Being captured by queer kinship: Margaret Lowenfeld and Margaret Mead.

IF 0.5 2区 历史学 Q2 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
History of the Human Sciences Pub Date : 2025-04-10 eCollection Date: 2025-07-01 DOI:10.1177/09526951251328114
Katherine A Hubbard
{"title":"Being captured by queer kinship: Margaret Lowenfeld and Margaret Mead.","authors":"Katherine A Hubbard","doi":"10.1177/09526951251328114","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Margaret Lowenfeld (1890-1973) and Margaret Mead (1901-78) met in 1948. This eventful first meeting in London was the start of a fascinating working friendship, albeit a somewhat uneven one. The two women share particular similarities across their careers, including their positions as women in their respective fields of psychology and anthropology, though Mead was notably more renowned. They also both had substantial and long-lasting relationships with other women. In this article, I draw primarily upon archival resources of interviews with both Mead and Rhoda Métraux conducted about Lowenfeld following her death. In doing so I argue how such material not only reveals the type of relationship between Lowenfeld and Mead, but also raises questions about how lesbian relationships are historically understood. In recognising the queer worlds of these women, it is possible to extend historical thinking about the lesbian relationships they had. Crucially, it also demonstrates what a lesbian feminist historical approach uniquely provides. In addition to this, by likewise recognising myself as a queer feminist, it is possible to reveal the reflexive and emotional queer kinship which extends between historian and subject.</p>","PeriodicalId":50403,"journal":{"name":"History of the Human Sciences","volume":"38 3-4","pages":"239-259"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12416825/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"History of the Human Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09526951251328114","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Margaret Lowenfeld (1890-1973) and Margaret Mead (1901-78) met in 1948. This eventful first meeting in London was the start of a fascinating working friendship, albeit a somewhat uneven one. The two women share particular similarities across their careers, including their positions as women in their respective fields of psychology and anthropology, though Mead was notably more renowned. They also both had substantial and long-lasting relationships with other women. In this article, I draw primarily upon archival resources of interviews with both Mead and Rhoda Métraux conducted about Lowenfeld following her death. In doing so I argue how such material not only reveals the type of relationship between Lowenfeld and Mead, but also raises questions about how lesbian relationships are historically understood. In recognising the queer worlds of these women, it is possible to extend historical thinking about the lesbian relationships they had. Crucially, it also demonstrates what a lesbian feminist historical approach uniquely provides. In addition to this, by likewise recognising myself as a queer feminist, it is possible to reveal the reflexive and emotional queer kinship which extends between historian and subject.

被奇怪的亲属关系俘获:玛格丽特·洛温菲尔德和玛格丽特·米德。
玛格丽特·洛温菲尔德(1890-1973)和玛格丽特·米德(1901-78)于1948年相识。在伦敦举行的第一次多事的会面,是一段令人着迷的工作友谊的开始,尽管这种友谊有些不平衡。这两位女性在她们的职业生涯中有着特别的相似之处,包括她们在各自的心理学和人类学领域中作为女性的地位,尽管米德的名气要大得多。他们也都与其他女性有着稳固而持久的关系。在这篇文章中,我主要利用了米德和罗达·姆萨特罗在洛温菲尔德去世后对她进行的采访的档案资源。在这样做的过程中,我认为这些材料不仅揭示了洛温菲尔德和米德之间的关系类型,而且还提出了关于历史上如何理解女同性恋关系的问题。认识到这些女性的酷儿世界,就有可能扩展对她们所拥有的女同性恋关系的历史思考。至关重要的是,它还展示了女同性恋女权主义历史研究的独特之处。除此之外,通过同样地承认自己是一个酷儿女权主义者,有可能揭示历史学家和主体之间的反身性和情感上的酷儿亲属关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
History of the Human Sciences
History of the Human Sciences 综合性期刊-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
11.10%
发文量
31
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: History of the Human Sciences aims to expand our understanding of the human world through a broad interdisciplinary approach. The journal will bring you critical articles from sociology, psychology, anthropology and politics, and link their interests with those of philosophy, literary criticism, art history, linguistics, psychoanalysis, aesthetics and law.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信