Prasenjit Duara is Director of the Asia Research Institute at National University of Singapore.
In the early twentieth century, the Chinese state made strenuous efforts to broaden and deepen its authority over rural society. This book is an ambitious attempt to offer both a method and a framework for analyzing Chinese social history in the state-making era.The author constructs a prismatic view of village-level society that shows how marketing, kinship, water control, temple patronage, and other structures of human interaction overlapped to form what he calls the cultural nexus of power in local society. The author's concept of the cultural nexus and his tracing of how it was altered enables us for the first time to grapple with change at the village level in all its complexity.The author asserts that the growth of the state transformed and delegitimized the traditional cultural nexus during the Republican era, particularly in the realm of village leadership and finances. Thus, the expansion of state power was ultimately and paradoxically responsible for the revolution in China as it eroded the foundations of village life, leaving nothing in its place.The problems of state-making in China were different from those of eighteenth- and nineteenth-century Europe; the Chinese experience heralds the process that would become increasingly common in the emergent states of the developing world under the very different circumstances of the twentieth century.
本书充分利用“满铁”在华北地区的调查资料,重点研究了20世纪上半叶国家政权的扩张对华北乡村社会权力结构的影响,从历史和社会学的角度出发,利用“权力的文化网络”和“国家政权的内卷化”这两个核心概念对这一时期村庄领导层地位的变化进行深入的分析,旨在探讨中国国家政...
评分美国学者杜赞奇先生的《文化、权力与国家》一书,是海外中国研究领域的一部重要作品,之前已经想读多时,刚好凭借这次社会学吧精读会共读的机会,把这本书系统地学习了一遍。尽管专注于华北中国20世纪的乡村变迁,但杜老在这本书里,试图建构出一整套解释中国乡村变迁的理论体...
评分这是我初次读杜赞奇先生的《文化、权力与国家》一书,他围绕华北农村(主要是河北和山东)的几个农村来还原历史,详细描述了1900-1942年国家政权是如何下沉到农村社会的。这个过程其实是国家与乡村社会两个主体之间的博弈,充斥着张力。国家政权欲控制传统的乡村社会,...
评分 评分该书充分利用满铁在华北地区的调查资料,利用“权力的文化网络”和“国家政权的内卷化”这两个概念对这一时期村庄领导层地位的变化进行深入的分析,旨在探讨中国国家政权与乡村社会之间的互动关系。20世纪初华北乡村社会中的政治权威体现在由组织和象征符号构成的文化网络之中,这一网络主要由宗族、市场等方面形成的等级组织,各种非人际关系网等构成。文化网络赋予了民众对乡村领袖领导地位和国家政权合法性的认可。然而现代化进程中的国家政权却抛弃了文化网络,企图建立全新的政治体系加强对基层社会的控制。国家政权的深入、文化网络的破坏和日益增加的苛捐杂税使得乡村精英开始退出乡村政治领导层,保护型经纪体制逐渐为赢利型经纪所取代。国家政权无法依靠提高旧有或新增机构的效益,而是靠复制旧有的经纪制来扩大行政职能,陷入了内卷化的困境
评分it seems very trendy to criticize a model/paradigm focusing too much on “consistency” and neglecting “culture”…It seems we can modify everything by pointing out there are contested/negotiated symbols…
评分Postscript: “The Methodological Limbo of Social History” 这一节也不错
评分独立的基土文化和内向性的问题的严重性可能是一个很根本的问题,毕竟,蒙古和基督两大现象,近代以来的外来征伐,北元满清的遗留也好,算是历史的背负吧,被迫采取了这么个过于独立和内缩的一个治理生态和心灵秩序,对庙堂和国家概念的疏离甚之又甚,大概念,大祭司,大民族,大梦想之下,这些小小坚韧的自我持守反而显得有力量,不是一个独立的现象,历史上是没有人的,具体的大家的焚烧的生活自己野蛮的生长成了这个样子,我觉得还是要对书本上的河,天上的光,暂时放下,从土地笔直的穿过去,他们会感动,他们会真诚,他们也渴求一个现代的可爱生活,但是历史背负和政权质量让他们难以轻松舞蹈
评分看的1988版的
本站所有内容均为互联网搜索引擎提供的公开搜索信息,本站不存储任何数据与内容,任何内容与数据均与本站无关,如有需要请联系相关搜索引擎包括但不限于百度,google,bing,sogou 等
© 2025 onlinetoolsland.com All Rights Reserved. 本本书屋 版权所有