Catalogue Search | MBRL
Search Results Heading
Explore the vast range of titles available.
MBRLSearchResults
-
DisciplineDiscipline
-
Is Peer ReviewedIs Peer Reviewed
-
Reading LevelReading Level
-
Content TypeContent Type
-
YearFrom:-To:
-
More FiltersMore FiltersItem TypeIs Full-Text AvailableSubjectCountry Of PublicationPublisherSourceDonorLanguagePlace of PublicationContributorsLocation
Done
Filters
Reset
11,614
result(s) for
"Ambivalence."
Sort by:
Navigating and Exhibiting Ambivalence: Yin Hua Artist Organization and Sino-Indonesian Relations in the 1950s to 1960s
2024
This paper interrogates the logic of inclusion and exclusion that foregrounds the ethnocentrism and spatial boundedness of the state project’s national identity construction and proposes critical terms of discussion that challenge the limiting nation-centric framework prevalent in the dominant modern art historiography discourse. Drawing on primary archival research, it describes accounts of Lembaga Seniman Yin Hua (Yin Hua Meishu Xiehui, 印華美術協會, Yin Hua Artist Organization), an art organization established in 1955 in Jakarta and analyzes it against the backdrop of the Sino-Indonesian diplomatic relationship during the Cold War era. By engaging with the ambivalent aesthetic and politic of Chinese Indonesian artists, this paper recognizes the active and strategic agency of Chinese Indonesians as both insiders and outsiders in China and Indonesia under the uncertain circumstances of their dual nationality status. It argues that Yin Hua ambivalently navigated between the political patronage of Indonesia and China, performed dual loyalty to Indonesian and Sino-centric art history, and exhibited multiple artistic lineages that disrupted the stabilized territory of postcolonial nation-state geographical and cultural border. Weaving exhibition history, diplomatic history, and critical ethnic studies through a thread of transnational perspective, this paper provides historical narratives that unsettle the roots of racializing logic in the political articulation of nationalism and pushes toward an epistemic shift in rethinking categories of national identity, ethnicity, and citizenship.
Journal Article
Psychoanalysing ambivalence with Freud and Lacan : on and off the couch
\"Taking a deep dive into contemporary Western culture, this book suggests we are all fundamentally ambivalent beings. A great deal has been written about how to love-to be kinder, more empathic, a better person, and so on. But trying to love without dealing with our ambivalence, with our hatred, is often a recipe for failure. Any attempt, therefore, to love our neighbour as ourselves-or even, for that matter, to love ourselves-must recognize that we love where we hate and we hate where we love. Psychoanalysis, beginning with Freud, has claimed that to be in two minds about something or someone is characteristic of human subjectivity. Owens and Swales trace the concept of ambivalence through its various iterations in Freud and Lacan in order to question how the contemporary subject deals with its ambivalence. They argue that experiences of ambivalence are, in present-day cultural life, increasingly excised or foreclosed, and that this foreclosure has symptomatic effects at the individual as well as social levels. Owens and Swales examine ambivalence as it is at work in mourning, in matters of sexuality, in our enjoyment under neo-liberalism and capitalism. Above all, the authors consider how today's ambivalent subject relates to the racially, religiously, culturally, or sexually different neighbour as a result of the current societal dictate of complete tolerance of the other. In this vein, Swales and Owens argue that ambivalence about one's own jouissance is at the very roots of xenophobia. Peppered with relevant and stimulating examples from clinical work, film, television, politics and everyday life, Psychoanalysing Ambivalence breathes new life into an old concept and will appeal to any reader, academic or clinician with an interest in psychoanalytic ideas\"-- Provided by publisher.
Ambivalências do risco◊ ◊ Traduzido por Liana Fernandes
by
David Le Breton
in
Ambivalence
2019
O objetivo deste artigo é resgatar a ambivalência e a complexidade da noção de risco. A existência individual oscila entre vulnerabilidade e segurança, risco e prudência. Como a existência nunca é dada de antemão, o gosto pela vida a acompanha e evoca o sabor de todas as coisas. Não assumir um risco não é menos um risco, o do esclerosamento, do aprisionamento nas rotinas. É condenar-se a nunca transformar as coisas, mesmo que pudessem ser melhores; por exemplo, manter-se em estado de sujeição ou sofrimento, ser impotente para inventar-se.
Journal Article
Hybridregime unter externer Kontrolle Zum Charakter der ungarischen Politik
2018
Ungarns politisches System ist weder eine Demokratie noch eine Diktatur. Es handelt sich um ein spezifisches Hybridregime. Die Regierung unter Viktor Orbán hat seit 2010 die Gewaltenteilung, wie sie den liberalen Verfassungsstaat kennzeichnet, weitgehend außer Kraft gesetzt. Allerdings werden die Grundrechte der Bürger in Ungarn bis heute weitgehend gewahrt. Das liegt an Ungarns Einbindung in die Europäische Union und der Mitgliedschaft im Europarat. Die Rolle der EU ist jedoch ambivalent. Ihre Rechtsordnung wirkt dem Aufbau eines autoritären Systems entgegen. Gleichzeitig stabilisieren die Gelder aus den EU-Fonds das Regime in Budapest. Da die EU als Verbund demokratischer Staaten gilt, nutzt Orbán zudem die Mitgliedschaft Ungarns, um sein Regime zu legitimieren.
Journal Article
Paradoxe Familienähnlichkeit
2018
Russland und die Türkei erscheinen wie Zwillinge. Sie haben ein imperiales Erbe, die Nationsbildung ist unvollendet, die Modernisierung vollzog sich durch staatliche Mobilisierung. Ebenso ist ihr Verhältnis zu Europa ambivalent. Die autoritären Regime scheinen ideale Bündnispartner zu sein. Dies sind sie mitnichten. Das gegenwärtige gemeinsame Auftreten täuscht darüber hinweg, dass sie in ihrem regionalen Umfeld unterschiedliche Interessen haben und ihre nach wie vor imperiale strategische Kultur sie dort zu Konkurrenten macht.
At first glance, Russia and Turkey resemble twins. They have an imperial heritage, the nation building process has not yet been completed, and modernisation has occurred through state mobilisation. Their relationship with Europe is also ambivalent. The authoritarian regimes appear to be ideal alliance partners. Yet in reality, this is far from true. Their current joint appearance belies the fact that they are pursuing different interests in their shared regional environment, where they have become competitors due to the ongoing imperialist nature of their strategic culture.
Journal Article