The Victorian private solider was a despised figure. Yet in the first sixteen months of the Great War two and a half million men from the UK and many more from the empire, flocked to the colours without any form of legal compulsion. This book is the result of reflection on one of the most extraordinary mass movements in history: the surge of volunteers into the British army during the first sixteen months of the Great War. The notion that compulsory service in arms was repugnant to British tradition was mistaken. The nation's general state of mind, system of values and set of attitudes derived largely from the upper middle class, which had emerged and become dominant during the nineteenth century. The book examines the phenomenon of 1914 and the views held by people of that class, since it was under their leadership that the country went to war. It discusses the general theoretical notions of the nature of war of two nineteenth-century thinkers: Karl von Clausewitz and Charles Darwin. By 1914 patriotism and imperialism were interdependent. The early Victorians directed their abundant political energies chiefly towards free trade and parliamentary reform. It was the Germans' own policy which jolted the British into unity, for the Cabinet and the nation were far from unanimously in favour of war until the Germans attacked Belgium. Upper-class intellectual culture was founded on the tradition of 'liberal education' at the greater public schools and at Oxford and Cambridge.
Four Decisive Challenges Confronting Humanitarian Innovation
Gerard Finnigan and Otto Farkas
We wish to thank World Vision National Office staff who have been invaluable
in progressing this concept and acknowledge Dr Jonatan Lassa and Associate
Professor Akhilesh Surjan from the Disaster and Emergency Management
Programme at CharlesDarwin University for their critical support
Reminiscing about his many visits over the years to the home of his dear friend and scientific colleague CharlesDarwin, Joseph Hooker, Britain's leading botanist for much of the second half of the nineteenth century, noted that a regular feature of those visits was joining Darwin on his noontime walk: ‘away we trudged through the garden,’ recalled Hooker, ‘where there was always some experiment to visit’ (F. Darwin 1887 : II. 27). Hooker's description – despite the begrudging ‘trudge’ – captures nicely the multiple roles that the garden
science during the nineteenth century as that century shaded into the twentieth. Wallace had
a reputation as both scientist and social radical (Wallace, 1913 ) who had experienced
poverty through an underprivileged childhood (Wallace, 1908 ). In
1899, he was still best known for his role in the articulation of the theory of evolution by
natural selection, alongside the more prominent, prestigious and socially privileged CharlesDarwin in 1858. Evolution was evinced in the ‘wonderful’ selections and
– came to terms
with the actuality of the site. CharlesDarwin’s trip points to the real
challenges posed by this terrain – that it could not be easily
accommodated within standard European aesthetic frameworks. He asserted
that the Blue Mountains were different from typical European mountainous
scenery. He also hinted at the ways in which these mountains challenged
European preconceptions of the sublime
upper intellectual atmosphere, let us glance at two
nineteenth-century thinkers, neither likely to be familiar to ordinary Englishmen, unless
indirectly and superficially, and far removed from each other in subject-matter. One is Karl
von Clausewitz (1780-1831), a Prussian general who served against Napoleon, and the other is
CharlesDarwin (1809-1882), who came of a numerous family at the centre of the high-Victorian
‘intellectual aristocracy’ (seep. 129 below) of liberal Britain.
Clausewitz’s book On War , first published
Stuart Mill, Herbert Spencer,
and CharlesDarwin, and to places such as Europe and the United States. These
comparisons, I suggest, are selective appropriations, colonial hesitations, and performances for particular audiences.
On the other hand, attempts to address distinct audiences across different
works, or to appeal to multiple audiences in one work, may not succeed. Authors
can fail to calibrate their arguments to their intended audience. Different audiences can interpret one or many texts in numerous ways. And a thinker
Sushmita Chatterjee, Deboleena Roy, and Banu Subramaniam
In this chapter, three feminist and Science and Technology Scholars discuss the idea of biological politics within the South Asian context. The concepts of biopower and biopolitics emerged within a western frame of Foucauldian theorisations on the technologies of power. As the introduction to this volume suggests, Charles Darwin and Thomas Malthus have played important roles in navigating our conversations regarding bodies and populations in colonial and post-independent India. Yet, the chapter cautions against any easy deployment of biopolitics as a universal theory of how the entanglements of biology and politics play out in the South Asian context. All three scholars have been part of an ongoing project on thinking about biological politics in a South Asian context. The chapter highlights the key issues that emerge, and the many elisions and erasures in the complex histories of science in South Asia. Recent work challenges us to think beyond enlightenment logics in postcolonial contexts. Rather, during colonial and postcolonial times, the colonies have always resisted the imposition of western science resulting not in a pure or universal science but rather complex and hybrid sciences in the postcolony. We explore these tensions and, in particular, the new formations of reproductive labour that are emerging in South Asia.
Lewis, Depth of Translation: The Book of Raft, Melbourne: New Music Articles, 1999 .
Kelp (with Edmund Carter, Christopher Williams). Exhibition: Hidden Histories, Warrnambool Art Gallery, Victoria, April 2014 .
Involutes (with Edmund Carter) 2011). Exhibition: Laminations, Multimedia Room, CharlesDarwin University, Casuarina Campus, 15 October 2015 . Graphic art
Hinges (with Edmund Carter), 2006. Reference: Paul Carter, ‘Masters of the Gap: art, migration and eido-kinesis’, in C
This book explores for the first time women’s leading roles in animal protection in nineteenth-century Britain. Victorian women founded pioneering bodies such as the Battersea Dogs’ Home, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, and the first anti-vivisection society. They intervened directly to stop abuses, promoted animal welfare, and schooled the young in humane values via the Band of Mercy movement. They also published literature that, through strongly argued polemic or through imaginative storytelling, notably in Anna Sewell’s Black Beauty, showed man’s unjustifiable cruelty to animals. In all these enterprises, they encountered opponents who sought to discredit and thwart their efforts by invoking age-old notions of female ‘sentimentality’ or ‘hysteria’, which supposedly needed to be checked by ‘masculine’ pragmatism, rationality and broadmindedness, especially where men’s field sports were concerned. To counter any public perception of extremism, conservative bodies such as the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals for long excluded women from executive roles, despite their crucial importance as donors and grassroots activists. However, women’s growing opportunities for public work in philanthropic projects and the development of militant feminism, running in parallel with campaigns for the vote, gave them greater boldness in expressing their distinctive view of animal–human relations, in defiance of patriarchy. In analysing all these historic factors, the book unites feminist perspectives, especially constructions of gender, with the fast-developing field of animal–human history.