I would be interested in a session discussing what people believe are the most important themes of the past twenty years in the former "satellite" states, plus maybe the Baltics. Gale Stokes

I would like to suggest a topic. I would like to see original readings by poets, fiction writers and translators at the conference. bobradov@xula.edu

Many recent PhDs and others are anxious to publish their research but have little experience of how to prepare articles for publication, are intimidated by the refereeing process, and are bewildered by the length of the process. I would propose a session in which editors and experienced contributors exchange advice and explain some of the pitfalls and benefits of the publishing and refereeing process.

Martyn Rady, Slavonic and East European Review (m.rady@ssees.ucl.ac.uk)

I would propose the following topic:Russian networked public sphere: Freedom of Information and Communications

I would propose a session on using the web--particularly the read-write capabilities sometimes called Web2.0--to help scholars find, use and share data and other resources with one another.
Kevin Deegan-Krause, Department of Political Science, Wayne State University, kdk{at]wayne[dot}edu

While all the ideas are interesting, I wonder if both Gale's and Martyn's ideas might be used to complement each other nicely. I could easily see Gale's discussion focusing on those who have been in the field during these twenty tumultuous years (I know I woudl love to listen to a discussion on this topic) while one on publshing might draw a core of folks from editorial boards (if Denise K is not there I woudl be happy to represent the CAS board) AND young scholars who are perhaps trying to push forward from the core appraches of the past 20 years.

Might there be a two parter here?

Also- might anyone be interested in a chat about institutional review boards and research ethics?

I would like to propose a session on post-nationalism in the Balkans--there is so much lit and film produced that directly deals with the war in Yugoslavia--but what about cultural products that are moving beyond this paradigm i.e works that aren't necessarily about the war/transition but discuss contemporary life in former Yugoslavia (or other countries, such as Romania). . . .I would be happy to facilitate.

I find this an interesting one. I have no knowledge to add to such a discussion, but I would like to hear those who do.

Taking off from Gale's original suggestion, I would like to see a discussion on the most important CURRENT trends in Soviet and post-Soviet history. The field seems as if it's undergoing a paradigm shift, but as an "oldster," I'm not quite sure what that is, and I'd like to know!

Irina Del Genio, Associate Dean, Liberal, Visual & Performing Arts at Elgin Community College emails two more potential topics:

American Studies in Russia, Russian Studies in America: How Well Do We Know Each Other?
The focus of this proposal is to assess the current status of the respective area studies in both countries. To compare and contrast Russian Studies in America and American Studies in Russia, their history, methodology, institutional framework and funding sources. Map the major changes that these area studies have undergone since the dissolution of the Soviet Union. To answer the question: Are strong area studies conducive to public knowledge, scholarly dialogue, and Russian-American relations?

Teaching Russian Studies in Two-year Colleges: Luxury or Necessity?

Michael Kunichika of the Department of Russian and Slavic Studies at NYU offers another potential topic:

I am writing on behalf of a group of scholars who would like to propose an unconference session devoted to the past and future of the Slavic and Baltic reading room at the NYPL, which was closed this past year due to the restructuring of the library. A major resource for Slavic Studies, the collection now faces a set of challenges to its maintenance — from such basic problems such as cataloguing and even re-shelving to continued issues of its growth. Currently, there are numerous initiatives underway to appeal to the director of the NYPL to restore some basic patron services and continuing to provide basic maintenance of the collection. For instance, Bill Taubman, in his capacity as President of AAASS, has written to the Director of the NYPL urging him to devote staff to maintaining the collection; and Karen Rosenberg has drafted another letter to outline further steps toward that end.

As such, we imagine that this session could allow for a general discussion of the value of the collection to scholars past and present, and, more urgently, to consider current initiatives and future proposals as well as to try to garner broad support for these initiatives from the field. I have appended both a letter we drafted as an appeal to AAASS, which has all of the signatories and potential participants for the session; and an email from Wendy Walker who encouraged Tony Anemone to pursue this option.

I would like to propose a session in which to discuss the recent advances in the study of early Slavic history. I envision a discussion of new information and techniques that have improved our understanding of the development of the Slavic peoples from 10,000 ybp up to the Middle Ages. I would anticipate participation by scholars studing linguistics, archaeology, anthropology, cultural development, and DNA tracking of deep genealogy.

I am one of the group of mainly New York scholars who hope to mobilize the Slavic field to come to the support for access to the resources of the former Slavic and Baltic Division at the New York Public Library. I therefore strongly second Michael Kunichika's proposal for a session devoted to the current problems with the NYPL's collections in our fields. Michael and I were part of last summer's NEH seminar at the NYPL, and the greatly diminished access to the collection for this year's NEH group has alerted everyone to the grave nature of the problems the NYPL and we face. This is one of the world's great Slavic collections. Yet only through conversations with NEH scholars did Victoria Steele, the new Brooke Russell Astor Director of Collection Strategy, learn that the research branch had this collection and was about to transfer out the last person who knows the collection and the languages. Mr. Yoo will now remain with the collection, but he is completely alone! Ed Kasinec has retired, Rob Davis now oversees Columbia's Slavic collection, and their staff are gone. We need to show the NYPL that we care and this situation is unacceptable.

I would like to add my voice to those requesting a session devoted to the current problems with access to the Slavic collection at the NYPL. This is truly a dire situation which should be of concern to all AAASS members.

I also would like to support the idea of a panel on access to the Slavic collections at the NYPL after the closing of the Slavic Division. The collection is unique and certainly worthy of the attention of the whole scholarly community. It would be interesting to exchange ideas with others who have dealt with threats of closure, such as to the European Reading Room in the Library of Congress. Also, many scholars are still unaware that the Slavic Division has closed, and this would help raise awareness of the situation. The NYPL has responded to the concerns of this summer's NEH group by retaining Mr. Yoo to service the collection, so it is possible for scholars to influence the course of affairs at the library, and the more scholars involved in keeping access open to the collection, the better.

I would also like to participate in a session devoted to the fate and the future of the Slavic collection at the NYPL - the fate of one of our greatest libraries should be of interest to a large number of slavists at AAASS.

I would like to add a topic about the problems of divided towns in the Balkans, especially problems that local people face every day (divided schools...)

I echo the call for, and will participate in, a session on the situation at the NYPL.

I, too, support a panel on access to the NYPL Slavic collection.

There is already a roundtable discussion on topics such as this, and, I believe, Robert Davis (formerly of NYPL) will be speaking on his experience:

9-02 The Future of Slavic Librarianship in the Digital Era - (Roundtable) - Bello Mondo
Sponsored by: BDC Subcommittee on Slavic Digital Projects

o Chair: Michael Meyer Brewer, U of Arizona
o Part.: Robert Harding Davis, Columbia U
o Janice T. Pilch, U of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
o Nicholas Thorner, Library of Congress
o Patricia K. Thurston, Yale U

The panel will discuss two different, but interconnected issues of great importance to the future of Slavic librarianship in the United States. The first is the wave of "reorganizations" that is sweeping this country's academic research libraries. Slavic librarians (and AAASS members more generally) would benefit from hearing about these developments from those who work at the institutions affected by such changes (New York Public Library, Library of Congress, University of Illinois-Urbana, etc.). The other issue concerns how these changes fit into the larger picture of where Slavic studies librarianship is going. What historical forces are driving this wave of reorganization, what has changed in the field, and what will this mean for the field of Slavic librarianship in the near future?

It would seem that an "unconference" panel focusing on the concerns of scholars/users confronted by the changes at teh NYPL would complement the "official" panel very well.

Late to the game, as usual, I agree that it'd be good to discuss the NYPL situation at the "unofficial part" of the conference.
RRR

Perhaps we could have a session during which attendees discuss issues that are common to all different regions of the FSU. The topics might range from environmental concerns to pedagogical challenges, transitional governance and legitimacy to traditional and non-traditional security concerns.

I would be interested in discussing a topic about nationalism and possibly gender in post-war Yugoslavia and her successor states.