Blog Archives

Presentation 26 August: Mazu Worship and the Commercial Network of Chaozhou Merchants during the Qing Dynasty

We have the pleasure of inviting you to the presentation “Mazu Worship and the Commercial Network of Chaozhou Merchants during the Qing Dynasty” by Dr. Chen Jingxi (Huaqiao University, China). The lecture will be in Chinese.

Wednesday 26 August 2015 | 15.00~17:00 hrs. | Room 001, Arsenaal, Arsenaalstraat 1, 2311 CT Leiden

讲题:

《妈祖信仰与清代潮州海商网络》

提要:

本研究运用碑刻、方志、海关报告等资料,以时间为序,梳理清代康熙年间至同治年间,潮州海上贸易商人先后在苏州、上海、澄海、新加坡、汕头五地,建立起崇奉天后圣母,以“万某某”(其中四家为“万世某”)为名称的妈祖祭祀组织的历史脉络,藉此探讨流行于清代潮州族群中的妈祖信仰文化,与特定地域、特定行业人群的历史联系。

讲者:

陈景熙,国际潮籍博士联合会郑汉明学者交流奖励计划资助对象, 中山大学历史学博士,中国社会科学院世界宗教研究所宗教学博士后。现任华侨大学华侨华人研究院副教授、硕士生导师,华侨大学华侨华人文献中心主任、海外华人宗教研究中心副主任,泰国德教会紫真阁荣誉顾问,中国宗教学会理事,潮汕历史文化研究中心学术委员会、青年委员会主任委员,《潮学集刊》( The Journal of Chaoshan History and Culture Studies)主编,《华侨华人文献学刊》( The Journal of World Confederation of Institutes and Libraries for Overseas Chinese Studies)副主编,潮学网(http://www.chxw.net/)站长。

7 mei seminar Boek, letter, pijl en boog: Leiden en de Mantsjoes

Boek, letter, pijl en boog
Leiden en de Mantsjoes | Programma

07 mei 2015
Van 13:30 tot 16:15 uur
East Asian Library – Arsenaal

13:30
Aftrap door Léon Rodenburg en Fresco Sam-Sin

13:45-14:25
Van loden drukletter naar digitaal font: de typografische evolutie van
lettertypes voor de Mantsjoe taal. Door: Dr. Jo De Baerdemaeker

Over de oorsprong, de evolutie en het gebruik van authentieke Mantsjoe
drukletters. De Baerdemaeker zal aantonen waarom het nodig is
voormalige druktechnieken en de typografische karakteristieken van
Mantsjoe lettertypes te onderzoeken, om zo oplossingen te vinden voor de
ontwikkeling van nieuwe hedendaagse digitale Mantsjoe fonts.

14:35-15:15
De kracht van het boogschieten: de rol van pijl en boog bij de Mantsjoes.
Door: Peter Dekker

De Mantsjoes wierpen in 1644 de Ming omver. In de eeuw erna breidden
zij de grenzen uit tot een rijk dat over zo’n 36% van de toenmalige
wereldbevolking heerste. Opeens werden hun pijl-en-boog traditie het
symbool van de macht van China’s nieuwe dynastie, de Qing. Dekker
bespreekt deze traditie en legt uit hoe pijl en boog won van vuurwapens.

15:15
Pauze. Werp een blik op het tentoongestelde Mantsjoe-materiaal.

15:35-16:15
Spiegeltje, spiegeltje: klank, letter, pijl en boog in de Keizerlijke woordenboeken.
Door Fresco Sam-Sin

Mantsjoe-keizers hechtten veel belang aan hun encyclopedische
woordenboeken, spiegels. Dit was ingegeven door hun angst dat de
Mantsjoe-cultuur in de vergetelheid zou raken. Fresco Sam-Sin pakt de
onderwerpen en objecten op van Jo De Baerdemaeker en Peter Dekker, en
zet ze voor de Spiegel.

May 1, Leiden University: Talk by Art Critic Su Wei: Nothing about Matisse: the postponed modern and its intellectual trace

#SinArts Presents
NOTHING ABOUT MATISSE:
THE POSTPONED MODERN AND ITS INTELLECTUAL TRACE

When: May 1st 2015 15:15-17:00
Where: Leiden University, Lipsius 030.

#SinArts has the pleasure of hosting Art Critic and Curator Su Wei (苏伟, 1982) , recent winner of the inaugural IAAC award (with his essay on an exhibition of Yan Lei’s work.). Please join us to discuss the re-examination of art historical frameworks in China:

“On Feb. 3rd 1942, the Lu Xun Fine Arts Academy in Yan’an sent a delegation consisting of nine artists to the frontline of Anti-Japanese war. After their return to Yan’an, artist Zhuang Yan realized an exhibition along with two other members of the delegation. They presented some paintings they had finished during their visit at the frontline, which were then sharply criticized as ‘too much like Matisse’ and ‘alienated from the people’. Given the fact that the exhibition was held during the ‘Yan’an Forum on Literature and art’, one of the most significant events in China’s modern history of art, the ‘debate of Matisse’ inevitably turned into a political discussion. Mao Zedong’s talk at ‘Yan’an Forum on Literature and art’ stipulates that art should reflect the life of the ‘working class’ and serve politics, therefore, the ‘debate of Matisse’ doesn’t revolve around a certain formalist aesthetics, rather, it is a postponed discussion of modernism: ‘Matisse’ and its modern ideology never arrived.

The talk will elaborate on the influence of the ‘debate of Matisse’, focusing on several historical cases of art practice in the 30s, 80s, 90s and 2000s. By analyzing their context and various forms of struggle with political ideology, the talk will bring up several common issues shared by different art practitioners in different eras and an intellectual trace that leads to current state of Chinese contemporary art. On what basis can we discuss China’s art practice? How is the commercialized formalist wave, which is taking place in Beijing and Shanghai’s art scene, related to Chinese modern ideological development, what is missing and hidden on behalf of internationalization and globalisation? To what extend does or doesn’t Chinese artists’ modernist appeal overlap with the modernist blueprint of the state? All these questions need to be re-examined in a new art-historical framework that differentiates itself from the existing art historical narrative, which – since more than three decades – has been governing our understanding of China’s art practice with its dogma of cultural criticism and appropriation of occidental methodology.”

SU WEI
SU Wei (苏伟, 1982) is an independent art critic and curator, based in Beijing and Hong Kong. Since 2008, his work has focused on theoretical practice and writings on contemporary art. SU Wei received his PhD at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences in 2012, after spending two years researching his dissertation, at the Free University, Berlin. He took part in the ICI curatorial course in 2012 in New York and won the 1st prize of International Awards for Art Criticism (IAAC) in 2014.
SU Wei was involved in the curatorial team of Little Movements: Self-Practice in Contemporary Art, in 2011. In 2012 he co-curated the 7th Shenzhen Sculpture Biennale at OCAT, Shenzhen. In 2014, he curated, Keep the Modern Going: Immersion, Awaiting and Idealism, also at OCAT, as well as Position of Interference. Zhao Liang’s Solo Exhibition at the Three Shadows Gallery, in Beijing. His publications include Little Movements, Self-Practice in Contemporary Art (with others), 2011; Accidental Message: Art is Not a System, Not a World (with others), 2012; Individual Experience: Commentaries and Narratives of Chinese Contemporary Art from 1989-2013 (also with others) 2013. He has also written commentaries on each chapter of art historian Hans Belting’s monograph Art History after Modernism, in his own translation of the work.

For registration and extra information please contact info@sinarts.nl
This event is made possible with the generous support of the Confucius Institute at Leiden University.

Presentation 15 Sept: The Ming Court in a Chinggisid World by David M. Robinson

Presentation by David Robinson at the Leiden Institute of History, Monday Sept. 15

————————————————-

David Robinson
15 September 15.00u-17.00u
Huizinga Conference Room

The Ming Court in a Chinggisid World
David M. Robinson

During fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, the Ming court should be understood as one of many courts in Eurasia struggling to come to terms with the legacy of the Mongol empire. Such courts struck various poses vis-à-vis the Mongol empire: some announced themselves the proud successors to the Chinggisid mantle; some denounced the Mongols’ pernicious impact on society, culture, and morality; yet others focused on the restoration of pure native traditions; some tried to domesticate and subjugate the Chinggisid lineage; and finally others quietly appropriated technologies of governances used by the Chinggisids. Regardless of which combination of strategies they chose, polities throughout Eurasia shared a common point of reference, the memory of the Mongol empire and the living reality of the Chinggisid successors. During its first eighty years, the Ming court regularly and explicitly addressed the Chinggisids as both history and contemporary rivals in its effort to legitimate its position both at home and abroad. Such a strategy was predicated on the idea that the Chinggisids still mattered to a broad audience, from close neighbors like Korea, Jurchens, and Mongols, to more distant polities such as Hami, Turfan, and Tibet, all the way to Eastern Moghulistan and the Timurids.