Acasă Articole RTR Women Members of the Bucharest Sociological School as Researchers and Authors: A...

Women Members of the Bucharest Sociological School as Researchers and Authors: A Synthetic Outlook

39
Rezumat

Women Members of the Bucharest Sociological School as Researchers and Authors:
a Synthetic Outlook

In the anthology “These second-class characters”. Publications by women members of the Bucharest Sociological School, Theodora-Eliza Văcărescu initiates the exploration of the history of Romanian sociology by considering the gender issue. Her introductory study provides convincing arguments that, with a few exceptions, women scientists who were members of the Bucharest Sociological School (BSS) have been marginalized both by the leaders of the School and by posterity. Nevertheless, the following article does not employ a gender perspective, suggesting instead to reconsider women’s contributions as part of the valuable scientific heritage of BSS on one side and in a larger frame of feminine epistemology on the other side.
To this respect, the article reviews the intellectual identity of the BSS in the light of recent critical contributions which underline the uniqueness of Gusti’s scientific and institutional enterprise in a particular historical context dominated by the effort to consolidate Romania’s national construction after the unification in 1918. Further, the scientific contributions of women members of the BSS are examined by taking into consideration their adherence to feminist ideology and to the “research and action” ideology of Gusti’s School and also the intrinsic quality of the content and form of a few articles signed by few representative authors, such as Ştefania Cristescu, Dochia Ioanovici or Paula Herseni. In the last section of the article, the idea of difference between feminine and masculine cognitive modes is explored, identifying samples of a possible feminine epistemology in the varied materials included in the anthology edited by Theodora-Eliza Văcărescu.

Keywords: Bucharest Sociological School, sociological monograph, qualitative research, women sociologists, feminine epistemology

Bibliografie

Anderson, Elizabeth. “Feminist Epistemology and Philosophy of Science.” In Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Edited by Edward N. Zalta, 2001.
Retrieved on 01.03.2019 at https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminism-epistemology/.
Bucur, Bogdan. “The Bucharest School of Sociology and the Failure of the Interwar Community Development Project.” In Bulletin of the Transilvania University of Braşov, Series VII: Social Sciences, Law. Vol. 6 (56), No. 2 (2013): 93-102.
Diaconu, Marin. Şcoala sociologică a lui Dimitrie Gusti. Documentar sociologic. Vol. I (1880-1933) [The Sociological School of Dimitrie Gusti. Sociological Documents]. Bucharest: Eminescu, 2000.
Fruntelată, Ioana. “Etnologia românească actuală: tradiții, teme, practici disciplinare” [Contemporary Romanian Ethnology: Traditions, Themes, Professional Practices]. In Romanian Studies Today, edited by Mircea Vasilescu and Magda Răduţă, 16-29. Bucharest: University of Bucharest Press, 2017.
Golopenţia, Sanda. “The Sociological School of Bucharest between its Heyday and Suppression.” In Revista română de sociologie, no. 5–6 (2014): 379–404.
Grant, Linda, Marybeth Stalp, and Kathryn B. Ward. “Women’s Sociological Research and Writing in the AJS in the pre-World War II Era.” The American Sociologist, no. 33 (September 2002).
DOI: 10.1007/s12108-002-1012-4.
Momoc, Antonio. “Engineering a Good Society. The Sociological School of Bucharest National Project for Building Romania.” European Journal of Science and Theology, Vol.9, Supplement 2 (June 2013): 95-104.
Retrieved on 19.12.2018 at http://www.cooperativag.ro/engineering-good-society-sociological-school-bucharest-national-project-building-romania/
Mucha, Janusz. “Institutionalization of Sociology.” Polish Sociological Review, no. 123 (1998): 235-46.
Retrieved on 04.06.2019 at http://www.jstor.org/stable/41274681.
Pena, Mihaela, Emil Ţîrcomnicu, Laura Jiga-Iliescu, and Nicolae Teodoreanu. “Şcoala sociologică” [The Sociological School]. In Etnologie românească. I. Folcloristică şi etnomuzicologie [Romanian Ethnology. Folkloristics and Ethnomusicology], Edited by Sabina Ispas and Nicoleta Coatu, 262-300. Bucharest: Romanian Academy Press, 2006.
Puşcaş, Vasile. “Philip E. Mosely şi Şcoala sociologică a lui Dimitrie Gusti” [Philip E. Mosely and the Sociological School of Dimitrie Gusti]. In Anuarul Institutului de Istorie George Bariţiu din Cluj-Napoca [Yearbook of the Institute of History George Bariţiu of Cluj-Napoca], volume LIII (2014): 97-198.
Rostás, Zoltán. The Bucharest School of Sociology. East Central Europe, Vol. 27, no. 2, (2000).
Retrieved on 19.12.2018 at http://www.cooperativag.ro/the-bucharest-school-of-sociology/.
Rostás, Zoltán. Sala luminoasă. Primii monografişti ai Şcolii gustiene [The Bright Hall. First monographists of Gusti’s School]. Bucharest: Paideia, 2003.
Schumaker, Lynette. “A Tent with a View: Colonial Officers, Anthropologists, and the Making of the Field in Northern Rhodesia, 1937-1960.” Osiris, 2nd Series, Vol. 11, Science in the Field (1996) 237-258.
Retrieved on 28.03.2011 at http://www.jstor.org/stable/301934.
Văcărescu, Theodora-Eliza (ed.). „Personajele acestea de a doua mână” – Din publicaţiile membrelor Şcolii Sociologice de la Bucureşti [“These Second-Class Characters.” Publications by Women Members of the Bucharest Sociological School]. Preface by Zoltán Rostás. Bucharest: Eikon, 2018.

DISTRIBUIȚI