In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

  • The Ambiguities of Chineseness and the Dispute Over the "Homecoming" of Turandot
  • Chengzhou He (bio)

The China of the 1990s and later has been vigorously explored theoretically, both nationally and internationally. While Li Zehou and Liu Zaifu called for a "farewell to revolution" in the mid-1990s, Wang Hui has claimed that the revolutionary century came to an end by the 1980s: "'The Nineties' were actually the opening act to the end of a revolutionary century, from which would emerge a new play of events."1 In terms of culture, Liu Kang thinks that the 1990s may be understood as "a hybrid post-revolutionary culture that embodies the fundamental tensions and contradictions of globalization."2 Although there are undeniable continuities between the revolutionary century and the so-called post-new era, the new epoch also is utterly new in ways that can only be analyzed based on both domestic development and global changes.3 Central to theoretical discussions about the post-new era is the debate over the concept of Chineseness. What does it mean? How is it used in different academic settings? What implications does it have for cultural studies?

Chineseness Reconsidered

In "Cong 'xiandai xing' dao 'zhonghua xing'" ("From Modernity to Chineseness"), Zhang Fa, Zhang Yiwu, and Wang Yichuan are very critical of the Western-style modernity embraced by China, which underwent several paradigm shifts successively in China from 1840 to 1990. Under the impact of marketization, mass media, consumerism, and the rise of the so-called middle class in the post-new era, China has experienced profound social and [End Page 547] cultural transformation, in response to which a new model of knowledge has come into being. Referred to as "Chineseness," the new model of knowledge emphasizes both cultural diversity and the unique Chinese experience, both universal values and Chinese subjectivity. Instead of being the "other" of the West, China has been integrated into the world and is playing an important role in shaping its future. Related to the formation of Chineseness is what Zhang, Zhang, and Wang call "the Chinese Rim," which shares common cultural heritage and ethical values.4 In "Zhongguo wenhua xiandai xing: Cong xiandai 1 to xiandai 2" ("Chinese Cultural Modernity: from the First Stage to the Second Stage"), Wang Yichuan argues that the major task of Chinese cultural modernity since the 1980s has been to establish a discourse of Chineseness and its unique characteristics in relation to other discourses in the globalized world.5

While domestic Chinese scholars are generally in favor of, or even obsessed with, Chineseness, scholars of the Chinese diaspora often critique or challenge the concept. In "Chineseness as a Theoretical Problem," Rey Chow discusses how Chinese culture struggles for access to representation under Western hegemony and yet at the same time exhibits unnecessary hostility and mistrust toward everything Western and a habitual obsession with Chineseness. The problem of access, she explains, is typical of what she calls "the logic of the wound"; the hostility and mistrust, she warns, is in danger of "sinocentrism."6 In addition, she thinks that the notion of Chineseness as "a monolithic given bound ultimately to mainland China" is problematic and that Chineseness, which is often taken for granted, remains untheorized.7 In "'From Modernity to Chineseness': The Rise of Nativist Cultural Theory in Post-1989 China," Ben Xu is very critical of the theorization of the Chinese experience and the concept of Chineseness as discussed by Zhang, Zhang, and Wang. "Such a theory of cultural transformation has emphasized broad unidirectional patterns. . . . Its unidirectionality causes it to concentrate on some kinds of change but to ignore ideological continuity and the importance of countercurrents that arise in opposition to presumably dominant cultural tendencies."8 Referencing Shao Jian, a staunch critic of cultural nativism, Xu warns that "the nativist blueprint for Chineseness reflects a dangerous dream of a new cultural hegemony, which is disguised as a struggle for cultural independence and counteraction against the old Western hegemony."9

The concept of Chineseness resists a clear-cut definition. Instead, it is characterized by its ambiguities. Firstly, as Chow suggests, Chineseness emerges as a cultural supplement to Western hegemony but eventually challenges the stereotypical representation of China: "Against...

pdf