Search results

THOMAS Carlyle's personal crusade for the opening of a lending library in London and his enlisting for the support of that cause influential and wealthy patrons such as Lord Clarendon, Bulwer‐Lytton, Lord Lyttelton, Dean Milman, Lord Houghton, W. E. Gladstone, Sir G. Cornewall Lewis, Henry Hallam—amongst a host of other now forgotten early Victorian luminaries—is well documented. According to Robert Harrison's Preface to the 1888 fifth edition of the Catalogue of the London Library, it opened on 3 May 1841 “with a collection of about 3,000 volumes, which, by the following March, when the first Catalogue was published, had increased to 13,000” (p.viii). The Library was declared formally open on 24 May 1841 using a hired hall in Pall Mall. There were 500 members. In April 1845 the Library moved to its present location in St. James's Square.

The following classified, annotated list of titles is intended to provide reference librarians with a current checklist of new reference books, and is designed to supplement the RSR review column, “Recent Reference Books,” by Frances Neel Cheney. “Reference Books in Print” includes all additional books received prior to the inclusion deadline established for this issue. Appearance in this column does not preclude a later review in RSR. Publishers are urged to send a copy of all new reference books directly to RSR as soon as published, for immediate listing in “Reference Books in Print.” Reference books with imprints older than two years will not be included (with the exception of current reprints or older books newly acquired for distribution by another publisher). The column shall also occasionally include library science or other library related publications of other than a reference character.

This paper aimed to inform research or collection development on the topic of Claude Debussy, with particular attention paid to English-language resources that highlight the cross-modal nature of his work.

This objective was achieved by examining primary and secondary sources relating to the works and correspondences of Debussy and those of painter James Abbott McNeill Whistler, and the works of poet Charles Baudelaire, whose work influenced Debussy.

Holistically studying Debussy and his contemporary influences enables the researcher to develop a richer understanding of Debussy's work.

This paper may have implications for research on James Abbott McNeill Whistler, Charles Baudelaire, Impressionism, and Symbolism.

Johanna Harwood was the first, and until Phoebe Waller-Bridge’s hiring on No Time to Die, the only woman screenwriter to work on the Bond films. Harwood was there at the beginning, gaining credits for her work on Dr No (1962) and From Russia with Love (1963), but her chequered experiences of trying to gain leverage within the film industry as a writer, having to contend with institutionalised as well as individualised sexism, prompted her eventual decision to leave Bond, her former employer Harry Saltzman, and the film industry behind. Her story not only provides valuable insights into the genesis of Bond on screen, it also shows the importance of incorporating production studies into discussions of gender and James Bond films, thinking about off-screen as well as on-screen female representation. Beyond Bond, it also illuminates some of the obstacles faced by women trying to build a career in the film industry in the 1960s (not that their problems are limited to that decade) and how film production labour done by women frequently goes uncredited or is discredited, despite its often formative importance.

This paper examines micro-practices of resistance to understand how they influence accounting.

A qualitative methodology based on interviews is used to explore an extreme case of disciplinary organization, that of the French Armed Forces whereby secrecy and discipline are the norm. The study draws on James Scott's concept of infrapolitics to illustrate how service members manage to appear obedient and disciplined, while simultaneously criticizing and resisting accounting practices “below the radar” of surveillance.

The study describes “resistance in obedience” to account for how service members resist while following discipline. Three main forms of resistance are identified. Containment consists in obstructing and delaying a process of change that depends on willing participation of active supporters. Subversion consists in weakening the sources of information and the communication channels. Sabotage consists in fragmenting accounting (here a balanced scorecard) by separating performance indicators from cost accounting. The study shows that these three tactics of hidden and informal resistances prevent the spread of accounting reforms, disrupt transparency and create a blockade around financial information.

The study of resistance to accounting in a setting where compliance and discipline are the norm shows how widespread it can be. In that respect, future research could provide a more systematic understanding of resistance in action and its conditions of possibility in various contexts and settings. This article further illustrates the allure of opacity against the threats of transparency and accountability. The use of accounting in opaque settings opens interesting avenues of research, since the appeal of accounting has often been related to the allure of transparency and to accounting's potential to create visibilities. Finally, this paper opens a perspective for future research on how micro-resistance meets micro-practices of power in the context of ostensibly liberated, participative and non-authoritarian management.

While previous literature argued that resistance to accounting arises when it is used to increase discipline, our findings challenge this assumed dichotomy, by showing that sometimes accounting is resisted in the name of discipline. This study further outlines the fact that the “allure” of transparency is not universal but can also prove disruptive and be contested. In addition, this study contributes to the literature on resistance to accounting that mainly focused on overt, dramatic and organized forms of resistances, by highlighting the existence of a more widespread, omnipresent yet hidden and mundane, day-to-day, form of opposition, which significantly influences accounting. Finally, the findings show that resistance is not only an outside force intersecting with accounting but also an intrinsic force that shapes accounting from the inside.

What is now known as the Canning Industry commenced on the 30th January, 1810, when Montalivet, the French Minister of the Interior, wrote to Francois Appert and informed him that his—Appert's—new process for preserving foods was assured of success and thereby granting to the process the official recognition of the French Government. Official recognition also carried with it a money grant of twelve thousand francs—about £500 in those days—Appert won this prize on the principle of “Delhi taken and India saved for one rupee eight annas”—and died in the year 1841 a comparatively poor man and the founder of one of the world's greatest industries. As a result of the warlike operations in which it had been engaged, multitudes of sick and wounded were thrown on the hands of the French Government, and scurvy was terribly prevalent in the fleets. Hence the French Government gave a public notice that it would award a prize to anyone who should discover a cheap and satisfactory method of preserving foodstuffs, without either drying or pickling, so that they could be kept for a long period and still retain the natural flavour and other characteristics of the fresh product. Appert had worked at and perfected his process during the preceding ten or fifteen years and had thoroughly assured himself of its practicability. He was therefore well prepared to demonstrate the details before the Board of Arts and Manufactures of which Board Gay Lussac had been a member since the year 1805. The report of this body to the Minister of the Interior was entirely favourable, as was also that of General Caffarelli, the Maritime Prefect of Brest. Caffarelli had found that soups and vegetables prepared by Appert's process had retained their goodness after three months' bottling, and he had been able to supply what seemed to the diners to be fresh vegetables in mid‐winter. It need hardly be said that Appert's process for preserving foods is the one in use now. Appert, however, knew nothing of the principles on which his process depended, nor did anyone else at that time. He supposed putrefaction to be due to the action of the air alone. In this view he was supported by the great authority of Gay Lussac who, it will be remembered, imagined atmospheric oxygen to be the cause. Appert at the request of the Minister of the Interior wrote a short book on the subject—a practical treatise explaining the methods of preserving animal and vegetable substances. This book was almost at once translated into several languages. It would seem that one of the chief advantages that Appert hoped the French people would gain by his invention was the saving of sugar. Up to that time the only means of preserving fruit other than by drying was to immerse the fruit in strong syrup made with cane sugar, and sugar was almost impossible to obtain in France at that time owing to war conditions. He also says that the French Government wished to draw “the utmost advantage from the productions of our soil in order to develop our agriculture and manufactures, and to diminish the consumption of foreign commodities” ! This is exactly what we in this country are trying to do now in the building up of a trade in canned food, a hundred and twenty years later. The English translator of Appert's work complacently observes:—

We observe with pleasure that the French Analytical Control, which is known as the Controle Chimique Permanent Français, continues to make satisfactory progress. The value and importance of the system of Control cannot fail to meet with appreciation in France—as it cannot fail to meet with appreciation elsewhere—so soon as its objects and method of working have been understood and have become sufficiently well known. From the reports which appear from time to time in l'Hygiène Moderne, the organ of the French Control, it is obvious that a number of French firms of the highest standing have grasped the fact that to place their products on the market with a permanent and authoritative scientific guarantee as to their nature and quality, is to meet a growing public demand, and must therefore become a commercial necessity. An ample assurance that the Controle Chimique Permanent Français is a solid and stable undertaking is afforded by the facts that it is under the general direction of so distinguished an expert as M. Ferdinand Jean and that he is assisted by several well‐known French scientists in carrying out the very varied technical work required.