Organizer: Axel Schneider, University of Heidelberg
Chair and Discussant: Paul A. Cohen, Wellesley College
Ever since the middle of the 19th century the question of national identity looms large in the Chinese historical, political, and economic discourse. Following the reforms in the late 1970s and the decline of socialism the questions of cultural and historical continuity are once again the focus of a heated debate in the PRC. The legitimacy of CCP rule has come under question and a variety of intellectual and political currents has emerged to fill the ideological vacuum. The history of the PRC and the role of the CCP are increasingly at the center of social interest and historical research.
The papers in this panel focus on three phenomena: the revival of Sun Yat-sen, the interest in "conservatives" and the way recent historical experiences are dealt with. The papers illustrate acts of remembering aiming at the re-construction of a new cultural memory. By defining what has to be remembered and what has to be forgotten historiography is torn between the task of presenting a view of history conforming with the ruling elite’s wish to perpetuate its position and the task of constructing a cultural memory that might function as the foundation for a new identity of the Chinese people beyond Communist ideology.
An analysis of these phenomena will help us to understand what options are being discussed and how they might take shape. Besides, to probe into these cases will enable us to answer the question of how collective cultural memory is being constructed and of whether or not there is a particular Chinese culture of memory.
Taking the "Heat" Out of a Problem: Remembering Traumatic Experiences in 20th-Century Chinese History
Susanne Weigelin-Schwiedrzik, University of Heidelberg
There is no sign of any historical experiences being of traumatic character anywhere in the account of 20th-century Chinese history as presented by party historiography in the PRC. This result of my research into party historiography contrasts with what at least an outsider’s view on recent Chinese history would be: that the 20th-century history of China is plastered by traumatic experiences of national, regional or local dimensions with the number of fatalities merely uncountable, at least for a European mind. The paper is to explore why CCP historiography abstains from using the force of traumatic experiences as part of historical narratives in order to increase the feelings of solidarity among the population in the PRC.
The paper uses the famine at the end of the 1950s as an example with the help of which to find out how party historiography is dealing with the problem of trauma. It analyses textbooks on party history which give only short mentioning of the famine and, since the resolution on party history passed in 1981, stress the responsibility on the side of the party for the suffering of the people. As a next step it contrasts the way party historiography deals with the problem to a novel published in 1994 describing a small mountain village during the famine (Zhi Liang: Ji’er de shancun). And it uses Jan Assmann’s theoretical framework related to "communicative" and "cultural" memories in order to answer the question why party historiography does not feel compelled to dominate people’s memories on incidents of such an enormous impact as the famine of 1959 to 1961 which caused at least the death of some 35 million people.
"Sun Yat-Sen’s Dream—China’s Reality": Creating a New Historical Memory for China
Margherita Zanasi, University of Texas, Austin
This paper explores the persistence of Sun Yat-sen’s image in China’s political and historical memory by placing it in the context of the post-Mao discourse on nation-building.
In its effort to reinvent itself as a new, viable ruling force for China, the CCP has turned to Sun as a source of political legitimization. It has focused especially on Sun’s ideas concerning economic reconstruction which, as epitomized by a recent article in the Beijing Review, "Sun Yat-Sen’s Dream—China’s Reality," the CCP claims as its legacy. Sun’s revival is made possible by the fact that the program of realizing "socialism with Chinese characteristics" is solidly rooted in a discourse on nation-building that continues to take as its point of reference late-nineteenth, early twentieth century nationalism.
The "socialism with Chinese characteristics" formula implies a reconciliation of modernization and tradition, of global and local. It leads inevitably to a rediscovery of China’s "tradition" and "national characteristics" as well as to the creation of a new historical memory focused on the Republican period. A crucial aspect of this new memory is a redefinition of Sun’s role in modern Chinese history and the appropriation of Sun’s legacy by the post-Mao CCP. This paper examines this process of historical reinterpretation by looking at recent writings on Sun published in major academic and government-controlled journals. It focuses especially on the CCP’s attempt to build a theoretical justification for China’s new market economy and position in the world.
Bridging the Gap: Attempts at Constructing a "New" Historical-Cultural Identity in the PRC
Axel Schneider, University of Heidelberg
Parallel to the resurgence of nationalism in the PRC in recent years there is a remarkable interest in "conservative" intellectuals from the Republican period. A plethora of books and articles on leading historians and intellectuals like Chen Yin-Wo, Wu Mi, Liu I-cheng, Ch’ien Mu, and others has been published.
The aim of this paper is to analyze the motives behind these publications and behind the revival of these figures by comparing their view of history and culture with the way they are utilized within contemporary discourse on identity in the PRC. I will shown that a major motive behind this revival is to construct a counter-presentive cultural memory that refers to traditional culture and to the role of the intelligentsia in handing down this tradition. In stark contrast to the CCP-promoted attempt at constructing a new leading ideology emphasizing the roots of "socialism with Chinese characteristics" in history and thereby creating an new basis for the legitimacy and dominance of the CCP, these implicit outlines of a new cultural memory stress the independence of the intellectuals and challenge the supremacy of the CCP. However, as far as the concrete contents of the tradition (Confucian high-culture, Taoism or traditional popular culture) and the relation of Chinese culture to world civilization (particularistic concepts of a specific Chinese culture or universalistic concepts of a world-wide humanistic civilization) are concerned, these independent currents are far from homogenous and can be traced back in each case to the Republican discourse on cultural and historical identity.