Organizer and Chair: F. Bruce Robinson, National Endowment for the Humanities
Discussants: Susan Wadley, Syracuse University; Elizabeth Sill, Henninger High School,
Syracuse; Eliot Deutsch, University of Hawai'i, Manoa; Peter Adams, Essex Community
College, Baltimore; Ainslie Embree, Columbia University
During the summer of 1994, two NEH funded institutes were offered that explore the history and culture of South Asia. At the University of Hawaii, twenty six faculty selected from colleges and universities across the country spent five weeks in a "South Asian Culture and Civilization Institute." Meanwhile, thirty New York State teachers spent four weeks at Syracuse University in Ithaca engaged in an institute bearing the title "The Ramayana: An Enduring Tradition, Its Text and Context." Dr. Eliot Deutsch, Professor of Philosophy, University of Hawaii, served as lead scholar for the faculty study institute, and Dr. Susan Wadley, Professor and Chair of the Department of Anthropology, Syracuse University, was the academic director of the institute for teachers.
The Hawaii proposal asserts that "The Institute . . . begins from the premise that within each cultural tradition there is a wealth of creativity and originality that has been and is expressed in the historical process of its ongoing growth. At the same time, there are certain unannounced, often even unconscious assumptions on which culture is constructed, and which give the culture its particular identity and continuity-its world views and its day-to-day practices of social interaction and material production." (pp. 10 & 11, quoted from F. M. Cornford, Thucydides Mythistoricus, London, 1907.) To discover the "constant factor which underlies all the differential characters of many minds" (p. 11), participants were introduced to the Vedas, Upanisads, Epics, and Advaita Vedanta, as well as popular Hinduism and the Buddhist alternative. With this background, the study proceeded to look at modern literature, Nationalism and Hindu reform movements, Islamic cultures of South Asia, and Buddhism in Sri Lanka.
In contrast, the Syracuse institute for teachers substantially narrowed the focus by concentrating on the epic story of the Ramayana as a point of access for the study of Hindu culture. Throughout the institute, participants were introduced to various tellings and retellings of Rama's trek. From that central story came discussions of the gods of Hinduism, the evolution of the bhakti traditions, the Hindu social order and its values, and consideration of the role of women. Later versions of the Ramayana also introduced discussions of popular and regional Hindu practices, the story's retelling under the non Brahmin Movement and under the "fundamentalists," and Hinduism's manifestation in South East Asia.
In each case, the purpose of the institute was to equip educators who have little acquaintance with South Asia so that they can present a coherent introduction to their students. In the creation of these projects, both applicants had to make a series of difficult decisions as to what to include and how, and both chose to ground their surveys in continuities that were first captured in early texts. The Hawaii institute chose a survey approach although it favored the Bhagavadgita with special attention; the Syracuse institute organized its presentation by looking at the variations and forms of a single seminal text and their social and cultural implications.
Do these approaches simply spring from the different scholarly orientations of each project's faculty director: one a philosopher and the other an anthropologist?
Are aspects of South Asian culture favored by one approach and not by the other? Does the search for cultural continuities unduly favor continuity while the review of variations on the Rama story over emphasize change?
Is a concentration on a single text too narrow? What characteristics allow the Ramayana to be used in this manner? Can the Bhagavadgita fill a similar role? What of other texts?
Is one of these approaches more effective than the other? What are the strengths and weaknesses of each? What of the intended ultimate audience-the students?
How can the successes of these two projects be built upon? Can either of these approaches serve as models for introductory studies of other cultural regions?
The round table would consist of the two project directors each supported by one institute participant. Elizabeth Sill, a teacher at Henninger High School, Syracuse, NY, would comment on the effectiveness of the Syracuse plan; and Peter Adams, Department of English, Essex Community College, Baltimore, MD, would evaluate his Hawaii experience.
The discussant would be Professor Ainslie Embree, who has himself just completed an NEH funded project for teachers entitled "Integrated Humanities Institute on India." Thirty teachers (fifteen teams) from the Greater New York City area met monthly over an eighteen month period. Professor Embree would challenge the presenters from the perspective of this third in service variation and from his experience as faculty director.
The round table convener is F. Bruce Robinson, Assistant Director, Division of Education Programs, National Endowment for the Humanities.
This round table proposal is presented in cooperation with the Committee on Teaching Asia of the Association for Asian Studies.
Would you like to return to the South Asia Table of Contents? Choose another area?