Stanford University Press Blog

The Return of Tintin

As a recent review in Publisher’s Weekly put it, “Those who lament the dearth of books about Tintin in English will welcome this translation of a landmark French study, first published in 1984.”  The book The Metamorphoses of Tintin: Or Tintin for Adults by Jean-Marie Apostolidès (translated by Jocelyn Hay) revives the memory of Tintin in an analysis of the complex cartoon character.

    Apostolidès examines the evolution of the character from political, social, and psychological standpoints. The book recounts Tintin’s famous adventures, all the while telling the reader how each one changed and developed Tintin into the character he became. From a superhero to an emotional and humanistic character, this tale of metamorphosis not only brings Tintin back to the literary scene but also into the latest English translation of this versatile character.

Punishment - A Self-Conscious Act?

I think that most of us can agree that punishment is often the most effective way to enforce certain rules. We associate punishment with what is right and good – it is not a selfish act, but a necessary one.  What if someone told you there are other motives to punishing a person? In a recent article in the Science Daily, Christine Horne explains that “We punish because we care what people think of us.”

In her book The Rewards of Punishment: A Relational Theory of Norm Enforcement, Horne develops her theory further, finding that the more cohesive the group is, the more likely that bad behavior will be punished.

How can it be that punishment becomes an act of selfish desires? Isn’t punishing a bad act simply the right thing to do? According to Horne, depending on the situation you’re in and the people you’re with you may decide to punish someone, or you may not - even if you think what they’re doing is wrong. For example, you may think that it’s proper to scold someone for using obscene language; but if you’re trying to impress a crowd that tends to use harsher language, you might keep the scolding to yourself.

This is a concept, perhaps, that we don’t all think of right away when talking about punishment. Most would say that punishment is about doing the right thing. Horne says that we punish to create our own self-image. So the next time you impart punishment, think about it: Is it because it’s the right thing to do? Or because it makes you look good?

Love Letters Spell out a Lifetime

The love and life of Robinson Jeffers, one of the most prominent American poets of the 20th century, is recorded in time by the newly published love letters between him and his eventual wife, Una. The volume, The Collected Letters of Robinson Jeffers, With Selected Letters from Una Jeffers 1890-1930, is the first of three that will chronicle Jeffers’ life. The book is praised and quoted in a recent article by Cynthia Haven of the Stanford Report, “For those who think of Jeffers as the craggy, roughhewn poet of the Pacific Coast, the letters show something of the heart of the man who wrote: ‘I'd sooner, except the penalties, kill a man as a hawk.’”

Of course this is no ordinary biography. The editor of the collection, James Karman, actually calls it an “epistolary autobiography.”  By putting the letters in chronological order, it is almost like hearing about the lives of Robinson and Una from their own minds. This work is evidence of how the poet’s life, love, and work lives on even into the next century.

Innovation helps shape the HP Way

Looking at the histories of big companies, we often contribute their successes to the competent leaders and the loyal employees who follow their direction. But what if defiance could be even more of a breakthrough for a company’s success? In their book, The HP Phenomenon: Innovation and Business Transformation, Charles H. House and Raymond L. Price explain how not following the leader can yield great results for the individual, the leader, and the company. In a recent review in Forbes, George Anders commends House and Price for pointing out many of these sorts of bottom-up instances of success that were possible at HP.

It would seem like bad leadership to allow dissention to continue in your company, and even worse if these ideas that the leader rejects are good ones! As House and Price reveal, it is not bad leadership to create a company that is smart enough to run itself. One of the most intriguing anecdotes in the book is that of Charles House himself. As an HP engineer in the ‘60s, House was set on pursuing a large-screen electrostatic monitor. When he was told, “When I come back in a year, I don’t want to see that product in the lab!” by a superior, he took it as incentive to get the monitor out of the lab – and into production as soon as possible. When the monitor turned out to be a great success, House was awarded the “HP Award for Meritorious Defiance”. 

Who knew that ignoring a direct order from a superior could lead to success for all –profits for the company, awards for the defiant, and a successful product, which always reflects well on the leader. While House and Price’s account is certainly not advocating for complete defiance in business relations, it points out how success can come from the most surprising innovations.  For HP, seeking new methods of business management and surprising the world with new techniques is what helped to create the HP Way. Despite some flaws along the way, the stories of unexpected as well as the intricately planned successes leave House and Price very optimistic about the future of this ground-breaking company.

Are you in need of a transformation? Goldman on Transforming Toxic Leaders

We all encounter problems in the workplace at one time or another: your boss is too hard on you, you don’t get along with your co-workers. But these are minor complaints that most of us learn to deal with. Lately, there have been major concerns coming up about toxicity in the workplace. Alan Goldman, author of Transforming Toxic Leaders, discusses in an interview on Psychjourney Podcasts how “toxic” leaders affect the workplace and how, many times, a transformation of the organization of the system is what can remedy a toxic situation, not just an adjustment of the leader themselves.

Toxic leaders can be described in many ways and often share a set of common traits. These traits not only make them hard to deal with, but often contribute to their success. Narcissism, obsessive compulsive tendencies, attention to technical detail – these are all traits which can make a leader great at his trade, but horrible at creating a functional working environment.

Goldman asserts that while there are cases where a toxic leader would be toxic in any situation, in many cases you can eliminate toxicity by reorganizing the structure of the workplace and putting experts in their rightful places. He uses the example of a surgeon who is a master of the technical aspects of his job but has no communication skills, yells, and makes his co-workers and patients feel scared or uncomfortable. Goldman coached the surgeon and suggested reorganizing the staff team so that the master of the surgical aspects of the profession worked in tandem with a surgeon with personal skills.

Overall, Goldman attributes toxicity in the workplace to individual psychology and staff organization – the latter being infinitely easier to deal with. With these ideas in mind, one might ask if toxicity is a necessary result of becoming a successful leader. Is it possible to become a master without creating a toxic environment? Goldman seems optimistic that non-toxic environments can exist and that even if toxicity enters the workplace, it can be eliminated.

Perhaps the next time you go to work you’ll look around and ask if your work environment is “working.” If not, how can you eliminate toxicity?

Demands for Net Neutrality: What have we been missing?

Most of us like to think that we have control over what we view on the internet, but as recent controversies involving broadband providers and internet search engines suggest -- perhaps we don’t. In an Op-Ed in the Short Stack column of The Washington Post, Dawn Nunziato addresses the issue of protecting free speech in the internet age. Nunziato, author of Virtual Freedom: Net Neutrality and Free Speech in the Internet Age, draws on her knowledge and research of First Amendment violations on the internet to uncover how internet providers and websites are limiting users’ freedom.

Nunziato explains that the FCC is now working toward requiring broadband providers to be neutral parties within internet communications. But why should the FCC have to take such measures?  Aren’t we already free to express and view whatever we want on the internet? After all, that’s what blogs like this one are for.  But according to Nunziato, not everyone is enjoying the same rights.

In both her book and the Op-Ed, Nunziato references occasions where companies like Verizon, Google, and Comcast have limited the actions of certain users. “In 2007, for example, Comcast blocked access to legal peer-to-peer file-sharing applications and then withheld information from its users (and the FCC) about its actions.” How is it that these sorts of violations to our right to free speech have been going on right before our eyes? 

Nunziato asserts, “The FCC and the EU should act now to require that the handful of powerful companies who serve as the gatekeepers for Internet expression fulfill their obligations to the public free of discrimination and censorship to protect our free speech interests in the digital age.” 

So the next time you’re on the internet, ask yourself: Just how much have I been missing?

The Roots of Israel's Obsession with Iran

In an interview with Swati Pandey of Zocalo Public Square, Israeli scholar, Hagai Ram and author of  Iranophobia: The Logic of an Israeli Obsession,  remarks that he became "increasingly disenchanted" with the Israeli ways of understanding Iran, "While there are many good reasons for the Jewish state to be apprehensive of the Islamic republic, I felt there was also a great deal of irrationality involved in that apprehension, and it is the cultural roots of that irrationality I sought to investigate in my book."  Read the full interview here. The book steps back from all-too-common geopolitical analyses to show that Israel's disagreements with Iran are as much a product of shared cultural trajectories and entangled histories as they are strategic concerns and political differences.  In an article in Informed Comment, Ram discusses how Israel has time and again (ab)used the specter of the “Iranian threat” in order to  divert attention from its own oversights,  such as the war crimes associated with its military strike in Gaza earlier in the year, and the continuation of the state-sanctioned apartheid regime in the Palestinian territories.

New Missile Defense: What future will Obama's decision hold?

President Obama’s recent decision to eliminate a missile defense system plan has stirred up quite a controversy in domestic and international politics.  Instead of setting up a limited missile defense system in Poland to intercept potential long-range nuclear missiles from Iran – which, at present, haven’t been developed there – Obama has decided that the US should arrange a shorter range missile interceptor near Iran for the medium range missile threat. Some say that this decision is a concession to Russian complaints that the longer range set-up would provide the U.S. with an opportunity for a first-strike.

In a recent op-ed in the Short Stack column for the Washington Post, Thomas Graham co-author of Preventing Catastrophe: The Use and Misuse of Intelligence in Efforts to Halt the Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction,  gives his opinion on Obama’s decision to change the strategy from the Bush administration’s more aggressive stance on missile defense.  He explains that after a long history of unsuccessful nuclear defense plans, a more realistic plan has now been introduced. Some fear that a new wave of nuclear proliferation could soon develop, leading to more dangerous and paranoid international relations. Graham points out that by changing our missile defense plan, the Obama administration is hoping to “reset” relations with Russia while also defending from the very realistic possibility of Iranian medium-range missiles.  It will be interesting to see how this decision plays out: Will it buy us more cooperation with Russia for future nonproliferation and help us to defend from the very real threat posed by Iran? Or, in terms of defending its NATO allies in Eastern Europe, is it dangerous and unwise move for U.S. foreign policy?

Confronting the Bomb: Can individuals make a difference?

Can ordinary citizens really bring change to international politics? We may think this question applies only to current times when we talk of Gov 2.0 and governments outsourcing ideas from citizens on Twitter. As the nuclear disarmament campaign shows, grassroots movements have had an impact in previous decades as well.

Larry Wittner, author of Confronting the Bomb, A Short History of the World Nuclear Disarmament Movement, provides a brief look at the history of the anti-nuclear movement and how it affected world leaders. In an interview with Marshall Poe of New Books in History, Wittner draws on his book to explain how nuclear disarmament has developed and how it has been affected by public movements. 

Wittner's book includes many interesting quotations from world leaders that evidence just how excited international leaders initially were about the advent of the Bomb. Winston Churchill loved the bomb and saw it as a way to win wars and maintain international influence. Eisenhower viewed the bomb as a positive addition to the U.S. arsenal, saying "My administration looks on nuclear weapons as no different than a bullet." The general consensus among leaders was that bigger and better weapons lead to better defense and therefore a safer environment.                                                         

As Wittner goes on to explain, the public saw nuclear weapons in a different light. From the early 1970's to its height in the early 1980s, an anti-nuclear movement had people all over the world protesting the Bomb. As Marshall Poe himself reminisces, he never thought that his small protests really had a big impact.  However, Wittner explains that the  growing anti-nuclear campaign had a huge influence on world leaders' decisions, from small protests to gatherings of almost 1 million people. At the beginning of Ronald Reagan's term as president, he made clear that  nuclear weapons  were a positive addition to U.S. defense.  But as time went on and as the disarmament campaign grew, the nation watched Reagan make a complete turn around. He began to consider the call for disarmament. Even leaders of other countries began to change the way they viewed nuclear weapons. After 1985, Nikolai Gorbachev said "new thinking" was needed. Gorbachev and Reagan met many times and were able to come to agreements for lessening the nuclear arsenals in their countries.

As leaders began to heed the requests of the public, people of the anti-nuclear movement became comfortable and complacent. The movement has since died down. Toward the late 1990's, the anti-nuclear movement became less prolific.  As a result, nuclear weapons began to increase again. In 1996, a Republican Senate rejected a nuclear test ban treaty, and later, during George W. Bush administration, the President began to pursue the creation of new nuclear weapons. Free from the pressure of the nuclear disarmament campaign, the government is at liberty to pursue nuclear weapons -- but, as Wittner explains, the movement is reviving.

Wittner's book goes into a brief history of the advent of bomb and a more detailed  history of the movement against it. Though the movement has had its ups and downs, Wittner is confident that it is resurging and as history shows, ordinary people can make a big difference.
    

Are you getting Caught in Play?

Why is that we get caught up with stories about celebrities even when they have nothing to do with our lives? Why do we spend hours on video games or reading pulp fiction? The activity temporarily assumed a profound significance and the outside world began to fade. Although we are likely to enjoy these experiences in the realm of entertainment, we rarely think about what effect they might be having on us. Precisely because it is so pervasive, entertainment is difficult to understand and even to talk about. 

Peter Stromberg's Caught In Play: How Entertainment Works on You addresses these issues. A recent review of the book in Publishers Weekly describes it as a meta-narrative about being "caught up" in the entertainment world and finds that "Reading this smart commentary on the grand spectrum of entertainment is an addictive experience, a sharp example of the very phenomenon it illuminates."

Caught in Play looks closely at how we engage entertainment and at the ideas and practices it creates and sustains. Even Recent research in cognitive neuroscience and psychology is beginning to clarify some of this. Our brains, we are discovering, are hard wired to automatically imitate what we observe because of a system of specialized neurons called mirror neurons. When we watch a movie or a T.V. show, we become caught up in it and sometimes mimic what we see. As Stromberg's work reveals, entertainment tells us more about ourselves than we are willing to acknowledge: values of
pleasure, self-indulgence, and consumption.

So the next time you're being entertained, think about it: Are you getting caught up?