Theorising Culture

A Chinese Perspective

Jinghe Han

• Publisher: Palgrave Pivot
• Year: 2019
• ISBN:
  9783030238803
• Topic: Langues et linguistique
• Subtopic: Langues

This book seeks for an alternative perspective in analysing cultural phenomena to supplement the norm of Western dominant theorising and conceptualisation. It engages notions and concepts of culture developed by Chinese cultural theorists when addressing Chinese teachers' cross-cultural experiences in Australian school settings. This alternative approach acknowledges the fact that the generation and development of cultural theories is contextually based. Through the reciprocated theory-data examination, it enables the arguments: Chinese culture is rooted in its written language ( hanzi ) which makes culture inseparable from language teaching; the core of the culture is linked back to, streamlined with and continues from China's elongated history; this core has been consistently influential on these teachers' practices and the observable cultural shift in them could be non-genuine mimicry for survival. Document analysis witnesses the current political push for the culture's stability and continuity through the national education system across sectors. This book provides background information for teachers with cultural backgrounds different from their students', and draws on a bank of practice-based evidence to suggest ways to enhance teacher-student relationships in cross-cultural settings.

© The Author(s) 2020

J. HanTheorising CulturePalgrave Studies in Teaching and Learning Chinesehttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-23880-3_1

Begin Abstract

1. Introduction

Jinghe Han¹

(1)

Centre for Educational Research, School of Education, Western Sydney University, Kingswood, NSW, Australia

Jinghe Han

Email: [email protected]

Abstract

This chapter begins from the standpoint of Western theories and definitions of, ‘What is culture?’ Although a brief review, the complexities around defining culture are apparent and significant. It is then contended that Western theorisation of culture was not appropriate in the context of the research informing this book. Based on the assumption that generation and development of theories in humanity and social science is not free of context (e.g. political, historical, geographical), cultural theories developed in multicultural democratic contexts may not have the same relevance as those locally developed to analyse the phenomena of a hegemonic nation. Thus engaging Chinese concepts and theorising of culture is offered as an alternative perspective to the norm of Western dominant theorising and conceptualisation, which has provided one-way generalist cultural views. The theoretical underpinnings for this approach and the methodology of the research are included and followed by an outline of the structure of the book.

Keywords

CultureComplexityPluralNon-Western

End Abstract

Since the second half of the nineteenth century, researchers and scholars of cultural studies have tried to define what culture is. Many are either normative or descriptive, seeking “a concise way to comprise everything that culture contains and represents” (Ginzberg 2016, p. 23). When exploring the various definitions or descriptions of culture, vocabulary emerged that makes ‘culture’ appear as a kaleidoscope. It is variously described by scholars of cultural studies as social, political, historical, environmental, geographical; spiritual, emotional, behavioural, psychological, philosophical, ideological; epistemological, intellectual, scientific; collective, institutional; ethical, humane, aesthetic, civil, artistic, artificial; activities, traits, capabilities, performance, experiences, achievements; static, biological, racial, ethnic, linguistic, national, inheritable, transnational, dynamic, fluid, static; visions, ideologies, doctrines, and discourses (Elam 2012; Lampert 2012; Mautner 2012; Grillo 2003; Sewell 1999; Hall 1996; Swartz 1997; DiMaggio 1997; Williams 1997; Kuper 1994; Geertz 1973; White 1975; Kroeber and Kluckhohn 1952; Elliot 1948). Such a plethora of meanings indicates more about what culture is not than what culture actually is. The reality of the broadness of cultural studies highlights the impossibility of generating one fully accepted or acceptable definition (Ginzberg 2016, p. 23).

When addressing the complexity of securing a definition of culture, some argue that it is more individual difference than culture (Dervin 2014, 2015; Kuper 1999). The outcome has been to suggest that culture is too broad to be accepted as a concept and should possibly be deleted entirely from the dictionary. Grillo (2003, p. 168) argues that this is the least likely solution as “the culture problem will not disappear by banishing the use of the word”. Some scholars of cultural studies suggest that more accurate words need to be used in describing or defining culture. That is “if one means language, ideology… food habits…, one could use those or equivalent terms” (Dervin 2014, 2015; Kuper 1999). For example, if one replaces ‘food habits’ with ‘food culture’, then the term ‘culture’ becomes diluted. A similar case is when ‘drug addiction’ is labelled ‘drug culture’. The overuse of the term ‘culture’ and claiming fashion, food and music are in and of themselves ‘culture’ adds to the complexity of understanding what culture is, and what it is not. Dervin and Kuper’s arguments are that culture should not be polluted by associating it with other contemporary behaviours or activities. Distinguishing between the metaphorical use and the connotative meaning of culture may assist with solving the unnecessary confusion created by the overuse of the word ‘culture’.

Theoretical Underpinning

Jullien (2014) provides some insight into the conundrum around defining culture. This approach is to use other concepts to help understand the connotative and denotative meaning of the concept being studied, which then can assist with establishing boundaries between concepts. When one needs to understand culture, it is feasible to start from other related concepts such as a priori and a posteriori knowledge, and notions of common culture and universality. Thus, to clarify the meaning of culture, a mind map of how ‘culture’ relates to, overlaps and interrelates to and with associated concepts would be useful. For example, if culture is related to values, are values totally subordinate to culture or do they partially overlap? If they do overlap what are the elements that do not? By engaging culture and its relevant concepts, one aim of this book is to advance the understanding of culture, epistemologically.

With globalisation and the consequential development of modern technology, many aspects of people’s lives are in a borderless space. Contextual differences to some degree may hence be ignored by contemporary cultural studies despite the development of theories of culture being based on context. Thus the second aim of this book is to explore and understand culture conceptually and practically by including Chinese contexts: engaging Chinese cultural concepts and theories, and exploring Chinese people’s understanding of culture and its impact on their lives.

The work of Smolicz (1988, 1999) and Secombe and Smolicz (2015) on language and values within the context of multicultural environments has been significant in developing the ideas for this book. In their research, Secombe and Smolicz explored the survival of ‘core values’ of individual cultures within a culturally plural society such as Australia. This inspired me to consider the example of the convergence of Chinese culture and multicultural Australia in terms of, will theories generated/developed according to multicultural and democratic contexts be applicable to cultures such as China, a more hegemonic nation comprised of the Han ethnic majority?

This book treads in the murky waters of ‘What is culture?’, by considering “a question that even some of the finest theorists of culture have struggled with” (Ginzberg 2016, p. 19). The purpose is not to add another description, or another normative definition; it is not the ambition for this book to generalise or theorise culture and cultural phenomena from a universal perspective. As “human understanding and knowledge of the world is theory-laden, and the social phenomena are concept dependent” (Easton 2010), engaging Chinese concepts and theorising of culture within a Western context may provide an alternative understanding of culture. The distinctiveness of this research is that it contributes to an alternative perspective to the norm of Western dominant theorising and conceptualisation, which has provided one-way generalist cultural views.

This book is written by a non-Western researcher conducting research in the West, and introducing Chinese theorisation of culture is attempting to break free of cultural appropriation. Under the “Western, epistemic practices”, dominating systems tend “to silence and speak for” marginalised group due to their perceived inability to communicate as knowledgeable persons (Matthes 2016, p. 349). In such a context, the mainstream scholars of culture often dominate and impose their understanding of culture (Matthes 2016, p. 347) on others; holding prejudices that marginalised groups may misinterpret as being representative of their own culture, as they claim authoritative understanding of the others’ culture. By giving non-Western researchers equal opportunity to present and engage their indigenous knowledge and acknowledging their knowledge as equally valid and valuable (Singh and Han 2017; Singh and Meng 2013), it enables knowledge equalities through acts of expression and representation. It allows the insiders’ voices to be heard and to represent their culture validly (Young 2008).

Methodology

Methodologically, this book draws on two data sources. The primary source is drawn from Chinese participants who have experienced living, teaching and conducting research in cross-cultural contexts—China and Australia. The other is secondary in nature, comprising two key education and culture policy documents issued recently by the Chinese Government. By focusing on small data sets, this research has its limitation in terms of generalisability. However, as most qualitative research does, rather than focus on generalisation, it engages effort to investigate phenomena that may symptomatise a greater reality (Flyvbjerg 2006). It is believed that this case or any qualitative research would partly contribute to “the collective process of knowledge accumula...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Front Matter
• 1. Introduction
• 2. Culture Through Chinese Theorising: Human Transforming and Transforming Human
• 3. Hanzi the Foundation of Chinese Culture
• 4. The Human-Human Dimension of Culture: Chinese Teachers in Relation to Australian Students
• 5. Impact Factors of Chinese Culture and Globalisation
• 6. Conclusion: Characteristics of Chinese Culture
• Back Matter