tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10698887.post2193177961101612205..comments2023-10-22T18:25:39.688+08:00Comments on The View from Taiwan: Taiwan: Lonely Planet GuideMichael Turtonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17974403961870976346noreply@blogger.comBlogger70125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10698887.post-40733949966692122352011-12-02T18:26:23.413+08:002011-12-02T18:26:23.413+08:00Jason, I appreciate you keeping the debate going. ...Jason, I appreciate you keeping the debate going. You've made a number of good points, some of which I've been considering independently. You are correct, for example, that a lot of people, for one reason or the other, will end up in Taichung. And they likely would appreciate a bit more coverage. And also expect it. <br /><br />While, again, the size of a city isn't really the issue (I also write for the China guide and there are plenty of larger cities that get little or no coverage at all), perhaps in a place as small as Taiwan, and with a sizable expat population, a fair percentage of travellers will pass through Taichung even if they are not going there specifically for the sights. <br /><br />Thanks for the input. I will give serious thought to a bit more coverage next time.Robert Scott Kellyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17790139614002283723noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10698887.post-53953119928216250562011-12-02T15:19:12.500+08:002011-12-02T15:19:12.500+08:00Thanks for the response, Mr. Kelly.
You said: &q...Thanks for the response, Mr. Kelly. <br /><br />You said: "if the only things standing between adequate coverage of Taichung and inadequate is a night market, a park, and a university campus (the rest of the places you mentioned are outside the city), then I contend Taichung really just doesn't cut it as a travel destination."<br /><br />Hmm, well I guess we just have different ideas about well-deserving travel destinations and the purpose of guidebooks. I would definitely say that Taichung's size (in addition to very close proximity to some spectacular places, including the ones mentioned) warrants more information than the book provides - especially as far as eating/staying/transporting goes. Like I said, not a ton, but certainly more. People will come here regardless, and guides are (in my opinion) meant to provide not only suggestions, but helpful information. <br />That being said, I definitely understand that there's a lot to be considered when writing a guide, and of course, it's impossible to include it all. I just wouldn't have minded if the (already pretty thin) book were just a bit thicker. ;) <br />Cheers.Jason S.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10698887.post-63797106883580017412011-12-01T21:41:08.948+08:002011-12-01T21:41:08.948+08:00@Anonymous December 1, 2011 7:21 AM
"Even if...@Anonymous December 1, 2011 7:21 AM<br /><br />"Even if the KMT loses power, major elements in the bureucracy and military are still controlled by a 5th colony."<br /><br />I think you mean a "Fifth column"?Kaminogehttp://kaminoge.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10698887.post-38381875477631636852011-12-01T21:40:34.545+08:002011-12-01T21:40:34.545+08:00George, remember the fall of Tripoli in Libya? In ...<b>George, remember the fall of Tripoli in Libya? In case of an invasion, the defense will crumble fast. Especially if the KMT is still in power...Even if the KMT loses power, major elements in the bureucracy and military are still controlled by a 5th colony.</b><br />You have sources that have received military training telling you this?<br /><br />GeorgeAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10698887.post-72301517465334033222011-12-01T07:21:01.900+08:002011-12-01T07:21:01.900+08:00George, remember the fall of Tripoli in Libya? In...George, remember the fall of Tripoli in Libya? In case of an invasion, the defense will crumble fast. Especially if the KMT is still in power...Even if the KMT loses power, major elements in the bureucracy and military are still controlled by a 5th colony.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10698887.post-62321809047737479482011-11-30T23:40:44.690+08:002011-11-30T23:40:44.690+08:00The only way for the Chinese to settle this issue ...<b>The only way for the Chinese to settle this issue is eventually by force, and it can be either very "easy" as pro-China Taiwanese in the government/military could surrender directly in case of an invasion, </b><br />I certainly do not agree with this. Physical requirements for military personnel have been getting stricter, modernized train reduces need for frequent operations that can be visually spied upon, security is actually getting more strict as well.<br /><br />If it happens, it's going to be an all out defense effort.<br /><br />GeorgeAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10698887.post-39072357107943192182011-11-30T23:24:16.342+08:002011-11-30T23:24:16.342+08:00It is true that we too often forget how recently o...It is true that we too often forget how recently our contemporary notions of national and ethnic identity came about. Writers of history textbooks love to over-simply history by projecting modern notions of nationality "back" onto the people they are writing about.<br /><br />As Mr. Anonymous points out, there was likely very little in the way of either "Chinese", "Taiwanese" or even "Han" group identity a century ago. People's identity (in most parts of the world) was always more local and more based on clan, class, religion or even language sub-groups. Even notions of an "Italian" or "German" people were very new a century ago.<br /><br />The history of immigration from China to Taiwan was full of recurring battles between Hakka and other groups, and even between Han settlers from different parts of Fujian. Identity was based much more on lineage and local place-of-origin. As one of many examples, as recently as the 1880s, there were still frequent battles between the (then seperate) southern and northen parts of today's Taipei.<br /><br />One of Sun Yat-sen's main objectives was to get people in China to begin thinking of themselves as one nation and one people. This lack of a cohesive national identity is part of what explains the chaos and regional instability in China during the 1910s and especially the 1920s, and even into the 1930s. <br /><br />When SYS visited Taiwan, did he think he was visiting one of China'a (or the Qing's) provinces? Or was he visiting a colony of Japan with a significant Chinese population, similar to the Chinese populations he knew in places like Singapore, Maylasia and Hawaii?John Scottnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10698887.post-83203263601128790432011-11-30T23:11:53.988+08:002011-11-30T23:11:53.988+08:00Anonymous November 29, 2011 11:27 AM wrote:
"...Anonymous November 29, 2011 11:27 AM wrote:<br /><br />"It isn't fair to knock Robert Storey's edition. Perhaps it's out of date now, but when I used it back in 2003 it was totally reliable (as well as charmingly written)."<br /><br />I used Storey's then-current guidebook on one of my first visits to Taichung circa 2001 and found several mistakes on the maps in the Taichung section. I also wondered why his restaurant recommendations included so many Western-style establishments, but so few eateries serving Chinese/Taiwanese food. The Taiwan guides that have come out since that 2001 edition have been much better.<br /><br />(Check out some of the customer reviews for Storey's guidebook on Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Lonely-Planet-Taiwan-Travel-Survival/product-reviews/1864502118/ref=sr_1_3_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1)Kaminogehttp://kaminoge.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10698887.post-2271260433394060392011-11-30T20:18:13.323+08:002011-11-30T20:18:13.323+08:00I think Michael Turton had presented very nice arg...I think Michael Turton had presented very nice arguments. Unfortunately for him, it is a bit futile. In this world, might makes right. The PRC only needs support of 10% of the current population of Taiwan to control Taiwan in the event of a take-over/(re)unification. I always thought peaceful unification is a pipe dream. Time is on Taiwan's side. The only way for the Chinese to settle this issue is eventually by force, and it can be either very "easy" as pro-China Taiwanese in the government/military could surrender directly in case of an invasion, or a very bloody war with insurgency. I suspect it will be the former, but it's a gamble nobody in the PRC is currently willing to take.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10698887.post-32669675279485539982011-11-30T14:55:56.946+08:002011-11-30T14:55:56.946+08:00When the Japanese in 1895 offered free passage to ...<b>When the Japanese in 1895 offered free passage to anyone who wanted to return to the place they identified with, China, among the two-three million "Han" in Taiwan only a couple of thousand took the offer. This is because the identification with the homeland was so strong, no doubt, and the local "Han" thought of themselves as Chinese and no local identity was in the process of evolving. This same powerful identification with China was at work in the recurring revolts against Qing rule. </b><br /><br />I said they identified with their native place in China (Zhangzhou or Quanzhou for the Hoklo people). Both "Chinese" and "Taiwanese" identities came later. A strong "Chinese" identity did however emerge among many people in the anti-colonial movement during the Japanese era. <br /><br />As for taking up the offer to move back to China - I think economic factors are the most likely explanation. Landless peasants emigrated from overcrowded Fujian to Taiwan where there was still plentiful land available to cultivate. Having established themselves in Taiwan, why would any of them want to move back to China where they would be landless and without the social networks they relied on in Taiwan?Mnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10698887.post-30200966523666531532011-11-30T14:45:54.316+08:002011-11-30T14:45:54.316+08:00That's why those Manchus issued edicts in Manc...<b>That's why those Manchus issued edicts in Manchurian right down to the last days of the Dynasty. They were hoping to help us weird pro-Taiwan propagandists out.</b><br /><br />I am not an expert on this, obviously, but according to Wikipedia the use of the Manchu language had pretty much died out by the end of the dynasty.<br /><br /><b>By the 19th century even the imperial court had lost fluency in the language. The Jiaqing Emperor (reigned 1796 to 1820) complained about his officials being good neither at understanding nor writing Manchu.[3]<br />By the end of the 19th century the language was so moribund that even at the office of the Shengjing (Shenyang) general, the only documents written in Manchu (rather than Chinese) would be the memorials wishing the emperor long life; at the same time period, the archives of the Hulan banner detachment in Heilongjiang show that only 1% of the bannermen could read Manchu, and no more than 0.2% could speak it.[3]</b>Mnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10698887.post-61767667732813313292011-11-30T13:20:32.229+08:002011-11-30T13:20:32.229+08:00Steve and Steve. Thank you for refocusing the comm...Steve and Steve. Thank you for refocusing the comment section. And also for the words of praise.<br /><br />Jason, cheers for being the first to take on the defense of Taichung city. I honestly have to say though that it looks like you have made my point: if the only things standing between adequate coverage of Taichung and inadequate is a night market, a park, and a university campus (the rest of the places you mentioned are outside the city), then I contend Taichung really just doesn't cut it as a travel destination. Merely being a large city is not enough.Robert Scott Kellyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17790139614002283723noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10698887.post-3876333742793715002011-11-30T11:41:28.964+08:002011-11-30T11:41:28.964+08:00"and there was no such as thing as a "Ta..."and there was no such as thing as a "Taiwanese" identity (people identified with their native place in China)"<br /><br />There was no such thing as a Chinese identity either. <br /><br />Han people in Taiwan often regarded other Han people as "other" and were not bound to create unions based on any preconceived ideas of ethnicity. In Taiwan, group identities were often based on class. <br /><br />This would explain why Han people informed the Dutch of a revolt by other Han, thus preventing an uprising. This can also be seen in the way Taiwanese Han married across the ethnic boundaries of Hoklo, Hakka and Pepo. Powerful Aborigine gentry would often marry with other gentry rather than Aborigine. They might fight together against other Hoklo or Hakka. <br /><br />The idea of a Chinese identity is as dubious as a Taiwanese one as the concepts of "one" vs. "other" have been in a constant state on negotiation. <br /><br />Under the Ming, a "man" was someone who dwelt within the lands of the Emperor bounded by the oceans and the mountains. Under the Qing the border between barbarian and human could be crossed if the barbarian transformed into Han through the adoption of Han customs. They enacted this transformationalist ideology while maintaining their own degree of distance. Under the Chinese Nationalist they created the concept of a "Chinese Race", using the new ideas offered up by the colonial scientism borrowed from the western social darwinism that served to gird global colonial enterprises. This is where Chinese Nationalism is now. <br /><br />A Taiwanese national identity is no less valid that a Chinese national identity. A Taiwanese national identity rooted in place and experience rather than "blood" may even be more plausible as Taiwan IS our imagined community.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10698887.post-77389240018831534532011-11-30T11:32:56.121+08:002011-11-30T11:32:56.121+08:00My point was that the Manchus were recognized much...<b>My point was that the Manchus were recognized much earlier as the rulers of China - the Qing dynasty wasn't just the Manchu Empire - </b><br /><br />I understand this point completely. It is, however, not relevant to the deployment of the term "Chinese" by Chinese, only to the way Chinese expansionists use the term to snow foreigners who don't understand Chinese history.Michael Turtonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17974403961870976346noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10698887.post-29946066440160555992011-11-30T11:23:15.334+08:002011-11-30T11:23:15.334+08:00But no, almost everyone is talking about Japanese ...<b>But no, almost everyone is talking about Japanese occupation period vs. colonial period. Personally I prefer the latter, because the Japanese did plant settlers in parts of Taiwan, and tried the mould the island in their own image. Occupiers, by contrast, seize what they can and shoot locals who get in the way, but seldom do anything constructive (the Allied occupations of Germany and Japan after World War II were a bit better than this, of course).</b><br />There are a few things that the Japanese did well, and many of the local elderly appreciate.<br />1. Education. Although it was targeted for Japan's interest, it did help the general education level.<br />2. Rail construction. Yes, they were shipping lots of Taiwan resources to Japan, but the railway system became more complete.<br />3. Many of the larger well know buildings like the 總統府 were build during that period still stand very well.<br /><br />Sometimes situation like these help local development regardless of the initial intent. I personally appreciate the various eras and their influence on Taiwan culture. The local elderly that I have met around the island feel that crime what at it's lowest during those periods.<br /><br />GeorgeAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10698887.post-82701525266866071642011-11-30T11:22:45.497+08:002011-11-30T11:22:45.497+08:00and there was no such as thing as a "Taiwanes...<b>and there was no such as thing as a "Taiwanese" identity (people identified with their native place in China)</b><br /><br />When the Japanese in 1895 offered free passage to anyone who wanted to return to the place they identified with, China, among the two-three million "Han" in Taiwan only a couple of thousand took the offer. This is because the identification with the homeland was so strong, no doubt, and the local "Han" thought of themselves as Chinese and no local identity was in the process of evolving. This same powerful identification with China was at work in the recurring revolts against Qing rule. <br /><br />MichaelMichael Turtonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17974403961870976346noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10698887.post-7567631119168542422011-11-30T10:56:01.855+08:002011-11-30T10:56:01.855+08:00by emphasizing the foreign ethnicity of the Manchu...<b>by emphasizing the foreign ethnicity of the Manchu Court they construct a narrative that seeks to deny Taiwan's "Chineseness".</b><br /><br />That's why those Manchus issued edicts in Manchurian right down to the last days of the Dynasty. They were hoping to help us weird pro-Taiwan propagandists out.Michael Turtonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17974403961870976346noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10698887.post-11736904667198440352011-11-30T09:41:32.059+08:002011-11-30T09:41:32.059+08:00Robert Scott Kelly, like Steven Crook I'm here...Robert Scott Kelly, like Steven Crook I'm here for YOU!! I have no idea how this managed to spin into a China/Taiwan argufest either. Oh wait! Now I know, it's argument by repetition, a common troll technique, along with argument by half-truth, argument by generalization, red herring arguments (Nazis and American Indians are especially popular) and of course the most popular "Error of Fact" arguments. <br /><br />Back to the subject. I liked your guidebook a lot... and enough to have purchased it. <br /><br />Anonymous (seems to be a favorite name over here), I panned the Robert Storey edition, which I used in '00-'03, because half the restaurants in Taipei had gone out of business long before (I checked) along with other great tidbits such as Hakka being a dying language that is rarely spoken in the island. Having a Hakka wife from Miaoli and having lived there for a year, I heard Hakka on the street everyday and in fact, if you didn't speak Hakka, you were going to pay more. I ran into all sorts of these errors as I read the book.<br /><br />Was there worthwhile information in it? Sure, how could there not be? But it was the worst LP guidebook I've ever read and can in no way compare to the most recent edition. Storey might have been a good guidebook author at one time but he had mentally checked out of Taiwan before he wrote that edition. When I'm going to restaurants in his book that have been closed down for 5 years, I know he didn't do his homework.Stevehttp://pacificrimshots.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10698887.post-9902298571287877052011-11-30T09:17:05.850+08:002011-11-30T09:17:05.850+08:00The issue isn't whether the Manchu emperor was...<b>The issue isn't whether the Manchu emperor was the ruler of China, but how the Chinese treated his ethnicity before and after the fall of the Dynasty. Essentially, the Manchus were foreigners until it dawned on people that their territories could be reconstructed as "Chinese" if their ethnicity was similarly reconstructed as "Chinese." That's the point I am making. They are doing the same thing today -- the Tibetans are now "Chinese", so Arunachal Pradesh should be part of China.</b><br /><br />Yes, of course Chinese nationalist discourse reconstructed the Manchus as Chinese (one of the "five races"). My point was that the Manchus were recognized much earlier as the rulers of China - the Qing dynasty wasn't just the Manchu Empire - it was known overseas simply as "China". In 1895, Taiwan was handed from "China" to Japan.<br />When we also remember that Taiwan was populated with Han Chinese settlers and run by Han Chinese administrators, and there was no such as thing as a "Taiwanese" identity (people identified with their native place in China) we can see how Taiwanese nationalists also try to reconstruct history - by emphasizing the foreign ethnicity of the Manchu Court they construct a narrative that seeks to deny Taiwan's "Chineseness".Mnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10698887.post-50719648254050133492011-11-30T07:47:28.763+08:002011-11-30T07:47:28.763+08:00It seems quite unfair to have people post comments...It seems quite unfair to have people post comments on George but not let George respond. Is he banned from all posts?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10698887.post-55649196607195377172011-11-30T04:49:13.912+08:002011-11-30T04:49:13.912+08:00"we recognize that such transfers as the colo...<b>"we recognize that such transfers as the colonial powers arranged among themselves are no longer valid due to lack of the consent of the governed."</b><br /><br />Here is where, I'm afraid, you are very much mistaken. No-one disputes the transfer of Hong Kong and Macao from the UK and Portugal to the PRC, but there was no referendum. International law, I'm afraid, has not been democratised in the way you seem to imagine.<br /><br />I am also interested to know when exactly it became so that countries which do not exercise complete control over the territory they claim automatically have no right to claim sovereignty over it. Saying that the Qing did not exercise complete control over Taiwan is somewhat banal - there was no province in the entire empire that was completely under their control. <br /><br />Is the sovereignty of the Afghan government over Helmand province, for example, invalid because of their incomplete control over that province? And since the Afghan Republic is a successor state to a minority-origin monarchy, is the modern Afghanistan a nation without sovereignty? <br /><br />Carrying on as if either side has total legal backing for their position is nonsense. <br /><br />The people who claim that Taiwan came under ROC sovereignty point to an automatic transfer of land on abandonment of Japanese sovereignty. A somewhat dubious claim indeed - but no more dubious than much that is seen and accepted as valid in the courts on any given day.<br /><br />On the side against you have - what? The idea that it should instead be the United States that should take sovereignty over the islands, since the ROC forces that occupied Taiwan were under US control?<br /><br />Or, alternatively, you have the entirely morale boosting argument that the Taiwanese people should have been consulted in a plebiscite. A more than fine argument, except that they weren't, and we are now getting on 70 years of ROC rule in Taiwan, the last fifteen of which have been democratic in form.<br /><br />I think it is entirely valid, and far more sane, to say that whatever the past situation, the people of Taiwan should have full democratic freedoms - including the right to redefine the state they live in. Why bother with this ultimately pointless and morale-boosting for a small minority dispute over what the true situation of Taiwan is when it is not at all clear, and your goal is anyway to change it into something different?Gilman Grundyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06607416440240634159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10698887.post-28877064413690990892011-11-29T11:27:13.520+08:002011-11-29T11:27:13.520+08:00It isn't fair to knock Robert Storey's edi...It isn't fair to knock Robert Storey's edition. Perhaps it's out of date now, but when I used it back in 2003 it was totally reliable (as well as charmingly written).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10698887.post-32225363694419436742011-11-29T10:52:15.340+08:002011-11-29T10:52:15.340+08:00I thought, "Wow! 46 comments liking or dislik...I thought, "Wow! 46 comments liking or disliking the guidebook or Michael's review. Should be something of professional interest and relevance for me there." <br /><br />But no, almost everyone is talking about Japanese occupation period vs. colonial period. Personally I prefer the latter, because the Japanese did plant settlers in parts of Taiwan, and tried the mould the island in their own image. Occupiers, by contrast, seize what they can and shoot locals who get in the way, but seldom do anything constructive (the Allied occupations of Germany and Japan after World War II were a bit better than this, of course).<br /><br />Disclosure: I'm the author of a publication that competes with LP, Taiwan: The Bradt Travel Guide.Steven Crookhttp://crooksteven.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10698887.post-75993355702795157692011-11-29T09:16:03.541+08:002011-11-29T09:16:03.541+08:00George lives in a world constructed from Chinese n...George lives in a world constructed from Chinese nationalist ideology, which is a faith-based construct interweaving oft conflicting interpretations of race, history, nationalism, anachronism, pseudoscience, myth and dogma. <br /><br />To people like George think they are neutral because they have been raised in a "religion" that teaches them that the Chinese Nationalists gods and mythologies are real. The prophet scholars speak sooth. <br /><br />Of course, from the outside, this is no different from other fundamentalist religions with talking snakes, burning bushes, redeemers and battles of righteousness and sin.<br /><br />If George could find the courage to look over the walls or face the source of the shadows passing the cave, he might discover what so many of us are talking about. <br /><br />This is a frightening proposition for anyone raised in a fundamentalist tradition and it would take more courage than George may be willing to venture. <br /><br />Like The Truman Show, we are asking George to leave the world as it has been constructed for him since birth, where he, as a "Chinese" by holy writ, has been in the seat of privilege, and begin questioning the very foundations of his beliefs. <br /><br />Unlikely! <br /><br /><br />There are volumes of academic works written by non-believers in the sacred tenants of Chinese Nationalism, and it doesn't take much to hunt them down. George's citation of Sun Yat-sen's 5 races of Chinese is testament to his faith. Of course modern scholars have torn that concept apart as a timely political construct...<br /><br />I wish George the best, but I doubt a man of privilege from the preferred class under this program will have the strength to forsake the comfort he feels in a religion that was made to serve him so well.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10698887.post-60872954433197903392011-11-28T22:18:41.308+08:002011-11-28T22:18:41.308+08:00The issue isn't whether the Manchu emperor was...The issue isn't whether the Manchu emperor was the ruler of China, but how the Chinese treated his ethnicity before and after the fall of the Dynasty. Essentially, the Manchus were foreigners until it dawned on people that their territories could be reconstructed as "Chinese" if their ethnicity was similarly reconstructed as "Chinese." That's the point I am making. They are doing the same thing today -- the Tibetans are now "Chinese", so Arunachal Pradesh should be part of China. <br /><br />MichaelMichael Turtonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17974403961870976346noreply@blogger.com