2002
DOI: 10.1086/532096
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Cosmopolitan Domesticity: Importing the American Dream, 1865-1920

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2003
2003
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
3
2
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 44 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…176-180). The national parks literature has discussed such physical transformations while overlooking the cognitive transformation of domesticating imperialism (Hoganson 2002;West 1999).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…176-180). The national parks literature has discussed such physical transformations while overlooking the cognitive transformation of domesticating imperialism (Hoganson 2002;West 1999).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…I use liberal open‐mindedness to describe the deliberately broad yet ideologically charged consciousness that drives many of the participants—both sellers and buyers—in this market. This particular construction of consciousness resonates with an attitude that historian Kristin Hoganson locates among U.S. households during the late 19th and early 20th centuries; she describes shoppers of that time as “cosmopolitan consumers [who] regarded their homes as loci of interaction with the wider world, as manifestations of open‐mindedness and cultural receptivity” (2002:83). In contrast to Hoganson's cosmopolitan consumers, however, I also emphasize the active and informed, sociopolitically charged ideology of “liberalism” that motivates the “open‐mindedness” of the participants at Farmers’ Basket.…”
Section: Notesmentioning
confidence: 87%
“…A quick glance at the proceedings of the 12th Berkshire Conference on the History of Women (2002) suggests the range of issues on offer, from the historical gendering of the real estate profession in the USA, to concerns over the urban spatial constructions of heteronormativity. And although on closer inspection some of these concerns by feminist historians about geography dissolve into metaphor, a good deal address issues at the very core of feminist historical geography-the complex historical relationships between gender and space (see, for example, Deutsch, 2002;Hoganson, 2002). But even closer to home, as it were, within the discipline of geography itself, feminist historical geography often travels under pseudonym.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%