russocentrism

[Mark Konecny]

Dear Seelangers,

With regard to Jan Piotrowicki, I have a few comments of my own.
1. The pronouncement of the demise of Soviet/Russian studies in the US is
premature. The end of the Soviet era has certainly changed the financial
footing of departments and student interest, but the relevance of the field
and the impending (perhaps cataclysmic) changes in Russia assure the
scholarly study of Russian language and history will continue.

2. Russocentrism (which, as Jan rightly points out) is rampant in our
field. This state of affairs is a result of the influence of the influx of
Russians into the field and the subsequent absorption of the prejudices of
the teacher by the student. However, equally as important is the existence
of a canon of work in Russian that is readily available to scholars. Until
recently have there been any Ukrainian or Belorusian publishers
distributing in the West? There has also been a paucity of scholarly works
on these languages; if there is to be some sort of change in the status
quo, there must be a more intense promotion of these ignored culture
(perhaps using Harvard's Ukrainian Studies center as a model). But
realistically because of sheer weight of numbers, Russian will always be
more widely taught than other slavic languages just as Spanish is more
widely taught than Portuguese.

3. Most disturbing for me (and what prompted me to write) was the crude
nationalism which permeats Jan Piotrowicki's snide letter. Even if I grant
the veracity of his argument, I can in no way tolerate his tone. The
destruction of panslavism in the postsoviet world should not be mirrored in
the academic discourse of Slavic studies. What will be next, arm wrestling
to prove the cultural superiority of your favorite nation?


Mark Konecny, Institute of Modern Russian Culture.
konecny at bcf.usc.edu