{"title":"回顾一个地区:加拿大大西洋的历史,2009-2019","authors":"L. Mackinnon","doi":"10.1353/aca.2019.0019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"REGION IS A SLIPPERY IDEA. From its earliest iteration at the turn of the century, David Russell Jack’s magazine Acadiensis concerned itself with the study of the Maritimes from a geographical perspective. With the revival of the journal in 1971, Newfoundland and Labrador were introduced as key areas of interest for scholars of the now-expanded Atlantic region. In the journal’s first essay, entitled “Acadiensis II,” Philip Bucker describes its focus as encompassing “not only the Maritime Provinces and Newfoundland, but also Gaspésia and Maine with further extensions into Central Canada and Northern New England.”1 The impetus for a journal dedicated to this area emerged out of a historiographical suspicion of nationally focused historical narratives that ignored regional concerns and produced a collective antipathy towards the sense, famously expressed by Frank Underhill, that “nothing, of course, ever happens” in the Maritimes.2 The assumption of a coherent Atlantic region that conforms with the boundaries of political geography has also inspired calls for political action. Jack, in the earliest years of the original Acadiensis, was a proponent of Maritime Union.3 Ernie Forbes argued in 1979 that the Maritime Rights Movement, the regional flavour of the social gospel, and working class activism in places like industrial Cape Breton revealed a radical sense of regionalism that emboldened various forms of resistance to structural decline.4 This vision of the Atlantic region has also invigorated calls for political action from more conservative perspectives. A future union of the region’s provinces, whether under a Maritime Union or Atlantic Union model, would – under this line of argument – reduce wasteful inefficiencies that go hand-in-hand with operating three (or four) distinct provinces. Why bother maintaining such","PeriodicalId":36377,"journal":{"name":"Regioni","volume":"126 1","pages":"230 - 240"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Region in Retrospective: The History of Atlantic Canada, 2009-2019\",\"authors\":\"L. Mackinnon\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/aca.2019.0019\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"REGION IS A SLIPPERY IDEA. From its earliest iteration at the turn of the century, David Russell Jack’s magazine Acadiensis concerned itself with the study of the Maritimes from a geographical perspective. With the revival of the journal in 1971, Newfoundland and Labrador were introduced as key areas of interest for scholars of the now-expanded Atlantic region. In the journal’s first essay, entitled “Acadiensis II,” Philip Bucker describes its focus as encompassing “not only the Maritime Provinces and Newfoundland, but also Gaspésia and Maine with further extensions into Central Canada and Northern New England.”1 The impetus for a journal dedicated to this area emerged out of a historiographical suspicion of nationally focused historical narratives that ignored regional concerns and produced a collective antipathy towards the sense, famously expressed by Frank Underhill, that “nothing, of course, ever happens” in the Maritimes.2 The assumption of a coherent Atlantic region that conforms with the boundaries of political geography has also inspired calls for political action. Jack, in the earliest years of the original Acadiensis, was a proponent of Maritime Union.3 Ernie Forbes argued in 1979 that the Maritime Rights Movement, the regional flavour of the social gospel, and working class activism in places like industrial Cape Breton revealed a radical sense of regionalism that emboldened various forms of resistance to structural decline.4 This vision of the Atlantic region has also invigorated calls for political action from more conservative perspectives. A future union of the region’s provinces, whether under a Maritime Union or Atlantic Union model, would – under this line of argument – reduce wasteful inefficiencies that go hand-in-hand with operating three (or four) distinct provinces. Why bother maintaining such\",\"PeriodicalId\":36377,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Regioni\",\"volume\":\"126 1\",\"pages\":\"230 - 240\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-11-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Regioni\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/aca.2019.0019\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Regioni","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/aca.2019.0019","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
区域是一个难以捉摸的概念。大卫·罗素·杰克(David Russell Jack)的杂志《Acadiensis》自世纪之交创刊以来,就从地理角度研究海洋。随着1971年该杂志的复兴,纽芬兰和拉布拉多被介绍为现在扩大的大西洋地区学者感兴趣的关键领域。在期刊的第一篇题为“Acadiensis II”的文章中,Philip Bucker将其重点描述为“不仅包括沿海省份和纽芬兰,还包括加斯帕西亚和缅因州,并进一步扩展到加拿大中部和新英格兰北部”。1这本致力于这一领域的杂志的动力来自于一种史学上的怀疑,即以国家为中心的历史叙述忽视了地区问题,并产生了对弗兰克·昂德希尔(Frank Underhill)著名表达的那种感觉的集体反感,即“当然,什么都不会发生”。2大西洋地区与政治地理边界一致的假设也激发了对政治行动的呼吁。杰克,在最初的阿卡迪ensis的早期,是海事工会的支持者。Ernie Forbes在1979年认为,海事权利运动,社会福音的地方风味,以及像工业布雷顿角这样的地方的工人阶级行动主义,揭示了一种激进的地方主义意识,这种意识鼓励了各种形式的抵抗结构衰退这种对大西洋地区的展望也激发了从更保守的角度要求采取政治行动的呼声。根据这一论点,未来该地区各省的联盟,无论是在海事联盟还是大西洋联盟模式下,都将减少由于运营三个(或四个)不同省份而导致的浪费和效率低下。为什么要维护这些呢?
A Region in Retrospective: The History of Atlantic Canada, 2009-2019
REGION IS A SLIPPERY IDEA. From its earliest iteration at the turn of the century, David Russell Jack’s magazine Acadiensis concerned itself with the study of the Maritimes from a geographical perspective. With the revival of the journal in 1971, Newfoundland and Labrador were introduced as key areas of interest for scholars of the now-expanded Atlantic region. In the journal’s first essay, entitled “Acadiensis II,” Philip Bucker describes its focus as encompassing “not only the Maritime Provinces and Newfoundland, but also Gaspésia and Maine with further extensions into Central Canada and Northern New England.”1 The impetus for a journal dedicated to this area emerged out of a historiographical suspicion of nationally focused historical narratives that ignored regional concerns and produced a collective antipathy towards the sense, famously expressed by Frank Underhill, that “nothing, of course, ever happens” in the Maritimes.2 The assumption of a coherent Atlantic region that conforms with the boundaries of political geography has also inspired calls for political action. Jack, in the earliest years of the original Acadiensis, was a proponent of Maritime Union.3 Ernie Forbes argued in 1979 that the Maritime Rights Movement, the regional flavour of the social gospel, and working class activism in places like industrial Cape Breton revealed a radical sense of regionalism that emboldened various forms of resistance to structural decline.4 This vision of the Atlantic region has also invigorated calls for political action from more conservative perspectives. A future union of the region’s provinces, whether under a Maritime Union or Atlantic Union model, would – under this line of argument – reduce wasteful inefficiencies that go hand-in-hand with operating three (or four) distinct provinces. Why bother maintaining such