长期以来欧洲的官僚保密和知识监管:混乱、疏忽、表现和监管

IF 0.4 1区 历史学 Q3 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Esther Liberman Cuenca, A. Siddiqi
{"title":"长期以来欧洲的官僚保密和知识监管:混乱、疏忽、表现和监管","authors":"Esther Liberman Cuenca, A. Siddiqi","doi":"10.1017/S0268416023000061","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In his now-classic mediation on the sociology of secrecy, Georg Simmel cautioned that while ‘human interaction is conditioned by the capacity to speak, it is [also] shaped by the capacity to be silent’.1 As historians, we are trained to see what is present, what is material, and what has effect. Investigating absence, on the other hand, as rewarding as it can be when we are able to reconstruct the seemingly unknowable, can lead us astray with speculative banalities or even counter-factual histories. Yet, as one manifestation of absence in society – in this case, the absence of knowledge – secrecy has had a fundamental place in the constitution, shaping, and functioning of the premodern and modern worlds. It has operated in many registers and appeared in many forms, such as censorship, coded language, classification regimes, and in oaths promising secrecy. All these modes in which we find practices related to secrecy operated within bureaucracies where the regulation of knowledge was either explicitly or implicitly part of their functioning. In looking at manifestations of absences – in particular, practices designed to regulate and then render knowledge absent – bureaucracies represent an emblematic and instructive site to explore questions on the co-constitution of power and knowledge.2","PeriodicalId":45309,"journal":{"name":"Continuity and Change","volume":"38 1","pages":"1 - 8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bureaucratic secrecy and the regulation of knowledge in Europe over the longue durée: Obfuscation, omission, performance, and policing\",\"authors\":\"Esther Liberman Cuenca, A. Siddiqi\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S0268416023000061\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In his now-classic mediation on the sociology of secrecy, Georg Simmel cautioned that while ‘human interaction is conditioned by the capacity to speak, it is [also] shaped by the capacity to be silent’.1 As historians, we are trained to see what is present, what is material, and what has effect. Investigating absence, on the other hand, as rewarding as it can be when we are able to reconstruct the seemingly unknowable, can lead us astray with speculative banalities or even counter-factual histories. Yet, as one manifestation of absence in society – in this case, the absence of knowledge – secrecy has had a fundamental place in the constitution, shaping, and functioning of the premodern and modern worlds. It has operated in many registers and appeared in many forms, such as censorship, coded language, classification regimes, and in oaths promising secrecy. All these modes in which we find practices related to secrecy operated within bureaucracies where the regulation of knowledge was either explicitly or implicitly part of their functioning. In looking at manifestations of absences – in particular, practices designed to regulate and then render knowledge absent – bureaucracies represent an emblematic and instructive site to explore questions on the co-constitution of power and knowledge.2\",\"PeriodicalId\":45309,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Continuity and Change\",\"volume\":\"38 1\",\"pages\":\"1 - 8\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Continuity and Change\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0268416023000061\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Continuity and Change","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0268416023000061","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

Georg Simmel在其关于保密社会学的经典调解中警告说,虽然“人类互动受说话能力的制约,但它也受沉默能力的影响”。1作为历史学家,我们接受的训练是看到什么是存在的,什么是物质的,什么有效果。另一方面,当我们能够重建看似不可知的东西时,调查缺席是有回报的,这可能会让我们误入歧途,陷入投机的平庸甚至反事实的历史。然而,作为社会缺席的一种表现——在这种情况下,就是知识的缺席——保密在前现代和现代世界的构成、塑造和运作中占有根本地位。它在许多登记册中运作,并以多种形式出现,如审查、编码语言、分类制度和承诺保密的誓言。我们发现,在所有这些模式中,与保密有关的做法都是在官僚机构中运作的,在官僚机构的运作中,对知识的监管要么是明确的,要么是隐含的。在观察缺席的表现形式时,特别是旨在规范并使知识缺席的做法,官僚机构代表了一个探索权力和知识共同构成问题的象征性和指导性场所。2
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Bureaucratic secrecy and the regulation of knowledge in Europe over the longue durée: Obfuscation, omission, performance, and policing
In his now-classic mediation on the sociology of secrecy, Georg Simmel cautioned that while ‘human interaction is conditioned by the capacity to speak, it is [also] shaped by the capacity to be silent’.1 As historians, we are trained to see what is present, what is material, and what has effect. Investigating absence, on the other hand, as rewarding as it can be when we are able to reconstruct the seemingly unknowable, can lead us astray with speculative banalities or even counter-factual histories. Yet, as one manifestation of absence in society – in this case, the absence of knowledge – secrecy has had a fundamental place in the constitution, shaping, and functioning of the premodern and modern worlds. It has operated in many registers and appeared in many forms, such as censorship, coded language, classification regimes, and in oaths promising secrecy. All these modes in which we find practices related to secrecy operated within bureaucracies where the regulation of knowledge was either explicitly or implicitly part of their functioning. In looking at manifestations of absences – in particular, practices designed to regulate and then render knowledge absent – bureaucracies represent an emblematic and instructive site to explore questions on the co-constitution of power and knowledge.2
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Continuity and Change
Continuity and Change SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
期刊介绍: Continuity and Change aims to define a field of historical sociology concerned with long-term continuities and discontinuities in the structures of past societies. Emphasis is upon studies whose agenda or methodology combines elements from traditional fields such as history, sociology, law, demography, economics or anthropology, or ranges freely between them. There is a strong commitment to comparative studies over a broad range of cultures and time spans.
×
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