[alst-l] Fwd: SSEES conferences and report

[Besnik Pula]

--- begin forwarded text


Date:         Mon, 1 Mar 1999 19:28:53 +0000
From: Stephanie Schwandner-Sievers <sschwand at ssees.ac.uk>
Subject:      SSEES conferences and report

SSEES - Albanian Studies e-mail Circular

1.  Last Call for the Myth Conference
2.  Report on the Albanian Studies Day on Law Development
3.  Call for South-Eastern Europe Conference


Dear Friends and Collegues,

The preparations for the international conference on The Role of Myth in
Albania in History and Development (June 11 to 13, 1999) are well under
way. As announced in earlier circulars, the official deadline for the
call for papers was February 28. Many internationally known scholars as
well as students of Albanian Studies have already submitted proposals. We
will certainly have an intellectually stimulating conference. A few of
you expressed interest in submitting papers but have not yet replied. If
you still wish to propose a paper please do so immediately. We will
accept proposals until March 15 after which the conference committee will
meet and start the selection process. Proposals should include a short
abstract (max. one page A4). (Item 1)

Please find enclosed a report of the recent Albanian Studies Day of
February 13, 1999, on Custom and Law in a Time of Transition... . This
report is published in the SSEES South Eastern Europe Newsletter
(subscription through Dr. Wendy Bracewell, bracewel at se1.ssees.ac.uk, or
through Mrs. Haley Frapwell, h.frapwell at se1.ssees.ac.uk). (Item 2)

I also wish to inform you of a call for papers by the Centre for South
Eastern European Studies for a conference on South-Eastern Europe:
History, Cultures, Boundaries, which will take place in June 1999. (Item 3)

As you may have noticed, the address list of this e-mail circular is
constantly expanding and increasingly includes more international
recipients. If you prefer your address to be removed from this list
please contact me: sschwand at se1.ssees.ac.uk. Please feel free to inform
other collegues or students who might be interested in the Albanian
Studies Programme at SSEES, or to send me further e-mail addresses of
those who would like to be reminded of special events (including those
organised at short notice) and independent of the postal Albanian Studies
Circular Letter.

I am looking forward to seeing you at future Albanian Studies events.

Sincerely yours,


Stephanie Schwandner-Sievers
(Nash Fellow for Albanian Studies)
School of Slavonic and East European Studies

Tel. **44 (0) 171 862 8611
Fax  **44 (0) 171 862 8642

http://www.ssees.ac.uk/albstud.htm
http://www.ssees.ac.uk/seecent.htm

Items 1 - 3

1. Last Call for the Myth Conference

The SSEES Albanian Studies conference board is preparing a conference on


THE ROLE OF MYTH IN ALBANIA IN HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT

to be held at
School of Slavonic and East European Studies, Senate House, Malet Street,
LONDON, WC1E 7HU
on
Friday 11th to Sunday 13th June 1999


Objectives of the conference

As with all nations, Albanias past and present are permeated by myths.
National and regional identities are constructed around myth as are the
perceptions of politics and every-day realities. Both historical and
contemporary Albanian elites frequently found it useful to employ myths
in attempting to find a common base for integrating the countrys
diversified society. Despite the apparent impact of myth on Albanian
development, the rationale and motivation of myths, the continuities and
caesuras, potential general trends related to mentalities, the creation,
meaning and application of myth in different realms of Albanian life in
past and present, these processes have yet to be explored systematically.

The origin or invention of Albanian myths, as with other nations, can be
approached by examining:
1. 	historical and contemporary processes (for example: rilindja,
monarchy, partisan struggle, imagesof enemies, isolationism and
patronage, transition to democracy, ...);
2.	the reproduction of images of the self and the other in texts and
symbolism (for example: literature, school books, academic writings,
folklore, media, speeches, art, monuments, artefacts ...).

We are looking, however, for papers which go beyond a pure description of
historical or ideological myths in an attempt to challenge the validity
of their truth claims but rather for papers which employ reflexive
analysis in the hopes of raising awareness of the nature of myth itself.
Papers should investigate the meaning and function of myth in particular
contexts while considering effects and implications for development in
political, social and other realms. As George Schpflin has shown (Myth
and Nationhood, London, SSEES/Macmillan, 1998), in addition to
deconstructing myths, their integrative, visionary and other constructive
functions can be examined, as well as their manipulative capacities. At
the same time, as Katherine Verdery (National Ideology under Socialism,
University of California Press, 1991) has pointed out, it should not be
ignored that national ideologies are products of social processes and so
require an analysis of myth in its social context: who were the actors or
interest groups who struggled to employ certain myths, what were their
intentions, why and how did they conflict and what were the results?

 In terms of case studies myths could be explored in the context of the
following randomly selected themes (any additional proposals are welcome):

- the myth of dependency and subsequent patronage or isolationism (in
relation to
   international relations in the past and present);
- the fear of the outside world (as evident in literature, politics,
folklore);
- socialist myths;
- politics of culture;
- the myth of ethnogenesis (Illyrian descent);
- cultural values like heroism, besa, trustworthiness, loyalty,
hospitality etc.;
- the role of feud and kanun;
- the writing of history;
- the perpetuation of oral tradition;
- the religion of the Albanian is to be an Albanian;
- conceptions of democracy, market economy or capitalism;
- the role of conspiracy theories in modern party politics and society;
- the mutual perceptions of Albanians and their neighbours (for example,
the creation of the  image of the Albanians as related to the
justification of violence against Albanians, or to international politics);
- the role of the Diaspora in generating myth;
- the KLA, authority, justification of violence.

The proceedings of the conference will be published in book form.
Participants are asked to prepare their contributions for advance
distribution (both electronic and hard copy). Participants will have 20
min. to deliver their papers; discussion will follow. The selection of
papers will be the responsibility of the SSEES Albanian Studies
Conference Board. The conference language is English. Young scholars are
particularly encouraged to submit proposals. Limited funding for travel
and accommodations may be available with priority given to South East
European Scholars.

Further details will be published on the SSEES website
(http://w.w.w.ssees.ac.uk/seecent.htm).

Please send your proposals for a paper including a short abstract by
February 28 (extension: March 15), 1999, to:

Stephanie Schwandner - Sievers
(Nash Fellow for Albanian Studies)
Centre for South East European Studies
SSEES, Senate House, Malet St., LONDON, WC1E 7HU
e-mail: sschwand at ssees.ac.uk

Conference Board:
Wendy Bracewell (SSEES, Centre for South East European Studies)
Ger Duijzings (SSEES, Serbian and Croatian Studies)
Bernd Fischer (Indiana University, Albanian History)
Piro Misha (Open Society Foundation, Tirana)
George Schpflin (SSEES, Centre for Studies in Nationalism and Myth)
Stephanie Schwandner - Sievers (SSEES, Nash Fellow, Albanian Studies)


2. Report on the Albanian Studies Day on Law Development
(by Christos Christopoulos and Stephanie Schwandner - Sievers)

On February 13 an Albanian Studies Day on Custom and Law in a Time of
Transition, was organised by the SSEES Albanian Studies Programme in
co-operation with the British Albanian Legal Association (BALA). UK
experts on the development of Albanian law as well as anthropological and
other field researchers discussed controversial questions concerning
whether local cultures or traditions could be included in the development
of a Rule of Law in Albania, in short, whether customary and democratic
law are compatible.

Timothy Robertson, BALA, systematically highlighted common grounds of
Albanian customary law and the Rule of Law. By showing that Gjecovs
version of The Kanun of Leke Dukagjini (1933) can, in some respects, be
interpreted as a constitutional text - compatible with a liberal
understanding of the Rule of Law - he suggested a selective applicability
in modern Albanian law development. In particular he pointed to shared
ethics (for example, the protection of the family), or shared democratic
structures (for example in the decision making processes of village
councils regulating local affairs and conflicts). However, because of the
Kanuns modern image, that of being related to the revitalisation of blood
feuds, he warned of its potential capacity to reinforce pre-modern customs.

Complementing this approach, the empirically based research of Antonia
Young, a social anthropologist from Bradford University, illustrated how
today Kanun serves to reconcile feuds in Northern Albania and Kosovo -
the latter, of course, relating to the outer threat of Serbian hegemonic
pressures. She argued that Kanun - as a part of Albanian thinking and
morality - cannot be ignored. Furthermore, through proper education,
attention should be shifted from violence, which in fact results from new
conflicts of the Albanian political transitional period, to Kanuns
capacity to contain violence through provisions for mediation and
appeasement procedures in the rural context.

In contrast, Marc Clark (European Bank of Reconstruction and Development
and independent researcher) questioned local support for the Kanun in
both the past and present by suggesting the slow death of Lek's Law since
the Albanians National Awakening. Based on citations from historical
sources he argued that reference to Kanun always had been an act of
frustration due to the absence of an acceptable popular alternative, i.e.
an effective, fair, integrated state organisation and justice system.
Consequently, Kanun should be seen as a transitional phenomenon and not
as a desire to revitalise old culture.

Stephanie Schwandner - Sievers (SSEES, social anthropologist) challenged
the notion of Kanun as representing an autochthonous tradition of
democracy. She presented todays Kanun as an idealistic and retrospective
discourse - distant in time and space and therefore unquestionable -
which lost any quality of predictability. Due to a generation gap as well
as to the existence of competing systems of reference (state law and
Kanun) it would create rather than solve conflicts. She suggested this
discourse served status and power politics in local and state political
arenas through providing arguments for social exclusion and inclusion,
for example in land re-distribution processes, and embodied in the
symbolism of Kanun texts. She showed social interactions to be
underpinned by a family-interest based concept of honour known from
similar contexts outside the Rule of Law in the Albanian as well as in
other societies in past and present. She questioned whether such
processes were compatible to the notion of a Rule of Law based on the
individuals equal rights.

Arianit Koci (research officer in Public Order at Leicester University)
described Kanun as a medieval constitutional codification by feudal lords
with elements still embracing the capacity to serve the social contract
and self-policing in Albania. He claimed that a substantial part of the
norms and values which have been instrumental in establishing and
maintaining the social contract owe more to the customary tradition of
the country than to the existence of the state. He argued that in
transitional periods which have been characterised by a weakening of
state authority, customary law has assumed the role of alternative
justice and self-policing. The strengthening of state authority and the
establishment of the Rule of Law in Albania does not necessarily negate
all aspects of customary law.

Publication of these presentations is in process, with plans to invite
further experts to contribute to questions concerning the factual
integration of customary law in constitutional law, (Balkan) regional and
historical comparisons, recent Kanun history etc. For information please
contact sschwand at ssees.ac.uk.


3. Call for South-Eastern Europe Conference

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 15:33:42 +0000 (GMT)
From: Wendy Bracewell <bracewel at se1.ssees.ac.uk>
To: Stephanie Schwandner-Sievers <sschwand at se1.ssees.ac.uk>
Subject: SEE conference at SSEES (fwd)


Call for papers
SOUTH-EASTERN EUROPE:  History, Cultures, Boundaries

Contributions are invited for a one-day conference entitled
ŒSouth-Eastern Europe: History, Cultures, Boundaries¹ organized by the
Centre for South-East European Studies, School of Slavonic and East
European Studies, London, on June 19, 1999.

 Proposals (maximum length one page A4) should be sent with a covering
letter by not later than mid-March, 1999, to the organizing committee,
care of:
Alex Drace-Francis  [adf at mailbox.ro]
  and/or
Wendy Bracewell
SSEES
Senate House, Malet Street
London WC1E 7HU
[w.bracewell at ssees.ac.uk]

Taking into account the dramatic changes in the shape of European
political and social structures in the last ten years, the organisers
propose a  discussion aimed at examining definitions of the area, and at
establishing the place of South-Eastern Europe in the European whole.
South-Eastern Europe has for a long time been defined as Œmarginal¹.
Whether this is a mere reflection of its geographical position and its
actual characteristics or rather a consequence of its treatment in
historical, cultural and other humanist study, is a moot point; and one
that has been the subject of increasing debate in both academic and
political circles. Its historical development has been substantially
different from that of Western Europe; but unlike other areas of the
globe (The New World, the Orient), that have been subjected to a
discourse of alterity, South-Eastern Europe is most often articulated by
the West not so much as an Œother¹ as a transitional zone, between East
and West, between conceptions of the civilised and the barbarian, between
Europe and Asia. The region was deeply imbued early on with what are seen
as founding elements of European culture; but has also missed the
material fruits of such an inheritance, as  enjoyed in the West.  South
Eastern Europe has been a major participant in, not just a witness to,the
historical, political and cultural experiences of twentieth-century
Europe; and its inhabitants feel the effects of fin-de-siecle
(post-)modernity as strongly as any other Europeans.

Against this background a series of discussions will be organised which
address the many specific difficulties to be met when attempting to
define the region, and particularly the problems in situating study of
South-Eastern Europe within existing disciplinary and area categories,
whether old or new.

Such a problem can be addressed from many different intellectual and
disciplinary positions, and contributions from the fields of history,
anthropology, literary and cultural studies, political science and
political theory, linguistics, sociology and geography (among others) are
welcomed. The organizers are particularly keen to interrogate the
problematics of the received disciplinary traditions (most of which
originated in Western Europe) in studying the region. European history
and literary studies tended to make light of South-Eastern Europe,
concentrating on the role and achievements of the Great Power states;
anthropology largely ignored it until recently, in favour of studying
non-European peoples. For the study of nationalism, on the other hand,
the region has been casually referred to for negative models at least
since the writings of Mill and Renan, while in international relations
ŒThe Eastern Question¹ was viewed as a paradigmatic problem.

The organizers have drawn up the following list of potential questions
and themes for debate. There will not be time to address all of them:
rather, a selection will be made following the receipt of proposals for
papers. Short, incisive contributions are sought, and the timing of
presentations should be limited to 15 minutes. Contributions are likely
to be organized into panels of four speakers each with a moderator.
Contributors are encouraged to grasp the
problems of the region as a whole as far as possible; local or national
case studies are not excluded, but must be aimed at addressing the stated
questions of defining the region, and of the problems of discipline or
area study.

1. Definitions
- Questions surrounding the terms ŒBalkans¹ and ŒSouth-Eastern Europe¹.
- What is it that defines the region? Who gets to define, to what ends?
- Boundaries. How big is the region? What are its margins?
- Who and what is the region¹s Œother¹?
- How does South Eastern Europe- or component parts - stand in relation
to Europe?

2. Making Cultures
- Is there such a thing as Balkan "culture(s)"?
- Problems of comparability and representativity of cultural products and
processes.
- Who creates culture(s) and to what ends?
- Change & diversity in South-East European culture.
- Is there a distinctive culture/politics relationship in South-Eastern
Europe?
- Political cultures: attitudes to authority, discipline, legitimacy,
responsibility.
- Anthropological perpectives on cultural strategies in South-East
Europe: agents & intentions in the construction of official culture;
regional and global cultures.
- High/low and elite/popular cultures: problems of definition,
origination, dissemination, appropriation, consumption.
- How are new factors affecting cultural politics?

3. History: creations and constraints
- To what extent is South-East European  history shared?
- How does South-East European history relate to that of the rest of Europe?
- How is contemporary (political) action shaped by historical experience?
And what are the relevant experiences?
- Do certain historiographical concepts constrain our understanding of
the role of the past in shaping the present? (nation-building; frontier
status; legacies?)
- How are interpretations of the past produced, imposed, contested,
manipulated; and to whose ends? What factors constrain its reception and
interpretation?
- The role of historical events and discourses in shaping collective memory.

Note: the adoption of the term ŒSouth-Eastern Europe¹ by the organisers
does not mean that it may not be equally exposed to debate during the
course of the seminar¹s proceedings. On the contrary: contributions
addressing this problem are especially welcome.


--- end forwarded text





_________________________________________________________
* ALST-L at alb-net.com / Albanian Studies Discussion List *
 To contact the list owner:  ALST-L-Approval at alb-net.com