Pub Date : 2022-07-03DOI: 10.1080/18752160.2022.2104997
Zuoyue Wang
Abstract As many historians who have studied the May Fourth have recognized, science was an important part of both the May Fourth, with Mr. Democracy and Mr. Science as its two banners, and its impact. Yet, besides valuable studies by Fan Hongye (樊洪业) and others on the close connections between the May Fourth and the Science Society of China and Charlotte Furth on the geologist Ding Wenjiang, little has been done on the relationship between Chinese scientists and the May Fourth, especially in the late twentieth century. In an attempt to explore this critical dimension of the May Fourth history, I have chosen to examine the lives and careers of two prominent practicing scientists and their connections with the May Fourth: the meteorologist Zhu Kezhen (竺可桢1890--1974) and the astrophysicist Fang Lizhi (方励之1936--2012). Both identified primarily as scientists even as they carried out administrative duties and political activism (in Fang’s case), their evolving and differentiated views of the May Fourth and its legacy indicated possibly generational and disciplinary dynamics at work.
{"title":"Practicing Mr. Science: Chinese Scientists and the May Fourth Movement from Zhu Kezhen to Fang Lizhi","authors":"Zuoyue Wang","doi":"10.1080/18752160.2022.2104997","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/18752160.2022.2104997","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract As many historians who have studied the May Fourth have recognized, science was an important part of both the May Fourth, with Mr. Democracy and Mr. Science as its two banners, and its impact. Yet, besides valuable studies by Fan Hongye (樊洪业) and others on the close connections between the May Fourth and the Science Society of China and Charlotte Furth on the geologist Ding Wenjiang, little has been done on the relationship between Chinese scientists and the May Fourth, especially in the late twentieth century. In an attempt to explore this critical dimension of the May Fourth history, I have chosen to examine the lives and careers of two prominent practicing scientists and their connections with the May Fourth: the meteorologist Zhu Kezhen (竺可桢1890--1974) and the astrophysicist Fang Lizhi (方励之1936--2012). Both identified primarily as scientists even as they carried out administrative duties and political activism (in Fang’s case), their evolving and differentiated views of the May Fourth and its legacy indicated possibly generational and disciplinary dynamics at work.","PeriodicalId":45255,"journal":{"name":"East Asian Science Technology and Society-An International Journal","volume":"2 1","pages":"327 - 348"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80296809","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-03DOI: 10.1080/18752160.2022.2096815
Jia-Chen Fu
Abstract Although science has been central to the history and historiography of the May Fourth Movement, our understanding of how May Fourth concerns influenced scientific discourses of food and eating remain undeveloped. What and how Mr. Science could and should eat were topics of genuine and thorough-going debate among the Chinese public, for whom food was as much a practical necessity for survival as an intellectual vehicle for understanding and grappling with the social, cultural, and economic crisis they perceived in the present. This essay analyzes two episodes, whose combination reveals the hidden logics of how efforts to historicize Chinese food in the 1930s informed the production of a scientific nutritional policy. First, we unpack these “histories” of Chinese food and its role in the degeneration of the Chinese people. Next, we follow the strands of this scientific storytelling into the thickets of science policy. In this way, we can see the interplay of May Fourth thinking and the practice of science as acts of negotiation between cultural narratives and scientific knowledge. The critical, connective figure was the biochemist Wu Hsien whose scientific credentials and professional standing made it possible for him to speak authoritatively to lay, scientific, and political audiences.
{"title":"Would Mr. Science Eat the Chinese Diet?","authors":"Jia-Chen Fu","doi":"10.1080/18752160.2022.2096815","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/18752160.2022.2096815","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Although science has been central to the history and historiography of the May Fourth Movement, our understanding of how May Fourth concerns influenced scientific discourses of food and eating remain undeveloped. What and how Mr. Science could and should eat were topics of genuine and thorough-going debate among the Chinese public, for whom food was as much a practical necessity for survival as an intellectual vehicle for understanding and grappling with the social, cultural, and economic crisis they perceived in the present. This essay analyzes two episodes, whose combination reveals the hidden logics of how efforts to historicize Chinese food in the 1930s informed the production of a scientific nutritional policy. First, we unpack these “histories” of Chinese food and its role in the degeneration of the Chinese people. Next, we follow the strands of this scientific storytelling into the thickets of science policy. In this way, we can see the interplay of May Fourth thinking and the practice of science as acts of negotiation between cultural narratives and scientific knowledge. The critical, connective figure was the biochemist Wu Hsien whose scientific credentials and professional standing made it possible for him to speak authoritatively to lay, scientific, and political audiences.","PeriodicalId":45255,"journal":{"name":"East Asian Science Technology and Society-An International Journal","volume":"13 1","pages":"367 - 386"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90841945","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-03DOI: 10.1080/18752160.2022.2095102
S. Lei
Abstract There is an intriguing puzzle to be found in the historiography of science in modern China: Yan Fu's 嚴復 (1854--1921) Tianyanlun 天演論 (On Heavenly Evolution), which was published in 1898 as the Chinese translation of Thomas Huxley's Evolution and Ethics (1893), is widely celebrated as the most influential book in modern Chinese intellectual history. And yet, this science-based book has received little,—if any,—credit in the history of science. Taking this puzzle as a clue, this article argues that On Heavenly Evolution constituted a historic breakthrough in a three-centuries-long struggle to win cultural authority for Western science in China, with the ultimate goal of persuading the Chinese to embrace Western civilization as a whole. The context within which On Heavenly Evolution played this pivotal role was the historical debate over the preservation or abandonment of China's quintessential teachings (jiao 教), which took place in the aftermath of China's catastrophic defeat in the first Sino-Japanese war of 1895. It is well-known that Yan Fu and Zhang Zhidong 張之洞 (1837--1909), the powerful architect of the New Policy Reform (1898--1912), held polarized positions in this debate over whether or not to abandon the most cherished institutions and ethical norms of Chinese civilization. What most scholars do not realize, however, is that these two towering figures based their positions on two opposing conceptions of Western science/technology: Following the strategy set up by Matteo Ricci (1552--1610) in the seventeenth century, Yan Fu fashioned Western science as Neo-Confucian gezhi 格致 (Investigation of Things to Acquire Knowledge) to win cultural authority for it, and thereby created a unique local conception of Western science as “Western gezhi” (xixue gezhi 西學格致). Vehemently rejecting Yan Fu's conception of “Western gezhi” and the resulting status of Western science as cultural authority, Zhang Zhidong created the notion of “Western mechanical arts” (xiyi 西藝) instead and promoted it as an official category in his reform agenda. By making visible their debate over the proper conception of Western science/technology, this article draws readers’ attention to the historic breakthrough moment when Western science became a major source of cultural authority in China. Along the way, it further argues that what was at stake in the debate over China's quintessential teachings—from Yan Fu's perspective,—was nothing less than the universality of “Western civilization” and therefore a wholesale adoption of it in China,—the very first time this radical idea was proposed in Chinese history. When On Heavenly Evolution—as a concrete manifestation of Yan's conception of “Western gezhi”—rose in importance to become the most influential book of modern Chinese thought, Western science finally succeeded in becoming the trusted foundation not only for the universalism of Western civilization, but at the same time also for the Neo-Confucian Way, while also pavin
{"title":"The Dawn of Science as Cultural Authority in China: Tianyanlun (On Heavenly Evolution) in the Post-1895 Debate over the Engagement with Western Civilization","authors":"S. Lei","doi":"10.1080/18752160.2022.2095102","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/18752160.2022.2095102","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract There is an intriguing puzzle to be found in the historiography of science in modern China: Yan Fu's 嚴復 (1854--1921) Tianyanlun 天演論 (On Heavenly Evolution), which was published in 1898 as the Chinese translation of Thomas Huxley's Evolution and Ethics (1893), is widely celebrated as the most influential book in modern Chinese intellectual history. And yet, this science-based book has received little,—if any,—credit in the history of science. Taking this puzzle as a clue, this article argues that On Heavenly Evolution constituted a historic breakthrough in a three-centuries-long struggle to win cultural authority for Western science in China, with the ultimate goal of persuading the Chinese to embrace Western civilization as a whole. The context within which On Heavenly Evolution played this pivotal role was the historical debate over the preservation or abandonment of China's quintessential teachings (jiao 教), which took place in the aftermath of China's catastrophic defeat in the first Sino-Japanese war of 1895. It is well-known that Yan Fu and Zhang Zhidong 張之洞 (1837--1909), the powerful architect of the New Policy Reform (1898--1912), held polarized positions in this debate over whether or not to abandon the most cherished institutions and ethical norms of Chinese civilization. What most scholars do not realize, however, is that these two towering figures based their positions on two opposing conceptions of Western science/technology: Following the strategy set up by Matteo Ricci (1552--1610) in the seventeenth century, Yan Fu fashioned Western science as Neo-Confucian gezhi 格致 (Investigation of Things to Acquire Knowledge) to win cultural authority for it, and thereby created a unique local conception of Western science as “Western gezhi” (xixue gezhi 西學格致). Vehemently rejecting Yan Fu's conception of “Western gezhi” and the resulting status of Western science as cultural authority, Zhang Zhidong created the notion of “Western mechanical arts” (xiyi 西藝) instead and promoted it as an official category in his reform agenda. By making visible their debate over the proper conception of Western science/technology, this article draws readers’ attention to the historic breakthrough moment when Western science became a major source of cultural authority in China. Along the way, it further argues that what was at stake in the debate over China's quintessential teachings—from Yan Fu's perspective,—was nothing less than the universality of “Western civilization” and therefore a wholesale adoption of it in China,—the very first time this radical idea was proposed in Chinese history. When On Heavenly Evolution—as a concrete manifestation of Yan's conception of “Western gezhi”—rose in importance to become the most influential book of modern Chinese thought, Western science finally succeeded in becoming the trusted foundation not only for the universalism of Western civilization, but at the same time also for the Neo-Confucian Way, while also pavin","PeriodicalId":45255,"journal":{"name":"East Asian Science Technology and Society-An International Journal","volume":"11 1","pages":"408 - 432"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78549546","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-03DOI: 10.1080/18752160.2022.2095103
V. Seow
Abstract This article examines how the notion of a tradition of invention, which took shape in China in the nineteenth century, became entrenched there by the 1920s. It begins by looking at how invention received heightened attention from Chinese elites in the May Fourth era, when many of them upheld the primacy of science for national salvation while science’s very rectitude was being contested. It then explores how these elites took up and contributed to narratives of a past inventiveness as a way of imagining possibilities of a better future, the most notable expression of which was the idea of the “four great inventions.” Finally, it delves into a particular paradox that underlay this glorification of prior scientific and technological achievements. While staking claim to a tradition of invention may have been ultimately for the purpose of charting a course toward a technoscientific tomorrow, the fixation on those past accomplishments led many Chinese across China’s long twentieth century to either ignore or downplay domestic developments in science and technology that were actually taking place. Ironically, then, the nagging sense of inferiority that underlay the lauding of ancient inventions came to be reinforced rather than alleviated by that very act.
{"title":"A Tradition of Invention: The Paradox of Glorifying Past Technological Breakthroughs","authors":"V. Seow","doi":"10.1080/18752160.2022.2095103","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/18752160.2022.2095103","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article examines how the notion of a tradition of invention, which took shape in China in the nineteenth century, became entrenched there by the 1920s. It begins by looking at how invention received heightened attention from Chinese elites in the May Fourth era, when many of them upheld the primacy of science for national salvation while science’s very rectitude was being contested. It then explores how these elites took up and contributed to narratives of a past inventiveness as a way of imagining possibilities of a better future, the most notable expression of which was the idea of the “four great inventions.” Finally, it delves into a particular paradox that underlay this glorification of prior scientific and technological achievements. While staking claim to a tradition of invention may have been ultimately for the purpose of charting a course toward a technoscientific tomorrow, the fixation on those past accomplishments led many Chinese across China’s long twentieth century to either ignore or downplay domestic developments in science and technology that were actually taking place. Ironically, then, the nagging sense of inferiority that underlay the lauding of ancient inventions came to be reinforced rather than alleviated by that very act.","PeriodicalId":45255,"journal":{"name":"East Asian Science Technology and Society-An International Journal","volume":"41 1","pages":"349 - 366"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73469372","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-03DOI: 10.1080/18752160.2022.2108256
V. Seow, S. Lei
Abstract This special issue is devoted to exploring the manifestations of Mr. Science in May Fourth China and to examining this icon’s significance not only to China’s modern era but also to our understandings of science and society beyond. In this introduction, the co-editors make a case for critically engaging Mr. Science and, by extension, questions of science in early twentieth century China, particularly in light of China’s emergence as a scientific and technological superpower today—a fact which has, incidentally, been framed by the current PRC government as a realization of May Fourth dreams. In concurrently reinvigorating Mr. Science’s idealism, critical edge, and cosmopolitanism while challenging his common association with scientism, the articles in this special issue offer new insights into topics from science and democracy to universality without Eurocentricism, which are of relevance and interest to both modern Chinese history and the global history of science.
{"title":"Who Is Mr. Science and Why Does He Matter?","authors":"V. Seow, S. Lei","doi":"10.1080/18752160.2022.2108256","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/18752160.2022.2108256","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This special issue is devoted to exploring the manifestations of Mr. Science in May Fourth China and to examining this icon’s significance not only to China’s modern era but also to our understandings of science and society beyond. In this introduction, the co-editors make a case for critically engaging Mr. Science and, by extension, questions of science in early twentieth century China, particularly in light of China’s emergence as a scientific and technological superpower today—a fact which has, incidentally, been framed by the current PRC government as a realization of May Fourth dreams. In concurrently reinvigorating Mr. Science’s idealism, critical edge, and cosmopolitanism while challenging his common association with scientism, the articles in this special issue offer new insights into topics from science and democracy to universality without Eurocentricism, which are of relevance and interest to both modern Chinese history and the global history of science.","PeriodicalId":45255,"journal":{"name":"East Asian Science Technology and Society-An International Journal","volume":"42 1","pages":"269 - 278"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88940528","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-03DOI: 10.1080/18752160.2022.2101737
Ju-Yi Roshnii Chou, Kuang-Chi Hung
With felicitous prose and powerful images, Carbon Technocracy: Energy Regimes in Modern East Asia by Victor Seow, assistant professor of the History of Science at Harvard University, tells an expansive story of fossil fuel energy regimes, centering around, but not limited to, what was once East Asia’s largest coal and shale oil mine, in Fushun, Manchuria. Palpably paying tribute to Timothy Mitchell’s seminal work, Carbon Democracy: Political Power in the Age of Oil (2011), Seow proposes the concept of “carbon technocracy” to make sense of the continuity of the colliery’s management, often motivated by developmentalist and autarkic aspirations amidst fears for energy scarcity, under the Japanese Empire, Chinese Nationalists, and then Chinese Communists, against a global backdrop. Mitchell argues that the British democratic system was an ineluctable consequence of the materiality of coal. Each step in the production of British coal, then the primary source of energy for Britain, called for localized and organized labor and was thus particularly susceptible to sabotage. To Mitchell, the democratic spirit was not fostered in scholar’s studies but in grim and dangerous coal mines where labor activists successfully campaigned for better pay and working conditions; democracy was neither proposed nor realized by city elites but by lowly miners. It was this feature of coal production that prompted the major industrial states to shift their main energy source from coal to oil, a liquid that required complex processing before human use, and democracy has been deteriorating accordingly ever since. Seow proposes an alternative argument. After the Meiji Restoration, an industrialized Japan also embraced the promises and pitfalls of coal energy. Interestingly, as Seow points out, Japan’s shift to the new energy source did not incubate democracy as Mitchell predicted, but technocracy, a term that any scholar concerned with the East Asian developmentalist states will surely encounter. While most researchers explain the origins of East Asian technocracy using political ideologies, cultural
{"title":"Carbon Technocracy: Energy Regimes in Modern East Asia","authors":"Ju-Yi Roshnii Chou, Kuang-Chi Hung","doi":"10.1080/18752160.2022.2101737","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/18752160.2022.2101737","url":null,"abstract":"With felicitous prose and powerful images, Carbon Technocracy: Energy Regimes in Modern East Asia by Victor Seow, assistant professor of the History of Science at Harvard University, tells an expansive story of fossil fuel energy regimes, centering around, but not limited to, what was once East Asia’s largest coal and shale oil mine, in Fushun, Manchuria. Palpably paying tribute to Timothy Mitchell’s seminal work, Carbon Democracy: Political Power in the Age of Oil (2011), Seow proposes the concept of “carbon technocracy” to make sense of the continuity of the colliery’s management, often motivated by developmentalist and autarkic aspirations amidst fears for energy scarcity, under the Japanese Empire, Chinese Nationalists, and then Chinese Communists, against a global backdrop. Mitchell argues that the British democratic system was an ineluctable consequence of the materiality of coal. Each step in the production of British coal, then the primary source of energy for Britain, called for localized and organized labor and was thus particularly susceptible to sabotage. To Mitchell, the democratic spirit was not fostered in scholar’s studies but in grim and dangerous coal mines where labor activists successfully campaigned for better pay and working conditions; democracy was neither proposed nor realized by city elites but by lowly miners. It was this feature of coal production that prompted the major industrial states to shift their main energy source from coal to oil, a liquid that required complex processing before human use, and democracy has been deteriorating accordingly ever since. Seow proposes an alternative argument. After the Meiji Restoration, an industrialized Japan also embraced the promises and pitfalls of coal energy. Interestingly, as Seow points out, Japan’s shift to the new energy source did not incubate democracy as Mitchell predicted, but technocracy, a term that any scholar concerned with the East Asian developmentalist states will surely encounter. While most researchers explain the origins of East Asian technocracy using political ideologies, cultural","PeriodicalId":45255,"journal":{"name":"East Asian Science Technology and Society-An International Journal","volume":"41 1","pages":"441 - 444"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87447911","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-03DOI: 10.1080/18752160.2022.2095099
Fa‐ti Fan
Abstract This paper argues that Mr. Science and the May 4th Movement was a significant chapter in the global history of science. To contextualize the story better, I will adopt three broad interpretive frames. First, I shall place Mr. Science and May Fourth in a longer view than the particular events in the 1910s–1920s. This will allow us to trace the historical changes and the evolving institutions, discourses, and practitioners of science over a few generations. Second, I shall highlight the most relevant global conditions. Western imperialism was of course a crucial setting, but there were more specific historical moments that also deserve attention. Finally, comparisons and connections; it is necessary to examine the transmutations of ideas, knowledge, and institutions across political and cultural borders. In other words, we should study Mr. Science and May Fourth in the mode of global intellectual history. Other than China, my main comparative cases are India and Japan, though I will also refer to Ottoman Turkey. Taken together, these examples provide a range of comparisons central to our inquiry into Mr. Science and the global history of science.
{"title":"“Mr. Science”, May Fourth, and the Global History of Science","authors":"Fa‐ti Fan","doi":"10.1080/18752160.2022.2095099","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/18752160.2022.2095099","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper argues that Mr. Science and the May 4th Movement was a significant chapter in the global history of science. To contextualize the story better, I will adopt three broad interpretive frames. First, I shall place Mr. Science and May Fourth in a longer view than the particular events in the 1910s–1920s. This will allow us to trace the historical changes and the evolving institutions, discourses, and practitioners of science over a few generations. Second, I shall highlight the most relevant global conditions. Western imperialism was of course a crucial setting, but there were more specific historical moments that also deserve attention. Finally, comparisons and connections; it is necessary to examine the transmutations of ideas, knowledge, and institutions across political and cultural borders. In other words, we should study Mr. Science and May Fourth in the mode of global intellectual history. Other than China, my main comparative cases are India and Japan, though I will also refer to Ottoman Turkey. Taken together, these examples provide a range of comparisons central to our inquiry into Mr. Science and the global history of science.","PeriodicalId":45255,"journal":{"name":"East Asian Science Technology and Society-An International Journal","volume":"1 1","pages":"279 - 304"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77261431","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-03DOI: 10.1080/18752160.2022.2108262
W. Kuo, Wen-ling Tu, Y. Fujigaki, Haidan Chen
{"title":"Welcome to Our Editorial Board Members, 2022–24","authors":"W. Kuo, Wen-ling Tu, Y. Fujigaki, Haidan Chen","doi":"10.1080/18752160.2022.2108262","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/18752160.2022.2108262","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45255,"journal":{"name":"East Asian Science Technology and Society-An International Journal","volume":"87 1","pages":"265 - 268"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84220689","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-14DOI: 10.1080/18752160.2021.2023970
Haiying Hou, E. Gardner Nakamura
Abstract This article explores female readers’ letters to a health advice column in the popular women’s magazine Shufu no tomo 主婦の友 (Housewife’s Companion) in the interwar period, with a focus on sexual health. While syphilis was regarded as the most dangerous sexually transmitted disease from a national standpoint, these letters suggest that gonorrhea, which was frequently transmitted by husbands to their wives, had a greater impact on women’s bodies, leading to gynecological diseases and infertility. Health consultant Yoshioka Yayoi 吉岡弥生 (1871–1959) played a role not only in assisting readers with their health concerns but also advising them on how to negotiate with their husbands’ infidelity. As a conservative female doctor, Yoshioka’s advice was instrumental in shaping her readers’ health awareness, but it was also ambiguous when it came to questioning men’s sexual morality. This article argues that although women during this period increasingly sought love in marriage and questioned the sexual double standard that neglected male chastity, the solutions offered in Shufu no tomo tended to reproduce, rather than challenge, existing social norms.
{"title":"“Can Respectable People Also Be Infected with Gonorrhea?”:","authors":"Haiying Hou, E. Gardner Nakamura","doi":"10.1080/18752160.2021.2023970","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/18752160.2021.2023970","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article explores female readers’ letters to a health advice column in the popular women’s magazine Shufu no tomo 主婦の友 (Housewife’s Companion) in the interwar period, with a focus on sexual health. While syphilis was regarded as the most dangerous sexually transmitted disease from a national standpoint, these letters suggest that gonorrhea, which was frequently transmitted by husbands to their wives, had a greater impact on women’s bodies, leading to gynecological diseases and infertility. Health consultant Yoshioka Yayoi 吉岡弥生 (1871–1959) played a role not only in assisting readers with their health concerns but also advising them on how to negotiate with their husbands’ infidelity. As a conservative female doctor, Yoshioka’s advice was instrumental in shaping her readers’ health awareness, but it was also ambiguous when it came to questioning men’s sexual morality. This article argues that although women during this period increasingly sought love in marriage and questioned the sexual double standard that neglected male chastity, the solutions offered in Shufu no tomo tended to reproduce, rather than challenge, existing social norms.","PeriodicalId":45255,"journal":{"name":"East Asian Science Technology and Society-An International Journal","volume":"1998 1","pages":"307 - 328"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2022-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89913062","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-14DOI: 10.1080/18752160.2022.2069376
Ling-Ming Huang
Abstract The Taipei City Government launched project of automated guideway transit system in the 1980s caused a conflict with the central government's metro project. This conflict drew the intervention of the US government, who invited American transportation consultants to integrate the two transit systems into one. The Brown Line became the only automated metro line of the Taipei Metro. Although the US government had hoped an American company would be the system provider for the Brown Line, Matra’s VAL256 won the contract. However, the VAL256 experienced fire and tire explosion accidents, leading to conflicts between Matra and the Taipei City Government. Matra withdrew all its technical supports to pressure Taipei to pay the down payment. Nonetheless, Taiwanese technical officials and engineers modified the system with flexible strategies making the Brown Line work smoothly without Matra’s technical support. Later, The Taiwanese technical officials invited Bombardier to provide its CITYFLO system and integrated it with the modified VAL256 into one system, avoiding paying a high price to Matra for the extension of the Brown Line. How the Brown Line became a hybrid metro system shows how technological hybridity can change the power relationship between technologically advanced countries such as France and “catching-up countries” such as Taiwan.
{"title":"The Hybrid Metro: The Brown Line of the Taipei Metro and Technological Hybridity","authors":"Ling-Ming Huang","doi":"10.1080/18752160.2022.2069376","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/18752160.2022.2069376","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The Taipei City Government launched project of automated guideway transit system in the 1980s caused a conflict with the central government's metro project. This conflict drew the intervention of the US government, who invited American transportation consultants to integrate the two transit systems into one. The Brown Line became the only automated metro line of the Taipei Metro. Although the US government had hoped an American company would be the system provider for the Brown Line, Matra’s VAL256 won the contract. However, the VAL256 experienced fire and tire explosion accidents, leading to conflicts between Matra and the Taipei City Government. Matra withdrew all its technical supports to pressure Taipei to pay the down payment. Nonetheless, Taiwanese technical officials and engineers modified the system with flexible strategies making the Brown Line work smoothly without Matra’s technical support. Later, The Taiwanese technical officials invited Bombardier to provide its CITYFLO system and integrated it with the modified VAL256 into one system, avoiding paying a high price to Matra for the extension of the Brown Line. How the Brown Line became a hybrid metro system shows how technological hybridity can change the power relationship between technologically advanced countries such as France and “catching-up countries” such as Taiwan.","PeriodicalId":45255,"journal":{"name":"East Asian Science Technology and Society-An International Journal","volume":"20 1","pages":"509 - 536"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2022-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83314848","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：