ILIJA LEMEŠKIN

Charles University in Prague

Research areas: Old Baltic literature and writing, comparative folkloristics, lexicography, and the history of Baltic studies.

WHERE DOES THE PATH OF LITHUANIAN STUDIES ABROAD LEAD?^*

The title of this text ends with a question mark, which compels me to admit at once that the author has no (optimistic) answer to the question posed. The question Where does the path of Lithuanian studies abroad lead? is rhetorical. It prompts reflection and general discussion, shared at the conference Lithuanian Studies (Baltic Studies) in Contemporary Educational Processes on April 6, 2017 (Vilnius, LEU). We should begin with concrete matters, namely the prehistory of the project Promoting Cooperation between Foreign Baltic Studies Centres and Lithuanian Research and Higher Education Institutions. I felt it was my duty to recall and remind others of what I witnessed ten years ago. On November 27, 2007, a major conference, Baltic Studies around the World, was held in Vilnius. The Lithuanian authorities at the time showed exceptional goodwill and interest in the fate of Baltic studies around the world (the same cannot be said of the current authorities). Perhaps this was also because the then President of the Republic of Lithuania, Valdas Adamkus, had long been a representative of that broad world abroad. He clearly understood the importance of a Lithuanian studies centre and not merely its practical benefits for emigrants’ lives, for example in the United States. The President received the conference participants and organizers and, during the meeting, stated: “Only strong Lithuanian studies in Lithuania can foster cooperation with foreign research institutions and the dissemination of Lithuanian studies around the world.”

After the conference, it seems on the very same day, November 27, 2007, a meeting took place at the Ministry of Education and Science. Jolanta Zabarskaitė, Grasilda Blažienė, and Danguolė Mikulėnienė took part (at the time, the Institute of the Lithuanian Language was the only Lithuanian institution concerned with Baltic studies centres and their internal existential problems; later, when funding began to be allocated, more institutions became interested). Eugenijus Jovaiša, Zigmas Zinkevičius, and Algirdas Sabaliauskas came to the meeting and stated their clear positions. Representatives of the centres were also there. I remember Pietro Umberto Dini,

^* The text was prepared on the basis of a paper read at the plenary session of the World Conference on Lithuanian Studies (Baltic Studies), held on April 6, 2017, Lithuanian Studies (Baltic Studies) in Contemporary Educational Processes. The conference was organized as part of the project Promoting Cooperation between Foreign Baltic Studies Centres and Lithuanian Research and Higher Education Institutions, funded by the EU Structural Funds, and was held in Vilnius at the Lithuanian University of Educational Sciences.

266

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXVI

Kur veda užsienio lituanistikos kelias?

Vanda Kazanskienė, among others. It was then that the decision was made to launch the future project, funded by the European Union Structural Funds, whose purpose would be to help Baltic studies abroad survive and flourish.

As non-residents, Baltic studies centres could not be listed as recipients of Structural Funds, so Lithuanian higher education institutions were invited to help; as a kind of administrative umbrella, they were to “cover” the entire project. At that point, the discussion was only about administration. It did not even occur to us that the institution (in time it became clear that there would be several institutions: there was also talk of one coordinator and its partners, that is, other universities in the Republic of Lithuania) would have its own conceptual insights, wishes, and ambitions, and that its own decisions—discussed and coordinated only minimally with the centres—would determine the planning and implementation of activities that mattered to us.

The formal inclusion of Lithuanian institution(s) in the project, which at the time seemed inevitable and mutually beneficial, determined—and continues to determine—the project’s character: from abroad, it sometimes gives the impression that these institutions devise activities for themselves, ostensibly for our (that is, the centres’) benefit and well-being. This happens without our knowledge and without any opportunity for us to influence matters. In ten years, not a single meeting has been held with representatives of the world’s Baltic studies centres to discuss conceptual aspects of the project’s implementation, for example at the ministry or with the project coordinator and its partners.

This is apparent in the project’s general discussions. The main stated objective is to strengthen cooperation with Lithuanian research and higher education institutions and faculty mobility. The question is: has the Lithuanian side been made aware of the actual situation abroad? There are various agreements between universities, between the ministries of individual countries, and between academies of sciences; we use the Erasmus programme, and so on. Such agreements, which have always existed and always will, provide for exchanges within specified quotas, which sometimes went—and continue to go—unused. Is it really worth devoting so much energy and funding (€5.8 million) to this activity? Of course, it is good to have the opportunity to send a more talented student, but the proposed scale is still unjustifiably inflated. Western Baltic studies centres simply do not have that many students, and we are confined to our own studies: students are pursuing a second degree or studying at another higher education institution, and cannot leave for another country at any time during the semester. The situation is different, as other conference participants noted, in Georgia and other Baltic studies centres in Eastern Europe, where students have different motivations for studying and are of a different type.

It is also difficult to agree with the view, resp. the project’s aim, which sets out to strengthen communication and cooperation between Baltic scholars abroad and Lithuanian research institutions. Does it really seem that we are insufficiently engaged in cooperation? The various research projects in which representatives of Baltic studies centres have participated and continue to participate have their own origins, rhythms, and schedules, which cannot be altered, intensified, or otherwise regulated according to a cooperation that has only just begun

Įžvalgos / Insights

267

ILJA LEMEŠKIN

the promotion project. The schedule of trips to Vilnius is and has always been very full, even without the project activities under discussion.

Another area of activity of concern is the organization of professional development courses. The aim is noble, but there were already certainly a great many such courses in 2012–2015. Lecturers and instructors working abroad appear to far surpass their colleagues working in Lithuania in terms of qualifications. How often can one travel to professional development courses? Sometimes one also needs to work—that is, to apply one’s improved competences in practice, in one’s work.

Speaking about those activities and the specific tasks that concern us, I can only emphasize one thing. The Baltic centers themselves know perfectly well what they need to do, when, and how (sometimes it is even essential). The initiative should come only from them (except perhaps in places where Baltic studies centers are only just taking shape). Those formally managing the project should not have the right to decide at their own discretion what foreign Balticists need and what they do not, since they may lack a little knowledge about Baltic studies centers around the world, their circumstances, and their needs. The Lithuanian side must oversee the targeted use of funds. The previously mentioned activities planned by Baltic studies centers, which they would gladly carry out, require expertise and funding; however, experience has shown that for some reason these are precisely the activities that Lithuanian research and higher education institutions find uninteresting and unnecessary. The centers are concerned with activities relevant to students, doctoral students, lecturers, and researchers—activities that would ensure the centers’ continued existence and development. In other words, everything that can be described as the centers’ needs is constantly changing rapidly. Ideally, Lithuania would inquire about the necessary activities carried out under the project—that is, activities useful to us—at least once per semester, in order to keep the project viable, rather than only exceptionally and urgently once every two years, before the project begins.

All this raises a fundamental question for representatives of Baltic studies centers: under the circumstances that have arisen, is it worth remaining in the project, and what should the relationship of cooperation between Lithuanian research and higher education institutions and Baltic studies centers be in the future? It would be very regrettable to see a situation in which, ostensibly for the benefit of foreign Baltic studies centers and to their advantage—but without their knowledge—a certain Lithuanian institution, or a person representing it who is little known to foreign Balticists, quietly draws up a “suitable” activity plan and then graciously invites them to help carry it out.

Received on April 21, 2017.

ILJA LEMEŠKIN

Charles University in Prague

Jana Palacha 2, 116 38 Praha 1, Czech Republic

[email protected]

268

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXVI