Hu Shih and Chinese History: The Problem of<i>Cheng-Li Kuo-Ku</i>

Eber, Irene

doi:10.1080/02549948.1968.11731054

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…I agree, but would stress the important political goals such commitments served: here, they underwrote Gu's support for research on a broadly expanded "Chinese nation." (For an introduction to the "reorganization of the national heritage" movement, see Eber, 1968; for a discussion of Gu's relationship to that movement, see Jenco, 2017: 463-65. ) 14.…”

Section: Jiao Affiliation and The Dissolution Of Minzumentioning

confidence: 99%

“… 13. Chan Hok Yin argues that the continuity in Gu’s work lies in his commitment to explicating the plurality of the Chinese past and to finding unity in plurality, and vice versa (Chan, 2016: 195). I agree, but would stress the important political goals such commitments served: here, they underwrote Gu’s support for research on a broadly expanded “Chinese nation.” (For an introduction to the “reorganization of the national heritage” movement, see Eber, 1968; for a discussion of Gu’s relationship to that movement, see Jenco, 2017: 463–65. ) …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Can the Chinese Nation Be One? Gu Jiegang, Chinese Muslims, and the Reworking of Culturalism

Jenco

2019

Modern China

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines how the classicist and folklorist Gu Jiegang, in conversation with his Hui (Chinese Muslim) colleagues at the Yugong study society and journal (published 1934–1937), theorized the “Chinese nation” ( Zhonghua minzu) as an internally plural and open-ended political project, to resist homogenizing claims by both Japanese imperialists and the ruling Chinese Nationalist party under Chiang Kai-shek in the 1930s. Echoing the struggles of his Hui colleagues to articulate their place in the nation as both Muslim and Chinese, Gu reworked traditional “culturalist” assumptions about the non-racial character of identity formation to pose minority experience as constitutive of a constantly expanding and transforming political community. When Gu asserted in his notorious 1939 essay that the “ Zhonghua minzu Is One,” he posed a unity built not on cultural assimilation or ethnic identity, but on a shared political commitment to an expansive and culturally hybrid concept of the “Chinese nation.”

show abstract

Section: Jiao Affiliation and The Dissolution Of Minzumentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Can the Chinese Nation Be One? Gu Jiegang, Chinese Muslims, and the Reworking of Culturalism

Jenco

2019

Modern China

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…6 Attempts to ‘reorganize the national heritage’ ( zhengli guogu ) were undertaken by New Tide writers such as Fu and Gu in the spirit of scientific inquiry and concern for national identity. 7 This reorganisation sought to apply scientifically rigorous methodology to the research of China’s past textual material, including recovery of lost works and settling issues of authorship and authenticity, as a means of solving the problems of today (Eber, 1968: 169; Hu, 1919: 131–132). Although seemingly at odds with the iconoclasm of Mao, these efforts at re-enaging the past were nevertheless identified as part of the ‘new thought tide’ by Hu in an influential 1919 essay.…”

Section: The Chinese Past At Beijing University 1919mentioning

confidence: 99%

How should we use the Chinese past? Contemporary Confucianism, the ‘reorganization of the national heritage’ and non-Western histories of thought in a global age

Jenco

2017

European Journal of Political Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this essay I argue that recent philosophical attempts to ‘modernise’ Confucianism rehearse problematic relationships to the past that – far from broadening Confucianism’s appeal beyond its typical borders – end up narrowing its scope as a source of scholarly knowledge. This is because the very attempt to modernise assumes a rupture with a past in which Confucianism was once alive and relevant, fixing its identity to a static historical place disconnected from the present. I go on to explore alternative means of situating past thought to present inquiry, by examining a debate among early 20th-century Chinese intellectuals over the value of their past heritage in a modern age. Their diverse responses undermine the certainty of a singular or persistent Chinese past, enabling a creative presentism that encourages deliberate filiation with alternative ‘tracks’ of past practice and thought.

show abstract

“…Nonetheless, despite Hu's stress on “assimilation,” his project was not assimilative in essence: it was a project of transformation, the transformation of the past according to his present (terminology and needs), transformation of “the old” into new history, not into a living, mutual part of his sense of “modern civilization.” Yet, without tradition-as-history (the old), Chinese modernity (the new) had no footing to stand upon. Hence the urgency in Hu Shi's call to “reorder the nation's past” rather than either accept it uncritically and live by its precepts or get rid of it completely (see Xu 2003, and Eber 1968, 169–207). The past, and tradition, was recast as history.…”

Section: Modernization Philosophy and Qing Intellectual Historymentioning

confidence: 99%

“To Feel at Home in the Wonderful World of Modern Science”: New Chinese Historiography and Qing Intellectual History

Sela

2017

Sci Context

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Argument In recent decades a large body of scholarship on the first half of twentieth-century China has successfully shown the ways in which history and historiography had been constructed at the time, as well as the links between history, national identity, education, and politics that was forged during this period. In this paper, I examine Qing intellectual history, in particular that of the mid or "High Qing." I discuss the development of the historiography of this field in the early twentieth century by drawing on the larger developments in historiography; by demonstrating how these developments had shaped Qing intellectual history for later times; by focusing on the historical actors' sense of the importance of "science," being "scientific," and "modernization"; and, by unraveling the intimate connections to older historiographical narratives going back all the way to the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.

show abstract

Hu Shih and Chinese History: The Problem ofCheng-Li Kuo-Ku

Cited by 8 publications

References 0 publications

Can the Chinese Nation Be One? Gu Jiegang, Chinese Muslims, and the Reworking of Culturalism

Can the Chinese Nation Be One? Gu Jiegang, Chinese Muslims, and the Reworking of Culturalism

How should we use the Chinese past? Contemporary Confucianism, the ‘reorganization of the national heritage’ and non-Western histories of thought in a global age

“To Feel at Home in the Wonderful World of Modern Science”: New Chinese Historiography and Qing Intellectual History

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About