Archives

Hidden Rhytms of Social Life

picWhere: Filosofický ústav AV ČR, conference room (124a), Jilská 1, Prague 1.

Organizers: Centre for Science, Technology, and Society Studies (Institute of Philosophy AV ČR) & CEFRES.

Language: English.

The world we inhabit is characterized by conflicting and often incommensurable temporalities. Investigations of such tensions between and among various temporalities, how they interact and their specificities are now self-standing issues in contemporary social analysis. This half-day symposium aims to explore theoretical and methodological inquiries into the shifting character of social temporalities as they relate to the broader socio-economic and cultural change, including the overall dynamization of life and work. The two panels will focus on various perceptions of time, temporal tactics and ways in which diverse actors (institutions and individuals) negotiate and embody different temporal aspects of late modern social realities as well as on how social acceleration as such becomes perpetuated through various agentic strategies.

Program

10.30: Introduction & Opening

EXPLORING SOCIAL TEMPORALITIES
10.45 – 11.15:  Immediacy, liveness, ceaselessness: foundations and consequences of the contemporary news environment – Marek Šebeš (PF JU)

11.15 – 11.45: Having no time in empty time: temporalities of the homeless – Petr Vašát (SOÚ AV ČR)

JUST HOW FAST IS ACCELERATED MODERNITY?
12.00 – 12.30: Coping with acceleration: triaging strategies and the new asceticism – Mark Carrigan (University of Warwick)

12.30 – 13.00: Fast modernity: ‘deflationary’ notes – Filip Vostal (FLÚ AV ČR & CEFRES)

13.00-13.30: Closing discussion

Visegrad Forum: Roger Chartier, between Warsaw & Prague

Program

Monday 16 May – Warsaw

5-7 PM
Lecture and debate at the Institute of Polish Culture (IKP).
Topic: History of works, history of book, history of reading.
Materiality of the text and horizon of expectations.
Discussant: Paweł Rodak (IKP).

Tuesday 17 May –Warsaw

10-12 AM
IKP and Institute of History (Warsaw University) joint PhD seminar around Roger Chartier’s text « The Author’s Hand. Literary Archives, Criticism, and Edition »

Wednesday 18 May– Prague

9:30 AM-1 PM
Written culture and society in Czech regions, 16th-18th centuries.
Workshop in honour of Rogier Chartier organized by the Institute of Czech Literature. See the complete program here.
Speakers: Veronika Čapská (FHS UK), Claire Madl (CEFRES), Pavel Sládek (FF UK), Daniela Tinková (FF UK), Michael Wögerbauer (ÚČL AV ČR)
Discussant: Roger Chartier.
Organizer: Michael Wögerbauer.
Where: Conference room of the Institute of Czech Literature,
Na Florenci 3.

6 PM
Lecture by Roger Chartier organized by CEFRES.
Topic: What is a book ? Answers of a Kant’s question. 
Where: Kino 35, French Institute of Prague.

Thursday 19 May – Prague

5 PM
PhD workshop around Roger Chartier lead by Jiří Hnilica (FPed UK).
Where: CEFRES Library, Na Florenci 3.

Private Actors in Politics and Policy-Making: Trespassers Producing Norms?

A Platform CEFRES workshop organized by Jana Vargovčíková (CEFRES & FF UK) and Kateřina Merklová (FF UK).
Where: CEFRES, Národní 18, conference room on 7th floor.
Language: English.

See the call for papers here.

Discussants:

Hélène Michel (SAGE, Institut d’Études Politiques in Strasbourg) Michael Smith (CERGE-EI, Czech Academy of Sciences) Ondřej Císař (Institute of Sociology, Czech Academy of Sciences) Mitchell Young (Institute of International Studies, Faculty of Social Sciences, Charles University in Prague).

9:15-9:30 — Welcome & Opening
9:30-11:30 — Panel 1

Armèle Cloteau, Laboratoire Printemps, UVSQ –Paris Saclay, France: “The Angels of Europe – European External Affairs employees: in-house entrepreneurs of Europe”

Lola Avril, Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, France: “Lobbying and influence: lawyers in competition law as actor in european policies”

Oriane Calligaro, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Belgium: “The Open Society Foundation, Advocacy NGOs and the Making of EU Anti-Discriminatory Norms”

11:30-11:45 —  Coffee Break
11:45-13:00 — Panel 2

Katarína Svitková, Charles University, Czech Republic: “The Role of Private and Hybrid Actors in Urban Resilience and Security”

Olivier Gajac, Centre Émile Durkheim, Bordeaux, France: “The Private Universities in the Education System in Turkey: Shared Interests Among Economic Actors, Political Power and New Elites”

13:00-14:30 — Lunch
14:30-15:50 — Panel 3            

Jaromír Mazák, Tomáš Diviák, Charles University in Prague, Czech Republic: “Transactions in multidimensional social networks: The case of the Reconstruction of the State”

Tomáš Korda, Charles University in Prague, Czech Republic: “Emancipation of the universal will from the particular one”

15:50-16:00 —Coffee Break
16:00-17:20 — Panel 4

Milos Resimic, Central European University, Budapest, Hungary: “The role of networks in privatization in post-Milosevic Serbia”

Vít Šimral, University Hradec Králové, Czech Republic: “Regulating Lobbying in Europe: No Model Fits All”

Critical Intellectuals: from Legislators to Interpreters to Mediators?

UntitledA lecture by profesor Gregor McLennan organized by Centre for Science, Technology, and Society Studies (Institute of Philosophy AV ČR), Program Prvouk 19 “Interdisciplinary sciences”, Department of Historical Sociology FHS UK and CEFRES.

Where: Jinonice, U Kříže 8, Praha 5 – room 6022.

Language: English.

The lecture is going to be held within the frame of the cycle “Historical Sociology Confrontations”.

Zygmunt Bauman once characterized the shift from modernity to postmodernity in terms of the changing style of intellectuals, from the model of the ‘legislator’ to that of the ‘interpreter’. With the blurring of any sharp contrast between modernity and postmodernity, a third figure, that of the ‘mediator’, has come to the fore. Working through various ways in which the rather bland connotations of mediation can be upgraded and energized, I identify the late Stuart Hall as an outstanding mediator in the last 50 years of critical social thought – though this involves questioning some received wisdom about Hall within cultural studies itself. And it turns out that one condition of being a notable intellectual mediator is the retention of a definite degree of ‘legislation’, in this case Hall’s continued (if stretched) allegiance to Marxism. I then consider (also affirmatively) the very different case of Ernest Gellner, who is sometimes thought to have been so legislatively modernist (and thus also ‘Eurocentric’ and ideologically ‘secularist’) as to have little to offer the ‘postsecular’ frame of understanding that is increasingly prominent in our times.

Gregor McLennan is Professor of Sociology and Head of the School of Sociology, Politics and International Studies at the University of Bristol. Building on previous writings on Marxism, pluralism, sociology and cultural studies, Prof McLennan’s more recent work has examined the theoretical challenges posed by contemporary postcolonialism and postsecularism.

Contact:
– Filip Vostal (FLÚ AV ČR, CEFRES) filip.vostal@gmail.com
– Nicolas Maslowski (FHS UK) nicolas.maslowski@gmail.com
– Marek Skovajsa (FHS UK) marek.skovajsa@fhs.cuni.cz

 

 

 

 

 

 

Architecture and Art as Historical Sources: On the Borders of Humanities and Social Sciences

A session led by Monika Brenišínová

In various theoretical discussions on architecture, we may notice that there is not a singular way of approaching it. From the classical perspective of the history of art classical art historical perspective, it is possible to identify at least three basic methods of inquiry: archaeological building survey („Bauforschung“, A. von Gerkan, in Czech “SHP”, D. Líbal); style-critical and style-historical analyses (H. Wölfflin, H. Focillon, M. Dvořák); semantic analysis (G. Passavant, E. Hubala). When we consider art in general, things however get even more complicated. If we take into account the fact that even among historians of art a consensus about the definition of art as such does not exist, what will happen when we will look at art from the perspective of another scientific discipline? When we conceive art as an historical source, traditional art historical categories such as the aesthetic point of view, the author’s fantasy, the styles or commonplaces (loci communes) quickly lose their significance. Moreover, historical work with visual sources is largely interpretative and requires a significantly critical approach. Thus we suddenly find ourselves on the borders of humanities and social sciences. And it is exactly such space, outside the frontiers of clearly defined disciplines, where the space and time change their shapes and where other disciplines – such as anthropology – can be brought into play.

Readings:

  • Clifford Geertz. ‘Art as Cultural System.’ MLN 91(6): 1473–1499, 1976.
  • George Kubler. ‘History: Or Anthropology: Of Art?’ Critical Inquiry, 1(4): 757-767, 1975.

Architecture and Art as Historical Sources: On the Borders of Humanities and Social Sciences

Session led by Monika Brenišínová.

Readings

  • Clifford Geertz. ‘Art as Cultural System.’ MLN 91(6): 1473–1499, 1976.
  • George Kubler. ‘History: Or Anthropology: Of Art?’ Critical Inquiry, 1(4): 757-767, 1975.

In various theoretical discussions on architecture, we may notice that there is not a singular way of approaching it. From the classical perspective of the history of art classical art historical perspective, it is possible to identify at least three basic methods of inquiry: archaeological building survey („Bauforschung“, A. von Gerkan, in Czech “SHP”, D. Líbal); style-critical and style-historical analyses (H. Wölfflin, H. Focillon, M. Dvořák); semantic analysis (G. Passavant, E. Hubala). When we consider art in general, things however get even more complicated. If we take into account the fact that even among historians of art a consensus about the definition of art as such does not exist, what will happen when we will look at art from the perspective of another scientific discipline? When we conceive art as an historical source, traditional art historical categories such as the aesthetic point of view, the author’s fantasy, the styles or commonplaces (loci communes) quickly lose their significance. Moreover, historical work with visual sources is largely interpretative and requires a significantly critical approach. Thus we suddenly find ourselves on the borders of humanities and social sciences. And it is exactly such space, outside the frontiers of clearly defined disciplines, where the space and time change their shapes and where other disciplines – such as anthropology – can be brought into play.