Le volume réunit les Actes du colloque de Bucarest ayant eu pour thème la notion de Tradition dans le judaïsme (27-28 octobre 2006). Ce choix fédérateur a été également lesté d’un dé? théorique marquant l’originalité de ce colloque : la valorisation des outils de l’anthropologie culturelle à la française et; plus particulièrement; la mise à l’épreuve du concept de bricolage par rapport à celui d’herméneutique. Dans cette perspective; l’acception du terme Tradition est empruntée à l’anthropologie sociale. Cette acception touche à la dé?nition de l’identité; tout en mettant l’accent sur les aspects d’héritage; d’habitus et de mémoire. Les contributions réunies ici traitent entre autres de la distinction entre trou de mémoire et oubli ou entre ré/invention et bricolage de la Tradition. De même; on s’interroge sur le corps comme support de la mémoire collective dans une Tradition dite « du livre ». En?n; nombre d’auteurs examinent les rapports du judaïsme à la modernité; à la sécularisation et à l’Etat; réalités qui sont autant de « matières à bricoler ». L’ouvrage rassemble 10 contributions en français et 6 en anglais.
#1636656 in Books 2016-01-30Original language:EnglishPDF # 1 8.50 x .30 x 5.51l; .37 #File Name: 1943737258126 pages
Review
1 of 2 people found the following review helpful. Too biased to take very seriouslyBy UpstateGentI was interested in learning more about Forrest in regard to his KKK involvement and the Fort Pillow controversy. The book addressed this but was written from a very biased Southern perspective. He used fairly limited historical source materials multiple times to reinforce his point; citing hundreds of historical rebuttals to Yankee propaganda; when in fact he used about two dozen. I happen to agree with his conclusions regarding the KKK and Fort Pillow but was turned off by his blatant anti Northern bias. He whitewashes the entire Southern slavery era by pointing out Northern transgressions; using this; by contrast to present a benign Southern approach to slavery. In addition he seems to think the entire written history of the era is some sort of conspiracy against the South. As a Southern; sympathetic to the South; having studied and written about ancestors actively involved politically and militarily; before; during; and after the war. I have found both accurate and inaccurate information presented by writer from both regions. The slavery period of our history was a dark period and neither side's involvement need not be white washed.3 of 4 people found the following review helpful. THE REAL NATHAN BEDFORD FORRESTBy Jerry CaineIf it is true that the Confederate battle flag is THE most politically incorrect symbol in the country now; then it would follow that the personification of that symbol would be; by popular exclaim; none other than Nathan Bedford Forrest. Two main arguments against him seem to be [1] that he started the KKK and [2] presided over the slaughter of black Union soldiers at the battle of Fort Pillow during what is popularly called the Civil War. This new book by Lochlainn Seabrook rejects and successfully refutes both charges in a clear and simple way that even Al Sharpton would be able to understand. Neither charge is true and correct. "Nathan Bedford Forrest and African-Americans" does set the record straight for it's readers on these and other points of wider context of the life of a great American. It is a simple objective fact of history that General Forrest was only invited to associate with the KKK after it had already been organized by others...contrary to that line in the "Forrest Gump" movie. The author also brings out that the post-war reconstruction KKK had nothing whatsoever to do with the modern version utilizing the same name. The original version only lasted a few years and was disbanded [not started] by Forrest. It is also difficult to see how the original could be labeled a racist organization for the simple reason there was actually an all-black chapter of it at the time. Also; the battle of Fort Pillow is probably one of the most misunderstood battle of the entire war. Were there black Union deaths at the battle? Yes. Did they follow directions to properly surrender? No. Did they totally disarm themselves of all their weaponry? No. Did some continue to fire back at General Forrest's men even among others trying to surrender...adding to the battlefield confusion? Yes. Did the Union officers supposedly in charge there allow a good number of their own men to get drunk the previous night adding to their impairment of judgement? Yes. One of General Forrest's defenders was one who could hardly be called a Southern apologist: General Sherman who actually sided with Forrest. This is NEVER presented in standard history books. This is why this brief treatment of the record is so valuable. It sets the record straight in a clear and concise manner. The book is highly recommended by myself as a high school history teacher. In the interest of diversity of opinion it should be given a wide readership. The author notes at the end that "He was; as his friends; servants; and soldiers knew him; 'a tender-hearted; kindly man who would go out of his way to assist anyone; whatever their complexion. Yes; that would include even Al Sharpton!2 of 3 people found the following review helpful. Five StarsBy Frank D.Great read and sure tells a different story
