作者简介

Sean Hsiang-lin Lei is associate research fellow at the Institute of Modern History, Academia Sinica, Taiwan; associate professor at the Institute of Science, Technology, and Society at National Yang-Ming University; and a member of the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton. He lives in Taipei, Taiwan.

内容简介

Neither Donkey nor Horse tells the story of how Chinese medicine was transformed from the antithesis of modernity in the early twentieth century into a potent symbol of and vehicle for China’s exploration of its own modernity half a century later. Instead of viewing this transition as derivative of the political history of modern China, Sean Hsiang-lin Lei argues that China’s medical history had a life of its own, one that at times directly influenced the ideological struggle over the meaning of China’s modernity and the Chinese state.

Far from being a remnant of China’s premodern past, Chinese medicine in the twentieth century coevolved with Western medicine and the Nationalist state, undergoing a profound transformation—institutionally, epistemologically, and materially—that resulted in the creation of a modern Chinese medicine. This new medicine was derided as “neither donkey nor horse” because it necessarily betrayed both of the parental traditions and therefore was doomed to fail. Yet this hybrid medicine survived, through self-innovation and negotiation, thus challenging the conception of modernity that rejected the possibility of productive crossbreeding between the modern and the traditional.

By exploring the production of modern Chinese medicine and China’s modernity in tandem, Lei offers both a political history of medicine and a medical history of the Chinese state.

Review

“In this insightful and provocative book, Lei shows us what it meant to practice ‘modern’ medicine in Mao Zedong’s semicolonial and semifeudal society. Drawing on rich historical sources, Neither Donkey nor Horse reveals that modern medicine will always be mongrel medicine. Importantly, Lei gives us the critical postcolonial genealogy for ‘Traditional Chinese Medicine,’ the epitome of Chinese modernity, now a global phenomenon.”

(Warwick Anderson, University of Sydney)

“Reaching far beyond the history of modern China, Neither Donkey nor Horse challenges conventional understanding of modernity, science, and state power through an intellectual and social history of medical debate and development in East Asia from the late nineteenth century forward. This is a thoughtful and meticulously researched investigation of transnational modernizing processes in the twentieth century as they touched down and transformed worlds in China. The book demonstrates that medical knowledge and practice, whether ‘modern’ or ‘traditional,’ historicized or fixed as policy, are nowhere innocent of politics, culture, and social hierarchy. It offers surprising historical lessons for everyone interested in science and local knowledge, socialism and capitalism, institutions and ideas about nature as they weave together in modern regimes of health and population governance.”

(Judith Farquhar, University of Chicago)

“Neither Donkey nor Horse is a tour de force of how both Western and Chinese medicine played central roles not only in Chinese modernity but also the formation of the state in Republican China. Lei thus adroitly relates the politics of medicine and debates over making Chinese medicine more scientific to the big themes of nationalism, the state, and modernity that dominated the political struggles of early twentieth-century China.”

(Marta Hanson, Johns Hopkins University)

“Neither Donkey nor Horse is a major work by the leading scholar in the field of modern Chinese medical history. Lei argues that what we now know as traditional Chinese medicine as it emerged as a discourse in the early twentieth century was fundamentally shaped by the encounter with Western medicine and the relationship with the state that this dictated. Chinese medicine was something new that was created during this period in response to themes with Western biomedicine as traditional practitioners sought social mobility through participation in the state. Lei’s argument is backed up by research of the highest standard: his knowledge of the historical sources is outstanding, and he is impressively familiar with the secondary and theoretical literature in both English and Chinese. His book will be of interest not only to historians of Republican China but also to those interested in the history of science more widely.”

(Henrietta Harrison, University of Oxford)

“If you are going to read just one book on the modern history of Chinese medicine, this is the work to read. Lei’s analysis of the entwinement of medicine, science, modernity, and the state is brilliantly original and persuasive, and argued with admirable clarity. Neither Donkey nor Horse is a major contribution to science studies and the history of global health, as well as to the study of twentieth-century China.”

(Shigehisa Kuriyama, Harvard University)


Sean Hsiang-lin Lei is associate research fellow at the Institute of Modern History, Academia Sinica, Taiwan; associate professor at the Institute of Science, Technology, and Society at National Yang-Ming University; and a member of the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton. He lives in Taipei, Taiwan.

下载地址

豆瓣评论

  • c2c3c50
    医学社会史入门书,三年前初读时惊为天人!当时开着和树哥的视频在读这本书,不由自主地把整个introduction部分朗读出来了,写的太棒了,一向不怎么听我说话的树某某都不住称赞,文章写成这样才有资格做芝大的博士,因为他我对杜赞奇好感度大增。主论点如题,所谓中国传统医学(Traditional Chinese Medicine)既不传统也不是现代医学,而是清末民初社会转型时中医从业者自我修补以自救的造物。果然还没有中译本,不然直接打脸中国中医科学院。04-26
  • Derridager
    很不错。Lei关于中医现代史的基本论点是:因为中医无法如现代的生物医学/西医那样预防疾病、保障公共健康和进入教育系统,所以为了成为进行现代国家建设的“中国”的国医,必须科学化中医,继而创造出一种“非驴非马”的杂医。但这并不意味着他们是反现代的,这群中医从业者恰恰是探索中医现代性和作为整体的中国现代性的积极行动主体。在共和、国民和共产主义时期,他们在“国家场域”之下代表中医与国家互动,不断使中医进化。自然-文化这一内在分界带来西方-非西方的外在分界,在现代化过程中,我们应该采取Latour的观点,关注两极中的杂合体。在本书中,则是“杂中医”,它不是传统的余孽,也非单纯的试验失败品,它能向我们证明现代科学和非西方文化间可能的关系。我们从未现代过,或者说,他者们也为现代性做出许多贡献。05-31
  • sanbilly
    很棒。对“非驴非马”的"现代中医”的形成过程中,中医、西医和国家之间的纠结,以及它与中国“现代性”的关系,有非常好的剖析。配合老皮的专著,对近代中医的发展当有更为深入的理解。10-18
  • L
    特别喜欢作者的两个观察。其一是“科学”在西欧语境中一直作名词,经由日本传到中国后才产生了“科学化”这个动词;“科学化”并不是去复制一个普遍性的话语,而是民族国家和现代科学之间的博弈手段。其二是“科学化”的epistemic violence。在科学化中医的过程中,不管是传统中医实践者还是在日本、美国接受过现代药学、生物化学教育的实践者,都在经历一个把已有的知识结构拆解和重组的过程,在两个知识网络之间进行翻译。这个翻译的过程不是对称的,也不是双向的,更不是完整的。尤其对于传统的中医实践者来说,由于科学成为民族国家内不同actors争取state支持的话语场,他们需要否定的不光是中医理论所指代过的事物,他们所熟悉的指代系统本身也成了没有所指的幽灵。是对于Latour比较好的应用了。12-08
  • 吴衢
    非常精彩的医疗史著作。讨论中西医冲突以及与民族国家的关系,这其中医学并没有扮演一个被国家规定的消极客体,相反他们主动地推动了和国家的结合。此外,中西医之争也直接和现代性相关,作者用了科学史和医学史来表明,并不只有中西医二元对立,中医改良者制造了“非驴非马”的混合医学来应对现实挑战。关于当今的中西医论战和赤脚医生问题,乃至更广泛的现代性问题和科学哲学,这本书都有重要的启发。12-06

猜你喜欢

大家都喜欢