Negotiating the boundaries between home and work practices: The case of home-workers

When people work from home, the domains of home and work are co-located, often under one roof. Home-workers have to cope with the meeting of two practices that have traditionally been physically separated. In light of this, we need to understand: how do people who work from home negotiate the boundaries between their home and work practices? What kinds of boundaries do people construct? How do boundaries affect the relationship between home and work as domains? What kinds of boundaries are available to home-workers? Are home-workers in charge of their boundaries or do they co-create them with others? How does this position home-workers in their domains? In order to address these questions, I analysed a variety of data, including newspaper columns, online forum discussions, interviews, and personal diary entries, using a discourse analytic approach that lends itself to issues of positioning. Current literature clashes over whether home-workers are in control of their boundaries, and over the relationship between home and work that arises out of boundary negotiations, i.e. whether home and work are dichotomous or layered. I seek to contribute to boundary theory by adopting a practice theory stance (Wenger, 1998) to guide my analysis. By viewing home and work as practices, I show that boundary negotiations depend on how home-workers are positioned, e.g. if they are positioned as peripheral in a domain, they lack influence over boundaries. I demonstrate that home and work constitute a number of different practices, rather than a rigid dichotomy, and that the way home and work are related are not the same for all home-workers. The application of practice concepts further shows how relationships between practices are created. The contribution of this work is a reconceptualisation of current boundary theory away from individual and cognitive notions (Nippert-Eng, 1996) into the realm of positioning.

'La Violence et la mauvaise foi': Context and rhetoric in Pierre Bayle's Ce que c'est que la France toute Catholique

My thesis presents an examination of Ce que c'est que la France toute Catholique (1686) by Pierre Bayle, a prominent figure in the Republic of Letters and the Huguenot Refuge in the seventeenth century. This pamphlet was the first occasional text that Bayle published following the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes in which the religious toleration afforded to the Huguenot minority in France was repealed, a pivotal moment in the history of early modern France. In my thesis, I analyse the specific context within which Bayle wrote this pamphlet as a means of addressing a number of issues, including the legitimacy of forced conversions, the impact of the religious controversy upon exchanges in the Republic of Letters, the nature of religious zeal and finally the alliance of Church and state discourses in the early modern period. An examination of this context provides a basis from which to re-interpret the rhetorical strategies at work within the pamphlet, and also to come to an increased understanding of how, why and to what end he wrote it. In turn this allowed me to examine the relationship between this often overlooked pamphlet and the more extensively studied Commentaire Philosophique, in which Bayle argued in favour of religious toleration. Ultimately, understanding the relationship between these two texts proves essential in order to characterise his response to the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes and to understand the place of the pamphlet within his oeuvre. Furthermore, an analysis of the pamphlet and the Commentaire Philosophique provide a lens through which to elucidate both Bayle's intellectual development at this early stage in his career, and also the wider context of the rise of toleration theory and the evolution of modes of civility within the Republic of Letters on the eve of the Enlightenment.

Home, family and society: women of the Irish landed class, 1860-1914. A Munster case study

The thesis analyses the roles and experiences of female members of the Irish landed class (wives, sisters and daughters of gentry and aristocratic landlords with estates over 1,000 acres) using primary personal material generated by twelve sample families over an important period of decline for the class, and growing rights for women. Notably, it analyses the experiences of relatively unknown married and unmarried women, something previously untried in Irish historiography. It demonstrates that women’s roles were more significant than has been assumed in the existing literature, and leads to a more rounded understanding of the entire class. Four chapters focus on themes which emerge from the sources used and which deal with their roles both inside and outside the home. These chapters argue that: Married and unmarried women were more closely bound to the priorities of their class than their sex, and prioritised male-centred values of family and estate. Male and female duties on the property overlapped, as marriage relationships were more equal than the legislation of the time would suggest. London was the cultural centre for this class. Due to close familial links with Britain (60% of sample daughters married English men) their self-perception was British or English, as well as Irish. With the self-confidence of their class, these women enjoyed cultural and political activities and movements outside the home (sport, travel, fashion, art, writing, philanthropy, (anti-)suffrage, and politics). Far from being pawns in arranged marriages, women were deeply conscious of their marriage decisions and chose socially, financially and personally compatible husbands; they also looked for sexual satisfaction. Childbirth sometimes caused lasting health problems, but pregnancy did not confine wealthy women to an invalid state. In opposition to the stereotypical distant aristocratic mother, these women breastfed their children, and were involved mothers. However, motherhood was not permitted to impinge on the more pressing role of wife