- Berman Jewish Policy Archive
Transcription
- Berman Jewish Policy Archive
fe^ssbciation for Jewish Studies IfiiVSLETTER Fall 1995 Number 45 25-Year Report of the Executive Secretary From the Seventh Annual Conference, 1975 Standing, 1. to r.: Charles and Judith Berlin, Frank Talmage, Ismar Schorsch Seated, 1. to r.: Marvin and June Fox, Salo and Jeanette Baron, Arnold Band I N T H I S ISSUE Page 1 25-Year Report of the Executive Secretary Page 6 Gender and Women's Studies Page 8 Pedagogy at the AJS Page 10 Jewish Music in the Curriculum Page 11 AJS in the ACLS Page 14 ACLS Travel Grants Page 14 Notes From the Twenty-Sixth Annual Conference, 1994 Left to right: Bernard Cooperman, Jehuda Reinharz, Marvin Fox, Charles and Judith Berlin, Herbert Paper, Arnold Band, Robert Seltzer 25-Year Report of the Executive Secretary Charles Berlin Harvard University AT THE ANNUAL BANQUET of the AJS on December 18, 1994, Charles Berlin presented his report on the state of the Association after twenty-five years. His report is followed here by the edited remarks of the current and former officers of the organization who spoke on that occasion. After twenty-two years as Executive Secretary, Dr. Berlin retired December 31, 1994. (Ed.) F R O M ITS MODEST BEGINNINGS in 1 9 6 9 , when forty-seven of us gathered together at Brandeis University to establish the Association for Jewish Studies, the Association has grown into an international learned society and professional organization with over 1500 members, the premier association in its field. It has been a quarter-century of enormous achievement. This, our 26th annual conference has 74 sessions and some 300 individuals on the program; in 1973, at our Fifth conference there were 8 sessions and 24 names on the program. As of this evening, we have some 600 conference registrations. At our Tenth annual conference, in 1978, we had 210 members registered at the conference. The annual conference of the AJS has become the primary meeting for the field of Jewish Studies. The AJS annual conference now houses the largest display of academic Judaica publications in the country and has become an important meeting place for publishers and authors. The Association itself has made significant contributions as a publisher of Judaica scholarship. Its journal, the AJS Review, now in its nineteenth year of 1 25-Year Report (continued from p. 1) publication, is the leading general journal of Jewish Studies in the United States. The four volumes of AJS conference proceedings are major contributions in their disciplines. In addition to academic conferences and scholarly publications which reflect the role of the AJS as a learned society, the Association has compiled an impressive twenty-fiveyear record in its function as a professional organization. Its catalog of courses in Jewish Studies at American and Canadian universities is now a standard reference source. Its Information bulletin: positions in Jewish Studies, of which twenty-eight issues have appeared, plays an important role in dissemination of information and recruitment. The Association's mailing list rental service has become a major source of information about positions, conferences, and publications in Jewish Studies. Issues of significance to the profession have been addressed in Association publications such as The Teaching of Judaica in American Universities which appeared in 1970; forty-four issues of the AJS Newsletter, and the recently published Report of the Task Force on Acquisitions: Israel, a joint project of the AJS and the Association of Research Libraries. All this activity is reflected in the growth of the Association's budget from some $23,000 in 1973 to one currently of some $104,000. Recognition of the Association's achievements and of its proper place in the academy was accorded it in 1985 when the Association was admitted as a constituent member of the American Council of Learned Societies. However, it is not my intention, in the few minutes allotted me by the Program Chairman, to attempt a descriptive or chronological account of those twenty-five years of achievement; a different, perhaps printed, forum would be more appropriate for that. At this time of transition, as the AJS emerges from the generation of its founders and enters its second quarter century, I would like to point to certain operating principles that have served the AJS administration as guidelines in the Association's development until now in the belief that they 2 may still be of value in the future. First, and of paramount importance has been assuring the independence of the Association, independence of any ideology or institution, of any community or partisan group, whether external or internal. Equally important has been an inclusive approach rather than an exclusive one—assuring that all concerned with Jewish Studies, regardless of field or rank, feel welcome in AJS. This democratization also manifests itself in the internal affairs of the Association, where volunteerism has become the Association's greatest strength—witness the work of the AJS Review Editorial Board, the Conference Program Committee, other Association committees, and finally the AJS Board of Directors, most of whose membership in recent years had not yet completed their graduate studies when the AJS was founded. To these should be added two other elements: the first is a sense of realism. That is, an awareness of the real strengths of the Association—and they are many—that always took into account the equally real limitations and constraints. The second is a sense of humor that always served to provide a sense of proportion and proper perspective in Association affairs and kept our founding fathers and their heirs from taking themselves as seriously as sometimes the many achievements of AJS might allow. Independence, openness, democratization, volunteerism, realism, humor—they have served the Association well in its first quarter-century; they can serve the Association well in the future. Finally, the AJS is moving from what in many respects was—to use a popular term—a virtual reality, certainly in terms of office location and its accoutrements, to what is very much a real office, thanks to the generous hospitality of our colleague Jehuda Reinharz. The Association will be well-positioned to avail itself of new technologies to assist its future growth both in size and in services offered. Electronic newsletters with current book reviews and a calendar of conferences and events; electronic conference programs and advance listings of conference abstracts—we will not be surprised to find such items on a technological "wish list" implemented in the not too distant future—to supplement the instant communication network of e-mail, fax and voice mail already instituted for AJS members since the start of this transition period by our very talented incoming Executive Secretary, Aaron Katchen, as part of a wideranging technological enhancement program. Our founders have done their work well and have passed on to a new generation a strong, disciplined, thriving, and respected organization, a solid foundation on which to build even more impressively. It has been a privilege to have participated in this process over the last quarter-century, as Treasurer for the first three years, and as Executive Secretary for the past twentytwo years. I am grateful to the Association for this opportunity to have participated in this effort to enhance Jewish Studies in the academy. And I shall always cherish the warm friendships of the many AJS colleagues with whom I had the pleasure of working closely during those twenty-five years, and who offered their unstinting support and encouragement, individuals like Arnie Band, Berny Cooperman, Marvin Fox, Jane Gerber, Ben Ravid, Jehuda Reinharz, Nahum Sarna, Bob Seltzer, and Ruth Wisse, and our colleagues now of blessed memory Frank Talmage and Marshall Sklare, and many others whom I cannot mention for lack of time. However, I would like to express my gratitude to Elizabeth Vernon who has for the past five years assisted me in the administrative tasks of the Association and has served so ably as Conference registrar. And a very special and immeasurable "thank you* to one whose support, encouragement, and counsel have lovingly sustained me throughout my AJS endeavors, as in all that I do, to my dear wife Judy. I am very pleased to welcome my successor, Aaron Katchen; it gives me great pleasure to know that the AJS is being entrusted to a person of such talent, dedication, and integrity. I look forward to being of assistance to the Association in the coming years and I wish it well as it enters its second quarter-century. For Charles Berlin: Remarks by Colleagues and Friends (continued) Arnold.J. Band UCLA Past President "Von Berlin Nach Boston" THE END OF THE BERLIN PERIOD in the history of the AJS should occasion the beginning of the writing of the history of our Association. Twenty-five years in the life of a significant learned society, particularly one that deals with the sweep of Jewish history, certainly suggests that we owe our heirs the materials for a coherent history. It is therefore only proper that we celebrate Charlie Berlin's years of service with a modest contribution to the history of the Association. Let me tell you how Charlie became the Executive Secretary of our Association. Sometime in the fall of 1972, after Baruch Levine, our second President, had persuaded me to assume the Presidency of the Association at the coming Conference to be held in Maryland in December, I asked for copies of the minutes and the budget. I had some sense of our administrative difficulties, that we had serious cash-flow problems, and that we really didn't have a working office. I realized that administering a primarily East Coast organization while living in Los Angeles was a daunting task. Baruch naturally assured me that the budget was balanced, that I could choose my own Executive Secretary, and that he would send me the requested record. Well, what I got would make the pinkasim of Eastern European kehillot look like models of Protestent administrative decorum. It was clear that my buddy Baruch was a fine Biblical scholar and had secured a handsome NEH grant for us, but was no manager. Our situation, in fact, was so stressed, that the proper selection of an Executive Secretary was critical. I considered the desired qualifications: I needed someone who had a scholarly training in Jewish Studies, but did not have to publish for survival. He had to be well organized, tenacious, and, most important, someone who knew how to count. My reasoning led me to chose Charlie Berlin, a person who understands that "the good God is found in the details." The choice led to a partnership which, I believe, was special. We discussed business frequently, and often rung up impressive telephone bills. We agreed on most issues, but, when we didn't, I noticed that Charlie had an uncanny understanding of Max Weber's theories on bureaucracy which say, in essence, that administration is really shaped by the person nearest to the xerox machine. After the Maryland conference, our Fourth, which had fewer participants than the previous conference held at Brandeis, Charlie and I sat down to assess our situation. On paper, we were clearly bankrupt, for while we could count on an infusion of cash in some six months from the Regional Conference Program that Baruch had so cleverly worked out with the NEH, we had no money and bills from the Maryland Conference kept tumbling in. We also discovered that dues had not been collected from our members in over a year. So while we had something short of 200 members on the books, they were mostly 200 non-dues-paying members. To cope with this dire situation, we had to do what all good statesmen do: we moved quickly to raise taxes, and we bluffed. In all humility, I must admit that we did both very well. The smoke and mirrors game we played that year outdid the finest efforts of Potemkin. The chicanery was really fun. The only thing that bothered me was that Charlie, living on the East Coast, always called right before dinner time on the West Coast. Time will not allow a detailed account of Charlie's critical contribution to the structuring of the Association— which resembled a shtibel before he took over. We initiated a series of rapid changes, each of which required an enormous investment in energy and good sense. To establish our identity, we had to move off the Brandeis campus. Since Charlie had an office at Harvard, at the Widener library, that would do. Similarly, we moved the next conference, our Fifth, to the Harvard Faculty Club, and, after we outgrew that facility two years later, to this hotel which we selected for two reasons: first—Charlie's reason—the price was right; and second—my reason—when I was a boy growing up in Boston, this hotel did not welcome Jewish guests. The irony was irresistible. Again and again, we complemented each other remarkably. He liked lists of figures and bibliographies, while I liked figures of speech; I seasoned the language, while he cooked the books. Charlie also had to cope with a surge in Association activity generated by the Regional Conferences that we were mounting, each involving complicated logistics and a publication. We also expanded the AJS Newsletter, which we published together several times a year through the early 1980s. These publications prepared us for the next step, the AJS Review, which was launched in 1976, after several years of arduous preparatory work by our gifted editor, the late Frank Talmage, and the Managing Editor, Charlie Berlin. We offered our services as a clearing house for job placement. As one who was there in the beginning, I can tell you that most of the features of the Association which we all take for granted today, were the work of Charlie Berlin. Let me conclude by describing our lunch together here in the hotel after our Seventh Conference in 1975, my last as President. We had just finished our business meeting and bade good-bye to our colleagues who were leaving the building. As we ate, we reviewed the conference and the past three years of working together. Both were enormously gratifying. We had by then 900 dues-paying members, a surplus in the budget, a thriving placement service, which had radically democratized the marketplace in our field, a vastly enhanced national visibility and credibility as a result of our vitality, and our publications: the regional conferences, the AJS Newsletter, and the beginnings of the AJS Review. As we tallied up our achievements, I said to Charlie: "I guess we don't have to bluff any more." He smiled at me slyly and answered: "But it was more fun when we did." 3 For Charles Berlin: Remarks by Colleagues and Friends (continued) Marvin Fox Boston University Past President BY ARNIE'S STANDARD, since I'm older, I get even more time, but I won't take it. When Berny Cooperman called to ask me to participate in this session, he said to me, "it's going to be very brief"—at that time he said "five minutes," by the way, not "three"—and he said to me, "it's very simple: all you have to do is tell a funny story, say something nice about Charlie, and the time will all be gone." So I explained to him: "I don't know any funny stories, and I can't think of a nice thing to say about Charlie, so what is there ... ?" He was stunned but he didn't say anything, and then I accepted. Let's not say nice things about Charlie, let's tell the truth. The truth is: if he were so nice, we wouldn't be here today. It's only because he is not Jehuda Reinharz Brandeis University Past Secretary-Treasurer I DON'T KNOW what the average tenure of an executive secretary in an organization in America is, but I'm willing to bet that twenty-two or twenty-five years, if we add the Treasurer's years, is some sort of a record. I can tell you what a President's average tenure in this country is and it's not anywhere near twenty-five; in fact, it hovers around five years or so, as we have seen time and time again. I'm also willing to bet that there is no professional organization that is twenty-five years old which has had only one Executive Secretary. Actually Charlie was not only the Executive Secretary, but as you have heard from Marvin Fox, and all of the past presidents who are here will readily testify, for the many years he served as the Executive Secretary, he was also the President, the Vice-President, the Editor of the journal, of the newsletter, he was of course the treasurer and, as Marvin mentioned, none of us would have been able to do our work without Charlie 4 only efficient and skillful, but because he's tough, and unyielding, that we survived; that we got through those years that Arnie described; that we then came to the glorious years of my own presidency. All of us can tell you: if we were presidents or other officers, we worked for Charlie, he didn't work for us. He's a tough, demanding taskmaster; he taught us a good deal about how to do our jobs; and he also told us when we were all wrong. And generally he was right. It's due to his remarkable skills and tenacity—and toughness—that the AJS was transformed from its small beginnings to what it is today. It's due to his natural frugality—penuriousness— the fact is that he's a tightwad—that we've managed to be solvent all these years. And it's due, probably, no less, to his incredible devotion to the AJS and to the profession. Essentially, if it had not been for all of these qualities and characteristics that Charlie brought to the work of the Executive Secretary, I do not believe that any of us would genuinely have succeeded in office, and I do not believe that we would have succeeded in building what is, as you've heard repeatedly this evening, certainly the major body of academic Jewish studies in this hemisphere, that has no peer. I want to add only one final note, which perhaps nobody appreciates as much as I (although someone said it, but I don't remember who), and that is, whether you know it or not, Charlie is deeply committed to the democratic process and has never permitted the officers to get out of line in overlooking or ignoring the wishes of the membership as a whole—and for that we're all deeply indebted to him. Charlie, for myself— and I hope I speak for everybody—we thank you for all you've done and we wish you well in whatever you do in the future. really jumping in the breach every time he was needed. If you require any demonstration, you saw it this afternoon at the business meeting when Rela was somewhat late and there was no report and Charlie just jumped in there and gave the report on her behalf until she arrived. Now, take myself as an example: in my six years as Secretary- Treasurer of the AJS, I had few tasks, except to sign, for the most part, blank checks (in fact the last blank check that I signed was this afternoon), give the annual report, which was co-written by Charlie, and generally just hand him the keys to the vault. Charlie dealt with the banks, with the creditors, with investments, and with deposits, seeing to it that the books were scrupulously kept, all presumably my tasks. At the first meeting at which the Association was founded at Brandeis in 1969 and during which I was a graduate student—by the way, for reasons that are still unknown to me I kept minutes and a diary of that meeting—Charlie was elected treasurer by the forty-seven scholars who attended. In the early years of the Asso- ciation, Charlie had a major role as the managing editor—as we have heard—of the AJS Review from 1976 to 1980. But even when he had no title, Charlie was involved in the journal, he was involved in the newsletter, he saw to it that the regional symposia took place all over the country, and, of course, in 1992 he published the catalog of Judaica courses that is so useful. He was the driving force behind the task force on Israeli acquisitions for research libraries, a model of how an assessment of library resources ought to be done anywhere. In short, for many years the administrative structure of the entire organization was on his shoulders. I do not recall once that Charlie ever complained about the amount of work he had; maybe he complained to Judy, but not to the rest of us. So for the last 25 years Charlie's name has really been synonymous with that of the AJS and, given the enormous contributions of the AJS to the entire field of Judaica in this country and abroad, much of the credit for the expansion of the field really belongs to him. We were lucky that For Charles Berlin: Remarks by Colleagues and Friends (continued) Jehuda Reinharz (continued from p. 4) Charles Berlin's scholarly expertise and many personal skills were so perfectly matched with the needs of this fledgling organization. He did the work for an entire office staff, his memory and attention to every detail, organizational as well as scholarly is nothing short of phenomenal. He can just as easily recite the first edition of a medieval text as he can the amount of money owed by a particular member of the AJS. Given his many intellectual and organizational contributions to the Association for Robert M. Seltzer Hunter College President, AJS AN ENGINEER WHO WORKS closely with architects of distinction once explained his role thus: Creative architects dream dreams, see visions, and design a building according to their aesthetic imagination and understanding of the human activities to be undertaken there. My friend then informs them if, given the necessary physical materials, deadlines, and budget, their structure will stand up. In the course of his years as Executive Secretary, Charles has acted as our structural engineer, telling us whether our imaginative constructions would stand up to the stresses and strains of everyday life, what side-effects were not being anticipated, how to accomplish even more effectively what we wanted to do, and, above all, whether eminently worthy ideas furthered the essential purpose of the AJS—to strengthen Jewish studies in American institutions of higher learning and the scholarly grasp of the Jewish tradition's place in civilization. Since we are all bona fide scholars of Judaica, we all know a lot, have wellhoned critical skills, overcrowded calendars, and some attitude. To get us to work together smoothly, as Charles has done, took meticulous concern for detail, considerable perspicuity, and not a little tough-mindedness, thickness of skin, and sagacity. During the last twenty-five years the AJS has been an especially effective agent for upholding Jewish Studies, it is fair to say that Charles Berlin was its main driving engine for a quarter of a century. Through some unorthodox means, I was able to obtain a message that Charlie received by e-mail from one of his many admirers (you'd be surprised what you can do with technology). I would like to read you that message. Upon hearing that Charlie is leaving the organization, the person writes, "Dear Charles, I just read in the latest AJS Newsletter of your decision to step down from your position as Secretarystandards and maintaining respect for scholarship and scholars. And it has also been one of the truly successful ecumenical associations in the American Jewish community in its goodwill toward such a broad range of methodologies, convictions, and opinions about Jewish Wissenschaft and Judaism. Under Charles' eye, the annual conference grew ever more ambitious, professional, inclusive. Credit, of course, is due to our series of notable program chairs—Frank Talmage, Michael Meyer, Jane Gerber, Steve Katz, David Blumenthal, Ruth Wisse, David Berger, Rela Geffen, and Berny Cooperman. All of them can testify to the behind-the-scenes role that Charles played so calmly and determinedly as nudge, facilitator, traffic cop, guardian angel of modern Jewish learning in America. The same can be said with respect to the structure Charles helped to create for the AJS Review, which has achieved such distinction under Frank Talmage, Robert Chazan, Norman Stillman, and their coworkers. It is due to Charles's watchfulness that this has been accomplished within our limited resources: modest dues, rental of the mailing list (the sanctity of which Charles has guarded so ferociously), and exceptionally frugal administrative costs. We have one of the lowest overheads of any similar organization and one of the highest percentage of attendance at the annual meeting because of Charles's careful planning and skill in mobilizing our members to volunteer their time and services to such a remarkable extent. Unlike the full-time, professional managers that have become an omnipresent feature of academic and Treasurer of the AJS. What an incredible record of service, you certainly deserve relief from the responsibility after all these years. The success of the AJS and the standing of the field in North America owe you an incalculable debt and it is no exaggeration to say that what you have contributed so much to is really a historic achievement in the history of American Higher Education. Yishar kohakha and many thanks." What else can one add after hearing such praise except to say: "Ich bin auch ein Berliner!" Thank you. organizational life in recent decades, Charles is one of us, a practitioner in the advancement of Jewish learning while keeping this association solvent and growing. No doubt there is more that the AJS should do. For example, the most recent phase of computer networking may allow us to provide bibliographies on demand, current news of the profession, and easier access to existing and possible databases. We have wanted the AJS Newsletter to provide articles on the practical side of our teaching and research roles and on campus issues that affect us directly. This moment of appreciation, however, acknowledges that we can do so because we are building on the substantial foundation laid by Charles and the officers of the first quartercentury of the association. Many of us know only too well the glazed look that comes over our children when urged to appreciate what their parents have done to provide the opportunities and choices they now face. Which doesn't make it any less true. It is because of Charles Berlin's hard work and dedication that the AJS has achieved such recognition and respect among learned societies here and abroad. I am sad to see him step down as Executive Secretary after only 22 years, but I interpret this as yeridah le-tsorekh 'aliyah. We are not losing the presence of Charles Berlin, but allowing him to gain greater transcendence as eminence, senior statesman, and rational conscience, while we move on to new matters for which his solid achievements paved the way. 5 Gender and Women's Studies Gender and Jewish Studies Dorothy O. Helly Professor of History and Women's Studies Hunter College and The Graduate School The City University of New York THE RECOGNITION within Jewish Studies that "the lives and concerns of Jewish women have often differed from the experiences of men and are deserving of study on their own terms," has been gathering momentum in scholarly terms over the past decade. The contributors to Gender and Jewish Studies: A Curriculum Guide, edited by Judith R. Baskin and Shelly Tenenbaum (New York: Biblio Press, 1994), reveal the considerable range and variety of this scholarship that can now be brought into the classroom. There is always a gap between the production of new knowledge and its introduction to university students. The process of integrating new information, new questions, new methods of analysis about gender—as about race, ethnicity, class, sexual orientation, and other particularities that identify us as social beings—into our courses is neither easy nor accomplished in a single semester. The nature of the process itself, transforming the curriculum to include what has formerly been excluded, makes us face difficult decisions of selection and emphasis at every turn, but the more we engage in it, the more intellectually exciting it becomes. The resultant ferment also leads to new programs, such as the Master's degree being offered in Jewish Women's Studies at the Jewish Theological Seminary beginning this fall. Our disciplines and fields, conceptualized with a default system that has usually excluded gender as a critical issue, make first efforts to include gender usually a patchwork of undigested addition. The editors of Gender and Jewish Studies: A Curriculum Guide are to be 6 congratulated for choosing forty syllabi which met the standard of integrating a gender analysis throughout the topics involved. These syllabi therefore offer the user of the guide a thoughtful beginning in terms of what gendered questions might be raised in a wide range of Jewish Studies. The thirty-three women and men who created these syllabi give us an excellent overview of what is currently available in books and film for use in the classroom. The syllabi are organized under the categories of: Bible and Rabbinics; General History; Women in Jewish History; Women and Religion; Literature; Social Science; and Learning Programs in the Women's Community. As Baskin and Tenenbaum put it, it is now possible to hear gendered voices in many scenes of Jewish life and to find writing by Jewish women which has not only confronted living in "a male-dominated Jewish culture" but also has faced the "duality of being part of a Jewish minority in often uncongenial cultural environments." The curriculum guide is a practical consequence of the establishment in 1986 of the Jewish Studies Women's Caucus in the Association of Jewish Studies to further the academic study of women in Jewish life and culture. There is space here to mention only a few of the innovative and imaginative efforts at curriculum transformation represented in this collection. Finding women's voices where they have not been recorded has led to innovative methodologies to tease out from the male- authored sources patterns of gendered behavior. Recent sociological and anthropological theory provides some ways to analyze such information and to reconstruct women's status, roles, and activities. Carol Meyers in her "Women in the Biblical Tradition," for example, takes this approach. Some syllabi are especially useful for integrating issues of race and sexual orientation in their themes, such as those by Laura Levitt ("Women in Judaism"), Lynn Davidman ("Women in Jewish Culture: Image and Status"), and Judith Baskin ("Women in Jewish History and Literature"). A syllabus by Deborah Hertz (The History of Jewish Women in Europe 1700-1932") provides an analysis of Jewish women in terms of wider European phenomena such as socialism and feminism. Two syllabi raise methodologically interesting issues regarding immigration and autobiographical memory (Yael Zerubavel's "Jewish Immigration in Fiction and Ethnography") and the use of folklore and ethnography (Chava Weissler's "Jewish Folklore: The Folklore and Folklife of Ashkenazic Jewry"). Striking contributions to their fields are Ellen M. Umansky's "History of Jewish Women's Spirituality" and Myrna Goldenberg's "Literature of the Holocaust," the latter for the way it deals with problems of historical context, ethics, and responsibility, as well as for its supplemental bibliography of women's Holocaust narratives. Shelly Tenenbaum's "American Jewish Life," demonstrates the wide range of such a topic handled by a sociologist. It includes Eastern European Jewish immigration, class formation, intermarriage, women's roles, religious and secular bases for Jewish identity, feminism, anti-Semitism, voting patterns, and black-Jewish relations. With this curriculum guide and books like Judith Baskin's Jewish Women in Historical Perspective (1991) and Lynn Davidman and Shelly Tenenbaum's Feminist Perspectives on Jewish Studies (1994), no one in Jewish Studies can any longer say, "I don't know where to begin." Gender and Women's Studies (continued) Report from the AJS Women's Caucus Pamela S. Nadell The American University Women's Caucus Co-Chair THE WOMEN'S CAUCUS o f the Associa- tion for Jewish Studies was founded in 1986 after a number of scholars remarked that, while women in other academic professional associations, notably the American Academy of Religion, regularly gathered to discuss their concerns, this had not yet occurred at the AJS. Founding co-chairs were Susan Shapiro and Ellen Umansky. In 1988, when the Caucus began its tradition of holding a breakfast meeting on the Monday morning of the AJS conference, members adopted a statement of purpose. It defined the Caucus as a "support and networking organization of and for women in Jewish Studies. Its primary concerns are the advancement both of women in the profession and of the academic study of women in Judaism." Initially, the Caucus was open only to female scholars, reflecting the goal of providing a place and a space for women, historically a small minority of AJS members, to meet. But after discussion at the 1993 annual meeting, Caucus members, now numbering close to 200, voted overwhelmingly to open their ranks to all interested AJS scholars, male and female. Current co-chairs Pamela Nadell and Tamar Rudavsky work with a Steering Committee to discuss issues and decide directions for the Caucus. These are reported and voted upon at the annual breakfast meeting of the Caucus. In addition to a time for spontaneous sharing and networking, this meeting has become a forum for informal presentations by Caucus members on how the intersections of gender and Jewish studies have shaped their careers and scholarship. Past programs have included reflections by scholars at different stages of their careers (Paula Hyman, Marsha Rozenblit, and Judith Romney Wegner) on how the field had or had not changed since they began their initial training. Upon the occasion of the twenty-fifth anniversary of the AJS, another group of scholars, also at different stages of their careers (Judith Hauptman, Pamela Nadell, and Miriam Peskowitz), considered changes they had observed since they first began attending AJS annual meetings (increased presence of women, their growing representation on panels, and the emergence of sessions devoted to Jewish women's and gender studies, including an annual session cosponsored by the Caucus). At the most recent meeting, Kay Kaufman Shelemay presented "On Gender and Marginality: On being an Ethnomusicologist," and Ruth Tsoffar offered "Speaking from the Margins." These addresses, a highlight of Caucus meetings, furnish perspective and support a sense of collective identity on issues individual scholars, working in comparative isolation, often encounter. Another feature of the annual breakfast meeting is the dissemination of information about new scholarship in Jewish women's and gender studies. Scholars bring their current works to the attention of Caucus members. In addition, Laura Levitt organizes a display of books from small presses of interest to Caucus members that may not appear at the larger AJS book exhibit. While the annual meeting provides a forum for celebration of this burgeoning field, scholars of Jewish women's and gender studies remain cautious. Those whose essays appear in Lynn Davidman and Shelly Tenenbaum's collection, Feminist Perspectives on Jewish Studies (Yale University Press, 1994), contend that much remains to be done. In evaluating the cumulative effect upon various disciplines of the new scholarship on Jewish women's and gender studies, these scholars find the influence of a gendered analysis absent in many fields of Jewish Studies. In others, it is just at its inception, with many "mainstream" scholars either unwilling to incorporate the new scholarship or largely ignorant of it. To date, only in anthropology, biblical studies, and literary studies have feminist approaches led to significant and wide-reaching reconceptualization of these areas. Despite the reservations expressed by the authors of Feminist Perspectives on Jewish Studies, new materials on Jewish women's and gender studies have already entered the classroom. That this new scholarship promised to enrich university Jewish Studies courses led Judith Baskin, then Caucus co-chair, to begin assembling an archive of genderinclusive syllabi and curricular material from all AJS members. That proved such a rich resource that Baskin and Shelly Tenenbaum edited Gender and Jewish Studies: A Curriculum Guide (Biblio Press, 1994), a compilation of both gender-inclusive syllabi for standard Jewish Studies courses, i.e. Modern Jewish Civilization, as well as syllabi devoted exclusively to aspects of Jewish women's and gender studies, i.e. Women in Jewish Tradition. Royalties from the sale of the Guide benefit the Caucus. To foster the original goal of networking, a new Women's Caucus directory was mailed to all members-in-goodstanding earlier this year. Scholars wishing to join the Caucus and to receive this directory (which includes e-mail addresses) should contact: Professor Pamela Nadell Jewish Studies Program The American University Washington, DC 20016-8042 e-mail: [email protected] phone: 202-885-2425 Dues are $5.00 for graduate students, $10.00 for all other AJS members, and are waived for foreign scholars. The Caucus mailing list is also available for purchase. The Women's Caucus of the Association for Jewish Studies remains excited about the new directions and developments in Jewish women's and gender studies, and gratified that our collective efforts have played some part in shaping this growing field as well as scholarly endeavors in Jewish Studies as a whole. 7 Pedagogy at the AJS "Find(ing) Yourself A Teacher:" Opening the Discussion on Pedagogy at the AJS Conference Susan Handelman University of Maryland, College Park AT LAST DECEMBER'S AJS conference, Marc Bregman (Hebrew Union CollegeJerusalem), Michael Signer (University of Notre Dame) and I tried to do something different. We organized a session entitled "Aseb Lekhka Rav u-Qneh Lekha Haver—Teaching Traditional Texts: An Open Discussion on Pedagogy." The title reflected our aim: we wanted to initiate discourse on the subject of teaching and we wanted an open discussion rather than another block of paper readings. We did not expect a large turnout, but, much to our surprise, the room filled up with around 80 people from the broad spectrum of graduate students and senior scholars who make up the AJS. We had many reasons for proposing a session on teaching. First, this subject has been conspicuously absent from AJS programming. It is a commonplace that with rise of the post-war modern university, teaching became a kind of poor step-sister to research. In recent years, however, that trend has begun to be reversed. Some of this interest has come from transformations in methodology, new questions about what constitutes knowledge and its modes of transmission, and issues surrounding politics in the classroom. Some of it has arisen in reaction to attacks on the university and its ethos. But there is also an independent desire to take teaching more seriously by a new generation of scholars who are questioning the conventions on which our professional lives as academics have been based. We also believed that the AJS conference itself needed some alternative formats. What we ourselves do in these conferences implicitly reflects much about what we think teaching and learning are, and how we construct academic community. The fixed structure of most sessions—three or four separate papers read to the audience with relatively little time for questions or dialogue—reflects an underlying assumption about how we think knowledge is best communicated. There have been radical changes in our postmodern view of knowledge, and in the kinds of stu- 8 dents who now make up the university (and seminary) population. But we still seem to be employing a mode of scholarly discourse appropriate for pre-print culture, some aspects of which may even harken back to medieval scholasticism. II So our plan for our session was simply for each of us to talk informally and personally for only ten minutes each, on a very practical level, about what techniques we have found particularly useful in teaching traditional Jewish texts to a variety of non-specialists, and to use these remarks as a springboard for an open discussion with the entire audience. We first decided to break the "ascetic tradition" of having only ice water on hand at AJS sessions and replace it with a more Jewish mode—serving food. The Passover Seder and Hasidic "tish" aside, there is indeed a deep connection between "opening the mouth" and "opening the mind"—a kind of receptiveness created by the communal sharing of food that is a great facilitator of learning. Since our session was scheduled for 9 PM on Tuesday evening, we passed around after dinner liqueurs and chocolates. To further foster interchange with the audience, we abandoned the dais and re-arranged the large room ahead of time by putting as many of the chairs as we could in a large circle. Many of us do this routinely in our classrooms—why not at a conference? What indeed physically constitutes a good "scene of instruction"? Why is it that often the most instructive and interesting intellectual interchanges at conferences take place in the hallways, lounges, and bars rather than at the sessions themselves? How can we integrate that lively exchange of ideas into the sessions? Is there any reason why we must only lecture frontally at colleagues sitting silently before us in straight rows of chairs? The common thread in all our informal remarks was based on a key point made by Michael Signer, that, "in good teaching, form should follow function, ... i.e., the students should do something that imitates the life of the text they are studying." In what sense, one might ask, do traditional Jewish texts themselves contain an implicit pedagogy? How does any text teach us how to teach it? As Marc Bregman said in his comments, his goal was not only to teach his students how to decipher rabbinic texts to his satisfaction as their teacher ... but also to demand that they think constantly about how they would communicate these texts to their future students and congregants who know less than they. "I like to think that this recaptures something of the traditional transmission of rabbinic learning." In teaching, he said, he has learned not only that "the best way to learn is to teach," but also that "the best way to teach is to teach to teach." Marc and I also have a special interest in midrash and share a sense of the "performative" nature of these texts. Marc described a course he has designed on "Interpreting Scripture" that focuses on the Aqedah, telling how he begins by having students elaborate and concretize the brief biblical text as if they were making it into a film. My comments were based on a handout I gave illustrating methods I have found successful in teaching "The Bible as Literature" in an English Department to a mix of Jewish and non-Jewish undergraduates, many of them with little background, at a large state university. Among the examples were: techniques for "putting a text into play," i.e., seeing it as a "script" to be "performed" by its readers; samples of student re-writes of biblical stories in contemporary style (Joseph and Potiphar's wife as a "Silhouette Romance"); role plays; and letters of students to each other, to biblical personae and to me. Instead of journals, which have no real audience, I now have my students write letters that are "published" by their bringing copies for the entire class and reading them aloud. m After the three of us had spoken for the first half-hour, we decided to take a risk. Rather than just open the floor to discussion, we actually employed some techniques from what is now known in educational circles as "collaborative learning," a mode of restructuring the classroom for more interactive and interdependent learning and teaching. (Many collaborative learning techniques are surprisingly similar to the venerable hevruta method of yeshiva learning.) We announced that we would like to divide the audience into small groups of four persons each, in which they would introduce themselves and discuss in each group for ten minutes or so the following two questions: "What is the biggest problem you are having in your teaching? What's the most successful teaching technique you have discovered?" Then we would solicit comments from the small groups and open it to a whole group discussion. At this point, not surprisingly, a mini-walk-out occurred. About onequarter of the audience got up and made haste for the doors. Some were probably already tired by the long day, but my hunch is that others left out of resistance to the idea of having to talk in a small group. Perhaps we teachers are so used to the controlled rhetoric of solitary performance in front of a passive class or audience that the idea of turning to the person sitting in the next seat and talking more personally about one's own teaching made some people uneasy. We were, however, pleasantly surprised by the intensity of the reactions of those who stayed. One especially noteworthy theme was the Angst several audience members expressed about the conflicts of teaching "sacred texts in profane settings," of how to balance spiritual commitment with critical dispassion. We then allowed a free non-directed discussion with the microphone being passed from one audience member to the next, and little commentary from us. In retrospect, this discussion, like any good classroom discussion, could have been moderated more, but an interesting weave of voices and concerns was heard. Moshe Greenberg (Hebrew University), for example, put it simply and eloquently by saying that "the teacher is a model of inquiry. He displays how he inquires into the text and creates a paradigm and standard by which the student can judge what he doing." The good teacher, then, does not go into the classroom fully knowing in advance what the text means, but tries to find out together with the students. This reminded Marc Bregman of the saying in the Talmud Bavli, "Teach your tongue to say, I do not know" (Ber. 4a; Derekh Eretz Zuta 3:30), for that is what enables true "inquiry" (also the meaning of the Hebrew root darash for the word midrash). Joseph Lukinsky (Jewish Theological Seminary) noted that, "aside from some technical imperatives, in much of our teaching there is no absolutely necessary reason why students are learning any given specific material. Ultimately, what the teacher is trying to do is to imbue students with your vision. ... We are artists. The job of art is to make you see the world in a way you never saw it before. ... [In our case, it is] to get them to see not just the surface of this text we are teaching, but to see that it is deeper. I think it is deeper this way, and four-fifths of them will see that it's deeper in a totally other way, which may be interesting to me or totally boring. But they see it as deeper, and they are excited and I did my job." IV Was the session successful? Yes and no. The problems of a professor at a large state university with a mix of Jewish and non-Jewish undergraduates are different from those of a scholar in an advanced graduate program at a rabbinical seminary or Ph.D. program. Teaching Talmud is different from teaching Italian Jewish history or Saul Bellow. And yet, at least a discussion was begun, and pedagogy was given a place and a name at the AJS. We would urge that discussions and sessions on teaching become an integral part of every AJS conference. There should be a regular division devoted to it, just as there is to Kabbalah, or Chassidism, or Rabbinic Literature. Our hope is also that, as a collective body, the AJS begin to experiment with different formats for the conference itself. Other academic conferences have begun to include many options including: roundtable seminars where the papers are distributed in advance; workshops that are designed for maximum interchange among leaders and participants; sessions where "great teachers" illustrate how they teach "great texts"; ideaexchange tables, where participants leave copies of teaching ideas and exercises that have worked well for them and pick up those of others, and so forth. Certainly, chairs of conventional panels could help make sure that there is ample time for audience questions, and even for one speaker on a panel to actually engage with another! Studies have shown that the maximum average adult attention span in listening to oral discourse is no more than twenty minutes. It is mind-numbing rather than mind- enriching to try to listen to three or four 20-minute-plus papers often read hurriedly one after another. Speakers could also help by not writing up their talks as if they were journal articles, i.e., in the complex language adapted to the printed text, but rather than in the simpler more recursive language needed by the listening ear. Yet many speakers are loath to do this. Why? What drives the writing and delivery of some of these highly difficult-to-absorb papers, I think, is as much performance anxiety as a desire to communicate, i.e., a fear of being exposed as ignorant, or a need to prove mastery of the field so as to forestall attack. In sum, the principles for good communication are the same for both a conference session and classroom. For what, in the end, is the purpose of an academic conference, and of scholarship in general? Parker Palmer, an educational theorist, has written eloquently in his book To Know as We Are Known (Harper San Francisco, 1983) about some of the negative effects of the "hidden curriculum," of cruel competition within the university, of how "the whole culture of the academic community with its systems of rewards and punishments works to shape our views of self and world." It is that "hidden curriculum" that students absorb as their lessons as much as if not more than the actual "content" of the material (19). But "to teach," continues Palmer, "is to create a space in which the community of truth is practised." And truth he defines as a kind of "troth"—a covenant with another, a pledge to engage in a mutually accountable and transforming relationship, a relationship forged of trust and faith in the face of unknowable risks. To know something or someone in truth is to enter troth with the known, to rejoin with new knowing what our minds have put asunder (31). "The true work of the mind," then, "is to reconnect us with that which would otherwise be out of reach, to reweave the great community of our lives" (xvi). That, too, may be the deeper meaning of the line from Pirke Avot (1:6) that we chose for the title of our session: the relation between Aseh Lekhka Rav u-Qneh Lekha Haver— "finding and making" oneself a teacher, and the acquiring of a friend. 9 Jewish Music in the Curriculum Does Jewish Music Have a Place in Jewish Studies? Joshua R. Jacobson Northeastern University [email protected] WHAT IS YOUR FIRST association when you hear the term Jewish Music? That volunteer choir at your synagogue? Your cantor who should have retired a decade ago? Or the one who offers you a new improved guitar-based liturgy? Your grandmother singing "My Yiddishe Mama"? Perry Como singing "Kol Nidre"? The ear-splitting band at your nephew's wedding? The way you butchered your bar- or bat-mitzvah haftarah? The muzak you were fed on El Al? Jewish music is all that and a whole lot more. After twenty-five years of conducting concerts of Jewish music and teaching college-level Jewish music courses, I find that the general public is still surprised to discover that there can be firstrate performances of music arising from the Jewish traditions, and that Jewish music in the classroom can be taught as a subject worthy of scholarship. More and more frequently one encounters courses in Jewish music in the catalogues of colleges, universities, and conservatories. Ethnomusicologists examine the unique musical cultures of various Jewish civilizations. Great concert artists teach the performance practice of Klezmer and other ethnic styles. And yet, in the typical college course in the history of Western music or music appreciation, students are taught, "In the beginning there was Gregorian Chant." Rare indeed is the general music teacher who demonstrates the origins of Christian chant in the singing of the Bet ha-Mikdash! The introductory course on Jewish music presents a unique dilemma. How does one organize the material? What approach does one take? One can try to present the material in a strictly chronological sequence, one can deal with one geographical area at a time, or one could organize the course around music associated with the various holiday-cycle and life-cycle events. One could take the approach of the ethnomusicologist and consider all music in the context of the culture that produced it, or one could take the approach of the strict structuralist, analyzing the music as a pure art form without external references, or the approach of the historical musicologist, teaching only the great masterworks, ignoring the music of the common people and the lesser masters. Like many of my colleagues, I take a kaleidoscopic approach, trying to make my students aware of all these approaches over the course of a semester. In an effort to' halt the decline in Jewish music literacy, many institutions of higher Jewish learning are now offering performance practicum courses in nusah ha-tefillah, the prayer modes, and ta'ame ha-mikra, the cantillation. There is evidence that in ancient times, Jewish prayer and learning were unthinkable without music. "If one reads the Scripture without a melody or teaches the Mishnah without a tune, of him Scrip- 10 ture says, 'Wherefore I gave them also statutes that were not good, etc.'" (Talmud Bavli Megillah 32a). Through my current area of research, the connection between melody and syntax in the Masoretic cantillation, I have developed new pedagogical methods to facilitate learning, deepen understanding, and sharpen performance skills. Taking a cue from Avrohom Goldfaden, I view the concert hall as a classroom as well. Through aesthetic experience, the Zamir Chorale, a community chorus of which I am the music director, seeks to transport its audiences to distant civilizations: music becomes a window to the culture out of which it arose. I make a point of introducing each piece in a concert. Thus, listening to a seventeenth-century synagogue motet by Salamone Rossi, one can come to sense the Jewish participation in the Italian Renaissance. A Psalm setting by Salomon Sulzer is meant to evoke the enlightenment in nineteenthcentury Vienna. Through a work by Pavel Haas one may sense both the anguish and the courage of the inmates of the Terezin concentration camp. The serious academic study of Jewish Music from many angles belongs in the curriculum. Unfortunately, the few academicians who specialize in Jewish Music are spread quite thin. Outside of several universities in Israel and three institutions in New York for the training of clergy, there is no focal point for scholarship in this area. The Association for Jewish Studies can play an important role by providing a venue for the presentation and centralization of research and curriculum in Jewish Music. The Zamir Chorale of Boston PROGRAM Sunday, December 18, 1994 Association for Jewish Studies Annual Conference The Worlds of Jewish Music HaZamir Leo Low Adon Olam Psalm 92 (Tov LeHodos) Avodat HaKodesh (second movement) Salamone Rossi Louis Lewandowski Ernst Bloch Tsen Brider Martin Rosenberg (arr: J. Jacobson) Ani Maamin Vishnets (arr: M. Lazar) Zol Shoyn Kumen Di GeUuleh S. Kaczerginski/A. I. Cook (arr: J. Jacobson) Erev Shel Shoshanim Dodi Li Tikvateinu Break Forth into Joy Amen Shem Nora Joseph Hadar (arr: J. Klebanow) Nira Chen (arr: J. Jacobson) David Burger Robert Starer traditional North African The AJS at ACLS The Executive Secretary of AJS represents the organization in the Conference of Administrative Officers (CAO) at the American Council of Learned Societies (ACLS). The CAO of the ACLS holds semi-annual meetings on issues of current interest in the humanities and the humanistic study of the social sciences. The mission of the ACLS is to support humanistic research by grants, to identify and meet the present and future needs of humanistic scholarship, and to put forth a unified national voice and presence on matters of interest to scholars. AJS also sends a delegate to the annual meeting of the ACLS. Robert M. Seltzer, President of AJS, is the delegate of the AJS, and is also currently Chair of the Executive Committee of the Delegates. The following were written by Aaron L. Katchen, the AJS Executive Secretary, for recent meetings of the CA O. The Internationalization of Scholarship and Scholarly Societies November 1994 THE MEMBERS OF the Association for Jewish Studies are full participants in the many and diverse fields of Jewish Studies scholarship practiced around the world. We have members in more than fifteen foreign countries. As a corporate entity, however, the Association for Jewish Studies maintains no international affiliations. We conduct no activities jointly with our organizational counterparts elsewhere. Indeed, our activities in the United States serve as a prime venue for foreign scholars, who participate annually in our December meeting and contribute frequently to our AJS Review. More than twenty years ago, the Association gave consideration to establishing formal links with the World Union of Jewish Studies, headquartered in Jerusalem. Given the very different agendas of the two organizations, such an arrangement did not materialize. The World Union has only two functions: to convene the quadrennial World Congress of Jewish Studies and to publish its proceedings. The Union has never sought to become a membershipbased organization, as is the AJS. The Union does not see itself, other than indirectly, as promoting the cause of Jewish Studies or the welfare of its practitioners, as does AJS. The Union, in sum, has a very limited scope and maintains and fosters no continuity, connection, or solidarity between participants during the four-year intervals between Congresses. One might suggest that the field of Jewish scholarship as practiced in North American academic institutions and in Europe has very different concerns and organizational structures than Jewish scholarship overseas. In North America, the typical model, with two notable exceptions, Brandeis University, where AJS is now housed, and New York University, shows individual scholars in academic departments across the spectrum of arts and sciences disciplines. In a few institutions, so-called Centers for Jewish Studies do provide gathering places for those with an interest in Judaica. In Israel, however, Jewish Studies is itself routinely organized along departmental lines, with large departments of Jewish Philosophy, Jewish History, Hebrew Literature, etc., the more widespread phenomenon. There is, as a result, perhaps, less concern for the material and intellectual welfare of scholars in the field and less need for continuity outside the immediate department or institution. This having been said, the World Congress organizers have frequently solicited participation from abroad and regularly invite overseas scholars to deliver papers; the Congress also accommodates those who volunteer. Members of our association have always participated fully in the Congress and published their papers in its Proceedings. Inasmuch as the World Union has met its goals without outside subvention or support, control has always remained in the hands of Israeli scholars. The European Union of Jewish Studies has grown up only over the last decade or so. Its membership is more scattered, and it is more loosely organ- ized. Though American scholars were instrumental in getting it off the ground, its contacts with the AJS as a body have remained informal. Aside from participating in international conferences held overseas, our American members contribute regularly to (as well as serve on the boards of or edit) prestigious foreign journals, often in languages other than English. Americans and other non-Israelis write in Hebrew for Israeli journals, for example, while foreign scholars regularly contribute in English to American journals besides our own, which also contains a Hebrew section. Monographs by American members of our association are frequently published at foreign presses. Some of our members publish in languages other than English or Hebrew. Translations of foreign language Judaica into English have become more widespread, and not merely from Hebrew to English, of which there is a veritable flood. The phenomenon is equally true in reverse, with much Jewish Studies scholarship by Americans finding a ready audience outside the United States. There are no national boundaries any more for either periodicals or monographs. That this is an especially acute problem for libraries is the subject of yet another conference. This reflects a larger phenomenon, and one that, issues of institution or affiliation aside, is a prime concern of this symposium. Jewish Studies scholarship is international almost by definition. Scholarship in Judaica draws on a world-wide, linguistically diverse body of learning. In all fields of Judaic Studies, scholars disregard what has been published or produced outside the 11 I Internationalization of Scholarship (continued from page 11.) United States or in a foreign language at their peril. While this was true in previous generations as well, when, more often than not, core works were created and appeared elsewhere, the transfer of the centers of scholarship to America and Israel has enhanced crossfertilization. It appears, indeed, that, despite the natural diversity in the topics and questions that form the core focus and interest of scholars in any given country, those interests now appear less difficult to erase or bridge than hitherto. While Americans studying American Jewry, for example, pay a great deal of attention to community issues, the interest in such issues from overseas has grown, particularly, with the large number of foreign scholars who spend large amounts of time in this country. They bring their concerns home with them, but they also bring home a sense of solidarity with their American counterparts. The establishment and maintenance of contact, facilitated by e-mail, on-line interest groups, FAQs, etc., etc., have exploded the envelope of opportunity for collaboration. for the American experience or are in any way "alien" in their perspective. That they are as perspicacious as we and often more so is undeniable fact, and only our own arrogance would presume otherwise. In Judaic Studies in particular, we have, I believe, overcome the view that we Americans do it best. This is evidenced by a number of features in the history and current practice of our association. It is hard to justify the impression that foreign scholars have less of a "feel" A number of years ago, there was an attempt to establish regional gatherings of the AJS above and beyond the annual conference. One of these was even held in Canada. While the initiative did not last, it is noteworthy that the organizers of the initial meetings were Israeli scholars with a long connection to the United States. One was the late Shlomo Dov Goitein, a European immigrant to Israel who spent many a year at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, the other the now nonagenarian Jacob Katz, a Hungarian-born, German-trained former Rector of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, who has held numerous visiting professorships in the United States and was here earlier this fall (1994) for a lecture at the Harvard Law School. Their activism has long been characteristic of the association's foreign members. Also to be noted is the fact that the first editor of Missions of a Learned Society in an Electronic Age lieve it will impact our mission and that of other learned societies as well. November 1995 THE ASSOCIATION FOR JEWISH STUDIES was founded "to promote, maintain, and improve teaching, research, and related endeavors in Jewish Studies in ... institutions of higher learning." It has tried to achieve this by furthering contacts between scholars through conferences and publications. We take these to be the principal functions of learned societies. As the information revolution transforms the character and the techniques of research and teaching and facilitates communication through a variety of new technologies, it has begun to transform the scope and management of our activities. We have good reason to be- 12 ADMINISTRATIVE APPROACHES The areas in which we have already implemented change are the obvious operational ones. We have maintained a membership database for about five years; this year we upgraded to MS-Access, a relational database. We have been composing our conference program using Pagemaker for several years. This year the database virtually generated the conference program. We have even availed ourselves of project management software to aid in conference planning. Along with every other learned society, we are on the Internet for email. We are about to put up a gopher site and a Web page. Looking ahead to the future, the means by which we collect and process dues may well the AJS Review was the late Frank Talmage, an American living and teaching in Toronto. We really have no international boundaries as far as membership and participation are concerned. [ , Finally, the program from our 26th Annual Conference this December > (1994) shows participants from Israel in large numbers and at many of the sessions likely to attract the greatest inter- j est. Our Canadian contingent is substantial, as usual. The U.K., France, | Russia, Germany, Greece, and South j Africa are also represented. There will ! be attendees from other countries as ! well. It will be hard to distinguish foreign perspectives from American ones at this conference, as it is at most. When some of our members are Europeanborn South Americans who, after migrating to Israel, now reside from time to time as visiting scholars in the United States, or some variation on this construct, it is hard to speak of whether we have become more international or less, given the history of migrations. In sum, Jewish Studies scholarship seems destined to maintain its international character. The Association for Jewish Studies will continue to provide a forum and a link between practitioners world-wide. change dramatically because of new banking regulations, policies, and available services. We will still continue to need the support of dues, which (along with some grants) sustain the journal that members receive. We also expect that such activities and services as those described below will never be completely self-funding. We will have to continually reexamine our dues policies to take account of ever-changing cost structures and staffing requirements. These tools and administrative factors do not, however, speak to our mission, even if they facilitate its execution. A J S IN A CHANGING CLIMATE SCHOLARLY The question that we have not addressed fully enough is whether we can continue to be a driving intellectual force in the scholarly lives of our members. Will they continue to regard attending our annual conference in December in Boston as a worthwhile enterprise, which more than a third of our membership currently does. Will chat rooms replace face-to-face contact? Will it soon be our role to moderate such a virtual discussion group? Will we be reduced to the modern version of a cafe society? We are not yet operating in this mode. Furthermore, it is unlikely that the intellectual focus of the practitioners of our discipline will undergo a paradigm shift as rapidly as that of many other users of the technology AJS members are increasingly adopting. The subject matter, both retrospective and contemporary, both abstract and applied, will continue to be the prime attraction for those working in our field, as it must be in any field. Among the new scenarios, however, will be the enhancements that new technologies enable. The collegial atmosphere that our meetings are known for and the personal contacts they foster will benefit from more sustained correspondence and collaboration. Meetings can be more productive and intensive, with sessions better prepared beforehand. Ease of access to colleagues overseas appears to have joined all our members more closely to one another and even to have increased scholarly productivity. AJS provides a forum for initiating contacts and reinvigorating them annually. It is probably fair to say that periodic video teleconferences will not replace such meetings; rather, they can and should provide a useful supplement to our December venue. RISKS AND GROWTH OPPORTUNITIES FOR The new tools and technologies afford increased access to information and enhanced contact between scholars. At the same time, by their modus operandi, they pose a threat to the scholarly profession. While they enable almost every practitioner to achieve a broader scope of vision, they mislead the untrained searcher into assuming that understanding and experience are bundled with the download data. The data itself may also be unreliable. Postings of Judaica to the Internet have proliferated, their source often-times being individuals and organizations with no scholarly creden- tials and with a doctrinaire or promotional intent. Some of these have been disseminated as a necessary counter to deliberate distortion or to anti-Jewish propaganda, though much of what appears is without academic integrity or accuracy. So much for purveyors. As for consumers, with a browsing tool on the Web, even the beginner can soon pretend to expertise and even skill. It is already beginning to be difficult to distinguish a gourmand from a gourmet at the banquet of learning. An all-too prevalent character on the current scene, one who surely has his counterpart elsewhere, is the "CD-ROM talmid hakham," whose inadequately seasoned learning can easily escape notice. The Hebrew appellation has distinguished the most learned of scholars for two millennia. The CD-ROM, on the other hand, the on-line database, and access to the Internet appear to create a level playing field. (This is independent of the question of the two-tier society of the computer literate and the nonliterate that needs to be addressed separately.) Rather than pouncing on this new dilettantism as pernicious, it may be wise to view it as an opportunity to disseminate knowledge in new and creative ways to an eager public. The mission of a learned society in a democratic society has to be inclusive of the larger public. We now have a lever with which to raise the standards of scholarship among the broadest possible network of students and teachers. We view this as a direct benefit to all scholars and students. A learned society's carefully monitored, moderated, and regulated Web site or listserv can serve as an "expert system" for guiding both successful and aspiring practitioners in their investigations. THE NEW REVENUE STREAM The learned society can expect to find new sources of revenue in refereed electronic journals and evergreen bibliographies (it is all-too-easy to recall printed bibliographic resources that were out-ofdate when they appeared). The society can serve as the repository of "libraries" of images with an "imprimatur" of authenticity and hypertext ties to guide learning. In the new publishing uni- verse, a learned society that fosters collaboration in such ventures by the leaders in the several disciplines it comprises has a new opportunity to raise the standards in the profession. Scholars represented in this galaxy by their membership in the learned society will have greater visibility. It is also possible that the learned society will be better equipped by its access to almost all those who work in the field to handle more mundane, yet equally critical tasks. These include the traditional ones of job placement and advocacy on behalf of its members, which become all the more valuable in a world of declining university resources and greater job insecurity. There can even be an opportunity for the learned society to reengineer or retool, by recreating, in a new form, the academy by correspondence, as the familiar university structure continues to erode. Although some universities have taken to creating virtual campuses, with courses available remotely, the learned society can draw on resources far more extensive than a single department at a single university. The learned society has the power to deliver programs of learning on every level, either autonomously or as the linchpin of a broadbased consortium of universities. The careful maintenance of standards that a for-profit venture may have to forego will be the hallmark of such a new "institution." This is only one of the many ways in which the learned society can help maintain the integrity and enhance the teaching of its subject. TIME-HONORED VALUES, MARKETS AND TECHNIQUES NEW The value-added in such tools and programs, then, is that in the proper hands they can reinforce in a new way the time-honored rules, values, and activities, and the integrity that characterize the scholarly profession. Scholarship must be a collaboration among great minds. It requires constant rapid feedback and monitoring that continue over a long period of time to deepen the student's understanding of the subject matter and of the process of education itself. It relies on the chance to float "trial balloons" and put forth meritorious, yet inchoate theories before a select, easily accessible group of experts. Scholarship 13 Missions of a Learned Society (continued from page 13) must be free of bias and readily disseminated. The ease of use offered by the new media almost guarantees that these values and approaches will be more easily maintained and even furthered. The learned society can serve as a conduit and facilitator for this enterprise and derive appropriate fees for helping consumers navigate the scholarly highways and by-ways of the larger information highway. OUR STRENGTH AND POTENTIAL This approach should not be regarded as an attempt to control. It is rather the kind of benefit to the profession that only the professional organization, with its unique access and vantage point, is able to provide. Such considerations also address directly the question of elitism that raises itself constantly. As electronic technology becomes more and more of a commodity, the cost of market entry for even the least advantaged among us becomes lower and lower. Everyone can become a "knowledge worker." The learned society must be a market leader and move ahead of the curve to capture the reins, so that its historic mission can be maintained: to promote teaching and scholarship. The learned society can do this if it steps forward to be more than a clearing house for issues in the field, more than a facilitator of on-line conferences, and more than a purveyor of on-line journals. It has to use the bully pulpit at its disposal to disseminate its message. The learned society adds value only to the extent that 1) it creates a more learned general society through the efforts of its members in that larger society, and 2) that it upholds the standards of scholarship to which its members aspire through the fostering of true collaboration among scholars. Our harnessing of the new technologies now at our disposal and of those that are rapidly emerging can enable this vision to become more than a virtual reality, as we transform ourselves from the traditional learned society to the "learning organization."1 See Peter M. Senge, The Fifth Discipline: the Art and Practice of the Learning Organization (1990). 1 14 ACLS Travel Grants ACLS Travel Grant Program, 1995 Competition Recipients Recommended by the Association for Jewish Studies: Conference of the International Organization for Qumran Studies, Cambridge, United Kingdom / July 16-17, 1995 Joseph M. Baumgarten Professor Emeritus of Rabbinic Literature Baltimore Hebrew Univesity "Description of an Unpublished 4Q Text" Robert A. Kugler Assistant Professor of Religious Studies, Gonzaga University "Isaac's Halakhic Instructions to Levi in 'Aramaic Levi': a discussion of a newly available .» text Dr. Marvin Fox Honored The AJS is proud to congratulate its past president, Dr. Marvin Fox, on the signal honor accorded him by the Boston Jewish community. A new $1 million gift to the Fund for Jewish Continuity from the Louis and Ida Selib Memorial Fund has been presented to the Combined Jewish Philanthropies of Greater Boston to be used to create the Marvin Fox Fund for Jewish Learning. This endowment is named in honor of Dr. Fox, scholar and Professor Emeritus of Near Eastern and Judaic Studies at Brandeis University, and Professor of Religion and Philosophy at Boston University, in recognition of his commitment and contribution to Jewish scholarship and the Jewish community. The funds are to be used to help support the Boston Kollel and CJP's overall Jewish continuity efforts. AJS Mailing List To rent the AJS mailing list, please contact: A. B. Data Information Management & Marketing Services Ltd. 8050 North Port Washington Rd. Milwaukee, WI 53217 Tel.: 414-352-4404 800-558-6908 FAX: 414-352-3994 AJS Newsletter Bernard D. Cooperman University of Maryland Vice-President for Publications Editor Aaron L. Katchen Association for Jewish Studies Managing Editor Correspondence / articles for the Newsletter should be sent to: Bernard D. Cooperman, Editor AJS Newsletter Meyerhoff Center for Jewish Studies 0113 Woods Hall University of Maryland College Park, MD 20742 Association for Jewish Studies Robert M. Seltzer Hunter College President Executive Secretary: Aaron L. Katchen MB 0001 Brandeis University P. O. Box 9110 Waltham, MA 02254-9110 Voice-Mail: 617-736-2981 FAX: 617-736-2982 email: [email protected] €> 1995 Association for Jewish Studies ASSOCIATION FOR JEWISH STUDIES Report of the Nominating Committee November 1995 The following is the report of the Nominating Committe, presented to the membership at the Annual Business Meeting on 17 December 1995: 1. Nominees for Officers for 1995-1996: • • • • • President Vice President/Program Vice President/Publications Vice President/Membership Secretary/Treasurer Robert M. Seltzer (Hunter) Lawrence H. Schiffman (NYU) Bernard D. Cooperman (Maryland) Paula E. Hyman (Yale) Benjamin Ravid (Brandeis) 2. Nominees for Members of the Board of Directors to serve a two-year term (December 1995-December 1997) until the Annual Meeting in 1997: Adele Berlin (Maryland) Arnold M. Eisen (Stanford) Michael Fishbane (Chicago) Deborah Lipstadt (Emory) Frances Malino (Wellesley) David Roskies QTSA) Tamar Rudavsky (Ohio State) Marc E. Saperstein (Washington U.) Michael A. Signer (Notre Dame) Haym Soloveitchik (Yeshiva U.) David Sorkin (Wisconsin) Yael Zerubavel (U. of Pennsylvania) 3. The following Directors continue to serve until the annual meeting in 1996, in terms to which they were elected at the Annual Meeting in 1994: David Berger (Brooklyn C.) Elisheva Carlebach (Queens) Todd M. Endelman (U. of Michigan) Talya Fishman (Rice) Ernest M. Frerichs (Brown) Rela Geffen (Gratz) Jay M. Harris (Harvard) Jacob Lassner (Northwestern) Jehuda Reinharz (Brandeis) Alvin H. Rosenfeld (Indiana) Jonathan Sarna (Brandeis) Naomi B. Sokoloff (U. of Washington) Steven J. Zipperstein (Stanford) 4. Honorary Directors: Leon A. Jick (Brandeis) Baruch A. Levine (NYU) Arnold J. Band (UCLA) Marvin Fox (Boston U.) Michael A. Meyer (HUC, Cine.) Jane S. Gerber (CUNY-Grad. Ctr.) Nahum M. Sarna (Florida Atlantic) Ruth R. Wisse (Harvard) Robert Chazan (NYU) Herbert H. Paper (HUC, Cincinnati) 5. Ex officio: Norman A. Stillman (Oklahoma), Editor, AJSReview Respectfully submitted, Arnold J. Band (UCLA) (Chair) Charles Berlin (Harvard) Deborah Lipstadt (Emory) Naomi Sokoloff (U. of Washington) Jeffrey Tigay (U. of Pennsylvania) Steven Zipperstein (Stanford) 15 ASSOCIATION FOR JEWISH STUDIES Advance Notice: 28th Annual AJS Conference Copley Plaza Hotel, Boston, MA, Dec. 15-17,1996 Proposals are due on March 29,1996. Watch the mail in early February for proposal forms/instructions. Tapes of all sessions of the 27th Annual Conference are available from: Audio Archives Intl., 3043 Foothill Blvd., Suite 2, La Crescenta, CA (800) 747-8069 AJS Review 20:1 has appeared. Paid-up members who have not received their copies are asked to notify the AJS office. AJS' Information Bulletin: Positions in Jewish Studies appeared in November. Our list of 1995-96 visiting scholars at American institutions is also now available. (1996-97 visitors: please use the questionnaire found on the Gopher and e-mail us.) Visit the AJS Gopher/Web site! Connect to: URL: gophery/gopher.brandeis.edu:70/ll/campusinfo/ajs AJS NEWSLETTER MB 0001 BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY P. O. Box 9110 WALTHAM, MA 02254-9110 Return and Forwarding Postage Guaranteed Non-Profit Org. U.S. POSTAGE PAID PERMIT NO. 1636 Boston, Mass.