Gender Inequality in the East Asia Family Unit.

While reading Susan Greenhalgh’s paper De-Orientalizing the Chinese Family Firm I could not help but draw links between my previous blog post about the stereotype of the Chinese work ethic and the family firm that Greenhalgh covers. In her paper, Greenhalgh seeks to deconstruct the discourse of the thesis on Confucian culture that had come about with the economic boom of Asia, especially the “four little dragons”, Taiwan, Hong-Kong, Singapore, and South Korea (1994:746). Greenhalgh takes a feminist stance while reconstructing the discourse.  This stance led me to think back about Stevan Harrell’s article and visualize where women stood in his description of the working family unit. Written almost ten years before Greenhalghs article, but still well within the post-modern period, Harrell portrays the perspective of women within the Chinese workplace, and their motivations towards having a higher or lower work ethics. In thinking about the feminist perspective, Harrell did a wonderful job in portraying a well rounded perspective of Chinese work ethic. In this, perhaps unintentionally, Harrell is breaking down the Orientalist discourse of the family unit that Greenhalgh seeks to do herself.

Greenhalgh covers a vast argument in her paper, what stood out to me was the political interest in keeping the age old ideas of Chinese values within the family unit. When Taiwanese families transitioned from a family unit to a family business unit, like any other businesses first starting, resources are scarce and every resource one does have must be used efficiently. This includes human power; in the beginning, when the labour is needed, women served a larger role in the family business, however, when the business grew, and resource were less scare, women tended to drop out of the business role to take a more tradition position in the family at home (1994: 760).

The nationalistic pride of showing the family unit as also a business unit further established the gender inequality within the family. With this political idea, Greenhalgh is attempting to break down these Confucian accounts about the traditional family to bring to light the aspects of gender inequality that had been oppressed by the growing political units. In this paper Greenhalgh does an excellent job and rooting out all of the overlooked inequalities in the family and business unit.

References

Greenhalgh, Susan. 1994. “De-Orientalizing the Chinese Family Firm.” American Ethonologist 21(4): 746-775.

Harrell, Stevan. 1985. “Why Do the Chinese Work so Hard? Reflections on an Entrepreneurial Ethic.” Modern China 11(2): 203-226.

Analysis of Chinese Work Ethic Stereotypes.

When touching on stereotypes of the Chinese, one of the foremost is that they convey a huge work ethic. Stevan Harrell covers this in his paper Why do the Chinese Work so Hard? Reflections on an Entrepreneurial Ethic. Harrell is looking to give an explanation for this stereotype, to see if there is a basis in it, and then to delve down and see what motivates them to be so productive and hard-working. This is an interesting aspect of a culture, to make a statement that widely covers most of the population and to see if there is actually any merit behind it. In this case, Harrell covers a series of accounts measuring across time, political groups and cultures. From this, he is creating a basis for the discussion of if indeed there is an increased work ethic among the Chinese (which they answer was mostly yes), and from there to determine which social groups held an above average work ethic and which did not. In doing this, one can look at where it is true and where it is not to see which variables affected the work ethic.

Harrell does a good job in staying neutral in his argument, to begin with laying out where and who had an increased work ethic and from there determining the causation of this increased value of hard work. He covers socialization, material incentives, and applications of an entrepreneurial ethic in trying to determine the source of this diligence. Harrell eventually lands of the point that individuals “will work hard when they see possible long-term benefits, in terms of improved material conditions and/ or security, for a group with which they identify” (1985: 217). This can be understood when one sees that unlike Western cultures, Chinese do not identify status and wealth in what they currently possess, but rather in what their descendants possess in the future. They are working towards the betterment of the family group, rather than the betterment of one’s own self (1985: 207).

This idea of a lack of selfishness to further increase the status of one’s family group is one that I find particularly interesting and which Harrell touches on quite and bit, which he calls the Entrepreneurial Ethic. The paper was very well written, and allowed the reader to see the basis behind the stereotype of Chinese having a higher work ethic than other cultural groups.

References

Harrell, Stevan. 1985. “Why Do the Chinese Work so Hard? Refelction on an Entreprenerial Ethic.” Modern China 11(2) : 203-226.

Primitive Calendars

For earlier societies whose existence was largely supported by farming, it becomes understandable that these societies would measure time around the agricultural periods. Festivals are often intermingled with certain agricultural events. Thus, these festivals will happen at the same time every year, with year being a loose definition of how it is understood in western culture. In Edmund Leach’s essay PrimitiveCalendars, he argues that the Triobanders do indeed have a fixed calendar with an intercalary month every one to three years (1950: 252).

Leach analyzes the works of two giants in the study of Triobandian culture, Malinowski and Austen, to determine whether or not the Triobanders have a functional calendar. Leach fills in the gaps between Malinowski and Austens data to form the decision that a calendar does exist and makes up for the gap between the lunar and solar cycles (1950: 250).

To begin with, Leach defines intercalation as “the means whereby the flexible lunar year is adjusted consciously or unconsciously in relation to the  fixed solar year as it exists in Nature” (1950: 249). In the case of the Triobanders, the insertion of an intercalary month is unconsciously made as there is no definition between the lunar and solar cycles. The Triobanders base their year around the fixed point of the Milamala festival, where in they see the arrival of the palolo worm (1950: 251). Using Malinowskis and Austens information, it is seen that there are four different areas, Vakuta, Kitava, Kuboma, and Kiriwina, that have a scattered time period for the Milamala festival, with each having it one month after the next and the cycle beginning nine lunar months later.

Maliowski originally theorizes that the shift in the festival correslates with the shift in harvesting times throughout the four areas (1950: 253), however then retracts this, showing that there is in fact no shift with the harvest times (1950: 254). This is interesting because it shows that the timing of the festival is not based upon the harvesting times, but rather the arrival of the palolo worm. If there palolo worm does not appear when it is expected, the festival month is doubled (seen as the intercalary month), and the following areas adjust their festival timings as well. Leach produces a table to show the relation of the months between each of the four areas, with the statement “To maintain this system on a regular 12-month cycle all that is necessary is that in addition to knowing the sequence of the four milamala festivals, Kitava should know that their Kuluwasasa coincides with Vakuta Utokakana, while Vakuta should know that their Kuluwasasa coincides with Kiriwina Milamala. This will provide the predictive apparatus for starting Kuluwasasa at the right moment” (1950: 255).

The Trioband Calendar System, Leach 1950: 253.

It is especially interesting to see how Leach was able to determine the calendar system of the Triobanders with information that was already available to both Malinowski and Austen. Sometimes a fresh pair of eyes is needed to show otherwise looked over information.  

References

Leach, Edmund. 1950. "Primitive Calendars." Oceania 20(4): 245-262.