Look Here: On the Pleasures of Observing the City

IF 0.2 3区 历史学 Q4 AREA STUDIES
Matthew Beaumont
{"title":"Look Here: On the Pleasures of Observing the City","authors":"Matthew Beaumont","doi":"10.1080/03058034.2022.2121904","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"in the history of London’s voting behaviour. This leads to much repetition, without adding to clarity. I would have found it more useful if Tichelar had reversed this order and started out with a short section discussing the key variables impinging on voter behaviour and how they are shaped within the distinctive political geography of London. Indeed, more on the latter would have been particularly helpful. It would then have been easier to pick out the interplay between these factors in the analysis of the historical processes of electoral change. Instead, while a sense of the overall trajectory of Labour voting in the capital is conveyed, the detail of why Labour was more successful in some locales at different times than in others is not always so apparent. Even the case studies, broken up as they are across the thematic chapters, do not fully help to address this issue. This book would also have benefited from closer proofreading. Most books contain a few typographic errors, but this has more than its fair share. There are also too many minor factual inaccuracies, such as the date of the Poplar Rates Rebellion (196), for comfort. These factors undermine the value of this work. A good analysis of Labour’s differential success in the capital is certainly needed, if only to explain why it has been able to overcome apparent disadvantages such as the low trade union density in London. I just wish I could give this attempt to provide such an analysis a more unqualified endorsement.","PeriodicalId":43904,"journal":{"name":"London Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"London Journal","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03058034.2022.2121904","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

in the history of London’s voting behaviour. This leads to much repetition, without adding to clarity. I would have found it more useful if Tichelar had reversed this order and started out with a short section discussing the key variables impinging on voter behaviour and how they are shaped within the distinctive political geography of London. Indeed, more on the latter would have been particularly helpful. It would then have been easier to pick out the interplay between these factors in the analysis of the historical processes of electoral change. Instead, while a sense of the overall trajectory of Labour voting in the capital is conveyed, the detail of why Labour was more successful in some locales at different times than in others is not always so apparent. Even the case studies, broken up as they are across the thematic chapters, do not fully help to address this issue. This book would also have benefited from closer proofreading. Most books contain a few typographic errors, but this has more than its fair share. There are also too many minor factual inaccuracies, such as the date of the Poplar Rates Rebellion (196), for comfort. These factors undermine the value of this work. A good analysis of Labour’s differential success in the capital is certainly needed, if only to explain why it has been able to overcome apparent disadvantages such as the low trade union density in London. I just wish I could give this attempt to provide such an analysis a more unqualified endorsement.
看这里:观察城市的乐趣
在伦敦投票行为的历史上。这导致了很多重复,而没有增加清晰度。如果蒂切拉改变了这一顺序,以一小段讨论影响选民行为的关键变量,以及这些变量是如何在伦敦独特的政治地理中形成的,我会发现这会更有用。事实上,对后者进行更多的研究会特别有帮助。这样,在分析选举变化的历史过程时,就更容易找出这些因素之间的相互作用。相反,尽管传达了工党在首都投票的总体轨迹,但工党在不同时期在某些地区比在其他地区更成功的细节并不总是那么明显。即使是跨主题章节进行的案例研究,也无助于解决这个问题。这本书也将受益于更密切的校对。大多数书都有一些印刷错误,但这超出了它的公平份额。还有太多小的事实不准确,比如白杨树起义的日期(196年),令人不安。这些因素削弱了这项工作的价值。当然,有必要对工党在首都的不同成功进行很好的分析,哪怕只是为了解释为什么工党能够克服明显的劣势,比如伦敦工会密度低。我只是希望我能对这种提供这种分析的尝试给予更无保留的支持。
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
London Journal
London Journal Multiple-
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
20.00%
发文量
27
期刊介绍: The scope of The London Journal is broad, embracing all aspects of metropolitan society past and present, including comparative studies. The Journal is multi-disciplinary and is intended to interest all concerned with the understanding and enrichment of London and Londoners: historians, geographers, economists, sociologists, social workers, political scientists, planners, educationalist, archaeologists, conservationists, architects, and all those taking an interest in the fine and performing arts, the natural environment and in commentaries on metropolitan life in fiction as in fact
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信