RAS-1980 — Page 152

RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊 All AI Reviewed

120

BARBARA E. WARD

the interest nor the techniques were available to study that other side of Chinese society which in fact was the experience of more than 90% of the population—the rural villages, small and large market towns, peasants, artisans, small tradesmen, fishermen and so on: in other words, the Little Traditions that were of course just as much part of the whole entity which was China, and without which the elite section would not have existed at all. After about 1920, interests changed a good deal in China, as elsewhere, and at about the same time anthropological and sociological techniques for studying the Little Traditions of the world began to be developed, but by the time that Wu Wen-tsao, Fei Hsiao-t'ung, Francis Hsu and their colleagues started to use the new techniques in the mid—and late thirties it was already very late. Despite the appalling conditions of national and civil wars they did a remarkable amount of work. Without it we should be immeasurably poorer than we are; but inevitably they could only cover a relatively small part of the vast whole before 1949.

To-day Mainland China is completely closed to the kind of prolonged, detailed, intimate study that classical anthropological fieldwork depends upon. Virtually no-one, not even Mainland Chinese themselves, has been able to do this kind of work since 1949, nor, in my opinion is it at all likely that it will become possible for very many years to come. (It is necessary to add that, of course, China does not stand alone in this prohibition; for what are in every case held to be good political reasons, the lights are going out for this kind of study in many, many parts of the world at present.) The result as far as Mainland China is concerned is that it will now never be possible to recover in detail the social and cultural heritage of what I have just referred to as the Little Traditions. The saddest words in all human languages have to be said—it is too late.

Thus only Hong Kong and Taiwan remain, and Dr. Wang Sung-hsing has just told how in his view Hong Kong is now the more valuable for this kind of recovery work and no-one in the world is better placed to know.

—

We may ask why are the New Territories still so rich in this way? It is, when you think of it a very odd thing! Surely two of the strangest outcomes of the history of opium wars and Western imperialism are, first, that Hong Kong to-day is one of the rather

Edit History

2026-05-12 23:54:07 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct

Live

View comparison

AI Proofread

120 BARBARA E. WARD the interest nor the techniques were available to study that other side of Chinese society which in fact was the experience of more than 90% of the population—the rural villages, small and large market towns, peasants, artisans, small tradesmen, fishermen and so on: in other words, the Little Traditions that were of course just as much part of the whole entity which was China, and without which the elite section would not have existed at all. After about 1920, interests changed a good deal in China, as elsewhere, and at about the same time anthropological and sociological techniques for studying the Little Traditions of the world began to be developed, but by the time that Wu Wen-tsao, Fei Hsiao-t'ung, Francis Hsu and their colleagues started to use the new techniques in the mid—and late thirties it was already very late. Despite the appalling conditions of national and civil wars they did a remarkable amount of work. Without it we should be immeasurably poorer than we are; but inevitably they could only cover a relatively small part of the vast whole before 1949. To-day Mainland China is completely closed to the kind of prolonged, detailed, intimate study that classical anthropological fieldwork depends upon. Virtually no-one, not even Mainland Chinese themselves, has been able to do this kind of work since 1949, nor, in my opinion is it at all likely that it will become possible for very many years to come. (It is necessary to add that, of course, China does not stand alone in this prohibition; for what are in every case held to be good political reasons, the lights are going out for this kind of study in many, many parts of the world at present.) The result as far as Mainland China is concerned is that it will now never be possible to recover in detail the social and cultural heritage of what I have just referred to as the Little Traditions. The saddest words in all human languages have to be said—it is too late. Thus only Hong Kong and Taiwan remain, and Dr. Wang Sung-hsing has just told how in his view Hong Kong is now the more valuable for this kind of recovery work and no-one in the world is better placed to know. — We may ask why are the New Territories still so rich in this way? It is, when you think of it a very odd thing! Surely two of the strangest outcomes of the history of opium wars and Western imperialism are, first, that Hong Kong to-day is one of the rather

Baseline (Original)

120 BARBARA E. WARD the interest nor the techniques were available to study that other side of Chinese society which in fact was the experience of more than 90% of the population—the rural villages, small and large market towns, peasants, artisans, small tradesmen, fishermen and so on: in other words, the Little Traditions that were of course just as much part of the whole entity which was China, and without which the elite section would not have existed at all. After about 1920, interests changed a good deal in China, as elsewhere, and at about the same time anthropological and sociological techniques for studying the Little Traditions of the world began to be develop- ed, but by the time that Wu Wen-tsao, Fei Hsiao-t'ung, Francis Hsu and their colleagues started to use the new techniques in the mid — and late thirties it was already very late. Despite the appal- ling conditions of national and civil wars they did a remarkable amount of work. Without it we should be immeasurably poorer than we are; but inevitably they could only cover a relatively small part of the vast whole before 1949. To-day Mainland China is completely closed to the kind of prolonged, detailed, intimate study that classical anthropological fieldwork depends upon. Vitually no-one, not even Mainland Chinese themselves, has been able to do this kind of work since 1949, nor, in my opinion is it at all likely that it will become possible for very many years to come. (It is necessary to add that, of course, China does not stand alone in this prohibition; for what are in every case held to be good political reasons, the lights are going out for this kind of study in many, many parts of the world at present.) The result as far as Mainland China is concerned is that it will now never be possible to recover in detail the social and cultural heritage of what I have just referred to as the Little Tradi- tions. The saddest words in all human languages have to be said— it is too late. Thus only Hong Kong and Taiwan remain, and Dr. Wang Sung- hsing has just told how in his view Hong Kong is now the more valuable for this kind of recovery work and no-one in the world is better palced to know. — We may ask why are the New Territories still so rich in this way? It is, when you think of it a very odd thing! Surely two of the strangest outcomes of the history of opium wars and Western imperialism are, first, that Hong Kong to-day is one of the rather

2026-05-12 23:54:07 · Baseline

View content

120

BARBARA E. WARD

the interest nor the techniques were available to study that other side of Chinese society which in fact was the experience of more than 90% of the population—the rural villages, small and large market towns, peasants, artisans, small tradesmen, fishermen and so on: in other words, the Little Traditions that were of course just as much part of the whole entity which was China, and without which the elite section would not have existed at all. After about 1920, interests changed a good deal in China, as elsewhere, and at about the same time anthropological and sociological techniques for studying the Little Traditions of the world began to be develop- ed, but by the time that Wu Wen-tsao, Fei Hsiao-t'ung, Francis Hsu and their colleagues started to use the new techniques in the mid — and late thirties it was already very late. Despite the appal- ling conditions of national and civil wars they did a remarkable amount of work. Without it we should be immeasurably poorer than we are; but inevitably they could only cover a relatively small part of the vast whole before 1949.

To-day Mainland China is completely closed to the kind of prolonged, detailed, intimate study that classical anthropological fieldwork depends upon. Vitually no-one, not even Mainland Chinese themselves, has been able to do this kind of work since 1949, nor, in my opinion is it at all likely that it will become possible for very many years to come. (It is necessary to add that, of course, China does not stand alone in this prohibition; for what are in every case held to be good political reasons, the lights are going out for this kind of study in many, many parts of the world at present.) The result as far as Mainland China is concerned is that it will now never be possible to recover in detail the social and cultural heritage of what I have just referred to as the Little Tradi- tions. The saddest words in all human languages have to be said— it is too late.

Thus only Hong Kong and Taiwan remain, and Dr. Wang Sung- hsing has just told how in his view Hong Kong is now the more valuable for this kind of recovery work and no-one in the world is better palced to know.

RAS-1980 — Page 152

Edit History

Comments

Private Research Note