Nativism is the Best Camouflage for “Closed-Door” Education

 Nativism is the Best Camouflage for “Closed-Door” Education

United Daily News Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan)

September 12, 2017

 Translation of an Excerpt

The battle over the ratio between classical and vernacular writings in the new high school Chinese literature textbook guidelines, after heated debate, remained unchanged, as proposed by the planning group of the Committee on Study and Revision under the Textbook Development Conference, i.e., 45-55%; this may be considered the last line of defense for professionalism in language and literature education. The discussion over the controversy, however, deeply tore open the scars in the identity of society, with a tendency to compound the rupture. The next stage of offense and defense will move to the core issue—the selection of writings. We believe that we must return to rational discussions, avoiding the staging of a drama of "backroom deals in disguise of democracy, bullying professionalism in the disguise of diversity."

The focus of this wave of dispute over classical and vernacular writings includes: greatly reducing the proportion of classical writings, unclear procedures in Internet voting, and six pieces of ten writings were obscure classical poetry by poets in Taiwan. This was originally an issue of a different dimension; they might be scrutinized separately from the professional perspectives of language, literature, culture or education. However, this time the operation of reviewing textbook guidelines attempted to appeal to "nativism" in order to achieve the objective of “de-Sinicization.” Such a “closed-door” education would inevitably sacrifice the quality and stature of learning on the part of students.

The dispute between classical and vernacular writings has lasted a hundred years; in essence, it has nothing to do with reunification and independence. However, the Tsai government erected a stage for a drama by a select few using the review of textbook guidelines as a pretext; from history to Chinese language and literature, they all aimed at accelerating the move of de-Sinicization. If history textbook guidelines could enable Taiwan to "exit China and enter Asia," could Chinese textbook guidelines, like "reducing the burning of incense becoming the extinction of incense burning" turn into something similar, i.e., "reducing classical writings becoming the extinction of classical writings”? This time the nightmare of reducing the ratio of classical writings has been temporarily dispelled; however, those who oppose reducing the ratio are adamant that they will not give up and would do battle in the selection of classical writings. Let us ask, if such self-contracted, “closed-door,” nativist education is not cultural suicide, what is?

[Translator’s note: In China, a hundred years ago, indeed a number of heavy-weight educators advocated vernacular writings instead of classical writings. However, the background was the Chinese population was 70-80% illiterate at the time; therefore, the focus was primarily to increase the literacy rate and enable those who had become literate to write what was in their mind without any classical references.

Times have changed. Taiwan has effectively eradicated illiteracy, thanks to a sustained period of peace, stability, and development under KMT administrations. Mainland China has been approaching the same goal. In Mainland schools, they are reemphasizing the teaching of classical writings.

Some commentators sarcastically state the Cultural Revolution in Mainland China is a thing of the past, but it seems to have found a new opportunity for rebirth in Taiwan.]

Attachment : none