印度支那。暧昧的殖民化，1858-1954。作者：Pierre Brocheux和Daniel Hémery。由Ly Lan Dill-Klein翻译。(Berkeley and Los Angeles: 加州大学出版社，2009。Pp. xv, 490. $60.00.)
巴黎大学的越南问题专家Pierre Brocheux和Daniel Hémery开始了这项关于东南亚法属帝国的研究，以纠正西方和越南历史学家的研究，在他们看来，这些研究受到二分法的影响，即从 "良性帝国主义 "的角度看待法属印度支那，或从 "民族主义斗争 "的角度看待其内部。
作者断言，历史现实更加 "模棱两可"，因此，对法属印度支那的研究应该 "超越记忆"，因为它考虑到殖民空间被纳入全球结构，在多个层面不断竞争的力量（xiv）。
综合较早的文献并结合较新的方法，作者将印度支那的 "事业 "作为一个多阶段发展的现象，包括19世纪在大南、柬埔寨和老挝的关键时刻进行殖民接管的前奏。
作者从殖民者和被殖民者的角度分析了使 "殖民资本主义 "的引入和 "殖民社会 "的发展成为可能的 "统治结构"，表明两者如何相互影响，导致前者不断重新评估自己，后者拒绝和排斥，但也合作。
作者挑战了双方对对方的刻板印象，证明了现实是更加细微的。
例如，与越南民族主义者 "法国建造的监狱比学校多 "的说法相反，法国当局全面改革了儒家体系，引入了以罗马字母为基础的quoc ngu，以削弱中国的影响，并通过提供大规模的基础学习机会来维持对人口的控制，同时将高等教育限制在少数人的范围内，在这个过程中，学校确实比监狱多（219）。
作者用六章的篇幅介绍了殖民事业，展示了 "抵抗、民族主义和社会运动 "是如何从殖民事业中演变出来的，他们更愿意谈论多种革命而不是起义，但没有像1945年的八月革命那样强调一种革命。
他们表明，这些运动是法兰西帝国境内 "最早熟、最多样化、最激进 "的运动，不仅发生在老挝、柬埔寨和越南的低地居民中，也发生在高地居民中，并具有传统和现代民族主义的表现形式，后者受到西方意识形态的影响（281）。
尽管专家们对法国在印度支那的殖民主义的不同阶段和角度都很熟悉，但作者收集了大量最新的研究，并在较早的学术背景下，以长篇大论的方式介绍了这些研究，提供了具体的数字、图表和地图，有助于更深入、更详细，而且是对法国殖民主义的模糊性有细微的了解。
该译本呈现了一个水晶般清晰的文本，不再被法语的细微差别和含糊不清所掩盖，提供的解释也许比《暧昧的殖民化》的作者所想的更清晰。除此以外，研究帝国主义、殖民主义、民族主义和印度支那历史的学生都会发现这部作品的价值。
天普大学 阮氏蝶
通过www.DeepL.com/Translator（免费版）翻译
Indochina: An Ambiguous Colonization,
1858-1954. By Pierre Brocheux and Daniel Hémery. Translated
by Ly Lan Dill-Klein. (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California
Press, 2009. Pp. xv, 490. $60.00.)
Pierre
Brocheux and Daniel Hémery, Vietnam specialists at the University of Paris, embarked
on this study of the French Empire in Southeast Asia as a corrective to studies
by Western and Vietnamese historians that have, in the authors’ opinion, suffered
from a dichotomic approach that viewed French Indochina externally through the
lens of “benign imperialism” or internally through that of a “nationalist
struggle.” Historical reality is more “ambiguous,” the authors assert, and the study
of French Indochina should thus “transcend memory” as it considers the colonial
space integrated into global structures of constantly competing forces at
multiple levels (xiv).
Synthesizing
the older literature and integrating newer approaches, the authors present the
Indochinese “enterprise” as a phenomenon that followed a multi-stage development
that includes the prelude to the colonial take-over in the 19th
century at a critical moment for Dai Nam, Cambodia, and Laos. The authors
analyze “the structures of domination” that made possible the introduction of
“colonial capitalism” and the development of “colonial society” from the perspective
of the colonizers but also of the colonized, showing how both were mutually affected,
leading the former to reassess themselves continuously and the latter to refuse
and reject but also to collaborate. The authors challenge stereotypical
opinions that each side had of the other by demonstrating that the reality was
more nuanced. For instance, contrary to Vietnamese nationalists’ refrain that
“France built more prisons than schools,” French authorities overhauled the
Confucian system, introducing the Roman alphabet-based quoc ngu to undermine Chinese influence and maintain control over
the population by affording mass access to basic studies while restricting
higher education to a minority, building in the process, indeed, more schools
than prisons (219).
The
authors, who devote six chapters to the colonial enterprise, show how
“Resistance, Nationalism, and Social Movements” evolved out of the colonial
enterprise, preferring to speak of multiple revolutions rather than uprisings but
not stressing one as has been done with the August Revolution of 1945. They
demonstrate that these were “the most precocious, the most diversified, and the
most radical” movements within the French Empire, taking place not only among
the lowlanders of Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam, but also among highlanders, and assuming
traditional as well as modern expressions of nationalism, the latter influenced
by Western ideologies (281).
Although
the different phases and angles of French colonialism in Indochina are familiar
to specialists, the authors have gathered numerous and recent studies and presented
them within the background of older scholarship, within a longue-durée approach
that provides specific numbers, charts, and maps that contribute to a deeper,
more detailed, and, yes, nuanced understanding of the ambiguities of French
colonialism.
The
translation presents a crystal-clear text, no longer obscured by the nuances
and ambiguities of the French language, providing perhaps a more clear-cut
interpretation than the authors of An
Ambiguous Colonization had intended. This caveat aside, students of imperialism,
colonialism, nationalism, of Indochinese history generally will find this work
invaluable.
Temple
University
Nguyen Thi Dieu
留言
張貼留言