University of CaliforniaBerkeley, California

94720

Center for Slavic and East European Studies

NewsletterFall 1995Vol. 12 No. 4

Notes from the Chair

In This Issue:

Notes from the Chair .........1

Calendar of Events ............. 3Veljko Vujacic:The Many Faces ofYugoslavia.........................4

David Engerman:

Book Review: Stalin’s DriveWest...................................8

William Saroyan VisitingProfessorship ................... 11Conference Reports:

Barbara Voytek:

International FlintSymposium .......................12

Reginald Zelnik:

Wokers & Intelligentsia inRussia, 19th-20thCenturies .......................... 13

The Caucusus Program .... 16

Faculty and Student

News ................................ 18

Faculty Publications ........ 19

Fellowships and OtherOpportunities ................... 20

Associates of the SlavicCenter .............................. 22

continued on next page

The Czech posters inthis issue are fromthe publicationPostelstvi Ulice byJosef Kroutvor.

The fall semester has gotten underway withunusual intensity. During September and Octoberthe Center sponsored many activities on thecampus. As this Newsletter goes to press inearly November, many of us have just returnedfrom a very lively annual meeting of theAmerican Association for the Advancement ofSlavic Studies, held in Washington DC. I want totake this opportunity to reflect on the current andfuture events of the Center.

We have begun several new and excitingprojects in recent months. One major effort isthe Convenor Group on “Europe East and Westafter the Collapse of Communism: Challenges toSovereignty from Above and Below.” Thisresearch project is jointly sponsored by theCenter for German and European Studies and theCenter for Slavic and East European Studies.Launched during the spring of 1995 inconversations between myself as Center chairand Gerald Feldman, chair of CGES, theConvenor Group is scheduled to meet for twoyears of productive scholarship. We expect theproject to generate several publications. Thereare twenty-two participants in the group includingon graduate student.

Another major undertaking is our Programfor the Study of the Caucasus, directed by theBerkeley Program in Soviet and Post-SovietStudies and funded by a grant from the FordFoundation. Although the grant has just beenawarded, the Program on the Study of theCaucasus has already moved ahead with plans toorganize a conference and invite a scholar fromthe area to be in residence. Several lectures havebeen sponsored and several have been planned, asyou can see in the Calendar of Events.

Deadline for next issueis January 9, 1996.

The Program on the Study of the Caucasuswill dovetail nicely with the Armenian StudiesProgram in which the Center has been involved.This is the first year for the William SaroyanVisiting Professor in Armenian Studies, held thisyear by Richard Hovannisian, professor ofhistory at UCLA. He is teaching contemporaryArmenian history through the history department.The Center has been assisting with other aspectsof the Armenian Studies Program, includingvisiting lectures and fundraising events. Forexample, on November 10, ProfessorHovannisian will give an evening lecture on the“Republic of Armenia in Retrospect.” Thelecture is open to the public. In this effort, co-sponsors include the Armenian AlumniAssociation and the Armenian StudiesAssociation.

A one-day conference on Crime andCorruption in the Former Soviet Union was heldin October. This stimulating event featured twosessions. The morning portion was devoted tothe situation in Russia with presentations byLouise Shelley, professor of law, justice andsociety at the American University; GregoryGrossman, professor emeritus, department ofeconomics; and visiting professor in law,Gianmaria Ajani, professor of law at theUniversity of Trento. The afternoon featured a“roundtable” discussion with James Critchlow ofHarvard University, addressing the situation inCentral Asia; Edward Walker of the BerkeleyProgram in Soviet and Post-Soviet Studiesdiscussing the Caucasus; Professor Shelleyfocussing on the Baltics; and Serge Petroff, withthe American-Russian Resources Group(ARRG), presenting an analysis of thecircumstances which affect foreign investment inRussia.

Since the beginning of the fallsemester, we have been proceeding withsupport for several working groups,smaller in scale that the ConvenorGroup, but just as productive in terms ofopportunities for scholarly work.Several of these groups are co-sponsored by the Berkeley Program inSoviet and Post-Soviet Studies. Thecover a range of topics including“Russian and Soviet History,” “CurrentDevelopments in the Former SovietUnion and East Europe,” and“Comparative Post-Communism.” Thegroups consist of graduate students andfaculty members.

As we look forward to the springsemester, highlights include asymposium on “The Russian Stravinsky”to be held in conjunction with thePokrovsky Dance Ensemble’sperformance of Les Noces presented byCal Performances. Les Noces, withmusic by Igor Stravinsky, will be thesubject of discussion in an afternoonsymposium preceeding the eveningperformance by the PokrovskyEnsemble. Participants will include:Caryl Emerson of Princeton University;Simon Karlinsky, professor emeritus inour Slavic department; DmitriPokrovsky, head of the DanceEnsemble; Richard Taruskin, professorof music at Cal; as well as otherscholars of Russian music and dance.The date of the event is February 10,1996, and the place is ZellerbachAuditorium. Be sure to mark it on yourcalendars.

March will witness a three-dayconference, entitled “Enthnographies ofTransition: The Political and CulturalDimensions of Emergent MarketEconomies in Russia and Eastern

Newsletter of the Center for Slavicand East European StudiesUniversity of California at Berkeley361 Stephens Hall, Berkeley, CA94720-2304

Editors: Monique Nowicki, BarbaraVoytek and Anna Wertz.510/642-9107

The Newsletter is published quarterlyduring the academic year. Please sendsuggestions, corrections or inquiries tothe editor(s) at the above address.Submit mailing address changes to theCenter attn: Dorotka Bratko orcall 510/642-3230. We welcome yourcomments and suggestions.

Notes from the Chair

Europe.” Professors Michael Burawoy,department of sociology, and KatherineVerdery, department of anthropology,Johns Hopkins University, are theorganizers. They designed theconference to bring together scholarsfrom different disciplines — sociology,anthropology, and political science —who have been conducting ethnographicstudies of the economic transition in theformer Soviet Union and EasternEurope. On Friday, March 22, theprogram is open to the public. Theinvited speakers are Ivan Szelenyi,department of sociology, UCLA; EllenComisso, department of politicalscience, UCSD; and Manuel Castells,UCB city and regional planning,together with Emma Kiselyova, Instituteof Economics and Engineering of theRussian Academy of Sciences,Novosibirsk. The Saturday and Sundaymeetings are closed sessions.

We shall also contribute to theXXth Annual Berkeley-StanfordConference, this year at Stanford, whichwill treat the topic, “Strategies ofNationhood: from NationalAssimilation to Ethnic Cleansing.”Again the date is set for March —Friday, March 8. As soon as theprogram has been finalized, we shall besure it is distributed. Be sure to checkthe spring issue of the Newsletter forthe latest information.

April is the month for our annualteachers’ outreach conference, and thisyear we will be meeting on the 19th,20th and 21st. The title is still beingdebated, but we expect that theconference will provide an update oncurrent events in Eastern Europe and theformer Soviet Union. Needless to say,in view of the ongoing situation in theBalkans and the upcoming elections in

Russia (among other issues), it will betime for an update.

With these programs and manyother events planned for the springsemester, this should be anexceptionally stimulating year at theCenter. We are delighted to becontributing to the intellectual life ofUC Berkeley, which has been ranked bythe National Research Council as thenation’s best overall graduate schoolwith thirty-five of its thirty-six graudateprograms ranking in the top ten forscholarly quality in their fields.Organized Research Units, such as theSlavic Center, help to keep this campusat the forefront of higher education inthe country.

Victoria E. Bonnell,Chair

CSEES Newsletter/2

Calendar of Events

~ Tuesday, November 7Brown Bag Lunch. NikolaiHohvannisian, director of the Institutefor Oriental Studies, ArmenianAcademy of Sciences. “The Republicof Armenia: Politics and Diplomacy.”Cosponsored by the William SaroyanChair in Armenian Studies and theBerkeley Program in Soviet and Post-Soviet Studies (BPS). 442 Stephens.Noon.

~ Wednesday, November 8Brown Bag Lunch. Susan Woodward,Brookings Senior Fellow and author ofBalkan Tragedy: Chaos andDissolution after the Cold War.“Prospects for Bosnia-Hercegovina.”442 Stephens. Noon.

~ Friday, November 10Public Lecture. Richard Hovannisian,William Saroyan Visiting Prof. inArmenian Studies. “The Republic ofArmenia: A Retrospective.” LipmanRoom. 7:30 p.m.

~ Tuesday, November 14Brown Bag Lunch. GennadyBordiugov, Russian historian andgeneral editor, Association for theStudy of Russian Society in theTwentieth Century. “CurrentHistoriographical Directions inRussia.” 442 Stephens. 12 noon.

~ Tuesday, November 14Public Lecture. Sergei Arutiunov,prof. of ethnography, MoscowAcademy of Sciences. “The CulturalRoots of Ethnic Radicalization in theNorth Caucasus.” Cosponsored withthe dept. of anthropology and BPS.Gifford Room, Krober Hall.4p.m.

~ Wednesday, November 15Brown Bag Lunch. Manuel Castells,prof. of planning and affiliated prof. ofsociology, chair of the Center forWestern European Studies, and EmmaKiselyova, asst. director of

International Relations at the Instituteof Economics and IndustrialEngineering, Russian Academy ofSciences and research associate, at theInstitute of Urban and RegionalDevelopment. “The Collapse of SovietCommunism: A View from theInformation Society,” a presentationand discussion of their newly publishedbook under this title. 442 Stephens.Noon.

~ Thursday, November 16Public Lecture. Maziar Behrooz.Cancelled. To be rescheduled in spring,1996.

~ Fri., Sat., November 17, 18Concert. Bay Area superstarsEnsemble Alcatraz and women’s vocalensemble KITKA join together inconcert. Friday: First UnitedMethodist Church, 625 HamiltonAvenue, Palo Alto, at 8 p.m. Saturday:First Congregational Church, Dana &Durant Streets, Berkeley (pre-concertlecture at 7 p.m.) 8 p.m. performance.510/528-1725

~ Tuesday, November 21Brown Bag Talk. Ronald G. Suny,visiting prof. of history at StanfordUniversity and professor of politicalscience at the University of Chicago.

“The Karabakh Question: A SolubleProblem.” Cosponsored with theWilliam Saroyan Chair in ArmenianStudies and BPS.Noon. 442 Stephens

~ Thur.-Sat., November 23-25Dance Festival. 44th Annual KoloFestival. Kolo dancing is non-partnerline dancing. Beginner to advanceddancers and families welcome. Danceand singing instruction, live music,ethnic foods, crafts and costumes.Registration 510/652-7859 or800/730-5615.

~ Tuesday, November 28Public Talk. Leila Alieva, KennanInstitute. “Leadership Strategies inAzerbaijan.” Co-sponsored by theAssociation for the Study ofNationalities (ASN) and BPS.270 Stephens. 4 p.m.

~ Tuesday, November 28Brown Bag Lunch. Igor Zevelev,visiting professor of political science,San Jose State University. Title TBA.442 Stephens. Noon.

~ Friday, December 1Public Lecture. Marc Nichanian,University of Strasbourg and visitingprof. of Armenian at UCLA. “ModernArmenian Literature: Outcry andMutism.” Cosponsored by the WilliamSaroyan Chair in Armenian Studies.7:30 p.m.160 Kroeber.

~ Wednesday, December 6Brown Bag Lunch. Sergei Kudryashov,editor of the Russian hist journals,Rodina and Istochik. “Stalin’s ForeignPolicy 1937-48.” 442 Stephens. Noon.

~ Tuesday, December 12Public Talk. Bruce Allyn, HarvardUniversity. “Peace-keeping and Peace-preventing: International Interventionsin the Post-Soviet Regions.” Co-sponsored with the ASN and BPS.270 Stephens. 4p.m.

12345678901234567890121234567890123456789012123456789012345678901212345678901234567890121234567890123456789012123456789012345678901212345678901234567890121234567890123456789012123456789012345678901212345678901234567890121234567890123456789012123456789012345678901212345678901234567890121234567890123456789012123456789012345678901212345678901234567890121234567890123456789012123456789012345678901212345678901234567890121234567890123456789012123456789012345678901212345678901234567890121234567890123456789012123456789012345678901212345678901234567890121234567890123456789012

Please note: for current information on Center events, please call (510) 642-3230. Even if no one is available to helpyou, you can listen to a recorded listing of events that is updated every Friday afternoon.

Nations, Regions, Mentalities: The Many Faces of Yugoslavia

by Veljko VujacicAssistant Professor of Sociology

Oberlin College

Throughout its seventy-year-old existence as a unifiedstate, Yugoslavia exhibited a degree of complexity unusual evenfor that cauldron of peoples that we euphemistically call EasternEurope. Much of this complexity has been lost in newspaperreports on the Yugoslav war in which Serbs,Croats, and Bosnian Moslems are treated ashomogeneous entities not subject to furtherdissection. More frequently than not, thecomplex regional differences that cross-cutethnicity have been neglected.

There is no better place to begin toappreciate the tremendous complexity of theYugoslav lands than the main site of the currentwar, Bosnia. Here Orthodox, Catholic, Slavic(Bosnian) Moslems, and Sephardic andAshkenazi Jews coexisted for centuries underthe hegemony of the Ottoman and Hapsburgempires. Once the age of nationalism dawnedon this part of the world in the period of imperialdecline, Bosnia became a point of contentionbetween Serbian and Croatian nationalideologues and soon, movements as well. It wasthe Yugoslav idea that helped bridge the gapbetween these contending forces, guaranteeingthat the fragile interethnic balance would notexplode into open warfare. And it is for thisreason, among others (such as the large numberof interethnic marriages) that the number of “Yugoslavs” wasespecially high in Bosnia.

It is hardly an accident that the two proverbial andcolorful characters of many Yugoslav jokes, Mujo and Haso(Muhamed and Hasan) were Bosnian Moslems. AlthoughMoslem by name and in spirit, the overarching identity ofMujo and Haso was Yugoslav. Stuck between the CatholicYugoslav West of Slovenia and Croatia, and the OrthodoxYugoslav East of Serbia, Macedonia, and Montenegro, Mujoand Haso were at the very center of the larger homeland—akind of Yugoslav average, a blend of and connection betweenSerb and Croat with an equally good understanding ofOrthodoxy and Catholicism; as if the mixing of Orthodoxyand Catholicism in a south Slavic kitchen would give you aspicy Middle Eastern dish. And just as in an excellent dish of

123456789012345678901234567890121234567891234567890123456789012345678901212345678912345678901234567890123456789012123456789123456789012345678901234567890121234567891234567890123456789012345678901212345678912345678901234567890123456789012123456789123456789012345678901234567890121234567891234567890123456789012345678901212345678912345678901234567890123456789012123456789123456789012345678901234567890121234567891234567890123456789012345678901212345678912345678901234567890123456789012123456789123456789012345678901234567890121234567891234567890123456789012345678901212345678912345678901234567890123456789012123456789123456789012345678901234567890121234567891234567890123456789012345678901212345678912345678901234567890123456789012123456789123456789012345678901234567890121234567891234567890123456789012345678901212345678912345678901234567890123456789012123456789123456789012345678901234567890121234567891234567890123456789012345678901212345678912345678901234567890123456789012123456789123456789012345678901234567890121234567891234567890123456789012345678901212345678912345678901234567890123456789012123456789123456789012345678901234567890121234567891234567890123456789012345678901212345678912345678901234567890123456789012123456789123456789012345678901234567890121234567891234567890123456789012345678901212345678912345678901234567890123456789012123456789123456789012345678901234567890121234567891234567890123456789012345678901212345678912345678901234567890123456789012123456789

Former Yugoslavia

Balkan gilled meat, it is impossible to say whether the spiritis Slavic and the flesh is Ottoman, so it is impossible toseparate the two into the Bosnian body and soul. Or, to put itdifferently, the Bosnian Moslem is rather like a delightful,but also dangerous mixture of slivovitz and Turkish coffee;and, as any foreign traveler who was forced by hisaggressively hospitable Yugoslav hosts to have a shot ofslivovitz and a cup of Turkish coffee before breakfast knows,the cocktail was not made for timid souls.

Bosnia, everyone will agree, was a small Yugoslavia.With the exception of the most northern and culturallywestern republic, Slovenia, the various Yugoslav lands offerno clear boundaries between civilizations, nations, religiouscommunities or mentalities. Even in Slovenia, the mostethnically homogeneous successor state, one begins to sensethe diversity of culture and experience. The impatientWesterner who crosses the border from the Austrian sidewill say that Slovenian billages are exactly like Austrianones; but the one who crosses from Italy will say that theyare exactly the same as in northern Italy. Visit the thinstretch of the Slovenian coast on the Istrian Peninsula (whichSlovenia shares with neighboring Croatia) and you will seethat both foreigners are right and wrong. For Istria, like itscuisine, offers a blend of Central Europe and Italy with a

CSEES Newsletter/4

distinct Slavic touch. And, to your own surprise, you arelikely to find that Istrians are people who have assimilatedthe best of all those cultures: not as kitschy, but as clean asthe Austrians; not as loud, but as fundamentally civilized asthe Italians; not as proverbially thrifty (not to say stingy) assome Continental Slovenes; not as angry, nor asMediterranean as their neighbors, the Dalmatian Croats.Travel further down the beautiful Croatian coast and you willenter a more typically Mediterranean world. It reaches itscultural height in the gorgeous, but typically dirty and sweatytown of Split in whose center one finds the formidablepalace of the Roman emperor Diocletian; but unlike otherancient palaces, this one is still inhabited by real people who,in rather typical Mediterranean fashion, hang their linenesfrom the windows. But Split is also a world unto itself, notonly a part of Croatian Dalmatia. For the old people of Split,there is only one truly legitimate identity: that of being acitizen of Split. The cruder newcomers, who come from themountainous Dalmatian hinterland are referred to as“Vlachs,” a perjorative term derived from the name of anancient Illyrian tribe. Sometimes used in Croatia and Bosniato describe “primitive Serbs,” in Split, Vlach applies to allcrude mountaineers, regardless of nationality.

Just to prove that the south is not always morebackward than the north, the city of Dubrovnik, located nearthe very border of Montenegro, is markedly more “civilized”than some parts of Dalamtia to the north; for if Split is asbeautiful as Genoa and as angry as Naples, Dubrovnik is asmajestic as a smaller Venice. With its distinct touch of acommercial aristocracy, it truly stands out among all southSlavic cities. Not accidentally, it was here that theRenaissance touched the south Slavic poets like Ian Gundulicwho are jealously, egoistically, and meaninglessly claimedby Serbian and Croatian nationalists alike. This is becauseDubrovnik, despite its predominantly Catholic character,always had a significant Serbian contingent. Moreover, it ishere that, in an interesting aberration from the historicalpattern which largely equates Serbdom with Orthodoxy, onefinds a contingent of Catholic Serbs who converted to theWestern faith through a centuries-long process ofintermarriage and cultural mixing.

Istria, Dalmatia, and Dubrovnik, the last with itsseparate existence as a city-state until the Napoleonicinvasions (yes, among all the conquerors in the Balkans, itwould be somewhat of a crime if we had missed out on thecrowned Jacobin, Napoleon), do not exhaust the complexityof croissant-shaped Croatia. After all, the early Croatiankings ruled over the three historic lands of Croatia, Slavonia,and Dalmatia.

Indeed, Continental Croatia is different. In its capital,Zagreb, the angry, noisy, and urbane Mediterranean world ofDalmatia is replaced with the bourgeois (some would saypetit-bourgeois) manners of a medium-sized provincialcapital of that great Central European empire whose symbolis the Viennese waltz. Zagreb is, indeed, a typical baroqueCentral-European town, with the proverbial opera and coffeehouse at the center of its cultural life; while the southernsuburbs of the city imperceptibly flow into the rich fields ofSlavonia, itself a part of the larger Panonian Plain, whichCroatia shares with Hungary and Vojvodina, the last being thenorthern part of today’s Serbia. The boring sleepiness ofthese Slavonian villages and small towns served as a sort ofinspriation of all Croat and Yugoslav authors; Krleza woulduse the metaphor of “our Panonian mud” to convey to thereader a feeling of existential despair from which there is noescape.

Even all this does not capture the full complexity ofthe Croatian nation, for we left out the most Croatian of allCroatian tribes, the Croats of Herzegovina. It is here, amidstthe rocks and snakes, in the rough landscape of Herzegovina,which is rendered more humane only by the beautifully greenand treacherous Neretva River, that the great CatholicMadonna of Medjugorje made her appearance. And whileChristian miracles are supposed to be be unpredictable, ifone were faced with a multiple-choice text before ithappened, one would have probably predicted that a Catholicvision was bound to occur among the Herzegovina Croats. Itis among them that the brothers of the most asceticFranciscan order came to proselytize in an attempt topreserve the true faith in the face of Ottoman onslaught fromthe east. For centuries they said their prayers and sang theirchants all the more zealously because their flock was alwaysunder the threat of a potential conversion to Islam, in thefashion of some of their Bosnian brothers. Is it surprisingthat the most determined and vicious Croatian fighters havecome from western Herzegovina? And is it surprising thatthe so-called Herzegovina lobby has a very strong influenceon the policies of Tudjman’s government, always pushing itmore to the right, as if it were not right wing enough?

The complexities of Croatia and Bosnia behind us, wecan now travel east to Serbia. If geographical Serbia is not asdiverse as Croatia, the mentalities of the different Serbian“tribes” are as distinct as those which can be detected amongtheir Catholic Croatian brethren. First, there are the peacefulSerbs of Vojvodina, a region which flows in Slavonia and is apart of the rich plain to the north. The proverbial hero of

CSEES Newsletter/5

continued on next page

many jokes about these Serbs is the Lala(tulip) from Vojvodina. In one of thethem, Lala catches a goldfish and, as isalways the case, can have his threewished before he lets the goldfish free:

First wish: I don’t want my wife Sosa[typically a healthy, plump lady] tocheat on me;

Second wish: If she cheats on me, Idon’t want to find out about it.

Third wish, Even if I find out about it, Idon’t want to get very upset.

Clearly, our Serbian tulip is not awarlike creature. But Vojvodina is notonly the site of these peaceful Serbianpeasants but also the cradle of modernSerbian culture. In the aftermath of aseries of unsuccessful uprisings againstthe Ottomans, the migrations fromKosovo (the largest one in 1690)brought into Hungarian Vojvodina a largecontingent of Serbs, as well as thepatriarch of the Serbian OrthodoxChurch. It was only from Vojvodina thatthe bishops and more secular and better-educated Serbian intelligentsia and petitebourgeoisie began a Serbian culturalrevival in the nineteenth-century age ofnationalism, providing rationales for theexpansion of the Serbian state, whichwas gradually gaining ground in itsconfrontation with the Ottoman empire.Not for nothing was Novi Sad, the capitalof Vojvodina, compared to SerbianAthens, a cultural center with no parallelin the Serbian lands.

But there was also rough Montenegro,the “Black Mountain” and the SerbianSpara, daring the Ottoman conqueror toclimb up the rocky cliffs and confrontwarrior clans and tribes known for theirpatriarchal cruelty as well as their senseof honor. Of them, the English poetTennyson wrote,

They kept their faith, theirfreedom and their height,Chaste, frugal, savage, armed byday and night,Against the Turk.

Faces of Yugoslavia, continued

Amidst these armed, frugal savagesarose in the nineteenth century PetarPetrovic Njegos, a man of exceptionalpoetic gifts, a cosmopolitan Orthodoxbishop and ruler, who wrote one of themost beautiful epic poems of all time,Mountain Wreath. Characteristically,his great epic is devoted to the theme ofpatriarchal retribution, and its targets arethose Serbs who had made the unhappychoice of converting to Islam, therebecoming, in the eyes of Njego’sMontenergin heroes, traitors to theirtribe and to Orthodoxy, the “true faith.”Here is how one of them admonished hisSlavic Moslem brethren to reconvert toOrthodoxy:

Should you not listen to BaltricI swear to you by Obilic’s faithand by my arms, my trusty weapons,our faiths will be immersed in blood,the better one will not sink!Bairam cannot make peace withChristmas!

In the ninteenth century age ofromantic nationalism when variousWesterners, beginning with Lord Byronand the great German historian Leopoldvon Ranke (who, incidentally wrote oneof his histories of the first Serbianinsurrection against the Ottoman Turksunder Karageorge or Black George)expressed sympathy for the cause of“oppressed peoples,” such words wereseen as part of a movement for nationalliberations. Today they would beinterpreted as a justification for ethniccleansing.

But the historical tragedy of theBalkans lies in the fact that the twoprocesses could not be separated, andthe liberation of one people frequentlyentailed the persecution of another. Themost typical example is the BalkanWars of 1912-1913 when Serbs,Montenegrins, Bulgarians, and Greeksfirst united to defeat the Turk and thenturned against each other in a battle overMacedonia, committing atrocities that

CSEES Newsletter/6

Graduate Studentand Faculty

Working Groups

The Center, together with theBerkeley Program in Soviet andPost-Soviet Studies, continuetheir working group program.Modest support is offered towardthose who organize a series ofregular meetings for a specificconstituency to discuss specificissues related to Eastern Europeand the former Soviet Union.Assistance for each workinggroup does not exceed $300annually, and funds can be usedfor expenses such asphotocopying, refreshments,supplies, etc. To apply a granttoward a working group, facultyand/or students must prepare a 1-2 page proposal which clearlystates the topic of the group andthe significance of organizing aregular meeting to address thattopic. In addition, it shouldindicate the membership of thegroup, the time and place ofmeetings, as well as theirfrequency. If necessary,arrangements can be made formeetings in the Slavic Centerconference room in 270Stephens. Finally, the organizersmust indicate the way in whichthey plan to disseminate the workof the group. Questions can bedirected toward the ExecutiveDirectors: Ned Walker at 642-6168 or Barbara Voytek 643-6736.

are suspiciously reminiscent of the oneswe are witnessing today. It ischaracteristic that Serbs continuedperceiving the Second Balkan War asone of liberation; for Skopje, the presentcapital of the “Former YugoslavRepublic of Macedonia” (this clumsyname itself a confirmation of Greekresentments over Macedonia, as well asits veto power in the Europeancommunity) was the town that themedieval Serbian king Dusan chose asthe capital of his empire and in which heproclaimed himself tsar in the year1346. The Macedonians, however, whowere less sentimental about Dusan, sawthe Second Balkan War as a continuationof their enslavement, albeit under newand different masters, Serbs, Greeks, andperhaps less so, Bulgarians.

Such realities are frequently lost onWesterners and especially those ofAnglo-Saxon background, for there isnothing in their historical experiencethat quite matches such unpleasantcomplexities. The historical confusionof Western visitors to the Balkans waswell captured by Rebecca West, a greatEnglish lady and the author or one of themost fantastic travelogues of all times,which happens to be about Yugoslavia. Inher Black Lamb and Grey Falcon shequite correctly observed that

Each people was perpetually makingcharges of inhumanity against all itsneighbors. The Serb, for example, raisedhis bitterest complaint against the Turk,but was also ready to accuse the Greeks,the Bulgarians, the Vlachs, and theAlbanians of every crime under the sun.English persons, therefore, ofhumanitarian and reformist dispositionconstantly went to the Balkan Peninsulato see who was in fact ill-treating whom,and being by the very nature of theirperfectionist faith unable to accept thehorrid hypothesis that everybody was ill-treating everybody else, all came backwith a per Balkan people established intheir hearts as suffering and innocent,eternally the massacree and never themassacrer.

Besides the warrior-likeMontenegrins, there are also the no lesswarlike Serbs of the Hapsburg militaryfrontier known as the Vojna Krajina (orsimply Krajina). Like those ofVojvodina, these Serbs migrated inseveral waves from the Ottomanterritories and were attracted to thefrontier by the prospect oflandownership. In this respect, theirposition as well as their mentality wasnot unlike that of those better-knownprotectors of another great empire, theRussian Cossacks. In the Hapsburgmilitary frontier, every man from the ageof sixteen to sixty was on permanentcall; and, in comparison to the otherHapsburg provinces, which gave onesoldier for every 142 inhabitants, thatratio on the frontier was one to nine.

For several centuries, therefore, thefrontier formed a separate corpus in theempire. Is it surprising, then, that theidea of historical autonomy has survivedamong these frontier Serbs in Croatia?Not accidentally, it was from this groupthat the core of Tito’s Partisanmovement was made in World War IIafter being the target of horriblepersecution at the hands of Croatianfascists. In view of all this, it should notbe so shocking that these warlikeSerbian communities are now ready toface the Croatian Army even in theabsence of support from Serbia itself,rather than deriving the concreteeconomic benefits that are promised tothem by well-meaning Americanambassadors upon their recognition ofthe Croatian state.

For the stubbornness of thesecommunities is rooted in their historicalexperiences. And that life in the frontierwas no vacation is testified by thefollowing Moslem epic song fromHerzegovina:

The bloody Frontier is this-like withdinner blood, with supper blood,everybody chews bloody mouthfulsnever one white day for repose.

Finally, there are the Serbs of centralSerbia, the hilly Sumadija, theirmentality lying somewhere between thepreoccupation with peace of the Lalafrom Vojvodina and the warlikeexperiences of their cousins fromMontenegro and the frontier. There ispossibly no other Yugoslav region whichhas suffered such losses in this centuryas the Serbian heartland, devastated bythe Austro-Hungarian Imperial Army andNazi occupier, and torn by a fratricidalwar which pitted Partisan againstChetnik, communist again monarchist.So, even if the Serbian peasant fromSumadija wanted to stay out of it all, hehad little choice but to become a part ofthat terrifying historical process whichbrought two world wars to his home.

Last, there is Belgrade, the capital ofSerbia and the former Yugoslavia, a cityof would-be despots, liberal intellectualsand a (still) remarkably free oppositionpress, and the site of a bohemian cafelife which combines the spirit of CentralEurope with that of Eastern Orthodoxyand the Ottoman Mediterranean. It is atestimony to the vulgarity of Milosevic’sregime that the ruralization of thispreviously cosmopolitan city wasdeliberately fostered in order to breakdown the liberal spirit of the growingBelgrade citizen class, but it is also truethat this campaign was only partiallysuccessful, as Belgrade was the site ofthe largest opposition demonstrations inpostwar Yugoslavia (in March 1991) andthe longest student strike in Yugoslavhistory (in summer 1992), both of themdirected against that colorlessapparatchik turned populist despot whohas brought such shame upon the wholeSerbian nation.

At the end of our Yugoslav journey,we come to Kosovo and Macedonia. Thefirst one, Kosovo, is the site of the

continued on page 15

CSEES Newsletter/7

material, however, on the negotiations and renegotiations ofthe Hitler-Stalin Pact in the fall of 1939. The Sovietizationof eastern Poland, which Raack considers part of Stalin’s“prewar dreams,” was effected through an agreement withNazi Germany as cynical (if not more) as the percentagesagreement with Churchill. Extrapolating backwards from

Poland in 1939, Raack goes on to infer that “in 1938, as in1939, Stalin very much wanted a general war in the West”—be it over Czechoslovakia in 1938, or over Poland thefollowing year.

Tracing Stalin’s ambitions through the war, in a chapterironically entitled “Stalin Fights the War—of Defense,”Raack focuses on the northern sphere, covering the Finnishcampaign and the Sovietization of the Baltics—which tookplace, he emphasizes, only one day after Nazi armiesmarched through Paris. Raack also gives considerableattention to the “fulfillment” of the Hitler-Stalin Pact—thepartition of Poland.

The activities of the Soviet Army and other Soviet organs

123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123

BOOK REVIEW

Stalin’s Drive to the West, 1938-1945: The Origins of the Cold War.By R.G. Raack. Stanford University Press, 1995. 168pp. Notes, bibliography, index.

“Might it not be thought cynical if it seemed we had disposedof these issues, so fateful to millions of people, in such anoffhand manner? Let us burn the paper,” Sir WinstonChurchill later recalled telling Premier Josef Stalin. The paperin question was the infamous “percentages agreement,” drawnup by Churchill and approved by Stalin at their Moscow meetingin October 1944. The millions ofpeople to whom Churchill referredresided in southeastern Europe, whichthe two Allied leaders had resolved tosplit up according to “degree ofinfluence”: Romania was to be 90percent Russian; Bulgaria, 75 percentRussian; Greece, 90 percent British(with American help); Yugoslavia andHungary, 50-50. The paper—whichStalin handed back to Churchill, saying“No, you keep it”—represents to manyhistorians an apathy with which the BigThree treated the fate of those livingbetween the Elbe and the Soviet Union.The story has also served Americanswell, suggesting that the US was notinvolved in this ultimate realpolitikdeal.

Indeed, the “Sovietization” ofEastern Europe—a term used by theSoviets and the English-speaking alliesalike—is often seen as a major tragedyin an especially tragic period. R.G.Raack, a historian of Eastern Europewho has recently retired from the California State University inHayward, shares his view. His new book, Stalin’s Drive to theWest, covers both Soviet territorial aims to its west and thefailure—in his terms—of a significant Western response tothese aims. Based (as the jacket copy says) on newly availablematerials from East Bloc archives, the book argues stridentlythat Stalin had always aimed at taking over all of Europe east ofthe Elbe, that Stalin’s claim for “defensive” needs were a coverfor these ambitions, and that Western diplomats andjournalists—and later historians—worked hard to hide this factfrom themselves and others in their dealings with the USSR.

After a brief and strongly worded introduction, Raackacquaints the reader with Stalin’s intentions of invadingwestward with the Czech crisis of 1938. He has more

German or Ukrainian auxiliary soldier destroys picture of Stalin. June, 1941.

CSEES Newsletter/8

in Poland were treated well in chapter three. Here Raack hasenough material, archival and otherwise, to trace out in moredetail the machinations of Soviet political officers attachedto the Red Army. Not surprisingly, he supplements his ownsources with Jan Gross’s important work on this topic,Revolution from Abroad: The Soviet Conquest of Poland’sWestern Ukraine and Western Belorussia. In comparisonwith Gross’s study, however, Raack’s analysis fairs poorly;his work lacks Gross’s interpretative ambitiousness as wellas the source base for analysis of social processes.

Raack is successful, however, in describing the Alliedconflict over Poland and the rivalry between the Londongovernment and the Soviet-supported government in Lublin,which, he argues, was central to the development of the ColdWar. A focus on Poland as a mainspring of the Cold War, ofcourse, is not a new interpretation; more general diplomatichistories have long pointed to Poland as a significantharbinger of future Soviet-Western tensions. But Raackpresents the Allied-power machinations from a more Polish-centered perspective: for instance, Roosevelt and Churchill’sblithe acceptance of a division closely resembling theCurzon line is treated as much for its domestic, social, andespecially political implications in Poland, as for itssignificance in great-power diplomacy.

Chapter five—the best in the book—deploys a wealth ofnew materials from East German state and party archives inorder to support Raack’s argument about plans for teh“Sovietization” of its occupation zones. While some pagesare devoted to the macabre and bizarre history of Hitler’scorpse, pride of place is reserved for East German partyleader Wilhelm Pieck’s notes from a Moscow meeting.Among the options discussed at that 1941 meeting—and theone preferred by the Soviets, Raack insists—is taken down inshorthand by Pieck as “prospect of [Nazi] victory dwindles—international fraternization—revolution with the support ofthe Soviet Union.” Here Raack’s access to internal Germandocuments shows the Soviet focus on political control andpropaganda over emergency relief and economicreconstruction. In Marshal Zhukov’s pithy phrase, “It’s quitesimple, it must look democratic but everything must be inour hands.” Once again, though, Raack’s source base couldbe wider. Newly released documents from the SovietMilitary Administration in Germany (by its Russian initials,SVAG) were not consulted, nor was a recent collection ofSVAG documents from the former Central Party Archive inMoscow.

Raack concludes his narrative with a chapter on “Stalin in

CSEES Newsletter/9

the heart of Europe,” devoting special attention to the“Soviet show”: the Potsdam Conference in July 1945. HereRaack’s anger is aimed at the Allies for not holding theUSSR to its promised plans of occupation—themselvesproblematic—even when confronted with evidence of brokenpromises. Such evidence, Raack aptly notes, was not only atthe negotiating table, but visible all around, amid thedestruction of the eastern sector. The image of huge color

portraits of Stalin hung up over smoldering rubble is anevocative expression of Soviet policy. Thus concludes whatRaack called Stalin’s Drang nach Westen ; while Stalinwanted more, Raack claims, he had won what he could.

Raack’s use of sources throughout is creative, especiallyin his examination of numerous American and Sovietdocumentary films. He weaves together printed sources froma range of formerly restricted archives in Prague, Berlin, andWarsaw, complementing these with reports from Americandiplomats in those areas. Published and unpublishedmemoirs (stored, for instance, at the Hoover Institution) arealso deployed to add both texture and occasionally importantinsight into Soviet activities. Yet no author, no matter howclever and creative, can use this set of sources to makeclaims about Stalin’s intentions—“Stalin” here meaning theperson, not just a stand-in for Soviet policy. Raack iscomfortable making assertions about Stalin’s “years ofwaiting”—from 1923—to enact his plan of imperialism,inspired equally by Leninist internationalism and tsaristexpansionism. The author frequently extrapolates backward,assuming that Stalin’s intentions were essentially unchangedover two decades. While it is not hard to detect patterns inSoviet military and occupation policies after 1938, this doesnot justify arguing, for example, that the Soviet response tothe 1938 Czech crisis can be understood with documentsfrom Poland in 1939.

Raack’s sections on Stalin’s personality and politics areequally speculative at times. Raack adopts a name-callingstyle similar to that of D.A. Volkogonov in his biography ofthe Soviet leader, Triumf i tragediia: I.V. Stalin. Raack,whose new documents contain far fewer revelations, tries to

(Raack) stridently argues that Stalin hadalways aimed at taking over all of Europeeast of the Elbe...and that Westerndiplomats and journalists—and laterhistorians—worked hard to hide this factfrom themselves and others in theirdealings with the USSR.

continued on next page

match Volkogonov’s angry accusations. Stalin is a “derangeddictator” with a “cold heart” living in “mentaldisequalibrium,” “paranoic,” “stumped,” and so on. Further,Raack’s conclusion that some “Red government indignities”were “directly attibutable to Stalin” remains an unsupported(if not implausible) “inference” so long as Moscow remainsonly a quick stopover on Raack’s archival excursions. Whilethe former Party Archive and the Foreign Ministry Archivemay not contain—or release to researchers—Volkogonov-type revelations, or a full recond of the foreign-policydebates in Moscow, assertions about Stalin’s “direct”influence certainly could benefit from an examination ofmore of these sources.

These limits of sources and interpretation could be moreeasily overlooked were it not for Raack’s insistence that heis the sole truth-teller amid packs of the self-deceived (orworse). Thus analysts who disagree with Raack “deliberatelydid not look,” or took “conscience-faith as reality.” This istopped by a remarkable one and one-half page footnotelisting individuals misinformed about Stalin’s intentions.While the record of American analysis of Soviet aims inEurope is far from proud, Raack is quick to condemn expertsand politicians who had sort out hundreds of pieces ofcontradicting information arriving daily. Or perhaps he

Stalin’s Drive West, continued

deliberately ignores their circumstances. Raack’s one effortat modesty in this regard—the caveat that his book is“necessarily incomplete” and will be “corrected by otherslater” is undercut by the next sentence, which boasts that hisbook “should superannuate countless earlier histories.”

In spite of these problems, however, we should takeRaack’s challenge to heart. His use of non-textual sourcesand his comparative perspective are especially valuable forhis topic, a study of events more typically seen as the mapupon which the Great Powers solved their own disputesrather than as the wholesale reallocation of territory, whichled to untold personal and societal losses. It is an indicationof his assessment of these losses that Raack, looking fromsmoldering central Europe east to smoldering Nagasaki,suggests that the only instrument capable of saving Japanfrom the tragic division of their country was the atomicbomb.

David Engerman, Ph.D. candidate,History Department,University of California,Berkeley

IAS PUBLICATIONS INSLAVIC AND EAST EUROPEAN STUDIES

IAS Publications has recently produced two works of interest to scholars and students in our area.Ivo Andrich Revisited: The Bridge Still Stands, is edited by Wayne Vucinish (History, StanfordUniversity). Ivo Andric was awarded the 1961 Nobel Prize for Literature for his fiction and poetry.This volume examines Andric’s use of South Slavic oral and written traditions, and themes ofvictimazation, gender relations, and art in the formation of Yugoslav identity.

The Collapse of Soviet Communism: A View from the Information Society is the secondpublication in the IAS series, “Exploratory Essays.” The authors are Manuel Castells, professor ofplanning and affiliated professor of sociology as well as chair of the Center for Western EuropeanStudies at Berkeley, and Emma Kiselyova, assistant director of international relations at the Instituteof Economics and Industrial Engineering, Russian Academy of Sciences, and research associate, atthe Institute of Urban and Regional Development at Cal.

Copies of either volume are availabe from IAS Publications, 510/642-4065.

CSEES Newsletter/10

William Saroyan Visiting Professorship in Armenian Studies1234567890123456789012345678901212345123456789012345678901234567890121234512345678901234567890123456789012123451234567890123456789012345678901212345123456789012345678901234567890121234512345678901234567890123456789012123451234567890123456789012345678901212345123456789012345678901234567890121234512345678901234567890123456789012123451234567890123456789012345678901212345123456789012345678901234567890121234512345678901234567890123456789012123451234567890123456789012345678901212345123456789012345678901234567890121234512345678901234567890123456789012123451234567890123456789012345678901212345123456789012345678901234567890121234512345678901234567890123456789012123451234567890123456789012345678901212345123456789012345678901234567890121234512345678901234567890123456789012123451234567890123456789012345678901212345123456789012345678901234567890121234512345678901234567890123456789012123451234567890123456789012345678901212345123456789012345678901234567890121234512345678901234567890123456789012123451234567890123456789012345678901212345123456789012345678901234567890121234512345678901234567890123456789012123451234567890123456789012345678901212345123456789012345678901234567890121234512345678901234567890123456789012123451234567890123456789012345678901212345123456789012345678901234567890121234512345678901234567890123456789012123451234567890123456789012345678901212345123456789012345678901234567890121234512345678901234567890123456789012123451234567890123456789012345678901212345123456789012345678901234567890121234512345678901234567890123456789012123451234567890123456789012345678901212345123456789012345678901234567890121234512345678901234567890123456789012123451234567890123456789012345678901212345123456789012345678901234567890121234512345678901234567890123456789012123451234567890123456789012345678901212345123456789012345678901234567890121234512345678901234567890123456789012123451234567890123456789012345678901212345123456789012345678901234567890121234512345678901234567890123456789012123451234567890123456789012345678901212345123456789012345678901234567890121234512345678901234567890123456789012123451234567890123456789012345678901212345123456789012345678901234567890121234512345678901234567890123456789012123451234567890123456789012345678901212345123456789012345678901234567890121234512345678901234567890123456789012123451234567890123456789012345678901212345123456789012345678901234567890121234512345678901234567890123456789012123451234567890123456789012345678901212345

Two new endowments support Armenian Studies at the Universityof California at Berkeley: the William Saroyan Endowment for aVisiting Professor and the Krouzian Study Center Endowment. Theobjective is to support an integrated program of activities whichwill lead to opportunities for students, faculty, scholars, andmembers of the general public to learn about Armenia — itssociety, languages, culture, history, and socioeconomicposition within a global framework. While the emphasis is oncontemporary issues, the program is flexible and mayencompass any of the study areas mentioned above.Complementary programs in related fields of Near East,Middle East, Russian, Caucasus, Byzantine, and Greekstudies are well developed on the Berkeley campus.

Applications are now being considered for a visitingprofessor for the Fall 1996 Semester (August 21 toDecember 15). Field open. Salary negotiable. Theapplicant is expected to teach an undergraduate course(s)on an approved topic of Armenian studies, supervise andassist student research, interact with faculty and studentsin related fields, present a public lecture, and lead thedevelopment of an active program.Requirements: candidates must have a Ph.D. orequivalent. They must have teaching experience in theEnglish language. Application consists of thefollowing: curriculum vitae; a proposed syllabusand description of course or courses to be taught;two references.

The Armenian Studies Program is administeredthrough the Center for Slavic and East EuropeanStudies, an organized research unit withinInternational and Area Studies. It is supportedby an advisory committee appointed by theVice Chancellor with representatives from the

Armenian Alumni Association,the Armenian Community within the Bay Area in general, as well asthe Slavic Center, the Center for Middle Eastern Studies, and the Department ofNear East Studies.

Interested individuals should send a cv and supporting documents to Dr.Barbara Voytek, Executive Director, Center for Slavic and East EuropeanStudies, 361 Stephens Hall #2304, University of California, Berkeley, CA94720-2304. The deadline for application is December 1, 1995.

William Saroyan FilmAn award winning documentaryfilm, Remembering WilliamSaroyan: The Man, The Writerwill be shown atSt. John Armenian Church Hall275 Olympia WaySan FranciscoDecember 3rdReception 4:00 p.m.$10 donation415/591-1951

CSEES Newsletter/11

The Seventh International Flint Symposium,Warsaw and Ostrowiec Swietokrzyski, Poland

4-8 September, 1995

The VIIth International Flint Symposium was held thisyear in Warsaw and Ostrowiec Swietokrzyski, Poland. Over100 participants met at the State Archaeological Museum inWarsaw on the afternoon of the 4th of September and beganthe conference with a wine reception and tour of the newexhibit. The exhibit is an excellent panorama of the natureand extent of prehistoric flint-mining in Poland. Afterviewing the exhibit, one understands clearly that Poland wasthe perfect choice for the flint symposium.

After the reception, we traveled by bus to Ostrowiec inthe region of the “Holy Cross Mountains.” The next two dayssaw intense scholarly activity with three simulataneoussessions: Flint Mines and Mining; Flint Distribution andTechnology; and Geology, Mineralogy, Petrography andGeochemistry of Raw Materials of the Stone Age. The thirdday provided an excursion into the foothills where we wereable to witness firsthand the occurrence and evidence ofprehistoric exploitation of Upper Jurassic and UpperCretaceous siliceous rocks which, to Europeanarchaeologists, are more commonly known as the “chocolateflint” and the “banded flint” of Poland. In addition, we spent awonderful afternoon touring the flint mine of Krzemionki, animpressive site and a flint-knapper’s dream. Friday ended theconference with a final day of meetings. This year moreemphasis was placed on the socioeconomic context of flint-mining. Anthropological models were discussed, not withoutrather heated argument.

Participants came largely from Poland, followed byCzechs, Slovaks, Germans, Danes, English, and Dutch.Approximately three each of Hungarian, French, Italian, andSpanish were in attendance. One geologist from Russia, ayoung Ukrainian and an archaeologist from Belarus wereable to come. Three Iranian archaeologists attended, althoughtheir interest in flint exploitation was not so immediate as itwas for the Europeans. There were three participants fromthe US.

The significance of the conference lay in several areas.It was the first time the conference was held in the East andthe first time the number of archaeologists from the Eastmatched that from the West. The location, Ostrowiec, is amidsize town near many ancient flint mines. Our symposiumwas a source of great interest for the local people and helped

obtain funds for improving the facilities (park and museum)connected with the flint mines. Our four days there attractedattention. The symposium and participants were prominentlyfeatured on the local cable TV station, as well as covered inthe local news.

In addition, the Polish archaeologists, as well as thosefrom other Eastern countries, connected with Westerncolleagues for future collaborations. The Danish and Englisharchaeologists are expert in flint exploitation studies andthey were impressed with the level of research on the Polishflint mines. Several remained after the conference to teachflint-mining techniques to the Polish students. I expect thatwith my connection to the Center and to Cal’sArchaeological Research Facility, there will be futurecollaborations with the Polish archaeologists as well.

Notably, the conference was made possible through theefforts of several institutions whose cooperation andcoordination surpassed similar operations I have witnessedin the West. The organizers were the Institute ofArchaeology and Ethnology of the Polish Academy ofSciences; the State Archaeological Museum in Warsaw; andthe Museum of History and Archaeology in Ostrowiec.Sponsors were the State Committee for Scientific Research;the Polish Academy of Sciences; the City of OstrowiecSwietokrzyski; and the Wojewoda of Kielce. Those whoacted in cooperation with the organizers included theInstitute of Archaeology of the University of Warsaw; theInstitute of Archaeology of the Jagiellonian University; theInstitute of Mineralogy, Raw Materials, and Geochemistry;the Academy of Mining and Metallurgy, Krakow; and theInstitute of Geological Sciences of the Polish Academy ofSciences, Warsaw.

Barbara Voytek,Executive Director,CSEES

Conference Reports

CSEES Newsletter/12

The International Colloquium on Workers and the Intelligentsia in Russiain the Late Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Centuries

St. Petersburg, June 1995

Is the history of the Russian working class still a viable topic,now that the “workers’ state” no longer exists? Was there,indeed, ever such a thing as a Russian “working class”? On thebasis of a recent international conference in the former Russiancapital the answer to the first question is surely “yes”: fresh andcreative analysis and discussion of Russian labor history isapparently alive and well, both in Russia and in the West. Theanswer to the second question, however—better formulated as“how useful is the concept working class to our understandingof late Imperial Russian society?”—is now very much indispute, as witness the attention it received and the controversyit aroused at the conference.

The conference, or “colloquium,” as the Russians prefer tocall it (the official Russian title was: Rabochie Rossii vo vtoroipolovine XIX-nachale XX v.: oblik, mentalitet; rabochie iobshchestvo; rabochie i intelligentsiia) was held in the filmprojection room of the Gostinitsa Smol’nonskaia, just acrossfrom the famous Smol’ny Monastery. The main institutionalcosponsors were, on the Russian side, the Petersburg filial ofthe Institute of Russian History (hereafter “IRH”) of theRussian Academy of Sciences, and on the “Western” side, ourown UC Berkeley Slavic Center, which played a role asadministrator in the NEH-backed, IREX grant that funded theevent (special thanks to Brenda Rizzetto for her splendidassistance), the Harriman Institute (Columbia University), andthe Maison des Sciences de l’Homme. As “principalinvestigator” for the project, I was joined by Dr. Sergei I.Potolov of the IRH in the capacity of co-chair of theconference itself, along with a larger “coordinating committee”that included Professors Mark Steinberg of Yale (my closeassociate in the organization of the program) and LeopoldHaiman of Colombia. Steinberg, as many readers of hisnewsletter will recall, is a UC Berkeley History Ph.D., as wereseveral other participants: Professors Deborah Pearl ofCleveland State University, Gerald Surh of North Carolina StateUniversity, and Eugene “Tony” Swift of the University of Essex.Although Russians and Americans were numericallypredominant, the event’s international flavor was enhanced bythe presence of scholars from Germany, England, France,Finland, and Azerbaijan (the only “successor state” representedbesided Russia itself).

The gathering was meant to be exploratory, designed toencourage the examination of the many areas of interplaybetween workers and other strata (sloi) of Russian society,especially educated society, including both the revolutionaryand the non-revolutionary (or less revolutionary) intelligentsiaand the educated professionals who dealt with workers in either

an official or an unofficial capacity. The conference was alsomeant to foster the notion, already suggested, if not fullydeveloped, in earlier Soviet works by the concept of oblik, thatthe mental and moral world of workers was as rich, varied,complex and worthy of study as the world of educated society.Russian workers, including, of course, the so-called worker-inteligentsia, have and should have their own rich and variedcultural and intellectual histories.

Iurii Kirianov of the Moscow IRH, considered by many to bethe premier historian of Russian labor, first introduced the thendaring concept of oblik into the Soviet historical lexicon in the1960s. Kirianov gave what amounted to the keynote address atthe conference, in which he did himself and oblik one better byinvoking the French Annales School notion of mentalité (inRussian, mentalitet). Although some might argue that he wassimply introducing a new word for oblik, and that a fullerexploration of worker “mentalité” is still needed, the use of theterm was nonetheless emblematic of the powerful desire of theRussian participants to explore modes of analysis that had oncebeen alien to historians of labor. Both the expression and thequestion of its value came up again and again in the course ofthe subsequent discussions.

The conference was divided into three sections (usuallycomprising two sessions each, a morning and an afternoon),each devoted to a broad topic (problema): Topic one,“samoopredelenie, oblik, mentalitet,” included the “mentality”paper by Kirianov, which many saw as the highlight of theconference, especially in the light of its striking departuresfrom the shibboleths of past historiography. A thematic paperby Leo Haimson highlighted the mutual “representations”(predstavleniia) of workers and intelligenty within the Social-Democratic movement, and an innovative paper by Steinbergdealt with worker-intelligenty’s concepts of the individual “self”(lichnost’). Also included in the first topic were papers by E. R.Ol’khovskii on the “formation” of the worker-intelligentsia, bythe anthropologist N.S. Polishchuk (the only non-historianparticipant), on working-class customs and morés, by I. A.Akhanchi, on relations among ethno-religious groups in theBaku oil industry, by N. V. Mikhailov, on the “self-organizationof worker collectives and the psychology of russian workers,”and by Tony Swift, on workers’ theater. Mikhailov’s paperprovoked instance discussion because of its emphasis on thepeasant origins of industrial collectivism, a tabu line ofargument in Russia only a few years ago.

Topic two, “workers and the Russian social movement”(obshchestvennoe dvizhenie), included papers by G. I.

Conference Reports

CSEES Newsletter/13

Korolev, comparing and contrasting theways in which workers and intelligentyunderstood the word “socialism,” JoanNeuberger, on some fasinating casestudies of workers who broughtgrievances before the post-Reformjustices of the peace (mirovye sud’i),Deborah Pearl, on the complex relationsbetween workers and the People’s Will(Narodnaia Volia), A. S. Kasimov, on thelocal interactions between workers andintelligenty in the Central Black-SoilRegion, Manfred Hildermeier, onworkers and the SR Party, WilliamRosenberg, on liberal representations ofworkers, S. L. Firsov, on workers and theOrthodox Church, S. A. Stepanov, on theBlack Hundreds’ efforts to recruitworkers, Hubertus Jahn, on workerpatriotism during World War I, and R. Sh.Ganelin, on representations of the labormovement in the minds of bureaucraticreformers.

Topic three, “workers andintelligentsiia,” began with my own paperon the social and personal relationsbetween worker-revolutionaries andrevolutionary students in the 1870s,followed by papers by T. M. Kitianina, onworkers and the “technical intelligentsia”(membes of the Imperial RussianTechnical Society), Jerry Surh, on the“chimera” of economism, a case study ofthe Petersburg “Rabochaia organizatsiia”(1900-03), Sergei Potolov, on worker-intelligentsiia relations on the eve of the1905 Revolution (mainly the GaponAssembly), Jutta Sherrer, on worker-intelligentsia relations at the Marxist“schools” in Capri and Bologna, andSteven Smith of Essex, who presented anunusual comparative paper on worker-intelligentsia relations in Petersburg andShanghai. (Discussants included LauraEngelstein of Princeton, Ziva Galili ofRugers, Louise McReynolds of theUniversity of Hawaii, and NikolaiSmirnov of the IRH.) Finally, on the lastday of the conference, with Rosenbergchairing, there was a series of briefconcluding remarks by P. B. Volobuev ofthe Academy of Sciences, Hiamson,Potolov, and myself.

The papers, and the discussions theyprovoked, highlighted the importance ofanalyzing the preconceptions with whichthe various components of Russia’s pre-Revolutionary élites approached theworkers whom they hoped to influence,as well as the ways in which their contactswith workers altered thosepreconceptions in the course of time.Workers and intellectuals were inconstant contact from the Great Reformsto the end of the old régime, and many ofthe papers succeeded in probing thosecontacts in depth and shedding new lighton them. The intelligentsia’s very variedimages (“representations”) of workers,and the confusing, contradictory, yetrevealing ways in which intelligentystruggled with their understanding of the“working class” over time, provided theconference with a recurrent leitmotif.The inclusion of balanced discussions ofconservative, nationalist, and religiousmovements and institutions and of theirapproaches to workers and to the laborquestions was a valuable innovation(though one missing dimension thatwould have been useful was workerrelations with police). Especiallygratifying was the amount of attentionpaid by several speakers to the subject ofworkers as intelligentsia, their mentality,ethical ideals, and self-identifications. Ofcouse the topics covered were hardlyexhaustive, but the conference surelyadvanced our research agenda and helpedenrich the thinking of scholars on bothsides of what is fast becoming, from anintellectual standpoint, an artificial divide.

We are now preparing the publicationof the proceedings of the conference inbook form. A talented Russian publisher,“Blitz,” has been found, though somefunding is still needed to subsidize theventure. When that problem has beensolved, we also plan to pursue thepublication of a large selection of thepapers in English.

by Reginald E. Zelnik,Profesor of History,University of California, Berkeley

MEMORIAL TOMARK SAROYAN

Plans are set for the publication ofthe collected works of MarkSaroyan, UC Berkeley Ph.D. inpolitical science, who passed awaylast year. International and AreaStudies at Cal will publish the work.Harvard University, where Marktaught after completing his degree,contributed generously to theproject. The compilation is underthe directorship of Timothy Coltonand Susan Farrar from Harvard andGail Lapidus from Stanford. Onceagain, we would like to thank thealumni who contributed toward thepublication of this important work.

NEW COURSE!

STRUCTURES OFCONTEMPORARY ROMANIAN

Instructor: Gabriella Duda,professor of pedagogy and philologyat the University of Ploiesti, Romania.

The course presents the mainphonological, morphological,syntactic and lexical aspects ofcontemporary standard Romanian.The instructor will design a readerwith various texts (literary,newspaper, etc.) for grammaticaland lexical exercises. Differencesbetween spoken and writtenlanguage, formal and informalcommunication will be highlighted.

The course is open to students inRomance Languages, SlavicLanguages and Linguistics. Thoseinterested in enrolling are advised tocontact Professor Duda at the SlavicCenter 642-3230.

Meets MWF 10-11 in 189 DwinelleRomance Philology 220,

Course 78509Linguistics 270,Course 52972

CSEES Newsletter/14

famous battle of the Field of theBlackbirds (Kosovo Polje) in which themedieval Serbian kings lost theirkingdom to the invading Ottomans in1389. Successive generations turnedthis defeat on the field of battle into aspiritual victory for Christianity; for,according to the legend, when facedwith the excruciating choice, Serbiantsar Lazar chose the Kingdom inHeaven over the one on Earth, even ifsimultaneously one of his nobles,Milos Obilic, proceeded to take thelife of his opponent, the great SultanMurat, in an act of earthly retribution.This connection between the twothemes of Christian martyrdom andpatriarchal revenge was henceforthpassed on from generation togeneration through epic poems,forming the basis of the defining mythof nineteenth-century Serbiannationalism. In light of this, the Serbianpreoccupation with the loss of Kosovoto the growing Albanian populationbecomes more understandable, even ifthe practical political consequences aremorally unjustifiable.

The Albanians are the only non-Slavic and therefore, strictly speaking,non-Yugoslav tribe in the formerYugoslav space. Their origin is still thesubject of great controversy, for theydo not seem related to any of thesurrounding peoples; the same could besaid of the Albanian language which isnot a part of the more standardlanguage groups. But aside from beingpredominantly Moslem (for there arealso Orthodox and Catholic Albanians),the Kosovo Albanians are close inmentality to the neighboringMontenegrins. In any case, like theMontenegrins they have tended to livein large clans whose origins arecarefully preserved in collectivememory; and naturally, in such asociety, vendetta over the perennialquestion of honor is still far from

Faces of Yugoslavia, continued

PROCLAMATIONS

Acceptance of the idea thateverything in America works or canbe worked out, whether this idea istrue or not, is perhaps the watershedmoment for someone who hasrecently arrived from EasternEurope. Having gotten used to this,he now becomes a new man. That is,to a certain extent; there are stillsome vestiges of his old mentalitywhich simply cannot be eradicated.In spite of all his euphoria, the NewWorld sometimes also provokesfeelings of cultural alienation,incomprehension, or disgust. Here isa partial list of things Americanwhich E.E. will never be able tocome to terms with:

1. Barbara Walters

2. Wonder Bread

3. Stand-Up parties

4. Baseball

5. Small Talk

6. Dental Bills

7. Muzak

8. Decaffeinated coffee

9. Catfood commercials

- Excerpt from “E.E.: The Extraterrestrial”in Stanislaw Baranczak’s “Breathing UnderWater and Other East European Essays.”Harvard University Press, 1990.

being an uncommon practice.

Last comes Macedonia, which isitself a great mixture of peoples amongwhom the Yugoslav Macedonians (forthere are Macedonians in Bulgaria andGreece as well) predominate. It is thisgreat diversity which gave the name toan exotic French salad with a greatmany different ingredients—lamacedoine. But frustrated nationhoodand a legacy of oppression by everyconceivable neighbor also madeMacedonia a land of sad ballads and themost wonderfully heavy, somberdances, performed in a strange rhythmthat is still the subject ofmusicological interest, and also a landof dark plots and extremistconspiracies, many of which shookYugoslav and Bulgarian politics in theinterwar period. If present-dayMacedonia survives its ordeals as afully independent state, it will be indefiance of a well establishedhistorical pattern.

Naturally, this brief tour ofYugoslav or former Yugoslavidentities, regions, nations andmentalities has touched only on someselect aspects of the larger and evenmore complex picture. The cultural gapbetween city and country, the poorpeople of the mountains and those ofthe richer plains, various intranationalresentments such as those betweenformer apparatchiks and the newnationalists, army officers and“separatists” or “internal traitors,” and agreat many other possible divisionshave only been hinted at. But if thisinevitably short tour has served toconvey the idea that not everything is asclear cut as it appears, it will haveserved its purpose.

CSEES Newsletter/15

BPS Caucusus Program

12345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012

Map of the three Transcaucasianrepublics of Armenia, Azerbaijan, andGeorgia.

I am pleased to report thatthe Berkeley Program in Sovietand Post-Soviet Studies hasbeen awarded a three-year grantby the Ford Foundation forgraduate training and researchprojects on the contemporaryCaucasus. In our proposal toFord, we argued that while theCaucasus, which we defined asthe three Transcaucasianrepublics of Armenia,Azerbaijan, and Georgia as well as theNorth Caucasus region of the RussianFederation, is a strategically vital,extremely volatile, and fascinatingregion, it is at the same time highlyunderstudied. The region is strategicallyvital because of its very large oil and gasreserves; the security concerns andcultural ties of outside powers in theregion (particularly Russia, Turkey, andIran); and its location as a potential routefor pipelines bringing oil and gas fromCentral Asia to the internationalmarketplace. At the same time, theregion is extremely unstable, asevidenced by the still unresolvedconflicts over Nagorno-Karabakh,Abkhazia, Chechnya, and South Ossetia;the conflicts between factions of the“titular nationalities” in Azerbaijan andGeorgia; and the territorial disputes andethnic tensions throughout the region.Finally, the rich history and extremeethnic heterogeneity of the region makesit a fascinating object of study for socialscientists. Nevertheless, the Caucasusremains the most understudied region ofthe former Soviet Union.

The three-year project will bringvisiting scholars from the region toteach and conduct research at UCBerkeley; fund graduate training,dissertation, and language trainingfellowships for UC Berkeley graduatestudents specializing on the Caucasus;

CSEES Newsletter/16

provide travel and conference grants tofaculty and graduate students conductingresearch on the Caucasus; bringspeakers to campus for publicpresentations and seminars, and convenean annual conference. The project hasthree research themes, one for eachyear of the grant period: (1)“Nationalism, Ethnopolitics, andConflict in the Caucasus”; (2) “TheGeopolitics of Oil, Gas, and Ecology inthe Caucasus and Caspian Sea;” and (3)“State Building and the Reconstructionof Shattered Societies.” The visitingscholar brought to UCB each year willbe an expert on that year’s theme andwill lead an informal graduate seminar,conduct research, and participate in theannual conference. The research topicof the year will be the organizing themeof the annual conference.

We expect to work closely with theSlavic Center and the Armenian StudiesProgram here at UC Berkeley inimplementing the project. We are alsocooperating with the American Universityof Armenia (AUA). AUA is a graduateuniversity located in Yerevan, Armenia,that began operation in September 1991.Since its inception, AUA has had a formalaffiliation with the University ofCalifornia (UC), which provides AUAwith technical support in administration,faculty training, and collaborativeprograms of scholarly exchange andresearch. We hope that cooperation with

AUA will provide Programgraduate students and facultywith access to a range ofscholars throughout theCaucasus, as well as withextensive logistical support forconducting research in theregion.

We are currentlydeveloping other institutionallinks in the region as well.We have establishedcooperative ties with the

North Ossetian State University(NOSU), which is conveniently locatedin Russia’s North Caucasus region andis equipped with an excellent library,modern communication equipment,and other facilities for visitingresearchers. Catherine Dale, a BPSgraduate student in political science andan expert on Georgia and the Abkahzconflict, has just returned from a two-week trip to Tbilisi, where sheinterviewed potential visiting scholarsand explored the possibility ofinstitutional links, while conductingresearch for a paper on the Abkhazcrisis which she will present at the endof the year at a conference in Oslo. Inaddition, Steve Fish, UC Berkeley’snew assistant professor in politicalscience and a specialist on politicalparties and social movements in post-communist societies, will travel toBaku to conduct research and developscholarly contacts in Azerbaijan.

We have also begun our speakersseries for the project, cooperating withthe Armenian Studies Program, theAssociation for the Study ofNationalities, and the Slavic Center tobring an excellent set of speakers onthe Caucasus to campus for the fallterm. Already, Katrina Menzigian(Fletcher School of Law andDiplomacy, Tufts University) has givena talk on the geopolitics of the Azer oil

CSEES Newsletter/17

industry; Raffi Hovannisian (formerforeign minister of Armenia, Yerevan)gave a presentation on Armeniandomestic politics and foreign policy;Fiona Hill (Strengthening DemocraticInstitutions, the Kennedy School ofGovernment, Harvard University)presented a paper on Russian policy inthe Caucasus; and Nikolai Hovhanissian(director of the Institute for OrientalStudies, Armenian Academy ofSciences) spoke about Armenianpolitics and diplomacy. In the comingweeks, Sergei Arutiunov (Institute ofEthnology and Anthropology inMoscow) will give a talk on the culturalroots of ethnic conflict in the NorthCaucasus, including Chechnya; RichardHovannisian (professor of history atUCLA) will speak on Armenian historyand his recently completed multi-volume hsitory of the republic; RonSuny (professor of political science atthe Univeristy of Chicago) will give apresentation on the Karabakh conflict;Leila Alieva (Kennan Institute) willspeak on current Azerbaijani politics;and Bruce Allyn (the ConflictManagement Group, Cambridge, MA)will talk about peacekeeping and therole of international institutions in theCaucasus hot spots.

Finally, we are hoping to facilitategreater communication and interactionbetween scholars of the Caucasus inthis country. We are currentlycompiling a database of these scholarsand their publications, and we willprepare a newsletter to inform thoseinterested in the region about events,resources, new publications, and so on.We also hope to sponsor panels atprofessional conventions and will bringboth scholars from the region and fromelsewhere in the U.S. to our annualconferences.

We believe that there is an urgentneed to develop scholarly expertise inthe study of the Caucasus in thiscountry. With our tradition ofexcellence in Soviet, post-Soviet, andEast European studies; our existing

institutional infrastructure; theinitiatives already underway on campusin Caucasus studies; and our outstandingfaculty and graduate students, we hopethat our new program at UC Berkeleywill contribute greatly to scholarship

and informed policy making on thisvital yet understudied part of the world.Edward W. Walker,Executive DirectorBerkeley Program inSoviet and Post-Soviet Studies

VISITING SCHOLARS

Gianmaria Ajani, head of thedepartment of law at the University ofTrento, Italy, is a visiting professor ofcomparative law at Boalt Hall. Since1994, Ajani has acted as co-directorof the United Nations’ course oninternational trade in Turin. Aspecialist on Russian and EastEuropean law, he has also served as alegal consultant to the InternationalMonetary Fund and was responsiblefor the drafting of a preliminary civilcode for Albania. His current researchinterest is the influence of WesternEuropean law on the transformationof legal codes in Central and EasternEurope. He is teaching a course oneconomic transformation and the law.

Chen-yu Chang, a graduate student inpolitical science at National TaiwanUniversity in Taipei has come to doresearch as part of the Repbulic ofChina-UC Berkeley CooperativeProgram. Her master’s thesisexamined nationalist movements inYugoslavia and Czechoslovakia, andshe intends to do further research onframeworks for analyzing suchmovements in Eastern Europe.

Robert O. Crummey, professoremeritus of history at the Universityof California, Davis, is teaching anundergraduate course on hisspecialization, the early history ofRussia. His latest book on the periodis The Formation of Muscovy, 1304-1613. He has also recently edited abook of articles on reform in Russiaand the USSR and is continuingresearch on his longtime interest, theOld Believers.

Gabriela Duda, a native ofBucharest, comes to Berkeley as aFulbright scholar to teach modernRomanian (see course description inthis issue). Head of the departmentof philology and pedagogy at theUniversity of Ploiesti, Duda alsohelped establish a department ofRomanian and English at theuniversity. Her publications include aRomanian textbook and a dictionaryof Romanian phrases and idioms forforeigners, as well as several workson Romanian poetics. Her currentinterests include the evolution ofpoetic forms.

Grigorii Golosov ofNovosibirsk State University joinsthe university community as aparticipant in the IREX ContemporaryIssues Regional Scholar ExchangeProgram. A professor of social andpolitical theory, he will examineWestern Siberia as a case study of therole of Russia’s new political parties.Golosov has published severalarticles on Russian politics in acomparative perspective.

Svetlana Mintz teaches Russianhistory at Kuban State University andcultural studies at the ManagementInstitute in Krasnodar, Russia. In1990, Mintz joined a commission toreorganize the university’s historycurriculum in line with internationaleducational standards. She hasreceived an IREX Social ScienceCurriculum Fellowship to learnabout new methods of historicalinvestigation and theoreticalapproaches to the study of culture,

CSEES Newsletter/18

Faculty and Student News

FLAS Fellowship Recipientsfor Academic Year 1995-96

Robin Brooks (Political Science), BulgarianDiana Cheren (Art History), RussianVladimir Doukhovnikov (Environ. Health), RussianCharles Greer (Slavic), SerbianDavid Hoffman (Political Science), RussianLucian Kim (Journalism), RussianKonstantin Klioutchkine (Slavic), CzechDanielle Lussier (Music), HungarianSarah Shul (Slavic), CzechAnna Wertz (History), Polish

Johanna Nichols was awarded theLeonard Bloomfield Book award at theJanuary 1994 meeting of the LinguisticSociety of America for her book,Linguistic Diversity in Space andTime, published by University ofChicagoPress in 1992.

New Students within theBerkeley Program for Soviet andPost-Soviet StudiesRobin Brooks (political science)Michael Carpenter (political science)Adam Cohen-Siegel (linguistics)Lisa Cook (economics)Catherine Dale (political science)James Hamon (sociology)Laura Henry (political science)Marie-Alice L’Heureux (architecture)Norm Offestein (agriculture andresource economics)Jan Plamper (history)Brian Silverstein (anthropology)Arthur Small (agriculture and resourceeconomics)

In 1994, Westview Press Published ThePostcommunist Economic Transition:Essays in Honor of GregoryGrossman, edited by Robert W.Campbell.

SSRC Awardees in 1995James C. Hamon (sociology)received a Language Training Grantfor Czech; Graduate Training Awardswere given to Adrienne Edgar(history) and Marie-Alice L’Heureux(architecture and urban planning);Maranatha Ivanova (politicalscience) was awarded an InternationalPredissertation Fellowship; aDissertation Fellowship was grantedto Valerie Sperling (politicalscience) for her research on “TheDevelopment of the Women’sMovement in Post-CommunistRussia”; David E. Schneider (music)received a Dissertation Fellowship forhis work, “Hungarian CulminationPoints: Folk Music and Meaning inFour Concertos by Bela Bartok.”

Eric Naiman, assistant professor inSlavic and comparative literature,was recently given an F. WarrenHellman award for “exciting,creative research.” He received theaward for his study of “MonumentalIntimacy: Privacy and the Shaping ofSoviet Life.”

M. Steven Fish, newly appointedassistant professor in politicalscience, was awarded an SSRCAdvanced Research Grant for thestudy of the development of multi-partism in Russia’s unconsolidateddemocracy.

New Students in the AreaRobin Brooks (political science)Michael Carpenter (political science)Adam Cohen-Siegel (political science)Stephan Collier (anthropology)Berit Grobecker (education)Jim Hamon (sociology)Laura Henry (political science)David Hoffman (political science)Lucian Kim (journalism)Edward Lee (Slavic)Jason Ostergren (history)Jessica Sharzer (Slavic)David Shneer (history)Brian Silverstein (anthropology)Michelle Viise (Slavic)Anna Zagorska (history)

12345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890

CSEES Newsletter/19

Selected Faculty Publications

1234567890123456789012123456789012345678901212345678901234567890121234567890123456789012123456789012345678901212345678901234567890121234567890123456789012123456789012345678901212345678901234567890121234567890123456789012123456789012345678901212345678901234567890121234567890123456789012123456789012345678901212345678901234567890121234567890123456789012

Bonnell, Victoria E. “TheIconongraphy of the Worker in SovietPolitical Art.” In R. Suny and L.Siegelbaum, eds., The Making of theSoviet Working Class. CornellUniversity Press, forthcoming, 1995.

Breslauer, George W. “How do youSell a Concessionary Foriegn Policy?”Post-Soviet Affairs, July-September,1994; revised version reprinted as “The‘New Political Thinking’ asJustification for Gorbachev’sConcessionary Foreign Policy.” InNorman Naimark, ed., Essays in Honorof Alexander Dallin, forthcoming.

——. “Yel’tsin’s PoliticalLeadership: Why Invade Chechnya?” InC. J. Lee, ed., Russia: Political andEconomic Development, forthcoming.

——. “Counterfactual Reasoning inWestern Studies of Soviet Politics andForeign Relations. In Philip Tetlockand Aaron Belkin, eds., CounterfactualThought Experiments in WorldPolitics, forthcoming.

Grossman, Gregory. “What Was —Is, Will Be — The CommandEconomy?” Most (Bologna), 1994.

Grossman, Joan Delaney.“Decadent Games: Briusov’s Passionsat the Dacha.” In Michael S. Flier andRobert P. Hughes, eds., For SK: InCelebration of the Life and Career ofSimon Karlinsky. Berkeley SlavicStudies, 1994.

——.Ivan Konevskoi’s TiutchevanPilgrimage. In Simon Karlinsky et al.,eds., O RUS! Studies litteraria slavicain honorem Hugh McLean. BerkeleySlavic Specialties, 1995.

Hammel, Eugene A. “Fertilitydecline in Prussia 1875-1910: a PooledCross-section Time Series Analysis.”with P. Galloway and R. D. Lee.Populations Studies 48: 135-58.

“Meeting the Minotaur.”Anthropology Newsletter 35 (4):48.

Washington, American AnthropologicalAssn.

——. “Fertility decline in Russia:Estimating Influences on Supply,Demand, and Degree of Control.” WithP. Galloway and R. D. Lee,Demography 31:347-73.

Hughes, Robert P., and IrinaPaperno, eds. with Boris Gasparovand Olga Raevsky-Hughes.Christianity and the Eastern Slavs.Volume 3: Russian Literature inModern Times. Berkeley: TheUniversity of California Press,forthcoming, fall 1995.

Malia, Martin. The Soviet Tragedy:A History of Socialism in Russia,1917-1991. New York: The FreePress, 1994. (German and Frenchtranslations appeared in 1994; Japanesetranslation to appear this fall; Polishand Russian underway)

——. “The NomenklaturaCapitalists,” The New Republic, May22, 1995. An expanded version inFrench, published in Commentaire, fall,1995.

——. “How European is Russia?”Three Lectures delivered in April 1995at the Institut der Wissenschaften vomMenschen, Vienna. To appear as asmall book in 1996.

——. “Getting Russia ‘wrong:’ ananswer to S. N. Lipset and L. Bence,” inGerman, Transit, fall 1995.

——.From the Bronze Horseman to

the Lenin Mausoleum: Russia underWestern Eyes. Forthcoming, HarvardUniversity Press, 1996.

——.The Pattern and Escalation ofEuropean Revolutions 1640-1917.The Free Press, forthcoming.

McLean, Hugh. “The Case of theMissing Mothers or When Does aBeginning Begin?” In Michael S. Flierand Robert P. Hughes, eds., For SK: InCelebration of the Life and Career ofSimon Karlinsky. Berkeley SlavicStudies, 1994.

Naiman, Eric, and Anne Nesbet.“Documentary Discipline: ThreeInterrogations of StanislavGovorukhin.” In Nancy Condee, ed.,Soviet Heiroglyphics: Visual Culturein Late Twentieth-Century Russia.Indiana University Press, 1995.

Nichols, Johanna. “Who are theChechen?” Newsletter of the Centerfor Slavic and East European Studies,Spring 1995. Full version published inDhumbadji!, Journal for the History ofLanguage 2:2, 1995.

Ram, Harsha. “Russian Poetry andthe Imperial Sublime.” In MonikaGreenleaf and Stephen Moeller Sally,eds., The Subject’s Space: Russia’sGolden Age. Stanford UniversityPress, forthcoming.

Voytek, Barbara, and Paolo Biagi.“The Neolithisation of the Trieste Karstin North Eastern Italy and ItsNeighbouring Countries.” Josa AndrasMuzeum Evkonyve, Nyiregyhaza, 1994.

Voytek, Barbara, and ElisabettaStarnini . “The Use of StoneResources from the Neolithic Levels ofArene Candide (Liguria, Italy).”Archaeologia Polona 33:173-186,1995.

Zelnik, Reginald. Law andDisorder on the Narova River: TheKreenholm Strike of 1872. Universityof California Press, 1995.

Fellowships and Other Opportunities

Slavic Center Travel Grants TheCenter’s US Department of EducationTitle VI grant provides limited travelsupport for Center-affiliated graduatestudents and faculty. Awards of up to$300 are made to those presenting apaper at a meeting of a recognizedscholarly organization. Awards aremade on a first-come, first-serve basis.Priority given to those who did not havegrants in AY94-95. To apply, sendrequest with budget to Barbara Voytek(643-6736).

American Council of LearnedSocieties ACLS-administered Grantsfor East European Studies (except asnoted, intended for study outsideEastern Europe; applicants must becitizens or permanent residents of theUS). Proposals dealing with Albania,Bulgaria, Romania, and the formerYugoslavia are particularly encouraged:

-Predissertation Travel Grants. Totravel to Eastern Europe to examineresources available for research. Up to$5,000 to support a summer trip toEastern Europe of two months or more.Applicants must have been acceptedinto a Ph.D. program before applying.Deadline: February 1, 1996.

- East European Individual LanguageTraining Grants. For first- or second-year summer study of any EastEuropean language (not languages ofthe CIS) in the US or intermediate oradvanced training in Eastern Europe.Graduating college seniors, gradstudents, and postdoctoral scholars areligible to apply. $2,000-2,500.Deadline February 1, 1996.

Applications forms for the above grantsmust be requested in writing from theOffice of Fellowships and Grants,Akmerican Council of LearnedSocieties, 228 East 45th Street, New

York NY 10017-3398. No part of theinquiry or application procedure may beconducted by fax.

Center for German and EuropeanStudies Faculty Grants Applicationsfor graduate student research assistanceduring Spring 1996 on specificEuropean topics. Awards of $3,000.Deadline: November 17, 1995.

- Short Term Predissertation ResearchFellowships. For research in Europeduring summer-fall 1996. UC graduatestudents researching modern Europeantopics, advanced or close to candidacy,eligible to apply. Awards of $3,000.Deadline: January 31, 1996.

For information on applicationprocedure and topics funded for theaforementioned grants, contact CGES,254 Moses Hall #2316.cges@uclink.berkeley.edu

Foreign Language and Area Studies(FLAS) Fellowships

Fellowships awarded to students in oneor more modern foreign language.Priority given to students in thehumanities, social sciences andprofessional fields. Academic yearawards deadline: Continuing students:February 23. Entering students submitfellowship application with applicationfor admission by the departmentaldeadline. Summer FLAS deadline:February 2. Contact GraduateFellowships Office, 318 Sproul Hall,510/642-0672.

International Research & ExchangesBoard (IREX) —

- Short-Term Travel Grants (BalticStates; Central and Eastern Europe;Mongolia; Newly Independent States).For scholarly projects, for brief visits,including presentations at scholarly

CSEES Newsletter/20

conferences. Deadline: February 1,1996; June 1, 1996.

- Special Projects in Library andInformation Science: mid January1996 (exact date to be announced).

- Special Projects in the Study ofCentral and Eastern Europe and Eurasia:March 1, 1996.

- Summer Language Training forCollege and University Instructors ofRussian and Other Languages of theNIS: On-site training. Deadline:January 31, 1996.

IREX, 1616 H Street, N.W.,Washington DC 20006; Tel (202) 628-8188; Fax (202) 628-8189.irex@info.irex.org

Kennan Institute for AdvancedRussian Studies

- Short-term Grants (up to one month’sdurations) to be spent at the Institute inWashington. Deadlines: December 1;March 1 and June 1.

- Research Scholarships (3-9 months’duration). Post-doctoral grants to bespent at the Institute. Deadline:October 1.

BOTH PROGRAMS FOR 1996-7 ARECONTINGENT ON FUNDING. CALLTHE INSTITUTE TO CONFIRM.

Kennan Institute/Woodrow WillsonCenter, 370 L’Enfant Promenade, SW,Ste. 704, Washington DC 20024; (202)287-3400; Fax (202) 287-3772; Bitnet:wwcem116@sivm; Internet:wwcem116@sivm.si.edu. Noapplications by fax or e-mail will beconsidered.

The MacArthur Foundation Fund forForeign Travel. To help individualsfrom former Soviet Union to

CSEES Newsletter/21

participate in workshops or presentpapers abroad. Deadlines: September 1and December 1, 1995. Forinformation and eligibility factors:Tatiana Zhdanova or Elizabeth McKeon,MacArthur Foundation, Moscow; (095)290-5088; Fax (095) 2956-6358;macarthur@glas.apc.org; or AndrewKuchins, 140 S. Dearborn St., Ste.1100, Chicago IL 60603; (312) 726-8000; Fax (312) 917-0200.

NATO Advanced Research FellowshipPrograms Individual/InstitutionalResearch Grants in Political/MilitaryStudies. Scholars conduct research onNATO related topics. Deadline:January 1, 1996. Contact: Council forInternational Exchange of Scholars,3007 Tilden St., NW, Suite 5M, BoxNEWS, Washington DC 20008-3009(202) 686-7878; Internet:cies1@ciesnet.cies.org

Social Science Research Council(SSRC) —

SSRC-MacArthur FoundationFellowships on Peace and Security in aChanging World.

Fellows are required to undertaketraining that adds a new competence tothe disciplinary skills they already have.Dissertation and PostdoctoralFellowships. No citizenship, residency,or nationality requirements. Deadline:December 1, 1995.

- Research Workshop Competition.Workshops must be initiated byrecipients of SSRC-MarArthurFoundation Fellowships in InternationalPeace and Security (past and present),Application deadlines: September 15,1995, and February 15, 1996. ContactInternational Peace and SecurityProgram, SSRC.

SSRc-administered Grants for Study ofthe Soviet Union and Its SuccessorStates (for US citizens):

- Postdoctoral Research Fellowships.Fellowship stipend to provide threeyears of summer support plus onesemester free of teaching. Must havePh.D. in hand at time of application.$27,000. Deadline: December 1, 1995.

- Graduate Training Fellowships. Forstudents currently enrolled in agraduate program who (1) have strongtraining in the study of the USSR/Successor States and propose relatedtraining or (2) have disciplinary trainingand wish to acquire competence in thestudy of the USSR/Successor States.Stipend up to $15,000. Deadline:December 1, 1995.

- Dissertation Fellowships. Anacademic year of support fordisseration writeup. $15,000maximum. Deadline: December 1,1995.

- Research Development Grants. Tosupport meetings, workshops, and pilotporjects. Maximum award is $7,500.Deadlines: September 15, 1995 andMarch 1, 1996.The Louis Dupree Prize on CentralAsia.

A prize of $2,500 will be awarded forthe most promisiing dissertationinvolving field research in Central Asia:Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, Kirghizia,Mongolia, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan,Uzbekistan, and culturally-relatedcontiguous areas of Iran, Pakistan,Kazakhstan, and China. Only candidateswho receive a dissertation researchfellowship under an SSRC program areeligible to apply.

SSRC WORKSHOP. “Architecture andthe Expression of Group Identity: TheRussian Empire and the Soviet Union,1500-Present.” To be held May 2-5,1996, in Chicago. FinancialAssistance: all costs covered by theconference. Applications accepted

from grad students currently enrolled ina doctoral program and from scholarswho received their terminal degree notearlier than 1990. Deadline:December 1, 1995.

For further information: SocialScience Research Council, 605 ThirdAvenue, NYC 10158; Tel (212) 661-0280; Fax (212) 370-7896.

United States Institute of Peace. TheJennings Randolph Program forInternational Peace DissertationFellowships. Applicants may becitizens of any country but must bedoctoral candidates at a US Universitywith all degree requirements except thedissertation completed by September1996. Deadline: November 15, 1995.Contact: Jennings Randolph Programfor International Peace, US Institute ofPeace, 1550 M Street, NW, Suite 700F,Washington DC 20005-1708; Tel (202)429-3886; Fax (202) 429-6063.

The Institute also has a grant program.Call (202) 429-3843 for information.

East European Studies, The WoodrowWilson International Center forScholars —

- Research Scholarships: 2-4 months ofresearch in Washington. DeadlineNovember 1, 1995.

- Short-Term Grants: Stipend of $80per day for up to thirty days forresearch in Washington. Deadlines:September 1 and December 1, 1995.Contact: John R. Lampe, Director, EastEuropean Studies, The WoodrowWilson Center, 370 L’EnfantPromenade, SW, Ste. 704, WashingtonDC 20024; (202) 287-3000, ext. 222;fax: (202) 287-3772.

Associates of the Slavic Center

The Center acknowledges with sincere appreciation the following individuals who have contributed to the annual givingprogram, the Associates of the Slavic Center, between May 1 and September 15, 1995. Financial support from theAssociates is vital to our program of research, training, and extracurricular activities. We would like to thank all membersof the ASC for their generous assistance. (*signifies gift of continuing membership)

CENTER CIRCLE

Richard Castile*

Michael Richards*

Anonymous*

Wells Fargo Bank Matching Fund*

SPONSORS

Suzanne Adams*

Anthony Arnold*

Howard Hecht*

John and Mary Macmeeken*

John Macut*

Richard Mains

Chris Olson*

Richard and Sally Tuttle*

Dorothy and Alex Vucinich*

MEMBERS

Sergius M. Boikan*

Olga Carlisle*

Colby Cogswell*

Charlene Depner*

Ralph Fisher*

Ives Franquien*

Krista Hanson*

Nancy Hayes*

Kathryn McCrodden*

Clara Pryor*

Dorothy Robbins*

Glenn and Helen Seaborg*

CSEES Newsletter/22

For those of you who are not yet members, we encourage you tojoin. We believe you will enjoy the stimulating programs; evenif you cannot participate as often as you might wish, yourcontinuing contribution critically supports the Center’s missionand goals. This year we are not mailing a separate letter aboutASC; please take a minute to read about the Associates and ifpossible, join.

Members ($50 to $100). Members of ASC regularly receiveNewsletter “Updates” and special mailings to notify them of last-minute events and special activities, such as cultural performancesand major conferences. In this way, they get direct notificationabout last-minute items.

Sponsors ($100-up). ASC Sponsors also receive a handsomeEuro ballpoint pen, designed to promote Slavic and East Euro-pean Studies at Berkeley. They also receive invitations to specialinformal afternoon and evening talks on campus featuring guestspeakers from the faculty as well as visiting scholars.

Benefactors ($500-up). ASC Benefactors receive invita-tionsto the dinner and evening programs associated with our annualconferences, such as the annual Berkeley-Stanford Conference inthe spring.

Center Circle ($1,000-up). In addition to enjoying the above-mentioned benefits, donors within the Center Circle will alsobecome Robert Gordon Sproul Associates of the Univer-sity. Assuch, they are invited to the Chancellor’s annual black tie banquetand to luncheons before the major football games. They alsoreceive membership in the Faculty Club and twenty other world-wide faculty clubs. The names of donors of $1,000 or more appearin the Annual Report of Private Giving.

It is a policy of the University of California and the BerkeleyFoundation that a portion of the gifts and/or income therefrom isused to defray the costs of raising and administering the funds.Donations are tax-deductible to the extent allowed by law.

Associates of the Slavic CenterSend your check, made payable to the Regents of the University ofCalifornia, to the Center for Slavic and East European Studies, 361Stephens Hall, University of California, Berkeley CA 94720. Attn: ASC

Name(s)__________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________

Address ___________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________

City _____________________________State ______Zip __________

Home Phone _______________ Business Phone _________________

If your employer has a matching gift program, please print name ofcorporation below:

_________________________________________________________

❒ I have made a contribution but wish to remain anonymous.

Associate Membership

CSEES Newsletter/23

Center for Slavic and East European StudiesInternational and Area Studies361 Stephens Hall #2304University of CaliforniaBerkeley, CA 94720 USAIV13Address correction requested

HISTORY SEMINARSHistory 103B.4 East-CentralEuropean (Auto)biography in

the 20th Century

Instructor: John ConnellyW 10-12, 190 Barrows

This course offers and introduction to theconfusing world of East-Central Europe.Through descriptions and self-descriptions ofindividuals’ lives it explores the meaning behindhistorical events like World Wars, nationbuilding, the Holocaust, Stalinist purges,economic transformation or educational reform.Against a background of epochal historicalchange it will probe how individual and groupindentities, whether ethnic, national, gender,religious, or class have changed, shifted ordisappeared. Perhaps no region of the world hasbeen as profoundly influenced by this century’sdefining mass movements, fascism andcommunism; this course tries to elicit historicalunderstanding of these movements —which arenow viewed as having been “unmistakablywrong”--by showing how they attracted theallegiance of hundreds of thousands of mostlyyoung men and women.

History 103B.8 Making and RemakingLife: Ordinary People and Everyday Life

in 20th Century Russia and Germany

Instructor: Ms. FreidlanderTh 12-2 F318 HAAS

This seminar considers ordinary people as anhistorical problem from two perspectives. Howdid governments that actively and explicitlysought to remake everyday life conceptualize“ordinary people” and how did the subject ofthese efforts understand their lives? What werethe boundaries and interfaces between daily lifeand politics? We will also look at the ways inwhich the idea of the ordinary person works whenhistorians make it a central part of their work. Isit possible to ask where history leaves off andmemory begins? How does the historian’s ownrelationship to events work? Readings will focuson the idea of the person and the problem ofremembering; historians and the recollections ofordinary people in Nazi Germany; film andhistory; recreating daily life in the Soviet Union;Stalinist repression; Soviet culture and the workof remembering in the post-Soviet era.