Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-19T13:09:05.607Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Re-visioning Global Modernity through the Prism of China

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 March 2015

Sheldon Lu
Sheldon Lu*
Affiliation:
Department of Comparative Literature, University of California at Davis, USA. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This essay reviews and assesses recent attempts to revisit and revise the position of China in the configuration of global modernity. Such re-descriptions question the implicit Eurocentric teleology of modern world history. First, the discourse of East Asian modernity or Confucian capitalism draws on late imperial (early modern) East Asia to locate an alternative origin of global modernity. Second, recent scholarship in world-systems analysis repudiates previous Eurocentric narratives of global capitalism and locates China at the center of the world economy in the early modern period up to 1800. Third, China’s revolutionary legacy (what was called ‘Maoism’) and its current ‘socialism with Chinese characteristics’ in official parlance are considered by New Leftist theorists as a viable alternative to capitalist modernity. Fourth, universal modernity as such is regarded as a social and political imperative by the opposing camp of Neo-Liberalists as modernity is still an ‘incomplete project’ in Chinese history. Overall, such debates are efforts to chart out a cultural and theoretical landscape that does not easily fit in existing models of Western cultural studies that are often based on the colonial and postcolonial experiences of the Anglophone and Francophone world.

Global modernity refers to a moment of the breakdown of the hegemony of a Eurocentric modernity and the fragmentation into many cultural spheres of the very idea of the modern without any promise so far of how modernity might be reconstituted and some coherence restored to its claims.... On the other hand, Global Modernity as a concept is also intended to transcend the situation of which it is the product, as this very situation enables the possibility of re-envisioning modernity, rescuing it from entrapment in a vision of history dominated by Eurocentrism and imagining it differently. (Arif Dirlik, Culture and History in Postrevolutionary China: The Perspective of Global Modernity)1

Type
Rediscovering China from Today’s Perspective
Information
European Review , Volume 23 , Issue 2 , May 2015 , pp. 210 - 226
Copyright
© Academia Europaea 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References and Notes

1.Dirlik, A. (2011) Culture and History in Postrevolutionary China: The Perspective of Global Modernity (Hong Kong: the Chinese University Press), p. 274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Dirlik, A. (2011) Revisioning modernity: modernity in Eurasian perspectives. Inter-Asia Cultural Studies, 12(2), p. 284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Weber, M. (1958) The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, trans. T. Parsons (New York: Scribner).Google Scholar
4.For a survey of debates about the rise of capitalism in China, see Brook, T. and Blue, G. (eds) (1999) China and Historical Capitalism: Genealogies of Sinological Knowledge (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press). Timothy Brook writes: ‘The most aggressive reconceptualization of the history of capitalist elements in China came not from within the ranks of historians in China, but from the Chinese-American scholars Yü Ying-shih and Tu Wei-ming. At the heart of their concerns was the reevaluation of Confucianism, an important component of which was “vulgar” Confucianism, meaning the assemblage of values and habits in popular Chinese culture that ordinary people considered “Confucian”’. In: T. Brook and G. Blue (eds) (1999) China and Historical Capitalism: Genealogies of Sinological Knowledge (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press), p. 153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.See Brook, T. (Ed.) (1989) The Asiatic Mode of Production in China (Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe).Google Scholar
6.Weber, M. (1968) The Religion of China: Confucianism and Taoism, trans. and ed. H. H. Gerth, intro. C. K. Yang (New York: Free Press); M. Weber (1958) The Religion of India: The Sociology of Hinduism and Buddhism, trans. and ed. Hans. H. Gerth and D. Martindale (Glencoe, IL: Free Press).Google Scholar
7.Wei-ming, T. (1996) Introduction. In T. Wei-ming (Ed.) Confucian Traditions in East Asian Modernity: Moral Education and Economic Culture in Japan and the Four Mini-Dragons (Cambridge, MA; London, UK: Harvard University Press), p. 7.Google Scholar
8.Wei-ming, Tu (1991) Cultural China: the periphery as the center. Daedalus, 120(2), pp. 1–32.Google Scholar
9.See the link ‘Confucius Institute at UC Davis to Focus on Food, Beverage Culture’ http://news.ucdavis.edu/search/news_detail.lasso?id=10661; the link ‘Martin Yan on the Confucius Institute’ http://youtu.be/hihe9lDtnWA (accessed 17 September, 2013).Google Scholar
10.Naitō Konan (1992) A Outline of the Tang-Song Period . In: Translation of Selected Studies of Chinese History by Japanese Scholars , vol. 1, (Ed.) Liu Junwen , (trans.) Huang Yuese (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju), pp. 10–18. See also J. A. Fogel (1984) Politics and Sinology: The Case of Naitō Konan, 1866–1934 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Asia Center), pp. 195–210.Google Scholar
11.Miyakawa, H. (1955) An outline of the Naitō Hypothesis and its effects on Japanese studies of China. The Journal of Asian Studies (formerly known as Far Eastern Quarterly), 14(4), p. 542.Google Scholar
12.Miyakawa, H. (1955) An outline of the Naitō Hypothesis and its effects on Japanese studies of China. The Journal of Asian Studies (formerly known as Far Eastern Quarterly), 14(4), 545. Also see I. Miyazaki (1992) The Early Modern Period in East Asia . In: Translation of Selected Studies of Chinese History by Japanese Scholars, vol. 1, (Ed.) Liu J. (trans.) Huang Yuese (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju) pp. 153–242.Google Scholar
13.Hui, W. (2011) The Politics of Imagining Asia, Ed. T. Huters (Cambridge, MA; London, UK: Harvard University Press), p. 57.Google Scholar
14.Hui, W. (2008) The Rise of Modern Chinese Thought (Xiandai Zhongguo sixiang de xingqi ), 4 vols (Beijing: Sanlian).Google Scholar
15.See Yü-Sheng, Lin (1970) The Crisis of Chinese Consciousness: Radical Anti-traditionalism in the May Fourth Era (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press).Google Scholar
16.Wallerstein, I. (1979) The Capitalist World-Economy (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press), p. 18.Google Scholar
17.Frank, A. G. (1998) ReOrient: Global Economy in the Asian Age (Berkeley: University of California Press), p. 126. It is also noteworthy that Timothy Brook argues that China’s Ming Dynasty (1368–1644) was at the economic center of the world at that time in his book T. Brook (1999) The Confusions of Pleasure: Commerce and Culture in Ming China (Berkeley: University of California Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18.Frank, A. G. (1998) ReOrient: Global Economy in the Asian Age (Berkeley: University of California Press), p. 353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19.On these various issues, see Moyo, D. (2009) Dead Aid: Why Aid is Not Working and How There is a Better Way for Africa (New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux); D. Moyo (2012) Winner Take All: China’s Race for Resources and What It Means for the World (New York: Basic Books).Google Scholar
20.Arrighi, G. (2007) Adam Smith in Beijing: Lineages of the Twenty-First Century (London and New York: Verso), p. 279.Google Scholar
21.Harvey, D. (2005) A Brief History of Neoliberalism (Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press), p. 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22.Chun, L. (2006) The Transformation of Chinese Socialism (Durham and London: Duke University Press), p. 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23.Chun, L. (2006) The Transformation of Chinese Socialism (Durham and London: Duke University Press), p. 285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24.Lu, J. (2012) Constructing agency: challenges and possibilities in Chinese new left literature. In: B. Wang and J. Lu (eds), China and New Left Visions: Political and Cultural Interventions (Lanham, MD: Lexington Books), p. 121.Google Scholar
25.Sheldon Lu discusses these issues in great detail in his books. See Lu, S. (2001) China, Transnational Visuality, Global Postmodernity (Stanford: Stanford University Press), especially Chapter 2, ‘Universality/Difference: The Discourses of Chinese Modernity, Postmodernity, and Postcoloniality’, pp. 48–70; S. Lu (2007) Chinese Modernity and Global Biopolitics: Studies in Literature and Visual Culture (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press), especially ‘Historical Conclusion: Chinese Modernity and the Capitalist World-System’, pp. 191–203; ‘Postscript: Answering the Question, What Is Chinese Postsocialism?’ pp. 204–210.Google Scholar