social-theory Books

This book is another intellectual feast produced by the great Valmek VolKan. He and his colleagues propose in this book that psychic trauma can be transmitted collectively to succeeding generations through a process coined "trans-generational transmission."

Part I of the book sets up the conceptual machinery for defining and exploring the meaning of "trans-generational transmission;" part II, examines a carefully chosen variety of case studies dealing with victims of the Nazi and Armenian Holocausts. Interestingly, these include at least one German who lived as a "perpetrator" during that period. Part three deals with the therapeutic consequences of "trans-generational transmission." As usual, Volkan's work is on the cutting edge intellectually and is as stimulating as it is provocative.

In part I the authors explain how traumatized victims often oblige their descendants (and do this almost always unconsciously) to carry the weight of, and help resolve the unfinished business of their past traumas, thus among other things, helping them reverse (or at least attenuate) hopelessness and accumulated residual psychic pain. Images of past traumas are carried forward and relived in the mind of succeeding generations of individuals and groups that are culturally related, as unconscious fantasies. That is to say, the progeny or descendants of past traumas learn to live in two worlds: their own (present-oriented) world, and vicariously in that inhabited by their victimized ethnic survivor/ancestors and simultaneously in "an imagined but un-experienced" past oriented-world. Like the real victims of such experiences, these "vicarious victims" too are caught up in the same time warp of past traumatic experiences as the "real victims" are. However, with the important twist that the "vicarious victims" have never experienced the traumas they imagine.

Such is the case with Jews whose parents and relatives were victims of the European Holocaust; American blacks whose ancestors were victims of slavery; the sons and daughters of the Armenian genocide, and the descendants of the genocide against Native Americans, to name just a few select examples. These "unremembered" and "un-experienced" events become "real" in the imagination, and an unforgettable part of the conscious (but "wholly imagined") experiences and life-histories of the descendants. The imagined experiences become in effect "chosen traumas" and a part of a shared "chosen history" to use two other phrases coined by Volkan in his earlier books.

The personalities of these "vicarious victims," adapt to a set of "imagined events" as if they were real and had actually happened to them. They "playact" as if the imagined events are a part of a "shared victimization experience." Their simulated and imagined world becomes a part of the repertoire and a part of a continuum of culturally shared experiences: a kind of "transference neurosis," as it were, that can be as real in its consequences as any other shared experiences can be. Indeed, as these authors so carefully point out in Part III, they eventually become an integral part of the daily repertoire of the "vicarious victim's" own behavioral responses.

The larger and much deeper question this research raises is this: To what extent does this phenomenon of trans-generational transmission represent just the more complex, and more obvious end of a continuum: from strong to weak trauma, and from strong to weak ethnic identification? Indeed, is it possible that trans-generational transmission is just a larger "backdoor" way to defining cultural and ethnic identification itself? Or put differently, to what extent is all ethnic history and identification just a more complex form of identity based on imagined traumas? That is to say, to what extent is ethnic identity a more general but greatly attenuated form of trans-generational transmission?

I raise these questions only because after a careful reading of Part III, which is dense to say the least, the reader is left with the notion that at some level all ethnic grievances may in some sense be viewed as part of a continuum of shared or "chosen traumas" (that is from massive to minimal traumas). And since it is true that ethnic identification (and arguably even ethnicity) is, as often as not, defined by collective grievances, collective insecurity, shared threats to security, shared collective fears and "chosen histories of past traumas," - that is by the gaps in the mental space of group identity -- it is not unreasonable to suggest that the effects of traumas on succeeding generations can easily fit along a continuum, or even a series of continua.

Even if this last suggestion seems premature, or unsuited for the clinical setting, it certainly does no harm to raise the larger issue of whether or not the concept of trans-generational transmission has much wider application and whether or not despite these misgivings it can be seen in a more general, global light as a more systemic psychological phenomenon. Certainly the author's arguments in Chapter III, where traumas take on symbolic and proto-symbolic representations can be read and interpreted in this way.

But this is not the only meaning that can be mined from this conceptually rich mother lode. There are endless possible permutations to how the concept of trans-generational transmission might be expanded and put to further clinical as well as theoretical use, as the term "massive trauma" is further delineated and parsed. It is not unreasonable to suggest that it could, for instance, be expanded to include "perpetrator groups" as well as "victim groups" by the following logical analysis:

Since it is true that wherever there is a "victim group" there is usually also a corresponding "perpetrator group," whose identity is equally "fragmented, equally full of gaps in their mental spaces, and defined by and tied to "shared acts of cruelty," such groups, at least at the unconscious level, experience the same kind of "reverse or indirect trauma," as do "victim groups" do directly. This is another way of saying that "perpetrator groups" are defined as much by their shared "unconscious guilt" from committing acts of cruelty as victim groups are by the cruelty perceived to have been inflicted upon them by actual cruelty.

Is it not true that in the end these are but different sides of the same psychological coin? Building rationalizations and a defensive wall of solidarity becomes as important a form of group identification for perpetrator groups as "reliving victim-hood" does for victimized groups -- and often are the only tangible bases of group solidarity and identification for either group.

As but a couple of interesting examples we could take the results of the American Civil War as a case in point.

It would be difficult to argue that Southern whites did not experienced a kind of collective "massive trauma" by any definition of the term, and whether it be a situational definition or a more general one. However, the same could be said of two other groups' experiences from that war: "The Northern victors, " and the blacks who were "freed" from slavery. In each of these latter cases, the indirect trauma of upheaval and war were no less traumatic than it was directly to southerners, whether or not it was consciously perceived as such by either of these latter two groups. The gaps in their respective collective identities and mental space were nevertheless filled by fears and insecurities of that war. Their respective subgroup identities were defined by and bound by the experiences shared during that period. And so too were the vicariously imagined experiences of their descendants.

The point, of course is that while there are many large definitional problems involved with the concept of "massive trauma," and with the psychological meaning of "ethnic identity," theoretically these are nevertheless a very rich and very useful set of terms, and when they are coupled with Volkan's term transgenerational transmission, the depths of what they can do together has yet to be completely plumbed.

One cannot say enough about the work of Valmik Volkan. Fifty stars! Amen.

Dr. Volkan, this time with some colleagues, presented an enlightened thesis about Transgenerational Transmissions of Traumas and its Consequences. Although aim at the legacy of the third rich in the mind, it can be applied to established a new outlook about transgenerational transmissions of traumas in others scenarios.

As Martin Rubin notes, "thriller" is a very diffuse term that can cover anything from private eye films to horror movies. This excellent book tries to offer a way of thinking about this wide genre.

The first part of the book searches for a definition of the thriller. Rubin basically decides that a thriller has an extradorinary danger emerging in an ordinary setting. Thus westerns, swashbucklers and Gothic horror films, while exciting and thrilling, don't fit.

The second part of the book is an examination of how the thriller developed from silent days to the end of the 20th century. This is the best part of the book, as Rubin touches on many different types of film, even including Harold Lloyd's comedies. His comments on horror films and film noir are very thought provoking.

The final part of the book looks at key films that represent important thriller subgenres: The Big Sleep (private eye), Strangers on a Train (psychological suspense) The French Connection (police film). Again, Rubin's comments here are all very sound.

I found this a very useful and enjoyable book that made me think about familiar films in a new way.

Martin Rubin is an excellent writer who has crafted a superb analysis and historical overview of the thriller story. He tracks the evolution of the thriller from Gothic tales to modern motion pictures. The focus on the thriller's structure and history gives this text substatial merit. Rubin covers a great deal of film history. All aspiring screenwriters should have a copy of this book on their shelf.

Similar to Steven Covey (7 Habits of Highly Effective People, etc.) principles, but stated in a fresh way and making insightful observations about life at the turn of the 21st century - why it's so stressful, and what we can do about it. I bought this book for one friend and recommended it to several others.

Six strategies for taming the 'new world of work' address the problems inherent in the breakdown between barriers between work and home life. Readers who find themselves working not only harder but all the time will find Thriving In 24/7 a practical guide to adjusting routines and recognizing the hidden obstacles to success at home and at work.

Many surprises and intriguing conclusions await any reader willing to follow this book's discussions attentively and carefully.
No previous training in physics or Buddhism is assumed. Indeed, this text could serve as a first introduction to either discipline. The author, a professor of physic and astronomy, tells us that a major impetus for writing the book was a call by His Holiness the Dalai Lama for works that would introduce Tibetan monks to issues in modern science.
Although the author makes his points with great care and precision, his general tone is light and often quite personal, with frequent anecdotes, occasional humor, photographs, and poetry. The author's warmth shines through. Nevertheless, the discussion is layered, so that deeper meanings are available to more knowledgeable readers.
I've enjoyed a few other books that compare modern physics to Asian philosophies. This one stands out because it focuses in detail on some very specific issues without hand-waving or short-cuts. Among the problems discussed are: can an entity be truly independent? is there invariably a direction to time? can an event be "uncaused"? do physical laws support the possibility of "compassion" as understood in Buddhism? Don't assume you already know what conclusions are reached.
This book comes across as written with feeling and honesty. For all its intellectual concentration, I believe it was primarily a labor of love.

For those wanting to read entire chapters or the introduction by the Dalai Lama, go to the author's website at www.lightlink.com/vic. That site has much more information about the book. It may help you decide if it is for you.

Vic

A time for revolution contains two volumes from distinct points in Negri's career. The essays written in prison, which form the latter half of the book, are what I have read in depth and are what I would like to discuss.

Kairos, Alma Venus and Multitudo represent concurrent and cumulatively logical essays outlining a materialist ontology, tying together as primary concepts a temporal epistemology, ontology of the common, and conceptual framework for differentiated action. To explain this, jargon free, Negri claims that through most of the history of philosophy and of knowing subjects there has been a false transcendental illusion of knowledge that exists external to time, and that this form of knowledge is privileged and replicated by the interests of the powerful. His project is to restore the belief among subjects that change can be affected and of the possibilities time affords. He wishes to tie in this priviledging of the tempral nature of knowledge to a logically consistent ethical basis of the common and refutation of power.

These essays are prefaced by an insightful and absorbing introduction in which Negri explains his tribulations with the state of Italy, and through his elaborate articulation sets himself within the pantheon of philosophical minds. It is not surprising then, especially considering the aim and extent of this project, that a Time for Revolution often comes off as a quasi-mystical Platonic text, evading specificity, and tending towards the very transcendentalism loathed by Negri. Strangely, however, for this reader this logically inconsistent facet of the text is perhaps one of the greatest draws; to enact hope of change: hearts and not just minds are in need of being won over.

Like Spinoza Negri pushes his philosophical message through with sheer eloquence at times, the very mysticism of what is sometimes being proposed gated into sequenced paragraphs.

This book has been an inspiration to me. The density of the writing is so heavy, you feel that perhaps a whole life's thoughts have been compressed into these essays, meaning that with each reading the writing reveals something new. I am currently working on a film about Savonarola that draws on many of the themes in these essays, if you are interested in discussing Negri's work or my film email me at ncoombs@fastmail.co.uk

This book contains two books written by Antonio Negri in a span of 20 years. Negri was involved in the Italian far left Operaismo and Autonomia movements and is deeply inspired by the philosophies of Marx, Deleuze/Guattari and Spinoza.

The first book - 'The Constitution of Time' is written from a Marxist materialist perspective. It starts with the aporias of time in Marx's works, especially 'Capital', 'Grundrisse' and 'Theories of Surplus Value' such as between intensive and extensive labour time, or between the time of historical materialism and subsumed labour time as values in economic circulation. Negri distinguishes three kinds of time in the subsumed time of captialism - collective, productive and constitutive. In each, he distinguishes a concept of time that is oriented to control and another that is oriented to freedom. Finally, he distinguishes positive and negative variants of the 'time for revolution'.

His aim is to lay the foundation for a time of resistance in a world of control. However, his Deleuze/Guattari borrowings and his dogmatic materialism mar his first book. The first book also suffers from an excess of assertoric rather than logico-analytical statements.

The second book - 'Kairos, Alma Venus, Multitudo' represents a real breakthrough in the philosophy of time. Written 20 years later it represents greater intellectual clarity and helps understand the previous work.

Negri says that time is always the tip of the arrow that has been released. Accordingly, being is always in a state of transformation. Past is a psychological construct and so is future. Neither past or future is experienced time. Time as becoming, as tip of the arrow - is neither past nor future but a time when being transforms itself by inaugurating the new or 'to come'. He also criticizes the focus on being and neglect of time in ontology and launches an attack on spatial metaphors of time which represent time as a sort of plane with past, present and future arranged in a line.

He then goes on to explain other concepts like language, love, multitude, power etc. based on his concept of an ontology grounded in time. This second book is remarkable for the step by step way it builds up its arguments.

Despite his strong anti-Hegelianism and rejection of 'dialectics', he uses a very dialectical method of developing his own arguments , in both books. But, that is one of the strengths of the books and not the soruce of their weaknesses.

His weaknesses lie elsewhere. His materialism and his Deleuze/Guattari heritage, leads him to resort to contortions in order to deal with the question of subject and resistance - because like all materialists he seeks to avoid questions about consciousness and will and like post-structuralists he is uneasy with the question of the 'subject'. However, unlike Deleuze/Guattari he does not bypass the question of the subject by reducing living beings to desiring machines or in any other way, but comes with as good an explanation of the concept of 'subject' as is possible from a strictly materialist perspective.

This book was both thought provoking and entertaining. It is full of quirky articles and stories, impassioned and intelligent writing and interesting interviews. I enjoyed that it dares to be more radical than a lot of what I read and yet for the most part is also very informed and well written. I agreed with many of the articles, disagreed with a few, but was delighted regardless to find authors not afraid to voice controversial views that shook up my beliefs, confirmed what I myself feel, or shed light on a new way of looking at things. My only complaint is that for being called "The Sacred Cow" I sometimes felt like their was a tinge of a "little holier than thou" in that I at times felt like if I met a few of these authors they would scorn me for not being radical enough. (Maybe that is just my own insecurity talking, though.) Regardless, books with alternative views are much needed and this one has the additional bonus of being very fun to read.

Smart, funny, deeply imaginative, and highly informative, "Tipping the Sacred Cow" is a brilliant anthology of radical essays exploring a broad range of political topics like queer liberation, Native American rights, feminism, ecology, hip hop, the Zapatistas, and much, much more. While I loved all the excellent articles and interviews in this book, I especially enjoyed the essay by Lisa Jervis on the need for the mainstream feminist movement to overcome its gender essentialism and biological determinism and Mattilda Bernstein Sycamore's fabulous essay about gay assimilation and gay marriage being forms of "participatory patriarchy". I also really appreciated Jennifer Whitney's insightful essay on the problems with Indymedia, the interview with Vandana Shiva about biotechnology, democracy, and the privatization of water, the fascinating interview with the feminist Jessica Giordani about the health risks associated with the carcinogenic toxins used in the manufacture of sex toys, and the interview with the activist film-maker Heather Rogers about the politics of garbage. This book also includes a truly profound essay by the American Indian/Green Party activist Winona LaDuke. Thought-provoking, humorous, refreshing, and subversive, this is yet again another wonderful book from the folks of AK Press. Besides, how can one help but fall in love with a book that includes both genderqueer erotica and anti-capitalist analysis?!!

Require book for International Law class. Easy to read and gives good detailed information on the subject matter

Marnia Lazreg is a Professor in the Sociology Department at Hunter College, the City University of New York. In this brilliant and disturbing book, she studies France's war against Algeria (1954-62).

She shows how a militarised colonial state used torture and terror to forestall the collapse of its empire in the age of decolonisation. The political economy of colonial rule required violence, including torture.

Once torture was permitted, it became routine. Euphemised as `screening' and `pacification', its purpose was to enforce obedience. It continued right to the end of the war. The only way to stop it was to end the war.

Torture routinely practised was routinely denied. Politicians tried to excuse it as coming from `a few rotten apples', as `occasional excesses' and `regrettable incidents', and blamed the victims, claiming that Algerians `only understood force'.

Novelist Albert Camus condemned the violence by both sides, yet defended France's claim to Algeria, which could only be upheld by violence. He supported the settlers against the colonised, using the same arguments as the colonial state, calling for peace and coexistence within colonial rule.

Today, apologists for torture like Alan Dershowitz, Michael Walzer, Jean Elshtain and Michael Ignatieff assist politicians who destroy civil liberties at home and cause chaos abroad. Blair seeks solace in confession and God's forgiveness, preferring these to democratic accountability.

Lazreg shows that despite the cultural differences, French, British and American war practices and rhetorics are similar. Their wars of occupation disguise material and strategic interests as civilising or democracy-building. The French, like the US and British occupiers today, used the rhetoric of women's emancipation, claiming that they were `protecting' women from Islam.

And torture of prisoners was part of every French colonial war, part of every British colonial war, from Malaya in the 1940s to Kenya in the 1950s, Oman in the 1960s and Northern Ireland in the 1970s, and part of the current wars against Afghanistan and Iraq.

Finally, Lazreg argues that acts of terror, like any other crimes, do not threaten democracy. They do not even affect democracy - unless states respond by violating democratic rights, as the French state did and as the British and US states are doing. As she concludes, "The `war on terror' has become a war of terror."

What a marvelous book. Utopian in spirit yet practical in application this book takes the notion of multiculturalism to human levels not seen in many discourses. The nalaysis is fresh and interesting and should be a part of every teacher training program. Weil is a former kindergarten, first and second grade bilingual teacher and he is formidable in both his analysis and his historical awareness. I walked away as a teacher of fifth grade, finally understanding multiculturalism as more than a 'fad' but as a serious quest to be human. Highly recommended.

This book is an insightful addition to a subject that has received more than its share of exposure. However, what Weil does in this essay is compare and contrast much of what parades as multicultural education, and in the spirit of the Frankfurt School, Paulo Freire and Henry Giroux, he couches our understanding of multiculturalism within political realizations and emancipatory objectives. His point is simple and worth considering: The tourist approach to multiculturalism along with individualistic approaches to understanding diversity fail to seat this understanding within socio-historical contexts and fail to provide reasoning opportunities for students to reason their way within and through, multicultural points of view . Thus, these approaches fail to provide hope for combatting what Weil calls "the logic of oppression" that faces all human beings. The book is theoretical and practical. Weil is an ex-kindergarden and first grade teacher so he speaks with teachers, not to them. A must read for all teachers, prospective teachers, parents and humanistic intellectuals interested in exapanding the debate regarding diversity and multiculturalism.

This book addresses two principal issues: how people were governed (and perhaps increasingly come to govern themselves); and, within that context, how we might understand schools (where they came from, how and why they arose when, where and in the form they did, and their significance). It explores patriarchy (understood as rule of both father and husband, and as constituting both age and gender relations) as a mode of government within families, workplaces, and the institutions of state.

It is an ambitious book. It draws on an impressively wide range of scholarly literature, from religious, family, demographic, economic, social, political and military history.

It ranges widely over Western European societies and their colonial offshoots from the sixteenth to the end of the nineteenth centuries (and beyond). It examines the complex impacts of demographic, economic, political, institutional and 'cultural' changes on patriarchal organisation, and the ways in which patriarchal understandings and practices mediated and shaped those changes, in institutions, and in everyday life.

It keeps a sharp eye out for similar tendencies across different situations and circumstances, for the unevenness of the developments it traces, and for the connections between between different aspects of social life, and between the different social and regional conditions which constitute 'uneven development'.

At the centre of its analysis are the sheer materiality of human existence and the ways in which the production of material life is conducted. But it is theoretically subtle and sophisticated, grafting onto its marxist heritage a qualified theoretical eclecticism and a concern with such things as the formation of particular personality characteristics in particular socio-political regimes.

It is roughly chronological in its overall organisation, but rather than a chronological narrative, it proceeds as what the author calls a 'patchwork' of 'case studies' to map important developments, to explore both what they have in common with what was happening elsewhere and their particularities and contingencies, and to note the diversity of conditions and practices across western societies. At the same time, it concerned to identify causes, and to make connections between seemingly disparate aspects and levels of social life.

The book is clearly written and well organised. I'd rate it as a useful book and important book. It is impressively scholarly. While it attempts synthesis it avoids any sort of singular, homogenising ('that's it in a nutshell') formula. And, third, because contemporary academic politics offers substantial inducements to turn out small, self-contained, 'do-able' bits - they get the publication points for a minimum of time and effort. But academic life needs, somewhere, works which assemble a breadth of knowledge and attempt the large-scale synthesis which that makes possible.

This book addresses two principal issues: how people were governed (and perhaps increasingly come to govern themselves); and, within that context, how we might understand schools (where they came from, how and why they arose when, where and in the form they did, and their significance). It explores patriarchy (understood as rule of both father and husband, and as constituting both age and gender relations) as a mode of government within families, workplaces, and the institutions of state. It ranges widely over Western European societies and their colonial offshoots from the sixteenth to the end of the nineteenth centuries (and beyond). It examines the complex impacts of demographic, economic, political/institutional and 'cultural' changes on patriarchal organisation, and the ways in which patriarchal understandings and practices mediated and shaped those changes, in institutions, and in the everyday life. This is an ambitious book. It ranges over a wide geo-political and chronological span, and draws on an extensive body of literature from religious, family, demographic, economic, social, political and military history. It keeps a sharp eye out for similar tendencies across different situations and circumstances, for the unevenness of the developments it traces, and for the connections between different aspects of social life, and between the different social and regional conditions which constitute 'uneven development'. At the centre of its analysis are the sheer materiality of human existence and the ways in which the production of material life is conducted. But it is theoretically subtle and sophisticated, qualifying its marxist heritage with a qualified theoretical eclecticism and a concern with such things as the formation of particular personality characteristics in particular socio-political regimes. It is roughly chronological in its overall organisation, but rather than a chronological narrative, it proceeds as what the author calls a 'patchwork' of 'case studies' to map important developments, to explore both what they have in common with what was happening elsewhere and their particularities and contingencies, and to note the diversity of conditions and practices across western societies. At the same time, it concerned to identify causes, and to make connections between seemingly disparate aspects and levels of social life. The book is clearly written and well organised. I'd rate it as a useful book and important book. It is impressively scholarly. While it attempts synthesis it avoids any sort of singular, homogenising ('that's it in a nutshell') formula. And, third, because contemporary academic politics offers substantial inducements to turn out small, self-contained, 'do-able' bits - they get the publication points for a minimum of time and effort. But academic life needs, somewhere, works which assemble a breadth of knowledge and attempt the large-scale synthesis which that makes possible.

(Adapted from History of Education Review 28 (1) 1999, 77-79)

Robert Collins covers it all in this book, from political economy to culture to foreign policy and the end of the Cold War. One of the most interesting arguments in the book is his observation that America moved both right and left in the 80s; he claims that American politics experienced a rightward realignment while culture paradoxically continued to become more permissive. The chapter on Reaganomics showcases Collins's ability to bring to life reasonably difficult topics without sacrificing analytical rigor, and his exploration of business in the 1980s should not be missed.

If you are interested in Ronald Reagan or the history of the 1980s, you would be a fool to skip this book.

Depending upon to whom you are speaking Ronald Reagan was either the closest thing we've had to a saint, or perhaps the Devil incarnate. I have long held that you don't really begin to understand a time or a presidency until the history books get written. And this book is an excellent example.

As the author says in his introduction, he has sought to take seriously the historian's obligation to rise out of [his own views] to see what all sides thought they were up to. Those whose view matches that of Tom Clancy, who dedicated one of his books to Reagan as 'the man who won the war,' will find plenty to support his view. Those who prefer to look at Iran-Contra or the lack of funding for AIDS research will likewise find points to justify their view.

It seemed to me that Reagan was the first president to be considered inconsequential, a tool of the people around him. Instead Dr. Collins finds Reagan one of the most consequential and successful presidents of the modern era. I believe he is correct. For better or worse, the Reagan years accompanied masive changes in the political and cultural structure of our country. Dr. Collins has written an excellent chronicle of those years.