扭曲的文明:比较东南亚城市及其他地区的礼貌、强迫和羞辱

Asmus Rungby, Erik Harms
{"title":"扭曲的文明:比较东南亚城市及其他地区的礼貌、强迫和羞辱","authors":"Asmus Rungby, Erik Harms","doi":"10.1017/trn.2023.5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The literature on civility navigates the gravitational pulls of binary camps: civility sceptics tend to emphasize how it operates as an instrument of power; civility optimists tend to emphasize its emancipatory potentials. While some scholarship has attempted to reconcile these perspectives by showing how civility can be both negative and positive, such theorization tends to describe this relation in terms of ambivalence. While these approaches rightly indicate that normative judgments about civility are largely a matter of perspective, the concept of twisted civility developed here focuses on the ways in which actors become trapped by the dynamic shifts of force embedded within civility. Comparisons across seemingly incommensurate examples suggest that such multidirectional dynamics are not culturally specific but rather more generalizable. Building our theoretical conception of twisted civility from a comparative approach based on research in Kuching and Saigon, and then using the concept to consider examples from the United States and Denmark, this article also reverses the direction of theorizing typically employed in scholarship on civility. Using postcolonial Southeast Asia as the source of theory rather than its afterthought, the method here uses anthropological comparison to generate theory and to problematize assumptions that universalize Euro-American trajectories of civility.","PeriodicalId":23341,"journal":{"name":"TRaNS: Trans -Regional and -National Studies of Southeast Asia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Twisted Civility: Comparing Courtesy, Coercion and Shaming in Southeast Asian Cities and Beyond\",\"authors\":\"Asmus Rungby, Erik Harms\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/trn.2023.5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n The literature on civility navigates the gravitational pulls of binary camps: civility sceptics tend to emphasize how it operates as an instrument of power; civility optimists tend to emphasize its emancipatory potentials. While some scholarship has attempted to reconcile these perspectives by showing how civility can be both negative and positive, such theorization tends to describe this relation in terms of ambivalence. While these approaches rightly indicate that normative judgments about civility are largely a matter of perspective, the concept of twisted civility developed here focuses on the ways in which actors become trapped by the dynamic shifts of force embedded within civility. Comparisons across seemingly incommensurate examples suggest that such multidirectional dynamics are not culturally specific but rather more generalizable. Building our theoretical conception of twisted civility from a comparative approach based on research in Kuching and Saigon, and then using the concept to consider examples from the United States and Denmark, this article also reverses the direction of theorizing typically employed in scholarship on civility. Using postcolonial Southeast Asia as the source of theory rather than its afterthought, the method here uses anthropological comparison to generate theory and to problematize assumptions that universalize Euro-American trajectories of civility.\",\"PeriodicalId\":23341,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"TRaNS: Trans -Regional and -National Studies of Southeast Asia\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"TRaNS: Trans -Regional and -National Studies of Southeast Asia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/trn.2023.5\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"AREA STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"TRaNS: Trans -Regional and -National Studies of Southeast Asia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/trn.2023.5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

关于文明的文献在两个阵营的引力作用下游移自如:文明怀疑论者倾向于强调文明作为权力工具的运作方式;对文明持乐观态度的人倾向于强调文明的解放潜力。虽然一些学者试图通过展示文明如何既消极又积极来调和这些观点,但这种理论化倾向于用矛盾心理来描述这种关系。虽然这些方法正确地表明,关于文明的规范性判断在很大程度上是一个视角问题,但这里发展的扭曲文明的概念侧重于行为者被嵌入在文明中的力量的动态变化所困住的方式。对看似不相称的例子的比较表明,这种多向动态不是文化特有的,而是更普遍的。以古晋和西贡的研究为基础,通过比较的方法构建扭曲文明的理论概念,然后将这一概念用于考虑美国和丹麦的例子,本文还扭转了文明学术研究中典型的理论化方向。将后殖民时期的东南亚作为理论的来源,而不是事后的想法,本文的方法使用人类学比较来产生理论,并对使欧美文明轨迹普遍化的假设提出问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Twisted Civility: Comparing Courtesy, Coercion and Shaming in Southeast Asian Cities and Beyond
The literature on civility navigates the gravitational pulls of binary camps: civility sceptics tend to emphasize how it operates as an instrument of power; civility optimists tend to emphasize its emancipatory potentials. While some scholarship has attempted to reconcile these perspectives by showing how civility can be both negative and positive, such theorization tends to describe this relation in terms of ambivalence. While these approaches rightly indicate that normative judgments about civility are largely a matter of perspective, the concept of twisted civility developed here focuses on the ways in which actors become trapped by the dynamic shifts of force embedded within civility. Comparisons across seemingly incommensurate examples suggest that such multidirectional dynamics are not culturally specific but rather more generalizable. Building our theoretical conception of twisted civility from a comparative approach based on research in Kuching and Saigon, and then using the concept to consider examples from the United States and Denmark, this article also reverses the direction of theorizing typically employed in scholarship on civility. Using postcolonial Southeast Asia as the source of theory rather than its afterthought, the method here uses anthropological comparison to generate theory and to problematize assumptions that universalize Euro-American trajectories of civility.
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
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
期刊介绍: TRaNS approaches the study of Southeast Asia by looking at the region as a place that is defined by its diverse and rapidly-changing social context, and as a place that challenges scholars to move beyond conventional ideas of borders and boundedness. TRaNS invites studies of broadly defined trans-national, trans-regional and comparative perspectives. Case studies spanning more than two countries of Southeast Asia and its neighbouring countries/regions are particularly welcomed.
期刊最新文献
Transgenderism, Othering and Third Way Buddhist Monasticism in Chiang Mai, Thailand Transgenderism, Othering and Third Way Buddhist Monasticism in Chiang Mai, Thailand Waria, Worship, and Welfare: Exploring Trans Women's Conditions of Precarity Amidst COVID-19 in Yogyakarta, Indonesia From Bad Student to Transnational Activist: Netiwit Chotiphatphaisal and Transnational Activism in Northeast and Southeast Asia International Perception and Local Pride in Smart City Development: The Case of Hong Kong
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1