4. THE MATERIAL PRESENCE OF THE PAST

This article deals with the material presence of the past and the recent call in the human sciences for a “return to things.” This renewed interest in things signals a rejection of constructivism and textualism and the longing for what is “real,” where “regaining” the object is conceived as a means for re‐establishing contact with reality. In the context of this turn, we might wish to reconsider the (ontological) status of relics of the past and their function in mediating relations between the organic and the inorganic, between people and things, and among various kinds of things themselves for reconceptualizing the study of the past. I argue that the future will depend on whether and how various scholars interested in the past manage to modify their understanding of the material remnants of the past, that is, things as well as human, animal, and plant remains. In discussing this problem I will refer to Martin heidegger's distinction between an object and a thing, to bruno latour's idea of the agency of things and object‐oriented democracy, and to Don Ihde's material hermeneutics. To illustrate my argument I will focus on some examples of the ambivalent status of the disappeared person (dead or alive) in argentina, which resists the oppositional structure of present versus absent. In this context, the disappeared body is a paradigm of the past itself, which is both continuous with the present and discontinuous from it, which simultaneously is and is not. Since there are no adequate terms to analyze the “contradictory” or anomalous status of the present‐absent dichotomy, I look for them outside the binary oppositions conventionally used to conceptualize the present‐absent relationship in our thinking about the past. for this purpose I employ Algirdas Julien Greimas's semiotic square.     

THE MAP IN THE SCIENTIFIC AND ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIVITIES OF N.I. VAVILOV

Special attention is devoted to Vavilov's use of detailed maps for (a) recording initial results of field work in the study of local agriculture and ranges of domesticated plants in travels across several continents; and (b) presenting information about a large number of processes and phenomena in a concise way, affording the basis for their critical analysis and comparison. He was involved in programs to map Soviet and world agriculture (translated by Jay K. Mitchell, PlanEcon, Inc., Washington, DC 20005).     

ACADEMICIAN N. I. VAVILOV AND THE GEOGRAPHICAL SOCIETY OF THE USSR

Academician N. I. Vavilov (1887-1943) served as president of the Geographical Society of the USSR from 1931 to 1940. A distinguished plant breeder, geneticist, explorer for wild ancestors of cultivated plants, and geographer, he traveled widely and reported regularly to the Society on his explorations and discoveries. Together with Yu. N. Shokal'skiy, then the honorary president, he brought many new initiatives to the activities of the Society. They arranged for the transfer of the Society from the People's Comissariat of Education of the RSFSR to the Academy of Sciences of the USSR. The First All-Union Congress of Geographers of the USSR was held in 1933, participation in international congresses was arranged, international co-operation was sponsored, membership was increased sharply, sections and commissions were established or revived, a series of public lectures was organized, a lecture hall was opened, and the scientific archives were enriched. Vavilov was especially interested in the work of the Section on History of Geographical Knowledge and participated actively in special issues of Izvestiya of the Society and in commemorative meetings at the Society devoted to individual geographers who had made particularly significant contributions to geographical knowledge (translated by Chauncy D. Harris, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois 60637-1583).