{"title":"特邀编者简介:《中国民俗学:走向学科成熟》","authors":"Jing Li","doi":"10.18874/AE.74.2.01","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The historiography of Chinese folklore studies commonly traces the advent of the discipline to the Folksong Studies Movement (Geyaoxue yundong 歌谣学运动; (hereafter, FSM) of the May Fourth era (1910s to 1920s)1 (Chao 1942; 1943; Honko 1986; Hung 1985; Tuohy 1991). In his critical study of this movement, Wolfram Eberhard highlighted the underlying forces of nationalism and cultural awakening that rendered early Chinese folklore studies a discipline of “political science” (Eberhard 1970, 2). If we look to the connection between nationalism and the rise of folklore in Germany, Finland, Greece, and Turkey, we notice that this politicized disciplinary inception is hardly unique to China, or as Eminov described, it is rather another episode of “the nationalism-folklore syndrome” (EMinov 1978, 174). In China, this deeply political nature has lasted well beyond the birth of the discipline, continuing throughout much of the twentieth century to shape the contours of folklore research. By the beginning of the twenty-first century, Chinese folklore studies had adopted a more self-reflective recomposition of its disciplinary orientation and practices. Folklorists have returned to grassroots communities while critically engaging China’s cultural policies and movements with their research. They also actively engage with disciplinary concerns and perspectives on a global scale. The articles in this special issue will introduce a few of these trends and developments by presenting recent work from the current generation of China-based folklorists.","PeriodicalId":53972,"journal":{"name":"Asian Ethnology","volume":"74 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2015-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Guest Editor’s Introduction: Chinese Folklore Studies: Toward Disciplinary Maturity\",\"authors\":\"Jing Li\",\"doi\":\"10.18874/AE.74.2.01\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The historiography of Chinese folklore studies commonly traces the advent of the discipline to the Folksong Studies Movement (Geyaoxue yundong 歌谣学运动; (hereafter, FSM) of the May Fourth era (1910s to 1920s)1 (Chao 1942; 1943; Honko 1986; Hung 1985; Tuohy 1991). In his critical study of this movement, Wolfram Eberhard highlighted the underlying forces of nationalism and cultural awakening that rendered early Chinese folklore studies a discipline of “political science” (Eberhard 1970, 2). If we look to the connection between nationalism and the rise of folklore in Germany, Finland, Greece, and Turkey, we notice that this politicized disciplinary inception is hardly unique to China, or as Eminov described, it is rather another episode of “the nationalism-folklore syndrome” (EMinov 1978, 174). In China, this deeply political nature has lasted well beyond the birth of the discipline, continuing throughout much of the twentieth century to shape the contours of folklore research. By the beginning of the twenty-first century, Chinese folklore studies had adopted a more self-reflective recomposition of its disciplinary orientation and practices. Folklorists have returned to grassroots communities while critically engaging China’s cultural policies and movements with their research. They also actively engage with disciplinary concerns and perspectives on a global scale. The articles in this special issue will introduce a few of these trends and developments by presenting recent work from the current generation of China-based folklorists.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53972,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asian Ethnology\",\"volume\":\"74 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-11-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asian Ethnology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18874/AE.74.2.01\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Ethnology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18874/AE.74.2.01","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
Guest Editor’s Introduction: Chinese Folklore Studies: Toward Disciplinary Maturity
The historiography of Chinese folklore studies commonly traces the advent of the discipline to the Folksong Studies Movement (Geyaoxue yundong 歌谣学运动; (hereafter, FSM) of the May Fourth era (1910s to 1920s)1 (Chao 1942; 1943; Honko 1986; Hung 1985; Tuohy 1991). In his critical study of this movement, Wolfram Eberhard highlighted the underlying forces of nationalism and cultural awakening that rendered early Chinese folklore studies a discipline of “political science” (Eberhard 1970, 2). If we look to the connection between nationalism and the rise of folklore in Germany, Finland, Greece, and Turkey, we notice that this politicized disciplinary inception is hardly unique to China, or as Eminov described, it is rather another episode of “the nationalism-folklore syndrome” (EMinov 1978, 174). In China, this deeply political nature has lasted well beyond the birth of the discipline, continuing throughout much of the twentieth century to shape the contours of folklore research. By the beginning of the twenty-first century, Chinese folklore studies had adopted a more self-reflective recomposition of its disciplinary orientation and practices. Folklorists have returned to grassroots communities while critically engaging China’s cultural policies and movements with their research. They also actively engage with disciplinary concerns and perspectives on a global scale. The articles in this special issue will introduce a few of these trends and developments by presenting recent work from the current generation of China-based folklorists.
期刊介绍:
Asian Ethnology (ISSN 1882–6865) is a double-blind peer-reviewed journal registered as an Open Access Journal with all the contents freely downloadable. Please read the information on our open access and copyright policies. A list of monographs that were published under the journal''s former names, Folklore Studies and Asian Folklore Studies, appear here. Asian Ethnology is dedicated to the promotion of scholarly research on the peoples and cultures of Asia. It began in China as Folklore Studies in 1942 and later moved to Japan where its name was changed to Asian Folklore Studies. It is edited and published at Nanzan University in Nagoya, Japan, with the cooperation of Boston University. Asian Ethnology seeks to deepen understanding and further the pursuit of knowledge about the peoples and cultures of Asia. We wish to facilitate intellectual exchange between Asia and the rest of the world, and particularly welcome submissions from scholars based in Asia. The journal presents formal essays and analyses, research reports, and critical book reviews relating to a wide range of topical categories, including: -narratives, performances, and other forms of cultural representation -popular religious concepts -vernacular approaches to health and healing -local ecological/environmental knowledge -collective memory and uses of the past -cultural transformations in diaspora -transnational flows -material culture -museology -visual culture