MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4377031906 · doi:10.1111/blar.13479

Brunson, Takkara K.Black Women, Citizenship, and the Making of Modern Cuba, University of Florida Press (Gainesville, FL), 2021, xi + 191 pp. $80.00 hbk.

2023· article· en· W4377031906 sur OpenAlexaff
Marco Noventa

Notice bibliographique

RevueBulletin of Latin American Research · 2023
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiquePolitics and Society in Latin America
Établissements canadiensQueen's University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésCitizenshipCitationLibrary scienceSociologyPolitical scienceLawPoliticsComputer science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

In analyses of pre-revolutionary Cuba, race and gender are frequently dichotomised, obscuring the specific role African descended women have played as political activists and integral participants in the formation of contemporary Cuban identity. In Black Women, Citizenship, and the Making of Modern Cuba, Takkara Brunson offers a distinct approach to Cuban history between 1902 and 1958. Focusing on upwardly mobile and elite Black women, Brunson analyses race and gender as conflicting and complementary forces informing discourses of Cuban identity. With thoughtfulness and detail, she explores the political strategies employed by Cuban women of African descent as they navigated multiple systems of oppression in pursuit of racial rights, gender equity and official citizenship. In seven chapters, Brunson intertwines individual and collective narratives to chart the challenges, achievements, and changes in Afrocuban women's organising. Chapter 1 examines the post-Abolition period and how Black Cuban women contributed to building – and expanding – a vibrant public sphere aimed at integration. Throughout chapter 2, Brunson analyses letters written by Black women across class backgrounds to Black male politicians. These letters highlight how African-descended women used patriarchal rhetoric to help elevate Black male political authority while simultaneously disrupting ideas that a woman's domain was solely domestic. Chapter 3 is an insightful exploration of how portraiture and comportment were used to imagine freedom. Using visual culture to demonstrate compliance with standards of ‘proper’ public conduct, Brunson thoroughly examines how elite and upwardly mobile women of African descent employed patriarchal ideals of femininity to combat racism and ‘radically re-imagine their place in a modernizing nation’ (p. 67). In chapters 4 and 5, Brunson notes shifts in racial and gender dynamics that caused political strategies to change in the early twentieth century. As African descended Cuban women increasingly ‘stood at the intersection of national women's activism and elite Black male activism’, gendered approaches to legal reform progressively shaped activist strategies and Black feminist thought within the women's movement (p. 137). Chapter 6 centres Black educator and activist Ana Echegoyen de Cañizares to illustrate how she (and her contemporaries) continued to navigate race and gender discrimination even as they gained full citizenship. The seventh and final chapter focuses on African descended Cuban women and the communist movement in the 1940s and 1950s. Here, Brunson demonstrates how the Communist Party provided a platform through which African-descended women could broadcast anti-racist feminism and address socio-economic disparities to the nation and beyond. This book has no shortage of strengths, but two aspects stand out. The first is Brunson's attention to previously unanalysed creative sources like letter writing and photographic portraiture. These sources serve as potent counter-archives offering the personal testimonies of African-descended Cuban women largely absent from conventional historiography. In addition to affirming the fact that Black women were agents in their self-fashioning, these sources highlight a crucial need to explore activities outside the national political sphere to expand the narrative of Black feminist history and political activism. The second aspect is Brunson's open engagement with tensions and intersections that repeatedly emerge throughout her analysis. In any writing of political history, it can be easy for binary arguments to arise and accumulate on one side or the other. Brunson avoids this by actively addressing the paradoxes that materialised as upwardly mobile and elite women of African descent sought to assert their dignity. Throughout the book, Brunson highlights that ‘at no time were all Black women of one mind regarding which political philosophy would be most helpful in improving women's social status’ (p. 137). She underscores the complex and ever-shifting socio-cultural dynamics within Cuban political communities during the study period. This includes nuanced observations about how and why elite and upwardly mobile Black women often worked apart from White women's social spaces while forming strategic alliances with them at other moments. It also includes attention to ever-changing expectations of women's public behaviour and the shifting relationship with the labouring poor within contexts of being compelled to racial silence. While Brunson asserts that women's embrace of patriarchy helped sustain their marginalisation from political and institutional leadership, this does not overshadow the indispensable contributions of the African-descended women she centres on or their role in forging a modern Cuban democracy (p. 191). Outstanding in its documentation and analysis, this book is essential for anyone interested in Cuban studies, Black feminism, Caribbean and Latin American feminism, or Caribbean and Latin American studies. Black Women, Citizenship, and the Making of Modern Cuba inserts itself as an important ‘part of a centuries-long, complex trajectory of Black women's social thought, community activism, and cultural production’ that looks to the past to imagine a future ‘that validates [the] full humanity’ of African-descended women (p. 190).

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 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)0,005
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesÉtudes des sciences et des technologies, Charge 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: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,221
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0050,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,012
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,054
Tête enseignante GPT0,339
Écart entre enseignants0,285 · 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

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2023
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBulletin of Latin American ResearchMême sujetPolitics and Society in Latin AmericaTravaux en français237 207