{"title":"\"纯粹是相互尊重\":跨文化禁忌与新加坡民族主义的日常再现","authors":"Laavanya Kathiravelu, Sharad Pandian","doi":"10.1111/sena.12416","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While differences often threaten ethnonationalist projects, the Singaporean state has rendered a particular configuration of racial-religious diversity constitutive of nationalism in the city-state. In this paper, we approach nationalism through an often-overlooked avenue: intangible heritage such as everyday myths, customs, and taboos. A total of 150 interviews were conducted in three neighbourhoods in Singapore, where guided conversations were conducted regarding common customs, myths, and taboos in individuals’ families and communities. We found that respondents imagined their (state-designated) racial-religious groups as communities of shared customs, while also demonstrating familiarity, even deference, to the customs of other groups. However, this intimacy with other groups’ practices did not undermine the integrity of respondents’ own group identity, since they remained committed to their cultural practices as embodying ancient and useful – even “scientific” – knowledge. The data thus showed that citizens are deeply reflexive about the nature, origins, and justification of the practices they undertake. This domain of everyday practices was neither simply defined into being by the state, nor is it some heroic realm of defiance: instead, it is one where people display creativity and agency in making sense of cherished cultural similarities and differences, all while using state-prescribed categories as resources for their meaning-making.","PeriodicalId":45020,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Ethnicity and Nationalism","volume":"83 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"“It's purely mutual respect”: Cross-cultural taboos and the everyday reproduction of Singaporean nationalism\",\"authors\":\"Laavanya Kathiravelu, Sharad Pandian\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/sena.12416\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"While differences often threaten ethnonationalist projects, the Singaporean state has rendered a particular configuration of racial-religious diversity constitutive of nationalism in the city-state. In this paper, we approach nationalism through an often-overlooked avenue: intangible heritage such as everyday myths, customs, and taboos. A total of 150 interviews were conducted in three neighbourhoods in Singapore, where guided conversations were conducted regarding common customs, myths, and taboos in individuals’ families and communities. We found that respondents imagined their (state-designated) racial-religious groups as communities of shared customs, while also demonstrating familiarity, even deference, to the customs of other groups. However, this intimacy with other groups’ practices did not undermine the integrity of respondents’ own group identity, since they remained committed to their cultural practices as embodying ancient and useful – even “scientific” – knowledge. The data thus showed that citizens are deeply reflexive about the nature, origins, and justification of the practices they undertake. This domain of everyday practices was neither simply defined into being by the state, nor is it some heroic realm of defiance: instead, it is one where people display creativity and agency in making sense of cherished cultural similarities and differences, all while using state-prescribed categories as resources for their meaning-making.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45020,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studies in Ethnicity and Nationalism\",\"volume\":\"83 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studies in Ethnicity and Nationalism\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/sena.12416\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHNIC STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in Ethnicity and Nationalism","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/sena.12416","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ETHNIC STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
“It's purely mutual respect”: Cross-cultural taboos and the everyday reproduction of Singaporean nationalism
While differences often threaten ethnonationalist projects, the Singaporean state has rendered a particular configuration of racial-religious diversity constitutive of nationalism in the city-state. In this paper, we approach nationalism through an often-overlooked avenue: intangible heritage such as everyday myths, customs, and taboos. A total of 150 interviews were conducted in three neighbourhoods in Singapore, where guided conversations were conducted regarding common customs, myths, and taboos in individuals’ families and communities. We found that respondents imagined their (state-designated) racial-religious groups as communities of shared customs, while also demonstrating familiarity, even deference, to the customs of other groups. However, this intimacy with other groups’ practices did not undermine the integrity of respondents’ own group identity, since they remained committed to their cultural practices as embodying ancient and useful – even “scientific” – knowledge. The data thus showed that citizens are deeply reflexive about the nature, origins, and justification of the practices they undertake. This domain of everyday practices was neither simply defined into being by the state, nor is it some heroic realm of defiance: instead, it is one where people display creativity and agency in making sense of cherished cultural similarities and differences, all while using state-prescribed categories as resources for their meaning-making.
期刊介绍:
Studies in Ethnicity and Nationalism (SEN) is a fully refereed journal publishing three issues per volume on ethnicity, race and nationalism. The sources and nature of ethnic identity, minority rights, migration and identity politics remain central and recurring themes of the modern world. The journal approaches the complexity of these questions from a contemporary perspective. The journal''s sole purpose is to showcase exceptional articles from up-and-coming scholars across the world, as well as concerned professionals and practitioners in government, law, NGOs and media, making it one of the first journals to provide an interdisciplinary forum for established and younger scholars alike. The journal is strictly non-partisan and does not subscribe to any particular viewpoints or perspective. All articles are fully peer-reviewed by scholars who are specialists in their respective fields. Studies in Ethnicity and Nationalism publishes high quality contributions based on the latest scholarship drawing on political science, sociology, anthropology, economics, international relations, history and cultural studies. It welcomes contributions that address contemporary questions of ethnicity, race and nationalism across the globe and disciplines. In addition to short research articles, each issue introduces the latest publications in this field, as well as cutting edge review articles of topical and scholarly debates in this field. The journal also publishes regular special issues on themes of contemporary relevance, as well as the conference issue of the annual conference of the Association for the Study of Ethnicity and Nationalism (ASEN).