{"id":1711,"date":"2020-03-05T17:41:43","date_gmt":"2020-03-05T17:41:43","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/transnationalhistory.net\/doing\/?p=1711"},"modified":"2020-03-05T17:41:47","modified_gmt":"2020-03-05T17:41:47","slug":"unifying-the-world-kang-youweis-vision-of-the-global-in-datong-shu","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/transnationalhistory.net\/doing\/2020\/03\/05\/unifying-the-world-kang-youweis-vision-of-the-global-in-datong-shu\/","title":{"rendered":"Unifying the World? Kang Youwei\u2019s Vision of the Global in Datong Shu"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

In his posthumously-published work, Datong Shu,<\/em> or The Book of Great Unity,<\/em> Qing intellectual and statesman Kang Youwei (1858-1927) outlines a utopian image of a united \u201cOne World,\u201d or \u201cGreat Unity.\u201d In Kang\u2019s utopian society, the \u201cnine boundaries\u201d of human suffering have been abolished: the very concepts of nation (national borders), class, race, sex, family (and its relationships), occupation (private ownership), disorder (unjust law), kind (the separation of humans from animals), and suffering itself (as it provokes further suffering). The One World imagined in Datong Shu<\/em> is one that prioritizes \u201crightness,\u201d which is defined loosely as what brings people happiness. It is characterized by the fulfilling, harmonious lives led by its inhabitants, citizens of a united world whose only borders are its arbitrary administrative units.[1]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

What\nis most striking about Datong Shu <\/em>is the ideological contrast that exists\nbetween the ideas Kang presents in his work and the historical context of his\ntimes. The world Kang lived in was one dominated and divided by Western\nimperial domination, yet a work predicting the creation of a harmonious Great\nUnity was still written in it. The very fact that a text as radically-minded as\nDatong Shu <\/em>was written within the context of its times provokes pressing\nhistorical questions, questions that are best answered via the methods and perspective\nof global intellectual history. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In\ntheir 2013 work on Global Intellectual History,<\/em> Moyn and\nSartori propose a number of paths that may be adopted by the global\nintellectual historian. One takes its starting point by defining the \u201cglobal\u201d\nas a \u201csubjective category used by historical agents.\u201d[2]<\/a> In other words, the\napproach considers how historical actors themselves perceived the concept of\nthe global. This is the historiographical angle that I will take in considering\nDatong Shu, <\/em>as I will analyze how Kang conceives of the \u201cglobal\u201d within his\ntext.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

My proposed project seeks to question the ideological disparities between the imagined world of Datong Shu<\/em> and the historical context in which it was written in order to better understand Kang\u2019s times. What is the vision of the \u201cglobal\u201d that Kang articulates in his work? What underpins his ideas toward the idea of a world government, a fully-realized \u201cGreat Unity?\u201d What does this tell us about the historical nature of 19th<\/sup> and 20th<\/sup> century China, let alone the world? These are the kinds of historiographical questions my proposed project will ask of Datong Shu<\/em> and its place within history.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

My\nglobal intellectual approach will be centered around a close reading of Datong\nShu.<\/em> My project will utilize a 1958 translation of the work by Laurence G.\nThompson, as I am unable to read the Classical Chinese of the original.[3]<\/a> I will disclaim this\nclearly within my work. However, I believe that the inevitable distortions of Datong\nShu\u2019s<\/em> translation will have little impact upon my overall project; I will\nfocus upon Datong Shu\u2019s<\/em> concepts within a broad historical context,\nrather than consider the text\u2019s precise definitions and wording. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

My close reading of Datong Shu <\/em>will be informed by a global intellectual history framework that will place it in conversation with other texts and within the context of its times. Much has already been written on Kang as a historical figure and Datong Shu<\/em> as an intellectual text, but there has yet to be a work that considers Kang\u2019s conception of the global within Datong Shu<\/em>.[4]<\/a> Through completing this project, in addition to remedying this historiographical gap, I hope to foster better understandings of Kang\u2019s times and historical conceptions of the global.
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

[1]<\/a> K\u2019ang\nYu-Wei and Laurence G. Thompson, trans., Ta T\u2019ung Shu <\/em>(New\nYork, 1958).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[2]<\/a> Samuel\nMoyn and Andrew Sartori, \u201cApproaches to Global Intellectual History\u201d in Samuel\nMoyn and Andrew Sartori, eds., Global Intellectual History, <\/em>(New\nYork, 2013) pp. 4, 16-17.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[3]<\/a>\nK\u2019ang, Ta T\u2019ung Shu.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

[4]<\/a>\nSee Jonathan Spence, The Gate of Heavenly Peace: The Chinese and Their\nRevolution<\/em> (New York, 1981) and Ban Wang, \u201cThe Moral Vision in Kang\nYouwei’s Book of the Great Community\u201d <\/em>in Ban Wang, ed., Chinese\nVisions of World Order: Tianxia, Culture, and World Politics<\/em> (Durham, 2017),\npp. 87-105. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In his posthumously-published work, Datong Shu, or The Book of Great Unity, Qing intellectual and statesman Kang Youwei (1858-1927) outlines a utopian image of a united \u201cOne World,\u201d or \u201cGreat Unity.\u201d In Kang\u2019s utopian society, the \u201cnine boundaries\u201d of human<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1711","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p5wNtZ-rB","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/transnationalhistory.net\/doing\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1711","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/transnationalhistory.net\/doing\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/transnationalhistory.net\/doing\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/transnationalhistory.net\/doing\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/transnationalhistory.net\/doing\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1711"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/transnationalhistory.net\/doing\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1711\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1713,"href":"https:\/\/transnationalhistory.net\/doing\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1711\/revisions\/1713"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/transnationalhistory.net\/doing\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1711"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/transnationalhistory.net\/doing\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1711"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/transnationalhistory.net\/doing\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1711"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}