BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//CeMEAS - ECPv6.15.16//NONSGML v1.0//EN
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
X-ORIGINAL-URL:https://www.cemeas.de
X-WR-CALDESC:Events for CeMEAS
REFRESH-INTERVAL;VALUE=DURATION:PT1H
X-Robots-Tag:noindex
X-PUBLISHED-TTL:PT1H
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:Europe/Paris
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+0100
TZOFFSETTO:+0200
TZNAME:CEST
DTSTART:20150329T010000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0200
TZOFFSETTO:+0100
TZNAME:CET
DTSTART:20151025T010000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+0100
TZOFFSETTO:+0200
TZNAME:CEST
DTSTART:20160327T010000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0200
TZOFFSETTO:+0100
TZNAME:CET
DTSTART:20161030T010000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+0100
TZOFFSETTO:+0200
TZNAME:CEST
DTSTART:20170326T010000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0200
TZOFFSETTO:+0100
TZNAME:CET
DTSTART:20171029T010000
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Paris:20160706T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Paris:20160706T180000
DTSTAMP:20260407T095210
CREATED:20160617T112828Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20160617T112828Z
UID:4262-1467820800-1467828000@www.cemeas.de
SUMMARY:Guest Lecture: Common Elements of an Axial Age? Comparative Perspectives on Ancient China and Ancient Egypt
DESCRIPTION:Guest Lecture\nCommon Elements of an Axial Age? Comparative Perspectives on Ancient China and Ancient Egypt\nWednesday July 6\, 2016  · 4 pm (c.t.) ·  KWZ 0.608\nProf. Mu-Chou Poo\, Department of History\, The Chinese University of Hong Kong \nIn this lecture Prof. Poo re-examines the theory of the Axial Age by first investigating the case of China\, situating the findings in the context of the on-going scholarly discussions on the idea of the Axial Age as proposed by Jaspers and expounded by subsequent generations of scholars. A comparison with the case of ancient Egypt will then follow\, examining burial custom of ancient Egypt and the associated funerary texts. This lecture essentially holds that the concept of the Axial Age\, a philosophical interpretation of certain historical phenomena found in a number of early civilizations\, should not be seen as a “historical rule” or “evolutionary rule” in the development of the history of mankind. The concept might be a useful starting point to engage in the comparative study of civilizations\, but it also has the problem of favoring certain cultural traits in selected civilizations\, and ignoring some other parts and aspects of human history if we wish to see humanity as really a united one. \n  \nImage: By Pulpolux !!!\, Central Axis\, CC BY 2.0\, https://flic.kr/p/CXm48\nDesign: CeMEAS \n  \n 
URL:https://www.cemeas.de/event/4262/
LOCATION:Kulturwissenschaftliches Zentrum (KWZ)
CATEGORIES:CeMEAS Lecture Series,Lecture
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Paris:20160706T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Paris:20160706T180000
DTSTAMP:20260407T095210
CREATED:20160617T112828Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20160617T112828Z
UID:5408-1467820800-1467828000@www.cemeas.de
SUMMARY:Guest Lecture: Common Elements of an Axial Age? Comparative Perspectives on Ancient China and Ancient Egypt
DESCRIPTION:Guest Lecture\nCommon Elements of an Axial Age? Comparative Perspectives on Ancient China and Ancient Egypt\nWednesday July 6\, 2016  · 4 pm (c.t.) ·  KWZ 0.608\nProf. Mu-Chou Poo\, Department of History\, The Chinese University of Hong Kong \nIn this lecture Prof. Poo re-examines the theory of the Axial Age by first investigating the case of China\, situating the findings in the context of the on-going scholarly discussions on the idea of the Axial Age as proposed by Jaspers and expounded by subsequent generations of scholars. A comparison with the case of ancient Egypt will then follow\, examining burial custom of ancient Egypt and the associated funerary texts. This lecture essentially holds that the concept of the Axial Age\, a philosophical interpretation of certain historical phenomena found in a number of early civilizations\, should not be seen as a “historical rule” or “evolutionary rule” in the development of the history of mankind. The concept might be a useful starting point to engage in the comparative study of civilizations\, but it also has the problem of favoring certain cultural traits in selected civilizations\, and ignoring some other parts and aspects of human history if we wish to see humanity as really a united one. \n  \nImage: By Pulpolux !!!\, Central Axis\, CC BY 2.0\, https://flic.kr/p/CXm48\nDesign: CeMEAS \n  \n 
URL:https://www.cemeas.de/event/4262-2/
LOCATION:Kulturwissenschaftliches Zentrum (KWZ)
CATEGORIES:CeMEAS Lecture Series,Lecture
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Paris:20160706T180000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Paris:20160706T200000
DTSTAMP:20260407T095210
CREATED:20160617T113448Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20160617T113448Z
UID:4264-1467828000-1467835200@www.cemeas.de
SUMMARY:Guest Lecture: Chinese Humanities in the Global Era
DESCRIPTION:Guest Lecture\nChinese Humanities in the Global Era\nWednesday July 6\, 2016  · 6 pm (c.t.) ·  KWZ 0.602\nProf. Hsiung Ping-Chen\, The Chinese University of Hong Kong \nThe Term “Humanities” is often used in reference to disciplinary academic humanities: a modern\, institutional subject. That its development is usually a product (or byproduct) of cultural politics in nation-building can be taken for granted. In the case of China\, however\, the long and complicated civilization evidenced before the modern era—since Neolithic times\, with literary texts that date back thousands of years—presents us with the particular problem of deciding whether “national” is the best and most representative designation for the evolution of Chinese humanities as a disciplinary subject or for the cultural heritage behind it. The developmental phases of Chinese humanities provide us with a good tool for considering the nature of “national” humanities in an era that is increasingly global. The fact that “Chinese” humanistic studies are the product of an ancient civilization has also given them an undeniable regional quality\, which explains why they continue to exhibit characteristics that appear to be more broadly “East Asian.” In crises or opportunities involving Chinese academic and public humanities\, therefore\, the interplay of this national and intrinsically regional character may help scholars to address the complex yet fundamental questions behind the assumption that any humanities can be labeled as national or regional in this global era. \n  \nImage: By Kevin Doncaster\, Marbles\, CC BY 2.0\, https://flic.kr/p/ChipsX\nDesign: CeMEAS \n 
URL:https://www.cemeas.de/event/guest-lecture-chinese-humanities-in-the-global-era/
LOCATION:Kulturwissenschaftliches Zentrum (KWZ)
CATEGORIES:CeMEAS Lecture Series,Lecture
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Paris:20160706T180000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Paris:20160706T200000
DTSTAMP:20260407T095210
CREATED:20160617T113448Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20160617T113448Z
UID:5409-1467828000-1467835200@www.cemeas.de
SUMMARY:Guest Lecture: Chinese Humanities in the Global Era
DESCRIPTION:Guest Lecture\nChinese Humanities in the Global Era\nWednesday July 6\, 2016  · 6 pm (c.t.) ·  KWZ 0.602\nProf. Hsiung Ping-Chen\, The Chinese University of Hong Kong \nThe Term “Humanities” is often used in reference to disciplinary academic humanities: a modern\, institutional subject. That its development is usually a product (or byproduct) of cultural politics in nation-building can be taken for granted. In the case of China\, however\, the long and complicated civilization evidenced before the modern era—since Neolithic times\, with literary texts that date back thousands of years—presents us with the particular problem of deciding whether “national” is the best and most representative designation for the evolution of Chinese humanities as a disciplinary subject or for the cultural heritage behind it. The developmental phases of Chinese humanities provide us with a good tool for considering the nature of “national” humanities in an era that is increasingly global. The fact that “Chinese” humanistic studies are the product of an ancient civilization has also given them an undeniable regional quality\, which explains why they continue to exhibit characteristics that appear to be more broadly “East Asian.” In crises or opportunities involving Chinese academic and public humanities\, therefore\, the interplay of this national and intrinsically regional character may help scholars to address the complex yet fundamental questions behind the assumption that any humanities can be labeled as national or regional in this global era. \n  \nImage: By Kevin Doncaster\, Marbles\, CC BY 2.0\, https://flic.kr/p/ChipsX\nDesign: CeMEAS \n 
URL:https://www.cemeas.de/event/guest-lecture-chinese-humanities-in-the-global-era-2/
LOCATION:Kulturwissenschaftliches Zentrum (KWZ)
CATEGORIES:CeMEAS Lecture Series,Lecture
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Paris:20160707T180000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Paris:20160707T200000
DTSTAMP:20260407T095210
CREATED:20160630T122231Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20160630T122231Z
UID:5410-1467914400-1467921600@www.cemeas.de
SUMMARY:Gastvortrag: Ein Postkolonialer Denker avant la lettre?  Takeuchi Yoshimi\, sein Asianismus und die Kritik an der Moderne
DESCRIPTION:Gastvortrag\nEin Postkolonialer Denker avant la lettre? Takeuchi Yoshimi\, sein Asianismus und die Kritik an der Moderne\nThursday July 7\, 2016  · 6 pm (c.t.) ·  KWZ 3.701\nProf. Viren Murthy\, Department of History\, University of Wisconsin-Madison \nIn den 1980er Jahren begann eine zentrale Auseinandersetzung zwischen Marxisten und postkolonialen Theoretikern. Letztere kritisierten den Marxismus als eurozentrisch. Ihrer Meinung nach sahen Marxisten die europäische Geschichte als universell gültig und nutzten daher das europäische Entwicklungsmodell um Asien zu erklären. So verwendeten die Marxisten Kategorien wie Sklavengesellschaft und Feudalismus\, um die chinesische\, japanische und indische Geschichte zu interpretieren. In dieser Hinsicht erscheint der bekannte japanische Intellektuelle Takeuchi Yoshimi (1910-1977) als postkolonialer Denker avant la lettre.  In seiner Beschäftigung mit chinesischen Autoren und  Politikern wie etwa Lu Xun\, Sun Yat-sen und Mao Zedong kritisiert Takeuchi Kategorien wie Ost und West und entwickelt dadurch eine neue politische Sicht von Asien. Seiner Meinung nach wurde der Orient durch den Imperialismus erschaffen und daher als weniger fortschrittlich beurteilt als der Okzident. Intellektuelle im Orient setzen diese Wertung voraus\, obwohl sie gegen den Westen kämpfen\, denn in der Dialektik der 4.-Mai-Bewegung in China oder in der japanischen Meiji-Restauration kämpften chinesische und japanische Intellektuelle gegen den Imperialismus. In diesen Bewegungen verleugneten die Intellektuellen jedoch ihre eigene Kultur\, die sie als ein Hindernis für die Modernisierung sahen.  Takeuchi lieferte  hier eine neue Interpretation mit seiner Kritik an Ost und West. \nTakeuchi machte seinen Standpunkt durch seine eigene Auslegung von Lu Xun deutlich.  Lu Xun ist der bekannteste moderne Schriftsteller in China und  war nach den 1930er Jahren in China als Verteidiger der Modernisierung bekannt.  Als Takeuchis berühmtes Buch über Lu Xun 1944 erschien war er wahrscheinlich einer der ersten\, der Lu Xun als Kritiker der Moderne\, oder zumindest als einen der Moderne gegenüber zwiegespaltenen Denker\, einschätzte. Heutzutage ist eine solche Interpretation weit verbreitet. Der chinesische Neulinke Wang Hui hat beispielsweise in den späten 1980er Jahren eine ähnliche Interpretation von Lu Xun entwickelt. Dank des Einflusses subalterner und postkolonialer Studien in den 1990er Jahren haben Japanologen und wie Sinologen Takeuchi Yoshimi und seine Lu-Xun-Interpretation wiederentdeckt. In seinem Buch Takeuchi Yoshimi: Displacing the West (2004) versucht Richard Calichman Takeuchi philosophisch auszulegen und Takeuchis Begriff von Gefühl bzw. Passivität auf Basis der Thesen von Derrida und Jean-Luc Nancy zu erklären. \nChristian Uhls Wer War Takeuchis Lu Xun hingegen versucht Takeuchi von einer historischen Seite anzugehen und erklärt\, wie Takeuchi einige Begriffe und auch den theoretischen Rahmen von Nishida Kitaro verwendet. Ich versuche diese beiden Methoden weiterzuentwickeln\, konzentriere mich aber mehr auf die die Bedingungen der Interpretation Takeuchis sowie darauf\, wie solche Bedingungen mit den globalen Phänomenen des Kapitalismus und Imperialismus verknüpft sind. Takeuchi versucht  nämlich hier alternative Arten von Transzendenz zu entdecken und konstruiert durch eine literarische bzw. religiöse Transzendenz seine politische Vision. Seiner Meinung nach ist eine solche politische Transzendenz von einer eurozentrischen Perspektive aus nicht zu finden.  Die politische Vision\, die Takeuchi in China und Asien findet\, basiert auf einer anderen Art\, die Politik\, Religion und Literatur verbindet. In diesem Vortrag beabsichtige ich\, Takeuchis politische Ansicht von Asien bzw. seine Auslegung von Lu Xuns politischer Ansicht in einer Theorie des Kapitalismus zu begründen. Es ist bekannt\, daß Okawa Shumei Religion und Politik verbunden hat. Takeuchi versucht sich jedoch an dem Projekt\, Politik\, Religion und Literatur zu verknüpfen. Dieses Vorgehen ist mit der Suche nach einer Welt jenseits des Kapitalismus verbunden. Es ist zudem sein eigener Versuch\, eine neue sozialistische Politik zu schaffen. Wir können seinen Versuch postkolonial nennen\, aber trotzdem gibt es auch eine hegelianische Dimension\, weil Takeuchi danach strebt\, durch die Vermittlung Asiens westliche Ideale wie Freiheit und Egalität auf einer höheren Ebene zu realisieren. \n  \nImage: By guercio\, it depends on the cage you are in  CC BY 2.0\, https://flic.kr/p/6ctyJd\nPoster Design: CeMEAS \n 
URL:https://www.cemeas.de/event/guestlecture-ein-postkolonialer-denker-avant-la-lettre-takeuchi-yoshimi-sein-asianismus-und-die-kritik-der-moderne-2/
LOCATION:Kulturwissenschaftliches Zentrum (KWZ)
CATEGORIES:CeMEAS Lecture Series,Lecture
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Paris:20160707T180000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Paris:20160707T200000
DTSTAMP:20260407T095210
CREATED:20160630T122231Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20160630T122231Z
UID:4269-1467914400-1467921600@www.cemeas.de
SUMMARY:Gastvortrag: Ein Postkolonialer Denker avant la lettre?  Takeuchi Yoshimi\, sein Asianismus und die Kritik an der Moderne
DESCRIPTION:Gastvortrag\nEin Postkolonialer Denker avant la lettre? Takeuchi Yoshimi\, sein Asianismus und die Kritik an der Moderne\nThursday July 7\, 2016  · 6 pm (c.t.) ·  KWZ 3.701\nProf. Viren Murthy\, Department of History\, University of Wisconsin-Madison \nIn den 1980er Jahren begann eine zentrale Auseinandersetzung zwischen Marxisten und postkolonialen Theoretikern. Letztere kritisierten den Marxismus als eurozentrisch. Ihrer Meinung nach sahen Marxisten die europäische Geschichte als universell gültig und nutzten daher das europäische Entwicklungsmodell um Asien zu erklären. So verwendeten die Marxisten Kategorien wie Sklavengesellschaft und Feudalismus\, um die chinesische\, japanische und indische Geschichte zu interpretieren. In dieser Hinsicht erscheint der bekannte japanische Intellektuelle Takeuchi Yoshimi (1910-1977) als postkolonialer Denker avant la lettre.  In seiner Beschäftigung mit chinesischen Autoren und  Politikern wie etwa Lu Xun\, Sun Yat-sen und Mao Zedong kritisiert Takeuchi Kategorien wie Ost und West und entwickelt dadurch eine neue politische Sicht von Asien. Seiner Meinung nach wurde der Orient durch den Imperialismus erschaffen und daher als weniger fortschrittlich beurteilt als der Okzident. Intellektuelle im Orient setzen diese Wertung voraus\, obwohl sie gegen den Westen kämpfen\, denn in der Dialektik der 4.-Mai-Bewegung in China oder in der japanischen Meiji-Restauration kämpften chinesische und japanische Intellektuelle gegen den Imperialismus. In diesen Bewegungen verleugneten die Intellektuellen jedoch ihre eigene Kultur\, die sie als ein Hindernis für die Modernisierung sahen.  Takeuchi lieferte  hier eine neue Interpretation mit seiner Kritik an Ost und West. \nTakeuchi machte seinen Standpunkt durch seine eigene Auslegung von Lu Xun deutlich.  Lu Xun ist der bekannteste moderne Schriftsteller in China und  war nach den 1930er Jahren in China als Verteidiger der Modernisierung bekannt.  Als Takeuchis berühmtes Buch über Lu Xun 1944 erschien war er wahrscheinlich einer der ersten\, der Lu Xun als Kritiker der Moderne\, oder zumindest als einen der Moderne gegenüber zwiegespaltenen Denker\, einschätzte. Heutzutage ist eine solche Interpretation weit verbreitet. Der chinesische Neulinke Wang Hui hat beispielsweise in den späten 1980er Jahren eine ähnliche Interpretation von Lu Xun entwickelt. Dank des Einflusses subalterner und postkolonialer Studien in den 1990er Jahren haben Japanologen und wie Sinologen Takeuchi Yoshimi und seine Lu-Xun-Interpretation wiederentdeckt. In seinem Buch Takeuchi Yoshimi: Displacing the West (2004) versucht Richard Calichman Takeuchi philosophisch auszulegen und Takeuchis Begriff von Gefühl bzw. Passivität auf Basis der Thesen von Derrida und Jean-Luc Nancy zu erklären. \nChristian Uhls Wer War Takeuchis Lu Xun hingegen versucht Takeuchi von einer historischen Seite anzugehen und erklärt\, wie Takeuchi einige Begriffe und auch den theoretischen Rahmen von Nishida Kitaro verwendet. Ich versuche diese beiden Methoden weiterzuentwickeln\, konzentriere mich aber mehr auf die die Bedingungen der Interpretation Takeuchis sowie darauf\, wie solche Bedingungen mit den globalen Phänomenen des Kapitalismus und Imperialismus verknüpft sind. Takeuchi versucht  nämlich hier alternative Arten von Transzendenz zu entdecken und konstruiert durch eine literarische bzw. religiöse Transzendenz seine politische Vision. Seiner Meinung nach ist eine solche politische Transzendenz von einer eurozentrischen Perspektive aus nicht zu finden.  Die politische Vision\, die Takeuchi in China und Asien findet\, basiert auf einer anderen Art\, die Politik\, Religion und Literatur verbindet. In diesem Vortrag beabsichtige ich\, Takeuchis politische Ansicht von Asien bzw. seine Auslegung von Lu Xuns politischer Ansicht in einer Theorie des Kapitalismus zu begründen. Es ist bekannt\, daß Okawa Shumei Religion und Politik verbunden hat. Takeuchi versucht sich jedoch an dem Projekt\, Politik\, Religion und Literatur zu verknüpfen. Dieses Vorgehen ist mit der Suche nach einer Welt jenseits des Kapitalismus verbunden. Es ist zudem sein eigener Versuch\, eine neue sozialistische Politik zu schaffen. Wir können seinen Versuch postkolonial nennen\, aber trotzdem gibt es auch eine hegelianische Dimension\, weil Takeuchi danach strebt\, durch die Vermittlung Asiens westliche Ideale wie Freiheit und Egalität auf einer höheren Ebene zu realisieren. \n  \nImage: By guercio\, it depends on the cage you are in  CC BY 2.0\, https://flic.kr/p/6ctyJd\nPoster Design: CeMEAS \n 
URL:https://www.cemeas.de/event/guestlecture-ein-postkolonialer-denker-avant-la-lettre-takeuchi-yoshimi-sein-asianismus-und-die-kritik-der-moderne/
LOCATION:Kulturwissenschaftliches Zentrum (KWZ)
CATEGORIES:CeMEAS Lecture Series,Lecture
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Paris:20160708T140000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Paris:20160708T160000
DTSTAMP:20260407T095210
CREATED:20160701T071714Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20160701T071714Z
UID:4278-1467986400-1467993600@www.cemeas.de
SUMMARY:Guest Lecture: Floating Gods\, Ghosts\, and Ancestors in North China Plain
DESCRIPTION:Guest Lecture\nFloating Gods\, Ghosts\, and Ancestors in North China Plain: Boat-dwelling Fisherpeople’s Mobile Pantheon and Ancestral Hall\nFriday July 8\, 2016 · 2 pm (c.t.) · KWZ 0.610\nChing-chih Lin\n Graduate Institute of Religious Studies\, National Chengchi University \nThis talk focuses on how environmental change transformed the religious culture by examining the floating community of boat-dwelling fisherpeople in freshwater in North China. These mobile\, isolated boat people adapted to a boat-dwelling lifestyle\, organized aquatic social groups\, and created innovative religious practices and beliefs in order to maintain their relationships with spirits and ancestors\, as well as dispersed lineage members\, given that they had no fixed base on land to build temples\, ancestral shrines or tombs. These boat dwellers were displaced from their land-based estates and became environmental refugees during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. More than hundred thousands of boat-dwellers moved back and forth via interconnected waterways among lakes and Grand Canal in North Jiangsu\, Southwest Shandong\, and the Huai River valleys of Anhui. The isolation of the boat people protected their unique religious activities from the anti-religious campaigns of the twentieth century. Their ritual tradition Duangu Ceremony was granted the status of National Intangible Cultural Heritage by the Ministry of Culture of the People’s Republic of China in 2011. \nSome significant elements and structures of religious belief and practice of boat people\, namely their ancestral worship and central rituals for deities\, remained unchanged\, transcending differences in occupation\, social status\, and environment for centuries. With the assistance of ritualists within the floating community\, these boat people endeavored to continue their genealogies and maintain ancestor worship\, practices that were equally important to farmers. These shared components can help us rethink core elements and structures of Chinese popular culture\, previously based on farmers’ experiences\, and discern which features are the most significant in Chinese popular religion and how and why they play such vital roles. More importantly\, core cultural elements have been resilient and resistant to environmental change. \nImage: By Lawrence Siu\, the grand canal\, CC BY 2.0\, https://flic.kr/p/4jAW6\,
URL:https://www.cemeas.de/event/guest-lecture-floating-gods-ghosts-ancestors-north-china-plain/
LOCATION:KWZ\, Heinrich Düker Weg 14\, 37073 Göttingen\, Germany
CATEGORIES:CeMEAS Lecture Series,Lecture
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Paris:20160708T140000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Paris:20160708T160000
DTSTAMP:20260407T095210
CREATED:20160701T071714Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20160701T071714Z
UID:5411-1467986400-1467993600@www.cemeas.de
SUMMARY:Guest Lecture: Floating Gods\, Ghosts\, and Ancestors in North China Plain
DESCRIPTION:Guest Lecture\nFloating Gods\, Ghosts\, and Ancestors in North China Plain: Boat-dwelling Fisherpeople’s Mobile Pantheon and Ancestral Hall\nFriday July 8\, 2016 · 2 pm (c.t.) · KWZ 0.610\nChing-chih Lin\n Graduate Institute of Religious Studies\, National Chengchi University \nThis talk focuses on how environmental change transformed the religious culture by examining the floating community of boat-dwelling fisherpeople in freshwater in North China. These mobile\, isolated boat people adapted to a boat-dwelling lifestyle\, organized aquatic social groups\, and created innovative religious practices and beliefs in order to maintain their relationships with spirits and ancestors\, as well as dispersed lineage members\, given that they had no fixed base on land to build temples\, ancestral shrines or tombs. These boat dwellers were displaced from their land-based estates and became environmental refugees during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. More than hundred thousands of boat-dwellers moved back and forth via interconnected waterways among lakes and Grand Canal in North Jiangsu\, Southwest Shandong\, and the Huai River valleys of Anhui. The isolation of the boat people protected their unique religious activities from the anti-religious campaigns of the twentieth century. Their ritual tradition Duangu Ceremony was granted the status of National Intangible Cultural Heritage by the Ministry of Culture of the People’s Republic of China in 2011. \nSome significant elements and structures of religious belief and practice of boat people\, namely their ancestral worship and central rituals for deities\, remained unchanged\, transcending differences in occupation\, social status\, and environment for centuries. With the assistance of ritualists within the floating community\, these boat people endeavored to continue their genealogies and maintain ancestor worship\, practices that were equally important to farmers. These shared components can help us rethink core elements and structures of Chinese popular culture\, previously based on farmers’ experiences\, and discern which features are the most significant in Chinese popular religion and how and why they play such vital roles. More importantly\, core cultural elements have been resilient and resistant to environmental change. \nImage: By Lawrence Siu\, the grand canal\, CC BY 2.0\, https://flic.kr/p/4jAW6\,
URL:https://www.cemeas.de/event/guest-lecture-floating-gods-ghosts-ancestors-north-china-plain-2/
LOCATION:KWZ\, Heinrich Düker Weg 14\, 37073 Göttingen\, Germany
CATEGORIES:CeMEAS Lecture Series,Lecture
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Paris:20160718T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Paris:20160722T180000
DTSTAMP:20260407T095210
CREATED:20160705T114645Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20160705T114645Z
UID:4283-1468828800-1469210400@www.cemeas.de
SUMMARY:Summer School Göttingen SPIRIT 2016. "Beyond the City Limits: Rethinking New Religiosities in Asia."
DESCRIPTION:Summer School\nSummer School Göttingen SPIRIT 2016. “Beyond the City Limits: Rethinking New Religiosities in Asia.” \n18-22 July 2016. University of Göttingen\, Germany\nGöttingen Institute for Social and Cultural Anthropology (GISCA)\, Centre for Modern Indian Studies (CeMIS) & Centre for Modern East Asian Studies (CeMEAS) \nTheme\nWith the rapid urbanization across Asia\, with new cityscapes\, glittering skyscrapers\, shopping malls\, globalized forms of consumption it is easy to assume that cities are the primary sites for the production of the new. Indeed\, urbanity is often used as a synonym for modernity and Asian futures would appear to be increasingly urban. The study of religion is no exception\, and emergent trends\, practices and movements are often implicitly or explicitly connected with the city. For example\, new religious movements are commonly treated as distinctly urban phenomena that reflect middle class sensibilities and subjectivities\, concerns and consumption patterns. Moreover\, the rise of new religious forms is often understood as coming at the expense of the rural\, as when village mediumship practices are seen to give way to urban spirit cults\, or when so-called “forest monasteries” in Thailand increasingly find themselves in urban or peri-urban zones. \nBut if cities are the future\, is the country then the past? Does the focus on cities as sites of “the new” ignore the complex ways rural contexts\, settings and imaginaries are implicated and contribute to contemporary religious practice? And to what extent does the notion of “urban religion” implicitly depend on its “others”? Does it reproduce the urban/rural distinction as one of the “great divides”  (Latour 1993) that have been central to the experience of modernity? In truth\, it is increasingly difficult to sustain sharp distinctions between rural and urban. Across Asia\, increased mobility especially patterns of rural/urban migration and the spread of communications and transport technologies connect urban and rural settings like never before improved education rates have seen the rise of an increasingly sophisticated\, cosmopolitan and politically engaged rural population. Yet nationalist constructions of identity and modernizing discourses across Asia have at once denigrated the rural\, “the peasantry”\, as backwards and in need of “development” while at the same time valorizing them as embodying traditional values and the essence of national identities. Religion is similarly implicated in such discourses\, at times standing for the “other” of modernity\, at others functioning as the locus of ethnic or national identities. \nYet so-called urban and rural religious practices do not constitute two opposed spheres of activity but are interconnected in various ways. Indeed\, it is frequently the very notion of an opposition between city and country that facilitates interactions and networks that traverse urban and rural contexts. For example\, urban religious institutions may recruit ritual specialists from the countryside because they are seen to have retained “correct” knowledge and techniques that urban practitioners have lost (Davis 2016)\, or city dwellers may see rural settings as sites of spiritual potential and seek out sites of pilgrimage\, of refuge or retreat. \nThis Summer School takes up these issues and asks how the study of contemporary religious life in Asia can benefit from “thinking beyond the city”\, whether “the city” is understood as a spatial entity\, a site of enquiry\, or as an analytical category. It will call into question many of the assumptions that go along with the study of urban religiosity and will attempt to bring “the urban” explicitly into relationship with its various “others” – such as the “rural”\, “hinterland”\, “periphery”\, or “village”. Central questions include: How do patterns of pilgrimage\, travel and tourism\, or the circulation of religious symbols or objects connect “urban” and “rural”? How do religious networks and practices help particular actors – such as rural/urban migrants – to negotiate tensions between their rural and urban lives? How do notions of nostalgia and pastness figure in projects of urban religio-spiritual renewal? How do dialectics of religion\, secularity and rationality play out in rural/urban spaces? And to what extent does the notion of an urban/rural divide itself inform religious practices and imaginaries? A final avenue of questioning focuses on the hierarchization of city and country and the relative superiority and agency attributed to the former. Just as postcolonial and critical theory have\nchallenged discourses that contrast a dynamic and active occident with a relatively static\, passive orient\, the Summer School will critically examine the manner in which similar distinctions between city and country have inflected the study of religion in Asia. It will ask how “provincializing” the city can lead to new insights and approaches that can reveal blindspots and draw attention to power differentials in Asian societies. The purpose would be to challenge the processes of othering that assign a relatively passive or reactive role for the countryside and to instead draw attention to the agency of rural actors\, to alternative imaginaries of the future\, and to ask what role religion plays in specifically rural modernities. \nThe summer school thus invites participants to engage with\, and develop\, their own work through an exploration of the way religion and spirituality intersect with three key themes: (1) traversing and transcending the rural/urban divide; (2) the city and its “others”; (3) provincializing the city. A range of international speakers has been invited whose collective expertise connects questions of rural/urban religiosities and critical engagements with the category of “the city” in contemporary Asia. An innovative approach of this Summer School is to include both scholars who work on religion and those do not but whose research aims to critically engage with the category of “the city”. This combination of perspectives is expected to produce stimulating exchange and novel insights. \nSpeakers will include: \n\nProf. Michael Herzfeld\, Harvard University\nProf. Ursula Rao\, Leipzig University\nProf. Christina Schwenkel\, UC Riverside\nProf. Julia Huang\, National Tsing Hua University\, Taiwan (tentative)\nDr. Radhika Gupta\, Göttingen University\n\nProf. Herzfeld will provide a public keynote as well as a general workshop on successful thesis writing. Podium discussions and morning lectures will provide theoretical frames and ethnographic snapshots from diverse Asian contexts. In addition\, students will participate in small working and reading groups moderated and mentored by each of the invited speakers over the course of the School. Mandatory readings for these sessions will be shared in advance. Participants will have the opportunity to introduce their own work in working groups\, to connect their research to each of the three theme blocs\, in order to develop new ideas and learn new approaches for their own work. \nHighlights of the cultural program include: \n\nA visit to the historic Bodenwerder synagogue from 1825\, which was translocated to Göttingen in 2006 to find out about the transformation of religious sites in a local context.\nA city tour\, including guided tours of historically significant cemeteries.\n\nAbout the organizers\nGISCA\, CEMIS and CeMEAS are key institutions building research\, network and outreach capacities in the study of religions at Göttingen Research campus (GRC). Bringing together scholars in the social sciences and humanities for inter-disciplinary dialogue\, they in particular foster an appreciation of regional diversity and intra- and cross-regional entanglements in Asia. With GISCA’s expertise in the anthropology of Southeast Asia and CEMIS and CeMEAS core competence in South and East Asia respectively\, these centers complement each other\, join creative forces and pool their excellent academic networks to organize this Summer School. \nContact\nKarin Klenke at karin.klenke@cemis.uni-goettingen.de\nhttps://www.uni-goettingen.de/de/531996.html
URL:https://www.cemeas.de/event/summer-school-gottingen-spirit-2016-beyond-city-limits-rethinking-new-religiosities-asia/
LOCATION:Kulturwissenschaftliches Zentrum (KWZ)
CATEGORIES:Conference,Lecture,Workshop
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Paris:20160718T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Paris:20160722T180000
DTSTAMP:20260407T095210
CREATED:20160705T114645Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20160705T114645Z
UID:5412-1468828800-1469210400@www.cemeas.de
SUMMARY:Summer School Göttingen SPIRIT 2016. "Beyond the City Limits: Rethinking New Religiosities in Asia."
DESCRIPTION:Summer School\nSummer School Göttingen SPIRIT 2016. “Beyond the City Limits: Rethinking New Religiosities in Asia.” \n18-22 July 2016. University of Göttingen\, Germany\nGöttingen Institute for Social and Cultural Anthropology (GISCA)\, Centre for Modern Indian Studies (CeMIS) & Centre for Modern East Asian Studies (CeMEAS) \nTheme\nWith the rapid urbanization across Asia\, with new cityscapes\, glittering skyscrapers\, shopping malls\, globalized forms of consumption it is easy to assume that cities are the primary sites for the production of the new. Indeed\, urbanity is often used as a synonym for modernity and Asian futures would appear to be increasingly urban. The study of religion is no exception\, and emergent trends\, practices and movements are often implicitly or explicitly connected with the city. For example\, new religious movements are commonly treated as distinctly urban phenomena that reflect middle class sensibilities and subjectivities\, concerns and consumption patterns. Moreover\, the rise of new religious forms is often understood as coming at the expense of the rural\, as when village mediumship practices are seen to give way to urban spirit cults\, or when so-called “forest monasteries” in Thailand increasingly find themselves in urban or peri-urban zones. \nBut if cities are the future\, is the country then the past? Does the focus on cities as sites of “the new” ignore the complex ways rural contexts\, settings and imaginaries are implicated and contribute to contemporary religious practice? And to what extent does the notion of “urban religion” implicitly depend on its “others”? Does it reproduce the urban/rural distinction as one of the “great divides”  (Latour 1993) that have been central to the experience of modernity? In truth\, it is increasingly difficult to sustain sharp distinctions between rural and urban. Across Asia\, increased mobility especially patterns of rural/urban migration and the spread of communications and transport technologies connect urban and rural settings like never before improved education rates have seen the rise of an increasingly sophisticated\, cosmopolitan and politically engaged rural population. Yet nationalist constructions of identity and modernizing discourses across Asia have at once denigrated the rural\, “the peasantry”\, as backwards and in need of “development” while at the same time valorizing them as embodying traditional values and the essence of national identities. Religion is similarly implicated in such discourses\, at times standing for the “other” of modernity\, at others functioning as the locus of ethnic or national identities. \nYet so-called urban and rural religious practices do not constitute two opposed spheres of activity but are interconnected in various ways. Indeed\, it is frequently the very notion of an opposition between city and country that facilitates interactions and networks that traverse urban and rural contexts. For example\, urban religious institutions may recruit ritual specialists from the countryside because they are seen to have retained “correct” knowledge and techniques that urban practitioners have lost (Davis 2016)\, or city dwellers may see rural settings as sites of spiritual potential and seek out sites of pilgrimage\, of refuge or retreat. \nThis Summer School takes up these issues and asks how the study of contemporary religious life in Asia can benefit from “thinking beyond the city”\, whether “the city” is understood as a spatial entity\, a site of enquiry\, or as an analytical category. It will call into question many of the assumptions that go along with the study of urban religiosity and will attempt to bring “the urban” explicitly into relationship with its various “others” – such as the “rural”\, “hinterland”\, “periphery”\, or “village”. Central questions include: How do patterns of pilgrimage\, travel and tourism\, or the circulation of religious symbols or objects connect “urban” and “rural”? How do religious networks and practices help particular actors – such as rural/urban migrants – to negotiate tensions between their rural and urban lives? How do notions of nostalgia and pastness figure in projects of urban religio-spiritual renewal? How do dialectics of religion\, secularity and rationality play out in rural/urban spaces? And to what extent does the notion of an urban/rural divide itself inform religious practices and imaginaries? A final avenue of questioning focuses on the hierarchization of city and country and the relative superiority and agency attributed to the former. Just as postcolonial and critical theory have\nchallenged discourses that contrast a dynamic and active occident with a relatively static\, passive orient\, the Summer School will critically examine the manner in which similar distinctions between city and country have inflected the study of religion in Asia. It will ask how “provincializing” the city can lead to new insights and approaches that can reveal blindspots and draw attention to power differentials in Asian societies. The purpose would be to challenge the processes of othering that assign a relatively passive or reactive role for the countryside and to instead draw attention to the agency of rural actors\, to alternative imaginaries of the future\, and to ask what role religion plays in specifically rural modernities. \nThe summer school thus invites participants to engage with\, and develop\, their own work through an exploration of the way religion and spirituality intersect with three key themes: (1) traversing and transcending the rural/urban divide; (2) the city and its “others”; (3) provincializing the city. A range of international speakers has been invited whose collective expertise connects questions of rural/urban religiosities and critical engagements with the category of “the city” in contemporary Asia. An innovative approach of this Summer School is to include both scholars who work on religion and those do not but whose research aims to critically engage with the category of “the city”. This combination of perspectives is expected to produce stimulating exchange and novel insights. \nSpeakers will include: \n\nProf. Michael Herzfeld\, Harvard University\nProf. Ursula Rao\, Leipzig University\nProf. Christina Schwenkel\, UC Riverside\nProf. Julia Huang\, National Tsing Hua University\, Taiwan (tentative)\nDr. Radhika Gupta\, Göttingen University\n\nProf. Herzfeld will provide a public keynote as well as a general workshop on successful thesis writing. Podium discussions and morning lectures will provide theoretical frames and ethnographic snapshots from diverse Asian contexts. In addition\, students will participate in small working and reading groups moderated and mentored by each of the invited speakers over the course of the School. Mandatory readings for these sessions will be shared in advance. Participants will have the opportunity to introduce their own work in working groups\, to connect their research to each of the three theme blocs\, in order to develop new ideas and learn new approaches for their own work. \nHighlights of the cultural program include: \n\nA visit to the historic Bodenwerder synagogue from 1825\, which was translocated to Göttingen in 2006 to find out about the transformation of religious sites in a local context.\nA city tour\, including guided tours of historically significant cemeteries.\n\nAbout the organizers\nGISCA\, CEMIS and CeMEAS are key institutions building research\, network and outreach capacities in the study of religions at Göttingen Research campus (GRC). Bringing together scholars in the social sciences and humanities for inter-disciplinary dialogue\, they in particular foster an appreciation of regional diversity and intra- and cross-regional entanglements in Asia. With GISCA’s expertise in the anthropology of Southeast Asia and CEMIS and CeMEAS core competence in South and East Asia respectively\, these centers complement each other\, join creative forces and pool their excellent academic networks to organize this Summer School. \nContact\nKarin Klenke at karin.klenke@cemis.uni-goettingen.de\nhttps://www.uni-goettingen.de/de/531996.html
URL:https://www.cemeas.de/event/summer-school-gottingen-spirit-2016-beyond-city-limits-rethinking-new-religiosities-asia-2/
LOCATION:Kulturwissenschaftliches Zentrum (KWZ)
CATEGORIES:Conference,Lecture,Workshop
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Paris:20160725T161500
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Paris:20160725T180000
DTSTAMP:20260407T095210
CREATED:20160718T082629Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20160718T082629Z
UID:4296-1469463300-1469469600@www.cemeas.de
SUMMARY:Lecture Series: What’s Religious about a Dead Body? Cadaver Donations in Taiwan
DESCRIPTION:CeMEAS lecture:\nWhat’s Religious about a Dead Body? Cadaver Donations in Taiwan \nMonday July 25\, 2016  · 4 pm (c.t.)  ·  KWZ 0.610\n Prof. C. Julia Huang\, National Tsing Hua University\, Taiwan/VisitingScholar\, The Ho Center for Buddhist Studies\, Stanford University \nDrawing from ethnographies\, in this lecture Prof. Huang will explore the phenomenon of a recent “surge” of cadaver donations for medical purposes in Taiwan. The setting is a university founded by Tzu Chi (Ciji)\, a charismatic movement that runs one of the largest charities of Chinese Buddhism in the world. Since Tzu Chi founded its medical school in 1994\, the total number of donors for whole body donation for medical education has increased from one in 1995 to over 34\,000 in 2013. To what extent is this increase of willed bodies a religious phenomenon? What is religious about the dead body? In this lecture\, Prof. Huang will analyze her ethnographies with different approaches to religion\, in hope that her work will shed light on the shifting concept of religion in a modern and multicultural context. \nImage: By University of Liverpool Faculty of Health & Life Sciences\, Anatomical diagram of the human skeleton (rear view)\, CC BY-SA 2.0\, https://flic.kr/p/huDYbS\nDesign: CeMEAS
URL:https://www.cemeas.de/event/lecture-series-whats-religious-dead-body-cadaver-donations-taiwan/
LOCATION:Kulturwissenschaftliches Zentrum (KWZ)
CATEGORIES:CeMEAS Lecture Series,Lecture
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Paris:20160725T161500
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Paris:20160725T180000
DTSTAMP:20260407T095210
CREATED:20160718T082629Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20160718T082629Z
UID:5413-1469463300-1469469600@www.cemeas.de
SUMMARY:Lecture Series: What’s Religious about a Dead Body? Cadaver Donations in Taiwan
DESCRIPTION:CeMEAS lecture:\nWhat’s Religious about a Dead Body? Cadaver Donations in Taiwan \nMonday July 25\, 2016  · 4 pm (c.t.)  ·  KWZ 0.610\n Prof. C. Julia Huang\, National Tsing Hua University\, Taiwan/VisitingScholar\, The Ho Center for Buddhist Studies\, Stanford University \nDrawing from ethnographies\, in this lecture Prof. Huang will explore the phenomenon of a recent “surge” of cadaver donations for medical purposes in Taiwan. The setting is a university founded by Tzu Chi (Ciji)\, a charismatic movement that runs one of the largest charities of Chinese Buddhism in the world. Since Tzu Chi founded its medical school in 1994\, the total number of donors for whole body donation for medical education has increased from one in 1995 to over 34\,000 in 2013. To what extent is this increase of willed bodies a religious phenomenon? What is religious about the dead body? In this lecture\, Prof. Huang will analyze her ethnographies with different approaches to religion\, in hope that her work will shed light on the shifting concept of religion in a modern and multicultural context. \nImage: By University of Liverpool Faculty of Health & Life Sciences\, Anatomical diagram of the human skeleton (rear view)\, CC BY-SA 2.0\, https://flic.kr/p/huDYbS\nDesign: CeMEAS
URL:https://www.cemeas.de/event/lecture-series-whats-religious-dead-body-cadaver-donations-taiwan-2/
LOCATION:Kulturwissenschaftliches Zentrum (KWZ)
CATEGORIES:CeMEAS Lecture Series,Lecture
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR