Gotowa bibliografia na temat „Socialism, 1876-1889”

Adler and Sullivan's Auditorium Building in Chicago (1886-1890) is here analyzed in the context of Chicago's social history of the 1880s. Specifically, the building is seen as a capitalistic response to socialist and anarchist movements of the period. The Auditorium's principal patron, Ferdinand W. Peck, created a theater that was to give access to cultural and civic events for the city's workers, to draw them away from both politicized and nonpoliticized "low" urban entertainments. Adler and Sullivan's theater was to serve a mass audience, unlike opera houses of the period, which held multiple tiers of boxes for privileged patrons. This tradition was represented by the Metropolitan Opera House in New York City (1881-1883). Turning away from works like the Paris Opéra, Peck and his architects perhaps sought to emulate ideas of other European theaters of the period, such as Bayreuth's Festspielhaus (1872-1876). Sullivan's interior had an ornamental and iconographic program that was innovative relative to traditional opera houses. His design of the building's exterior was in a Romanesque style that recalled ancient Roman monuments. It is here compared with other Chicago buildings of its era that represented high capital's reaction to workers' culture, such as Burnham and Root's First Regiment Armory (1889-1891), Peck's own house (1887), and the Chicago Athenaeum (1890-1891). The Auditorium's story invites a view of the Chicago School that emphasizes the role of patrons' ideological agenda rather than modern structural expression.

Cette thèse d'histoire étudie le discours et le vocabulaire politiques français dans l'entre-deux-guerres (1928-1939), car ceux-ci paraissent des acteurs pertinents de la crise que connaissent la France et la république dans les années 30, qui aboutit à la défaite et à Vichy. La guerre civile verbale est étudiée d'abord à grands traits grâce à une comparaison gauche / droite, puis plus finement par l'étude du discours communiste (Maurice Thorez), socialiste (Léon Blum), orléaniste (Pierre-Etienne Flandin) et bonapartiste (André Tardieu). La méthode d'analyse utilisée est la lexicométrie dont le principe épistémologique est clair : ne rien avancer qui ne soit démontré ou suscité par le constat chiffre de la sur-utilisation ou de la sous-utilisation d'un terme, à une époque déterminée, par un locuteur donné. Grâce à une série d'outils linguistiques, statistiques, informatiques, -notamment des analyses factorielles des correspondances- il a été possible de déterminer, par une étude synchronique des discours, l'identité lexicale, discursive, idéologique de quatre familles politiques françaises; puis, par une étude diachronique, de montrer comment le débat politique, le consensus républicain éclatent au fil des années, en isolant les pratiques lexicales de Thorez, Blum, Flandin et Tardieu, pour rendre inexpugnable une logomachie funeste au pays
The present doctoral thesis proposes to study the French political vocabulary and speech during the interwar period (1928-1939), for indeed those seem to have played a part significant enough in the crisis France and the republic went through in the 1930s and which led to the defeat and Vichy. The verbal civil war is first studied roughly though a left/right comparison and then more subtly throught the study of communist (Maurice Thorez), socialist (Leon bloom), orleanist (Pierre-Etienne Flandin) and bonapartist (André Tardieu) speeches. The method of analysis here used is lexicometry whose epistemological principle is clear : never put forward what is not proved or incited by the figured recording of the over- or underuse of a term by a given speaker at a determined time. Thanks to a whole range of linguistic, statistical and computer tools -particulary correspondence analysis- it has been possible to determine, by the means of a synchronic investigation of the differents speeches, the lexical, discursive and ideological identity of four French political persuasions. Then with a diachronic investigation and by isolating the lexical practices of Thorez, Blum, Flandin and Tardieu, we have been able to demonstrate how the political debate and the republican consensus ruptured with the passing years to make impregnable and overweening verbosity so baneful for the country