THE FUTURE OF AREA S T U D I E S / 1 5

universities. This seed money approach can often be very helpful for introducing new faculty positions and establishing the utility of new curricula. A number of other special problems are apparent in Russian and East European studies. One is the shortage of people in some vital areas of study. There is still a serious shortage of specialists on the national minorities of the Soviet Union, particularly those of the Transcaucasus and Central Asia. There is also a shortage of people trained in the minority languages, especially those of Central Asia. There is a shortage of specialists on many areas of Soviet foreign policy, and a shortage of people working in major areas of Soviet history, of sociology, economics, and other disciplines. The shortage is even more striking when one looks at the field of East European studies, where the attrition in recent years verges on disaster. Hence the planning for the future in both Russian and East European studies needs to give considerable attention to the weaknesses of particular fields. We also need to examine the ways in which fellowship opportunities, new academic positions, and support resources can be added, and to consider other measures that can be undertaken to strengthen the overall position of both Russian and East European studies in American higher education. The pressures of the job market have encouraged a number of initiatives, both within academic institutions and outside, to broaden the base of employment opportunities for students in the field of Russian and East European studies-certainly a central concern if the field is to be strong. These have included ties with professional schools and programs inside the universities that make it possible for students to combine area studies with work on a professional degree. Unfortunately, the economic relations between the USSR and Eastern Europe and the United States do not provide many op-

portunities in the business field, and opportunities have been limited elsewhere. Aside from education, government employment continues to provide the greatest number of opportunities, and it is important that recent studies of language and area instruction stress the vital need for quality language instruction and the standardization of language programs. The evidence is that the colleges and universities have not satisfied government clients with the quality of their training programs and the competency level of their graduates. The national institutions for Russian studies may well have new opportunities to serve more effectively with the passage of the new federal legislation and increased foundation benefits. For IREX and the National Council, the need has been for more adequate and stable funding so that exchange programs and general research support could be developed more effectively. The revival of the Joint Committee on Soviet Studies promises to provide an important source of new initiatives in research in the field. Also, the planned expansion of the Kennan Institute promises to extend the program of research fellowships, publications, seminars, and conferences, and to increase access to the library and other resources of Washington, D.C. The plan for adding a European Program with an East European dimension in the Wilson Center will help to provide the kind of support for East European studies now provided for Russian studies by the Kennan Institute. Lastly, the revival and reorganization of the American Association for the Advancement of Slavic Studies, and its close cooperation with the other national organizations in Slavic studies, has been an important part of the recent refurbishment of national organizations in the Russian and East European studies field. [] Herbert J. Ellison ts secretary of the Kennan Institute for Advanced Russian Studies at the Smithsonian Institution.

The Middle East R.B. Winder

he Middle East, as an area of study, shares its difficulties and rewards with those encountered in the study of other lesser developed regions of the world. In general, studies of these Third World regions differ from those of developed areas such as Western Europe, Eastern Europe, and Japan, but I focus on special characteristics of the Middle Eastern field. The problem of access for students and faculty conducting research is increasing--Iran and South Yemen are completely closed, and various other countries are

T

becoming more difficult to enter. It is not farfetched to suggest that, if present trends persist, social science research will become restricted to a handful of countries. Humanities and premodern studies, which will certainly be less restricted, may increasingly become the research fields on which the United States academy will be forced to rely for firsthand knowledge of the Middle East. A second problem of Middle Eastern studies is the end of the ten-to-fifteen-year "gold rush" ushered in by the October/Ramadan Arab-Israeli war of 1973, with the

16/SOCIETY 9 MAY/JUNE1985 subsequent steep hikes in the price of oil. Since that date, many universities have benefited from the generosity of major United States oil and other companies, and of oilaffluent agencies and individuals in the Middle East. The fall of the shah and the oil glut and consequent decline in real oil prices over the last couple of years all indicate that Middle Eastern and corporate American donations to Middle Eastern language and area studies are likely to decline at least proportionately to oil income. As a specific indicator, we can mention that the U.S. Department of Commerce in March, 1984, reported that exports from the United States to members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) declined by $6 billion (22.9 to 16.9) from 1982 to 1983. Thus, federal support for all aspects of Middle Eastern studies will be much more crucial in the coming decade or so than it has been in the past, when other donations have been able to cushion the general problems. A third special aspect of the Middle Eastern field is its languages. In theory, there are only four major (Arabic, Hebrew, Persian, and Turkish) languages plus three minor (Armenian, Berber, and Kurdish) ones--with Arabic as, overwhelmingly, the one with the broadest sweep (of more than nineteen countries). This formulation, for Arabic in particular, is grossly misleading. Few persons in the world, including Arabs, know Arabic in the sense that they can read easily anything written in the language or speak with people everywhere across nineteen countries. Written Arabic varies from older, and

more literary forms (which are necessary to know) to newer, more journalistic forms (which are also necessary). All written Arabic differs very markedly from all spoken Arabic. Spoken Arabic also varies widely from country to country and within countries. Distinct dialectical differences between villages a few kilometers apart or between ethnic groups in the same city are more of a rule than an exception. The result is that, for students of this language, significantly more time must be allowed than for other languages to acquire even a modest ability to carry on ordinary dealings in it. The problems of Arabic raise, at least, the issue of whether or not more training centers such as the highly valuable Center for Arabic Study Abroad (CASA), which operates primarily through the American University in Cairo, should be established in other major dialect areas such as North Africa--especially Morocco--and in the lower Iraq/Gulf area. The widespread geography of Arabic also suggests that library funds should be particularly large for works in this language---especially in terms of official publications. Nineteen official gazettes, nineteen law codes, and nineteen sets of newspapers give some symbolic idea of the magnitude of the problems involved.[]

R.B. Winder t~ acting director oJ the Kevorkian Center f o r Near Eastern Studie~ at N e w York University.

sociological analysis Published by the Association for the Sociology of Religion editor: Roger O'Toole, University of Toronto, Canada

a journal in the sociology of religion Now in its forty-fourth year, Sociological Analysis is the only English-language scholarly journal devoted entirely to the sociology of religion. Published by the Association for the Society of Religion, its recent contents include symposia on "Religious Awakenings" and "Scholarship and Sponsorship", as well as articles on such topics as religious power, the Kingdom of Judah, Japanese religion, Christian sociology and the sociology of heresy. A subscription to Sociological Analysis is included with membership in the Association for the Sociology of Religion. Membership dues are $20.00 (U.S.) for residents of the U.S.A., S22.00 (U.S,) for foreign members, and S10.00 (U.S.) for students. Should you wish to join ASR please write to: Lorraine D'Antonio, Business Manager A.S.R., P.O. Box U-68A, University of Connecticut, Storrs, Connecticut 06268