{"title":"多样的脆弱,脆弱的多样性:菲律宾和印尼的华语写作","authors":"Josh Stenberg","doi":"10.1080/14631369.2021.1951598","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Attending to postwar Chinese-language letters in Indonesia and the Philippines reveals a stronger tendency to write within a discourse of long-distance cultural nationalism than in hybrid or local modes. Omitting cultural nationalist discourses from a view of the corpus risks skewing accounts of Sinophone production, since many authors who write in Chinese have been receptive to ethnic, cultural, and even political appeals from China. This result is also ironic, in that it is specifically production in Chinese (rather than in imperial or archipelagic languages) which is most in tension with the postmodern and postcolonial bent of the Sinophone turn. As an open system for interrogating essentialist definitions of ‘Chineseness’, Sinophone Studies should also accommodate the culturally (and sometimes politically) orthodox ‘Chinese’ strands of Southeast Asian writing. Considering non- or less-hybrid strands of the corpus in turn opens new avenues for understanding the region’s Sinophone cultural production as the result of a rich, politically diverse network with considerable scope for comparative intraregional study.","PeriodicalId":45296,"journal":{"name":"Asian Ethnicity","volume":"24 1","pages":"59 - 77"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Diverse fragility, fragile diversity: Sinophone writing in the Philippines and Indonesia\",\"authors\":\"Josh Stenberg\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14631369.2021.1951598\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Attending to postwar Chinese-language letters in Indonesia and the Philippines reveals a stronger tendency to write within a discourse of long-distance cultural nationalism than in hybrid or local modes. Omitting cultural nationalist discourses from a view of the corpus risks skewing accounts of Sinophone production, since many authors who write in Chinese have been receptive to ethnic, cultural, and even political appeals from China. This result is also ironic, in that it is specifically production in Chinese (rather than in imperial or archipelagic languages) which is most in tension with the postmodern and postcolonial bent of the Sinophone turn. As an open system for interrogating essentialist definitions of ‘Chineseness’, Sinophone Studies should also accommodate the culturally (and sometimes politically) orthodox ‘Chinese’ strands of Southeast Asian writing. Considering non- or less-hybrid strands of the corpus in turn opens new avenues for understanding the region’s Sinophone cultural production as the result of a rich, politically diverse network with considerable scope for comparative intraregional study.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45296,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asian Ethnicity\",\"volume\":\"24 1\",\"pages\":\"59 - 77\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asian Ethnicity\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14631369.2021.1951598\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHNIC STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Ethnicity","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14631369.2021.1951598","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ETHNIC STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Diverse fragility, fragile diversity: Sinophone writing in the Philippines and Indonesia
ABSTRACT Attending to postwar Chinese-language letters in Indonesia and the Philippines reveals a stronger tendency to write within a discourse of long-distance cultural nationalism than in hybrid or local modes. Omitting cultural nationalist discourses from a view of the corpus risks skewing accounts of Sinophone production, since many authors who write in Chinese have been receptive to ethnic, cultural, and even political appeals from China. This result is also ironic, in that it is specifically production in Chinese (rather than in imperial or archipelagic languages) which is most in tension with the postmodern and postcolonial bent of the Sinophone turn. As an open system for interrogating essentialist definitions of ‘Chineseness’, Sinophone Studies should also accommodate the culturally (and sometimes politically) orthodox ‘Chinese’ strands of Southeast Asian writing. Considering non- or less-hybrid strands of the corpus in turn opens new avenues for understanding the region’s Sinophone cultural production as the result of a rich, politically diverse network with considerable scope for comparative intraregional study.
期刊介绍:
In the twenty-first century ethnic issues have assumed importance in many parts of the world. Until recently, questions of Asian ethnicity and identity have been treated in a balkanized fashion, with anthropologists, economists, historians, political scientists, sociologists and others publishing their studies in single-discipline journals. Asian Ethnicity provides a cross-disciplinary, international venue for the publication of well-researched articles about ethnic groups and ethnic relations in the half of the world where questions of ethnicity now loom largest. Asian Ethnicity covers any time period, although the greatest focus is expected to be on the twentieth and twenty-first centuries.