This paper considers masculinity in two twentieth-century historical novels set in the eighteenth century: Andrew Miller’s Ingenious Pain (1997) and Hilary Mantel’s The Giant, O’Brien (1998). It argues that both novels create protagonists who embody masculine-coded attributes, including resistance to pain and bodily size and strength, and that, in both novels, earning potential is concomitant with such attributes. Complicating matters, however, the very exaggeration of stereotypical masculine characteristics in these texts causes each man to seem something other and less (...) than a man—ranging for both, at different times, from monstrous to pathetically weak (and childlike, or even womanish) victim. Qualities associated with manhood, therefore, paradoxically deny the men more agency than they allow in these stories set in the eighteenth century, inhibiting them from enjoying ideal manhood and making them the property of other men. (shrink)

The second edition of Andrew Skinner's essays has been updated to take account of his latest thinking on Adam Smith's system of social and moral science and his experience of teaching Smith to a student audience. The material from the first edition has been extensively rewritten in the light of recent scholarship, and four new essays have been included. Each essay can be read as a self-contained unit, supported by a full bibliography and notes; the book as a whole (...) expounds a single coherent argument which demonstrates how Smith's works are inter-related. (shrink)

In this article, Andrew Thompson explores the tension between Gert Biesta's concept of educational purpose and education's historical function. For Biesta, the purpose of education consists of three overlapping spheres: qualification, socialization, and subjectification. While scholars have devoted a great deal of attention to Biesta's notion of subjectification, there is not enough consideration of his treatment of socialization and its limits on human freedom. Here, Thompson examines the historical role of socialization as it relates to the cultivation of self-reflecting (...) and self-governing citizens through a process Ian Hunter describes as pastoral pedagogy. Both Biesta and Hunter critique essentialist notions of subjectivity, noting that critical pedagogy in both liberal and Marxian iterations has relied upon a metaphysics informed by Kantian moral definition in which the subject must freely exercise rational autonomy toward self-realization. While Biesta suggests redefining the subject, Hunter dismisses any attempt at redefinition as irrelevant since the school's historical process of moral development is inevitably linked to the antiquated liberal ideal. In Hunter's view, all attempts to escape the school's moral teleology inexorably employ a pedagogy that is based on the moral ideal its critics wish to eliminate. This article illustrates the agonism inherent in Biesta's concept of educational purpose and explores the role of the theorist as the expression of a particular moral self that informs the ideal persona of the teacher. (shrink)