been systematically destroyed. This article is primarily based on memoirs and research conducted by people who were active in the Soviet theatre system. It systematises the empirical material into four parts: 1) mechanisms of censorship, 2) forms and strategies, 3) counter-strategies against censorship and 4) taboo topics. Despite the attempt to map theatre censorship in Estonia after the Second World War (1945–1990), most of the material concerns the period from the mid-1960s to the mid-1980s. This can be explained by the age of the respondents, but it can also be related to the fact that the Soviet control system became more liberal or ambiguous after the Khrushchev thaw encouraged theatre artists and officials to test the limits of freedom. The mechanisms of theatre censorship were multifaceted. Ideological correctness and the artistic maturity of repertoire and single productions were officially controlled by the Arts Administration (1940–1975) and afterwards by the Theatre Administration (1975–1990) under the supervision of the Ministry of Culture. Performing rights for new texts were allocated by the Main Administration for Literary and Publishing Affairs (Glavlit): texts by foreign authors were approved by the central office in Moscow, and texts by local authors were approved by local offices. The third censorship agency was the artistic committee that operated in every single theatre. Nevertheless, the most powerful institution was the Department of Culture of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Estonia, whose influence on artistic issues had to be kept confidential by the parties involved. On top of all this, there was the hidden power and omnipresent network of agents of the Committee for State Security (KGB). Some audience members also acted as self-appointed censors. The network and system of censorship made the control system almost total and permanent, also enforcing self-censorship. Forms of censorship can be divided into preventive and punitive censorship, and strategies into direct and indirect censorship. Soviet censorship institutions mostly applied preventive censorship to plays or parts of productions, but hardly any production was cancelled before its premiere because that would have had undesirable financial consequences. Punitive censorship after the premiere was meant for correcting mistakes when the political climate changed or if a censor had been too reckless/lenient/clever, or if actors/audiences had started emphasising implicit meanings. Preventive censorship was predominantly direct and punitive censorship indirect (compelling directors to change mise en scènes or prescribing the number of performances). Indirect censorship can be characterised by ambiguity and allusions. A distinction can be made between preventive and punitive censorship in the context of single productions, but when forbidden authors, works or topics were involved, these two forms often merged. The plurality of censorship institutions or mechanisms, and shared responsibility led to a playful situation where parties on both sides of the front line were constantly changing, enabling theatre artists to use different counter-strategies against censorship. Two main battlefields were the mass media and meetings of the artistic committees, where new productions were introduced. The most common counter-strategies were the empowerment of productions and directors with opinions from experts and public figures (used also as a tool of censorship), providing ideologically correct interpretations of productions, overstated/insincere self-criticism on the part of theatre artists, concealing dangerous information (names of authors, original titles of texts, etc.), establishing relationships based on mutual trust with representatives of censorship institutions for greater artistic freedom, applying for help from central institutions of the Soviet Union against local authorities, and delating on censors. At the same time, a censor could fight for freedom of expression or a critic could work ambivalently as support or protection. In addition to forbidden authors whose biography, world view or works were unacceptable to Soviet authorities, there was an implicit list of dangerous topics: criticism of the Soviet Union as a state and a representative of the socialist way of life, positive representations of capitalist countries and their lifestyles, national independence and symbols of the independent Republic of Estonia (incl. blue-black-white colour combinations), idealisation of the past and the bourgeoisie, derogation of the Russian language and nation, violence and harassment by Soviet authorities, pessimism and lack of positive character, religious propaganda, sexuality and intimacy. When comparing the list of forbidden topics with analogous ones in other countries, for example in the United Kingdom where censorship was abolished in 1968, it appears that at a general level the topics are quite similar, but priorities are reversed: Western censorship was dealing with moral issues while its Eastern counterpart was engaged with political issues. It can be concluded that all censorship systems are somehow similar, embracing both the areas of restrictions and the areas of freedom and role play, providing individuals on both sides of the front line with opportunities to interpret and embody their roles according their world view and ethics. Censorship of arts is still an issue nowadays, even when it is hidden or neglected.

Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui (1) Sejarah pendirian makam Chabib Umar Bin Yusuf Al- Magribi di Desa Candikuning, (2) Dampak sosial ekonomi bagi masyarakat Desa Candikuning, (3) Potensi makam Chabib Umar Bin Yusuf Al- Magribi di Desa Candikuning, Bedugul dapat digunakan sebagai sumber belajar sejarah di SMA. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian sejarah, sehingga langkah-langkah yang dilakukan adalah (1) Heuristik; (2) Kritik Sumber; (3) Interpretasi; (4) Historiografi. Hasil penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa, (1) Sejarah pendirian makam Chabib Umar Bin Yusuf Al- Magribi dengan ditemukannya lokasi makam yang terletak di atas bukit bedugul Desa Candikuning pada tahun 1940-an yang disinyalir merupakan makam seorang tokoh penyebar agama Islam yang berasal dari Timur Tengah. (2) Dampak sosial ekonomi dari Makam Chabib Umar Bin Yusuf Al- Magribi bagi masyarakat di Desa Candikuning, Bedugul adalah dampak mengenai mata pencaharian masyarakat sekitar makam, pendapatan masyarakat sekitar makam, serta interaksi sosial yang terjadi di dalam masyarakat. (3) Makam Chabib Umar Bin Yusuf Al- Magribi mengandung nilai historis sebagai salah satu tokoh penyebar agama Islam di Bali dan merupakan salah satu wali pitu yang dapat dijadikan sebagai sumber belajar sejarah lokal di SMA. Kata Kunci : Sejarah, Dampak Sosial Ekonomi, dan Sebagai Sumber Belajar Sejarah The purpose of this study was to find out (1) History of the chabib Umar Bin Yusuf Al- Magribi tomb in the village of Candikuning, (2) Socio economic impact for the community in the village of Candikuning, (3) Potential of the tomb of Chabib Umar Bin Yusuf Al- Magribi in the village of Candikuning, Bedugul can be used as a source of historical learning in high school. This research is a historical research, so the steps taken are (1) Heuristics; (2) Source Criticism; (3) Interpretation; (4) Historiography. The results of this study indicate that, (1) The history of the establlishment of the Chabib Umar Bin Yusuf Al- Magribi tomb with the discovery of the location of the tomb located on the hill of the village of Candikuning Bedugul in the 1940s which was allegedly the tomb of a prominent Muslim propagator from the Middle East. (2) The socio economic impact of the Chabib Umar Bin Yusuf Al- Magribi tomb for the community in the village of Candikuning, Bedugul is the impact on the livelihoods of the people around the tomb, as well as the social interactions that occur within the community. (3) The tomb of Chabib Umar Bin Yusuf Al- Magribi containts historical value as one of the leaders of the spread of Islam in Bali and is one of the guardians who can be used as a source of learning local history in high school.keyword : History, Socio-Economic impact, and as a Source of Learning History

This article examines the career of Hungarian geographer, Tibor Mendöl, who was appointed the first Chair of Human Geography at Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest in 1940. Mendöl’s career had a bright start but was shattered following World War II. His story is not unique in Hungary, and in fact was common to other countries in the former Soviet sphere where a generation of geographers shared his fate. The history of Mendöl’s career and the reception of his work reaches beyond the significance of a personal life story. It offers insight into twentieth-century Hungarian geography and into Hungarian scholarly life in general. Mendöl’s career was emblematic of a period when geography–which had been institutionally strong, vital in public thought in Hungary, and important in a policy context–became marginalised within academia, and came very close to disciplinary annihilation. Mendöl was allowed to retain his chair up to his date of retirement, but his disciples had to leave the university. His efforts to publish his work were in turn hindered, and his scientific theories received strong criticism. Students of geography in Budapest probably did not even hear his name uttered, even a few years after his death. Mendöl’s works were even removed from the university curriculum. The output of the more recent Mendöl ‘heritage industry,’ however, proves that the legacy of his work has not yet been exhausted, and that his story remains relevant. Though the protagonist of this story has been dead for more than fifty years, his spirit (or perhaps his phantom) returns occasionally. Varying attitudes towards his life and work–from rejection, through concealment, to carefully expressed and later more bravely- worded tributes–have always been only partially about professional and subject-based issues. Interpretations of his life and work have also always been matters of historiography and politics.

IntroductionIn 2008, researchers at New York University’s Computational Neuroimaging Laboratory challenged our contemporary understanding of audience with an alternative approach to engaging some of the most essential questions regarding film consumption. The study itself used a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) scanner during the “free viewing of films” allowing researchers the opportunity to see which sections of the brain are activated during certain parts of the viewing (Hasson et al. 2). In an effort to overcome limitations of fMRI imaging, the researchers further utilized an inter-subjective correlation (ISC) technique to validate their findings. Simply put, ISC looks at the similar effects in neuroimaging across a range of viewers for the same rhetorical artifact; the higher the similarity, the more confident the researchers are that the impact of the film is the same for most or all viewers. This impact is said to “control” the viewers mental and emotional state in that they can be a reliable way to predict a viewer’s “emotions, thoughts, [and] attitudes” (Hasson et al. 2). The researchers termed their work “neurocinematics” and concluded that this new approach could “contribute to the cognitive movement in film theory, analogous to contributions that neuroscience has made to cognitive and social psychology.” (Hasson et al. 21).Since the publication of this research, there have been over a dozen academic essays published, including additional work in the hard sciences, and contributions from psychology and literary and film studies (see Cohen, Shavalian and Rube; Loschky et al.; Erincin; Kauttonen, Hlushchuk and Tikka; Christoforou et al.). Many seem to be responding to the original authors’ calls for neurocinematics to be “a new interdisciplinary field” between “cognitive neuroscience and film studies” that is “part of a larger endeavor that looks for connections between neuroscience and art” (Hasson et al. 1, 21). Noticeably missing from their call for an inter-disciplinary approach, however, is one that includes rhetorical studies. In fact, to date, there has only been a single publication referring to neurocinematics in communication studies – an essay that was not specific to film nor audience, and that limited its discussion to the effectiveness of fMRI imaging (see Weber, Mangus and Huskey). It is the argument of this essay that rhetorical studies should be included in neurocinematics for two reasons: first, rhetorical studies can provide an alternative theoretical understanding of narrative that should prove to be enlightening for this emerging field; and second, rhetorical studies can provide the necessary ethical positioning for this emerging field.The Rhetorical Studies AlternativeThe first justification for the inclusion of rhetorical studies in neurocinematics is the alternative theoretical approach to narrative that rhetoricians can provide. The original neurocinematics research found that structured stories provided a much higher degree of ISC than open-ended, unstructured “real life” depictions. The researchers showed 10 minutes of Sergio Leone’s film, The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly and a 10-minute stable shot of a Saturday afternoon in Washington Square Park that represented an unstructured, real-life event. The researchers concluded that, “a mere mechanical reproduction of reality, with no directorial intention or intervention, is not sufficient by itself for controlling viewer’s brain activity” (Hasson et al. 8). That the “slice of real life” didn’t have the same predictive functions as the “intentional construction of the film’s sequence through aesthetic means” has important implications for rhetorical studies (Hasson et al. 9). It’s not cinematic imagery alone that corresponds to brain activations, but the construction of story and the aesthetic elements of narrative presentations (that is to say, the creation of rhetoric) that has predictive functions. In A Grammar of Motives, Kenneth Burke notes that dramatism “invites one to consider the matter of motives in a perspective that, being developed from the analysis of drama, treats language and thought primarily as modes of action” (xxii). For Burke, all of our stories are the product of thought, whether it be conscious or unconscious, and this thought belies how we view the world of symbols in which we live. Michael Overington contends that dramatismaddresses the empirical questions of how persons explain their actions to themselves and others, what the cultural and social structural influences on these interpretations might be, and what effect connotational links among the explanatory (motivational) terms might have on these explanations and hence, on action itself. (133)Language is the vehicle for human behaviour and represents how we describe the world to ourselves and to others so that “a rhetor’s language can be used to discover motive” (Foss, Foss and Trapp 200). Film is nothing short of a dramatistic explanation that allows us the opportunity to dissect it with more detail to determine the worldview not only of the auteur, but of the spectator as well. Although film studies has its own theories on story and structure, a “systematic application” of Burke’s dramatism “enables an observer to reconstruct various perspectives of ‘reality’” (Stewart, Smith, and Denton 168). When compared to film studies, as an academic discipline, rhetorical studies offers an alternative understanding of narrative. Film studies asks us to apply a structural model to a narrative, while rhetorical studies asks us to apply a systems model that unmasks a narrative. As an example, film studies might examine a film’s structure, looking at the rising action of subplot B as it corresponds in the third reel to the declining action of the subplot A before denouement. As an alternative example, rhetorical studies could offer a dramatistic reading to examine the motivations of scenic ratios between the two subplots as it defines cinematic reality for the audience. Although neurocinematics may help predict the affective impact of the subplots for an audience, it is currently rooted in a structural assumption of audience and narrative, which fails to provide a full account of the spectator’s experience as it relates to the filmmaker’s rhetorical motivation. The addition of rhetorical studies to the conversation can provide an alternative approach and give an additional richness to our understandings of audience.While film studies may engage the ideological function of films, rhetorical studies amplifies their findings. In “The Storyteller,” Walter Benjamin writes,the storytelling that thrives for a long time in the milieu of work … is itself an artisanal form of communication, as it were. It does not aim to convey the pure ‘in itself’ or gist of a thing, like information or a report. It submerges the thing into the life of the story-teller, in order to bring it out of him again. (149)For Benjamin, the storyteller is an artisan that exists external to the rhetorical artifact itself, which, of course, means that the structural focus of film studies falls inevitably short. Further, Benjamin argues that there is an ideological component to both narrative and its medium. He writes, “Just as the entire mode of existence of human collectives changes over long historical periods, so too does their mode of perception. The way in which human perception is organized – the medium in which it occurs – is conditioned not only by nature but by history” (Benjamin "Reproducibility" 255, emphasis in original). The oral tradition of storytelling is different, as is the storytelling of the novel, film, and so on. Indeed, it is the goal of neurocinematics to illustrate how the rhetoric of film is distinct from other forms of narrative discourse, which necessarily demands an inter-disciplinary focus that allows for an interrogation of the ideological functions that exist both within and without the text, which is what Burke’s dramatism provides.Further, Walter Fisher’s work with narrative extends the role of rhetorical theory into what should be discussed in neurocinematics. Fisher contends that the narrative form is something that is unique to humans, but something that all humans engage in; for him, “stories are fundamental to communication because they provide structure for our experience as humans and because they influence people to live in communities that share common explanations and understandings” (Burgchardt 239). As noted earlier, neurocinematics argues that there is a coherence in cinematic narratives that don’t exist in “slice of life” filmic images. Similarly, Walter Fisher contends that this “coherence” is inborn in the narrative being (his homo narran) “their inherent awareness of narrative probability, what constitutes a coherent story, and their constant habit of testing narrative fidelity, whether the stories they experience ring true with the stories they know to be true in their lives” (8). The neurocinematics researchers conclude that, “the ISC analysis of brain activity can also serve as a measurement of systematic differences in how various groups of individuals … respond to the same film” (Hasson et al. 20). Fisher notes that the philosophical foundation of the rational world paradigm (which he sets opposite his narrative paradigm) “is epistemology. Its linguistic materials are self-evident propositions, demonstrations, and proofs, the verbal expressions of certain and probably knowing” (4). The danger with neurocinematics rooted in pure rationality is that it co-opts the narrative function, makes the spectator as agent and film as object separate from one another (when ISC begs that they interact), and brackets off questions such as ethics. Fisher concludes, “With knowledge of agents, we can hope to find that which is reliable or trustworthy; with knowledge of objects, we can hope to discover that which has the quality of veracity. The world requires both kinds of knowledge” (18). Of course, this question demands a discussion of ethics, which the current approach to neurocinematics explicitly denies as a subject of inquiry. The authors write, different filmmakers differ in the level of control they choose to impose on viewers, and out methods are not designed to judge this, but rather to measure the effect of a given film on different target groups. Thus the critical evaluation of each film is outside the domain of this research. (Hasson et al. 21-2)This is the danger Fisher warns of. The assumption that neurocinematics can be a purely descriptive project is not only unfeasible, but also unconscionable. Unlike researchers who deny the place of ideology and ethics, “rhetorical critics, of course, have long recognized the centrality of ideology to persuasive discourse” (Burgchardt 451). To illustrate why this is a vital issue for neurocinematics, let’s take its existing descriptive project to its logical conclusion. Theoretically, researchers could reach a point where there was a 100% ISC, meaning that there existed a cinematic formula that would impact every audience member the same way and would “control” their emotional and mental states – for neurocinematics this would constitute the “perfect” film. This “perfect” film, however, wouldn’t exist in a research vacuum, but in a morass of culture, politics, and ideology. Cultural critic Slavoj Žižek notes the impact that Nine-Eleven had on film:the ultimate twist in this link between Hollywood and the ‘war on terrorism’ occurred when the Pentagon decided to solicit the help of Hollywood: … at the beginning of November 2001, there was a series of meetings between White House advisors and senior Hollywood executives with the aim of co-ordinating the war effort and establishing how Hollywood could help in the war effort and establishing how Hollywood could help in the ‘war against terrorism’ by getting the right ideological meaning across not only to Americans, but to the Hollywood public around the globe – the ultimate empirical proof that Hollywood does in fact function as an ‘ideological state apparatus’. (16)The ethical implications are overwhelming: propaganda films are nothing new, but neurocinematics has the potential to usher in a whole new type of propaganda cinema, under the guise of entertainment, that is 100% effective. The original neurocinematic research argued that “the ISC measurement should probably not be used to evaluate the aesthetic, artistic, social, or political value of movies” (Hasson et al. 21). Conversely, rhetorical studies demands that criticism and scholarship not only comment on texts, but ethical considerations “will not be averted either by ignoring it or placing it beyond our provence” (Wander 18).Further, the very goal of neurocinematics demands the critical reaction that current rhetorical theory is prepared to provide. The stated end-game for neurocinematics is to determine how films discursively interact with a viewer’s mental state and, therefore, their affective response to an aesthetic experience. Raymie McKerrow notes that critical rhetorical theory must examine “the manner in which discourse insinuates itself in the fabric of social power, and thereby ‘effects’ the status of knowledge among the members of the social group” (92). Michael Calvin McGee argues, “We do not ‘observe’ objects and human actions … we construct these phenomena through rational acts of ‘selecting,’ ‘coordinating,’ ‘interpreting,’ and ‘applying’ sensory data” (48). There is no potential for a non-normative descriptive project inside of these parameters; there is no neutral observation by the spectator, the filmic experience is one that is constructed internally. Neurocinematics notes that there are interactions between brain spheres (e.g. neocortex and the amygdala) that create an intersubjective experience (which is quantitatively described with the ISC), but to explain, even descriptively, what is occurring in these viewers requires determining what the audience “knows” and how the discursive impact of the film effects them neurologically. The field of neurocinematics is not morally neutral, though it insists on presenting itself that way. At its most basic level, the researchers are not separate from the ethical and ideological functions of their studies: they make normative claims about which films are “worthy” of study, they manufacture inter-subjective reality with their critical reactions to the artifacts, and their communicative reporting in the essay itself provides agency to the film while simultaneously denying agency to the viewers. Further, when neurocinematics is taken to its logical conclusion (the ability to manufacture the descriptively “perfect” film – one with a 100% ISC), the ethical concerns are overwhelming. With Hollywood films operating more and more as a part of the ideological state apparatus, the potential for highly effective propaganda films becomes more and more real, and more and more frightening. If the conclusions by these researchers is true, that these films “control” our mental states, then the power of such propaganda films could be devastating.ConclusionThis essay has argued that rhetorical scholars have not only a unique opportunity, but an ethical obligation, to insert ourselves into one of the most innovative inter-disciplinary fields to emerge in recent history. Neurocinematics has the potential to transform cognitive neuroscience and film studies both and it is imperative that rhetoricians insert themselves into this dialogue. First, the work that rhetorical studies has done on storytelling, narrative, and dramatism provides unique perspectives that have been overlooked by the structural models of film studies. Further, the scientists driving neurocinematics forward deny the need for political and value claims to be assessed to their work. Rhetorical studies has the opportunity to challenge these illusions of neutrality and help neuroscientists to understand that their work is, indeed, ideological, and that the dangers of ideology manifest themselves when these perspectives are pushed to the side under the guise of neutrality. ReferencesBenjamin, Walter. "The Storyteller." Trans. Edmund Jephcott, Howard Eiland, and others. Selected Writings Volume 3, 1935-1938. Eds. Howard Eiland and Michael W. Jennings. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2002. ———. "Work of Art in the Age of Reproducibility." Trans. Edmund Jephcott and others. Selected Writings Volume 4, 1938-1940. Eds. Howard Eiland and Michael W. Jennings. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2003. Burgchardt, Carl, ed. Readings in Rhetorical Criticism. Third ed. State College: Strata Publishing, 2005. Burke, Kenneth. A Grammar of Motives. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1945. Christoforou, Christoforos, Spyros Christou-Champi, Fofi Constantinidou, and Maria Theodorou. "From the Eyes and the Heart: A Novel Eye-Gaze Metric That Predicts Video Preferences of a Large Audience." Frontiers in Psychology 6 (2015): 1-11. Cohen, Anna-Lisa, Elliot Shavalian, and Moshe Rube. "The Power of the Picture: How Narrative Film Captures Attention and Disrupts Goal Pursuit." PLoS ONE 10.12 (2015): 1-8. Erincin, Serap. "Dance in Translation: Subjectivity, Failed Spectatorship and Tolerance." Word & Text: A Journal of Literary Studies & Linguistics 2.2 (2012): 156-70. Fisher, Walter. "Narration as a Human Communication Paradigm: The Case of Public Moral Argument." Communication Monographs 51.1 (1984): 1-22. Foss, Sonja K., Karen A. Foss, and Robert Trapp. Contemporary Perspectives on Rhetoric. Third ed. Prospect Heights: Waveland Press, 2002. Hasson, Uri, Ohad Landesman, Barbara Knappmeyer, Ignacio Vallines, Nava Rubin, and David J. Heeger. "Neurocinematics: The Neuroscience of Film." Projections 2.1 (2008): 1-26. Kauttonen, Janne, Yevhen Hlushchuk, and Pia Tikka. "Optimizing Methods for Linking Cinematic Features to fMRI Data." NeuroImage 110 (2015): 136-48. Loschky, Lester C., Adam M. Larson, Joseph P. Magliano, and Tim J. Smith. "What Would Jaws Do? The Tyranny of Film and the Relationship between Gaze and Higher-Level Narrative Film Comprehension." PLoS ONE 10.11 (2015): 1-23. McKerrow, Raymie E. "Critical Rhetoric: Theory and Praxis." Communication Monographs 56.2 (1989): 91. Overington, Michael A. "Kenneth Burke and the Method of Dramatism." Theory & Society 4.1 (1977): 131. Stewart, Charles J., Craig Allen Smith, and Robert E. Denton Jr. Persuasion and Social Movements. Prospect Heights: Waveland Press, 1994. Wander, Philip C. "The Ideological Turn in Modern Criticism." Central States Speech Journal 34 (1983): 1-18. Weber, René, J. Michael Mangus, and Richard Huskey. "Brain Imaging in Communication Research: A Practical Guide to Understanding and Evaluating fMRI Studies." Communication Methods & Measures 9.1/2 (2015): 5-29. Žižek, Slavoj. Welcome to the Desert of the Real! Five Essays on September 11 and Related Dates. New York: Verso, 2002.