Center For Southeast Asian Studies

The Shan have been fighting since 1958 for the autonomous state in Southeast Asia they were promised. Jane M. Ferguson articulates Shanland as an ongoing project of resistance, resilience, and accommodation within Thailand and Myanmar, showing how the Shan have forged a homeland and identity during great upheaval.

This admirable book contains fascinating autobiographical accounts, by some of Southeast Asia's most eminent scholars, concerning their struggle to find their own voices in interpreting the region to which they belong. The book should be indispensable to anyone interested in thinking about knowledge production and its politics in a postcolonial world. In the views of these scholarly Southeast Asians, we are made to see, in very personal terms, the link between the global crisis in the social sciences and the need to find remedies for it that are neither Eurocentric nor parochially anti-Western. Professor Alexander Woodside Professor of Chinese and Southeast Asian History University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada. This book marks the shift of the centre of Southeast Asian Studies from the West to Southeast Asia. The insights provided by the authors are not simply explanations of colonial and postcolonial experiences of major Southeast Asian scholars. Rather, the book provides a unique set of intellectual genealogies that show that distinctions between humanities and social sciences are less important than the development of distinctive local and regional traditions and practices of scholarship. Goh Beng-Lans introduction frames the collection through her subtle deconstruction of international discourses on Southeast Asia. This introduction then allows the reader to view the different generations of Southeast Asian scholars in their social, political, and academic contexts. The end result is a combined view of the state of the art of Southeast Asian Studies, a view that is greater than the sum of its national parts. Professor Adrian Vickers Chair of Southeast Asian Studies University of Sydney and Director, Australian Centre for Asian Art and Archaeology The collection represents a coming of age of scholars from Southeast Asia. What we hear is not bluster that comes from a wounded pride or doctrinal certainties, but a quiet confidence that acknowledges the multiple currents in which their scholarship has been formed, and a willingness to engage the perspective of the other, both within and without. The reflexivity in this volume sets the stage for scholars from the region to develop perspectives and concepts to address the challenges of the new configuration of the Asia being ushered in by ASEAN. Professor Prasenjit Duara Raffles Professor of Humanities and Director of Research Humanities and Social Sciences, National University of Singapore

The essays in Knowing Southeast Asian Subjects ask how the rising preponderance of scholarship from Southeast Asia is de-centering Southeast Asian area studies in the United States. The contributions address recent transformations within the field and new directions for research, pedagogy, and institutional cooperation. Contributions from the perspectives of history, anthropology, cultural studies, political theory, and libraries pose questions ranging from how a concern with postcolonial and feminist questions of identity might reorient the field to how anthropological work on civil society and Islam in Southeast Asia provides an opportunity for comparative political theorists to develop more sophisticated analytic approaches. A vision common to all the contributors is the potential of area studies to produce knowledge outside a global academic framework that presumes the privilege and even hegemony of Euro-American academic trends and scholars.

"What is the relevance of the area studies approach to Southeast Asia?" The current state and future directions of area studies, of which Southeast Asian studies are a part, is a central question not only to scientists working in the field but also those engaged in university politics. This collection of nine articles is written by specialists from different disciplinary backgrounds and working in institutions of higher learning all around the world. It provides an up-to-date insight into the current state of the study field, its strengths and weaknesses and seeks ways to reconfigure Southeast Asian studies in order to meet the challenges of a region that is caught up in profound transformation as a consequence of both globalization and localization.

Economic behavior is governed by two major sets of boundary conditions: environmental and technological factors on the one hand, and conditions of social organization on the other hand. Indeed, social scientists are often particularly interested in the framework of exchange relationships: exchange of goods, services, personnel, and information. Economic exchanges lend concrete manifestations to social relations that themselves may transcend the economic realm and that otherwise are often difficult to trace. Yet in social science research in Southeast Asia, the area of economic studies has lagged behind, despite the great study potential represented by the tremendous diversity of its physical and human environment. Economic Exchange and Social Interaction in Southeast Asia attempts to take advantage of that opportunity. As a number of the contributions to this volume show, many if not most of the systems organized on very different levels of integration interact with each other. Taken as a whole, they provide evidence of the incredible diversity of economic and social systems that may be investigated in Southeast Asia.

This volume is a manifestation of the continuing interest of scholars at the University of Michigan in Philippine studies. Written by a generation of post-colonial scholars, it attempts to unravel some of the historical problems of the colonial era. Again and again the authors focus on the relationship of the ilustrados and the Americans, on the problems of continuity and discontinuity, and on the meaning of “modernization” in the Philippine context. As part of the Vietnam generation, these authors have looked at American imperialism with a new perspective, and yet their analysis is tempered, not strident, and reflective, not dogmatic. Perhaps the most central theme to emerge is the depth of the contradiction inherent in the American colonial experiment. [vi-vii]