vendredi 22 septembre 2017

Les femmes poivrotes

Lady Lushes: Gender, Alcoholism, and Medicine in Modern America 

Michelle L. McClellan


Series: Critical Issues in Health and Medicine
Hardcover: 234 pages
Publisher: Rutgers University Press; 1 edition (August 31, 2017)
Language: English
ISBN-13: 978-0813576985

According to the popular press in the mid twentieth century, American women, in a misguided attempt to act like men in work and leisure, were drinking more. “Lady Lushes” were becoming a widespread social phenomenon. From the glamorous hard-drinking flapper of the 1920s to the disgraced and alcoholic wife and mother played by Lee Remick in the 1962 film “Days of Wine and Roses,” alcohol consumption by American women has been seen as both a prerogative and as a threat to health, happiness, and the social order.

In Lady Lushes, medical historian Michelle L. McClellan traces the story of the female alcoholic from the late-nineteenth through the twentieth century. She draws on a range of sources to demonstrate the persistence of the belief that alcohol use is antithetical to an idealized feminine role, particularly one that glorifies motherhood. Lady Lushes offers a fresh perspective on the importance of gender role ideology in the formation of medical knowledge and authority.

Histoire des cordons sanitaires

Barriers without Borders. Global and transdisciplinary perspectives on sanitary cordons throughout history

Call for Papers

2nd International Conference of the QSN 
University of the Balearic Islands, Palma de Mallorca, 

7-8 November 2018 


Sanitary cordons to regulate and control the spread of bubonic plague were developed in Italy in the 14th century in parallel with maritime quarantine (mainly lazarettos) and came to be quickly imposed by other Mediterranean/European countries. Today, various types of cordons are still being used ‘to control the spread of epizootics and to mitigate the impact of both newly emerging and re-emerging infectious diseases upon the human population’ (Cliff, 2009) with the 21st-century pandemics of Ebola or avian flu showing their continued utility. At this juncture one finds a stunning paradox: despite their functions as instruments of isolation/separation, sanitary cordons came to be highly appreciated, legitimized and defended by state authorities and frequently by the populations themselves. By the 1800s, they had already been accepted and utilized in most countries of the world.

The success of sanitary cordons was also measured by their widespread adoption across various social and cultural domains. Thus, sanitary cordons became inseparable from military and political demarcations of territorial borders especially, but by no means exclusively, at the state level.

Well-known cases include the cordon set-up against the plague in the Austrian-Ottoman border as from 1770; the so called ‘yellow fever cordon’ set up in the Catalan sector of the French-Spanish border in 1822; and the one established against cholera on the Ottoman-Persian frontier during the 1850s. The concept of the ‘common good’ via the preservation of public health was also used as an argument to legitimize, consolidate and militarize borders through the setting up of cordons. On the other hand, as sanitary cordons were set up to separate healthy sectors of a community – or indeed whole populations – from others considered sick, they were directly involved in processes of nation-building, international conflict or colonial domination. Sanitary cordons helped to define and ‘protect’ national identities and, at the same time, ‘isolate’ and control various provincial, national and colonial ‘others’. This was legitimized through old and new medical theories, scientific discourse or just pure prejudice or a combination of all these.

Sanitary cordons were also successfully ‘translated’ into the fields of politics and diplomacy, where the concept has been employed metaphorically to refer to attempts to prevent the spread of an ideology or another deemed dangerous to the international or the social order. For example, in 1917, the French minister of Foreign Affairs employed such a term to designate the new states (Finland, the Baltic republics, Poland and Romania) established along the Western border of the USSR (as buffer states) against the spread of the Bolshevist revolution into Central and Western Europe. Besides geography, politics and diplomacy, personal narratives of sanitary cordons became a sort of subgenre in modern literature, where they have also been used as metaphors to deal with issues of social control, identity/alterity or dystopic futures.

Incorporating all these perspectives and seeking papers with original research approaches, this conference wants to explore sanitary cordons throughout history to the present as they were put in place and employed in different parts of the globe and different social and cultural domains. Topics to be addressed could include, among others:
- Origins and development of sanitary cordons for the prevention of epidemics throughout history to the present: concepts, practices, regulations, global expansion, unknown or understudied historical cases throughout the world.
- Patterns of sanitary cordons throughout history and in different regions/countries of the world.
- Sanitary cordons as border sites of negotiation and/or resistance.
- Pre-modern and non-European forms of isolation/separation of diseased groups or communities from the rest in all their diversity (and cultural specificities).
- Literary narratives recounting eye-witness accounts/experience of cordons or employing the metaphor ‘sanitary cordons’ on issues of identity and otherness, liminality, movement/migration, global inequality, and so on.
- Memorialization: sanitary cordons in the collective imaginaries, shared memories, material culture/heritage sites, lieux de mémoire.
- Sanitary cordons and the construction, and expansion, of early-modern/modern borders of states, provinces or any other territorial demarcations.
- Place of non-human creatures and organisms (animals, plants, substances) within cordons.
- Juridical, ethical, humanitarian and religious issues raised by the use of cordons in public health, war, political struggle, migration control, and human rights.
- Sanitary cordons and science: particularly the connections between contagionism and hygiene, as well as the part played by novel advances in medicine – bacteriology.
- Relations with power: effective sanitary cordons and types of state projections of power (national sovereignty, central administrative state development, Imperial/colonial state power).
- Connections between cordons and other forms of quarantine, isolation hospitals and the public health systems. Sanitary cordons and western medicalization of society: surveillance and disciplinary processes.

Please submit your paper proposal of up to 400 words before 31st October 2017 to this address: quarantinestudies@gmail.com

After that date, more information will be provided about the venue, travel and accommodation options, as well as funding opportunities.

jeudi 21 septembre 2017

Histoires de la contagion post-mortelle

Histories of Post-Mortem Contagion. Infectious Corpses and Contested Burials


Editors: Lynteris, Christos, Evans, Nicholas (Eds.)


Palgrave Macmillan
Medicine and Biomedical Sciences in Modern History
Copyright 2018 
278 p. 
ISBN 978-3-319-62929-2


This edited volume draws historians, anthropologists and archaeologists together to explore the contested worlds of epidemic corpses and their disposal. Why are burials so frequently at the center of disagreement, recrimination and protest during epidemics? Why are the human corpses produced in the course of infectious disease outbreaks seen as dangerous, not just to the living, but also to the continued existence of society and civilization? Examining cases from the Black Death to Ebola, contributors challenge the predominant idea that a single, universal framework of contagion can explain the political, social and cultural importance and impact of the epidemic corpse.

Perdants, outsiders et hérétiques dans l'histoire de la médecine

Rewrite Conflicts: The Role of Losers, Heretics, and Outsiders in the History of Medicine


Call for Papers

Invited editor: Fabrizio Baldassarri
Webpage: https://fbaldassarriphilo.wordpress.com/home/cfp-outcomes/


A multifaceted narration characterizes the contrapositions between schools, factions, theories, and practices in the history of medicine. Yet, studying these conflicts helps to shed light on those actors traditional historiographies usually relegate to secondary roles: surgeons, practitioners, apothecaries, botanists, astronomers, chymists, men and women devoted to the knowledge of simples. Especially when following losers, outsiders, heretics, and marginalized scholars, medical conflicts reveal epistemologically fruitful paths that help to track the changes buttressing early modern bio-medical revolution. While academic physicians required the support of theologians to rule out these practices as responsible for heresies, errors, and charlatanisms, kings frequently credited such outsiders as court physicians (i.e., Ambroise Paré, Guy de La Brosse), elevating their knowledge and experience to a crucial role. Slowly, these actors entered medical schools and academies, rewriting early modern history of medicine.
This fascicule aims to reconstruct this conflicting situation, and to analyse diverse cases of such outsiders and losers, moving from the sixteenth to the eighteenth centuries (wider focuses are accepted as well). Research articles coming from different fields (history of philosophy, psychology, science, medicine, botany, ideas, intellectual history, and history of life sciences…) are welcome.
Societate și Politică is a peer-reviewed scholarly journal published by Vasile Goldiș Western University of Arad, Romania. See http://uvvg.ro/socpol/.
Papers no longer than 8.000 words or book reviews no longer than 800 words should be submitted by email to fabrizio.baldassarri@gmail.com by 15 December 2017. Paper will go through double-blind peer-review process. Publication is scheduled by 30 April 2018.
For the authors guidelines see: http://socpol.uvvg.ro/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=48&Itemid=53

mercredi 20 septembre 2017

Les sujets de la malaria

Malarial Subjects. Empire, Medicine and Nonhumans in British India, 1820–1909


Rohan Deb Roy



Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2017
Online ISBN: 9781316771617

Malaria was considered one of the most widespread disease-causing entities in the nineteenth century. It was associated with a variety of frailties far beyond fevers, ranging from idiocy to impotence. And yet, it was not a self-contained category. The reconsolidation of malaria as a diagnostic category during this period happened within a wider context in which cinchona plants and their most valuable extract, quinine, were reinforced as objects of natural knowledge and social control. In India, the exigencies and apparatuses of British imperial rule occasioned the close interactions between these histories. In the process, British imperial rule became entangled with a network of nonhumans that included, apart from cinchona plants and the drug quinine, a range of objects described as malarial, as well as mosquitoes. Malarial Subjects explores this history of the co-constitution of a cure and disease, of British colonial rule and nonhumans, and of science, medicine and empire.

Les expériences négatives du soin

“Bads” in healthcare: Negative experience as an impetus to reform in nineteenth and twentieth centuries


Call for Papers


21st and 22nd of June 2018 at the Zurich University of Applied Sciences (ZHAW), School of Health, Winterthur (Switzerland).

European Conference of the Swiss Society of the History of Health and Nursing (GPG-HSS) in Cooperation with the European Association for the History of Nursing (EAHN) and the European Journal for Nursing History, Theory and Ethics (ENHE)


Cultural expectations of ‘good care’ change according to context. They vary according to time and place. They are constantly shaped and reshaped by knowledge and techniques of health professions; by bodily and emotional needs and sensations; by symbols and rituals of attention and of sympathy; by religious ideas; and by views of justice, of caring human relations and of the person’s dignity. Individual experiences sometimes harmonize with expectations so that patients, and their nurses, midwives and physiotherapists, all feel satisfied. But sometimes, whether during birth, while nursing a newborn or a dying person, or whether engaging in some other healthcare process, things can and do go wrong. Bad things can happen – and these can be compounded by the failure of systems to intervene, to ‘turn things around’. Those involved can be left with negative experiences and may suffer consequences. According to the Dutch Philosopher Annemarie Mol such experiences are termed ambiguously as “bads” in care: “There is something else that bothers me. It is that somehow writing about the goods of care is just too nice. Too cosy. There are also bads to address, but how to do so?”1 

This international Conference will provide an opportunity for scholars from a range of disciplines to debate historical research relating to this subject. It will consider both individual and collective experiences of healthcare; explanations for bad care; and descriptions of ways in which individuals and groups have attempted to find impetus for reform. The history of Europe and its colonies in the 19th and 20th Centuries contain many examples of so-called “bads” in healthcare. During this time science based medical knowledge and techniques gained a powerful position within the logics of care and within the systems and practices of health professions. “Good” healthcare was redefined. And yet, the materiality, symbolisms and rituals of care continued to be understood in terms of the Judao-Christian religious context, coupled with bourgeois ideas of social justice, moral behaviour and human dignity.

Through decades, different cultures of care responded to what they considered “bad” in attention, protection or kindness. During the “Age of Extremes” (1914-1991) – to use the term coined by Eric Hobsbawm – totalitarian ideologies and race biology, dictatorial regimes, authoritarian societies and economies at war put pressure on the multifaceted cultures of care; at times, healthcare was perverted and destroyed by these ideologies and political pressures.

From the 1960s on, organisations of victims and of patients, social and feminist movements as well as critical scholars launched historical studies and social inquiries to disclose neglect, failures of care, mistreatments and abuse in medical, psychiatric and foster care institutions in past and present. These processes are still ongoing and they contribute to reforms in healthcare, to acts of apology, to compensation and to commemorative cultures. The history of nursing, midwifery, physio- and other health therapies started to investigate the past role and responsibilities of denominational nurses and health professionals from the 1990s onwards. The aim of this European conference is to enlarge our understanding of how these professions were interlinked with “bads” in healthcare, of how they addressed and responded to negative experiences and how they contributed to the improvement of healthcare in the 19th and 20th centuries.

The conference calls for contributions from scholars who can present research relating to negative experiences of and with health professionals such as nurses, midwives and therapists. Their starting point should be the individual or the collective experience of health professionals and/or of patients and family members with bad care. They should find answers to these questions: What shaped experience of “bads” as the actors addressed them? Whom did they make responsible for their negative experiences? How did they explain them? What did they claim? How did the actors involved deal with the negative experiences? How did those made responsible for “bads” respond to re-establish their standards of good healthcare, reputation and trustworthiness? How did this process contribute to reforms in healthcare?

The following fields of research are suggested:

1) patients and patient’s organisations: rights of patients and family members; complaints about “bads” in professional health care; goals for compensation and/or improvement; strategies to gain influence; networking for cooperation with health professionals.

2) professional standards: “good” in healthcare turns “bad” or vice versa; theory and ethics of “bads”; norms of professional competences; the significance of research to negative care experiences; development of methods for quality improvements.

3) everyday “bads” of professionals in healthcare: narratives of “bads” in care relations with patients and relatives, superiors, colleagues; trans-professional cooperation; the search for reforms in practice.

4) managing “bads”: the institutionalisation and role of ethics committees; surveys and the steering of patient’s and collaborator’s satisfaction.

5) Care in public: media scandals; ‘heroes’ and ‘villains’ in care; healthcare in court; effects of public discussions for healthcare improvements.

6) The quest for historical research: victims turn into witnesses; the role and work of committees of inquiry; integration or not of the blamed professionals; development reconciliation and of commemorative cultures for “bads” in past healthcare.


Registration, Presentations and Reimbursements


To participate at the conference, please apply with an abstract of 400 words maximum, which includes title, research question, methods, and sources used as well as results, before the 30th of November 2017 via email to gpg@gpg-hss.ch. The Conference Committee will disclose its decisions relating to the acceptance or non-acceptance of papers by the 15th of January 2018. The spoken language at the conference will be English. A slot of 30 minutes per paper will be permitted, and papers will be allotted in threes, to 90-minute panels.
A maximum of 20 minutes should be used for each paper; the remainder of the time is reserved for discussion. The fundraising for the conference is still ongoing so that the reimbursement of the costs of accommodation, travel and meals cannot yet be guaranteed.

Please send any enquiries to gpg@gpg-hss.ch.

Conference Committee

Switzerland: Sabina Roth, MA, independant historian, Zürich, president of GPG-HSS. Joëlle Droux, PhD, UNIGE, Genève. Kristin Hammer, registered midwife, MA, ZHAW, Winterthur. Véronique Hasler, MA, physiotherapist, HESAV, UNIL, Lausanne. Séverine Pilloud, PhD,
HEdS-La Source, Lausanne. On behalf of EAHN and ENHE: Prof. Dr. Christine Hallett, Manchester UK, Prof. Dr. Susanne Kreutzer, Münster D, PD Dr. Karen Nolte, Würzburg D.

mardi 19 septembre 2017

L'anti-psychiatrie britannique

The British Anti-Psychiatrists: From Institutional Psychiatry to the Counter-Culture, 1960-1971 

Oisín Wall


Series: Routledge Studies in Cultural History (Book 54)
Hardcover: 256 pages
Publisher: Routledge; 1 edition (August 31, 2017)
Language: English
ISBN-13: 978-1138048560


The British anti-psychiatric group, which formed around R.D. Laing, David Cooper, and Aaron Esterson in the 1960s, burned bright, but briefly, and has left a long legacy. This book follows their practical, social, and theoretical trajectory away from the structured world of institutional psychiatry and into the social chaos of the counter-culture. It explores the rapidly changing landscape of British psychiatry in the mid-Twentieth Century and the apparently structureless organisation of the part of the counter-culture that clustered around the anti-psychiatrists, including the informal power structures that it produced.

The book also problematizes this trajectory, examining how the anti-psychiatrists distanced themselves from institutional psychiatry while building links with some of the most important people in post-war psychiatry and psychoanalysis. The anti-psychiatrists bridged the gap between psychiatry and the counter-culture, and briefly became legitimate voices in both. Wall argues that their synthesis of disparate discourses was one of their strengths, but also contributed to the group’s collapse.

The British Anti-Psychiatrists offers original historical expositions of the Villa 21 experiment and the Anti-University. Finally, it proposes a new reading of anti-psychiatric theory, displacing Laing from his central position and looking at their work as an unfolding conversation within a social network.

Les esprits biologiques

Making Biological Minds

Conference

21st-22nd September, 2017

University of Leeds, UK

Organised by Sean Dyde, in cooperation with the University of Leeds and the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme.

The neurosciences are flourishing, while the relationship between the neurosciences and the humanities is not. Whereas some scholars have welcomed closer collaboration, much work attempting to bring the two together can seem off-puttingly imperial or else preparatory to a larger engagement. These deficiencies in turn have generated widespread doubt that either side has anything to learn from the other. In this two-day conference, we will argue differently. We explore ways in which the broad range of practices, methods and theories within the neurosciences and the humanities may offer cooperation, while the disciplines still retain their professional identities. Both fields working towards a common goal to describe, however tantalisingly, what it means to be human.

The speakers are:

Felicity Callard (Birkbeck University of London)
Reverie, Daydreams and Mind-Wandering in the Twentieth- and Twenty-First Century Mind and Brain Sciences

Alfred Cheesman (Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin)
Measuring the “Broken Brain”: Neuroimaging and the “Biological Revolution” in American and British Psychiatry

Stephen T Casper (Clarkson University, United States)
A History of Locked-in Syndrome: The Making of Neurological Consciousness, 1880-Present

Chuanfei Chin (National University of Singapore)
Neuroscientific Impasses and Historical Insights

Stephanie Eichberg (Zentrum für Literatur- und Kulturforschung)
From Metaphor to Molecule: Decoding the Languages of Pain

Liam Kempthorne (University College London) and Sean Dyde (University of Leeds)
Neuroscience and the Humanities: Where to from here?

Åsa Jansson (Durham University)
The Politics of the Borderline Brain: Dialectical Behaviour Therapy and Neoliberalism in Swedish Psychiatry

Natasha Lushetich (LaSalle College of the Arts)
The Extended Mind in a Technologically Augmented Body: Neuroplasticity and Bio-Sociality

Richard Milne (University of Cambridge) and Joanna Latimer (University of York)
Pathology’s Progress: Molecular Mobilities and the Neuroscientific Body

Elfed Huw Price (Independent Scholar)
Personhood and the Brain

Tom Quick (University of Manchester)
History in the Laboratory: Digitization, Education, and Design at the Laboratory of Physiology, Anatomy, and Genetics, University of Oxford

Kathryn Schoefert (King’s College London)
Making the Biological Brain: An Organismic View of Neurosciences and Humanities

Roger Smith (Institute of the History of Science and Technology, Russian Federation)
The Sensing of Movement

Claudia Stein (University of Warwick)
Visions of Economic Man: Biomedical Bodies, Political Economy and History around 1900

Gonzalo Talavera (University of Leeds)
Max Isserlin and the Role of Aphasiology in the Debate on Psychologism in Early Twentieth-Century Germany

Priya Umachandran (King’s College London)
Brain Policy Now?

More details of the conference, including abstracts, can be found at:

The event is free, but places are limited, so please register at:

Attendees may also be interested in attending our celebrations for the 60th anniversary of History and Philosophy of Science at the University of Leeds, to be held on the 19th and 20th of September. Further information can be found at: