This thesis re-examines the writing of Raymond Williams. It has two goals. Firstly, it explores Williams's concept of cultural materialism, which theorises the role played by cultural forms in the creation and contestation of a national political order. Secondly, it extrapolates Williams's implicit critique of the unitary British state, and his theory of how cultural forms relate to that state. In Chapter One, I argue that Williams developed his theory of culture by combining a theoretical critique of national literary traditions with an interest in the emergent drama of nineteenth-century Scandinavia and twentieth-century Ireland and Wales. This theme is developed in Chapter Two, where I suggest that certain cultural and political experiences in Wales helped Williams to develop a cultural theory that was more generally applicable. Central to Williams's political aspirations was an attempt to expand and democratise the education system. In Chapter Three, I argue that Williams's novels can be understood as university fiction, providing examples of the kind of university he wished to develop. Since universities arose as institutions generating a sense of unified national culture during the imperial period, to re-think the work of the university is also to re-think the political make-up of the nation. This theme is expanded in Chapter Four, where I argue that Williams related the break-up of the British empire to the break-up of the British state, via devolution in Scotland and Wales. Williams theorised the part played by fiction and other cultural forms in enabling those nations to develop their own voices. He also showed that fiction could provide an imaginative critique of the unitary British state from a series of other perspectives, notably feminism and ethnic subcultures. Finally, in Chapter Five I argue that Raymond Williams can be understood as a film theorist, and demonstrate that a similar renegotiation of British identities occurs in contemporary film. An interest in the political make-up of the British state, and an attempt to develop alternative political and cultural formations, spanned Williams's career. This aspect of his work has hitherto received little critical attention. By discussing Williams in relation to the political break-up of Britain, this thesis makes a significant contribution to our understanding of the Williams oeuvre.

Submitted by Jordan (jordanbiblio@gmail.com) on 2017-06-10T14:44:11Z No. of bitstreams: 1 DISS_2015_André Marinho de Oliveira.pdf: 817020 bytes, checksum: ecb72ce953134e0f66ee35184d03d982 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Jordan (jordanbiblio@gmail.com) on 2017-06-10T16:42:54Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 DISS_2015_André Marinho de Oliveira.pdf: 817020 bytes, checksum: ecb72ce953134e0f66ee35184d03d982 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2017-06-10T16:42:54Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 DISS_2015_André Marinho de Oliveira.pdf: 817020 bytes, checksum: ecb72ce953134e0f66ee35184d03d982 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2015-04-09 / CAPES / Este trabalho se propõe a analisar a Primeira Cruzada sob a trajetória senhorial de Raimundo IV de Toulouse. As marcações temporais adotadas acompanham o sujeito histórico selecionado do nascimento (1041) a conquista de Jerusalém (1099); abordando o percurso das relações políticas que o levaram da conquista do título de “conde de Toulouse” até a participação como cruzado. Para que consigamos dissertar sobre a maioria dos pontos, estabelecemos um quadro comparativo com a condição senhorial no Ocidente do século XI, incluindo da formação dos territórios de domínio à ação como combatente no Oriente. No decorrer das análises das fontes, consigamos estabelecer comparações metodológicas nas atitudes políticas de Raimundo. Em meio a tantos aparatos político, nos propomos a encontrar a utilização da espiritualidade na justificação da conquista, a discussão da autoridade e do poder para as cruzadas, bem como a multiplicidade de políticas estabelecidas pela grande diversidade de senhores que participaram do evento. A bibliografia, para abarcar todas essas questões, varia de relatos clássicos a discussões mais recentes: buscamos relatar os pontos nodais do poder senhorial desde as discussões de Marc Bloch e George Duby, até as recentes abordagens de Thomas N. Bisson e Dominique Barthélemy. Tal perspectiva foi aplicada sobre o estudo da cruzada, propondo uma abordagem crítica de trabalhos como os de Steven Runciman e Christopher Tyerman, relatam os detalhes junto com as fontes de Raimundo d’Aguilers, cronista do conde de Toulouse e Foucher de Chartres, ambos cronistas participantes da cruzada. Essas fontes, e algumas outras estão no compilado e excelente trabalho comparativo de August C. Krey; cujas notas elucidativas também se incluem na bibliográfica, ainda que como parte da obra. / This work propounds to analyze the Crusades by the politic vision of Raymond of Toulouse. This temporal marks follow the historical subject, starting with born of Raymond IV (1041) and end up to of the First Crusade (1099); account his lifetime including both the conquer of title of earl of Toulouse and his participation as crusade. For we could relate about this points, we established a common point for most of lords and their domains formations. While we make the analyses of sources, we could methodological measure on the politic behavior of Raymond. In the midst of so many political apparatus, we propose to find the use of the spiritualized in the justification of the conquest, the discussion of authority and power for the Crusades, as well as the multiplicity of policies established by the great diversity of lords of which attended the event. The bibliography to encompass all these issues, ranging from classical texts with more recent discussions: report the nodal points of landlord range from discussions of Marc Bloch and George Duby and include the recent one Thomas N. Bisson and Dominique Barthelemy. Steven Runciman and Christopher Tyerman are also report the details with Raymond d’Aguilers, the chronicler of the count, and Foucher de Chartres, both members of the crusades. These Sources and some others are in the compilation work of August C. Krey whose elucidative notes are included in this work, despite inside the Krey work.

L'amorce repose sur une contradiction quasi-résorbée : Les ludique et absurde négligés par la littérature, s'imposent au XXe siècle, comme composants utiles à une manifestation intellectuelle plus en phase avec la pensée humaine contemporaine. L'analyse littéraire repose sur l'observation d'aptitudes que manifestent les notions de ludique et d'absurde pour s'adapter aux contraintes inhérentes aux écritures romanesques, théâtrales et poétiques, aujourd'hui. Pour définir les compétences accrues d'un message littéraire en contexte ludique et/ou absurde, la première partie est une relecture ciblée d'auteurs que la critique ne classe pas dans un registre ludico-absurde. La seconde précise et illustre la nature de ces nouvelles compétences, par l'étude d'expérimentations de R. Devos et R. Queneau, dont les rhétoriques ludico-absurdes renvoient à une surréalité toujours populaire car déjà intellectuellement intégré par le récepteur. La dernière aborde la dimension socioculturelle de la littérature, témoin-artisan d'une pensée collective férue de valeurs ludico-absurdes, et qui après s'être souvent fait le chantre de la philosophie de l'absurde, esquisse de l'individu, sa nouvelle manière d'être au monde. / The absurd along with that of the “ludic” can no longer be confirmed to the domain of literary prose, but are in fact essential elements to twentieth-century intellectual thought at large. The literary fundamentals are based on the observation of the capacity of the absurd and the “ludic” to adapt to inherent constraints of the novelistic, theatrical and poetic. Our first section argue for a re-evaluation of that message focusing on specific writers that critics thus far have failed to appreciate as part of a distinctive “ludico-absurd” form. The second section focus on this emerging capacity based on studies of the work of R. Devos and R. Queneau, whose “ludico-absurd” rhetoric holds in common a surrealism. It remains popular as audiences are ever sensitive to the message of the “ludico-absurd”, while the latters having integrated it intellectually. The third section focus on the socio-cultural dimensions of the literature, concentrating on the position of the artist as well as that of the beholder. Ultimately, this paper look at the way in which the philosophy of the Absurd continue to elaborate and indeed herald a new relationship between the individual and the contemporary world.

While focussing on the metaphor of scientificity in Leavis's and Macherey's writings, this dissertation addresses other questions central to criticism, cultural theory, and the philosophy of science. Whereas Leavis opposes scientificity, Macherey proposes "scientific criticism" as imperative to theoretical practice. Between the two critics, scientificity reveals its major metamorphoses. This study is divided into four major parts. Part One situates the concept of scientificity in the modern debate between critics and philosophers of science. I compare their problematization of scientificity to the way this notion has been represented in literary criticism. The debate blurs the boundary between scientific and literary knowledge, and brings the question of ideology in scientific discourse to the fore. Scientificity is thus bound with ideology as an epistemological practice. Part two focusses on Leavis's rejection of scientificity. In three chapters here I investigate the significance of Leavis's definition of "organic culture," "civilization," "science," and "criticism." These are all rooted in Arnold's cultural paradigm, which privileges a traditional order. Leavis's opposition to "theory," "science," and "philosophy" problematizes his principles of "precision," "analysis," and "standards." His controversies with CP. Snow's scientism and with Marxism reveal his concern with theory and scientific epistemology. His defence of "ambiguity," and "impossibility of definition" also makes his framework confront a theoretical impasse that is revealed by a desire to theorize criticism—Leavis's duty towards society— and a fear of theory and science, perceived as destructive. Part Three, comprising three chapter, considers Macherey's scientific criticism. His notions of the "structure of absence" and "symptomatic reading" are central to his theorization of criticism, science, and ideology. These are formulated through Freud's categories of dream analysis, Saussure's notion of difference, and Althusser's conception of ideology. For Macherey, scientific criticism negates ideology. But his emphasis on "absence" as constitutive of scientificity brings his epistemology to a theoretical impasse that resembles Leavis's. Macherey's anchoring of meaning in economic structures, in ideology, and in Marxism as "science," problematizes his scientific project because it abandons "absence." Part Four concludes the dissertation by investigating ways in which Leavis and Macherey illustrate the importance of an epistemological phenomenon in literary studies: criticism's struggle with scientificity. Whether opposed or defended, scientificity has helped criticism to emulate the hegemonic discourse of science and to combat rival critical strategies. However, to dispel "scientific" delusions, criticism must scrutinize its affiliation with ideology both in scientific method and in theory. / Arts, Faculty of / English, Department of / Graduate

Orientador: Josúe Pereira da Silva / Tese (doutorado) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Instituto de Filosofia e Ciências Humanas / Made available in DSpace on 2018-08-22T04:00:25Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 DiasJunior_AntonioCarlos_D.pdf: 13575411 bytes, checksum: 325e5af2ad35e15c19289638d09c3c67 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2013 / Resumo: A tese trata da obra do filósofo e sociólogo francês Raymond Aron (1905-1983), de seu percurso intelectual e, especificamente, da sociologia política presente no conjunto de sua produção intelectual, com especial ênfase em suas obras acadêmicas e cursos proferidos em diversas instituições de ensino, como a Sorbonne e o Collège de France. Filósofo de formação, mas sociólogo, professor e jornalista por ofício, Aron produziu extensa obra sobre diversos temas: da filosofia à sociologia, passando pela economia, história, guerra, política francesa, marxismo, relações internacionais e história das ideias, dentre outros assuntos. A percepção política presente na sociologia aroniana é discutida em quatro momentos: formação filosófica; publicação da trilogia sobre a sociedade industrial e de As etapas do pensamento sociológico; crítica a K. Marx e ao regime soviético; e crítica dos mitos da esquerda e dos marxismos imaginários. O trabalho oferece ainda uma análise biobibliográfica de Raymond Aron, além de um levantamento completo dos trabalhos (livros e teses acadêmicas) a seu respeito / Abstract: The thesis treats about the work of french philosopher and sociologist Raymond Aron (1905-1983), of his intellectual course and, specifically, about political sociology present in the whole of his intellectual production, with special emphasis in his academical works and university studies pronounced in several institutions of teaching, like Sorbonne and Collège de France. Graduated philosopher, but sociologist, master and journalist by charge, Aron produced a vast work about several themes: from philosophy to sociology, through the economy, history, war, french politics, marxism, diplomacy and history of ideas, among other matters. The political perception present in aronian sociology is debated in four moments: philosophical development, publication of trilogy about the industrial society and Main Currents in Sociological Thought; critique to K. Marx and the soviet regime; and critique of the left myths and imaginary marxisms. The work offers yet a biobliographical analysis of Raymond Aron, yonder a complete survey of works (books and academical thesis) to concern him / Doutorado / Sociologia / Doutor em Sociologia

No description available.

Conventional wisdom, inspired in part by Eric Raymond, suggests that open source developers primarily develop software for developers like themselves. In our studies we distinguish between reflexive software (software written primarily for other developers) and irreflexive software (software written primarily for passive users). In the first study, we present four criteria which we then use to assess project reflexivity in SourceForge. These criteria are based on three specific indicators: intended audience, relevant topics, and supported operating systems. Based on our criteria, we find that 68% of SourceForge projects are reflexive (in the sense described by Raymond). In the second study, we randomly sample and statically estimate reflexivity within SourceForge. Our results support Raymond's assertions that 1) OSS projects tend to be reflexive and 2) reflexive OSS projects tend to be more successful than irreflexive projects. We also find a decrease in reflexivity from a high in 2001 to a low in 2011.

Mémoire numérisé par la Direction des bibliothèques de l'Université de Montréal.

No description available.

No description available.