Crises, Methods, and Knowledge Production

Session Submission Type: Panel Session

Abstract

How do crises and catastrophes shape the work we do? What do periods of instability and contest suggest for the methods of inquiry we use and the knowledge we produce? The papers on this panel engage these questions in two important ways.

First, these scholars focus on times of crisis and change in their work. Their research raises questions of how best to understand catastrophe. Are some methods of inquiry more amenable to studying uncertainty and instability? Does investigating crises require searching for more varied, complex evidence for documentation? How do researchers grapple with inconsistency or incoherence among their sources?

Second, we live during times of crisis. The recent past has presented us with catastrophes emanating from October 7th, wars, pandemics, authoritarian regimes, exile, famine, and threats to academic freedom. Alongside these public catastrophes, many of us also live with less visible personal crises—human rights abuses, illness, economic insecurity to name a few. Does grappling with the meanings of crises suggest revisions to the focus of our scholarship, the evidence we cite, and the analyses we develop?

Attention to catastrophes stands in contrast to more traditional epistemologies. Conventional social science training urges value neutrality and objectivity. Comparably, training in history cautions against presentism in research. These traditions ignore emotions and affect as well as social justice—matters these papers engage.

The papers on this panel vary in (inter)disciplinary commitments and practices. Irina Nicorici focuses on personal sentiments and feelings, and traces how subjective knowledge informs archival knowledge of the Holocaust in Romania. Louisa McClintock analyzes postwar trial testimonies in Lublin and traces how intimacy, trust, and familiarity—i.e., social distance shaped violence and denunciation against Jews. Laurie Marhoefer reflects on the impact of October 7th as well as growing anti-transgender legislation on their research on trans and intersex people living in Berlin between 1918 and 1945. While their presentations span a wide terrain, each scholar aims to understand how crisis and change can best be understood and what wisdom the knowledge they produce, stands to offer the field of Jewish studies.

Sub Unit

• Interdisciplinary Approaches

Cosponsor

• Holocaust Studies

Chair

• Judith Gerson, Rutgers University

Individual Presentations

• An Autoethnography of Feelings and Crises - Irina Nicorici

• Social Distance and the Holocaust: A New Approach - Louisa M McClintock

• Crisis and Transgender Jewish History - Laurie Marhoefer, Stroum Center for Jewish Studies, University of Washington

Respondent

• Judith Gerson, Rutgers University

Zoom Host

• Zoom Host 03