CHINET

Get to know the CHINET, our team, upcoming conferences, seminars, workshops and much more!

REVIEWS

Browse our selected reviews from current publications in the field of Chinese studies.

FORUM

Find out even more information in our field notes, opinion papers and surveys.

What’s Wrong with the Study of China/Countries

What's Wrong with the Study of China/Countries

Martin Lavicka30 Jun 2014Leave a comment


WHAT’S WRONG WITH THE STUDY OF CHINA/COUNTRIES

Hans Kuijper* 

ABSTRACT

In this paper[1] the thesis is submitted that there is something fundamentally amiss in Western Sinology (Zhōngguóxué, as distinct from Hànxué, which is a kind of old-fashioned philology): ‘China experts’  either pretend  to be knowledgeable about everything related to China, in which case they cannot be taken seriously, or – eventually – admit not to be scientific all-rounders with respect to the country, in which case they cannot be called China experts. The author expects no tenured professor of Chinese Studies/History to share this view. Having exposed the weakness, indeed the scandal of Sinology as practised thus far, he also points out the way junior Sinologists should go. The fork in that road is two-pronged: translating or collaborating.

KEYWORDS: Sinology, area/country studies, complexity, scientific collaboration, e-research


All things are one. (Heraclitus)

There is nothing isolated. (Zhu Xi)

Tout tient à tout. (French proverb)

INTRODUCTION

To mark its 50th anniversary, in April 2003, the Institute of International Relations, a think tank affiliated with the National Chengchi University, in Taipei, published a double issue of its flagship journal Issues & Studies on “The State of the China Studies Field”. The reasons given for this laudable initiative were: a) “the major jump in both data output within China and access to this data by scholars from outside the PRC”, and b) “the dramatic increase in the number and types of individuals analyzing China”. However, the reader who expects to find a critical assessment of how China has been studied will be disappointed. The (mainly Western) contributors to the special issue ignore the elephant in the room. None of them is brave enough to ask the key question: of all the Western scholars having occupied themselves with the “curious land” (David Mungello), who has really been in the business of “analyzing China”, qua China? We think the sad answer to this perfectly legitimate question is: nobody has! Let us explain.

Continue reading at Asian Studies. For an updated version of the article, the reader is advised to contact the author at: j_kuijper@online.nl.

 

*The author, who graduated in Sinology from Leiden University and in economics from Erasmus University Rotterdam, is a retired civil servant and independent researcher, currently working on a book about the necessity and possibility of scientific collaboration with regard to the study of countries. His email address is j_kuijper@online.nl.

[1] The substantially longer, heavily annotated version, entitled “UPLIFTING THE STUDY OF CHINA”, can be downloaded for free at the website of Academia.edu. With the article “IS SINOLOGY A SCIENCE?” (Kuijper 2000) we attempted the ball to start rolling. Our advice having fallen on deaf ears, we found solace in Seneca’s saying: Silentium videtur confessio.

Write a comment

Categories

Recent Posts

13 Nov 2017

11th Annual Conference on Asian Studies: Commemorating October 1917: Re-thinking Marxism and the Russian Revolution in East and Southeast Asia: Photo Gallery

Bellow please find pictures taken during the 11th Annual Conference on Asian...

Read more

14 Oct 2017

Emeritus Professor Carlyle Thayer – South China Sea: Realpolitik Trumps International Law

Department of Asian Studies, Faculty of Arts, Palacký University Olomouc,...

Read more

Latest Comments

23 May 2016 / Norbert Francis

Yes, this was an interesting study by Chang and Lu of bilingualism and perceptions of the ...

25 May 2015 / Ming-Yeh Rawnsley

I just want to echo Gary's comments and to alert to readers who may be interested in Routl...

24 May 2015 / Gary Rawnsley

Thanks for the inclusion, Jon. Readers may also be interested in the newly published Routl...

Archives