Showing posts with label cfp. Show all posts
Showing posts with label cfp. Show all posts

Friday, January 27, 2017

CFP:The Ins and Outs of Socialism


On August 25-27, 2017 the Center for Urban History will host a conference "The Ins and Outs of Socialism: Visions and Experiences of Urban Change in the Second World."

This conference aims at bringing together scholars who study different time periods and cities where socialist projects were either launched or collapsed in the 20th century, as well as those that are still in place. The theme of transition into and out of socialism and the (un-)making of socialist cities serves as entry points into broader discussions about the specificity of urban change in the Second World and its relationship to similar currents in the global North and South. The conference examines the content of the socialist city – its "ins and outs" – from power grids and housing stocks to museums and places of worship at these points of transition. Looking at the series of junctures that produced new forms of urbanity can help create a fresh narrative of socialist urban experiences and visions at the crucial moments of their realizations and reconceptualizations as both the future and the past of the socialist project

Deadlines:
The conference selection committee will announce its selection of papers for the conference by February 15, 2017
http://www.lvivcenter.org/en/conferences/conferences/2250-17-08-26-the-ins-and-outs-of-socialism/









Sunday, October 30, 2016

CFP: “ Ambivalent Legacies: Memory and Amnesia in Post - Habsburg and Post - Ottoman Cities”

The empires that once defined the political geography of Europe are no more. One cannot meet a Prussian, Romanov, Habsburg, or Ottoman today; these dusty categories of affiliation have ceded to myriad national identities. Yet it would be mistaken to assume that Europe’s bygone empires have become mere relics of history. Imperial pasts continue to inspire nostalgia, identification, pride, anxiety, skepticism, and disdain in the present. The afterlives of empires as objects of memory exceed historical knowledge, precisely because these afterlives shape and recast the present and the future. Simultaneously, present- and future-oriented imperatives accentuate imperial pasts in selective ways, yielding new configurations of post-imperial amnesia as well as memory.

Our conference, “Ambivalent Legacies: Memory and Amnesia in Post-Habsburg and Post-Ottoman Cities,” aims to bring together an interdisciplinary group of scholars working on post-imperial legacies, especially in relation to eight specific cities: Vienna, Istanbul, Budapest, Sarajevo, Trieste, Thessaloniki, Zagreb, and Belgrade. We seek contributions from historians, sociologists, anthropologists, geographers, and scholars of comparative literature and architecture—among others—that pursue the politics and cultures of memory in one or more of our eight cities. Paper proposals should speak to two general, interrelated questions: "What are the effects of imperial legacies on contemporary cities?" and "How do present-day urban processes reshape the forms of post-imperial memory and forgetting?" 
The conference will convene at the Max Planck Institute for the Study of Religious and Ethnic Diversity from April 26th to 28th, 2017. Conference participants will be provided with lodging and will be reimbursed for their travel. 
Please send abstracts of 250 words, along with a brief academic biography, to Marina Cziesielsky at Cziesielsky@mmg.mpg.de by December 1st, 2016.

Wednesday, October 26, 2016

CFP: Populisms in Central and Eastern Europe in the 20 th Century

Workshop and publication of the proceedings in the review Connexe. Les espaces postcommunistes en question(s)
 

11-12 May 2017
EHESS, Paris, France

Deadline: 15 December 2016

Organizer: Roman Krakovsky, LabEx Tepsis, EHESS and IHTP, CNRS, Paris, France

Since the 1990s, several political movements qualified as “populist” have emerged in Central and Eastern Europe, drawing the attention of political scientists. If we want to understand why these movements exercise such attraction and why they are so relentless in this space, it is necessary to cross the study of current politics with the analysis of long term developments. Indeed, since the 19th century, Central and Eastern Europe has known several movements and political parties that have called themselves or have been labelled as "populist". In this sense, the long-term approach allows considering the similarities and the differences, according to different contexts and periods, and identifying the reasons and the mechanisms of action of these movements. At last, this historical approach helps to consider the specificity - if there is any specificity - of these movements in Central and Eastern Europe and to evaluate their impact on political cultures of the region.

In dialogue with the extensive historiography devoted to the analysis of current populisms in Central and Eastern Europe, this workshop will address the phenomenon in its historical developments, from the late 19th century to the fall of communism in 1989. It will consider the space labelled during this period under the term "Central and Eastern Europe", that is, before 1918, the territories of Austria-Hungary and the German, Ottoman and Russian empire, the Romania and the Bulgaria, during the interwar period and the Second World War, the territories of the successor states of these empires and states, and, after 1945, the countries of the "Eastern bloc".

I. Defining "populism"

The indeterminate nature of populism is one of the major reasons of its political effectiveness, as Ernesto Laclau has argued ( On Populist Reason , Verso, 2005). It can incorporate different contents from the right and the left but at the same time, it does not accommodate with all. One way to unravel this extraordinary semantic ambiguity is to consider the following topics:

1. Labeling populism. What are the terms used for the populist phenomenon? In different Central and East European languages, several expressions often coexist: the Polish, for example, uses ludowość (based on the Slavic lud , the people) and populism (based on the Latin populus, by analogy with the English term "populism", encompassing a more pejorative connotation), etc. What does this semantic diversity says about populist movements and political parties and their assessment by their contemporaries?

2. Using the term "populist". Who is qualified and who calls himself as "populist" in Central and Eastern Europe? Why are these qualifications mobilized by different political actors and with what consequences? What are the reasons and effects of the use of the term - and its avoidance – in political or academic sphere?

3. The circumstances of appearance and use. In what contexts populist movements and political parties appear? What relationship do they maintain with other ideologies and political doctrines that Central and Eastern Europe has known during the 20 th century: democracy, liberalism, nationalism, fascism and communism?

II. The constitution of the "people" as political community

These ideologies and political doctrines define the political community according to the dynastic principle (monarchies), the nation (nation states), the race (fascist regimes) or the class (communist regimes). How populist movements consider these definitions of political community? How do they use, in these different contexts, the notion of "people" and how they reflect political pluralism? To consider these issues, we propose to deal with the following themes:

1. The boundaries of the political community. Who, in these different contexts, is considered as being part of the "people" and who is excluded from it, and with what consequences? How populist movements express the relation to the endogenous and to the other?

2. The relation to the elites. How populist movements express the relation between the "people" and the "elite" / "establishment" in these different contexts, particularly during the period of political transition (anti-cosmopolitanism, society without class antagonism, etc.)?

3. The relationship between the individual and the political community. If populist movements proclaim a unity of the "people", how they organize this same "people" in practice? How do they connect the individual to the collective?

III. The representation of the political community

In general, populist movements claim to be the only legitimate representatives of the people. How they recognize the spirit of the people (as political community)? How is it implemented? One way to consider the mechanisms of political representation is to answer the following questions:

1. The spirit or the will of the people. How populist movements mobilize the people in order to strengthen the participation to political life and decisions-making?

2. The leader, the party and the "people". How populist movements and its leaders embody the spirit of the "people"?

3. The vocabulary and the rhetoric. What is the rhetoric and the vocabulary used by various populist movements to mobilize the "people"?

IV. Populism in action

One way to identify populist movements and parties is to observe their behavior, whether in opposition or as a ruling body, especially in times of political conflict and struggle for power (coup d’état, political crises, elections, etc.). We propose to address this issue from the following prospects:

1. Relations with other political actors. What are the relations between populist movements and their partners and political enemies?

2. Action on institutions and legal system . How populist movements act on the legal system (laws, constitutions), especially considering the checks and balances, political pluralism and the mechanisms by which the will of the people is voiced (elections, plebiscites, referendums, membership to political parties, etc.)?

3. Communication in the public space. Finally, what is the relationship between populist movements and media and how do they act in public?

These themes may be considered through a comparative case study of the phenomenon, while remaining within the chronology and geographical scope defined, or through a case study.

The schedule and the submission of proposals

To submit your proposal, thank you to send a summary in English or in French (between 400 and 800 words), accompanied by your CV, by 30 November 2016, to Roman Krakovsky ( roman.krakovsky@ehess.fr ).

15 December, 2016 Deadline for submitting proposals

10 January 2017 Announcement of participants

11-12 May 2017 Workshop

30 June 2017 Deadline for submitting the manuscripts for publication

December 2017 Publication of the proceedings of the workshop in Connexe. Les espaces postcommunistes en question(s)

The workshop will take place at École des hautes etudes en sciences sociales (EHESS) in Paris, on 11 and 12 May 2017. The workshop will be held in French and in English.

Tuesday, July 12, 2016

Call for Applications:2 positions as a research assistant (PhD student) and 2 PhD scholarships at the Graduate School for East and Southeast European Studies (Munich and Regensburg, Germany

Beginning November 15, 2016 the Graduate School for East and Southeast European Studies offers the following doctoral positions: up to 2 positions as a research assistant – employment according to the German TV-L in part time (65 %) – and up to 2 PhD scholarships.

The Graduate School for East and Southeast European Studies is a cooperative venture organized by the Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU) Munich and the Universität Regensburg. The School is funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) as part of the German Excellence Initiative and started in November 2012. Research at the Graduate School is conducted in three broad interdisciplinary fields:

- Origins and Forms of Social and Political Change
- Cultural Systems
- Infrastructure, Migration and Transfer of Knowledge

Research at the Graduate School focuses particularly on interrelations and interdependencies between East and Southeast Europe and other regions of the world.

In the context of its primary focus on East and Southeast Europe, the Graduate School draws on the following disciplines: History, Literary and Language Studies, Art History, Theatre Studies, Social Sciences, and Law. In the context of cross-regional comparisons and transfer studies the School’s expertise in Area Studies is complemented by insights from Chinese, Japanese and North American Studies.

For further information see:www.gs-oses.de

Beginning November 15, 2016 available for 11,5 months with the option of extension for another 24,5 months the Graduate School offers the following doctoral positions:

up to 2 positions as a research assistant – employment according to the German TV-L in part time (65 %) – and up to 2 PhD Scholarships.

Research Associate positions:
These positions are assigned to conduct an independent PhD project. The remuneration is based on Grade E 13 (65%) of the German Public Service Salary Scale. It includes a teaching obligation of one semester hour per week.

PhD Scholarships:
PhD Scholarships are awarded with a basic monthly stipend of 1.365 Euro, plus travel funds, grants for material costs as well as child-care expenses in accordance with DFG guidelines where applicable.

Both forms of doctoral positions can be realized either at the LMU Munich or at the Universität Regensburg, depending on the advisor’s assignment.

The holders of both the doctoral positions and the scholarships will be expected to successfully conduct an independent research project which contributes to the Graduate School’s research fields. Participation in the Graduate School’s seminars and qualification programme is mandatory. In an international working environment the Graduate School offers ideal conditions for the realization of excellent PhD-projects in the Humanities as well as in Social and Legal Studies which focus on East and Southeast Europe and the entanglements of this region with other regions of the world. The Graduate School is part of the centers for East and Southeast European studies at both sites which beside the universities include non-university research institutions. As an international research institution the Graduate School also explicitly invites applications from foreign candidates. The Graduate School’s seminars are bilingual (German and English). Appropriate language skills are expected.

Requirements:
- very good graduate degree (Master’s, Magister, Diploma, State Examination or equivalent degree)
- independent research project within the fields of interest to the Graduate School
- interest in interdisciplinary research questions and sensitivity for transnational and spatial perspectives
- knowledge of German and English
- knowledge of the language of the object of studies

Application:
- research proposal of 4 to 6 pages
- work plan and time schedule
- letter of motivation
- Curriculum Vitae
- degree certificates (after higher education entrance qualification)
- abstract of the Master’s thesis
- list of publications if applicable
- references by two university professors

Please submit the complete application online:
http://portal.graduatecenter-lmu.de/ocgc/gs-oses

Deadline for applications is August 15, 2016.

Eligible candidates will be invited for an interview with the two speakers of the Graduate School, the Admission Committee and their future advisors in Munich on October 4, 2016. Following the interview, the Admission Committee will decide on the candidate’s admission to the Graduate School and the offer of a research assistant position or a PhD scholarship. Please refrain from making requests before October 4th, 2016.

The Graduate School is committed to the compatibility of family and career. It therefore encourages applications from women. As an international research institution, the School welcomes applications from abroad. Applicants with disabilities possessing essentially equivalent qualifications will receive preferential consideration. If applicable, please mention the disability in the application.

For further information please contact:
Email:applications.graduateschool@lrz.uni-muenchen.de

Dr. Caroline Fricke
Graduate School for East and Southeast European Studies
LMU Munich
Maria-Theresia-Straße 21
81675 Munich

Dr. Heidrun Hamersky
Graduate School for East and Southeast European Studies
Universität Regensburg
Landshuter Straße 4
93047 Regensburg
http://www.gs-oses.de

Monday, June 20, 2016

CFP: NATIONALISMS IN THE POST-SOVIET SPACE: LOGICS, ETHICS, PRACTICES


Moscow
October 31-November 2, 2016

organized by
Gefter Online Magazine, Centre d´Études Franco-Russe de Moscou and Yegor Gaidar Foundation


In recent decades, nationalism has become a more and more urgent issue on the international agenda. Originating in the last third of the eighteenth century as a radical offshoot of European national liberation concepts, it evolved rather quickly into a network of diverse ideologies all over the world. Their common ground was the dominance of the concept of (single) nation in politics, social relations, and intellectual sphere. This concept has often been used without proper reflection, with ascribed meanings of `nation´multiplying, overlapping with other political concepts and categories and contradicting each other. It takes sometimes a great effort to understand exactly which sense of `nation´ and `national´ a politician or a public figure is meaning. At the same time, many different currents in nationalism today make a point of maintaining a genetic connection with the ideas of national revival that date back to past centuries. This encumbers critical reflection on them in societies where they are gaining popularity.

The Gefter Online Magazine, Centre d´Études Franco-Russes de Moscou and Yegor Gaidar Foundation propose a discussion of how national and nationalist identities take shape and how they function both at the level of official doctrines and, more importantly, at the level of everyday practices. At the same time, we would like to mark a terminological distinction between `nation´ and `nationalism´ on the one hand, and `nationality´, `ethnicity´, `citizenship´ etc. on the
other.

We suggest that conference participants discuss the following issues related to national and nationalist identities in ex-Soviet Union and in the post-Soviet space:

- Continuity and discontinuity: to what extent are modern versions of
nationalism generated by late-Soviet ones?

- The `national constants´ as a way to control political loyalty.

- Institutional forms of nationalism: how is `Russianness´
(`Ukrainianness´, `Belarussianness´, `Estonianness´, etc.) formulated
outside of Russia (Ukraine, Belarus, Estonia...)?

- Nationalism and neo-colonialism: the expansion of Russianness and
the rhetoric of `salvaging´ - from `saving the Russian world´ to
salvation as an eschatological category.

- Memory in nationalism: what memory practices existed in nationalist
doctrines in the Soviet Union and how they were transformed in post-
Soviet countries.

- Nationalism and dissent in the USSR - nationalism and political
opposition in the post-Soviet era.

- Nationalism and national trauma: can talk about nationalism be a
way to overcome a collective trauma, and if so, why is it jugulated
in Russia and a number of other East European countries?

- The ethics of nationalism: what ethical principles do ideologists
of nationalism build their doctrines on? What moral categories are
formed within nationalist theories?

- Nationalism as a news opportunity: practices typical of media
defining themselves as nationalist.

- Nationalism and democracy: why was democracy often regarded as a
national mission in perestroika years, and was has become of this
idea later on?

- Alternative political programs: what did perestroika-time political
thinkers such as Andrey Sakharov, Yegor Gaidar and others think of
nation-building rhetoric and what alternatives to it did they offer?

- Nationalism and economics in post-Soviet countries.

The two-day conference will combine scholarly talks in plenary and morning sessions with afternoon roundtables and workshops. The afternoon events will focus on individual cases (or groups of interrelated cases), based on which various approaches to analyzing nationalism and civil society will be discussed.

How to participate:

Applicants are invited to submit an abstract (English or Russian) of maximum of 500 words to callforpapernationalism@gmail.com by 26th June 2016 at the latest. Applications can be submitted either for the presentation of a paper (incl. co-authored ones) or for the organization of a workshop/roundtable (panel).

Successful applicants will be informed by 15th July 2016. Final papers of a maximum of 8000 words should be submitted by 15st October 2016. Selected papers and panel proceedings of the conference will be published in a monograph. The organizing committee reserves the right to select the texts to be included in it.

More Info:http://www.centre-fr.net/events/541/
Scientific Commitee (provisional):
Catriona Kelly, Marlene Laruelle, Sergey Oushakine, Cecile Vaissie.
Фонд Егора ГайдараCEFR Logo

CFP: Cultural Exchanges between USSR and Popular Democracies

Bucharest, Romania, July 16 - 17, 2016
Deadline: Jun 26, 2016

La place du grand frère. Cultural Exchanges Between the Soviet Union and the Popular Democracies during the Communist Era

The role played by the USSR in the popular democracies in Central and Eastern Europe is both overestimated and underestimated in current works. It is overestimated in numerous studies, which consider the imposing force of the “Soviet-type model” to have been acquired when these countries fell under the Soviet sphere of influence at the end of World War II. The mere definition of the model per se was however anything but clear; its transplantation had many loopholes and the adoption of this model showed significant discrepancies depending on the periods and areas taken into consideration. It is underestimated since the entire array of exchanges made with the USSR during the socialist period have rarely been fully considered, given that the USSR was one of the main destinations chosen by the various players of the socialist stage. This historiographical situation of both over- and under-estimation may be explained, to a large extent, by the sources mobilised at the time: on the one hand, the discourse celebrating the collaboration with the Soviet “big brother” and, on the other hand, the accounts made after 1989, which often fail to mention the connections with the USSR (favouring the ones with the Western world). Another two factors which also interfered with the historiographical reflexion were the emphasis placed on the memories of the big geopolitical crises which led to Soviet military intervention (in 1953 in East Berlin, in 1956 in Budapest and in 1968 in Prague), and the evolution of the relations between each of these countries and the Russian power following the fall of the Berlin Wall.

Through this conference, we propose that this issue be readdressed again, and we invite researchers working on the topic of the USSR and the popular democracies to debate on the topic so as to reflect on the sources and notions used to report such exchanges. We shall focus on cultural exchanges in fields such as theatre, literature, music, visual arts, architecture and cinematography. The various ways in which the Soviet-type model was received replay the whole story of the Soviet presence and its versions in the various countries. By bringing together the various national histories, we may acquire an overall comparative understanding of how each country shaped its own cultural communist experience. How can the cultural field support us in rethinking the question of the Soviet presence in the East? This international conference aims to put the evolutions of the relations between the popular democracies and the USSR into perspective though culture. We also hope to reach a better understanding of a topic we now know little of: did the Soviets have any interest in what was happening within the popular democracies? Do we need to consider cultural transfers from the popular democracies to the USSR?

The participants are invited to reflect upon several lines of approach:

1. The cultural institutions and policies. Contributions on this topic could look into the role of cultural associations, “creative and professional unions” or cultural administration institutions, concerning activities such as the definition of cultural policies, the establishment of cultural agreements, the performance of protocol or documentation visits, the transfer of experts, the imposition or the reclassification of the artistic or literary creation models.

2. The cultural actors and the cross-border networks. The considerations on this topic should emphasise the routes taken by the intellectuals, artistes and experts in various cultural fields, or by the representatives of administrative and political structures who were initiators, mediators or beneficiaries of the exchanges and circulation to the East, or those who were excluded from them. The proposals could relate to, amongst other things, the biographies of people involved in cultural commerce activities, the artistic and intellectual background of those trained in the USSR, the cross-border cultural exchange network, etc.

3. The dissemination, reception, circulation and re-appropriation of the discourses, know-how, practices and goods. The contributions on this axis could delve into how the public, the cultural agents or the political and administrative authorities perceived the Soviet culture, and how the Soviets perceived the culture of its sister-countries, respectively. How did the popular democracies accommodate the things the Soviets sent to them? What did the collaborations between the various countries and the USSR focus on precisely? What were the official or clandestine circuits for people and works? What were the advantages or disadvantages of the exchanges with the USSR? In which artistic forms was the political and cultural power of the “Soviet Big Brother” celebrated or challenged?

4. The geography of cultural exchanges. What role was played by the Soviet Republics bordering the popular democracies (the Republics of Ukraine, Byelorussia and Moldova) in the exchanges with the centre and the other countries in the Soviet bloc? Did this movement benefit from the geographical proximity? More generally, which cities (besides Moscow and Leningrad) and regions in the USSR, and which cities and regions in Eastern Europe, were concerned by these exchanges? What does the movement map look like for this period?

The paper proposals (title and abstract of a maximum of 500 words), accompanied by a short biographical note (a maximum of 10 lines), should be submitted before June 26, 2016 to the e-mail addresses: popescualinaa@yahoo.fr and luciadragomir@gmail.com. Their acceptance will be notified, at the latest, on June 30, 2016.

The working language will be mainly French, but papers in English will also be accepted. The conference proceedings will be subject to publication. Travel and accommodation expenses will be refunded within the limits of the available budget. When submitting a proposal, attendees should mention whether they wish to benefit from this refund.

Organising committee:
Jérôme Bazin (Paris-Est Créteil Val-de-Marne University)
Lucia Dragomir (University of Bucharest)
Dragos Jipa (EDSS – CEREFREA Villa Noël, University of Bucharest)
Alina Popescu (ISP - Paris Ouest Nanterre la Défense University/University of Bucharest)
Caterina Preda (University of Bucharest)

Partner Institutions
Centre Régional Francophone de Recherches Avancées en Sciences Sociales (CEREFREA Villa Noël) – Université de Bucarest
Centre de recherche en histoire européenne comparée (CRHEC) – Université Paris-Est Créteil Val-de-Marne
Agence universitaire de la Francophonie - Bureau Europe centrale et orientale (AUF BECO)
École doctorale francophone en sciences sociales (EDSS – CEREFREA Villa Noël) – Université de Bucarest
Institut des Sciences sociales du Politique (ISP) – Université Paris Ouest Nanterre La Défense

Tuesday, May 24, 2016

CFP: Close Encounters across the Iron Curtain.

International Conference University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam School of Regional, Transnational and European Studies, "European Travel Cultures" Research Group
14.10.2016-15.10.2016, Amsterdam

Twenty-five years after the collapse of Communism, mutual perceptions of “the East” and “the West” seem more than ever to be building on Cold War stereotypes. Exploring the roots of this phenomenon, the European Travel Cultures research group at the University of Amsterdam invites the submission of proposals for the second “Close Encounters” workshop.
The workshop will focus on the sense-making of tourist encounters between East and West during the Cold War. How did tourists and travellers understand their encounters with people, cultures, and political systems on the other side of the Iron Curtain and how were these meanings disseminated and received?
We are particularly interested in papers dealing with East – West encounters at the intersection of mediality and materiality:
  • What kind of media (TV, Radio, Printed matter, dictionaries, books, maps etc.) did tourists use in preparation of their journeys? How critical did the users approach these source of information?
  • How was “being elsewhere” experienced and understood by people traveling across the Iron Curtain for leisurely purposes and work? We invite participants to include attempts at mutual understanding as well as conscious attempts at self-distancing.
  • How did travel experiences influence self-conceptions and identities of the travellers while being abroad and back home? 
  • What kind of images, stories and material souvenirs did the tourist bring home and how did they try to circulate their experiences and interpretations back home?
We particularly welcome papers from the fields of history of the everyday, consumption history, media studies, reception studies, and cultural anthropology exploring mutual misinterpretations, misreadings of the alien environment, cases of conscious and subconscious misconduct etc.
Participants will be required to submit papers for pre-circulation four weeks ahead of the conference. We also ask for the submission of original contributions as we plan publishing an edited volume.
Deadlines: Please send an abstract of up to 500 words and a short bio (max. 100 words) to close-encounters-fgw@uva.nl before 15 June 2016. Conference papers are due on 15 September 2016.
Conference fee: € 50 covering lunches and the conference dinner.
Funding: Very limited funding is available to cover accommodation and travel costs. Please indicate when submitting the abstract if you would like to apply for funding.
Conference organisers: Dr Christian Noack (c.u.noack@uva.nl); Dr Sune Bechmann Pedersen (sune.bechmann_pedersen@hist.lu.se)

Friday, May 6, 2016

CFP: Copernicus Graduate School

"Inclusion and Exclusion as Constitutive Elements of Society Formation Processes"
11-14 July 2016 Toruń (Poland)
It can be said that the paradigm of civil society in the processes of nation-building does not find clear usage in the research on nationalism. Such research approach would be very inspiring as a model for explaining the role of democracy and power in nationalism or relations between the individual and a social group. Without a doubt the contemporary nation is a form of organization of modern mass societies which uses existence conditions, formulation of goals and attributes of civil society. It realizes the promise of solidarity and community, which makes the nation so attractive and constructs the identity of masses. Without such structures of self-organization of civil society, implementation of thinking in national categories is unimaginable, and only a self-organization commitment towards the nation brings the feeling of bonds and mobilization potential for every possibility, which lets the nationalized societies function. The necessary equalization with individual project of life done by that develops a spectrum, which fulfills the necessity of security by an individual. Understanding society through the idea of nation and the functionality of civil society constitutes the strength and stability of national movement. Feasibility is perceived as an important civilization element.

In the sense of research "close to society", the existential question will be asked about basic parameters of change and adjusting to them of human being. Cultural bonds, transitional spaces and territories inhabited by mixed ethnic groups, which negate formal patterns of homogenic society become particularly effective for demonstrating the models of social development, which are used in order to bring answers to actual questions about conflict solutions and society organization options.

The work of the summer school is divided into four work groups:
1. Nationalization of the Society as Normative Unification Process
2. Determinants of Closed and Open Societies
3. Nationality Policies in Multinational States
4. Economic Aspects of Social Exclusion
  
The Summer School is addressed to PhD students of all humanistic disciplines.
Every participant of the Summer School will be actively working in a discussion group under the guidance of CGS fellow. The fellows will deliver the preparatory reading.

The results of the event will be published in a reviewed volume of the "CGS Studies" scientific series, at the Cambridge Scholars Publishing House (UK). Every participant will be invited to deliver a paper related to the topic and inspired by the event.
The working language is English - all the discussions will be held and papers for the book have to be prepared in English.

Admission fee:
110 €/450 PLN (with accommodation) 90 €/370 PLN (without accommodation)
The fee covers:
- accommodation with breakfast and other board,
- participation in the working groups' discussions and other related events,
- summer school materials,
- publication of the paper in English in a book of the series "CGS Studies",
- official banquet.

Application deadline: 20.06.2016

More information: www.cgs.umk.pl
 Home

Tuesday, April 5, 2016

CfP:THE KNOWLEDGE FACTOR : Refugees in Central and Eastern Europe, 1912-2001


The 2016 Annual Convention of the Leibniz Graduate School at the
Herder Institute for Historical Research on East Central Europe.
Deadline: 20 June 2016
Date: 8-9 December 2016
Location: Gisonenweg 5-7, 35037 Marburg, Germany.
In arguments about the current refugee crisis, East European heads of state have repeatedly claimed that their countries have never been perceived as desirable destinations; therefore, they shall never be such. We would like to take the occasion of the 2016 Annual Convention of the Leibniz Graduate School at the Herder Institute for Historical Research on East Central Europe to investigate this claim.
“The Knowledge Factor” offers an opportunity to discuss the history of refugees in, not from, Eastern Europe and the role knowledge inherent to or associated with refugees has played in the interaction with host societies. The focus lies on the twentieth century from the Balkan Wars of 1912 until its ultimate end in 2001.
For the purpose of this convention, we consider a refugee a person who
involuntarily had to leave home due to political persecution, war, violence,
breakdown of a political and social order as well as natural catastrophes. We are interested in the region that was once considered the Eastern bloc, i.e. East Central Europe and the successor states of the Soviet Union. Papers should interrogate the perception, integration, and adaptation of professional, scholarly, scientific, artistic and cultural knowledge and skills. They are not limited to but should seek answers to such questions as:
• When and why is knowledge specific to refugees appreciated, adapted or
dismissed? Under which circumstances are refugees recognized – formally and informally – as professionals and experts? Which policies are enacted to deal with such recognition? In how far do these policies reflect geopolitical, ilogical and cultural concept
How do relations and interactions with the majority society impact the
knowledge of refugees? How did the understanding of knowledge of and by refugees change between their departure and arrival in the host country? To what extent, for instance, were intellectuals seen as ‘native informants’ about their countries and regions of origin, disregarding the professional knowledge and expertise they had brought with them?
• What strategies do refugees pursue to integrate their knowledge into, adopt practices from or guard it against the majority society? How does knowledge allow refugees to maintain or advance their social status? And, by the same token, when does their refugee status disadvantage them regardless of level of skills and knowledge?
• What are the trajectories of interaction of the refugee knowledge with the knowledge of different groups in the host countries? Does this interaction take place in preexisting spaces or produce new ones?
• Under which circumstances does the refugee knowledge challenge accepted norms, stereotypes and prejudices in their host society? What does the interaction between the majority and refugees say about preexisting knowledge and its norms?
Critical analyzes should emphasize the historical dimension of this topic; the conference aspires to contribute to the history of science, post-colonial studies, and the socio-political as well as cultural history of the twentieth century. Whereas case studies should focus on Eastern Europe as destination and host country, we explicitly welcome papers on the global entanglements of the region and the inherent interdependence of its composing parts.
PhD students and Post-doctoral scholars are encouraged to apply. 
Please submit an abstract of no more than 350 words and a one-page-CV by 20 June 2016to jan.surman@herder-institut.de and victoria.harms@herder-institut.de
The Herder Institute provides accommodation; travel expenses will be partially or fully reimbursed. Participants, particularly from North America, are encouraged to seek additional funding.
http://www.herder-institut.de/fileadmin/user_upload/bilder/logos/Logo_zum_download/Pantone/HI-Logo-pan3282-rgb-300.jpg                              




Tuesday, March 22, 2016

CfP: “Fostering interdisciplinary communication - discussing approaches to discourse” University of Bremen, 30 June 2016



On June 30th 2016 (Thursday), the University of Bremen is hosting an international and interdisciplinary workshop on working with  discourse analysis. The workshop shall bring together doctoral and postdoctoral researchers from the fields of linguistics, history, and  cultural and social sciences, who will share their experiences and discuss advantages and disadvantages of applying the method within and across their respective disciplines. Participants will have the unique opportunity to express their concerns, work on possible solutions, learn from each other’s practice, and develop a positive approach to communication across fields in humanities and social sciences, with the overarching goal of establishing new and fostering already existing networks, links and connections. The workshop format of the meeting supports intensive collaborative work, while the small size of the group (max. 10 participants) and informal atmosphere guarantee an honest and open discussion. The topics to be covered during this full-day event can be divided into the following categories:

 1.  Discourse analysis in my field – i.e., Has my work in DA  affected my understanding of my field and its subject matter? What  other methods are available in my field and (how) are they compatible with DA?

 2.   Discourse analysis across fields – i.e., Has my interest in DA  facilitated my interaction with other disciplines, and in what ways? Has my understanding of/approach to DA improved because of
interaction with other disciplines?

3.    Discourse analysis and my career – i.e., How can the choice to use DA affect my career prospects in my field?

 4.    Other topics may include ethical considerations, problems
 concerning publishing, grant proposal writing, the applicability of  DA projects, etc.

The workshop will have the form of a free, informal group discussion. Accepted participants will be expected to prepare a 5-minute presentation about their projects involving discourse analysis, as well as think about possible answers to a number of questions incl. the examples above. The full list of questions will be distributed  before the workshop and all participants will have the opportunity to
suggest new or different questions, topics and problems to be discussed.

The participation in the event is free, and there is a possibility of  receiving a travel grant. 
Please apply by sending a free-form message  to: joanna.chojnicka@uni-bremen.de mailto:joanna.chojnicka@uni-bremen.de. Deadline: 15.05.2016.

 

Sunday, March 20, 2016

CfP:Ottoman Empire-Hungarian-Habsburg Contacts and Suleiman the Magnificent, 23-27 November 2016, Budapest/Hungary

Ottoman relations with the Habsburg dynasty and Hungary started in the late fourteenth century and quickly entered into a military engagement period after the Hungarians and the Habsburgs sided with the Byzantine Empire in the crusades against the Ottoman Empire. The Ottoman-Hungarian struggle further intensified in the fifteenth century because of their disputes over Serbia.
After Suleiman the Magnificent brought a big part of Hungary under the Ottoman rule, the Habsburgs claimed the same lands and the two powers entered into a centuries-long rivalry. The Ottoman domination of Hungary until the second siege of Vienna in 1683 created long lasting effects on the cultural, political and economic history of Hungary. The Hungarian kings Thököly Imre (1657-1705), Rákóczi Frenc (1676-1735) and Lajos Kossuth (1802-1894) took refuge in the Ottoman Empire and added another dimention to Ottoman-Hungarian relations.
In the eighteenth century, the military rivalry between the Ottoman and the Habsburg empires entered into a new stage with the French Revolution. The emerging threat of separatist nationalism not only ended the ensuing Ottoman-Habsburg War in 1791 but also demonstrated that the two multi-ethnic empires had to cooperate to remain intact in the age nationalism.
Despite some Austrian interferences against the Ottomans, after the Congress of Vienna the relations between the Ottoman and the Austrian empires relied on mutual interests. The Austrian compromise to satisfy both monarchists and nationalists created the dual monarchy of Austria-Hungary in 1868 and delayed the disintegration of the empire until the end of World War I. Likewise, after dealing with separatist Balkan nationalisms and World War I, the Ottoman Empire shared the same destiny. Nation states emerged from the ashes of two empires.
The Ottoman Sultan Suleiman the Magnificent was one of the most influential figures in Ottoman, Hungarian and Habsburg relations. He died during the siege of Szigetwar in 1566. Prof. Dr. Pál Fudor and his crew from the Hungarian Academy of Sciences discovered the tomb of Suleiman I in 2015. On the 450th anniversary of his death, this symposium aims to shed light on Ottoman, Hungarian and Habsburg relations. The symposium will hold a special panel on Suleiman the Magnificent and his key role in the outcome of Ottoman relations with Hungary and Habsburgs.
Existing academic literature on the history of Ottoman relations with Hungary and the Habsburgs is insufficient to cover the multi-dimentional aspects of relations among these three powers. By attracting the works of scholars, this symposium aims to fill the gap in the field and pioneer more works on the political, economic, military, cultural and social relations among these countries.

Topics & Themes:
- Ottoman-Hungarian-Habsburg relations from beginning to 1918,
Ottoman-Hungarian-Habsburg relations in the Age of Suleiman the Magnificent,
- The last campaign of Suleiman the Magnificent and his death,
- Treaties between the Ottoman Empire and Hungarys,
- Treaties between the Ottoman Empire and the Habsburg Empire,
Diplomatic, economic and social and cultural relations between these powers,
- The first and second sieges of Vienna and their ramifications,
- The Congress of Vienna (1815) and its consequences,
- The Congress of Berlin (1878) and its impact on Ottoman-Austria/Hungary relations,
- Habsburg and Hungarian Influence on Ottoman modernization,
- Hungarian sources on Ottoman history,
- Ottoman sources on Hungarian history


Contact: 
Abidin Temizer, Mehmet Akif Ersoy University, Turkey
e-mail: atemizer@mehmetakif.edu.tr

Peri Benedek, Eötvös Loránd University, Hungary
e-mail: peribenedek@gmail.com


http://sempozyum.ttk.gov.tr/eng/2016-eng-sempozyum3.html 
 

Wednesday, February 10, 2016

CFP: Contested Spheres: Artworlds under Socialism (Budapest, 27-28 May 16)



Kassák Múzeum – Petőfi Literary Museum and Translocal Institute, Budapest, May 27 - 28, 2016
Deadline: Feb 29, 2016

Contested Spheres: Actually Existing Artworlds under Socialism

This conference aims to provide a platform for fresh research into the art history of Eastern Europe that brings to light the varied solutions that artists and cultural workers found to living and working inside the socialist system in the period of the 1960s and 1970s.

While some took the path of direct confrontation with the authorities, leading to harassment, imprisonment or exile, and refused in principle all collaboration with state-run art institutions, others complied with the demands of the Party and freely placed their talents at the service of communist ideology, either through conviction or in exchange for public commissions, exhibition opportunities and institutional positions. There was also a wide band of artists, curators and art historians who, like the majority of citizens of ‘actually existing Socialism’, devised their own individual strategies for negotiating a haphazardly repressive system and actively participated in shaping a complex artistic landscape of alternative spaces, transitory gatherings and artist-run galleries, as well as semi-independent institutions, associations and open air symposia, which all functioned according to the unorthodox rules of the socialist art economy. Examining the art worlds of mid- to late Socialism not from the top down perspective symbolised by the notorious ‘three T’s’ of Hungarian cultural policy, which divided artists into the categories of supported, tolerated and forbidden, but rather through a bottom up approach that examines the variety of possible attitudes adopted by cultural producers to the socialist system, ranging from confrontation and withdrawal to conformity and compromise, this conference sets out to foster debate about the conditions of artistic production during the last decades of Socialism and how these affected the individual trajectories, aesthetic choices and post-communist legacies of East European artists.

Proposals for conference papers are sought that examine how artists, curators or art historians, or even entire art scenes, responded to the demands of the socialist system, investigating, for example, prominent cases of refusal and resistance, the self-image and social role of official artists, as well as instances of disingenuousness, ambiguity and doublespeak in the machinations of late Socialist art worlds. Of equal relevance are papers that examine the workings of the artistic economy under socialism, and the different ways in which artists reacted to, suffered under, or turned to their advantage the distinctive material and economic environment established by the socialist state.

Speakers are invited to submit abstracts of 250 words, along with a short biography (approx. 100 words) to
fowkes@translocal.org by 29 February 2016.

Papers will be selected by a conference board made up of: Dr. Klara Kemp Welch, Courtauld Institute London, Dr. Tomáš Pospiszyl, Academy of Fine Arts, Prague, Dr. Maja Fowkes and Dr. Reuben Fowkes, Translocal Institute, Budapest and Dr. Emese Kürti, ACB Research Lab, Budapest.

This conference is organised with the framework of the Kassák Museum’s long term research project into the art of the 1960s and 70s.
 Kassák Museum