The Institute of Area Studies, Peking University (PKUIAS) held the fourth lecture in its series titled “Autonomous Knowledge System Construction and New Perspectives in Area Studies” on October 30. The seminar, named “China Studies in North American Area Studies: History, Present and Prospects,” took place at the School of International Studies, Peking University in Beijing. Chen Li, associate professor of the Department of History at the University of Toronto and invited scholar at Peking University, led the lecture, with Zhang Yongle, deputy dfirector of PKUIAS, moderating the session.
Chen Li initiated the seminar by outlining various stages of China studies in the West and North America. From the 17th to the 19th centuries, Western understanding of China was fragmented and primarily based on information from Western missionaries, tourists, diplomats, and media reports. The first half of the 20th century marked the second phase, where Sinology studies became institutionalized in universities. The analytical framework introduced by Fei Zhengqing, based on the “Western impact-Chinese response” model, became a significant research paradigm in Western Sinology. The third phase, post-World War II, saw the rise of post-colonialism and its critique of Orientalism, with area studies during the Cold War characterized by practical and utilitarian approaches. This era also witnessed crucial reflections and breakthroughs within North American studies on China, leading to notable developments in the field.
The seminar then shifted to discuss the evolution of research topics in North American China studies. While earlier decades focused on traditional culture, modernization, and social transformation, recent studies have diversified into areas like transnational and global history, environmental history, and the history of emotions. Chen Li highlighted the tension between Chinese area studies and mainstream research fields in North America, noting the limited influence of Chinese studies on other mainstream social science disciplines. He also pointed out the challenges in dialogue between local Chinese scholars and their North American counterparts, due to theoretical, linguistic, and academic differences.
Chen Li further explored the present and future of China Studies, acknowledging significant progress in research scale, discipline identity, language skills, and professionalism. However, he emphasized the need for increased dialogue with top international scholars in other fields. He argued for a separation of academic and political discourse in future China studies and advocated for the adoption of the latest interdisciplinary theories to enhance the discipline’s value and contribution.
The discussion session saw various faculty members from Peking University engage with Chen Li’s presentation. Topics ranged from the decoupling of area studies in North America from their own country’s history, comparative area studies between China and the US, and the shortcomings of new generation China researchers in North America. Assistant Professor Xie Kankan discussed academic authority structures in Southeast Asian studies, while other professors explored the dual role of international law in China, the relationship between area studies and social science theory innovation, and the “New Qing History.”
Associate Professor Zheng Xiaowei from the University of California, Santa Barbara, pointed out perspective differences in China studies, emphasizing the need for researchers with diverse viewpoints to construct commonalities to refine theories. Chen Li concluded the seminar with detailed responses to the questions and thoughts raised by the attendees.
