Hungarian Studies Newsletter, 1979 (7. évfolyam, 19-22. szám)
1979 / 21. szám
DISSERTATIONS* Bell, Peter D. (U. of California, San Diego, 1979) “Social Change and Social Perception in a Rural Hungarian Village.” 212 pages. This study based on 13 months of fieldwork examines the post World War II transformation of the Hungarian countryside and describes how national policies and processes have been translated into social existence in one village. Taking a broad historical perspective, it explores the ways in which the social structure, the institutions, the lives, and the perceptions of its inhabitants have been affected by farreaching events. In regard to pre-war Hungary, the study examines social stratification, whose basis was landed wealth, determining social status and prestige, work opportunities and education; the system of family, kin, and social relationships; and local organizations and associations in which power and authority manifested themselves. As to the post-war era, the study outlines the organization and structure of the farming cooperative, and it weighs the effects collectivization has had on traditional social institutions. Although the economic role of the family has shrunk, says the author, family and a reduced circle of kin are at the center of a still vital system of social interaction and exchange. Patron-client ties, no longer based on wealth, are still of concern for many villagers. The reciprocity underlying them is reinforced by the continued importance of kin-based reciprocity and by the overlap between the system of familyand kin-based reciprocation and the system of powerdependency relations in the local collective farm. Despite greater social and material equality, themes of hierarchy and inequality, of power and dependence, remain important factors. Locally, concerns with hierarchy stem from contradictions between egalitarian ideology and requirements of hierarchy and leadership in a large organization like the collective farm, the ambivalent position of leaders in a centralized political and administrative structure, the traditional peasant value of independence, local competition for positions and resources in the emerging collective farm, and so on. The study is quite unique in examining the main dimensions of village social perceptions; power, prestige, and income; work and ways of getting ahead; sociability and interpersonal behavior; and cultivation and refinement. Similarities to past “Abstracts are usually based on those published in Dissertation Abstracts International. Microfilm and xerox copies of the original full dissertation may be obtained, when indicated, from Xerox University Microfilm 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Ml 48106. When ordering, use the number shown. BOOKS (Continued) movement, he tries to answer the question: What alternatives did Hungary have? He feels that the present stage of development is not the ultimate phase in the history of peasantry. In conclusion he says: “I would not want to commit the error of equating the process of modernization with its apparent outcome, one that is far from completed. It may still be possible for modernizing societies, Hungary included, to reintegrate their spiritually and physically uprooted millions in their social, political, and economic fabrics, and establish a new value system which would be based on humaneness and reason. However, it is evident that such an outcome of modernity, if ever achieved, is still far in the uncertain future.” dimensions of perception are traced to the way in which collective farm organization has encouraged the maintenance of previous social forms, to village size dimensions and the concerns over hierarchy are used along with the concept of moral community, systematic misperception of villagers, and the semantics of Gypsy to understand the very negative stereotypes villagers hold of newly arrived Gypsies in the village. Komlos, John (U. of Chicago, 1978) “The Habsburg Monarchy as a Customs Union: Economic Development in Austria-Hungary in the Nineteenth Century.” Available from the author (Dept, of Economics, Aurora College, Aurora, IL 60507) $8.50. The economic consequences of the creation of the common market between Austria and Hungary in 1850 are described. The static effects from the theory of customs union were found to have been positive for both partners though not highly significant. Thus, one cannot attribute to the elimination of the tariffs a prominent role in the econmic development of the states concerned. The Austrian industrial production index shows that production accelerated in the late 1820s. The role of exports, including exports to Hungary was not seen as a decisive force in inducing the first wave of industrialization. However, Austrian industrialization was decisive in providing an incentive for the development of Hungary's agricultural sector. Without the increased Austrian demand Hungarian agriculture would have stagnated. The availability of Hungarian grain was beneficial to the Austrian economy but it was not crucial; Austria could have substituted relatively easily for Hungarian products on the world market. The blame of the relative benefits of the industrial sector tilted even more heavily in Hungary’s favor. After half a century of steady development, Austria’s industrial production index decelerated during the two business cycles subsequent to a market crash in 1873. Thereafter the Austrian capital market was biased in favor of safe investments such as government bonds and against industrial equity holdings for two decades. When the Hungarian government began profusely to issue state securities after 1878, more than half of them were bought by Austrian credit institutions and the Austrian public until the 1890s. The Hungarian government’s open market operations in Austria enabled it to finance its ordinary expenditures and investments into social overhead capital without attracting funds away from private domestic investors. Moreover, the government was thereby enabled to accomplish its fiscal goals without resort to excessive taxation. By attracting funds from Austria, Hungary’s money supply was growing faster than it would have otherwise and since prices were determined empire-wide, the increased supply of money in Hungary put upward pressure on output and imports. The upshot of these developments was that beginning in 1878 industrial production led by flour production, advanced significantly in Hungary for the first time in widely diffused sectors of the economy. In Austria, on the other hand, the diminished stock of venture capital had a negative impact on industrial production until 1896. By attracting large amounts of Austrian capital, the Hungarian economy was therefore influential in prolonging the depression in Austria. Until 1913 Austrian and Hungarian industrial growth continued to be out-of-phase with one another and were related inversely to the direction of capital flows. Once again the close ties to Austria were beneficial to Hungary’s development. 4 NO. 21, 1979, HUNGARIAN STUDIES NEWSLETTER
