MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4321353201 · doi:10.1353/gsr.2023.0029

Disability in German-Speaking Europe: History, Memory, Culture ed. by Linda Leskau, Tanja Nusser, and Katherine Sorrels

2023· article· en· W4321353201 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueGerman Studies Review · 2023
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueMedical History and Research
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésGermanGender studiesPopulationSociologyHistoryMedia studiesPsychologyDemography

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Disability in German-Speaking Europe: History, Memory, Culture ed. by Linda Leskau, Tanja Nusser, and Katherine Sorrels Petra Watzke Disability in German-Speaking Europe: History, Memory, Culture. Edited by Linda Leskau, Tanja Nusser, and Katherine Sorrels. Rochester, NY: Camden House, 2022. Pp. 249. Hardcover $99.00. ISBN 978-1640141087. German-speaking Europe has a complicated relationship with disability. Although roughly 10–20% of the population in German-speaking countries is disabled, disabled people are often treated as an afterthought in efforts to achieve diversity, equity, and inclusivity. The lackluster media response to the murder of four disabled people by a caregiver in Potsdam in 2021 emphasizes the role that ableist attitudes play in the disdain for disabled people. Even though the general reaction to this tragic event indicates persistent prejudices about disability, attitudes are slowly changing. This change is due to general societal shifts, continued disability activism, and, at least partially, the increased presence of Disability Studies in the academic institutions of German-speaking countries, where it has grown into an established interdisciplinary method of inquiry since the early 2000s. This volume builds upon and engages with discourses of disability studies in German-speaking Europe and is overall informed by a literary and cultural studies approach to this topic. The volume traces sociocultural attempts to define, frame, and control disability from the Middle Ages to the present. The individual contributions are from scholars in Canada, Germany, and the United States and cover a wide range of academic disciplines, including history, German studies, and sociology. This interdisciplinary approach suits the complexity of the topic and allows the reader to see continuities in the conceptualization of disability in different time periods, genres, and methodologies. The individual contributions are divided into three sections that are largely informed by the methodologies of their different disciplines. The first section, "Negotiating Interpersonal Relationships: Historical Perspectives," examines the processes by which normative definitions of disability are negotiated on the individual level. The articles' subject matters range from the pre-modern to the mid-twentieth century in judicial and educational settings, and in a doctor-patient relationship. Ashley Elrod's article "Moral Madness: Representations of Prodigality, Disability, and Competence in German Legal History" uses two legal cases from the seventeenth to the early twentieth century to trace the liminal category of prodigality between impairment and moral failure. The case studies not only demonstrate changes in the categorization of disability, especially with the establishment of psychiatric and psychoanalytic professions, but also show how pre-modern attitudes stigmatizing disability as deviant survived into modern times. The unreflected stigmatization of disability is examined in the other two articles in this section. The second section, "Reckoning with the Past: Reconstruction of Memory," engages with the institutionalization, pathologization, and persecution of disabled [End Page 179] people in the first half of the twentieth century in order to demonstrate how this difficult history has been dealt with (or ignored) since. Dagmar Herzog's article, "From the Disability Murder Archive: Ernst Klee's Confrontation of the Public with Nazism's First Genocide," excels at demonstrating how traumatic past events have informed ableist attitudes throughout the twentieth century. Her article discusses the work of the journalist and disability activist Klee who, in the 1970s and 80s, uncovered extant documentation of the Nazi's eugenics program aimed at the annihilation of disabled persons, commonly referred to as the T4 program. The article emphasizes Klee's important work Euthanasie im NS-Staat: Die Vernichtung lebensunwerten Lebens for confronting the public with the Nazis' widespread euthanasia program, even though the work was dismissed by academics in its own time. Tracing Klee's research process and the narrative structure he builds around the case files he discovered, Herzog reevaluates Klee's work as an important contribution to reckoning with the past in disability activism and disability studies. The third section, "Intersections and Diversity: The Lens of Culture," includes articles by German studies scholars focused on close readings of a variety of very different texts that provide mostly intersectional approaches to disability. Waltraud Maierhofer's reading of Alissa Walter's novel about the blind Maria Theresa Paradies, entitled Am Anfang war die Nachtmusik (1992), exemplifies this. The novel is...

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.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,067
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,001

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,101
Tête enseignante GPT0,365
Écart entre enseignants0,265 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle