Eros and Modernity,or Sympathy and Nihilism

Chantal Delsol's work is distinguished by its articulation of the interdependence of an effective defense of human rights with a truthful understanding of the dignified responsibility of the human person. Most of the experience of the modern world, however, has called into question the sustainability of the experience of the person, while also making it clear that human beings do not have the option of returning to some more holistic world. Delsol reflects on the emptiness of the experience of the modern individual, the inability of modern societies to accord proper dignity to caregiving, and the continuing need for a personal theology.     

Embracing Hygienic Modernity in Late Nineteenth-century Korea: A View from the Periphery

This paper examines Koreans’ response to cholera and the introduction of hygienic modernity by the Japanese after the opening of Korea in 1876. As Korea’s first open port, Pusan became a testing ground for Japanese hygienic modernity in Korea with the influx of Japanese settlers who introduced modern medical knowledge to the area. The introduction of modern medical science and technology by the Japanese, through the establishment of modern facilities such as Saisei Iin, the first modern clinic in Pusan, had a significant impact on the local community, which was suffering the horrific consequences of cholera due to ineffectual government management. In the process, the Japanese settlers utilised hygienic modernity as a way of legitimising and increasing their power over indigenous Koreans. While it is necessary to recognise the contributions of the Japanese to disseminating modern medicine and medical knowledge to local Koreans in Pusan, hygienic modernity became a way of legitimising the power of the Japanese settlers over indigenous Koreans in Pusan as a result.     

认识他者与反观自我：近代中国人的韩国认识

朝鲜的兴亡是近代中国人从传统中华主义向近代民族主义转变的重要参照物,因而中国人的韩国认识与近代思想演化有着密切的联系。复杂的国际国内环境,东西思想的冲突,以及深厚的历史记忆,使近代中国人在对韩认识方面往往不得不面临种种情感和思想的困境。首先,对于大韩帝国灭亡一事,虽然中国人普遍谴责日本帝国主义的背信弃义和侵略行径,但是为了唤起国民,追求自强,中国人又往往更愿意从其内部来寻找其亡国之原因;其二,在如何认识日本帝国主义下朝鲜的殖民地近代性问题上,有人持肯定、甚至赞叹的态度,也有人认识到近代化成就背后朝鲜人民所遭受的苦痛,直到日本侵占中国东北以后才基本统一到彻底的反殖民主义立场之上;其三,近代中国人的韩国认识往往受到历史记忆的很大影响,对宗藩关系的记忆增进了中国人对支援韩国独立运动的责任感,同时中国支援韩国独立运动也是因为中国人认为朝鲜半岛对于中国来说有重要的地政学意义,关系到中国乃至整个东亚的和平与安全。这种对韩认识的复杂性体现了近代中国他者认识与自我认识的相关性,也对中国近代民族主义的形成具有一定的影响。     

The Dialogical Tradition of Iranian Modernity: Monazereh,Simultaneity, and the Making of Modern Iran

Iranian modernity has chiefly been examined in the context of a dialectical antagonism between “traditionalists” and “modernists”—main categories comprised of related sub-headings such as “Islamist” versus “secular,” “reactionary” versus “revolutionary,” and “regressive” versus “progressive.” Following this approach, Iranian adaptations of modernity have often been (de)historicized as a theater of national “awakening” resulting from the toils of secular intellectuals in overcoming the obstinate resistance of traditional reactionaries, a confrontation between two purportedly well-defined and mutually exclusive camps. Such reductionist dialectics has generally overwritten the dialogic narrative of Iranian modernity, a conflicted dialogue misrepresented as a conflicting dialectic. It has also silenced an important feature of Iranian modernity: the universally acknowledged premise of the simultaneity and commensurability of tradition with modernity. The monazereh (disputation or debate) is the account of the interaction between rival discourses that engaged in opposing, informing, and appropriating each other in the process of adapting modernity. Narrativizing the history of Iranian modernity as the conflict between mutually exclusive binaries overlooks its hyphenated, liminal¹1 The notion of liminality has been theorized in different capacities. The anthropologist Victor Turner first used the idea of liminality in his study of tribal and religious rituals during which an initiate experiences a liminal stage when he belongs neither to the old order nor yet accepted into his new designation. Victor Turner, The Ritual Process: Structure and Anti-structure (Chicago, IL: Aldine, 1969). Turner’s insight has been expanded to investigate the general question of status in society. See, for example, Caroline Walker Bynam, Fragmentation and Redemption (New York: Zone Books, 1992), 27–51. Bynam applies Turner’s notion of liminality to the lives of Medieval female saints, arguing that Turner’s liminal passage applies more readily to the male initiate but does not in most cases reflect the experience of female initiates in Medieval times. Jungian psychology has shifted the focus from liminality as a stage in social movement to a step in an individual’s progress in the process of individuation. Jeffrey Miller, The Transcendent Function (New York: State University of New York Press, 2004), 104. See also: Peter Homans, Jung in Context: Modernity and the Making of a Psychology (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1979). Others have used liminality to describe cultural and political change, have prescribed its application to historical analysis, or have made reference to “permanent liminality” to describe the condition in which a society is frozen in the final stage of a ritual passage. Respectively, Agnes Horvath, Bjorn Thomassen, and Harald Wydra, “Introduction: Liminality and Cultures of Change.” International Political Anthropology (2009); Agnes Horvath, Modernism and Charisma (Basingstoke: Palgrave, Macmillan, 2013); and Szakolczai, Reflexive Historical Sociology (New York: Routledge, 2000), 23. Finally, the notion of liminality has been applied to the analysis of mimetic behaviour and to the emergence of tricksters as charismatic leaders, given the association of the figure of the trickster with imitation. Respectively, Agnes Horvarth, Modernism and Charisma (Basingstoke: Palgrave, Macmillan, 2013), 55; and Arpad Szakolczai, Reflexive Historical Sociology (New York: Routledge, 2000), 155. This latter sense seems to apply to the history of Iranian modernity, for the anxiety of imitation was indeed one of its central concerns, and influential figures such as Mirza Malkum Khan (1833–1908) were sometimes perceived (though this was not universally the case) as saviours or tricksters alternatively by different people. On this issue, Fereydun Adamiyat notes how different people had different views of Malkum. The “despotic prince Zill al-Sultan” considered him to be of equal status to Plato and Aristotle. Aqa Ibrahim Badayi’ Nigar thought he was devoid of “the fineries of knowledge and literature (latīfah-i dānish va adab). Minister of Sciences and chief minister Mukhbirul Saltanah Hidayat thought “whatever Malkum wrote has been said in other ways in [Sa’di’s] Gulistan and Bustan.” Fekr-e Azadi (Tehran: Sukhan, 1340/1961), 99. Mehdi Quli Khan Hedayat’s view of Malkum Khan was summed up in these words: “This Malkum knew some things in magic and trickstery and finally did some dishonorable things and gave the dar al-fonun a bad reputation,” Khaterat va Khatarat (Tehran: Zavvar, 1389/2010), 58. Having said that, my use of the notion of liminality, though informed by the theoretical perspectives cited above, diverges from them in one important aspect: liminality as perceived by contemporary theory seems to be based on a pre-/post- understanding of non-liminal statuses accompanied by a desire on the part of the subject to emerge from the liminal state. This approach does not explain liminality as a site for the synthesis of coexisting identities. The munāzirah is precisely the account of such a process. In the context of Iranian modernity, the discourse of tradition was not perceived as prior to the discourse of modernity, as we shall amply see. In fact, European civilizational progress was deemed to have resulted from the successful implementation of Islamic principles. Therefore, while the history of Iranian modernity can still be analyzed as a liminal stage where a weakened old order meets the promise of a new order, it must be understood in terms of the encounter of simultaneous and parallel discourses. It is in this sense that liminality is employed in this study.View all notes identity—a narrative of adaptation rather than wholesale adoption, of heterogeneity rather than homogeneity, of dialogues rather than dialectics. The monazereh is the account of modern Iranian histories.     

近代朝鲜华侨制造业研究——以铸造业为中心

以朝鲜殖民地时期华侨制造业中最具代表性的铸造业作为研究对象,对华侨铸造工厂诞生的背景、同乡网络及其生产体制进行了阐述;分析了华侨制造业在朝鲜烧锅制造领域里取得垄断性地位的原因,一是华侨铸造工厂里中国劳动者较低的工资及技术开发的进行;二是全国的华侨铸造工厂形成了以河北省交河县为中心的同乡网络并进行协力合作。中日战争爆发后,日本政府谋求战时经济的强化,朝鲜总督府也加强了战时统治经济,生铁原料的配给发生困难,华侨铸造工厂因而纷纷倒闭,走向衰退。     

自我的觉醒:彼特拉克与现代性

自布克哈特在《意大利文艺复兴时期的文化》中首次提出彼特拉克是"第一个现代人"后,引发学术界关于彼特拉克是"现代人"抑或中世纪人的激烈争论。身处中世纪与文艺复兴新旧交替以及"现代人"与旧有传统矛盾的历史时期,作为文艺复兴之父的彼特拉克首当其冲地经历了这场巨变。在经历青年、中年和老年的三场觉醒后,彼特拉克意识到自己需要摆脱过去与未来之纠缠,在新旧的断裂带中寻找突破时间限制的夹缝,让自己的作品在时间的洪流中保持永恒的鲜活。     

后现代、现代性重建与中国的现代性问题

后现代主义对现代性的批判为人们提供了一个理解现代的有益视角,它有利于揭示现代性充满矛盾和悖论的一面,促使人们加强对现代性的反思并发掘其尚未释放的理性潜能,从而实现现代性的重建。就中国的后现代主义者而言,他们对现代性的批判过多地集中于剖析其“西化”本质,忽视了现代性的某些普遍内涵,使中国的现代性问题局限于中西对立的二元视野。客观地评价中国的现代性,就应当突破上述理论框架,认识到现代性中所包含的普遍性与特殊性之间的张力,同时借鉴后现代主义的建设性作用,努力实现现代性的解放功能。     

Small-Town Sustainability: Prospects in the Second Modernity

Small towns account for a significant fraction of the total population in many regions, but there has been a relative lack of research into small towns, with researchers' attention being drawn more to the effects of globalization and technological change on large cities and city regions. Yet, as the effects of globalization have become increasingly imprinted on small towns, transnational grassroots movements have emerged to address the needs, challenges and opportunities of small-town communities. Many of these movements involve partnerships and networks linking the local and international levels. They are often framed in terms of sustainability of their community, with an emphasis on liveability and quality of life. This article places the emergence of cross-border collaborations between small towns in the broader context of shifts from the “first” to the “second modernity”. Through in-depth case studies of movements such as Italy's Slow Food and Slow City movement, Sweden's eco-cities, economic gardening in the US and the creative cities project in Albania, we highlight four sensibilities that have emerged: local, organic and slow food; environmentalism; entrepreneurship and creativity.     

Modernity and life politics: conceptualizing the biodiversity crisis

The article examines the implicit boundary narratives of both modernization theory and of its counter-discourses (neo-Malthusianism) and successors (globalism and reflexive modernization). Among the successors, special attention is given to the paradigm of reflexive modernization and its empirical corollary, the hypothesis of an emerging global agenda of “life politics”. After offering a matrix of basic theoretical responses to modernization theory, the paper locates the biodiversity crisis within current controversies about how to overcome the flaws of traditional modernization theory. It is suggested to trace the development of this policy area back to the early twentieth century and to reread it in the light of different societal and theoretical approaches toward modernization. In conclusion, it is argued that in order to enhance our analytical capabilities, the concept of life politics needs some critical injection from literatures more sensitive to notions such as spatiality, locatedness and the lived contexts of social groups.