高彦颐,(Dorothy Ko) 美国斯坦福大学国际关系学学士、东亚历史系博士,专攻明清社会史及比较妇女史。曾任教加州大学圣地亚哥分校及新泽西州立罗格斯大学历史及妇女研究系,现为纽约哥伦比亚大学巴纳德分校历史系教授。近作有《步步生莲:绣鞋与缠足文物》(Every Step a Lotus:Shoes for BoundFeet)及《闺塾师:明末清初江南的才女文化》(TeaeheFS of the Inner Chambers:Women andCulture in Seventeenth—Century China)等书。
The history of footbinding is full of contradictions and unexpected turns. The practice originated in the dance culture of China's medieval court and spread to gentry families, brothels, maid's quarters, and peasant households. Conventional views of footbinding as patriarchal oppression often neglect its complex history and the incentives of the women involved. This revisionist history, elegantly written and meticulously researched, presents a fascinating new picture of the practice from its beginnings in the tenth century to its demise in the twentieth century. Neither condemning nor defending foot-binding, Dorothy Ko debunks many myths and misconceptions about its origins, development, and eventual end, exploring in the process the entanglements of male power and female desires during the practice's thousand-year history. "Cinderella's Sisters" argues that rather than stemming from sexual perversion, men's desire for bound feet was connected to larger concerns such as cultural nostalgia, regional rivalries, and claims of male privilege. Nor were women hapless victims, the author contends. Ko describes how women - those who could afford it - bound their own and their daughters' feet to signal their high status and self-respect. Femininity, like the binding of feet, was associated with bodily labor and domestic work, and properly bound feet and beautifully made shoes both required exquisite skills and technical knowledge passed from generation to generation. Throughout her narrative, Ko deftly wields methods of social history, literary criticism, material culture studies, and the history of the body and fashion to illustrate how a practice that began as embodied lyricism - as a way to live as the poets imagined - ended up being an exercise in excess and folly.
高彦颐对材料的解读水平真的让人叹为观止。无论是近代反缠足知识分子留下的议论,充满争议的《采菲录》,还是明清时期文人的笔记和文学作品,高对文字材料建构知识、影响观念、反映作者态度等等各个角度的分析都很到位。历史学家还是需要学会一些文学批判的套路的。唯一的遗憾...
评分上世纪80年代,“中国文化热”方兴未艾,有关缠足的论著大批量出现,但大多纠缠于以现代医学、功能观、及女性主义去盖棺论定,“五四妇女史观”的旧调依然清晰辨别,诸如“缠了足,便是废物中的废物”,易招“外人野蛮之讥”等。这一认知范式流布之广之深,就连汉学权威费正清...
评分这本书的英文题目意为“辛德瑞拉的姐妹们”,辛德瑞拉就是格林童话中的灰姑娘。原著中灰姑娘的故事要比现在通行的儿童版本“虐”得多,简直就是西方版的“削足适履”。 作者为什么要研究这个课题?这是我看到这本书时的第一反应,缠足不过是丑陋畸形的审美情趣,而且已经永远地...
评分“缠足”这一话题产生了多久就谈论了多久,但无非都以谴责封建思想对妇女的压制为主,而高彦颐以不同的视角给我们呈现了一部缠足史,展现了不同的内涵。在这部书中,女性的声音没有被埋没,女性被真正的作为一个话语主体而呈现出来。 “玉足三寸波澜显,青瓦一片苔痕见”,女...
评分「缠足」历来被认为是中国妇女史上一个残忍的,甚至带有文化污点式的行为。之前我也并未怀疑过这样的观点,觉得裹脚布就是对女性身体最直接的束缚。但是,读罢高彦颐教授《缠足》一书中的章节,我发现二十世纪初「放足」运动的实施远比想象的复杂,其背后的动机也并非单纯...
读了part one 感觉真的没啥意思啊,作者看了多少小黄书啊。。。
评分之前读的补标,很喜欢这本书。看了其他一些书评说作者过度否定反对缠足的正面意义,但是我觉得作者并没有这样做。因为反对缠足、鼓励放足这样的运动已经得到了大部分史学家的关注和肯定,而作者仅仅是想去填补这其中对于缠足甚至主动缠足的女性的探讨和研究。发展缠足文化的是男性,发起女性解放运动的仍然是男性,而故事里的女性在历史里被遮蔽了。难道我们不该去听听故事里女性的声音吗(就算是一味妥协)?作者的书无疑为缠足和放足史增添了许多层次和复杂性
评分总觉得隔靴瘙痒
评分感觉现在好多revionist啊...私以为本书其实就是替当时的保守派人士发声。其实当时的保守派人士就是看到了旧制度的优点。
评分每一章单独拿出来都是很好的research (特别是山西的放足运动那一章),但组合在一起就显得刻意和奇怪。花大力气证明记录缠足的文字材料不可靠,大多是男性和性有关的想象。直到最后一章(还包括倒数第二章的最后几节)才开始从女性身体与物质文化的角度讨论问题。其实全书严格说并不是关于缠足的修正历史,而是关于缠足之想象的历史。
本站所有内容均为互联网搜索引擎提供的公开搜索信息,本站不存储任何数据与内容,任何内容与数据均与本站无关,如有需要请联系相关搜索引擎包括但不限于百度,google,bing,sogou 等
© 2025 book.wenda123.org All Rights Reserved. 图书目录大全 版权所有