up interesting new directions for future researchers in the field. The book’s conclusion builds on the ‘coda’ sections of each part, which take a more personal, almost ‘psychogeographic’ tone in their reflections of the author’s experience at each site. Here, Rapson draws on Sebald’s writing about place and memory to reinforce her earlier arguments around mediation and remediation of memory through landscape, the transnational, cosmopolitan, interconnected nature of memory exchange, and the importance of the ecocritical perspective. The three sites are united in the frequently evoked trope of the disrupted pastoral. While this trope elides the always problematic nature of humans’ relationship with nature, the power of the ‘mobilization of [. . .] affectivity in memorial landscapes’ (p. 196) is clear, and the mourning involved may be put to productive ends. The book ends on a discussion of Sebald’s work as a way of accessing an ‘ecocentric view of the Holocaust’ (p. 197), providing a compelling conclusion to the case studies that draws together the complex connections between ecology, genocide, modernity and cultural memory.

中文翻译：

---

定量生活：波西米亚土地上的科学、日常生活和工人阶级政治，1914-1918

为该领域的未来研究人员提供有趣的新方向。这本书的结论建立在每个部分的“尾声”部分之上，这些部分在反映作者在每个地点的经历时采用了更个人化的、几乎是“心理地理学”的语气。在这里，拉普森借鉴了塞巴尔德关于地点和记忆的写作，以加强她早期关于通过景观调解和修复记忆、记忆交换的跨国、世界性、相互关联的性质以及生态批判观点的重要性的论点。这三个地点在经常被唤起的被破坏的田园的比喻中联合起来。虽然这个比喻忽略了人类与自然关系中总是有问题的性质，但“动员 [. . .] 纪念景观中的情感”（第 196 页）很清楚，所涉及的哀悼可能会以富有成效的方式结束。这本书以讨论 Sebald 的工作作为结束“大屠杀的生态中心观点”（第 197 页）的一种方式结束，为案例研究提供了令人信服的结论，这些案例研究将生态学、种族灭绝、现代性和文化之间的复杂联系结合在一起记忆。