Grenada, Education and Revolution, 1979-83

Grenada’s New Jewel Movement, led by Maurice Bishop, was the first indigenous political grouping in the history of the English-speaking Caribbean to overthrow an existing government by armed force. Yet most of the four and a half years of the Revolution (1979-83) were characterized by considerable popular support for the new People’s Revolutionary Government before it came to it’s tragic, unexpected and shocking end in October 1983. Social, economic and political change seems possible in the 1970s and ‘80s. People in newly decolonizing countries were encouraged by the beginnings of the Non-Aligned Movement of Third World nations demanding new international economic order that would win them some economic justice after the ravages of colonialism. People also saw that some radical regimes, such as that led by Michael Manley in Jamaica and the Sandinistas in Nicaragua, were articulating and implementing basic rights that held the promise of countering the social and political oppression that they had endured throughout the centuries of colonial history. A majority of Grenadians committed themselves to fighting by the side of the People’s Revolutionary Government for such new goals. This chapter will analyse how the Grenada Revolution reconceptualised the education, planned new goals, and implemented bold new educational policies. It will discuss the extent to which the government and people were able to reshape education as a tool for national reconstruction and the raising of national consciousness.

War and Revolution in St. Petersburg : Modernist Links in the Poetry of Edith Södergran and Anna Andreevna Akhmatova

Important modernists in their own countries, Anna Akhmatova and Edith Södergran are compared in this dissertation as poets whose poetry reflects the climactic events of the early twentieth century in Finland and Russia. A comparatist, biographical and historical approach is used to uncover the circumstances surrounding these events. First the poets’ early works are reviewed and their contemporaries are mentioned to provide a poetic context. Then a brief review of Finnish and Russian history situates them historically. Next, the rich literary diversity of St. Petersburg’s Silver Age is presented and the work of the poets is viewed in context before their poetry is compared, as the First World War, October Revolution and subsequent Finnish Civil War impact their writing. While biography is not the primary focus, it becomes important as inevitably the writers’ lives are changed by cataclysmic events and the textual analysis of the poems in Swedish, Russian and English shows the impact of war on their poetry. These two poets have not been compared before in a critical review in English and this work contributes to needed work in English. They share certain common modernist traits: attention to the word, an intimate, unconventional voice, and a concern with audience. In addition, they both reject formal traditions while they adopt new forms and use modern, outside influences such as art, architecture and philosophy as subject matter and a lens through which to focus their poetry. While it may seem that Anna Akhmatova was the most socially aware poet, because of the censorship she endured under Stalin, my research has revealed that actually Edith Södergran showed the most social consciousness. Thus, a contrast of the poets’ themes reveals these differences in their approaches. Both poets articulated a vibrant response to war and revolution becoming modernists in the process. In their final works created in the years before their deaths, they reveal the solace they found in nature as well as final mentions of the violent events of their youth. Keywords: St. Petersburg, Modernism, Symbolism, Acmeism, Silver Age, Finland-Swedish literature

Family, Kinship and Revolution: The Russian Nobility, 1917-1923

Rendle, M. (2005). Family, Kinship and Revolution: The Russian Nobility, 1917-1923. Family and Community History. 8(1), pp.35-47. RAE2008

Conservatism and Revolution: The All-Russian Union of Landowners, 1916-1918

Rendle, Matthew, 'Conservatism and Revolution: The All-Russian Union of Landowners, 1916-1918', Slavonic and East European Review (2006) 84(3) pp.481-507 RAE2008

Revolt and Revolution: the place of Islamism

The outbreak of revolt and revolution in the Middle East has given rise to a re-consideration of threat and security analyses as they pertain to the region and beyond. The resilience of some authoritarian regimes and the rapid collapse of others signal a significant transition within the region to which jihadi Islamist groups form one part of a powerful matrix. This article analyses the part and place of jihadi Islamism and Islamisms more generally in the revolts and revolutions. The article contends that events provide both opportunities and threats in strategies aimed at countering terrorism in the Middle East.

Russia in war and revolution : Russia 1900-1924.

Se examinan las malas condiciones de vida en las que se encontraba la población rusa a principios del siglo XX, y lo poco que el gobierno zarista hizo para mejorarlas. Se describen los acontecimientos que llevaron a los bolcheviques al poder en 1917 y cómo Lenin obtuvo el control del país, introdujo una nueva política económica y una nueva constitución. Incluye fragmentos de fuentes históricas originales, así como, material de aprendizaje activo: ejercicios, preguntas, y pruebas.

Delight and revolution: literary studies, aesthetics and ideology

 A commissioned article for the special edition on the future of English as a discipline.

Vivienda y Revolución. El Concurso entre Camaradas de la OSA, la Sección de Tipificación del Stroykom y la Casa Experimental de Transición Narkomfin (1926-1930) = Housing and Revolution. OSA’s Comradely Competition, Typification Section of the Stroykom and Narkomfin Experimental Transitional House (1926-1930)

La cuestión del asentamiento socialista en la URSS durante la década de 1920 estuvo caracterizada por el objetivo de definir y establecer un estado socialista en términos políticos, sociales y económicos. En este contexto de inestabilidad y cambio, un grupo de arquitectos pertenecientes a la Asociación de Arquitectos Contemporáneos, OSA, y liderado por Moisey Ginzburg, abordó el tema de la vivienda obrera asumiendo la responsabilidad y el compromiso por alcanzar un nuevo orden social. Su misión no consistió únicamente en solucionar el problema del alojamiento para los trabajadores en las grandes ciudades soviéticas, sino en redefinirlo como el marco adecuado para una sociedad sometida a un cambio sin precedentes que, al mismo tiempo y en un proceso dialéctico, debía contribuir a la construcción de esa nueva sociedad. La respuesta dada por la OSA trascendió el diseño inmediato bajo los estándares modernos establecidos en Occidente y tomó forma en un proceso de investigación que habría de prolongarse durante cinco años. Este trabajo, que culminó con la construcción y puesta en crisis de la Casa Narkomfin, se desarrolló en tres aproximaciones sucesivas. La primera, de carácter conceptual, consideró la participación ciudadana, así como de especialistas independientes, formalizándose en el Concurso entre Camaradas convocado por la OSA en 1926. La segunda aproximación al problema de la vivienda obrera se articuló a través de la investigación llevada a cabo por la Sección de Tipificación del Stroykom, esta vez desde premisas científicas y metodológicas. Finalmente, las conclusiones alcanzadas fueron transferidas a la práctica arquitectónica por medio de la construcción de seis Casas Experimentales de Transición, entre las que destacó la Casa Narkomfin. Este último acercamiento, de carácter empírico, ha sido tradicionalmente examinado por los expertos como un hecho aislado. Sin embargo, su estudio debe trascender necesariamente el genio del autor-creador en favor del proceso de investigación al que pertenece. En esta tesis, la Casa Narkomfin no se presenta sólo como el paradigma de vivienda soviética de vanguardia al que estamos acostumbrados, sino como un prototipo que recoge los principios y conclusiones alcanzados en las aproximaciones conceptuales y científicas precedentes. Únicamente desde este punto de vista cobra sentido la consideración de Ginzburg sobre su propio edificio como un medio propositivo y no impositivo: un proyecto concebido como una herramienta de transición hacia una sociedad más avanzada. ABSTRACT The question of mass housing in the USSR during the Twenties was marked by the drive to define and establish a socialist state in political, social and economic terms. In this context of instability and change, a group of architects gathered together under the Association of Contemporary Architects, OSA, led by Moisey Ginzburg, to address the issue of mass housing, thus taking on the responsibility and being committed to creating a new social order. Their quest not only involved solving the problem of housing for workers in large Soviet cities, but also redefining this solution as an appropriate framework for a society undergoing dramatic changes which, at the same time and in a dialectical process, would contribute to the creation of this new society. The solution provided by OSA transcended Modern standards of immediate design set by the West and was the result of a research process that would last five years. This work culminated in the construction of Narkomfin House and its self-criticism, developed in three successive approaches. The first was conceptual, being formalized in the Comradely Competition held by the OSA in 1926 and taking into account the participation of citizens and independent experts. The second approach to the problem of mass housing involved research developed by the Typification Section of the Stroykom, this time under scientific and methodological premises. Finally, the conclusions reached were put in practice with the construction of six Experimental Transitional Houses of which the most notable is Narkomfin House. This third empirical approach has traditionally been examined by scholars in isolation. However, its study must necessarily transcend the genius of the author-creator and involve the research process of which it is part. In this thesis, Narkomfin House is presented not only as the paradigm in Soviet housing avant-garde we are used to, but also as a prototype reflecting the principles and conclusions reached in the preceding conceptual and scientific approaches. Only from this point of view does Ginzburg’s understanding of his own building as a proactive and non-imposed environment make sense: a project conceived as a transition tool towards a more advanced society.

Reason and revolution; Hegel and the rise of social theory.

Mode of access: Internet.