Stockholms universitet

Lisa Svanfeldt-WinterPostdoktor

Om mig

Jag är forskare i modern historia, med huvudsakligt intresse för vetenskapshistoria och genushistoria. 

I mitt nuvarande forskningsprojekt undersöker jag debatten om jordens form i Storbritannien under 1800-talet. Jag är intresserad av hur man i debatten strävade efter att övertyga sin publik och argumentera för sin sak, ofta med till synes samma argument och vetenskapsideal, och hur debatten kunde fortsätta trots att gemensamma experiment utfallit till den konventionella kunskapens fördel. Projektet löper under 2021–2022 och finansieras av Anna Ahlströms och Ellen Terserus stiftelse. År 2021 är jag gästforskare vid Institutet för vetenskaps-, medicin- och teknikhistoria vid King’s College i London.

I min doktorsavhandling, Where Scholars are Made (2019),undersökte jag hur unga folklorister agerade för att uppfattas som trovärdiga forskare inom sitt ämne under början av 1900-talet. Som huvudsakligt källmaterial använde jag brev och dagböcker av två finska folklorister, Elsa Enäjärvi (1901–1951) och Martti Haavio (1899–1973). 

Efter disputationen har jag jobbat i ett antologiprojekt om brev som källor till forskning om känslor i vetenskap och i ett mindre projekt om vetenskapsnormer och kvinnliga forskares internationella akademiska relationer. Jag har även undervisat vid Historiska institutionen på modernhistoriska kurser och handlett kandidatuppsatser i genushistoria och vetenskapshistoria.

Forskningsprojekt

Publikationer

I urval från Stockholms universitets publikationsdatabas

  • Where Scholars are Made

    2019. Lisa Svanfeldt-Winter (et al.).

    Avhandling (Dok)

    This dissertation investigates how two Finnish folklorists, Elsa Enäjärvi (1901–1951) and Martti Haavio (1899–1973), obtained information about perceptions of what constituted good and acknowledged scholars and how they responded to these implicit and explicit expectations and requirements. The dissertation uses the concept of scholarly persona as an analytical tool to identify notions of good scholars as well as Enäjärvi’s and Haavio’s processes to form themselves as such. The analysis is based on a deep reading of private and public documents, with an emphasis on Enäjärvi’s and Haavio’s diaries and private letters to each other and friends in academia.

    The dissertation’s timeframe, 1918–1932, covers Enäjärvi’s and Haavio’s earliest years at university, from attending university to obtaining doctoral degrees. Being new to the academic community meant that these two young folklorists were in acute need of information regarding expectations and requirements in their discipline. Reflecting over observations of other scholars and sharing these observations with peers were important means of forming oneself as a scholar. This formation process was often articulated by making normative descriptions of the personal qualities, behaviour and research of other academics. By describing what was desirable, acceptable or inept in scholars, Enäjärvi and Haavio established what they themselves were like as scholars. The analysis also shows that the early phase of scholarly persona formation included informal rites of passage that integrated the students deeper into the academic community. The letters to friends offered a forum to make and test these formative descriptions and to reflect upon and give meaning to these rites of passage.

    The dissertation makes a systematic analysis of six arenas of Enäjärvi’s and Haavio’s academic life, where scholarly personae were formed: the university, the capital Helsinki, fieldwork, the transnational exchange with Estonian academics, international scholarly communities in Western Europe, and the scholarly home. The analysis shows that these arenas activated different dimensions of the folklorists’ persona. Moreover, the analysis shows that the different arenas activated different gendered practices and expectations of scholars and academic life. 

    Läs mer om Where Scholars are Made
  • Writing a folklorist’s persona in the field

    2018. Lisa Svanfeldt-Winter.

    Artikel

    In this article, I approach negotiations of belonging by studying the relationship between folklorists and their informants. I examine how young Finnish folklorists on their first collection journeys in the early 1920s positioned themselves as scholars by stressing both their identification with and their differences from the informants. The discipline's high status as a "national science" required the collectors to approach the locals as carriers of a national heritage shared between the collectors and informants. On the other hand, the pursuit of scholarly acknowledgement urged the scholars to emphasize their position as experts who could evaluate the authenticity and academic relevance of the information offered by the locals. One effective way to do so was to highlight a temporal distance between the describer and the described, placing the informants in an earlier time of lower social and cultural development than the scholar. I discuss how the alternation between identification and difference can be interpreted as a means for the scholars to negotiate their places in their academic community and to form feasible scholarly personas within it. The article places special focus on how the young collectors performed this negotiation by describing informants in their correspondences with student friends and cooperating to find shared ways of approaching the informants in acceptable ways according to their discipline.

    Läs mer om Writing a folklorist’s persona in the field

Visa alla publikationer av Lisa Svanfeldt-Winter vid Stockholms universitet

profilePageLayout