Miracle at the Faculty of Philology

‘Vreme’ has asked dr. Dusan Ivanic, professor of 18th  and 19th century Serbian literature to clarify the reasons which lead the department to accuse the dean of “ignoring and destroying the foundations of Serbian literature” and label his moves and future plans “anti-national”.

Dusan Ivanic: Marojevic is destroying and ignoring a 150 year-long tradition of researching Serbian literature. In contravention of the new university law, the dean is imposing non-existent scientific topics and renaming academic subjects. He is also imposing the existing atmosphere of loud and primitive nationalism by giving everything the attribute ‘Serbian’: why call a course ‘Serbian Medieval Literature’ when the department is already the Department of Serbian Literature?  According to the dean, the course currently called Literature from Renaissance to Rationalism should be renamed Serbian Literature from Renaissance to Rationalism although the course covers Croatian authors such as Marulic, Petar Zoranic or Petar Hektorovic...It seems that Radmilo Marojevic wants not only national literature to be taught as Serbian national literature, but also Croatian literature to be referred to as Serbian Croatian literature...As one of our colleagues said, the Faculty is soon to be renamed Serbian Faculty of Philology.

Vreme: In your statement, you say that Marojevic is forcing the lecturers to improvise, and put into effect “his dilettante theories about the history of Serbian literature”?
Our Dean is a professor of the Russian language: I do not understand how he can interfere with things he knows nothing about! What he is doing is both amateurish and arrogant. He is denying the foundations of our tradition, Serbian science, history and culture. This is a mixture of a high degree amateurism and clear political intentions. Look at the list of signatories of ‘A Word on Serbian Language’. None of them are of high academic standing: a couple are exceptions, and I am surprised they found themselves on that list.

You are accusing the dean of trying to make lecturers teach courses for which they have not been chosen? Besides, it is said that last autumn he examined students in four different subjects!

The dean’s plan to transfer lecturers from one subject to the next would constitute a huge anti-university gesture. The dean wants us to improvise in strictly specialized areas. The system of ‘exchange’ might work in high-schools, but the creation of some general post like ‘lecturer in Serbian literature’ the holder of which would be supposed to be equally competent to teach medieval, national and modern literature would fatally degrade this academic institution, and university teaching would be reduced to high-school level: our department, which is currently first among all departments which research Serbian literature, would become last. The Faculty of Philology is in deep crisis and the only solution is for Dean Marojevic to be sacked.

Marojevic said that he is doing everything in accordance with the law, and the government of national unity approves of his program?!

It is dangerous when a dean hides between state institutions. Is there a single state in the world whose business it is to approve academic plans and programs? Marojevic’s reorganization, in my opinion, was not carried out with the aim of improving the working conditions at the faculty, but was intended to eliminate ‘unsuitable’ lecturers and programs and create a small governing body which the dean could manipulate and through which he could carry out his plans. He is chasing away the ‘unsuitables’ and replacing them with his own supporters and poltroons.

Radmilo Marojevic responded publicly to the statement issued by the Department of Serbian Literature, which is part of the new Serbistics section. He is denying the accusations, calling the statement a ‘swan song of scientific dissidents’ while the sixteen signatories were labeled ‘scientifically and nationally unconscious lecturers’?
This nationally incensed  dilettante is accusing us of being nationally unconscious? Marojevic’s rhetoric is the worst thing I have witnessed at the faculty in the past twenty years. His Nazi-Stalinist rhetoric and technique, which involves deception, denunciation and contempt as the main means of communication with the public, are becoming unbearable. As we could all see at the public discussion last Friday, his attitude towards students is unworthy of an academic institution. I am faced with a huge dilemma as to whether I should stay at the faculty under such conditions. Maybe it would have been better if no one had signed the contract.