We are very excited to offer our first Spring Speaker Series! We have four marvellous scholars excited to share their research with you.

First, on March 26 at noon (US EST), is诺拉奥尼尔, a first-year medical student at Yale School of Medicine. She is pursuing a combined MD-PhD in the History of Science and Medicine. In 2018, she completed her bachelor’s degree from Harvard University in the History of Science, focusing on the intersection of disability rights and reproductive justice. At Yale, she plans to study the social constructions of disability in medical and social activist spaces. As a physician historian, she hopes to engage in patient-centered care while also unraveling the historical complexities of the patient-doctor relationship.

Her talk is titledCarry On: The Depiction of Post-War Disability in Government Propaganda and Consumer Culture, 1919-1925:

第二次世界大战后,由于200,000名军事成员返回了残疾,美国政府首次标准化康复计划。政府巩固康复服务导致残疾和能力的一致定义,一个与退伍军人对其家庭和社区的经济贡献密切相关。通过在这些方案中结合临床治疗和工作培训,政府承诺回归经济独立性。这一承诺通过政府宣传,政府宣传为退伍军人,包括杂志Coming Back(1919) andCarry On(1919-1918). This paper explores the government’s message of disability through such propaganda and the public’s response through popular magazines, likeLadies’ Home JournalandSaturday Evening Post. Veterans’ organizations, like the American Legion, also responded to such messages through their own publications. While magazines and advertisements inundated the public with the story of the disabled veteran returning home, earning a job, and providing for their family, the American Legion argued that the government had failed in its promises due to veterans’ experiences of discrimination. The government, popular media, and veterans’ organizations embraced a changing definition of disability to accommodate the many formerly abled men who returned from the war. Though the government promised a reformulation of disability as compatible with independence, rehabilitation failed to take into account the lived experiences of all disabled veterans, including veterans of color, women, and people who developed disabilities other than amputations. Disability, coupled with the valor associated with Great War veterans, was redefined to include the possibility of achieving independence through paid work, and yet this independence was only ascribed to those who government officials believed could succeed in their programs: white men with physical disabilities.

Register for Nora’s talkhere.

On April 2 at noon (US EST), isTrisha Haldarfrom Kolkata,India. She has completed her graduation (History Honours) from Bethune College, Kolkata and post-graduation from the University of Calcutta. She has a keen interest in the History of Medicine and so did her M.Phil. in this area from Jadavpur University, Kolkata, under the supervision of Professor Nupur Dasgupta. At present, she is an Assistant Professor at Ghoshpukur College, Siliguri.

Professor Haldar’s talk is titledWestern Medicine in the face of the scourge of the fevers of Bengal:

自从英国东印度公司”blished its bases in Calcutta, most travelers to the city wrote about its unhealthful environment. Gradually, as the English Company metamorphosed from a commercial unit to a political power, it indulged itself more in the Oriental wars. It is not unknown to us that in wars, deaths are bound to occur on both sides of the battlefield. But surprisingly, the Company lost more soldiers to the underlying disease than to the wars. It was the fevers of Bengal, which was perceived to be a deadly disease and was known to slew its patients within hours. Quite naturally, this fatality was to draw the attention of the medics working under the English East India Company. Eventually, there arose a curiosity among the medical practitioners to look out for effective medicines against such fevers. While looking into the fatality, in this paper, I have drawn special attention to the therapeutics prescribed by the Company appointed medics and in doing so I have in particular consulted the e-collections of these medical practitioners. Especially those archived by the Medical Heritage Library and also the Internet Archives. A close glimpse at these works shows that their medical practice was influenced both by the metropole and the indigenous medical culture of Bengal. Overall, the paper attempts to track the uncertainty relating to the treatment process. Such quandary over the therapeutics was essentially the outcome of colonial policies. Juxtaposed to it, the paper also attempts to show that how the practice of medication also got altered with the anatomization of the body.

Register for Trisha’s talkhere.

On April 9 at noon (US EST), isSarah Berry,纽约州立大学英语助理教授 - 俄罗斯州奥斯威戈。她专注于健康人文,并在医学,性别,种族和美国文化历史上写道。她是一个居民的贡献者Synapsis, serves in theHealth Humanities Consortium, and is working on a book titledPatient Revolutions: Health and Social Justice in America from Abolition to the Affordable Care Act.

Her talk is titled“Black Museum”: An American Medical Experiment:

Racial disparities in health and medical care have been highlighted by the current pandemic, but they have long roots in U.S. history. Teaching and researching this history is important for moving forward with restorative justice and health equity. A particularly rich starting point is “Black Museum,” a 2017 episode of the sci-fi television seriesBlack Mirror. This episode features three fictional medical technologies that call up specific, real ethical problems in U.S. racial and medical history. The technologies, exhibited by the Black Museum’s owner, a former research recruiter, harken back to the nineteenth-century commodification of race and somatic difference in three linked areas: the new science of forensics (institutionalized in the original Black Museum of Scotland Yard); medical museums; and circus “freak” shows. This presentation explores the “Roots of Racism in Health and Medicine” collection and other resources in the Medical Heritage Library in order to uncover the historical connections among race, medicine, entertainment, and crime dramatized in the episode. This talk offers pedagogical techniques to immerse students in digital archival research, enabling them to make their own connections among race and health justice in U.S. cultural history.

Register for Sarah’s talkhere.

Our final speaker on April 23 at noon (US EST) will beElizabeth McNeill, Ph.D. candidate in the Department of Germanic Languages and Literatures at the University of Michigan. Her dissertation, “Speaking (of) Animals in the Life Sciences and Literature of 20th-Century Germany,” tracks the various knowledge practices at work in the constellation of animality, language, and experimentation from the mid-19thto the late-20thcentury in the German-speaking world. “Speaking (of) Animals” ultimately reorients well-known scientific and literary figures such as Franz Kafka, Wilhelm Wundt, Robert Musil, and Konrad Lorenz in the context of once popular but today mostly forgotten or disqualified scientific discourses about animal intelligence and communication.

Her talk is titledThe Animal Soul between Natural Philosophy and Natural Science: Friedrich August Carus, Peter Scheitlin, and Wilhelm Wundt (1808-1885):

这个演讲涉及19th- 学习动物行为的中心来源,通常追溯到1830年代后期在伦敦动物园的达尔文的实验,目的是研究心理进化论。我通过在19岁内拯救它来使这个起源故事复杂化th-century history of psychology in the German-speaking world and, more specifically, the slow, contentious rise of animal psychology as a viable object and mode of scientific study. By tracking the shift from the question of the “animal soul” to that of the “animal expression of emotions” over the course of the 19thcentury, I draw into relief the tenuous position of “the animal” (and those who wished to study its inner life) in emerging psychological fields, as the positivist, experimental natural sciences gradually dethroned natural philosophy.

This mid-century paradigm shift is the point from which my inquiry unfolds. I contend that this unique moment gave rise to a wholly new way of thinking about animals: one which recognized animal expression as an outward manifestation of animal soul (or as Darwin would have it, emotion). My objective, then, is to underline the importance of 19th- 20岁早期的动物心理学th- 动物行为和沟通的配方。我不仅仅追溯了Wundtian实验心理,后卫的新心理学,新动物心理学或道德学。相反,我断言心理学中的动物的位置是自己的历史,并且在Wilhelm Wundt出生之前它开始很好。正如我通过恢复弗里德里希·普罗斯(1770-1807),Peter Scheitlin(1779-1848)和Wilhelm Wundt(1832-1920),19的智力血统th-Century德语动物心理学由尚未受到影响的人,但却可能会呼吁在20次出发的“动物实验心理学”。thcentury. With Scheitlin as the missing link in this history of animal psychology, I center my interrogation on his paradoxically forgotten yet foundational contribution to the study of animal behavior and communication. In doing so, I restore Scheitlin to his place in the history of science while tracing the 19th-century reverberations of the term he coined: “science of the animal soul” or, as Wundt disdainfully called it at century’s end, “animal psychology.”

Register for Elizabeth’s talkhere.

The speaker series is co-sponsored by MHL partner Center for the History of Medicine, Countway Library, Harvard University.

Comments are closed.