在“枢纽”与“限界”之间的边缘人民国时期边地汉人形象构建论说

Living in Between Hub and Border:A Study on the Image Construction of Han Chinese in Border Areas during the Republic of China

民国时期,边地汉人在研究者的笔触之下被赋予了不同的形象。吴文藻、陶云逵等较早地接受了美国芝加哥学派社会学家罗伯特·帕克提出的"边缘人"理论,并从宏大国家叙事着眼,阐释了边地汉人的"枢纽人"作用。不过,李安宅、梁钊韬、费孝通等基于微观"边地日常"的观察表明,作为"限界群"的边地汉人的图利动机及其行为有时对边疆建设来说是一个"问题"。两种相互矛盾的形象表述直接或间接地与罗伯特·帕克的"边缘人"理论发生对话,揭示了民国时期国内社会知识精英所持边疆社会改造方法论的分歧。回到历史现场,无论是"枢纽说"抑或"限界说",均表达了研究者对边地汉人的关怀和期待,同时亦反映了历史经验和现实利益交织下边地人群交往、交流、交融的复杂性。

During the period of the Republic of China,some researchers with academic training in western anthropology,ethnology,and sociology realized that the migration of Han Chinese from the interior to periphery regions made the geographical concept of"border"richer in its cultural and political meaning.Various scholars saw the role and mission of these Han Chinese in a different light:Wu Wenzao,Tao Yunkui and others followed Robert Parker’s"marginal man"theory to present helpfully the Han migrants as "pivotal men"contributing to the building of frontiers;in contrast,ethnographers,such as Li Anzhai,Liang Zhaotao and Fei Xiaotong,used their field observations to show that the image of"central people"and"key players"did not capture the whole picture of the Han Chinese in border regions.Instead,in their view,the selfinterest motive and behavior of the Hans could sometimes be a"problem"for border areas.The two contradictory images expressed by these scholars are both,nevertheless,in direct and indirect conversations with Parker’s"marginal man"theory and reflect the difference among the Chinese intellectuals about the ways of social change in border regions.No matter of the differences,both camps represented the concerns and hopes of the Chinese intellectual elites over the development of frontier areas and the reality of the complexity of the matter over the centuries of people integration between center and periphery.For the Han Chinese in border regions,agroup with diverse origin and culture,any single image will be undeniably partial.