Hungarian Studies Newsletter, 1973 (1. évfolyam, 1-2. szám)
1973 / 2. szám
was necessary to observe Hungarian history and society. The premise of this assumption is that science is not created in vacuum, but rather, it is formulated in accordance with society’s needs for solving certain problems or problem complexes. Hungary’s major socio-political problem throughout the centuries has been its subordinate status under the dominance of neighboring great powers. The Hungarian intellectural class, unable to organize a successful independence movement, wanted to demonstrate that, despite their country’s numerical inferiority, the Hungarian folk (viz. Hungarian nation) has maintained its ethnic purity through history, and such purity could not be polluted by German or Slavic cultural diffusion. Hence the major preoccupation of Hungarian ethnography with the tracing of culture traits and ethnic specifics. Although the work is not a comparative analysis, frequent contrasts were drawn between Hungarian ethnography, Anglo-American anthropology, and central European ethnographic traditions. Because it was written primarily for American anthropologists, it was necessary to transliterate scientific constructs and terminologies from Hungarian to English. The question of disciplinary organization was also of considerable importance. For instance, it was not only interesting but necessary to discern which sciences at what time in history ought to be consulted by American anthropologists to gain information* about Hungarian peasantry. At the same time adequate care was taken not to confuse such picture with what Hungarian scientists consider the proper study of their discipline. BOOKS (Continued from page 3) Halmos, Paul and Martin Albrow (eds.) HUNGARIAN SOCIOLOGICAL STUDIES. (The SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW Monograph, No. 17.) Keele, England: U. of Keele, February 1972. 332 pages. $6.60 paper. This volume is a cooperative product of the Monographs of the Sociological Review of the U. of Keele, Staffordshire, England under the editorship of Dr. Paul Halmos, and of the Sociological Research Division of the Hungarian Acadey of Sciences under the directorship of Dr. Kálmán Kulcsár. Kulcsár selected the contributors and presumably also the topics of the essays representing Hungarian sociology today. In his introduction to the volume, Kulcsár gives a brief history of Hungarian sociology beginning with the foundation of the Hungarian Sociological Society in 1901. He escribes the influence of Huszadik Század (Twentieth Century) the first periodical which could be considered as sociological in concept if not in content, and he elaborates through about 20 pages on the present state of the art in Hungary. Other essays in the volume are: “The role of values in the long range planning of distribution and consumption,” by András Hegedűs and Maria Markus;"“Changes in Hungarian society during 1945-1970,” by^ Egon Szabady; “Ways of living and social changes,” by Agnes Losonczi; “Work-performance, interests, powers and environment (The case of cyclincal slowdowns in a Hungarian factory),” by Lajos Héthy and Csaba Makó; “Lay participation in organizational decision making,” by Kálmán Kulcsár; “Achievement motivation research in Hungary,” by Károly Varga; “The internalization of deviant behavior patterns during socialization in the family,” by László Cseh-Szombathy, “Some relations DISSERTATIONS (Continued) between social structure and the school system” by Susan Ferge; “Expectations from and demands made upon children in a rural community,” by Judit H. Sas, “Housing system and social structure,” by Iván Szelényi; “On the place of sociological approaches in the methodological model of environment planning,” by András Szesztay; and “The correlation between juvenile delinquency an industrial development,” by András Szabó. Marer, Paul and George Pall. RECENT DEVELOPMENT IN THE HUNGARIAN FINANCIAL SYSTEM. Edited by Thad P. Alton. Prepared for the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency. New York: Columbia U., May 1971. Volume II., 252 pages, biblio. Mimeo: no price. In the preface Dr. Thad P. Alton, the director of the Project on National Income in East Central Europe says: “This study is one of a series of reports on the fiscal and financial systems of Czechoslovakia, Hungary, and Poland. The country studies are complementary; where one occasionally analyzes economic reform measures by reference to theoretical norms, another concentrates on the details of institutional organization and financial regulations within a single country. Taken together, the diverse approaches should provide better orientation inthe realitiesof the system than a single uniform approach could offer.” “The pace of economic reform was varied in the countries under review...Hungary hedged her progress toward decentralization by numerous exceptions to the general regulations that govern the new economic model and by standby powers to revert to central controls when ‘national interest’ may require. Because Hungary is proceeding with apparent Soviet approval, her successes and reversal have import for the USSR and other countries of Eastern Europe.” “Throughout the area there is increasing awareness of the need for promoting efficiency and innovation. Despite the uneven progress of reform in various countries, their economic systems will continue to be modified.” Chapters of the study cover the following topics: 1. The 1968 economic reform; administration, fiscal reforms and finance; 2. The 1968 price reforms; 3. Economic reforms and the state budge; 4. Accounting, reporting, and control procedure; 5. Aggregative economic reporting; 6. Foreign trade reporting and economic reforms; Bibliography. Marer, Paul. SELECTED COMPARISONS OF THE FINANCIAL SYSTEMS OF THE USSR, CZECHOSLOVAKIA, HUNGARY, AND POLAND. Edited by Thad P. Alton. Prepared for the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency. New York: Columbia U., October 1971. Volume IV, 70 pages, biblio. Mimeo; no price. The Soviet model of economic planning and management introduced after World War II in the countries of East Central Europe is reflected in their financial systems. Certain modifications of the basic model were made at the outset in view of the smaller size of the countries and their earlier experience, and subsequently some further diversity appeared in adjustment to economic problems and measures of reform designed to cope with them, both in the USSR and in East Central Europe. Nevertheless, enough similarity persists so that a detailed comparative study of the financial systems of these countries is instructive in understanding the system of any one of them. The report is making comparisons (Continued on page 8) HUNGARIAN STUDIES NEWSLETTER 5
