Bystander Narratives: The Fiction of J.M. Coetzee and the Holocaust

J.M. Coetzee’s novels are suffused with a pervasive, though often oblique, Holocaust awareness. Direct references to the event and to the historical era to which it belongs, subtle stylistic and thematic echoes of Holocaust writing, and the recurrent mobilization of Holocaust imagery in Coetzee’s novels all contribute to suggest the significance of the event to the author’s work and thought. Providing Coetzee with a lens through which to view the contemporary situation, both local and global, the Holocaust offers Coetzee a means by which difficult and complex questions of ethics and historiographical truth may be approached. Above all, the Holocaust and its representation contribute to Coetzee’s exploration of the dilemmas of translating the traumatic lived experience of atrocity – including, but not limited to, life in apartheid South Africa – into narrative form. Taken as a whole, Coetzee’s oeuvre initially anticipates and later responds to, in characteristically oblique fashion, the narrative project(s) facing post-apartheid South Africa as the newly-democratic nation sought to make sense of its past through a variety of means, the most important of which was the country’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Implicitly challenging the TRC’s findings as well as its narrative assumptions, the Coetzean oeuvre accordingly invites being read as offering a continuous and evolving counter-narrative to the TRC and its construction of a narrative of the apartheid past for the post-apartheid nation. In utilizing the Holocaust, its representations, and the reception thereof to frame his response to apartheid, Coetzee implicates both in a critique of the Western model of modernity, suggesting, in the process, the importance of reconfiguring modernity in a more ethical shape.

A phase 2 study of high-activity 186Re-HEDP with autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplant in progressive hormone-refractory prostate cancer metastatic to bone

Purpose: We investigated the potential for improvement in disease control by use of autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplant (PBSCT) to permit administration of high activities of 186Re-hydroxyethylidene diphosphonate (HEDP) in patients with progressive hormone-refractory prostate cancer (HRPC).

Methods: Eligible patients had progressive HRPC metastatic to bone, good performance status and minimal soft tissue disease. Patients received 5,000 MBq of 186Re-HEDP i.v., followed 14 days later by PBSCT. Response was assessed using PSA, survival, pain scores and quality of life.

Results: Thirty-eight patients with a median age of 67 years (range 50–77) and a median PSA of 57 ng/ml (range 4–3,628) received a median activity of 4,978 MBq 186Re-HEDP (range 4,770–5,100 MBq). The most serious toxicity was short-lived grade 3 thrombocytopenia in 8 (21%) patients. The median survival of the group is 21 months (95%CI 18–24 months) with Kaplan-Meier estimated 1- and 2-year survival rates of 83% and 40% respectively. Thirty-one patients (81%, 95% CI 66–90%) had stable or reduced PSA levels 3 months post therapy while 11 (29%, 95% CI 15–49%) had PSA reductions of >50% lasting >4 weeks. Quality of life measures were stable or improved in 27 (66%) at 3 months.

Conclusion: We have shown that it is feasible and safe to deliver high-activity radioisotope therapy with PBSCT to men with metastatic HRPC. Response rates and survival data are encouraging; however, further research is needed to define optimal role of this treatment approach.

Welfare Regimes and “progressive” governments in Latin America: The cases of Venezuela, Ecuador and Bolivia

Several authors have applied the concept of Welfare Regimens for studying social policy in Latin America (Esping-Andersen, 1993 and 2000). Among others, Martínez Franzoni (2007) develops a typology, with fi eld work is at the turn of the millennium, and establishes three categories: State-productivist regime, state-protectionist and family orientated. Most countries in the region are placed in the latter category. The hypothesis of this article argues that with the emergence of governments considered “left” or “progressive” in several countries of the region from the late ‘90s and, more decisively, in 2000’, the map of welfare regimes models could have mutated substantively. The nationally transformative experiences are different (various socio-economic realities and political action in which they are located exists) but they have several contact points that can be summarized in a greater state intervention in different areas previously closed to their operating and recovery of important functions of welfare and care of the population by the government. The paper discusses with an exploratory and descriptive approach the welfare schemes that would shape in three countries that have constitutionalized the change from the neoliberal paradigm: Venezuela, Bolivia and Ecuador.