An Ocean in Common: American Naval Officers, Scientists, and the Ocean Environment (review)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Reviewed by: An Ocean in Common: American Naval Officers, Scientists, and the Ocean Environment Gordon E. Hogg An Ocean in Common: American Naval Officers, Scientists, and the Ocean Environment. By Gary E. Weir. College Station: Texas A&M University Press, 2001. ISBN 1-58544-114-7. Photographs. Notes. Bibliography. Index. Pp. xix, 403. $44.95. Though late in joining the train of critical recognition accorded Gary E. Weir's An Ocean in Common, this "caboose" review is nonetheless dedicated to adding its perspective on this estimable publication. A book that can attract signal attention and praise from critics in several intersecting fields (among them naval history, naval research and development, oceanography, and the environmental and marine sciences) is rare indeed, and the welcome bellwether of a kind of "writing across the curriculum" ecumenism worthy of imitation and encouragement in the maritime research community. Following Dr. Weir's own description of his research and publishing path from his Building American Submarines, 1914-1940 (Washington: Naval Historical Center, 1991) and Building the Kaiser's Navy (Annapolis, Md: Naval Institute Press, 1992), through Forged in War: the Naval-Industrial Complex and American Submarine Construction, 1940-1960 (Washington: Naval Historical Center, 1993), and into the broad reaches of An Ocean in Common, one is struck by the evolution of the author's focus from detailed and synthesized assaying of the processes whereby increasingly complex oceangoing (and ocean-penetrating!) vessels came to be conceived and created over less than a century, right up to his "Aha!" decision to take as his latest subject certain convergent approaches to the very globe-girdling medium his previous inspirations had made their milieu, the ocean. The reader who is up to the challenge of this very intelligently written book will find the author's ingenious format a helpful foil to the sometimes daunting waves of analysis, explication, and information his excellent prose and notes set forth. In interposing his two perspective-lending "Interpolations" at key junctures among the eighteen chapters, Dr. Weir enjoins the interested reader to review and contextualize naval-scientific struggles and developments from the World War I era to the outbreak of World War II (after the first five chapters), and then (after Chapter Ten) to consider how collaborations during that second great conflict further solidified the connections between the U.S. Navy and the scientific community, setting the stage [End Page 1011] for the last eight chapters' elucidation of key oceanographic developments shared by these increasingly close partners in the early years of the Cold War. The well-chosen photographs following each Interpolation bring the reader closer to the important players, institutions, and events portrayed in An Ocean in Common, pointing up the intricate human relations that defined and cut across the scientific accomplishments of the communities involved. While limiting his work to the rich possibilities that a focused study of the American experience in this wide arena afforded him, Dr. Weir does particularly note the valuable contributions of Canada in this convergence, a full accounting of which he believes would merit another book. Indeed, developments beyond 1961 necessarily also fall outside the comprehensive purview of An Ocean in Common, a situation that should inspire a continuation of this valuable line of inquiry: the era of a deepening Cold War and beyond brought about further notable scientific and naval collaborations such as the employment of purpose-built submersibles—with the help of advanced sonar technology—in finding and documenting sunken civil and military ships once thought irretrievably lost, or the exhaustive mapping of the world oceans for the Soviet Navy's multi-volume Atlas Okeanov (Atlas of the oceans; Leningrad: Ministry of Defense, 1974-1980). For those writers who are game, the expanding study of the world's oceans is their research oyster, and Gary Weir, for one, has cultured a true pearl. Gordon E. Hogg University of Kentucky Libraries Lexington, Kentucky Copyright © 2004 Society for Military History
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,004 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».