Michael Eskin (Ph.D., Rutgers 1998) studied comparative literature, German,
American, and Russian literature, and philosophy. Before coming to Columbia, he
was a Research Fellow at Sidney Sussex College, University of Cambridge. He is
the author of Nabokovs Version von Puskins "Evgenij Onegin": Zwischen
Version und Fiktion - eine Ubersetzungs- und fiktionstheoretische
Untersuchung (Sagner 1994); Ethics and Dialogue in the Works of
Levinas, Bakhtin, Mandel'shtam, and Celan (Oxford University Press 2000);
and Poetic Affairs: Celan, Grunbein, Brodsky (Stanford University
Press; forthcoming). His articles have appeared in such venues as PMLA,
Poetics Today, Semiotica, New German Critique, and
TLS. He has also edited special issues of The Germanic Review
(77/1, 2002) and Poetics Today (25/4, 2004). Currently, he is working
on two book projects: one, dealing with philosophical autobiographies; the other
with poetic inscriptions of time.
Michael Eskin's areas of teaching and
research are: nineteenth- through twenty-first-century literature and
intellectual history; post-world war II and contemporary poetry and culture;
interdisciplinary and philosophical approaches to literature (ethics and
literature, hermeneutics, semiotics), literary theory and criticism, the theory
and practice of translation, as well as the theory of fiction and narrative.
Jointly sponsored by the Department of Slavic Languages and Literatures, Department of German Studies, Forum on Contemporary Europe, Center for Russian, East European and Eurasian Studies, Comparative Literature, and the DLCL Philosophy Reading group.
Pigott Hall (Building 260) Room 113
At his inauguration, South Korean President Lee Myung Bak proclaimed that his country “must move from the age of ideology into the age of pragmatism.” At a time when South Korean voters were fatigued by outgoing President Roh’s particular brand of politics heavily steeped in ideology, Lee’s image as an effective, non-deological manager had proved appealing. Though during the campaign Lee had vowed to strengthen the alliance with the United States and to insist on greater conditionality in inter-Korean relations, these issues were not the headlines of the 2007 presidential contest—in sharp contrast to the previous one. In fact, they received little traction. Instead, economic issues had top billing and Lee won based on economic promises. In a sense, this zeitgeist represents a departure from the previous 10 years of Korean politics, when the reassessment of the South Korea’s relationships with North Korea and the United States were central and divisive issues.
Yet, it would be imprudent to declare the demise of identity politics in South Korea. As Suh asserts, the country has been “caught between two conflicting identities: the alliance identity that sees the United States as a friendly provider and the nationalist identity that pits Korean identity against the United States.” Sharp division and disputes over the North and the alliance will not disappear in the near future because, for Koreans, these issues are intimately related to the basic and contested question of national identity. In fact, as clearly displayed during his first visit to Washington in April 2008, Lee’s “pragmatic” policy is firmly grounded in the “alliance” identity and has already provoked strong reaction from progressive forces that have promoted the nationalist identity.
Using newly collected data from the South Korean media, this article examines differing South Korean views of the North from 1992 to 2003, the critical time of the post–Cold War era, during which traditional notions of national identity have been challenged. While significant attention has been paid to how diff ering U.S. and South Korean perceptions of the North led to strains in the alliance, less is known about how these issues have been discussed, debated, and contested within the South, as well as why this fractious national debate has been laden with such intensity and emotion. We need to understand how these debates were related to efforts to (re)conceptualize South Korean identity vis-à-vis two principal “significant others”—the North and the United States—and how identity politics will continue to shape alliance relations as well as inter-Korean relations.
Claire Adida is a Ph.D. candidate in political science and a pre-doctoral fellow at CDDRL at Stanford. Her dissertation, “Immigrant Exclusion and Insecurity in Africa” explains why some immigrant communities integrate into their host societies while others face exclusion and hostility.
Her research interests include: ethnic identity and ethnic politics; African politics and development; field methods; comparative political behavior; the political economy of development; migration and development; public goods provision; trust and informal institutions
Encina Ground Floor Conference Room
Dan Diner is Professor of Modern European History at The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, and Director of the Simon Dubnow Institute for Jewish History and Culture at the University Leipzig. He is also a member of the Saxon Academy of Sciences, and served previously as Director of the Institute for German History at Tel Aviv University. Professor Diner is the author of numerous articles and books on the history of the 20th century, the Near East, and German history, especially the history of National Socialism and the Shoah as well as Jewish history. He is the Editor of the Yearbook of the Simon Dubnow Institute for Jewish History and Culture, and coeditor of Babylon.
This event is sponsored jointly by the Forum on Contemporary Europe and the Stanford Humanities Center.
Daniel and Nancy Okimoto Conference Room
Dr. Shea will talk with us about her research on menopause and aging among Chinese women and issues surrounding romance, sex, and marriage in later life in mainland China, as part three of the colloquium series on "The Implications of Demographic Change in China," co-sponsored by the Stanford China Program and the Asia Health Policy Program.
A sociocultural anthropologist who specializes in medical and psychological anthropology and Chinese culture, Dr. Shea's research interests include gender issues, health and healing, aging and the lifecycle, and intergenerational issues. She has spent three cumulative years living, studying, and doing research in the People's Republic of China.
Dr. Shea earned a B.A. in Asian Studies from Dartmouth College in 1989, followed by an M.A. and Ph.D. in Anthropology from Harvard University in 1994 and 1998.
Philippines Conference Room
This series of talks explore a number of issues which have arisen from a study of ethnogenesis, identity formation, state building, religious reform, and socio-economic "modernization" in selected regions of insular and peninsular Southeast Asia in the (late) modern period (late 19th century to the present).Clearly, none of these broad thematic areas can be adequately studied on its own.
The final talk examines the relationship between religion and secularisation, and specifically the implications of the so-called religious revival that is said to have taken place in different parts of Southeast Asia in recent years. The main aim here is not, however, to engage in the normative debate over what constitutes a ‘proper’ relationship between religion and the modern (secular) state in modern societies – that is to contribute directly to current debates about the modern ‘public sphere’. Rather by focussing on the formation of alternative publics, he proposes to investigate relations between religion and secularity from a broadly phenomenological or experiential – rather than from a naturalist or socio-historical – perspective.
Among Joel S. Kahn’s many books are Other Malays (2006), Modernity and Exclusion (2001), Southeast Asian Identities (ed., 1998), Culture, Multiculture, Postculture (1995), and Constituting the Minangkabau (1993). His other writings include State, Region, and the Politics of Recognition (forthcoming in National Integration and Regionalism in Indonesia and Malaysia). He is an elected Fellow of the Academy of the Social Sciences in Australia and has held appointments at Monash University and University College London, among other institutions. He serves or has served as an editorial board member of Critique of Anthropology, Current Anthropology, and Ethnicities. His doctorate is from the London School of Economics and Political Science.
A technical problem prevented the recording of Professor Kahn's third lecture.
Philippines Conference Room
This series of talks explore a number of issues which have arisen from a study of ethnogenesis, identity formation, state building, religious reform, and socio-economic "modernization" in selected regions of insular and peninsular Southeast Asia in the (late) modern period (late 19th century to the present).Clearly, none of these broad thematic areas can be adequately studied on its own.
The second is this series addresses the formation of group identities in Southeast Asia and their implication in modern processes of state formation, with a particular focus on the category ‘Malay’. In looking at the making of modern Malay-ness he will also address three areas of recent debate: firstly, over the nature and distinctiveness of so-called cultural identities in the modern period; secondly, over the (continuing) role of empire in the shaping of modern identities; and, thirdly, over the impact of cultural and religious pluralism on Southeast Asian polities.
Among Joel S. Kahn’s many books are Other Malays (2006), Modernity and Exclusion (2001), Southeast Asian Identities (ed., 1998), Culture, Multiculture, Postculture (1995), and Constituting the Minangkabau (1993). His other writings include State, Region, and the Politics of Recognition (forthcoming in National Integration and Regionalism in Indonesia and Malaysia). He is an elected Fellow of the Academy of the Social Sciences in Australia and has held appointments at Monash University and University College London, among other institutions. He serves or has served as an editorial board member of Critique of Anthropology, Current Anthropology, and Ethnicities. His doctorate is from the London School of Economics and Political Science.
Philippines Conference Room
