Southeast Asian Studies in China

3. Southeast Asianists in China in the Last Three Decades: A Preliminary Survey

30 Leo Suryadinata 3 3 Southeast Asianists in China in the Last Three Decades: A Preliminary Survey Leo Suryadinata FEW STUDIES ON THE SUBJECT MATTER Although the history of Southeast Asian Studies in China started prior to World War II, it began to develop only after the war. During the initial period, there was not much progress as the People’s Republic of China (PRC) had just been established and ideological issues were still dominant then. It was soon followed by the Cultural Revolution and its ten-year disastrous aftermath where only academic studies of relative significance were published by PRC Southeast Asianists. It was only after the reemergence of Deng Xiaoping in 1977/78, did Southeast Asian Studies in China obtain an opportunity to develop. Not surprisingly, Southeast Asian research institutions as well as books, journals, and articles came into being during the post-Mao period. However, books and articles which address the situation of the Southeast Asian Studies in China (Zhongguo Dongnanya Xue
 !"#) are still limited. To my knowledge, the first survey on the topic was done by the Australian National University (ANU) group led by Professor Wang Gungwu ０３ ＳＥＡＳｔｕｄｉｅｓ ｉｎ Ｃｈｉｎａ Ｃｈ ３ 10/20/06, 9:59 AM 30 Southeast Asianists in China in the Last Three Decades 31 (1981). Mainland Chinese scholars themselves have also published monographs and articles. The earliest one was, perhaps, Professor Yao Nan’s Research on Southeast Asian Historical studies in China (article in Chinese 1984), followed by Hong Kong’s Frances Lai’s edited book (in English, 1987) in which a few PRC scholars wrote articles on their research institutes. A book-length study was done by Liu Yong Zhuo (in Chinese, 1994), and a review article by Liu Hong (in English, 2003). But two review articles, one by Professor Zhao Heman (in Chinese, 2000), and the other (in Chinese, 2002) jointly written by three professors: Liang Zhiming, Zhang Xizhen and Yang Baojun deserve special attention. The Wang report was done soon after the re-emergence of Deng and therefore the picture painted was rather gloomy. However, the last two articles mentioned were written twenty years later and were produced by PRC scholars and presented a slightly brighter picture but remained critical of the shortcomings of PRC Southeast Asian Studies. One common characteristic in those PRC scholar writings, including those two articles, is that they talk about Southeast Asian Studies and their institutions in the PRC without referring to any individual PRC Southeast Asianists. There are two possible reasons, one of which is that the Southeast Asian Studies (with the exception of historical studies based on Chinese sources) has been under-developed, and perhaps they feel that there are not enough leading Southeast Asianists to be highlighted. Indeed, many PRC books on Southeast Asia have been “edited books” or “joint-products”, rather than individual works. It is also possible that in the PRC, during a particular period, “individualism” was discouraged. Everything was supposed to be done collectively and the name of the institutes rather than the work of their scholars should be highlighted. However, I noticed that this practice has been abandoned and most of the books published since 1990s have highlighted the name of the author/authors rather than the committee or institutes. There is another possible reason for PRC reviewers not to highlight China’s Southeast Asianists because they feel it is difficult to define what a Southeast Asianist is. In my view, there are at least two definitions of Southeast Asianists. One is a broad definition: Those whose works are on Southeast Asia, including scholars, researchers in various institutions, including government ministries/agencies, consultants, journalists, regardless of their publications and training. As long as their work is on Southeast Asian matters and they are “experts” in the region, they are Southeast Asianists. The other definition is a narrow one: Those researchers and scholars who have engaged in academic pursuits and published works regarding Southeast Asian Studies are Southeast Asianists. For the purpose of this chapter, I have taken the ０３ ＳＥＡＳｔｕｄｉｅｓ ｉｎ Ｃｈｉｎａ Ｃｈ ３ 10/20/06, 9:59 AM 31 32 Leo Suryadinata second narrow definition. They include linguists, literary critics, historians, political scientists, economists, anthropologists and sociologists. WHO ARE PRC SOUTHEAST ASIANISTS? By definition, Southeast Asianists should be area-based rather than disciplinebased . A scholar who is known in a particular discipline and happened to edit a book on Southeast Asia is not considered to be a Southeast Asianist. For instance, Zheng Xueyi...