Towards Transformation of Knowledge and Subjectivity in Curriculum Inquiry: Insights From Chen Kuan‐Hsing’s “Asia as Method”

Abstract

Chen’s book, Asia as Method (Duke University Press, 2010), and his theorization on topics of de‐imperialization, de‐colonization, de‐cold war, as well as on foregrounding epistemologies and frames of reference situated in the diverse contexts in Asia have contributed to empowering scholars and researchers situated not only in Taiwan, but also in many parts of the world. His critical cultural studies project in linking up scholars both inside and outside of Asia and in putting forward counter‐discourses to the binary “the West and the rest” knowledge structures and knowledge production practices has important implications for critical curriculum and education work. My essay review will focus on the implications of his notion of “Asia as Method” and his “strategy of critical syncretism” in exploring and designing critical curriculum and education inquiry that seeks to transform deep‐rooted colonial, imperialist, and cold war subjectivities. These subjectivities are part of the cultural and psychic aftermath of various imperialist, colonial, and cold war histories, the impact of which is still with us today.

Endnotes

Notes

1 CIC refers to the Committee on Institutional Cooperation.

2 “Cultural imaginaries” refers to cultural ethos, shared cultural schemata, and fantasies. For a theoretical delineation of the term and concept of “imaginary,” see Strauss (2006).

3 Lu Xun is a critical thinker and writer of modern China in the early 20th century.

4 Chen Ying‐zhen is a critical thinker and writer in Taiwan in the second half of the 20th century.

5 Chen’s notion of “structure of sentiment” is different from Raymond Williams’s notion of “structure of feeling.”Williams (1965) first came up with the notion of “structure of feeling” to remedy the abstractness of Eric Fromm’s notion of “social character” (Fromm & Maccoby, 1970) and Ruth Benedict’s (1934) notion of “pattern of culture.” Williams uses the term to refer to the actually experienced culture of a particular period of time and place. The term highlights the experienced quality of life of a particular social milieu and the social experiences of a particular class or group of people. It refers to a common set of lived experiences, perceptions and values shared by a particular generation, and these experiences, perceptions and values are usually articulated in particular artistic forms and conventions of popular cultural texts and products of this generation. Williams thus talks about the “popular structure of feeling” of the 1840s as reflected in the novels of that period. Williams sees the term as important in the analysis of culture and literary works. For instance, his analysis of the popular British novels of the 1840s has led him to conclude that some of the writers of that period could take their works outside of “the ordinary structure of feeling” of that era and “teaches a new feeling” (Williams, 1965, p. 85). Chen, however, has not borrowed the term from Williams and has developed the term, “structure of sentiment,” independently of Williams. Chen explains in an e‐mail about the origin of the notion of “structure of sentiment” or “emotional structure of sentiment”: “I do not know well enough Raymond Williams’s work in general, nor the context of formulating the ‘structure of feeling.’ At times, I use ‘emotional structure of sentiment,’ because it was translated from the Mandarin Chinese expression ‘ ,’ which is closer to the expression of ‘structure of sentiment.’ It wasn’t me who first used this, but Ding Naifei” (personal communication, July 8, 2011). To me, Chen’s “structure of sentiment” focuses more on the psychic structure of emotions as recurrently experienced by an ex‐colonized person and is closer to Fanon’s (1952) sociopolitical psychoanalysis of the psychological aftermath of colonization. While one can argue for some similarities between Williams’s notion and Chen’s notion, the contexts and ways in which the two notions have arisen and been used are distinctly different.

6 The Taiwanese movie Dou‐sang (the English translation adds a subtitle, “ A Borrowed Life”) was written and directed by the famous Taiwanese scriptwriter and novelist Wu Nian‐chen. Released in 1994, it was the first film to address the effects of Japanese colonialism in Taiwan after World War II. Dou‐sang is a Taiwanese term for father that has come from the Japanese word Otosan.

7 It is a discourse promoted by the wartime Japanese government to justify military colonization of other parts of Asia.

8 It is a geo‐biological discourse drawing a boundary between Australia and Asia.

9 These two movies are Dou‐sang (see endnote 6) and Banana Paradise. Banana Paradise was released in 1989. The film was told from the perspective of “old soldiers” ( laobing) who fled to Taiwan from Mainland China after the communist takeover in 1949. It was the first film produced in Taiwan that was critical of the Kuomintang regime in Taiwan.

10 Chiang was the leader of the National Democratic Party (Kuomintang) who fled to Taiwan after the Chinese Communist Party had taken over China.

11 The imperialist, colonial, or cold war “subject” here means a person who has been subjected to the ideological shaping forces and sociopolitical mechanisms of imperialism, colonialism, or cold war. The person’s subjectivities, structures of sentiment, and cultural imaginaries have been constituted by these forces and sociopolitical mechanisms.

12 Second Life is a new media application in which participants can create online realistic 3‐D images (called avatars) of new identities and personas for themselves. They can interact with other avatars “living in” their own avatars in the online virtual world.

13 It was translated into English by Charles L. Markman and first published in English in 1967 by Paladin Press in London.