2024-04-03 23:37:11
Article III “From our history of polemics”.
Elnur Astanbeyli
“It is clear from the archive documents preserved in the Public Education Museum of Gori seminary that Hajibeyov gave a test lesson on the Russian language during the pedagogical experience in the last year of the seminary. An interesting fact is that Hajibeyov taught the lesson not with the “dumb method” that prevailed in schools at that time, but with the “natural method”. This attracted the attention of the class leader. Although the head of the class V. Polevski did not appreciate this originality of Hajibeyov in 1904, he was forced to admit that he will be an efficient, intelligent and unique teacher in the future. These lines are from the encyclopedia about the great intellectual of Azerbaijan – composer and publicist Uzeyir Hajibeyli.
After reading those lines, my attention was first drawn to the “dumb method”. Where does this expression scratch my ears?
After thinking for a while, I remember something, and among the books in my personal library, I search for Abdulla Shaig’s “Memories”, find it and start turning the pages.
Yes, I was not mistaken: I first came across the phrase “dumb method” in Shaig’s memoir! Gradually, my memory dissolves and I remember Uzeyir Bey’s article “Dumb rule”.
This method was used to teach Russian to children.
A. Shaik writes about the “dumb method” in his “Memories”: “This method caused a lot of difficulties for both Azerbaijani children and Azerbaijani teachers teaching Russian. For example, if a teacher wanted to teach the children the sentences “dog barks” and “cat meows” in Russian, he should not say those sentences in Russian, but should express them only with sound and movement. In other words, the teacher had to bark like a dog and meow like a cat in front of the children.”
There was a dual position regarding the method in question. Many were strongly in favor of abolishing the “dumb method”; that is why in 1906 in Baku, during the congress of Azerbaijani teachers, there was a serious disagreement.
The most interesting thing is that the chairman of that congress, an outstanding scholar, the founder of our national press Hasan Bey Zardabiand his deputy was known as a writer-publicist at that time, who later played an important role in the overthrow of the Republic of Azerbaijan and the realization of the Russian-Bolshevik occupation. Nariman Narimanov was
But what makes this point interesting? The point is that the discussions about the “dumb method” would bring Zardabi and Narimanov face to face. How? More on that later.
For now, a small (and important!) interlude: The first congress of Azerbaijani teachers began on August 15, 1906, and continued for 13 days with two meetings a day. In addition to Zardabi and Narimanov, Uzeyir Hajibeyli, Mahmud bey Mahmudbeyov, Suleyman Sani Akhundov, Abdulla Shaig, Firudin bey Kocherli, Farhad Aghazad, Bahram bey Akhundzade, Ali Isgender Jafarzade, and other forward-thinking people of the time actively supported or closely participated in that three-year primary school congress. implementation of general compulsory education; granting the right to education to women as well as men; conducting education in each nation’s native language; improving the training of public teachers by improving their financial situation, etc. such progressive demands were put forward.
Issues such as increasing the number of secondary schools, improving teacher training, and creating evening schools for the elderly were also discussed at the congress.
***
We will return to the sharp fight between Zardabi and Narimanov regarding the “dumb method”. But first, some important information about this method is needed.
In 1905, the representatives of South Caucasus Muslims submitted to the tsar’s government the “Request Letter of the Muslims of the Caucasus”: “Until now, nothing has been done for Caucasian Muslims in the field of public education. The existing public schools among the Muslim population also kill the remaining interests of the students in acquiring literacy and knowledge. Because the method applied in education – Levitsky’s dumb method, by its essence and scope, is completely alien to the nature of Caucasian Tatars (meaning Azerbaijanis – EA) and highlanders. The mother tongue has been suppressed from all educational institutions to such an extent that even reading a book in the native language is considered a crime..
(Brief reference to the request (petition) containing the above lines: after the revolutionary events in Russia in 1905, in the house of the oil millionaire Haji Zeynalabdin Taghiyev, prominent intellectuals of Azerbaijan at that time – Alimardan bey Topchubashov, Ahmad bey Agaoglu, Adil Khan Ziyadkhan and others gathered in the Caucasus, he including, they exchanged views on the political-economic, cultural-humanitarian situation of Azerbaijani Muslims, and as a result of these discussions, they prepared a petition addressed to the tsar’s government…)
It was emphasized in the appeal that there can be no talk of teaching the mother tongue, national literature and history at all. Because the representatives of the Muslim community have been completely removed from the issues of education and training; the absence of newspapers, magazines and books, which are important means of culture and education, is particularly acute. Inexorable prohibitions on the publication of books, both original and translated, make it almost impossible to say that this field does not exist among Muslims today. It is clear that reading rooms, libraries, various public education courses and other educational institutions do not operate in such conditions. As if all this is lost, Caucasian Muslims have not even been able to get the right to establish a charitable society for many years.
But what was the essence of “Levitsky’s dumb method”, which is considered “alien to the nature” of Azerbaijanis? The basis of this method was laid by the Russian pedagogue Levitsky, and it was a pedagogical method that involves teaching on the basis of mechanical memorization. The reason for giving a special place to the method we talked about in the above request and emphasizing the issue of “native language” was because that method was considered completely unsuitable for a national school; because it would not be possible to explain in the mother tongue during the teaching of the Russian language!
This was met with serious objection and sharp criticism of the intellectuals and educators of Azerbaijan in the mentioned period (and rightfully so!). They unequivocally rejected “Levitsky’s dumb method”. For example, Uzeyir wrote in the article I mentioned earlier:
The “dumb rule” is as follows:
Uchitel enters the room and asks him to teach, he should not speak a word of Muslim, he looks at Levitsky’s book and sees that it is written: “Ya rydayu”, that is, I am sobbing and crying. Uchitel wants to impress these words on the children, he should not speak a word in Muslim, so Uchitel takes out a handkerchief from his pocket and starts crying and asks the children in Russian: “Ishto ya delayu?”
The children remain dumbfounded and do not know what Uchitel is asking, what happened to him, who died. Uchitel cries again and asks the children again, ishto or delayu? He himself should not speak a word of Muslim. The children are still like this, they don’t know who died like Uchitelin, who is to blame? Uchitel also resented this: “Ishto ya delayu?” I mean, what am I doing? He should not say a word in Muslim. At the end, one of the children raises his finger, Uchitel is happy and says in Russian: “Nuka, ishto ya delayu?” The child stands up and says in Muslim, “Mirza, my stomach hurts, let me go out!”
Uchitel is in pain, he doesn’t even have to speak a word in Muslim, he spits on the ground and walks around, saying to the children in Russian, “Ya rydayu!”, that is, I am sobbing. Children also say “Ya rydayu”. However, Uchitel does not agree to this, because the children should say “Ti rydayesh”, that is, you growl. The children don’t know this either, and the teacher shouldn’t speak a word of Muslim, time passes, the teacher shouts, the children don’t bleed, the lesson remains…
At the end, the uchitel says: “Tı rydayesh”, that is, you are crying, and the children say the same, the uchitel is a little happier. He holds the handkerchief to his eyes and sobs and asks in Russian, “What am I doing?” Children also say: What am I doing? Uchitel still remains, and so do the children.
Uchitel says that you are crying, the children also say that you are crying; The driver asks what I’m bringing. Children also say, “What am I doing?” Uchitel says that you are sobbing, and the children say that you are sobbing? Uchitel is very shy, he should not say a word in Muslim. Meanwhile, the school bell rings, children get up and run out of the room as if you had caught them and trapped them. And then they go home and tell their mother that there was a fight at school today. Their mother asks if there was anything wrong? They say no. They say, let us know, let’s go and cry, it’s good. They also say that it’s good…”
In a word, the result of the “dumb method” – complete inefficiency!
***
Let’s go back to the discussions about that method at the first congress of our teachers…
According to Abdulla Shaig, the participants of the congress “unanimously” support Zardabi’s proposal to cancel this method, which allows Azerbaijani teachers to “bark like dogs and meow like cats” during the teaching of the Russian language.
Again, according to Shaig’s writing, in order to implement the adopted decision, the congress proposes to send a telegram to the governor of the Caucasus (deputy – EA) and ask him to issue an order to cancel the “dumb method” in Azerbaijani schools.
Nariman Narimanov expresses his objection to that proposal: he says that “Until now, we have asked a lot, all our requests have remained on paper. Therefore, we should not ask, but demand. We must write in a telegram that the congress of teachers demands the elimination of this method!”
The congress acts according to Narimanov’s wishes.
So this time Zardabi loses his temper. He addresses Narimanova with these words: “What are you asking for?” Do you have guns or an army? Maybe you trust the rams who are dying for each other?”.
Thus, the debate flares up again and is prolonged. However, in the end, most of the congress participants took Narimanov’s side.
“When Hasan Bey told them, ‘You are young, you have little experience, you cannot overcome power,'” Dr. Seyidov answered gravely, “Intelligence is not in age, but in the head.” After such answers, Hasan Bey was forced to leave the congress. – Shaiq writes like this. Later, he added that Zardabi did not come to the congress again.
***
In fact, Hasan Bey was the one who came out right in the above debate about the “dumb method”.
It was necessary to wait a long time for the removal of this method, which is absolutely not suitable for national schools…
Azlogos.eu