As you already know, this Russification extended well beyond the borders of the Soviet Union. When I was growing up, the Soviet Union was Russia and Russia was the Soviet Union. No one ever said it out loud; it was an unspoken assumption. And I've read books written in the 21st century in which authors refer to Soviet prisoners of war (WWII) as Russian POWs, one German, the other British. So the Russification campaign was successful. And it's annoying as hell when books written in the 21st c., some of them very recent, use Russian spellings for Ukrainian place names. Kharkov! for example.
Reading some of these comments, I smile. One of things that strikes me taking this course is how very much my understanding of history is oriented toward the west. Without those comfortable well-established (what we used to call -- maybe still do) cognitive structures to hang new information, I find things don't stick as well as usual. My mind is busy mapping, building new cities, entire countries, with unpredictably changing, fast moving borders.
What an adventure! And what a guide!
So upward and onward, listening again, reading, reading again, I'm immersing. All I can say is -- well worth the time.
MB As a student eons ago and a history professor from age 58 to 80, I’d like to address ‘speak from notes’ to ‘reading a prepared text.’
At Yale I took a lecture course on American history with David Potter [a Pulitzer winner] as the professor. His lecture notes were so old that they were yellowed. He read without passion and laughed at his tired Mister Dooley jokes. I imagine, just before his lecture, he left whatever he was doing, grabbed his lecture notes, and then spoke for 50 minutes (no Q&A).
By contrast, Lewis Perry Curtis, in lecturing on English civilization, got up on lecture days at 5 a. .m, had tea while reviewing source materials, and then lectured with few or any notes. He received a standing ovation about half his lectures. He portrayed his passion for the subject.
In teaching history/economics for 23 years, I never read a lecture. I would get up early, go over source materials and previous notes, get passionate about what I was going to share, and then ZAZOOM. The passion came through, as contrasted to some of my colleagues who used PowerPoint presentations—ho hum.
In contrast, when I was making professional presentations at conferences or elsewhere (on the Constitution to a group of New Jersey Republicans—or Japanese World War II Atrocities—COMINT and Pearl Harbor & Midway— why Oliver Stone’s JFK was the most damaging ‘historical’ documentary ever) almost always I read my tightly argued synthesis. These were scholarly presentations that were the basis for a Q&A and sharing with those in the audience who sought the documentation.
I agree that professorial mannerisms are important. Professor Synder’s lectures are recorded far less professionally than those of the GREAT COURSES. His mannerisms seem more focused on the students in the auditorium than those listening to a recording.
Personally, perhaps because of my impaired hearing, I have significant difficulty comprehending his lectures. Quite often I quit before he has finished. Sorry—but that’s reality.
There is passion in spontaneity. [Though I’d be mesmerized simply listening to Meryl Strep read the telephone directory.]
My hearing is no longer great and I use hearing aids. I love the closed caption option (CC) that YouTube offers. It makes all the difference for me. If you miss something, you can also go back and re-listen. I do that often.
Susan Thanks. My hearing often misses the upper ranges. CC is a life saver, especially on British series where the accents and octaves I find difficult.
I'm an old lady, but fortunately my hearing is still quite good. My father was nearly deaf, though, and we had to shout at him just to carry on a conversation. Why not use the CC? Meh, I'm not keen on professional mannerisms. I rather like the way he lectures.
I'm an old lady ,too! I bought the books (Thank you Amazon.mx) and am doing the readings before every lecture. It makes a big difference! I adore the CC option and also like being able to go back to clear up something. I enjoy the lectures very much. I don't think reading from a paper is a good way to teach, too boring! His style is more dynamic.
As you already know, this Russification extended well beyond the borders of the Soviet Union. When I was growing up, the Soviet Union was Russia and Russia was the Soviet Union. No one ever said it out loud; it was an unspoken assumption. And I've read books written in the 21st century in which authors refer to Soviet prisoners of war (WWII) as Russian POWs, one German, the other British. So the Russification campaign was successful. And it's annoying as hell when books written in the 21st c., some of them very recent, use Russian spellings for Ukrainian place names. Kharkov! for example.
In the age of information, ignorance is a choice 👩🏻💻 Never stop learning!
Reading some of these comments, I smile. One of things that strikes me taking this course is how very much my understanding of history is oriented toward the west. Without those comfortable well-established (what we used to call -- maybe still do) cognitive structures to hang new information, I find things don't stick as well as usual. My mind is busy mapping, building new cities, entire countries, with unpredictably changing, fast moving borders.
What an adventure! And what a guide!
So upward and onward, listening again, reading, reading again, I'm immersing. All I can say is -- well worth the time.
I don’t see a link to the lecture.
Here you go: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7nM9SetN50&t=21s
Dear Dr. Snyder, Please add the web link to view Lecture 18. Thanks
Sorry about that! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7nM9SetN50&t=21s
Very interesting to understand how the "russification" of Ukraine came to be.
MB As a student eons ago and a history professor from age 58 to 80, I’d like to address ‘speak from notes’ to ‘reading a prepared text.’
At Yale I took a lecture course on American history with David Potter [a Pulitzer winner] as the professor. His lecture notes were so old that they were yellowed. He read without passion and laughed at his tired Mister Dooley jokes. I imagine, just before his lecture, he left whatever he was doing, grabbed his lecture notes, and then spoke for 50 minutes (no Q&A).
By contrast, Lewis Perry Curtis, in lecturing on English civilization, got up on lecture days at 5 a. .m, had tea while reviewing source materials, and then lectured with few or any notes. He received a standing ovation about half his lectures. He portrayed his passion for the subject.
In teaching history/economics for 23 years, I never read a lecture. I would get up early, go over source materials and previous notes, get passionate about what I was going to share, and then ZAZOOM. The passion came through, as contrasted to some of my colleagues who used PowerPoint presentations—ho hum.
In contrast, when I was making professional presentations at conferences or elsewhere (on the Constitution to a group of New Jersey Republicans—or Japanese World War II Atrocities—COMINT and Pearl Harbor & Midway— why Oliver Stone’s JFK was the most damaging ‘historical’ documentary ever) almost always I read my tightly argued synthesis. These were scholarly presentations that were the basis for a Q&A and sharing with those in the audience who sought the documentation.
I agree that professorial mannerisms are important. Professor Synder’s lectures are recorded far less professionally than those of the GREAT COURSES. His mannerisms seem more focused on the students in the auditorium than those listening to a recording.
Personally, perhaps because of my impaired hearing, I have significant difficulty comprehending his lectures. Quite often I quit before he has finished. Sorry—but that’s reality.
There is passion in spontaneity. [Though I’d be mesmerized simply listening to Meryl Strep read the telephone directory.]
My hearing is no longer great and I use hearing aids. I love the closed caption option (CC) that YouTube offers. It makes all the difference for me. If you miss something, you can also go back and re-listen. I do that often.
Susan Thanks. My hearing often misses the upper ranges. CC is a life saver, especially on British series where the accents and octaves I find difficult.
I'm an old lady, but fortunately my hearing is still quite good. My father was nearly deaf, though, and we had to shout at him just to carry on a conversation. Why not use the CC? Meh, I'm not keen on professional mannerisms. I rather like the way he lectures.
I'm an old lady ,too! I bought the books (Thank you Amazon.mx) and am doing the readings before every lecture. It makes a big difference! I adore the CC option and also like being able to go back to clear up something. I enjoy the lectures very much. I don't think reading from a paper is a good way to teach, too boring! His style is more dynamic.