Die elementaren (Fremd-)Erfahrungen der Gabe

What holds society together? In his famous essay The Gift (1925) Marcel Mauss answers this question. However, as this paper shows, he does so not by formulating something like a theory of reciprocity as was often assumed after Claude Lévi-Strauss’ brought forward his structuralist interpretation of Mauss. Instead, the reason why gift practices create obligatory, cohesive social bonds lies in experiences of ?being-possessed“ and self-transcendence. This assumption is proven by means of a new and detailed reading of Mauss’ Essai sur le don as well as by the anti-utilitarian reception of Mauss’ work by the Collège de Sociologie (Georges Bataille, Roger Caillois, Michel Leiris). Overall, Mauss’ theory of the gift features important elements of a theory of posession and self-transcendence which focuses on the dimensions of experience and action. This is why one can discern a certain similarity between Mauss’ and the pragmatist theory of action. Only against that backdrop the social binding force of gift practices can be explained.     

Die Konstruktion der soziologischen Realität durch Forschungsrating

The article subjects the research rating of sociology, published in 2008 and carried out by an evaluation group on behalf of the German Science Council, to a secondary analysis. It is shown that the research rating constructs a reality of sociology which does justice neither to the variety of sociological knowledge production nor to its own claim of multidimensionality. Unwillingly, the peer reviewed article has imposed itself as the dominant criterion for assessing the research quality of research units against other types of publication and other activities such as externally funded research, knowledge transfer for practical problem-solving and knowledge diffusion in the public sphere. This preference also affected the assessment of entire research institutions with regard to their impact and efficiency as well as the devaluation of knowledge transfer and diffusion. In this way, sociology is limited to the type of professional sociology, while critical, public and policy-oriented sociology are displaced.     

Emile Durkheims Moralpolitik des Individualismus

Emile Durkheim was neither a political scientist nor a political sociologist. His oeuvre though exhibits a political dimension which is not easy to grasp. This article makes the attempt to reconstruct his project of a moral politics of individualism. How is it possible to institutionalize successfully what Durkheim calls moral individualism? Durkheim’s project rests upon two pillars: the scientific and scholarly pillar which aims at the establishment of sociology as a scientific discipline at universities. The political pillar which sets out to analyze the socio-structural, institutional, cultural conditions, forms and effects of individualism and the successful socialization of its values which allows to take seriously the rhetoric of the freedom and dignity of human beings in modernity. Durkheim’s project is confronted with the traditional images of politics and the social order to delineate the differentia specifica of his moral politics of individualism.     

The eve of de‐struction: Charlotte Perkins Gilman and the feminist recreation of paradise

Wanton Eyes &; Chaste Desires: Female Sexuality in The Faerie Queene. By Sheila T. Cavanagh. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1994.

Colonial American Travel Narratives. Edited by Wendy Martin. London and New York: Penguin, 1994.

The Invention of Pornography: Obscenity and the Origins of Modernity, 1500–1800. Edited by Lynn Hunt. New York: Zone Books, 1993.     

Editorial

Both at Nordic and European level, public research funding is taking new forms. In this article we identify some new trends and ask which consequences they could have for interdisciplinary research, especially for studies on gender. Based on data gathered in an on‐going EU research project on interdisciplinarity and the integration of Humanities and the Social Sciences, we discuss the Nordic situation in comparison to some European countries which are part of the project. We argue that the new trends are contradictory and ambiguous. We explore what happens to disciplinary divisions in the emerging new structures. In a tentative conclusion we suggest that the European streamlining of research funding in combination with a demand for large‐scale co‐operation are possible threats to small interdisciplinary fields like feminist research. While disciplinary boundaries on a structural level seem to dissolve, they are maintained in application and evaluation practices. Research programmes focusing on interdisciplinarity and themes within feminist research might instead be opportunities.