Refine
Document Type
- Article (2)
Language
- English (2) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (2) (remove)
Keywords
- Terminologie (2) (remove)
The Soviet Union is remembered as a lab for socioeconomic changes on larges scales and environmental catastrophes: the Chernobyl disaster, the Aral Sea tragedy, and ecocide. However, little is known about the groundbreaking concepts and theories of Russian and early Soviet science which laid the foundation for systemic ecological thinking, environmental consciousness for nature conservation, and corresponding initiatives of the revolutionary years after 1917. The isolation of Eastern Europe that came as a result of Stalinism and the Cold War led to Soviet science developing its own scientific approaches and terminology during the 20th century. This does not only include ideological constructions and practices such as the pseudo-scientific Lysenkoism which outlawed genetics and led to disastrous effects on agriculture, the people, and the scientific community. Soviet science has also managed to continue and unfold the new concepts and interdisciplinary dynamics of the ecological turn on the threshold of the 20th century, a development which, at that time, was only sporadically noted in the West. In the context of its thematic focus on Eastern European ecological terminology, this issue discusses a selection of these concepts.
Although Walter Benjamin was never timid when it came to writing, one practice he consistently avoided was that of creating neologisms. It is therefore with all the more reluctance that I find myself compelled to resort to something similar, in order to sum up a motif that has imposed itself over the years in my reading of Benjamin. What is involved is, to be sure, not exactly a neologism, since it does not involve the creation of a new word, but rather the highlighting of a word-part, a suffix (eine Nachsilbe). In English, to be sure, this suffix, when spoken, is indistinguishable from a word: what distinguishes it from a word is not audible, but only legible: a hyphen, marking a separation that is also a joining, a 'Bindestrich' that does not bind it to anything in particular and yet that requires it to be bound to something else. The suffix in question thus sounds deceptively familiar, since it coincides, audibly, with the word "abilities". However, unlike that word, its first letter - which purely by accident happens to be the first letter of the alphabet--is preceded by a dash. When written in isolation, this gives it a somewhat bizarre appearance, to be sure, since suffixes are not usually encountered separately from the words they modify. But this bizarre appearance pales when compared to its German 'original'. If the book of essays to be published in English under the title, "Benjamin’s -abilities," is ever translated into German - "back" into German I was tempted to write, since German here is of course the language in which Benjamin wrote and in which I generally read him - then its title, were it to be entirely faithful to the English, would indeed have to involve the creation of a neologism. For translated back into German, the German title would require its readers to "read, what was never written", namely: "Benjamins -barkeiten" (written, "Bindestrich- b--kleingeschrieben").