24TH - 30TH JUNE, 2000
LEIDEN, THE NETHERLANDS
The International Association for Tibetan Studies (IATS)
A preview of the ninth seminar
Three hundred Tibet scholars, brimming with new ideas and research insights, are at present putting the finishing touches to their papers for the ninth seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies (announced earlier, IIAS Newsletter 19, p.14). For our part, we are finalizing organizational matters, in preparation for welcoming our learned colleagues in June. During the rare moments of leisure that organizing such an event allows, one may well wonder, sometimes, about the substantial investment of effort and expenses needed for just one week of academic exchange - not unlike seeing a full day's work in the kitchen disappear in five minutes of palatal excitation at the dining table. Musings such as the above notwithstanding, one may also realise that a privileged way to learn to appreciate an academic conference is to organize one.
By HENK BLEZER
Organizational involvement clearly reveals to what extent such an academic event helps focus research efforts. It really is a unique opportunity for synchronizing and fine-tuning the very latest in academic work (which, at least for larger gatherings, will most probably not appear in print until years later). I believe that the IATS meetings to date have been fine examples of this function and I sincerely hope that the seminar in June may also serve this purpose.When hearing about the ninth IATS seminar and particularly when learning of the number of participants, European scholars often politely inquire: 'Are you sure these are all Tibet scholars?' only to continue: 'So, what is this seminar about, what topic do you have?' European Asianists - unlike our colleagues across the Atlantic - seem to favour small expert meetings and workshops rather than large-scale academic conventions. This is almost an unwritten policy that becomes very much apparent when trying to raise funds for a large international convention of Asian scholars in Europe. As a matter of fact, the most generous support we have received for this seminar to date has come either from the Netherlands (IIAS, Gonda Fonds (at KNAW), Oost-Europa Fonds (at Prins Bernhard Fonds), the Prins Claus Fund, Stichting Eco-operation), or from outside Europe (US: Trace Foundation, our main sponsor of PRC Tibetan participants), occasionally also from private sponsors (Ms van Gulik and Ms Barbara Hines) and, last but not least, business partners (Curzon Press). Notable exceptions are special arrangements from Eco-Himal (Austria and Italy) and the Institute for Comparative Research in Human Cultural (Norway), arranged by sympathetic colleagues. Apparently, fund-raising for such sizeable academic events basically needs to be done at the national level(s), if you want to 'go international', more often than not you end up going to the US. This leaves me wondering about the reasons underlying the lack of facilities for financing large international academic conferences at a European level. Is this merely because of the borders of national politics and academic culture that divide us, or is this a matter of deliberate choice (for the quality of expert meetings)? Or does Europe, perhaps, not exist after all...?
Being in a position where I had to reflect on both the form and content of our seminar and make decisions affecting those, I feel obliged to question at least the argumentation based on quality. I emphatically do believe that focused working groups within the framework of a large international convention may well combine the best of both worlds. Given a careful selection of papers, the sheer number and large diversity of scholars attending do add significantly to the potential for discussion and exchange, not least across borders of disciplines (an important objective of our seminars). At the same time, opting for formats like focused round-table discussions and tightly knit panels within a large convention will preserve the indisputable asset of expert meetings. I should like to underline my point by reviewing a small selection of the near twenty panels and workshops that have been proposed so far for the ninth seminar of the IATS (these panels make up about one-third of the total volume of presentations). I wish to thank the panel organizers for sharing the panel descriptions below.
Grey-men-grey-texts
One of the first panels to be proposed came from a colleague of Virginia University, David Germano: 'Texts in Shades of Grey: Texts and Transmissions on the Early Boundaries of sNga 'gyur and gSar 'gyur Tibet', colloquially also dubbed the grey-men-grey-texts panel. The panel will explore texts and transmissions in the post-dynastic period (842 to early 12th century) that offer grounds for blurring the retroactive boundaries of sNga 'gyur (early translation) and gSar 'gyur (new translation), and illuminating a bit of the darkness that supposedly lies between them. In addition, they will be concerned with issues of what an authentic Buddhist text is considered to be during this time period when Indians create texts for Tibetan consumption, Tibetans translate ancient classic Indic texts into Tibetan transplants, and Tibetans themselves create entirely new texts in Tibet, which may or may not be firmly grounded in Indic paradigms. Dan Martin will be looking at sNga 'gyur transmissions of the mNgon-pa kun-btus that continue right into the eleventh century; Ronald Davidson will be looking at the Indic production of texts for Tibetans in Tibet; and David Germano will be looking at Tibetans producing sNga 'gyur 'Indic' texts for Tibetans, as well as signs of continuing sNga 'gyur authorship and translation prior to 1000. Germano will also co-chair a panel on The Nyingma Tantras Research Project Panel. The enlarged project was introduced in the previous IIAS Newsletter under The Samantabhadra Archives: The Nyingma Tantras Research Project (IIAS Newsletter 21, p.14).
Contemporary issues are very much in focus. Toni Huber from Victoria University, New Zealand, for instance, is organizing a panel on 'Tibetan Social and Cultural Revival in Amdo, Post-1980'. This panel will, as the title already indicates, investigate aspects of the modern Tibetan social and cultural revival in Amdo, which began around 1980 following local implementation of more liberal policies by the PRC. The will to establish Tibetan self-expression in this new set of possibilities can be investigated through diverse but often interrelated developments. The participants in the panel will present research in a variety of areas, such as religious revitalization, Tibetan language education, Tibetan literature and publishing, music and drama, tourism, social organization, and domestic practices, gender relations, etc. In group discussion, they hope to consider broader questions relating to the content, process and experience of post-1980 Tibetan social and cultural revival.
In this context I should also like to introduce, very briefly, an initiative by Christaan Klieger from the California Academy of Sciences, which is intended primarily to focus on the Tibetan refugee community: 'Presentation of Self in the Modern Tibetan Diaspora or Presentations of Tibetan Refugees to the Outside World'. The panel has now been expanded, however, to include modern Tibetans in the homeland and is basically conceived as a continuing examination of reflexivity between the Tibetan and Western interface.
By now well-established at our seminars is the Franco-Austrian anthropological alliance, which, once more (compare Graz, Austria), will fascinate and edify the IATS community with a high-quality anthropological forum on issues of: 'Territory and Identity in Tibet and the Himalaya'. The panel will adopt a multidisciplinary perspective to explore the manner in which minorities construct and reconstruct this identity on the basis of factors such as local divinities, kinship, and economy.
Lastly, to complete the scope of the disciplinary spectrum at the seminar I should draw attention to Christopher Beckwith's linguistic panel on: 'Medieval Tibeto-Burman Languages and Tibeto-Burman Reconstruction'. The panel will involve several carefully selected scholars who are all specialists in a particular medieval Tibeto-Burman language. The focus will be on Tibeto-Burman linguistics based on the earliest attested languages: in other words, if this panel is successful, Tibeto-Burman historical linguistics will finally be on its way to becoming a scientific field on a par with the study of language families such as Indo-European and Uralic languages. So far, no one has paid much attention to the attested medieval literary languages, which should be the basis for any historical linguistic study of Tibeto-Burman.
I rest my case. *
Dr Henk Blezer, research fellow IIAS
E-mail: blezer@let.leidenuniv.nl