The Bunun's Imagining of the State

The article, Imagining the State: an Ethnographic Study (2005) written by Shu-Yuan Yang, explains how the Bunun indigenous people of Taiwan imagine the state. It is said anthropologists research the state differently compared to political scientists as they focus “on the everyday formation of the state, and on how the state is constructed through the cultural imagination and everyday practice of ordinary people” (Yang 2005: 489). This signifies the emphasis on individual ways rather than a top to bottom approach that is forced upon people from the state. I find this way of doing research allows for the voice of the peoples to be highlighted, as this is one main characteristic of anthropological studies. Additionally, it is essential to allow this type of state view to be recognized as it allows for a different perspective to be shown. Furthermore, this idea can be connected to Melissa Brown (2010), who explains how collective identity is created through shared experiences. This means the lived experience of a person is equally important to manifest the cultural notions of the state as referred to in Yang (2005). This is key to note because as the above quote stated, the cultural imagination of the state by ordinary people is emphasized within anthropological studies.

Yang explains the Bunun are an example of how the “choice between power and resistance does not have to be made, but rather that a serious look should be taken at the way different cultures, at different historical moments, have constructed their own forms of agency” (2005: 508). This means the idea of the state does not need to be seen as a coercive institution, but rather one that can be used by its people in effective ways. The state becomes effective through the people’s agency as they are able to use their individual cultural formulations into the larger state’s ways of being. One way this idea is shown is through the Bunun’s meaning of the state. The word used, sasaipuk, means ‘to take care of’ (Yang 2005: 491). Therefore, the Bunun view the state as being a protective essence when its people are in need of help. Furthermore, Yang explains there are three ways for Bunun to show their needs and to obtain subsidies from the government: “applying in writing through the official bureaucratic procedures; protest and public demonstration; and making requests to government officials in person” (2005: 492). Each one of these methods is based solely on a person’s agency as they must act upon themselves to go to the government for help. The preferred method is to negotiate with the state, because of their historical experiences (Yang 2005: 493). It is known to the Bunun, the most effective method is to sit with government officials to establish personal relationships as they can negotiate and cooperate with one another (Yang 2005: 493). Therefore, this leads to the state as being imagined by the people as a tool to increase the standards of the Bunun people through their peaceful negotiations. 

References 

Brown, Melissa. 2010. “Changing Authentic Identities: Evidence from Taiwan and China.”Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 16 (3): 459-479.

Yang, Shu-Yuan. 2005. “Imagining the State: an Ethnographic Study.” Ethnography 6 (4): 487-516.

Taiwanese Policemen

Jeffrey Martin’s article,  A Reasonable Balance of Law and Sentiment: Social Order in Democratic Taiwan from the Policeman’s Point of View (2007), is written through his ethnographical study of neighbourhood police in Taiwan. His focus within his research was participant observation, which allowed him to gain an in-depth exposure to the field (Martin 2007: 667). This increases the researcher’s validity as he was able to spend four years within this field as well. Furthermore, Martin argues that there are social constructions in creating legitimacy within Taiwan which can constrain the rule of law and social order (Martin 2007: 666). As a result of this formation of policing, there are obscurities. Martin concludes by saying a main obscurity is the authority of police can be questioned by other authorities which does not make the rule of law as the final word (Martin 2007: 694). Thus this leaves the state of Taiwan in a problematic position as the social order does not allow for the authority to be taken as seriously. One way this obscurity is shown is through police patrolling of the street vendors, who continually take up public space that they are not to be in. Thus, the policemen are to enforce the clean up of the streets, which takes a lot more time as they must continually tell merchants to remove their goods from the sidewalks (Martin 2007: 682). It is the policemen’s job to produce a picture of the clean space (Martin 2007: 682). Martin (2007) points out, “It soon became obvious that the practical goal of our team was not to dispose of material, but rather to provoke the owners to move it (temporarily) back into officially private space so that a picture of a clean street could be produced” (682). This shows that the policemen are not taken seriously as they do not use power to restrict the merchants from the street. For a limited time they have some authority to tell merchants to remove the goods, however as mentioned above, it is only temporarily. The owners move their goods for a limited time so that the police can take their required photograph to prove to they did their job. It seems this is a norm within Taiwanese culture that the street vendors do not view the street patrollers with respect as they do not hold enough power and authority over them. Martin (2007) reiterates what one policeman explained to him, “‘It’s impossible to make any difference,’’ he sighed, ‘‘all you do is get into arguments with people. And then they go get their popular representatives, and it’s nothing but trouble.’” (683). This clearly shows the social order which policemen are to create and enforce cannot happen as they are undermined by institutions of higher power and authority. It is said that Taiwanese street police patrols must determine if they should interfere as there are more powerful social forces within the imbalance of positions (Martin 2007: 676). 

Unfortunately to me, it seems this process is just going through the motions rather than improving any social order within Taiwan. For the future, I see this continually being worsened as the street vendors will continue to get their way while policemen are taken for granted within this Taiwanese social order they are ultimately lacking control over. 

Reference

Martin, Jeffrey. 2007. “A Reasonable Balance of Law and Sentiment: Social Order in Democratic Taiwan from the Policeman’s Point of View.” Law & Society Review 41 (3): 665-697.

The Mediums' Association in Taiwan

I’ve decided to choose specific topics within the article for today’s blog, which caught my attention. First is the idea that traditional religions becoming more popular than foreign religions. Secondly, subject talking about the levels of mediums within Taiwan and thirdly, speaking of Chinese emphasis within Taiwan. The article by Yi-jia Tsai, called The Writing of History: The Religious Practices of the Mediums’ Association in Taiwan (2004), explains much more towards this subject than what I will comment on. However, as mentioned, these topics were most interesting to me to discuss in a larger Taiwanese anthropology context.

Tsai (2004) mentions popular religion has risen compared to foreign religions, because of the increase in the numbers of mediums (46). I find this interesting to see this rise in these types of religions rather than foreign religions because globalization usually opens up ties and allows for a flow of more “modern” Western religions. Traditionalism usually contains the connotations of old and backward to some people. However, it seems there is a continuation of traditionalism within this modern country that is a key characteristic. I think it is best to note this increased localization that can be seen in Taiwan. However, it must be remembered that traditionalism within Taiwan usually refers to Chinese ways. 

This article also explains the three types of mediums in Taiwan, which I had never heard of before. The first is jitong, a medium who mediates through their body, while the second called shenji, mediates through their heart-mind (Tsai 2004: 46). Lastly, the third medium called lingji, mediates through their spirit and is a representative for traditional Taiwanese religions, as well as within the Mediums’ Association (Tsai 2004: 46). It is interesting to see mediumship through the body is classified as the lowest order compared to the other two (Tsai 2004: 46). This also makes me wonder, because mediums worldwide, are usually concerned with doing all three aspects of the mediums spoken of above (as I had learned this through other anthropology classes). Additionally, it is interesting to see that the manifestation of the body, jitong, is the lowest order because I would think that to be able to transcend through the body, would be more elaborate compared to the mind. My perception of this also comes from a viewpoint of the body and mind being together as one. However, I also see the mind having to be used in order for the body to be used, which would essentially incorporate more work than just mediums for the heart-mind or spirit. 

Tsai (2004) talks about the flag formation for the Mediums’ Association within Taiwan. However, I find it interesting that the flag’s explanation for symbolism only really relates to China. It explains entirely its connection to China through its various selected symbols, such as plums and the number five (Tsai 2004: 49). I find this intriguing as it is to be a Taiwanese Association, however it is based solely on Chinese characteristics. I understand that the Mediums’ Association focuses on a religious point, which is based on traditional Chinese religion. However, if advertised as a Taiwanese association, it must at least relate to Taiwanese characteristics as well. Furthermore, within the article, it states the Association’s flag is for nationalistic concerns (Tsai 2004: 49). Clearly, there is a Chinese nationalistic tone within the association only. Thus, it entirely ignores the diversity of Taiwan. 

References

Tsai, Yi-jia. 2004. “The Writing of History: The Religious Practices of the Medium’s Association in Taiwan.” Taiwan Journal of Anthropology 2 (2): 43-80.

An Understanding of the Waishengren

In Dominic Meng-Hsuan Yang and Mau-Kuei Chang’s article, Understanding the Nuances of Waishengren: History and Agency, they look at how to understand the situations of the Mainlanders in Taiwan. They suggest through a broad research base through notions of both historical and social, will allow for a better understanding to this selected group as well as Taiwan as a whole. 

What was most interesting was the direct translation of Waishengren, which means “‘people from outside the province’ (of Taiwan)” (Yang & Chang 2010: 111). This is helpful to know as it contrasts with the English word “mainlanders,” meaning “people from mainland China” (Yang & Chang 2010: 111). These two different words have differing connotations which play into the conceptualization of the group. While Waishengren has a negative connotation as it implies that someone is from the outside, signifying they do not belong. This is the very essence of connotation which leads to the problematic relations between the four ethnic groups of Taiwan. When one’s literal meaning of their name depicts an outside view then there will ultimately be troubles in forming a true Taiwan identity this way.

It is also interesting to note that this very distinction between the outsiders and the natives (insiders), was the means for a rise of indigenisation. This can be connected through a common identity and its formation of who is who. Thus, this also leads to social and political movements in search of power. However, in the end, this distinction is the very means of not be able to form a collective Taiwan identity, which is essential for the nation and its state. The authors explain that during the early 1990s, there was a paradigmatic shift from looking at people from a provincial association, which claims the outsider/insider approach toward a total ethnic emphasis (Yang & Chang 2010: 112). However, I would argue that while this is helpful to not exclude peoples, it is undermining the mainlander group as an ethnicity, while they are very diverse people within it. A common geographical location cannot always translate to a full ethnic identity. 

This can also be connected to the contested national identity of reuniting with China or gaining independence, which the authors conclude as being a critical dividing issue between Mainlanders and native Taiwanese peoples (Yang & Chang 2010: 113). This comes down to the diversification that Taiwan has been made of through the years. It is also through separation of ethnic groups that can be a seen as a cause for this I believe. How can one country have one national identity when there is an emphasis on multiple ethnic identities?

This can further relate to the rise of indigenisation. When one group rises to dominate the others, there will lack a coherent identity as there is little common basis. Also through this rise of indigenisation, the authors relate to Scott Simon’s work, he concluded that Mainlanders were using diasporic ways to maintain themselves within Taiwan (Yang & Chang 2010: 115). I agree with this idea as when diasporas create communities in countries that are not their own, they are minorities who are trying to stay connected to their identities, while also trying to adapt in some ways to their new cultural setting. It is within diasporas that people can experience identities crises as they decipher how to maintain both old and new ways of life, which ultimately affects their identity. 

I think it is important, as this article shows, that there are many ways to approach Taiwanese identity and especially its relation to the Mainlanders. I believe understanding one’s ethnicity, cultural traditions, historical processes, are all important aspects in gaining knowledge of the larger picture which can be associated to other Taiwan ethnic groups, or in general to Taiwan as a whole. By approaching situations on an individual contextual level to gain an understanding of one particular part and then applying it to the larger context is essential in making the connections to each. I think these authors do a proper job in showing the reader the approaches and information to do this. 

Reference

Yang, Dominic Meng-Hsuan and Mau-Kuei Chang. 2010. “Understanding the Nuances of Waishengren: History and Agency.” China Perspectives 3:108-122.