劉Proposal to the Conference: “To See Modern China from Ethnic Groups andCulture,” ICCS of Aichi Univ., Oct. 10, 2004
X. LiuUC Berkeley
Title: The Ethnicity of China
When I was in London, working on my doctoral thesis, there was a woman, avisiting scholar at the University of London, from Xinjiang Autonomous Region
as it is officially called. We met a couple of times in the café and chatted about
our experiences of being abroad. One day, the conversation went in the directionof educational policy in Xinjiang. To my understanding, influenced by thenormal complaints that one often heard, the problem of “ethnic” education ischiefly that people were not allowed to continue their own authentic traditions
or, rather, they were forced to accept what is considered as the Han Chinese
education. This woman, who was in her late forties and taught in elementary
schools in Xinjiang for several years, complained in the opposite direction. She
said, in many elementary schools, there were not enough qualified mandarin
language teachers. Therefore, classes had to be taught in Uygur, the chief ethnic
language of the region. Therefore, there was no possibility for the children tolearn mandarin Chinese properly. Having seen my perplexing expression, she
continued to explain: if they did not receive proper education, there would not
be good opportunities for them to get jobs in the cities, either inside or outside
the Xinjiang region. That is the reason, as she said, why this is the problem ofethnic education in Xinjiang. Obviously, my mind had been clouded by the usualcomplaint that there was too much mandarin teaching in the minority areas sothat authentic ethnic traditions were not able to flourish.
This experience does not mean to be used as a factual statement. Instead, it is an
ethnographic moment of reflection that allows one to think about a number ofissues that I have tentatively placed under the title of “the Ethnicity of China.”
My chief concern in this inquiry is not about whether or not what is often called“China” can be viewed with a minority eye, which depends on the situation inwhich such a vision is cast. In other words, as shown in the above example, as
the situation changes, one might provide a different interpretation for the same
phenomenon. What needs to be problematized is, therefore, the conceptual
relations that we have established with such notions as ethnicity. What interests
me is this continuous attempt in employing “ethnic minorities” as a signifier for
the identity of China. Three questions will be asked. First, what is the conceptual
relationship of ethnicity to identity in the case of China? In order to understand247

新第２セッション〈文化〉

how “China” is seen, we need to understand the relationship of the seen and theseeing. This is the starting point of my reflection. Second, what is the history ofthis relationship—in both its political and cultural sense? This is more or less an
old story, especially for those whose scholarly concerns are about China. There
has been a long tradition in the Chinese case in dealing with so-called ethnicminorities. The present situation (i.e., from the late 1970s onwards) provides
another illuminating phase of that long tradition. Third, how can one think about
this relationship in terms of a troubled (or troubling) disciplinary practice ofanthropology that began with its inquiry about the primitive minorities as theOther of modern society? Some lessons may be learned from a critical review ofthe history of anthropology, especially its present predicament.
Note: This is not meant to be an original ethnographic study of how one
particular group of minority “sees” modern China; instead, it is a conceptual
exercise that hopes to clarify some ambiguities on such an important matter.

248

劉໧㗴ឭ⿠㧦‫ޟ‬ዋᢙ᳃ᣖߩ㓸࿅ߣᢥൻ߆ࠄᝒ߃ࠆ⃻ઍਛ࿖ߩⷞᐳ‫ޠ‬ᗲ⍮ᄢቇ ICCS 2004 ᐕ 10 ᦬ 10 ᣣਛ࿖ߩ᳃ᣖᕈഏᣂࠞ࡝ࡈࠜ࡞࠾ࠕᄢቇࡃ࡯ࠢ࡟࡯ᩞඳ჻⺰ᢥၫ╩ߩߚ߼ࡠࡦ࠼ࡦߦ޿ߚᤨ‫ޔ‬ᱜᑼߦ޿߁ߣᣂ⇴⥄ᴦ඙಴りߩᅚᕈ߇‫࠼ࡦࡠޔ‬ࡦᄢቇߦቴຬ⎇ⓥຬߣߒߡ޿ߚ‫ޕ‬ᓐᅚߣߪ 2 ᐲ߶ߤࠞࡈࠚߢળߞߡߪ‫ޔ‬ᶏᄖߢߩ૕㛎ߦߟ޿ߡળ⹤ߒߚߎߣ߇޽ࠆ߇‫ࠆ޽ޔ‬ᣣ‫⹤ޔ‬㗴ߪᣂ⇴ߦ߅ߌࠆᢎ⢒᡽╷ߦ෸ࠎߛ‫ߊࠃޕ‬⡊ߦߔࠆㅢᏱߩਇḩߦࠃࠅᓇ㗀ࠍฃߌߚ⑳ߩℂ⸃ߦࠃࠇ߫‫ޟޔ‬ዋᢙ᳃ᣖ‫ޠ‬ᢎ⢒ߩ໧㗴ߪਥߣߒߡ‫ޔ‬ᧄ᧪ߩ⁛⥄ߩવ⛔ߩ⛮⛯ࠍ⸵นߐࠇߥ޿ߣ߆‫ߪߦࠄߐޔ‬ṽൻᢎ⢒ߣᗐቯߐࠇࠆ߽ߩߩฃኈࠍᒝ೙ߐࠇࠆߣ޿߁ߎߣߢ޽ࠆ‫ޔߒ߆ߒޕ‬40 ઍᓟඨ߅ࠃ߮ዊቇᩞᤨઍߩᢙᐕࠍᣂ⇴ߢㆊߏߒߚߎߩᅚᕈߪ‫ޔ‬ᱜ෻ኻߩᣇะ߆ࠄᛕ್ߒߚ‫ޕ‬ᄙߊߩዊቇᩞߢߪ᦭⢻ߥਛ࿖⺆ᢎᏧ߇ਇ⿷ߒߡ޿ࠆߚ߼‫⃻ޔ‬࿾ߩਥⷐߥ᳃ᣖ⸒⺆ߢ޽ࠆ࠙ࠗࠣ࡞⺆ߦࠃࠅ᝼ᬺߪⴕࠊࠇߥߌࠇ߫ߥࠄߥ޿‫ߣޔ‬ᓐᅚߪ⸒߁‫߇┬ఽߦ߃ࠁޔߦࠄߐޕ‬ᱜߒ޿ਛ࿖⺆ࠍ⠌ᓧߔࠆน⢻ᕈߪ‫⊝ޔ‬ήߢ޽ࠆߣ߽‫ߩ⑳ޕ‬ᒰᖺߒߚ⴫ᖱࠍ⷗ߡ‫ߒ߽ޔ‬ᓐࠄᓐᅚࠄ߇ㆡᱜߥᢎ⢒ࠍฃߌࠆߎߣ߇ߢ߈ߥߌࠇ߫‫ޔ‬ㇺᏒㇱ‫ޔ‬ᣂ⇴࿾ၞౝᄖߢ߽ࠃ޿ዞᬺᯏળࠍᓧࠆߎߣߪߥ޿ߛࠈ߁‫ߣޔ‬ᓐᅚߪ⺑᣿ࠍ⛯ߌߚ‫ޕ‬ᓐᅚ߇⸒߁ࠃ߁ߦ‫߇ߣߎߚߒ߁ߎޔ‬ᣂ⇴ߦ߅ߌࠆዋᢙ᳃ᣖᢎ⢒ߩ໧㗴ߩේ࿃ߢ޽ࠆ‫ޕ‬ዋᢙ᳃ᣖ࿾඙ߢߩਛ࿖⺆ᢎ⢒߇ㆊ೾ߢ޽ࠆߚ߼‫⚐ޔ‬ὼߚࠆ᳃ᣖߩવ⛔߇❥ᩕߒᓧߥ޿ߣ޿ߞߚࠃߊ޽ࠆᜰ៰ࠍฃߌߡ‫ߩ⑳ޔ‬ᔃ߇ߘࠇ߹ߢᖨ‫ߪߣߎߚ޿ߡߒߣޘ‬᣿ࠄ߆ߢ޽ࠆ‫ޕ‬ߎߩ⚻㛎ߪ‫⃻ޔ‬ታߦၮߠ޿ߚ⊒⸒ߣߒߡߪ᦭ലߥ߽ߩߢߪߥ޿߇‫߇⑳ޔࠅࠊ߆ߩߘޔ‬ଢቱ⊛ߦߟߌߚ‫ޟ‬ਛ࿖ߩ᳃ᣖᗧ⼂‫߁޿ߣޠ‬㗴ฬ߆ࠄ‫ޔ‬ᄙߊߩ੐⽎߇⠨ኤߐࠇᓧࠆߣ޿߁᳃ᣖቇߩ㊀ⷐᕈࠍ෻ᤋߒߡ޿ࠆ‫⎇ߩߎޕ‬ⓥ⺖㗴ߦ߅ߌࠆ⑳ߩਥⷐߥ㑐ᔃߪ‫ޟ߫ߒ߫ߒޔ‬ਛ࿖‫ޠ‬ߣ๭߫ࠇࠆ߽ߩࠍዋᢙ᳃ᣖߩⷞὐࠍ߽ߞߡᝒ߃ᓧࠆ߆ุ߆ߣ޿߁ὐߦߪߥ޿‫ߒ߆ߒޔ߇ޕ‬ߘࠇߪ‫ߥ߁ࠃߩߘޔ‬ዷᦸ߇ឭ␜ߐࠇࠆ⁁ᴫߦࠃࠅᏀฝߐࠇࠆ‫ޔߦࠆߔⷐޕ‬਄⸥ߩ଀߆ࠄ߽ಽ߆ࠆ߇‫ޔ‬ห৻ੱ‛ߢ޽ߞߡ߽⁁ᴫߩᄌൻߦࠃߞߡ‫ޔ‬หߓ⃻⽎ߦኻߔࠆ⸃㉼߇⇣ߥࠆߎߣ߇޽ࠆ‫ޔߡߞࠃޕ‬໧㗴ⷞߐࠇߨ߫ߥࠄߥ޿ߎߣߪ‫߇ߜߚ⑳ޔ‬᭴▽ߒߡ߈ߚዋᢙ᳃ᣖߩࠃ߁ߥ᭎ᔨߣߩ᭎ᔨ⊛㑐ଥߢ޽ࠆ‫⥝߇⑳ޕ‬๧ࠍᒁ߆ࠇࠆὐߪ‫ޔ‬‫ޟ‬᳃ᣖ⊛ዋᢙᵷ‫ࠍޠ‬ਛ࿖ߩࠕࠗ࠺ࡦ࠹ࠖ࠹ࠖߣߒߡᵴ↪ߒࠃ߁ߣߔࠆߎ߁ߒߚਇᢿߩ⹜ߺߢ޽ࠆ‫ ߢߎߎޕ‬3 ߟߩ⇼໧ὐࠍឭ␜ߔࠆ‫ ╙ޕ‬1 ߦ‫ޔ‬ਛ࿖ߩࠕࠗ࠺ࡦ࠹ࠖ࠹ࠖߦኻߔࠆ᳃ᣖߣ޿߁᭎ᔨ⊛㑐ଥߣߪ૗߆‫߆޿ޕ‬ߦ‫ޟ‬ਛ࿖‫ࠍ߆߈ߴࠆ߃ᝒࠍޠ‬ℂ⸃ߔࠆߚ߼ߦߪ‫ߩߣࠆࠇࠄ⷗ߣࠆ⷗ޔ‬㑐ଥࠍℂ⸃ߔࠆߎߣ߇ᔅ㗇ߣߥࠆ‫ߩߎޕ‬ὐ߇⑳ߩᕁ⠨ߩᆎὐߢ޽ࠆ‫ ╙ޕ‬2 ߦ‫ޔ‬᡽ᴦ⊛‫ޔ‬ᢥൻ⊛෺ᣇߩᗧ๧ว޿

249

新第２セッション〈文化〉ߦ߅޿ߡ‫ߩߎޔ‬㑐ଥߩᱧผߣߪ޿߆ߥࠆ߽ߩ߆‫ޕ‬ቇ໧⊛㑐ᔃ߇ਛ࿖ߦะߌࠄࠇߡ޿ࠆੱߦ
ߣߞߡߪ‫ߪࠇߎߦ․ޔ‬ᄙ߆ࠇዋߥ߆ࠇ㐳޿⹤ߣߥࠆ‫ࠆࠁࠊ޿ޕ‬᳃ᣖ⊛ዋᢙᵷߩᛒ޿ࠍ߼ߋࠆਛ࿖ߩ੐଀ߦߪ㐳޿વ⛔߇ሽ࿷ߔࠆ‫ߡߒߘޕ‬㧔1970 ᐕઍᓟᦼએ㒠ߩ㧕⃻࿷ߩ⁁ᴫߪ‫ߘޔ‬ߩ㐳޿વ⛔ࠍ⸃᣿ߔࠆ߽߁߭ߣߟߩᲑ㓏ߢ޽ࠆ‫ޕ‬3 ߟ߼ߣߒߡ‫⃻ޔ‬ઍ␠ળߣߪኻᭂߦ޽ࠆ߽ߩߣߒߡߩේᆎ⊛ߥዋᢙ᳃ᣖߦ㑐ߔࠆ⺞ᩏࠍᚻᆎ߼ߣߔࠆੱ㘃ቇߩቇ໧⊛ታ〣ߣ޿߁ⷰὐ߆ࠄߪ‫ߩߎޔ‬㑐ଥࠍߤߩࠃ߁ߦ⠨ኤߒᓧࠆߩߢ޽ࠈ߁߆‫ੱޕ‬㘃ቇผߩᛕ್⊛࿁㘈ߦࠃࠅ‫ޔ‬․ߦੱ㘃ቇࠍ߼ߋࠆ੹ᣣߩ⧰Ⴚߦߣߞߡߪ޿ߊߟ߆ߩᢎ⸠߇ᓧࠄࠇࠆߛࠈ߁‫ޕ‬ᵈ㉼㧦ߎࠇߪ‫․ࠆ޽ޔ‬ቯߩዋᢙ᳃ᣖࠣ࡞࡯ࡊ߇⃻ઍਛ࿖ࠍ޿߆ߦ‫ࠍ߆ߩޠࠆ޿ߡ߃ᝒޟ‬␜ߒߚ⁛⥄ߩ᳃ᣖቇ⎇ⓥߚࠆߎߣࠍᗧ࿑ߒߡ޿ߥ޿‫ߚߒ߁ߎޔࠈߒ߻ޕ‬㊀ⷐߥ੐⽎ࠍ߼ߋࠆᄙ⟵ᕈࠍ᣿⏕ൻߔࠆߎߣࠍᦼᓙߒߚ᭎ᔨ਄ߩṶ⠌ߢ޽ࠆ‫ޕ‬250