HYI Director Elizabeth Perry visited the Harvard-Yenching Visiting Scholars Association-Korea (HY-VSA-K) in Seoul on November 11, 2009. Professor Perry had a pleasant talk with Professor Woo-Hyun Won, President of the HY-VSA-K, over lunch. Several HYI alumni were also present at the gathering. Professor Perry was in Seoul to deliver a special lecture at Seoul National University on November 10th.
Flying Dragon in Luoyang, Record of Three Generations of Literary Talent, and Records Showing the Distinction between Right and Wrong. (Novels from the Royal Family Collection of Chosŏn Korea I). Sŏngnam, Korea: Academy of Korean Studies, 2009.
Annotation Volume by Lim Ch’i-kyun et al.
Translation Volume by Lim Ch’i-kyun et al.
《낙성비룡, 문장풍류삼대록, 징세비태록》 (조선왕실의 소설1) 성남: 한국학중앙연구원, 2009.
(교주본) 임치균, 허원기, 박순임, 이지영. (현대어역) 임치균, 배영한, 이지영, 이래호.
Reviewed by Yoong-hee Jo (Associate Professor in Korean Literature, Academy of Korean Studies)
The Naksŏnjae collection which was originally stored in the Naksŏnjae building of the Ch’angdŏkgung palace includes appealing masterpieces of classical Korean novels. They were commonly enjoyed by women readers of the royal palace during the late Chosŏn period. This collection encompasses forty full-length novels in approximately one thousand and two hundred beautiful volumes written in classical Korean; with other royal archives these novels are located at the Changsŏgak library of the Academy of Korean Studies (AKS).
Though previous research on the Naksŏnjae archives has produced scholarly theses, articles, and monographs since the 1980s, ordinary readers still encounter difficulty in reading and understanding the original texts. Therefore, based on the Korean classical novels among the Naksŏnjae archives, these new source books have recently been published. This project is the very first step of a ten-year plan for the annotation and translation of the Naksŏnjae version of the novels into contemporary Korean.
This first publication consists of annotated translations in two volumes for the three different classical novels: Naksŏng piryong (洛城飛龍, Flying Dragon in Luoyang), Munjangpungnyu samdaerok (文章風流三代錄, Record of Three Generations of Literary Talent), Chingsebitaerok (懲世否泰錄, Record Showing the Distinction between Right and Wrong).
For the annotation volume, the participants of the project clarify the meaning of old vocabulary and correct errata along with punctuating the original texts. They also provide readers with detailed information about historical figures in the novels. This new annotation is the product of an interdisciplinary collaboration of six specialists in the area of classical Korean literature and old Korean language. Through their steady and patient efforts, this annotation allows readers to get closer to how Koreans might have thought in premodern society.
The translation volume is sensitive to the needs of ordinary readers who are not experts in classical Korean novels. The translators recognized the vast chasm separating specialists and common readers in understanding classical texts. From the classical novels, contemporary readers can learn diverse expressions of traditional Korean values like loyalty and filial piety. They can also experience interesting key motifs of classical literature: love, family, war, and fantasy. Readers may eventually feel that these values and motifs are still important in order to have a good grasp of contemporary Korean literature.
Interestingly, the spatial background and main characters of the three novels examined for this project came from China. In particular, Munjangpungnyu samdaerok and Chingsebitaerok use historical figures who existed in Song and Qing China respectively. China was a place that they had hardly visited but knew well. By using a foreign backdrop, the authors could justify values and expressions of which the Chosŏn elite class disapproved.
Professor Ch’i-kyun Lim of AKS, the organizer of the project, has continued to promote the popular understanding of Korean classical novels for contemporary readers. His achievements include new writings with intriguing motifs in Chosŏn fiction as well as translations and academic research on classical novels. These efforts are expected to be a strong base for the successful completion of this long-term project on the Naksŏnjae collection.
Tran Dinh Huou’s Selected Works (Trần Đình Hượu Tuyen Tap), 2 vols. Hanoi: Publishing House of Education, 2008, reprinted in 2009.
Reviewed by Trần Hải-Yến (Institute of Literature, Hanoi, Vietnam)
Along with Buddhism, Confucianism is an ideological system that has left a profound impact on pre-modern Vietnam’s spiritual life. However, unlike Buddhist thought, Confucian ideology was a factor in the formation of governmental institutions of Vietnam’s feudal system, which lasted from the 15th century until 1945, and continues to impact various aspects of the nation’s contemporary social life. The importance of studying Confucianism, therefore, has been stressed in social science research in Vietnam in recent years.
Although it is difficult to calculate the precise number of research works on this particular topic so far, it is certain that the name Tran Dinh Huou cannot be overlooked in any overview of research on Confucianism in Vietnam. A graduate of Moscow University with a diploma in Oriental Philosophy, upon his return to Vietnam Tran Dinh Huou was assigned as a professor in the Department of Philology, University of Hanoi (now College of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vietnam National University, Hanoi), where he continued to work from 1963 until his retirement in 1993. Appreciating the influence of Confucianism on virtually all aspects of Vietnamese society, Tran Dinh Huou focused most of his work on this ideological system, with a main emphasis on Vietnam’s road “from tradition to modernity”.
His works were mostly published after Doi Moi (Reform) policies (launched by the Communist Party of Vietnam at the Sixth National Congress in 1986): Vietnamese Literature during the Transitional Period, 1900-1930 (completed in 1974, but published in 1988), From Tradition to Modernity (first published in 1994, reprinted with modifications in 1996), and Confucianism and Vietnamese Literature in Medieval and Modern Periods (1998), Lectures on Oriental Ideology (compiled from students’ notes and recording tapes, 2001). Aside from his first work on transitional literature, which was composed to be used in academic curricula, others are comprised of scattered articles over the years, yet “the guiding principle always remains consistent” [vol. 2, 10].
Recently, the Education Publishing House has selected from the aforementioned works to publish a collection under the title Tran Dinh Huou’s Selected Works (2 volumes), divided into two parts: “Problems in Philosophy and Historical Ideology” (vol. 1), and “Problems in Literary History” (vol. 2). This anthology is one of the most crucial reference works of “practical and scientific values”, used in classes for undergraduate and graduate students in Vietnam [“Publisher’s Prologue”, vol.1]. It was published in 2008 and quickly reprinted the following year.
Reflecting upon research on Confucianism in Vietnam, Tran Dinh Huou saw his articles as merely “words of warning”, “signaling, avoiding some misunderstandings which can be potentially misleading” [Vol.1, 51]. In that light, what exactly are his “warnings”?
While Tran Dinh Huou was reflecting upon Confucianism and the ideological system underpinning the “Chinese script cultural spheres” (漢字文化圈) in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s, a way of thinking prevailed in Vietnam: whatever belonged to feudalism or was related to foreign aggression was bound to be negative, and thus must be eliminated, such as Confucianism. Tran Dinh Huou introduced a new perspective, considering Confucianism and its scholars as a historical phenomenon. He resolved to find the essence of Confucianism from Chinese classics, combined with understanding its penetration and alteration in Vietnam. He also proposed an emphasis on its functions and social institutions. According to Tran Dinh Huou, although Confucianism entered Vietnam rather early (during the period of domination by the Eastern Han), it was not fully appreciated until the nation’s independence was declared (Ly Dynasty, 11th century). The Confucianism accepted in Vietnam was that of the Song Dynasty, or Neo-Confucianism, which was used to construct society institutionally and educationally. Confucian education was of great importance for it was considered as the only way to select talented people for the government. Nonetheless, “despite the fact that Vietnamese Confucianism has a long history, it has not developed into textual studies (khào chứng考證) and classics research (kinh học經學)”, “Vietnamese Confucian scholars are more literati than thinkers” [vol.1, 126]. In brief, Confucianism in Vietnam was sponsored by the state over a long period of time (almost 10 centuries), and applied to almost all aspects of social life.
The second most important contribution of Tran Dinh Huou concerns the relationship between Confucianism and medieval - modern Vietnamese literature. He did not follow the commonly approved binary criteria of the time: feudalism or non-feudalism, patriotism or humanity, reality or non-reality. He instead sketched out a traditional period in which literature was “mostly composed by Confucian scholars with a Confucian conception of literature.” [vol. 2, 8]. He proposed three types of Confucian scholars in the composition of literature: socially engaged Confucians, secluded Confucians, and dilettante Confucians.
For the modern period, he focused on “turning points, transitional stages, and the manner in which new things are established” [vol.2, 9]. He suggested that this should be seen as “a process of transformation, mutual replacement/substitution so that sometimes one thing can be both A (traditional literature) and B (literature written according to European models, especially the French model, from the 17th to 19th centuries), yet sometimes it is neither A or B” [vol.2, 8]. After analyzing representative phenomena (Phan Boi Chau, Tan Da, writings of Dong Kinh nghia thuc or Tonkin Free School, and Progressive movement Duy Tan), he reiterated his argument on Vietnamese literature’s shift to modernism under Confucian influence.
The last “warning” pointed out by Tran Dinh Huou is “in [Vietnamese] tradition, I only speak of Confucianism. But in reality, it is not the only one.” [vol. 1, 50]. Future research should not be limited to further study on Confucianism, but needs to expand to “Buddhism, Lao-Zhuang thought, Daoism, and others”.
The study of Confucianism and medieval - modern Vietnamese literature by the late Professor Tran Dinh Huou is a landmark in social science research in Vietnam. Despite acknowledged limitations in the work, his instructions and forewarnings have served as important guidelines for later researchers, and the solid results of their research have confirmed the practicality of his scientific method.
Phoenix, Oh Phoenix: Collected Essays on Madness in Chinese Literature, Edited by Tamotsu Sato (Tokyo：Kyuko Shoin, 2009), 246pp.
佐藤保編『鳳よ鳳よ――中国文学における〈狂〉』（東京：汲古書院、2009年）、246頁.
Reviewed by Akiyoshi Yagi (八木章好), Harvard-Yenching Exchange Scholar from Keio University, Tokyo, 2008-2009.
“No other ethnic groups love the word ‘madness’ more than Chinese.” In his book Mojiyushin (文字遊心), Shizuka Shirakawa, a prominent Japanese Sinologist offered this perceptive remark on the significance of the word 狂 kuang (madness). Indeed, the concept of madness, with an extraordinary richness of meaning, has not only made an unparalleled contribution to the history of Chinese thought, its influence has also permeated Japanese philosophy and literature.
The concept of madness in Chinese thought, in general, can be divided into two mainstreams: 狂狷 kuangjuan (ardent yet cautious) and 佯狂 yangkuang (to feign madness). Both trace their origins back to the Analects. The former appears in Book 13:
The Master said, “If I am unable to find a man of the middle path with whom to associate, then I must turn to either the ardent or the cautious. The ardent are eager to advance; the cautiously refrain from certain deeds. ”
Although the original meaning of the Chinese character 狂 kuang carried a negative connotation, Confucius augmented its use with an affirming perspective. According to his words, a man of kuang is enterprising and self-motivated, while a man of juan is cautious and self-disciplined.
The other type of madness, yangkuang, is portrayed in Book 18:
The madman of Chu, Jieyu, passed by Confucius, singing and saying, “Phoenix! Oh Phoenix! How is your virtue degenerated! As to the past, reproof is useless; but the future may still be provided against. Give up your vain pursuit. Give up your vain pursuit. Peril awaits those who now engage in affairs of government.”
Jieyu is a fictitious hermit who put on a disguise of madness. From ancient times to the pre-modern era, yangkuang played an important role in the life of many Chinese literati who used it as a ready excuse to protect themselves from being coerced into political affairs.
Phoenix, Oh Phoenix, titled after the words of Jieyu in the above passage, is a collection of essays by a group of outstanding scholars who formed a research society chaired by Professor Tamotsu Sato of Ochanomizu University.
The book consists of ten papers contributed by eight scholars; five from Chinese classics, three from Japanese classics and two from Chinese modern literature. The following is a brief synopsis of each paper:
Chinese classic literature
Mitsuko Yajima (Asia University) presents two papers: the first describes the development of the concept of kuang throughout the time of Confucius, the Han dynasty and the Six Kingdoms, with an emphasis on yangkuang; the second paper focuses on the word kuanghua (mad flower) in the work of Yu Xin. Mayumi Taniguchi (Nagano Prefectural College) surveys the usage of the character kuang in the poems of the Tang dynasty. Kiyomi Murakoshi (Keio University) examines the expression of kuang in the ci poems of the Song dynasty. Yoko Onishi (Hitotsubashi University) introduces a painter, Zheng Sixiao, who showed fanatic resistance against the Yuan government.
Japanese classic literature
Wang Di (Nankai University, Taiwan) discusses the influence of Zhuangzi on Hitomi Bokuyuken(人見卜幽軒), a Japanese scholar of the Edo era. In two papers, Fumiko Naoi (Tokyo Seitoku University) surveys the usage of the character kuang in the Chinese poems of Japanese scholars, Lai Sanyo (頼山陽)and Saito Setsudo (斎藤拙堂).
Chinese modern literature
Yukiko Nishino (Ibaraki University) discusses the abnormal psychology depicted in the novels of Shi Zhecun. Akiko Sugimura (Kanazawa University) examines the peculiar characteristics of the eminent scholar, Qian Zhongshu.
The range of meaning that kuang conveys is so vast that it is hardly possible to exhaust all of its usages and significance in a single publication. To support further examination on this intriguing topic, the book provides, as an appendix, a list of related academic writings and a summary for each.
It is evident that further research studies on relevant topics, such as the Yangming School of Neo-Confucianism, novels and arts in the Ming and Qing dynasties, are pivotal to gaining a deep understanding and appreciation of the distinctive role that kuang has played in shaping Chinese culture.
On September 8, 2009, the Harvard-Yenching Institute Visiting Scholars Association of Korea held a forum on New Trends in the Humanities and Interdisciplinary Sciences, at the Press Center in Seoul, South Korea.
The forum covered two main topics, the first of which was the 21st Century and the Humanities. Professor Sung-Mu Lee (Former President, National Institute of Korean History, HYI scholar 1982-83) was the invited speaker.
The forum’s second topic, titled Interdisciplinary Discussion about the Humanities and Social Sciences in Korea, featured the following invited speakers:
Back row: Organizers Ik-Hwan Lee (’84-’85), Dong-Won Lee (’78-’79), Woo-Hyun Won (’82-’83, President), Joung-Woo Lee (’93-’94). Front row: Speakers Chang-Ho Yoon (’88-’89), Jung-In Kang (’95-’96), Doo-Seung Hong (’87-’88), Sung-Mu Lee (’82-’83), Nam-Jin Huh (’96-’97), Kyung-Sook Shin (’00-’01)
Administrative Committee members Soo-Kyung Oh, Dong-Won Lee, Woo-Hyun Won, Ik-Hwan Lee, Sung-Mu Lee and Min-haeng Lee.
Professor Woo-Hyun Won, President of the Harvard-Yenching Visiting Scholars Association of Korea.
Prior to the forum, in August 2009, Professor Lee Ik-Hwan (Current Vice President and President-elect of the HYI Visting Scholars Association of Korea) paid a visit to HYI Director Elizabeth Perry in Cambridge, where they discussed the alumni association’s recent activities. Prof. Lee was in town to attend the 13th Harvard International Symposium on Korean Linguistics. He was a visiting scholar at the Institute from 1984-85 and an associate from 1994-95.
Professor Lee Ik-Hwan, HYI Director Elizabeth Perry, and Professor Young-Se Kang (HYI scholar 1983-87).
Disrespect/Respect: A theoretical Viewpoint in philosophical and sociological studies, Vol. 1, by Tô Duy Hợp. (Khinh-Trọng: Một quan điểm lý thuyết trong nghiên cứu triết học và xã hội học). The World Publishing House, Hanoi, Vietnam, 2007, 768 pages.
Reveiwed by Le Ngoc Hung, Institute for Sociology, Ho Chi Minh National Academy of Politics and Administration, Hanoi, Vietnam
There is a common view of Sociology in Vietnam as an imported discipline, with no indigenous sociological theory by Vietnamese scholars. However, such a view is incorrect, as proven by Prof. Tô Duy Hợp’s Disrespect/Respect: A Theoretical Viewpoint in Philosophical and Sociological Studies, published in 2007 on the occasion of his 65th birthday. The book consists of a summary of his “Disrespect/Respect” (Khinh-Trọng) theory and a collection of 36 of his papers which were published in different Vietnamese scientific journals from 1977 to 2006. These papers are divided evenly into two parts: eighteen papers in Part I concentrate on philosophical studies, while the remaining papers in Part II focus on sociological research. In each part of the book, the author arranges his writings in a chronological order.
The name “Disrespect/Respect” (Khinh-Trọng) reveals internal dilemmas: on the one hand, its content is always a process of understanding and solving complicated problems in Philosophy and Sociology and, on the other hand, the very process of approaching complicated problems presents “Disrespect/Respect” issues of choice. The fundamental dilemma in Philosophy that “Disrespect/Respect” theory seeks to understand and resolve is that of formal logic and/or dialectical logic. “Disrespect/Respect” theory provides relevant principles of choice that consist of the following paradigms: (1) “Disrespect/Respect” extreme paradigms: either pure formal logic or pure dialectical logic, (2) moderate khinh-trọng paradigms, or a mixed paradigm emphasizing either formal logic or dialectical logic, (3) the undistinguished “Disrespect/Respect” paradigms of formal and dialectical logic.
In philosophical research Disrespect/Respect (Khinh-Trọng) theory highlights abstract dilemmas, but in sociological research it emphasizes concrete problems. To Duy Hop developed his khinh-trọng theory in rural sociological studies dealing with three specific dichotomies of peasant and/or non-peasant; agricultural and/or non-agricultural; and rural and/or non-rural. According to khinh-trọng theory the understanding and resolving of these dualisms are paradigms of choice of (1) Extreme paradigms of “getting this, losing that”, (2) Moderate paradigms of “more of this, less of that,” and (3) Undistinguished paradigms of “good for both sides”. To Duy Hop promises that in volume 2, which he plans to publish in the near future, his theory will be applied to other sociological dilemmas such as structure – action, function – conflict that have been among the deepest concerns of sociological theorists.
1968: Youths’ Revolts and Their Background/ The End of the Revolts and Their Legacy (1968: Wakamonotachi no hanran to sono haikei/ Hanran no shûen to sono isan) vols. 1 & 2 by Oguma Eiji (Tokyo: Shinyôsha, 2009, 2102 pp. hardcover)
Reviewed by Hideaki Fujiki (Department of Literature (Film Studies), Nagoya University)
The celebrated socio-historian Oguma Eiji’s latest book offers a fresh and broad perspective for understanding the student revolts that erupted in Japan during the late 1960s and early 1970s. Unlike other books on this theme, which often romanticize the students movements, Oguma historicizes them by illuminating their connections to the economic, educational and social conditions.
The book consists of seventeen chapters in addition to an introduction and conclusion. The first four chapters provide an overview of the historical background of the movements and the complicated relationships among various groups, sects and networks. The author then conducts specific case studies of struggles in universities and high schools and demonstrations at Haneda Airport (opposing the Japanese government support of the U.S. effort in Vietnam), in Sasebo, Nagasaki (opposing the entry of U.S. nuclear-powered vessels), and in Sanrizuka, Chiba (resisting the construction of Narita International Airport), and other activities by the “Peace for Vietnam” Committee (Beheiren), the United Red Army, and the women’s liberation movement. Although Beheiren, Oguma argues, fostered an excellent practical model for organizing a political movement, the student revolts largely aspired to abstract Marxist slogans (like “overthrowing capitalism”) and sectarian violence to defend their distinctive ideology. The author thus contends that the revolts were not really a political movement aiming at a specific goal, but an opportunity for students to discover their identity.
Oguma emphasizes that Japan’s rapid economic growth in the sixties led to a dramatic change in social milieu as the country shifted from a developing to a developed nation. It followed that the younger generation had dual educational experiences: the postwar humanistic democratic education before the sixties and the cram-school mass education oriented toward the fiercely competitive examinations afterwards. Consequently, the generation suffered not “modern unhappiness” (i.e. material deprivation from war and/or poverty) but “contemporary unhappiness,” in which material comfort and “automated” education led to an identity crisis, a feeling of entrapment, and a lack of reality. Therefore, while criticizing the school system and capitalism as a whole, young people found the revolts to be a site that enabled them to regain a sense of humanity and confirm their identity. As evidenced in the case of the Red Army, in which the leaders and members killed twelve of their colleagues, however, many of the revolts were inwardly oriented with little social appeal.
Japan’s current economic recession draws scholars’ and activists’ attention back to the late 1960s. Oguma’s book is most significant in this context not because it serves to revive the past political movements in a heroic way, but because it highlights their problems and opens up a debate on how to create new possibilities for a civil rights movement. 1968 should be widely read outside of Japan, and hence an English translation is expected.
The Harvard-Yenching Institute is pleased to welcome 15 Visiting Scholars and 6 Visiting Fellows for the 2009-2010 academic year:
ASEAN Economic Community: Content and Roadmap, edited by Nguyen Hong Son (Hanoi: Social Sciences Publishing House, 2009, 228 pp.).
Reviewed by Nguyen Manh Hung (Institute of World Economics and Politics, Vietnam Academy of Social Sciences).
The initiative to establish the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC), one of three pillars of the ASEAN Community, was adopted by ASEAN leaders at the 2003 Bali Summit. Since then AEC has become an issue that attracts a great deal of attention from international relations scholars in Vietnam. “ASEAN Economic Community: Content and Roadmap” (Cộng đồng kinh tế ASEAN: Nội dung và Lộ trình) edited by Nguyen Hong Son is a collective work by researchers of the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies and Institute of World Economics and Politics, Vietnam Academy of Social Sciences. The book brings the readers the current thought of Vietnamese scholars in the field of international studies on AEC from a political economy perspective.
The book consists of three chapters. Chapter One, “The Formation of AEC”, looks at the latter issue from two approaches. Neo-functionalism, which is a common theoretical viewpoint in the study of the European Economic Community, argues that the AEC will emerge from the integration spillover of the economic sectors in Southeast Asia ad part of a market-driven process. Yet, the authors also appreciate a realist view which tends to see the creation of AEC as a policy response of ASEAN governments to international and domestic competitive pressures, and the creation of AEC as a state-driven process. Chapter Two, “Major Characteristics of AEC and Their Implications”, is a descriptive analysis of the objectives, implementation stages and measures of AEC; possible social, economic and political impacts of AEC on the ASEAN countries; and barriers to the establishment and consolidation of AEC. The authors contend that the development gap is the biggest barrier, while strong political will is a decisive factor in the consolidation of AEC. They are optimistic that AEC can be achieved by 2015 as scheduled to become a single market and production base, or a Free Trade Area plus, with free flow of goods, services, investment and skilled labor, and freer flow of capital by 2020. However, a longer future for AEC is uncertain. It may evolve into a Custom Union and Common Market, or it may disappear in a more integrated Asia-Pacific region. Chapter Three, “Vietnam’s Participation in AEC”, provides a narrative account of the participation of Vietnam in AEC, pointing out the possible effects of AEC on the development of Vietnam. Although the authors acknowledge the importance of AEC, they recommend that the global market, rather than AEC, should be the final goal for the international economic integration of Vietnam.
The book offers a provocative, insightful view on the present and future of AEC. Although some parts of the book are largely descriptive, overall the book is worth reading to understand the current viewpoints of Vietnamese scholars in the field of international relations regarding the current state of regional integration in Southeast Asia.
Incarceration and the Incarcerated: Power and Resistance, by Saipin Suputtamongkol. (Bangkok: Thammasat University Press, 2002, 293 pp.)
Reviewed by Non Arkaraprasertkul (HYI Doctoral Scholar Candidate 2008-2012, Oxford University).
At the very fundamental level, Incarceration and the Incarcerated: Power and Resistance is an attempt to understand the prisoners’ lives and their inevitable process of adaptation to the social and cultural realms controlled absolutely by a set of formal rules and regulations that is by all means different from those of the world outside the prison.
Eye-opening and exhilarating! Incarceration and the Incarcerated: Power and Resistance not only brings back the childish joy of reading, but also presents substantial claims. First, not to be overly critical but it is one of the very few readable works on anthropology in Thailand with real intellectual rigor, especially in its task of scrutinizing both the marginal community of prisoners and the actual situation and showing us the various bodies and forms of tension and resistance that power brings to human beings at work. Second, this bold attempt to divulge the forms of individual and collective resistance in relation to the constructed environment for absolute discipline from an anthropological perspective reveals the social and theoretical mechanisms that undergird changes in the penal system in Thailand. Third, the author Dr. Saipin Suputtamongkol is a lucid writer who has mastered the highest level of academic writing in Thai; this book is straightforward, graceful, and concise. Furthermore, the comprehensive notes at the end of each chapter offer an extremely useful introduction to anthropology and sociology.
This book was the first to come to mind when I was asked to write a review of an important book published in the Thai language. Dr. Saipin Suputtamongkol is Lecturer in Social Anthropology at the Faculty of Sociology and Anthropology at Thammasat University, Bangkok. Her degrees include Political Science (B.A.1983) and Anthropology (M.A. 1999) from Thammasat University. After receiving the “Thammasat University’s Best Dissertation Award,” she was awarded a Harvard-Yenching Fellowship to study Social Anthropology at Harvard University with Professor Michael Herzfeld, and received her Ph.D. in 2007. Incarceration and the Incarcerated won the Toyota Thailand Foundation Award for the Best Research in Social Sciences, the most prestigious award for a book on social science written in Thai. Saipin is an international scholar whose linguistic skills in Thai and English (and several other languages) are highest standard. In Incarceration and the Incarcerated, Saipin shows us her love of ethnographic fieldwork through semi-formal narratives about her interviewees. Her ability to be skeptical about rhetoric and tactical prose, while at the same time, faithful to the facts is what has led to these highly-accessible, dynamic, and sophisticated stories of the mechanism of incarceration and the people who are incarcerated. One of Saipin’s major triumphs lies in her use of reflexive anthropology. She makes sure that we always know where the anthropologist is – often through touches of self-deprecating humor – and how her presence affects the scene being described. Here the anthropological method is shown at its best: Saipin really knows these people and their ways. What she tells us here in Incarceration and the Incarcerated is the true portrayal of the exercise of power and its discourse at its most extreme.
From Cesare Beccaria to Herbert Hart to Michel Foucault, scholars have studied the institution of punishment in historical, socioeconomic, and psychodynamic contexts. Foucault, especially, reveals that prison is a place where the exercise of power and the body is seen in its clearest light and that the gist of such exercise resonates in institutions outside the prisons in subtler forms yet still with the same basic concept of surveillance and discipline which is concealed to the general public. Like Foucault’s Discipline and Punish, Saipin Suputtamongkol’s Incarceration and the Incarcerated is not a book about prisoners and their life in prison per se. As its heavily conceptual title could also be misleading, it would be short-sighted to think that this book is only suitable for the small group of scholars who are interested in the study of punishment and its corollary process of rehabilitation. In fact, it is a book about people and their connections to everyday-life: Punishment is after all a human institution. Saipin uses prisoners and prison to demonstrate that absolute power engenders a radical response that cannot be repressed. This book is for anyone who is interested in reading the work of a linguistically sensitive ethnographer with unsurpassed passion in unpacking the complexity of the practice of power in prison and its relationship to the world outside.
The literal translation of the title of the book is “Prison and People: Power and Resistance” (Kook kub kon: Um-Naj Lae Karn Tor Tan Kud-Keun). The first chapter of the book discusses the theoretical basis of the work and some history of punishment. Similar to other scholars who study prisons and asylums, Saipin relies on Michel Foucault, David Garland, and Clifford Geertz. Despite drawing on Western ideas and theories, she always ties these into the context of prisons in Thailand. In this chapter, Saipin explains not only the framework of her study but also problems and issues encountered in this research project.
Unlike many books where notes are only important for reference, Saipin’s style of extensive end-noting is another salient feature of the book. Reading each chapter’s notes is a pleasurable walk through core literature and theories in anthropology and the study of contemporary society. Given the extremely dense content of the book – especially the theories – the extensive notes demonstrate the author’s sense of responsibility to her readers at all levels. For instance, in chapter 1 where in the main text Saipin presents her arguments and explains the history of prison and how it became an important component of power and discipline in modern society, the 13-page long chapter notes elaborate literally every single theory and idea discussed in the chapter. In the notes, Saipin combines Foucault’s analysis of Jeremy Bentham’s panopticism with Irvin Goffman’s concept of “total institution” to explain the interesting feature of the so-called social hybrid residential community where the power of the authority determines the status and the mode of confinement down to the microscopic details of everyday activities such as eating, exercising, and sleeping.
As a trained architect, I read Incarceration and the Incarcerated with great interest, especially concerning the irreconcilable relationship between the object of architecture (the prison, the cell, the public space), and the people. The architecture of prison has been a topic of debate and scrutiny for architectural theorists and historians due to its deep psychological impact not only on the incarcerated but also on the world outside. How do we perceive prisons in the context of modern society? From the physical point-of-view, the thematic debate has always been the organization of space and how to define space by the use of power to control prisoners’ activities. Normally the process of familiarization is extremely crucial to architecture; for instance, if an architect is to be commissioned to design a museum, he has to visit museums to understand the desirable quality of space of a museum alongside the requirements of program and mechanical functions. But how much could an architect learn from a few visits to prisons? It would be difficult to see a designer who is willing to spend a week or a month in prison with prisoners to understand how things work in order to design the architecture inside. If the life of prisoners is similar to what has been painted in Stephen King’s Shawshank Redemption where the power of the prison guard presides over basically everything; then architects have little role here. Most of the time, the architecture of prison is not a product of architectural creativity, but functionalism: the function of confinement, punishment, and rehabilitation.
In 1785, one of the first prison designs proposed by the renowned Jeremy Bentham was a Panopticon that dismissed the role of architecture in the design of social network space, physical orientation, and aesthetics. However, since the provision of open space as distance between the observer’s tower and the cells are desirable in Bentham’s design, the orientation of physical space at least enables non-tactile social connections among the members of the society. In our time, the orientation of space that facilitates observation of the prisoners has been replaced by surveillance camera technology, which allows prisons to be ‘more separated’ in terms of spatial orientation. Throughout history, prisons have evolved from places for incarceration to instruments of punishment to a humanistic institution for rehabilitation. The latest stage of development – prisons as places for rehabilitation – sparks the most important debate on the relationship between function and form in the recent study of spatiality. This is a place where the sole knowledge of physical space is useless and where Saipin’s work fills in the gap. As an architect, what I learned from Saipin Suputtamongkol’s Incarceration and the Incarcerated is the condition of resistance in the confined environment of a prison, which should play a role in the design of social space. With such understanding, architecture could break new ground in design with an appreciation of anthropological realism. That is to say, even in a distant field of architectural studies, this book serves extremely well as a bridge between two seemingly unconnected realms of knowledge.