Advertising Slavic (jobs)?

[Paul A. Klanderud]

Dear SEELANGers:

Perusing recent contributions -- many good ones -- to the discussion of
advertising Slavic, I couldn't help but ask myself (a recent Ph.D. presently
employed in another field, information systems) a rather selfish question:
what about promoting Slavic jobs? The question's more rhetorical than goal
oriented, and stems more from a healthy dose of self-pity at seeming to have
"missed the boat." But it's a question which, I'd guess, has been and will
be asked by many a recent or soon-to-be Ph.D.

What has the field been doing to offset the negative impact of what seems to
be a nationwide trend toward doing away with tenure-track positions, and
relying more and more on "adjunct" faculty? By now most people in my
position have probably seen the hallowed MLA job list. Amazingly, there are
actually some decent positions in Slavic linguistics. As to the general
"lang. and lit" jobs, there are -- nationwide, for an entire year -- roughly
four tenure-track positions, and another one "possible." And of these, at
least two suggest a joint app't with another department. The remaining half
dozen or so positions are the usual one- to three-year take-
what-you-can-get slots. In short, a bit more than a dozen total positions
for an increasingly large, hungry, and worried crop of candidates.

It seems obvious that school administrations have no compelling reason to
offer even the possibility of tenure in Slavics in today's climate, since
there is such a glut of well-qualified candidates, many of whom, having
devoted years to the study of things Russian (or Ukrainian, or whatever,
let's not get started), are willing to continue to sacrifice for the slight
chance that they might be among the fortunate who eventually secure a
position. A question I'd pose is, How much effort have those already in the
field been putting into convincing and cajoling adminstrators not to let
lines -- particularly tenure lines -- disappear? My guess is that the
overwhelming majority of profs have been working overtime to address this
issue; but (being selfish again), what do we have to show for it?  And I
know of one (tenured) prof who, when I've spoken with him/her about the
difficulties and enrollment problems, has responded (half-jokingly but with
a tinge of truth) in this vein: Hey, I've got tenure; why should I create
extra work for myself.

We have a job market that, I'm told, is the worst it has been at least since
Slavic studies got going in the early 60's. The recent enrollment figures
displayed on our list do show us at a historical low -- but not much lower
than in the early '80s, when the market was also tight -- but not this tight.

Perhaps it's simply a cyclical thing; those of us who happened to hit the
market in this period simply didn't have much control over things. As one
might expect, such a thought is small consolation, but it may be a simple
fact. Thus, each year increasingly well-qualified candidates (call me a
snob, but I'm one of 'em) create a "backlog," hanging on for as long as they
can; with time, we go on and find other avenues.

In the long term, this backlog will not continue. I'd guess that many of the
"best and the brightest" undergrads, faced with a choice of work or some
discipline in grad school -- if truthfully informed about the current
situation -- will not choose a profession in which they'll have to compete
with a hundred or so other candidates for the handfull of opportunities to
teach for one year at a school, and then to be shown the door, no matter how
well they do.

It may be too late for me and my generation (although, like Gogol's Manilov,
I still find myself letting my thoughts drift off to what it would really be
like to be back in the field: Then the Tsar, learning of their friendship,
bestowed highest honors upon them....). I know of a number of recent grads
who had -- and still have -- the potential to make stellar contributions to
this field, but who simply were compelled to get out. Real life gets in the
way sometimes. But if current trends continue, and if Slavic studies survive
and even rebound in some manner, how will there still be this horn of
plentiful and bright Ph.D's? Maybe so. The people I knew in grad school were
enormously dedicated; that's their nature. But if the same sort of dedicated
grads are still there five or ten years from now (or however many years it
takes), I hope for their sake that those now in the field will do what it
takes to ensure that they too have a shot at enjoying a reasonable sense of
security while pursuing a lifetime of learning and teaching.

Paul Klanderud