SUMMARYTo be Marxist at the turn of the twentieth century was highly contested. During this crisis of Marxism, identity politics were acute, exemplified by the private and public debate between Eduard Bernstein and Karl Kautsky. With Bernstein's celebrated turn away from the Marxist theory of his day, the grounds for being Marxist were at stake. Was it possible to criticise Marx's analysis of industrial capitalism, his account of historical change and his hard-nosed class politics, and yet still be in a (...) position to carry his name forward? Moreover, the springing-up of another identity, Revisionist, suggested that being Marxist was ambiguous. If one accepted Bernstein's and the Revisionists' point that Marxists had become too orthodox, leaving Revisionists as the true heirs of Marx's critical socialist spirit, then the Marxist identity was so open as to be meaningless. In this article, I contend that the name-calling of this period, the Revisionismusstreit, should be seen as creative. In contrast to politico-ideological perceptions of the Streit, which construe the clash of Marxist and Revisionist as representative of foundational Social Democratic party political realities, I highlight the manner in which being Marxist—the veneration of Marx's and Friedrich Engels's word into a Marxology of sorts by Marxists and Revisionists alike—held a certain epistemic value in its own right. (shrink)

Graduate students typically first experience research ethics when they submit their masters or doctoral research projects for ethics approval. Research ethics boards in Canada review and grant ethical approval for student research projects and often have to provide additional support to these novice researchers. Previous studies have explored curriculum content, teaching approaches, and the learning environment related to research ethics for graduate students. However, research does not exist that examines students’ actual experience with the research ethics process. Qualitative description was (...) used to explore the research ethics review experience of 11 masters and doctoral students in health discipline programs. Data analysis revealed four themes: curriculum, supervisor support, the ethics application process, and students’ overall experience. The results of this research suggest ideas for enhancing curriculum, deepening students’ relationships with supervisors, and developing the role of research ethics... (shrink)

Perlecan is a ubiquitous proteoglycan of basement membrane and vascularized tissues but is also present in articular cartilage, meniscus and intervertebral disc, which are devoid of basement membrane and predominantly avascular. It is a prominent pericellular proteoglycan in the transitory matrix of the cartilaginous rudiments that develop into components of diarthrodial joints and the axial skeleton, and it forms intricate perichondrial vessel networks that define the presumptive articulating surfaces of developing joints and line the cartilage canals in cartilaginous rudiments. Such (...) vessels have roles in the nutrition of the expanding cell numbers in the developing joint. Perlecan sequesters a number of growth factors pericellularly (FGFs, PDGF, VEGF and CTGF) and through these promotes cell signalling, cell proliferation and differentiation. Perlecan also interacts with a diverse range of extracellular matrix proteins, stabilising and organising the ECM, and promoting collagen fibrillogenesis. Perlecan is a prominent pericellular component of mesenchymal cells from their earliest developmental stages through to maturation, forming cell–cell and cell–ECM interconnections that are suggestive of a role in mechanosensory processes important to tissue homeostasis. BioEssays 30:457–469, 2008. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. (shrink)

INTRODUCTION The title of this book is inspired by Jacques Derrida and the title of one of his works, The Margins of Philosophy. This work introduced me to ...

Dans la deuxième moitié des années 1980 s’est développée, dans l’ensemble du champ de la culture, une véritable esthétique de la bêtise. Quelques jeunes critiques d’art se sont alors emparés du phénomène et ont tenté de le théoriser, entre 1994 et 1998, dans les revues les plus lues de l’époque : Flash Art International, Artpress, Frieze. L’étude de ce corpus d’articles (signés par Joshua Decter, Éric Troncy, Jon Savage, Andrew Hulktrans et Jean-Yves Jouannais) témoigne à la fois des mutations de (...) la critique d’art de l’époque et de l’enjeu que représente alors l’art délibérément bête. On remarquera que la critique d’art se fait alors critique culturelle : elle regarde peu les œuvres, réduites au statut d’illustrations et d’arguments visuels. On s’interrogera également sur la place que les revues d’art contemporain ont accordée à la culture populaire médiatique la plus régressive du temps. Beavis & Butt-Head, Melrose Place ou encore Alerte à Malibu ont été ainsi disséqués dans les colonnes d’ Artforum ou de Flash Art. Alors que les œuvres d’art estampillées « art contemporain » donnaient lieu à des analyses étonnamment sommaires, ce sont les séries télévisées et les dessins animés qui ont conduit aux analyses les plus stimulantes. Elles l’ont fait en recourant au paradigme de la méta-criticalité cher au modernisme, conférant aux œuvres les plus régressives le statut d’image spéculaire, à la fois duplice et critique, de la culture de la bêtise qui les générait. Pointe alors le paradoxe suivant : alternant entre l’enthousiasme forcené et la déploration, la critique d’art des années 1990 a intellectualisé l’anti-intellectualisme le plus radical. (shrink)

The Orpheus Institute celebrates 20 years of artistic research in music Artistic research has come of age, and with it the Orpheus Institute. Founded twenty years ago, the Institute’s purpose from the start has been to pursue research through the practice of musicians. The Orpheus Institute is of the same generation as the field it was established to explore. Like many young adults, artistic research and its structures are still constructing their identity within a wider world. How have they developed? (...) How will they mature? How can they negotiate relationships with institutions, disciplines, and bodies of theory and yet retain the essence of their work—the critical perspective of the artist? In the last two decades there have been major changes in the dynamics and structures of culture, its institutions and constituencies. How can artistic research maintain a productive dialectic between its potential status as a discipline and its core as radical practice? These and related questions are the threads woven through this collection of essays and assessments by present and past members of the Orpheus community—researchers, scholars, administrators, advisors. Together and separately they weave a tapestry of past accomplishments, current research, and future perspectives. They celebrate the twentieth anniversary of Orpheus not with congratulations but with challenges and questions—a job for research, a job for the Institute, a job for the future. The wide range of contributors to this volume includes practitioner-researchers, theorists, and academic leaders from institutions at the forefront of artistic research in music. Contributors Tom Beghin (Orpheus Institute, Ghent), Paulo de Assis (Orpheus Institute, Ghent), Leonella Grasso Caprioli (Conservatorio di Vicenza), Jonathan Impett (Orpheus Institute, Ghent), Esa Kirkkopelto (University of the Arts, Helsinki), Kari Kurkela (University of the Arts, Helsinki), Susan Melrose (Middlesex University, London), Stefan Östersjö (Orpheus Institute, Ghent), Gertrud Sandqvist (Malmö Art Academy), Huib Schippers, Vanessa Tomlinson, Paul Draper (Queensland Conservatorium Research Centre, Griffith University), Luk Vaes (Orpheus Institute, Ghent), Janneke Wesseling/ Kitty Zijlmans (Leiden University). (shrink)