超越偏见:毛时代资料的批判性分析与分层阅读

IF 0.4 4区 社会学 0 ASIAN STUDIES
S. Schmalzer
{"title":"超越偏见:毛时代资料的批判性分析与分层阅读","authors":"S. Schmalzer","doi":"10.1215/10679847-9286688","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:Scholars of Mao-era history adopt a wide range of approaches to the selection and treatment of source material. Some scholars regard published sources as propaganda, and therefore as biased and unreliable. For many, archival sources are the gold standard; others question the reliability even of the archive and favor materials that escaped the filtering fingers of the state to be found in flea markets or garbage piles. Avoiding the false choice of either accepting sources as received wisdom or dismissing them as biased, the author argues that how scholars read their sources is more important than which they keep and which they throw away. She advocates for a layered approach that accounts for contexts of production and circulation, and further emphasizes the need to make this process of reading sources visible in our writing. A critical, layered reading of three unlikely sources demonstrates the myriad possibilities for analysis that combines the empirical, the discursive, and the self-reflexive.","PeriodicalId":44356,"journal":{"name":"Positions-Asia Critique","volume":"19 1","pages":"759 - 782"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Beyond Bias: Critical Analysis and Layered Reading of Mao-Era Sources\",\"authors\":\"S. Schmalzer\",\"doi\":\"10.1215/10679847-9286688\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract:Scholars of Mao-era history adopt a wide range of approaches to the selection and treatment of source material. Some scholars regard published sources as propaganda, and therefore as biased and unreliable. For many, archival sources are the gold standard; others question the reliability even of the archive and favor materials that escaped the filtering fingers of the state to be found in flea markets or garbage piles. Avoiding the false choice of either accepting sources as received wisdom or dismissing them as biased, the author argues that how scholars read their sources is more important than which they keep and which they throw away. She advocates for a layered approach that accounts for contexts of production and circulation, and further emphasizes the need to make this process of reading sources visible in our writing. A critical, layered reading of three unlikely sources demonstrates the myriad possibilities for analysis that combines the empirical, the discursive, and the self-reflexive.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44356,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Positions-Asia Critique\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"759 - 782\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Positions-Asia Critique\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1215/10679847-9286688\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"ASIAN STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Positions-Asia Critique","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1215/10679847-9286688","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ASIAN STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要:研究毛时代历史的学者在选择和处理原始材料时采用了多种方法。一些学者认为出版的资料是宣传,因此是有偏见和不可靠的。对许多人来说,档案资料是黄金标准;其他人甚至质疑档案的可靠性,并赞成在跳蚤市场或垃圾堆中找到的逃脱国家过滤手指的材料。作者认为,学者们如何阅读他们的资料,比他们保留哪些资料和丢弃哪些资料更重要,这是为了避免将资料作为公认的智慧接受或将其视为偏见而予以驳回的错误选择。她提倡一种分层的方法来解释生产和流通的背景,并进一步强调需要使阅读来源的过程在我们的写作中可见。对三个不太可能的来源进行批判性的、分层的阅读,展示了结合经验、话语和自我反思的无数分析可能性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Beyond Bias: Critical Analysis and Layered Reading of Mao-Era Sources
Abstract:Scholars of Mao-era history adopt a wide range of approaches to the selection and treatment of source material. Some scholars regard published sources as propaganda, and therefore as biased and unreliable. For many, archival sources are the gold standard; others question the reliability even of the archive and favor materials that escaped the filtering fingers of the state to be found in flea markets or garbage piles. Avoiding the false choice of either accepting sources as received wisdom or dismissing them as biased, the author argues that how scholars read their sources is more important than which they keep and which they throw away. She advocates for a layered approach that accounts for contexts of production and circulation, and further emphasizes the need to make this process of reading sources visible in our writing. A critical, layered reading of three unlikely sources demonstrates the myriad possibilities for analysis that combines the empirical, the discursive, and the self-reflexive.
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
Positions-Asia Critique
Positions-Asia Critique ASIAN STUDIES-
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
29
×
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