Tara Zahra maintains in her article 'Imagined Noncommunities: National Indifferenceas a Category of Analysis' that many people in the early twentieth century were indifferent to the call of the national movements or oscillated between different national belongings. While finding Zahra's perspective relevant, this article criticizesthe choice of her central analytic concept,'national indifference,'and also questionsthe absence of an integrated gender perspective. Finally, the article queries the general applicability of her theoretical approach. While useful in the analysis of demotic national movements, it is considerably less so when studying elite minoritygroups. This becomes evident when Zahra's theoretical perspective is applied to the Baltic Germans.

How was the national agenda of a previously subordinated, ruling Latvian majority reconciled with established academic practices for appointments and enrolment – candidates judged on merit irrespective of ethnicity? Following the disintegration of the Russian Empire, the ethnic Latvian majority assumed power and used state resources to further their national project. Complex national issues arose when a new university, teaching in Latvian, was founded in 1919 – Latvian was a language previously regarded as a peasant vernacular wholly unsuitable for cultural or academic purposes. During the same period the Latvian state was a multi-ethnic parliamentary democracy containing several ethnic minorities, all with full citizenship rights. Some of these minorities, the Baltic Germans and the Jews in particular, possessed considerable cultural capital and experience of academia. The inherent conflicts and compromises in this double agenda are the main focus of Between National and Academic Agendas.