Care, Discipline, and the Politics of Visibility in Allied Surgical Histories, 1870-1945.

IF 3.2 4区 医学 Q1 NURSING
Nursing Inquiry Pub Date : 2026-04-01 DOI:10.1111/nin.70101
Jennifer Dunn
{"title":"Care, Discipline, and the Politics of Visibility in Allied Surgical Histories, 1870-1945.","authors":"Jennifer Dunn","doi":"10.1111/nin.70101","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Allied operating theaters between 1870 and 1945 were sites of surgical innovation and military urgency. This study argues that they functioned as infrastructures of power. It reconceptualizes the operating theater as an ideological formation where authority is spatially choreographed, emotional discipline institutionalized, and professional legitimacy unevenly distributed. Advancing three central claims, this inquiry argues that architecture and photographic composition functioned as epistemic practices that produced and reflected hierarchy. Second, it shows that emotional labor operated as institutional governance, regulating comportment, reinforcing hierarchy, and shaping professional recognition. Third, it contends that archival absence constitutes evidence of epistemic exclusion. Hiring policies privileging British birth and Christian affiliation structured access to care roles, while ward placements, military recruitment criteria, and publication networks shaped whose care entered the historical record. Methodologically, this inquiry adopts an intensive, relational narrative approach, triangulating personal narratives, administrative records, and institutional photographs across Canadian, British, American, and Scottish contexts. Treating storytelling as epistemic production, it reads tonal rupture, irony, compression, devotional framing, and strategic silence as evidence of nurses' negotiation of constraint. Foregrounding nurses' testimonies, this study reframes allied surgical history as terrain where space, affect, and archive converge to discipline and differentially recognize care, offering a critical re-reading of surgical modernity and calling for historiographies attentive to the infrastructures that produce visibility, authority, and memory.</p>","PeriodicalId":49727,"journal":{"name":"Nursing Inquiry","volume":"33 2","pages":"e70101"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13061354/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nursing Inquiry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/nin.70101","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Allied operating theaters between 1870 and 1945 were sites of surgical innovation and military urgency. This study argues that they functioned as infrastructures of power. It reconceptualizes the operating theater as an ideological formation where authority is spatially choreographed, emotional discipline institutionalized, and professional legitimacy unevenly distributed. Advancing three central claims, this inquiry argues that architecture and photographic composition functioned as epistemic practices that produced and reflected hierarchy. Second, it shows that emotional labor operated as institutional governance, regulating comportment, reinforcing hierarchy, and shaping professional recognition. Third, it contends that archival absence constitutes evidence of epistemic exclusion. Hiring policies privileging British birth and Christian affiliation structured access to care roles, while ward placements, military recruitment criteria, and publication networks shaped whose care entered the historical record. Methodologically, this inquiry adopts an intensive, relational narrative approach, triangulating personal narratives, administrative records, and institutional photographs across Canadian, British, American, and Scottish contexts. Treating storytelling as epistemic production, it reads tonal rupture, irony, compression, devotional framing, and strategic silence as evidence of nurses' negotiation of constraint. Foregrounding nurses' testimonies, this study reframes allied surgical history as terrain where space, affect, and archive converge to discipline and differentially recognize care, offering a critical re-reading of surgical modernity and calling for historiographies attentive to the infrastructures that produce visibility, authority, and memory.

1870-1945年联合外科史中的护理、纪律和政治能见度。
1870年至1945年间,盟军的手术室是外科创新和军事紧急的场所。本研究认为,它们是权力的基础设施。它将手术室重新定义为一种意识形态形态,其中权威在空间上编排,情感纪律制度化,专业合法性不均匀分布。该研究提出了三个核心主张,认为建筑和摄影构图作为产生和反映等级制度的认知实践。第二,情绪劳动具有制度治理、行为规范、等级强化、职业认知塑造等作用。第三,它认为档案缺失构成了认知排斥的证据。雇佣政策对英国出生和基督教信仰的特权构成了获得护理角色的机会,而病房安置、军队招募标准和出版网络则决定了谁的护理进入了历史记录。在方法上,本研究采用了密集的关系叙事方法,对加拿大、英国、美国和苏格兰背景下的个人叙述、行政记录和机构照片进行了三角测量。它将讲故事视为认知的产物,将音调断裂、反讽、压缩、虔诚的框架和战略性沉默视为护士谈判约束的证据。本研究以护士的证词为背景,将联合外科历史重新定义为空间、影响和档案汇聚到学科和差异化护理的地形,提供了对外科现代性的批判性重新阅读,并呼吁历史学家关注产生可见性、权威和记忆的基础设施。
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
Nursing Inquiry
Nursing Inquiry 医学-护理
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
13.00%
发文量
61
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Nursing Inquiry aims to stimulate examination of nursing''s current and emerging practices, conditions and contexts within an expanding international community of ideas. The journal aspires to excite thinking and stimulate action toward a preferred future for health and healthcare by encouraging critical reflection and lively debate on matters affecting and influenced by nursing from a range of disciplinary angles, scientific perspectives, analytic approaches, social locations and philosophical positions.
×
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
小红书