Search results

In 2015, Idris Elba declared ‘I’m probably the most famous Bond actor in the world … and I’ve not even played the role’. Speculation about Elba taking on the role of the world’s most famous spy has circulated for over a decade, fuelled by current Bond Daniel Craig’s assertion that the role has ruined his life. This chapter will examine the role of fans in driving hype about the future of Bond, focusing on the case study of alt-right outrage at the potential casting of Elba. The anti-Elba camp have framed their outrage as informed by authorial intent, and the desire to maintain canon, with claims that Ian Fleming’s Bond was, and should always be white and Scottish. Bond’s expansive narrative universe has remained constant since its inception, enabling fans of the series to form an emotional connection and sense of ownership over the text as a cohesive brand, a form of ‘affective economics’ (Hills, 2015; Jenkins, 2006a). By situating the debate over Elba’s suitability within the timeline of the Bond franchise, the author will posit that the rigid casting and structure of the film series to date enables feelings of fan ownership to flourish. Whilst the influence of vocal fan groups has altered the future direction of numerous popular texts, this chapter will suggest that the sameness of Bond-as-brand provides the justification for fan backlash towards potential change. In sum, this chapter will highlight the Elba-as-Bond rumours as a reflection of the contemporary political moment which seeks to flatten out difference under the auspice of protecting the canon and tradition of ‘brand Bond’.

This chapter focuses on a unique partnership made possible by Kazan Federal University, which has one of the largest teacher preparation programs in the Russian Republic. The partnership sponsors a scientific-practical conference known as the International Forum on Teacher Education (IFTE), arguably the most influential conference in the field of education in Eastern Europe and post-Soviet countries. Thousands of papers about different educational themes have been presented since 2015. Researchers share their views and their research results on the issues of modernization and development of the content of teacher education. Most recently, international guests have been playing a larger role. For example, ISATT partnered with IFTE and an ISATT regional conference flew under the IFTE banner in 2019. Many ISATT regional representatives attended. Since then, more researchers from the western world – including those from Europe and the United States – have been regularly attending IFTE, which is gaining an international reputation for being one of the most comprehensive teacher education conferences in the world.

This is a book for teacher educators. It is also a book for teacher candidates and educational stakeholders who are interested in using storied practice in teacher education. It is about teacher educators and teacher candidates as curriculum makers (Clandinin & Connelly, 1992) who engage in narrative inquiry practice. As editors of this volume, we came to this important writing project as a result of our respective work using narrative inquiry that originated from our studies with Dr. Michael Connelly and Dr. Jean Clandinin. In a large sense, this book represents our interpretations, as second-generation narrative inquirers, of three main ideas: narrative inquiry, curriculum making, and teacher education. Narrative inquiry, curriculum making, and teacher education are vitally interconnected concepts that offer an alternative way of understanding the current landscape of education. Narrative inquiry in teacher education would not have been possible without the groundbreaking work of Connelly and Clandinin.

Although the concept of social capital is rightly associated with Putnam (2000), arguably its roots lie further back in the nineteenth century, but were first articulated in a “contemporary sense” in 1916 (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 2001, p. 41). The authors begin their analysis by summarizing the main types of capital: economic, social, political, human, cultural and symbolic, before exploring the different types of social capital, including bonding, bridging and linking. These are then linked to a variety of related concepts, including: social enterprise, social networks, social value, community development, community resilience and sociability (Cook, Halsall, & Wankhade, 2015). It is argued that social capital is central to these, and is of increasing importance across the globe within the context of the threats and opportunities posed by globalization on the one hand (including the spread of COVID-19) and of potential deglobalization on the other, in part as a reaction to COVID-19 and pre-existing nationalist trends toward limitation of global interactions. The discussion is supported by examination of a range of case studies drawn from societies of contrasting types, including the UK, USA, China, Bangladesh and South Africa. The authors conclude their analysis via consideration of how social capital can be expanded further in order to help meet contemporary and future challenges from whichever direction it arises.

This chapter argues that aspiring hegemons face a wide array of complex and distinct military challenges. Managing scarce military resources requires a subtle and complex global strategy that is likely to generate cognitive overload for the political system. As a result of cognitive overload, aspiring hegemons are likely to flail around, rapidly shifting from one global strategy to another. Such strategic flailing will occur independently of whether or not the economy is in crisis, though clearly economic crisis will exacerbate the tendency towards strategic incoherence. The chapter examines U.S. global strategy since the end of the Cold War, looking at the focus on “rogue regimes,” a growing concern with “global chaos,” worry about the rise of a peer competitor (China), and the debates about the root causes of, and best strategies to mitigate, terrorism. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the role of culture and notions of national identity and their role in the formulation of grand strategy.