Organizer: Xiaogun Xu, Francis Marion University
Chair: William C. Kirby, Harvard University
Discussant: Guy Alitto, University of Chicago
The concept of professionalization has varied meanings, but generally it denotes the process by which occupational groups try to lay claims to professional status and privileges recognized by state and society at large. Historically, the process is part of modernization. It unfolded in Republican China as well, but in a somewhat different pattern. Professionalization in Western countries would mean that professionals are supposed to be professionals as such, not seeking political roles except as interest groups lobbying the government. In Republican China, however, it seemed rather difficult for professionals to be professional only and remain aloof from wider social and political concerns. This proposed panel aims to explore the manyfold roles that Chinese professionals played in the 1920s and 1930s, especially the ambiguity, the conflict, and the possibility of being professionals, social reformers, and political activists at the same time. We hope an examination of Chinese professionals' experience will shed more light on the complexity of the social and political environment in which Chinese professionals functioned at that time, and engage some important issues about modern China.
Xiaoqing C. Lin's paper explores the varied identities of the twentieth-century Chinese scholars which were different from those in the nineteenth century. Moving away from the traditional pattern of seeking Confucianist moral cultivation and political office characteristic of their predecessors in the past, scholars of the 1920s and the 1930s pursued knowledge for its own sake, informed by modern Western learning and modern methodology. Yet they were unable completely to escape the moral dimension of knowledge and of being knowledgeable, i.e., their sense of social and political responsibility. There was, therefore, a combination of professional, social, and political identities among these scholars, manifested in a variety of ways from the 1920s through 1930s with changing political situations. Lin illuminates her thesis through three cases: the Association for Tomorrow at the Beida; the motives and tenure of government services of a number of well-known scholars; and the synthesis of nationalism and scholarship in the writings of Qian Mu and Zhang Zhongfu.
Q. Edward Wang's paper addresses a similar issue with a different case. He looks at the attempts by modern Chinese historians, such as Hu Shi, Liang Qichao, Gu Jiegang, and Fu Sinian, to "organize the national heritage" (zhengli guogu) by rewriting national history. This new history was marked by a skeptical attitude toward traditional sources, an overt zest for new methodology, and an underlying nationalistic agenda. The success of these historians proved to be short-lived, however. With the Japanese aggression and the Chinese resistance unfolding in the 1930s, the urgency of national salvation prompted these historians to seek direct means to serve the country. Their choices varied, but few of them were able to produce scholarly works to continue their scientific scrutiny of Chinese history. Moreover, as Marxist historians used the past to champion a revolutionary cause and as tradition-bound historians like Qian Mu and Liu Yizheng exalted the national and cultural spirit, the critical approach of these liberal-minded historians to China's past lost much of its appeal.
Xiaoqun Xu's paper focuses on the political role played by the Shanghai Bar Association as a professional association (ziyou zhiye tuanti) in the 1920s and the 1930s. Sanctioned by the government as a public association (gongtuan) or legally established association (fatuan), yet explicitly prohibited by the Regulations on Lawyers from engaging in political actions, the Shanghai Bar nevertheless stepped into the political arena from time to time one way or another. In the 1920s the Bar created a surrogate organization for political action to go around the regulations. In the 1930s it simply jumped into the national salvation movement without worrying about the regulations. While the Bar was quick to change its tactics under the GMD pressure, Nanjing never invoked the regulations to restrict the Bar's political activities-a sign of changed political culture at the time of national crisis. Xu concludes that the SBA's experience not only indicates the possibility of professionals playing a political role, but also suggests the rich and wide variety of ways in which state and society interacted in Republican China.
Charles Hayford's paper grows out of and extends the work in his book, To the People: James Yen and Village China (Columbia University Press 1990). Tracing the trajectory of the idea of professionalism in twentieth-century China, he examines: (1) the idea in China during the decades leading up to 1949; and (2) the changing historiographical terms of debate in the West, as cheerleading for Western inspired modernization gave way to a guilty critique of Orientalism and the discourse of the nation, offset by concern for the public sphere and civil society. He suggests that with post-1989 emergence of still different ideas of professions, the pre-1949 period needs to be pondered again.
These papers deal from several angles with the choices for Chinese professionals to make between commitment to contributing to China's modernization as professionals and participation in social and political movements to save the nation as political actors. The circumstances under which they made choices and the result of their actions speak to an important dimension of state-society interaction in the Republican era. The papers not only present fresh research in this important area of the Republican China history, but also raise more questions about, and suggest further research on, professionalization, urban classes and urban politics, public sphere, nationalism, state and society in Republican China. Some of these issues will be addressed by the discussant, Guy Alitto of the University of Chicago. The panel will be chaired by William Kirby of Harvard University.
The Meaning of State, Society, and Profession to Twentieth-Century Chinese
Scholars
Xiaoqing C. Lin, Indiana University, Northwest
Compared with nineteenth-century Chinese scholars, one of the new identities twentieth-century Chinese scholars took on was the institutionalized academic or school educator whose lifelong goal of teaching (and research) contrasted with the life goal of many nineteenth-century scholars to pursue political office. Modern Western learning, and modern methods of learning, replaced Confucian textual exegesis as the content of scholarship for most of them. Character cultivation based on Confucian learning, previously the benchmark for government officials who were legitimated to rule by their morally exemplary behavior, was replaced by the pursuit of knowledge for its own sake. The professionalization of these scholars around their fields of study, however, competed with their continued social and political responsibilities that came from the Confucian tradition. The latter two responsibilities, on the other hand, took on new meanings in the twentieth century.
The purpose of this paper is to explore the varied identities of the twentieth century Chinese scholar, to see how the social, political, and professional identities were combined in him/her. Most of the time the three identities did not clash with one another for most scholars, because of a continued moral interpretation of knowledge for many Chinese. Moral knowledge took on varied forms. In the 1920s, it was shown in an avid interest to introduce Western, especially American, scientific methodologies that connected humans and society, which echoed a Confucian exhortation on the ethical nature of human beings and man's conformity to society, showing a preoccupation with moral norms. In the 1930s, as the Japanese invasions of China began, it was shown in a more explicit concern with morality and social order in general, and the need to connect knowledge teaching with the education in nationalism. Education in citizenship and nationalism, a big theme in primary and secondary school education in the 1930s, was connected with loyalty to the Nationalist Party, the then-government of China. Training in proper morality was similarly connected with identification with the GMD. The educators actively championed the connection because of the need they felt for national cohesion and social order in the face of Japanese encroachment.
This paper will focus on the manifestations of such a synthetic identity of university academics in three cases: (1) the organization of the mingri she (Association for Tomorrow, 1934) by a group of faculty members from the Education Department at Peking University and several other major universities in Beijing, to guide social reform with education; (2) the motives and tenure of government service by such prominent scholars as Hu Shi, Wang Shijie, Wang Chonghui, Ding Wenjiang, Jiang Menglin, Cai Yuanpei, Zhang Zhongfu, and Chen Daqi; (3) the synthesis of nationalism and scholarship, such as shown in Qian Mu and Zhang Zhongfu's writings.
An Interrupted Past: The End of Scientific History in Republican China
Q. Edward Wang, Rowan College, New Jersey
China's search for wealth and power in the twentieth century urged intellectuals to embark on the cause of historiographical reform. Thus the May Fourth enthusiasm for Western "science" was translated into an inquiry into China's past. Armed with "scientific" method, modern Chinese historians like Hu Shi, Liang Qichao, Gu Jiegang, and Fu Sinian attempted to "organize the national heritage" (zhengli guogu) by rewriting national history.
Different from the work of dynastic historians in the past, which was aimed to preserve ancient texts and provide valuable lessons for the ruler, the new national history was characterized with a skeptical attitude toward traditional sources, an overt zest for new methodology, and an underlying nationalist agenda. Having dismantled the traditional presentation of the past, as shown in the eye-catching "discussion of ancient history" (gushi bian) in the 1920s, these historians offered a new historical interpretation based upon scrutinized written sources as well as excavated archeological materials. This historiographical reform not only critically examined China's cultural heritage, by creating/inventing a new tradition, it also helped renew the interest of modern Chinese in their past, hence linking the past to the present. In so doing, these historians searched for comparable elements in the Chinese tradition that showed a "scientific" spirit. An example of this is found in Hu Shi's praise of the methodology of Qing "evidential" (kaozheng) scholars.
But the success of these modern Chinese historians proved to be short-lived. While nationalist concern was always present in modern Chinese historiography, it became increasingly intensified after China engaged in military confrontations with Japan in the 1930s. The urgency of "national salvation" prompted the historians to seek direct means to serve their country. As some struggled to keep their "detached" stance and offered political advice in the Independent Review (Duli pinglun), some simply joined the government and embraced Chiang Kai-shek's dictatorship. Despite the differences in their political involvements, few of them were able to produce scholarly works to continue their scientific scrutiny of Chinese history.
Moreover, their cause seemed to have lost its momentum. As the Marxist historians succeeded in using the past to champion their revolutionary cause and the historians schooled in traditional learning such as Qian Mu and Liu Yizheng gained popularity by exalting the national and cultural "spirit" (jingshen) in their texts, the critical approach of these liberal-minded historians to China's past no longer had its original appeal. After WWII and the civil war (1945-49), the entire generation of the May Fourth scholars were not only politically divided, but physically separated among Taiwan, Hong Kong, the United States, Europe, and mainland China. While their works still inspire many Chinese today, their methodologically centered approach to historical writing reached its end in the late 1940s.
To Be Professional or to Be Political? The Shanghai Bar Association in Republican
China, 1912-1937
Xiaoqun Xu, Francis Marion University
This paper examines how the Shanghai Bar Association as a professional association (ziyou zhiye tuanti) sanctioned by the government became involved in politics, what tactics Shanghai lawyers used in playing a political role, and how the government responded and how the Bar adjusted itself to such responses.
The Regulations on Lawyers enacted both in 1912 and in 1927 explicitly forbade bar associations to take action on matters other than judicial ones or those concerning the common interest of lawyers. For the most part Shanghai lawyers complied with the provision. There were times, however, they felt compelled to step into the political arena one way or another.
In the 1920s Shanghai lawyers created a surrogate, the Society for Promoting the Rule of Law, to do what they could not in the name of the Shanghai Bar Association. The main agenda of the organization was to help bring about a provincial constitution as the best solution to the political chaos in the country.
Under the GMD rule, using a surrogate was impossible and joining a political organization was dangerous. For some time the SBA concerned itself with judicial issues only, though some of the issues had political implications, too. It is the Japanese aggression in Manchuria and North China that set off an unprecedented national salvation movement which engulfed the Shanghai Bar as well as other social groups. The SBA strongly criticized not only Nanjing's Japan policy but also the GMD rule as a whole in a manifesto published in December 1931. It showed its open dissent from the government policy in a campaign of public telegrams to the GMD party, government, and individual officials. After the GMD party disciplined the author of the manifesto as a warning to the organization, the SBA changed its tactics. It performed political conformity on the one hand, and continued its activity in the movement on the other, but avoided being conspicuous by taking joint action with other public associations in Shanghai. Its political sophistication was reflected in its handling of the Xi'an Incident and the Seven Gentlemen Case.
Significantly, the GMD government never invoked the Regulations on Lawyers to restrict the SBA's political actions. Both the Shanghai Bar and the government seem to have regarded the provision as altogether irrelevant in the time of national crisis: the political culture had simply changed.
The experience of the SBA shows both the ambiguity and the possibility of Chinese professionals making choices between professional commitment and political involvement. It also suggests the rich and wide variety of ways in which state and society interacted in Republican China.
Professions, The Chinese Nation, and Populism: Changing Valences of an Idea
Charles W. Hayford, Northwestern University
In the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, Chinese in good number sought to train themselves as middle class professionals and to give professional autonomy and betterment an aura of patriotism and modernity. By the 1920s and 1930s, however, their considerable success drew criticism that professions were elitist cultural transplants and demands for new institutions which were scientific, democratic, and Chinese. The Maoist espousal of "red" over "expert" is only the most prominent example of these powerful but undefined ambitions.
This paper grows out of and extends the work in my book, To the People: James Yen and Village China (Columbia University Press, 1990). It examines both: (1) the professional idea in China during the decades leading up to 1949; and (2) the changing historiographical terms of debate in the West, as cheerleading for Western inspired modernization gave way to a guilty critique of Orientalism and the discourse of the nation, offset by concern for the public sphere and civil society. With post-1989 emergence of still different ideas of professions, the pre-1949 period needs to be pondered again.