Difference between revisions of "National temperament and national image"
AvionHerbert (talk | contribs) |
AvionHerbert (talk | contribs) |
||
(7 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
We are looking very tentatively at phenomena of “national temperament” as an actual truth, and we are also looking at national “image” in terms of the promotional ideas we see cultivated from time to time. | We are looking very tentatively at phenomena of “national temperament” as an actual truth, and we are also looking at national “image” in terms of the promotional ideas we see cultivated from time to time. | ||
− | === | + | === International characterization of any particular [[innovation]] === |
− | We may rightfully or wrongfully read nation-based personality traits into any given inventor. In general, we don’t do this. There are odd cases in which a national publication may promote the innovations of one of its countrymen, to the detriment of some other inventor, and terms used may lean into ideas bordering on stereotypes. [[Patent FR- | + | We may rightfully or wrongfully read nation-based personality traits into any given inventor. In general, we don’t do this. There are odd cases in which a national publication may promote the innovations of one of its countrymen, to the detriment of some other inventor, and terms used may lean into ideas bordering on stereotypes. [[Patent FR-1898-273723]], for instance, as covered by « Chronologie Aéronautique » pages of [[Aéro-Manuel 1914]], has [[Ferdinand von Zeppelin]] being granted his patent, in France, and praises the German’s energy and perseverance, while on the other hand going so far as to deny his status as “l’inventeur”, as such, alleging that [[Patent FR-1873-100696]] of [[Joseph Spiess]] contains the true kernel of innovation.<ref>[[Patent FR-1898-273723]]</ref> We may see this as humorous, and nationalistically biased indeed. In terms of the data we are tracking, any nuance in technical application may indeed constitute “invention”, aside from these ideas of variations in “national temperament”, and the French coverage, in this case, is charged with both French and German ideas of particular virtues, characteristics entering into national stereotype, whether or not said stereotypes contain “grains of truth”. |
+ | |||
+ | This French denial of inventor status to [[Ferdinand von Zeppelin]] may be our most obvious and extreme case. By virtually any quantitative or qualitative measure, French contributions to world aero-innovation have been profound, though likewise in comportment with a multitude of established and official norms Zeppelin was granted the patent. The rhetorical haggling runs concurrently with a long-sustained French agenda of national self-promotion, tangent to what has since become known as “the projection of soft power”. | ||
− | |||
=== The administrative culture and other institutional factors as they vary internationally === | === The administrative culture and other institutional factors as they vary internationally === | ||
This comes up in the context of patents classifications, the institutions doing the classification, mere compliance as opposed to enthusiastic compliance, regarding international [[priority date]]s and so forth. We don’t know the extent to which inventors, in their own conceptually innovative processes, were themselves swayed by the patent classification systems and other niceties involved. Again, it may be in the context of [[patent classification systems]] that we have the cleanest interface between these semi-abstract variably national phenomena and our ongoing intake of quantifiable data. | This comes up in the context of patents classifications, the institutions doing the classification, mere compliance as opposed to enthusiastic compliance, regarding international [[priority date]]s and so forth. We don’t know the extent to which inventors, in their own conceptually innovative processes, were themselves swayed by the patent classification systems and other niceties involved. Again, it may be in the context of [[patent classification systems]] that we have the cleanest interface between these semi-abstract variably national phenomena and our ongoing intake of quantifiable data. | ||
For more on “[[administrative culture]]”, also see “[[patent]]”, “[[Certificat d'addition]]” and “[[perfectionnement]]”. There are manners in which formalized semantics affect the overall legal and technological organization of the broad ingenuity we are tracking. | For more on “[[administrative culture]]”, also see “[[patent]]”, “[[Certificat d'addition]]” and “[[perfectionnement]]”. There are manners in which formalized semantics affect the overall legal and technological organization of the broad ingenuity we are tracking. | ||
+ | |||
+ | === Geopolitical outlook as affecting location phraseology === | ||
+ | |||
+ | This mainly comes up relative to specifically Austrian locations, such as Vienna, as referred to on British and American patents. British patents refer to the "Empire of Austria", making no mention of Hungary<ref>[[Patent GB-1910-27294]]</ref>, whereas American patents refer to "Austria-Hungary", making no mention of "Empire".<ref>[[Patent US-1910-1044600]]</ref> Without making too much of this, it could be, naturally, that the British are comfortable with the idea of "Empire", while downplaying the breadth of that Continental entity, and that the Americans are ideologically opposed to "Empire", but not so threatened by the unity of Austria and Hungary. | ||
=== Work done by others, pertinent to Canada and so forth === | === Work done by others, pertinent to Canada and so forth === | ||
− | We are familiar with work being presently conducted and finalized by others, studies of cases in which national temperament or “image” or even “national brand” are handled pro-actively. We’ll integrate references to said works as they become finalized, and made more | + | We are familiar with work being presently conducted and finalized by others, studies of cases in which national temperament or “image” or even “national brand” are handled pro-actively. We’ll integrate references to said works as they become finalized, and made more properly public. |
+ | ==== Blair Stein on the "Canadian-ness" of the [[Silver Dart]] ==== | ||
+ | This seems to tie into national identity, relative to the US and the British Empire in particular. Though we are nowhere near citing this work, this puts the emphasis on a nation's self-aware assertion of national identity, tied into these processes of aero-achievement, as distinct from ideas we've had and observations we've made, retrospectively, about the technical and governmental or administrative cultures as they've varied from nation to nation, all with effects both on developments in aviation and in the coverage of said developments. | ||
+ | {{References}} | ||
+ | |||
+ | [[Category:Historical context]] |
Latest revision as of 22:31, 26 December 2023
Contents
- 1 The Idea of National Temperament
The Idea of National Temperament
This is an idea not to be rushed, or over-done, but which we’d like to keep onhand. Even at its most nationalistically competitive, and sometimes bellicose, the long process of aero-innovation seems to have been tinged with internationalism, with a cross-fertilization of ideas going beyond national boundaries.
We are looking very tentatively at phenomena of “national temperament” as an actual truth, and we are also looking at national “image” in terms of the promotional ideas we see cultivated from time to time.
International characterization of any particular innovation
We may rightfully or wrongfully read nation-based personality traits into any given inventor. In general, we don’t do this. There are odd cases in which a national publication may promote the innovations of one of its countrymen, to the detriment of some other inventor, and terms used may lean into ideas bordering on stereotypes. Patent FR-1898-273723, for instance, as covered by « Chronologie Aéronautique » pages of Aéro-Manuel 1914, has Ferdinand von Zeppelin being granted his patent, in France, and praises the German’s energy and perseverance, while on the other hand going so far as to deny his status as “l’inventeur”, as such, alleging that Patent FR-1873-100696 of Joseph Spiess contains the true kernel of innovation.[1] We may see this as humorous, and nationalistically biased indeed. In terms of the data we are tracking, any nuance in technical application may indeed constitute “invention”, aside from these ideas of variations in “national temperament”, and the French coverage, in this case, is charged with both French and German ideas of particular virtues, characteristics entering into national stereotype, whether or not said stereotypes contain “grains of truth”.
This French denial of inventor status to Ferdinand von Zeppelin may be our most obvious and extreme case. By virtually any quantitative or qualitative measure, French contributions to world aero-innovation have been profound, though likewise in comportment with a multitude of established and official norms Zeppelin was granted the patent. The rhetorical haggling runs concurrently with a long-sustained French agenda of national self-promotion, tangent to what has since become known as “the projection of soft power”.
The administrative culture and other institutional factors as they vary internationally
This comes up in the context of patents classifications, the institutions doing the classification, mere compliance as opposed to enthusiastic compliance, regarding international priority dates and so forth. We don’t know the extent to which inventors, in their own conceptually innovative processes, were themselves swayed by the patent classification systems and other niceties involved. Again, it may be in the context of patent classification systems that we have the cleanest interface between these semi-abstract variably national phenomena and our ongoing intake of quantifiable data.
For more on “administrative culture”, also see “patent”, “Certificat d'addition” and “perfectionnement”. There are manners in which formalized semantics affect the overall legal and technological organization of the broad ingenuity we are tracking.
Geopolitical outlook as affecting location phraseology
This mainly comes up relative to specifically Austrian locations, such as Vienna, as referred to on British and American patents. British patents refer to the "Empire of Austria", making no mention of Hungary[2], whereas American patents refer to "Austria-Hungary", making no mention of "Empire".[3] Without making too much of this, it could be, naturally, that the British are comfortable with the idea of "Empire", while downplaying the breadth of that Continental entity, and that the Americans are ideologically opposed to "Empire", but not so threatened by the unity of Austria and Hungary.
Work done by others, pertinent to Canada and so forth
We are familiar with work being presently conducted and finalized by others, studies of cases in which national temperament or “image” or even “national brand” are handled pro-actively. We’ll integrate references to said works as they become finalized, and made more properly public.
Blair Stein on the "Canadian-ness" of the Silver Dart
This seems to tie into national identity, relative to the US and the British Empire in particular. Though we are nowhere near citing this work, this puts the emphasis on a nation's self-aware assertion of national identity, tied into these processes of aero-achievement, as distinct from ideas we've had and observations we've made, retrospectively, about the technical and governmental or administrative cultures as they've varied from nation to nation, all with effects both on developments in aviation and in the coverage of said developments.