作为方法的中国多元化:全球南方文化中介的非殖民化

IF 3.2 2区 文学 Q1 COMMUNICATION
Xiaotian Li, L. Tsang, T. Tse
{"title":"作为方法的中国多元化:全球南方文化中介的非殖民化","authors":"Xiaotian Li, L. Tsang, T. Tse","doi":"10.1177/20594364231216265","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The changing global landscape of imperialism, colonialism, and globalisation has urged scholars to reflect on and reexamine the lingering Eurocentric epistemology in media and cultural studies, sociology, anthropology, area studies, and other disciplines. The epistemological biases which currently exist in these academic disciplines hinder the development of a bottom-up theorisation and a thorough understanding of social and cultural phenomena. Recently, scholars in and beyond the global South have become more attentive to the inadequacy of a Eurocentric model of theorisation, and the idiosyncrasies of local societies. The rise of China, and its intensified international political, economic, and cultural exchanges with other Asian, middle-Eastern, and African countries, also make it imperative to move beyond a Eurocentric view in understanding the complexity of social and cultural dynamics within China and across the global South. Responding to this double inadequacy of Eurocentrism in terms of knowledge production in and for Asia, we build on the insightful arguments made, but also address their respective conceptual limits, in the “Asia as Method” and “trans-Asia as Method” approaches. While acknowledging Mizoguchi’s (2016) conception of “China as Method” which emphasises the empowerment of sinology, we seek to further rethink and pluralise such an existing epistemological approach to the study of media and culture in China. This double special issue brings together both reflective essays and empirical articles to examine the nuanced cross-border/cross-national cultural interactions and the intersectional dynamics of class, gender, sexuality, race and ethnicity and national/local identities. It aims to rebuild the subjectivity and redefine the agency of Asia in the post-colonial and post-imperialist world order, using what we term as a “decolonial cultural perspective”, to understand the idiosyncrasies of local societies within a seemingly homogeneous Asian country. We propose China as Method as a useful approach for all humanities and social sciences researchers to critically rethink Eurocentrism and to avoid an essentialist form of Sinocentrism in the Asian context.","PeriodicalId":42637,"journal":{"name":"Global Media and China","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pluralising China as Method: Decolonising cultural mediations in the global South\",\"authors\":\"Xiaotian Li, L. Tsang, T. Tse\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/20594364231216265\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The changing global landscape of imperialism, colonialism, and globalisation has urged scholars to reflect on and reexamine the lingering Eurocentric epistemology in media and cultural studies, sociology, anthropology, area studies, and other disciplines. The epistemological biases which currently exist in these academic disciplines hinder the development of a bottom-up theorisation and a thorough understanding of social and cultural phenomena. Recently, scholars in and beyond the global South have become more attentive to the inadequacy of a Eurocentric model of theorisation, and the idiosyncrasies of local societies. The rise of China, and its intensified international political, economic, and cultural exchanges with other Asian, middle-Eastern, and African countries, also make it imperative to move beyond a Eurocentric view in understanding the complexity of social and cultural dynamics within China and across the global South. Responding to this double inadequacy of Eurocentrism in terms of knowledge production in and for Asia, we build on the insightful arguments made, but also address their respective conceptual limits, in the “Asia as Method” and “trans-Asia as Method” approaches. While acknowledging Mizoguchi’s (2016) conception of “China as Method” which emphasises the empowerment of sinology, we seek to further rethink and pluralise such an existing epistemological approach to the study of media and culture in China. This double special issue brings together both reflective essays and empirical articles to examine the nuanced cross-border/cross-national cultural interactions and the intersectional dynamics of class, gender, sexuality, race and ethnicity and national/local identities. It aims to rebuild the subjectivity and redefine the agency of Asia in the post-colonial and post-imperialist world order, using what we term as a “decolonial cultural perspective”, to understand the idiosyncrasies of local societies within a seemingly homogeneous Asian country. We propose China as Method as a useful approach for all humanities and social sciences researchers to critically rethink Eurocentrism and to avoid an essentialist form of Sinocentrism in the Asian context.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42637,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global Media and China\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Media and China\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/20594364231216265\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Media and China","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20594364231216265","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

帝国主义、殖民主义和全球化的全球格局不断变化,促使学者们反思和重新审视媒体与文化研究、社会学、人类学、地区研究和其他学科中挥之不去的欧洲中心主义认识论。目前这些学科中存在的认识论偏见阻碍了自下而上的理论化发展以及对社会和文化现象的透彻理解。最近,全球南方及其他地区的学者越来越关注欧洲中心论模式的不足以及当地社会的特殊性。中国的崛起及其与其他亚洲、中东和非洲国家之间不断加强的国际政治、经济和文化交流,也使得我们在理解中国和整个全球南方社会和文化动态的复杂性时,必须超越欧洲中心论的视角。针对欧洲中心主义在亚洲知识生产方面的双重不足,我们在 "作为方法的亚洲 "和 "作为方法的跨亚洲 "这两种方法的基础上,提出了具有洞察力的论点,同时也解决了它们各自在概念上的局限性。水口(Mizoguchi,2016 年)提出的 "作为方法的中国 "概念强调了汉学的赋权,而我们则试图进一步反思和多元化现有的认识论方法,以研究中国的媒体和文化。本双月刊特刊汇集了反思性论文和实证性文章,探讨细微的跨境/跨国文化互动,以及阶级、性别、性、种族、民族和国家/地方身份的交叉动态。它旨在重建亚洲在后殖民和后帝国主义世界秩序中的主体性,并重新定义亚洲的能动性,使用我们称之为 "非殖民文化视角 "的方法来理解看似同质的亚洲国家中地方社会的特质。我们建议将 "方法论中国 "作为一种有用的方法,供所有人文和社会科学研究人员批判性地反思欧洲中心主义,避免在亚洲语境中出现本质主义形式的中国中心主义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Pluralising China as Method: Decolonising cultural mediations in the global South
The changing global landscape of imperialism, colonialism, and globalisation has urged scholars to reflect on and reexamine the lingering Eurocentric epistemology in media and cultural studies, sociology, anthropology, area studies, and other disciplines. The epistemological biases which currently exist in these academic disciplines hinder the development of a bottom-up theorisation and a thorough understanding of social and cultural phenomena. Recently, scholars in and beyond the global South have become more attentive to the inadequacy of a Eurocentric model of theorisation, and the idiosyncrasies of local societies. The rise of China, and its intensified international political, economic, and cultural exchanges with other Asian, middle-Eastern, and African countries, also make it imperative to move beyond a Eurocentric view in understanding the complexity of social and cultural dynamics within China and across the global South. Responding to this double inadequacy of Eurocentrism in terms of knowledge production in and for Asia, we build on the insightful arguments made, but also address their respective conceptual limits, in the “Asia as Method” and “trans-Asia as Method” approaches. While acknowledging Mizoguchi’s (2016) conception of “China as Method” which emphasises the empowerment of sinology, we seek to further rethink and pluralise such an existing epistemological approach to the study of media and culture in China. This double special issue brings together both reflective essays and empirical articles to examine the nuanced cross-border/cross-national cultural interactions and the intersectional dynamics of class, gender, sexuality, race and ethnicity and national/local identities. It aims to rebuild the subjectivity and redefine the agency of Asia in the post-colonial and post-imperialist world order, using what we term as a “decolonial cultural perspective”, to understand the idiosyncrasies of local societies within a seemingly homogeneous Asian country. We propose China as Method as a useful approach for all humanities and social sciences researchers to critically rethink Eurocentrism and to avoid an essentialist form of Sinocentrism in the Asian context.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Global Media and China
Global Media and China COMMUNICATION-
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
14.30%
发文量
29
审稿时长
15 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信