The summer issue of the Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences is now online. Articles in this issue explore the relationships of scientists who disagreed over the nature of race, the origins of Mary Ainsworth’s Strange Situation Procedure, Alfred Binet’s role as editorial director of a French publishing house, and more. Full titles, authors, and abstracts follow below.
“Race relationships: Collegiality and demarcation in physical anthropology,” by Peter Sachs Collopy. The abstract reads,
In 1962, anthropologist Carleton Coon argued in The Origin of Races that some human races had evolved further than others. Among his most vocal critics were geneticist Theodosius Dobzhansky and anthropologist Ashley Montagu, each of whom had known Coon for decades. I use this episode, and the long relationships between scientists that preceded it, to argue that scientific research on race was intertwined not only with political projects to conserve or reform race relations, but also with the relationships scientists shared as colleagues. Demarcation between science and pseudoscience, between legitimate research and scientific racism, involved emotional as well as intellectual labor.
Blackwell publishing launched a machine today that can print and bind within five minutes a single copy any of over 500,000 titles on demand. They hope to increase the number of titles to one million by the end of the year. The machine, called “Espresso,” is the brainchild of American publisher Jason Epstein. Blackwell chief executive Andrew Hutchings says “I like to think of it as the revitalisation of the local bookshop industry.”
According to the report at Guardian.co.uk, the machine can be seen:
printing over 100 pages a minute, clamping them into place, then binding, guillotining and spitting out the (warm as toast) finished article. The quality of the paperback was beyond dispute: the text clear, unsmudged and justified, the paper thick, the jacket smart…. Continue reading Gutenberg Reprieve or Quixotic Extravagance?→
Harlequin, the world’s largest publisher of “series romance,” is turning 60. Founded in 1949 — when Winnipeg businessman Richard Bonnycastle began issuing paperback reprints of cookbooks, westerns, detective yarns, and love stories — it now ships over 120 titles a month, in 29 languages. With stories ranging from tame to smutty, the publisher’s archive also offers a condensed social history of love and the making thereof.
The first pregnancy storyline arrived in the 1960s. The late ’70s saw a surge of sexual content, partly in response to the 19th-century S&M-fests penned by Rosemary Rogers, a scandalously popular author at rival publisher Avon. Harlequin cover model Fabio, all oiled chest and blond mane, debuted during the excessive 1980s. (The images in which Fabio commandingly clutches an adoring, half-naked woman are iconic examples of what is known in the industry as “the clinch.”) The ’90s saw some retrenchment into recognizably ordinary lives — heroes and heroines were often ranchers, pediatricians and cops in contemporary small-town North America. Increasingly, romances featured blended families, with single moms reconnecting with high school crushes or widowed fathers silently yearning for nurturing nannies. On these covers, the clinch is replaced by the potent hormonal cocktail of a handsome man holding an infant. (CBC.ca Arts)
According to some reports, Harlequin presently sells an average of 4 books every second. The reason? Passion is universal, claims author Shannon Drake.
Previously on AHP: Ian Nicholson was confirmed as the new editor of the Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences.
We recently asked him to share his thoughts. The result, below, provides an insider’s look at the future of one of the premiere journals in the field. He writes:
I come to the editorship of the Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences in a spirit of respect and appreciation. I first read the Journal as an undergraduate and it was an article in JHBS that inspired my early interest in the history of the behavioral and social sciences. Over the years, my interest in the Journal has only deepened, and I am indebted to my predecessors Robert I. Watson, Barbara Ross, John Burnham, Ray Fancher, and Chris Green for their dedication and commitment in developing the Journal, broadening its appeal, and adapting it to new circumstances. I remain conscious of this distinguished editorial pedigree, and I will do my utmost to further strengthen the Journal’s hard-won reputation as one of the foremost periodicals on the history of the behavioral and social sciences.
JHBS is an important publication with a loyal and highly knowledgeable readership. I am committed to maintaining the high historiographic standards for which the Journal is known and that our readers have come to expect. I will also be continuing the JHBS practice of publishing timely reviews of significant books in our fields. To this end, I am delighted to welcome Nicole Barenbaum of the University of the South who will be handling book reviews as the Journal’s new Associate Editor.
The academic and publishing landscape has changed markedly in the 44 years since JHBS first appeared. As Editor, I want to ensure that the Journal remains responsive to new interests and challenges. Continue reading Nicholson’s vision for JHBS→
In an essay published in a recent issue of Essays in Criticism, 58(4), James Stephen Murphy discusses the history and future of scholarly editing.
He begins with a quote from Roland Barthes‘ The Death of the Author (1968/1977): “The birth of the reader must be at the cost of the death of the Author” (p. 148). Following the trend in electronic publishing, and the ease with which readers can seek out a text, he then wonders if the birth of the data-miner must come at the eventual cost of the death of the Editor.
Much of the most advanced contemporary theorising about editing has suggested that the editor should follow the author into his grave. The vision of the scholarly editor as a steward of the text, entrusted with the establishment of an authoritative edition, the collection of variants and errata, and the creation of apparatuses to guide readers to a more profound understanding of a work and its history, has increasingly given way to another image: the editor not as expert guide, but as a brutish interloper forcing his interpretation on the defenceless text. This attitude towards editing has had and probably will continue to have deleterious effects on a craft that is already under threat both from dwindling university and university press budgets and from the declining numbers of university teachers and programmes capable of passing on the skills of analytical bibliography and editorial practice. (pp. 289-290)
Since many of the issues Murphy examines are paralleled by similar concerns discussed at the past several PsycInfo meetings, to say nothing of the challenges faced by editors of new scholarly editions (or translations), your comments would be particularly welcome.
I have spoken with Dr Murphy about his essay. He has graciously offered to respond to questions, or comments, posted here below.
Previously on AHP: Wade Pickren was confirmed as the new editor of History of Psychology, the official journal of the Society for the History of Psychology (division 26 of the American Psychological Association).
Just prior to making this announcement, I asked him to share his thoughts with AHP. The result, below, is a behind-the-scenes look at the future of History of Psychology. He writes:
I am very honored to have been chosen to be only the third editor of History of Psychology. The legacy of Michael Sokal and Jim Capshew is large and I have big shoes to fill. I look forward to the challenge of building on what they have constructed.
I think about psychology in very broad terms in both the little p and big P senses, to use Graham Richards’ distinction. I will encourage scholarship that is just as broad for publication in the journal.
I hope to make the journal even more inclusive in terms of topics covered and to expand even further the range of authors whose sound scholarship should be published in the journal. I hope we can add international perspectives so that we can share in the exciting developments occurring in our field in many countries around the world. Doing so will help us realize the importance of cultural context in both science and practice. It may well be that our best and most direct way to understand the complexities of our globalizing world is to take a historical perspective. I would want our journal, History of Psychology, to be at the forefront of providing that perspective. Continue reading Pickren’s vision for History of Psychology→
News flash: Sage is reporting that the impact factor for History of the Human Sciences increased 200% last year, over 2006, from 0.122 to 0.364. (By way of comparison, History of Psychiatry has an impact factor of 1.135 [up 135%]; Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 0.833 [+140%]; Social History of Medicine, 0.809 [+75%]; Isis,0.732 [+20%]; Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences, 0.630 [-30%]; Social Science History, 0.317 [-40%]; History of Science, 0.194 [+20%].)
The fifty most frequently cited articles in HHS are listed here.