A safer Ontario means more police and prosecutors making sure my car doesn't get stolen. It means building new jails to keep criminals behind bars. And it means there's no need to worry when I play at the park. We're making every corner of Ontario safer to make all of Ontario safer.
That's how we protect Ontario. For all of us. Learn how at ontario.ca. Pay for by the Government of Ontario.
It's springtime, which means that Princeton University Press is having its annual 50% off spring sale. From May 4th through June 9th, you can get 50% off nearly every single print, ebook and audio book from Princeton University Press. Just go to press.prinston.edu to get 50% off incredible books like Disneyland and the Rise of Automation. And beyond belief, how evidence shows what really works.
There's so many fantastic books you can get an incredible deal on. Go to press.prinston.edu and use the code spring50. That's spring50 at press.prinston.edu. This sale only lasts for a month, so go and get some books.
Welcome to the new books network. Hello everyone. Welcome back to the new books network in Chinese studies. My name is Eizhen, one of your channel hosts.
Today, we are very delighted to have Dr. D. Loewa with us on air to discuss her new monograph titled Beyond the Citizenship, Literacy in a Personhood in everyday China, 1900 to 1945, which was published by Briel in 2022. Dr.
Loewa is an assistant professor in the History Department at the University of Alabama. Her research interests include modern Chinese history, the history of everyday life, history of information management, comparative literacy studies and war and society. The book we'll discuss today, Beyond Citizenship, delves into the complex world of short-term literacy programs for young people and adults sponsored by the Guomintang and the Chinese Communist Party during the first half of the 20th century, a crucial period in Chinese history. The book highlights the ways in which state sponsors, administrators, educational reformers, educators and adult students shaped the meaning of literacy training through their relationship with other members of society and different social groups.
Dr. Loewa challenges the conventional nation-building modernization narrative of literacy by examining the diverse roles that literacy education played in social positioning. Through a detailed analysis of Guomintang and CCP's literacy programs, the book demonstrates how the experiences and outcomes of these programs were shaped by the political agendas of respective parties and the context-dependent perspectives of literacy held by the Chinese people. Furthermore, by moving beyond the citizenship framework and examining the multilateral negotiations among members of society, Dr.
Loewa provides at the audience with a fresh perspective on the relationship between state and society during China's transition from an imperial empire to a republic. Dr. Loewa, welcome to our show. Thank you, Yi, for your kind introduction and also it is my great pleasure to be here to talk about my book.
Thank you. Congratulations on the publication of your first amount of work. So the first question is, what inspired you to become interested in the topic of literacy training and its impact on identity politics in early 20th century China? Thank you for the question.
So overall, my research interests focuses on the history of 20th century China and one of the defining characteristics of this era is the rise of modern nation state. So I have long been interested in the issue of how ordinary people, especially those in relative disadvantage position, experienced expansion of state power in everyday life during this period. And without literacy training, I consider was one meeting ground between the state and the people of the lower social sector. So in this case, those refer to the illiterate people.
So this literacy training program provides me a concrete angle to examine how ordinary Chinese experience the rise of modern nation state. Wonderful. Obviously, you're interested in discovering the voices of ordinary Chinese people has already involved into this comprehensive study presented in the book. So from the very beginning, like in the introduction chapter and in the first chapter, you argue that the biases invented in the narrative of nation building and modernization played a significant role in people's acceptance of political authorities called for literacy training.
So before we dove into the case studies of your book, could you please elaborate on like what these biases were and discuss some of the ways that this bias is detached the narratives from the daily experience of the ordinary people and how they're effective in their participation in state sponsored literacy programs? Oh, thank you for the question. So what I discussed as the biases embedded in the nation building modernization narrative of literacy, I perceive it existed at several levels. So first of all, this narrative basically introduced one particular perspective to understand the importance of literacy.
And within this perspective literacy was considered essential for training qualified and responsible modern citizens. And mass literacy was treated as a precondition to building a modern nation state. And this view, however, largely reflect the perception of Chinese culture and political leaders, including educators, reformers, social activists, and political parties in the 20th century. And secondly, I consider this narrative defined literacy's importance, basically on the abstract collective level as an index of national power, and basically the literacy rate marked development of countries' status along a linear progression from backward to advanced.
And the importance of literacy was understood out of social context and the daily interactions. So this is what I define as one aspect of the biases of this narrative. I see fascinating. So I think the chapter one of your book really highlights the biases invented in the nation building modernization perspective literacy.
And it shows people's participatory experiences really complicated the social impact of these literacy training programs, often in ways that were not necessarily intended by party sponsors. And from the chapter two to chapter five, you use several case studies to demonstrate this point, to substantiate this point. In chapter two, you discuss the changing approaches of the literacy training first in 1924, Shanghai, and then in 1926, Guangzhou. So in its 1924 program, Guangzhou did not intend to use literacy training for, as you said, in Arabic, straightforward political indoctrination among the less educated.
And the nationalist party used it as an opportunity to groom its selected revolutionary leaders among those middle-school credits. But just two years later, in 2006, Guangzhou, the math literacy training program had significantly changed from its 1924 version. The 1926 program emphasized the party authority or purification down why as you referred to it in Arabic as a main objective. So could you please explain to our audience how the shifting priorities of the nationalist government influenced these approaches and the ways in which literacy training became a multi-dimensional context dependent process with all these various social implications?
Yeah, I think to answer this question, so let me first explain what I mean by literacy training as a multi-dimensional process with various social implications. So basically, in the book, I propose a new method to study the social impact of literacy training, which I call as a holistic perspective. So what I mean by this is to examine not only how literacy training affected illiterate adults as students and trainee, but also how the process affected its sponsors, managers, and teachers, in the sense of who they were and how they positioned themselves in the society. So this is what I mean by literacy training as a multi-dimensional process with various social implications.
Yeah, and actually the CCP's literacy program in 1924 Shanghai offers us a very good example. So maybe I think it will be helpful to talk about the social and historical contact for this literacy program. So what do we see in 1924 Shanghai? So basically it was the moment that the Communist Party and the Nationalist Party just formed this political alliance that united front with the CCP joined the GM data Communist Party.
So what I call as this is a former hybrid party basically. Yeah, and also at that moment in Shanghai, this group, they were revolutionaries. Their activities were watched and censored by Wall-R-Regime. And also in addition, at that time, the mass education movement led by Yang Yang Chu, also known as James Nguyen, had arrived in Shanghai and draw a lot of support from educators, including middle school teachers and students.
So this is what I perceive as the social historical contacts for the GMD and CCP when they start to collaborate on mass education in Shanghai. And when they try to formulate their program and start to reason the importance of the program. So clearly from their document from the document issue that the party is explaining the importance of mass education, it clearly showed that the party leaders had in mind several communities when they start to reason the importance of adult literacy training in Shanghai. So of course the illiterate adults in Shanghai was one of the community.
They take into consideration, but at the same time, they also want to engage those well-educated individuals who cared about mass education and dedicated themselves to this cause. So party leaders hope that through sponsoring mass education, they will be able to invoke sympathy towards the party from the supporters of mass education and to form a alliance with them. So they constantly choose not to politicize its literacy program. So in that way, so they will not differentiate the party-sponsored program from those sponsored by mass education movement led by Yang Chu, Shanghai.
And also this approach had another pragmatic advantage because it could have the party evade censorship by war wars and does give them opportunities to get close to the masses and develop itself. And lastly, organizing on the adult literacy training was also helpful to forge ties among members of this newly formed hybrid party. As the party leader reasoned that mass education training was the type of work that almost every party member could get involved. Through the shared work experience of teaching mass literacy, rather than ideological conformity, the party members were able to develop a sense of belonging to the party as a whole.
So to this purpose was again, deep politicizing the content of literacy could be helpful as it diverted party members' attention from the potential debates over political messages to be delivered instead they can focus on teaching and running the literacy program. That's I think the over historical social context decided the priority that the party leaders took on in designing their program in Shanghai, to try to avoid political indoctrination, and focus on cultivated sympathy towards party in the broadest possible public. Yeah, and also if we move on to talk about a literacy program in Guangzhou from 1925 to 1926, we would look at a different historical and local context. So in Guangzhou, we are the GMD basically able to gain a foothold in 1917.
However, they constantly have a struggle against the local wall art. So eventually it was in February 1926, the GMD was able to secure military dominance in Guangzhou. And then starting from July 1st, that year in 1926, the GMD declared another expedition with the goal of ending the wall art rule and reunified country. And by September 1926, the non-expedition claimed initial victory against wall art in central China.
So the GMD's literacy program in this area basically respond to this changing local circumstance and also the changing position of the party in the local and national political conditions. So we see that reflect in its literacy program in the initial initiative made by the party in 1925. It includes this agenda of so-called civic education in its literacy program, which is a different from Shanghai. We do not want to politicize our content.
We just want to blend in. We want to be just a seemingly look like other programs organized by the programs of young chus mass education movement. But in Guangzhou, they take a more affirmative stance in terms of they want to have the leadership training as part of civic education. However, in 1925, we still see the target group of its leadership training was still somehow relatively limited.
It focused upon those individuals between the ages of 14 and 30. It was only in September 1926 after its initial victory of the non-expedition to reunify China, the internationalist started to invasciate across the country as the target of its literacy program. And also, it was at that moment the central leaders start to emphasize and also to start to explore legitimacy exclusively to so-called national language for literacy instruction. So prior to that point, the GMD literacy program in Guangzhou promoted literacy in the local dialect.
So in a way to win the heart of local residents to consolidate its foothold in Guangzhou. And so over we see this local circumstance and the place of the party in national politics influenced its shifting priority in literacy training. Thank you so much. Thank you for sharing with us, especially with collaboration on the detailed social historical context of these two 1920s literacy programs in Shanghai and Guangzhou.
And I think you made a very clear point from the first two K-studies that literacy training was not purely about reading and writing, right? Rather, it was about the interaction of people involved. That's the reason the goals and strategies of these programs changed in our contents with these changing contexts. And people employed these literacy training programs as opportunities to develop or enact their relationships with different people and multiple communities.
Yeah, so moving to the next chapter, chapter three, you explore the competition between the women down and the CCP in sponsoring mass education from 1928 to 1936 with each party adopting a distinctive narrative about the importance of literacy. Could you elaborate on the key differences between their respective narratives and how this controls the approaches of shaped outcomes and the social impacts of their literacy programs? Oh, thank you for the question. I really liked the part of this book in terms of comparing the different narrative and frameworks made by these two parties because they are so different in terms of how they frame the artistic programs in this period between 1928 and 1936.
So we see, at that time, the Nationalist Party claimed control of the central government. And in its definition about the importance of mass education, basically it construes it as a part of this effort for eventually obtain constitutionalism. And in this whole process, they adopt the term initially as so-called impaired citizens, Bougie and Chen to describe the illiterate people in 1929. And then later in 1936, a user term of so-called shishio Min-jong and scoot masses to describe illiterate people.
So what we see in these two terms, so basically they both describe illiteracy as a kind of personal failure. The term of impaired citizens, so Bougie and Chen, Guo Min, basically implied that the illiterate people were incapable of becoming economically productive, politically engaged, and patriotically concerned. And the term of unschooled masses basically marked the failure of those individuals to fulfill the mandate of compulsory primary education. So in order to the way the party the Nationalist Party proposed to address the failures, those personal failures, is to obtain literacy through state-sponsored short-term training programs.
However, if we look at this proposal, this solution, it's quite doubtful if we look at it from the perspective of the people who participate in those training. And most of those short-term training only last about two to six months. So it's quite doubtful that those students would consider themselves literate after quite eating from those programs. And also many of them actually dropped out before completing So if we put those things together, what we see here is the narrative promoted by the GMD, basically placed illiterate at us, primarily in the social relationship with the educated the literate.
And this narrative basically perpetuates the image of the power hierarchy between illiterate impaired citizens and literate competent citizens. And the only path to change illiterate persons' social position was to obtain food literacy. However, this goal was not able to be obtained through the short-term training program provided by the state. So and also other, if we look at the frameworks the Nationalist Party used after 1928 to evaluate its literacy effort, we see it largely relied on this quantitative measurement, including enrollment numbers and literacy rate, to present its mass education efforts.
However, given the instability within and the invasions from outside, it was quite challenging for the Nationalist Party, all probably for any government, to bring about a quick and substantial increase in the literature rate in the 1930s and the 1940s. So in comparison, in contrast, if we look at the narrative of frameworks used by the CCP during the early 1930s, so largely the CCP presented illiteracy not as a personal failure, but as a result of class exploitation. So this perspective gave power to the action of acquiring literacy. So no matter how occasionally those actions would be, those actions actually create a sense of empowerment to the less educated, in relation to the rage and the well-educated.
Why is that so? Basically, they're talking about the reason why you are illiterate because you lack of opportunity to be educated. And therefore, once they get opportunity and actually they act out, they enroll in those literacy training. So that action along somehow are able is this kind of hazard power to generate a sense of empowerment.
So this matter of all no matter whether those people are able to obtain literacy or not. So this is kind of what I say or summarize describe as the way of CCP's way of managing literacy, which afforded a view of empowerment to the action of learning, regardless of whether a person becomes literate or not. And also this action-oriented view guided CCP's narrative to focus on the stories of individuals' transformative experiments. So it's different from the GMD's focus on statistics, focus on quantitative measurement.
Even though the CCP also uses literacy rate, etc. However, in its narrative, it also highlights those personal transformative stories. And those stories were able to give a compelling, cogent presentation to present the capability of the party in bringing changes to personal life and nation. So that's what I see as the major differences in terms of the narratives and frameworks used by these two parties during the early 1930s.
I see very interesting and inspiring to see these crucial differences between warming down literacy programs and CCPs. And basically, based on your just elaboration and the book I read, though they both believed in the importance of literacy in nation building, their conceptions of how exactly literacy could help build a modern nation state were very different from each other. And you further elaborate and demonstrate this point of argument in the next two chapters, which both focuses on the wartime period from 1937 to 1945. So the next chapter, chapter 4, you delve into the management of literacy programs during World Han in 2017 and the social impacts of these programs.
So what were the key challenges faced by the wartime nationalistic government, particularly in aligning the participatory experiences with the state agenda for training the patriotic citizens? And what were the multi-dimensional social impacts of the government provided at a literacy training during this specific time period? Yeah, so when I investigated this time period, I really kind of deeply felt the limitation faced by my historians. So basically, we have to rely on archival documents to investigate past experiences, right?
So we cannot do ethnographic work to see how the literacy program were actually implemented and what word experience looked like for those participants. So we have to gather our knowledge from government reports that documented those activities. And my conclusion about the key challenges the nationalist government faced during this time period basically are based on my analysis of those government reports. So what I see from those documents are the lack of cohesive and systematic implementation from the administrators to teachers and students that linked literacy training experience with patriotic commitment.
So basically what we see this, we can see this divergence at a different level. On the policy level, so according to the Ministry of Education and also those policy makers, basically they present and perceive literacy training as essential means to cultivate patriotic commitment. However, if we move down to next level in terms of implementation, in terms of managing, and what we see there is the administrators and teachers when they documented the literacy program, they largely evaluate the program by enrollment numbers. So there were no detailed documentation about any patriotic activities in which students were supposed to participate.
All they provide any evidence showing the efforts made by administrators and teachers to explore students' behavior and conceptual transformation through literacy training. So that kind of was kind of divergence. What I speak to what I mean by this lack of cohesive systematic implementation that really align kind of this literacy initiative with this patriotic commitment from students. And also this documentation culture in turn influenced how those administrators and teachers implemented the meaning of their work.
So with a focus upon statistics in the human number, etc., basically they shaped their perspective in understanding the meaning of their work largely as fulfilling the quotas assigned by their superiors. And those members, however, were not quite helpful in leading them to see the value of their work in making meaningful transformation in the people's life of those kind of trainees, those illiterate adults. So that's what I see as major challenges. And in terms of the multi-dimensional social impact of the GMD sponsored that was for training during wartime, I emphasize that even though the literacy program couldn't fulfill its goal of turning illiterate adults to become literate or the goal of eliminating illiteracy among the general publics, those programs had their own values in other areas.
So first of all, what we see is the GMD in late 1937, they pre-claim a goal of eliminating illiteracy in China within the year. So I want to argue that we shouldn't consider, okay, this is a realistic or irrational of a goal. But I want to emphasize this short timeframe, actually the party proposed spoke to this accurate urgency that is censored by many Chinese at a time. It can reflect the state's determination and rapid response in coping with the national crisis.
And it therefore offered a hope that China would quickly come together as a strong nation, as a strong national entity, and a hope that can kind of resonate with those who believe in the power of literacy to produce patriotic actions and cultivate patriotism among general populace. So in other words, the meaning of this program may not lie in the interaction or relationship between the state and the less educated, but it has a meaning in the relationship between the state and those well-educated people who believe in the power of literacy training in cultivating patriotic actions in cultivating citizenship. At the same time, I also see the value of the nationalist adult literacy training during one time. In terms of it offer a means of living, a means of a livehood for teachers who follow the nationalist government and relocate to Chongqing.
And so the literacy training program basically provides them a job opportunity. So those are also the areas where I see the impact or the social meaning of those programs organized by the GMD. Thank you. That's very interesting to see the interpretations and experiences of local administrators, teachers, and students of these party-sponsored literacy programs were distinct from the political elites or those policymakers of Womindang.
And as you just said, local agents probably, they saw such programs as a means to make a living or acquire other personal gaze. And though the Womindang probably cannot achieve its goal to cultivate literary citizens or patriotic citizens, it could actually use this program as a means to establish more close connections with those literary elites. This is fascinating. And in the last case study in chapter five, you explore the evolution of CCP's literacy programs in its non-Western, gen-space area during the same period, same wartime period, 1937 to 1945.
And you investigate how these programs impacted the social dynamics and identities in the border areas of the CCP. So like for example, in the 1940s, the Winter School Program, basically before the 1941, the CCP's goal of its literacy program was mainly to mobilize the villagers' national consciousness for support of the war, but this goal, as you demonstrated, largely failed. And consequently, the CCP made constant adjustments in following years. So can you discuss these adjustments made by the CCP party leaders in 1941 and in 1944 in their approach to literacy training and how these changes impacted the promotion of social identity and mass life policy among villagers?
Yeah, thank you for the question. So actually, in the book, I wasn't able to elaborate on the detail changes the party made prior to 1944, just because of the limit of space. And also, I want to give more attention to these more substantial changes that come in in a year of 1944. So yes, as you said, so for the party member, they make assessment about their initial years of so-called winter schooling, they offered this little training during winter time and tried to evaluate what was considered as successful and what the shortcomings are as well as what they are during that program.
So the initial response in 1941, so they're talking about the one to improve the quality of their training program because they perceive the major shortcomings for the 1940 program was that they focused too much on popularizing the program in terms of increase the accessibility to schooling among villagers. And actually, that perception reflects how the party leaders in North Western Sanchi also influenced by this nation-building and modernization narrative, perspective that readily spread and embraced by Chinese intellectuals, well-educated people at the time. So they basically initially believed, okay, the lack of access was the primary reason why there were so many illievered people living in the countryside. And therefore, their program is tried to improve accessibility by establishing those literacy programs, training facilities, and make them accessible to villagers.
And it turned out the enrollment rate or the numbers of students in the learning program were not in the way as they expected. So and then they reached, okay, what was the causes for this? They're talking about probably the teachers who run those programs were not good enough. They are not qualified teachers.
But at that moment, they evaluate what kind of qualified teacher, so they largely consider it still based upon their educational levels. So they're talking about how they want to improve the quality of teacher, make sure those teachers were really aware and have good knowledge about the party policies and they know how to run the program. So basically, it's more talking about the pedagogy, teaching pedagogy, etc. Right?
So that's what we see as adjustments they made in 1941. So they want to advertising upon quality over quantity. And we see that as enough agenda continue into 1942 and 1943. Until 1944, we see substantial changes adjustment made in this area.
So because of in response to the mass line policy promoted by the Central Party, and we see the substantial transform of reprogramming of literacy program in this area. So now they start to reevaluate what kind of as a qualified teacher for the program. We see they move away from this many folks upon educational level and cultural credential, etc. So they more focus upon how those teachers, winter school teachers, they were treated, viewed, or how their relationship with local residents looks like.
So they want to select those individuals where well regarded has a local reputation. So in that way, they consider those are good teachers. In addition, in 1944, so maybe they recrew teachers among local countries. So basically, those people serve in the leadership position already in the village, like as a village head or as leader in those mass organizations, etc.
So they're in this way, they also changed literacy training in 1944 as a way to transform the, the majority of style of those local countries. To make sure they, they will kind of solicit opinions, they will willing to work with local villagers to solve local problems. And to do so, in their teacher training program, they emphasize upon the so-called discussion centered training rather than this lecture centered training. So that reminds me about, we're talking about teacher centered, educated in our days.
So basically the winter school teacher training program, they want to show how to organize class discussions, how the teachers basically serve as a facilitator in the discussion, and they propose a discussion topic, and they basically moderate the conversation, and they try to encourage the input from, from the students. So over their teaching experience can become an example to show them how to implement so-called mass land policy in local, in local administration. And also we see substantial change in terms of the content of training. So the 1944 program starts to feature introduction instructions in how to calculate taxes, create production plans, and also organize local cooperatives.
So those contents I show arguing in the book, they really engage the social realities of those villagers. And those programs allow those villagers to envision new ways of how they can associate with one another. And also, mostly importantly, the 1944 program, they start to introduce a new social identity called as Lao Dong, the laboring people. And they also, along with this new identity of laboring people, so they also advocate this idea that laboring people created the world.
And so basically, they entitled people who worked, who labor to the source of wealth, they are entitled to the produce from the land. So in this way, they are able to create a sense of moral superiority to the laboring people with the way the leader class. And this slogan and this idea also legitimize this rent reduction request by the renters of the land. So that's one of the major reasons why we see that it's better responsive from the local society to the party's policy of land reduction in 1944.
And also, this laboring people created the world also further accommodate this villagers' desire of becoming rich. Because, previously, there are some concerns among villagers, they worry that if they improve production and they increase their income, they potentially will become victim of class struggle. They potentially will have will be burdened more in tax payment to the government. So the whole winter schooling program in 1944, basically, advocates' idea of laboring people created the world and also legitimize the villagers' desire to become rich.
So that's over. Or the 1944 program enabled the villagers to represent themselves in local communities to form new social ties. And so that's the reason why we see a better reception of villagers towards the 1944 program. Interesting.
So I think you definitely made a fantastic comparison between Gomindan and Sisipi's approaches to literacy training in different time periods. And from the analysis in the book, it appears that the Sisipi was more successful in engaging a large number of Chinese people in their literacy programs compared to Gomindan. You have already talked about the crucial differences between the two parties' programs of their approaches and strategies. Which, elaborate on the factors of that contributed to this situation.
How did the Sisipi manage to be more flexible and accommodating in implementing this program? And my current project focuses on the PRC history. So I'm wondering did this flexibility continue after 1949? Yeah, I think that's very important.
We see the kind of continuity and connection between the history of prior to 1949 and after. So yeah, I think the major differences between these two parties approach, I think, exist in several aspects. So first of all, as I mentioned, the framework, the narrative utilized by the two parties were so different. So the GMD as the leader, as a party control central government.
So basically they created a narrative talking about defining the importance of literacy, mass education, as a preparation for constitutionalism. And they rely on this quantitative measurement, enrollment number, and the literacy rate. And so this type of quantitative scale or quantitative perspective basically constrain the GMD in terms of really give a persevasive presentation about their achievement in mass education. Just because the limitations at the time they are not able to show or able to really bring about a substantial increase in the literacy rate.
And in comparison, the CCP at the time prior to 1949, basically, these are revolutionaries, they are challengers, they are in a different position in the national politics compared to the GMD. And also in the CCP's narrative, basically, they foregrounded literacy as index of social inequality. And also, they asserted that mass literacy could be achieved only after the establishment of a pro-littering state attained through a CCP-led revolution. So in this way, they basically put off the task of achieving a universal literacy while competing against the nationalists for national leadership.
And after becoming the ruling party in 1949, the CCP, we see lack of the GMD. They also started to use national literacy rate to evaluate its progress in mass education. So I feel this kind of different framework and also the narrative afforded to this two party also conditioned by their position, their place in international politics at the time. Interesting.
I really want to figure out how the people's in localities have really responded to the post-1949 literacy programs sponsored by the party state. So the book really challenges a linear teleological transition or narrative of moving from the imperial subjects to republic citizens and encourages understanding the experiences of Chinese people in the early 20th century as they transitioned from the imperial empire to republic. So how does the book locate the meaning and function of literacy training in multilateral negotiations among members of society? And what implications that this has for the way we understand literacy and citizenship in early 20th century China?
Yeah. So I think I treat my book as case study from this angle of adult literacy training to understand the state society relations in early 20th century China. And so far when we're talking about the state society relationship in China during this time period, so largely I think many of the scholarship has been influenced by this citizenship framework. And this framework, I perceive it focuses our attention to a singular dimension in the relationship between state and society.
So although scholars have discussed the different meanings and practices of citizenship, what is missing in this picture is how members of the society relate to one another and how the state interacted with multiple social connections. So as I show in the book, so the process of literature training actually not only affected the relationship between the illiterate adults and state, but also affected how illiterate adults position themselves in relation to their family members, peers and townsmen, and how teachers and administrators relate to their colleagues and other mass education sponsors. So those multi-dimensional relations as whole give meanings to people's participatory experiences and also give meanings of literacy in the social context. So in that regard, so that's what I mean by this multi-lectric negotiations among members of the society.
And I argue that the states goal were better served only when literacy training enabled students to represent precision themselves, favorably relative to other members of the local community. So we need to place these state and society relations in this multi-dimensional of social interactions among social members. So very inspiring. So the next question is that we both historians, we care about the sources and I see that your book really relies on archives from different localities.
Could you talk about the nature of these sources and how was your archive research and any fun episodes you want to share with our audience? Yeah, of course. I think as I mentioned, so my major source of evidence from government records and the way I approach those government documents is not only a treatment as source of information, rate of contents, but also I perceive those documents as practices of its producers. And I try to engage in the invasion.
What kind of meaning those document producers can generate while they produce those documents. So that's what I, the ways I analyzing those so-called cultural documentation of these two parties. And also quite interesting, we see these distinctive record-keeping practices between these two parties and for the GMD, many of the documents we see the feature with those enrollment numbers, statistical data, and for the CCP, somehow, especially in the case of North West China, especially we see after 1944, we see more detailed description about what was happening on the ground. They present this scenario, a scene of those social interactions between teachers and students.
So that's what I think about in terms of the way how we approach, when we encounter different types of documents, how should we interpret the differences? What those differences can tell us? So that's what I think is changing different perspectives. The ways we approach the document probably can open up a new scan of horizon research.
And yeah. And when did you do that kind of research before the COVID? Yes. How was that?
Yeah, because this project is based upon dissertations. So I benefit a lot in terms of the opportunity as a graduate students are able to go to archive for whole years. They are just immersed yourself into this kind of materials, etc. And I did just kind of go back to visit some archives afterwards after graduation and able to just kind of collect additional materials, etc.
But yeah, I haven't been back for a while. I don't know. Many years, right? Yeah, so the biggest revise from your dissertation.
I mean, I'm also a post-graduate and I'm curious about the revising process from the dissertation to the manuscript. So any insights you want to share with me and other young scholars, like one then how to start to revise your dissertation after you officially fly on dissertation, right? And what should we contact the publishers? How to find a suitable publisher?
Yeah. So I think I got advice from friends and senior colleagues. And so they basically recommend to, okay, you just take a break from this. Because I think we need that time, right?
So if we landed on the job or we are looking for a job, we need to spend more time in other areas, out job market and polishing, our teaching, etc. And also I think that also be helpful in terms of mentally. So you not feel guilty of not continuing to working on dissertation while you have to be busy with other responsibilities, etc. And taking a break, that's also is really helpful in my case because it allowed me to come back with a fresh pair of eyes and to look at the framework, the fundamental framework that able to tie all my cases together to tie my argument together.
So I was able to find a better framework to present my argument. And also other things I benefit greatly from interdisciplinary studies, interdisciplinary perspectives, because I got lots of inspiration from a friend in linguistic anthropology. And she offered me a lot of insights and also inspiration in describing and understanding the ways in which individuals make sense of themselves and also how one place oneself in social relations. So I feel I benefit greatly from other disciplines in terms of their framework, their theories, analyzing social relations and how language and action function in social interaction.
So in terms of finding a suitable publisher, so I think you can start a conversation with publishers after graduating. So you can just talk with them and ask about whether your topic will be a good faith with the press and also get to know what the procedure and timeline looks like. So you're able to plan accordingly and also to find a suitable publisher. So one way is just to look at the scholars in your field with public, with press they have published with.
So that probably is a good indicator about what would be a suitable publisher for your work. Thank you. Thank you for the generous sharing. I will I mean keep some distance from a dissertation and find some allies in other disciplines and also probably begin to talk with some publishers.
So Dr. what is your next project? Oh, thank you. So I would love to continue the topic of all the press education and probably bring it to post 1949.
But at this moment I just want to take a break and work on something different. So currently I'm working on a project that examines information exchange among family members, friends and state functionaries across political borders during second-side of Japanese war. So yeah, I want to like to examine how commoners and Chinese government entities meet in contact with individuals and institutions behind enemy lines. And also how people make sense of the nation state during a time of break chaos.
And so I feel that by answering those questions I was able to highlight people's evolving sense of who they were in relation to family, local community members, state and nation. So a multi-dimensional perspective that I carried forward from my first book project. That's interesting. I look forward to really your new research in the information management.
And also I look forward to really your literature program studies after the 1949. Okay, thank you so much Dr. Luv for discussing your fascinating monograph, sharing your research and insights with us today. Through our discussion I have gained deeper understanding of the historical complexities of literacy training and its implications for citizenship and identity politics in early 20th century China.
And thank you to all our audience for listening to this episode. We hope you found this discussion as enlightening and engaging as we did. For those interested in learning more, we highly encourage you to get your own hard copy of Dr. Luv's book, Beyond Citizenship.
We look forward to bringing you more thought-provoking conversations with scholars in the field of Chinese studies. Goodbye.