Here are my questions for class on Tuesday, February 9:
Historiography: Hoganson says that one of the goals of this book is to start from the beginning of this period and reconstruct the narrative of the Spanish-American and Philippine-American wars with gender as a basic building block for understanding why these conflicts took place (p. 13). Does she succeed in convincing the reader that the need to prove masculinity domestically and internationally is what caused these two conflicts and if so, is this perspective something completely new to the scholorship regarding these conflicts?
History question: After reading this book, are gendered motives the foundation for foreign policy decisions during this time period or should they just be considered a part of the "existing framework"? Hoganson wants to place gender as the most simplistic and tidy explanation for why these conflicts took place. Do gendered motives stand above all other reasons for this policy or are gendered motives just a part of the history? Does Hoganson make too big of a deal regarding the role of gender?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment