Search results

After the Event; Contents; Acknowledgements; Introduction; Chapter 1 -- Transmitting Loss; Chapter 2 -- Comparing the Incomparable: The Third Reich and a Phase of Maoism; Chapter 3 'Communism' in Mainland China and Taiwan: Official Transmission of the Great Leap Famine and of the White Terror; Part I -- The Great Leap Famine; Chapter 4 -- Moral and Political Dilemmas from the Great Leap Famine; Chapter 5 -- Implicit Transmission: The Generation Gap after the Great Leap Famine; Part II -- The Luku Incident of the White Terror; Chapter 6 -- Disruption, Commemoration and Family Repair in Taiwan.

Socialist governance and popular sovereignty require state administration of care. In the People's Republic of China (PRC) today, such state care is provided in the form of public services and in the guarantee of social security. Ideally, different levels of government should foster relations of care in local communities and remain responsive to "the people." Local self-government, relations of mutual support and ritual communities, however, reveal the deficits of state care. Much like general philosophies of care, such local ethics of care propose universal benchmarks against which social practice can be measured. This article outlines the main contours of state care in the post-Mao Zedong PRC, and contrasts its findings with empirical research on public services, social security and ritual responsiveness. Mutual help, neighbourhood communities and ritual practice, in particular, provide alternative models of care. As such, they can be extended and universalized, and offer possibilities for a critique of care. (China Q/GIGA)

I shall argue that most religious ritual is a performance that not only invokes but also performs communication. The ethnographic material from which I derive this argument is from China, in particular the temple rituals of local festivals. My argument is that a deep obeisance of welcome and departure that is both like and not like the normal ritual of greeting marks a religious from a non‐religious ritual occasion and place. It is a ritual doubling that makes the honoured guest also a host. Religious ritual is a medium, and as a medium it is double in another sense. It is deference and deferral, a repeated transmission of obeisance to authority that has the authority of repetition. As well as doubling, religious ritual is excessively communicative. The medium is a performance not only of invitation and departure but also of communicative response, and it repeats this communication as a test of communicative response over and over again. Religious ritual performs both the opening and closing of communication, both the seeking and the responsive reciprocation of gift offerings with bounteousness. It is shadowed by the possibility of no response, of giving offence, of being abandoned. This possibility is acknowledged by being prevented, while the possibility that the performers are their own responders is disavowed.