GRF2023 (6)

This panel examines the different approaches and perspectives towards public knowledges in Asia.

PANEL

Chairperson: Maitrii Victoriano Aung Thwin | NUS Department of History

Mohamed Effendy | NUS Department of Southeast Asian Studies

Guardians of public memory? A critical perspective.
In 2017, Singapore's first book "Silat Seni Gayong Pasak Singapura A Historical Legacy" which documented the history of a Malay martial arts group was published. Supported by the National Heritage Board, the work was an attempt to salvage as much memory possible of what senior members remember about the rise and activities of the group since the 1940s in Singapore but the process of writing and researching the work was fraught with challenges which threatened the progress of the work. Furthermore, on 2 May 2020, the leader of the group, Mr Rahim Hussain, passed away and this led to the decision by members in 2021 to formally withdraw their registration as a society. The group then disbanded and but enough knowledge has been preserved in the book to ensure that it is remembered by the Singapore community. Hence, this talk will discuss to what extent are academics important in safeguarding public memory and heritage and it will also address certain challenges that arises from doing so.

 

Tu Hang | NUS Department of Chinese Studies

The Covert Sphere: Two Chinese Intellectuals in Search of Esotericism
This article brings Leo Strauss’s “Persecution and the Art of Writing” thesis to bear on the crisis of independent thinking in modern Chinese intellectual history. It argues that while heterodox Chinese thinkers frequently practiced “writing between the lines” to evade censorship, conformist minds were equally adept at utilizing the charm of the clandestine—deception, fabrication, and self-mythologization—for their own agendas. To illustrate the peculiar tension between conformity and dissent, I focus on two Chinese thinkers who exploited esotericism at crucial junctures of PRC history: Liu Xiaofeng 劉小楓 (1956-), a conservative theologian who spawned a “Chinese Straussian School” to preach anti-liberal doctrines in contemporary China; and Chen Yinke 陳寅恪 (1890-1960), a cultural traditionalist who resisted Marxist doctrines throughout the Mao era. Both Liu and Chen conceived of the public as a hostile and conformist crowd and deliberately developed special techniques of writing that contain multiple levels of significance —Liu named his variant “subtle words with profound meaning” (微言大義) while Chen called his “inner history from the heart” (心史). Though formally similar, these two approaches took Strauss’s thesis in drastically different directions: while Chen deployed a rhetorical smokescreen of obscure references to tease the censor, Chinese Straussians wielded double teaching to conceal the conformism of their politics from the public.

Get in Touch

Please enter your name.
Please enter a message.