Exploring Qian Biao's The Method: A Book Review
Just now, I was reading a book review on Danbaini about “The Method” by Qian Biao (also known as Qiantai), which discusses his work on the Beijing and Zhejiang villages. While scrolling through the comments section, I came across one critical of Qian’s approach. The reviewer writes:
So things might have happened like this: The tendency in anthropology to focus only on what is real without considering what should be right or wrong fits the psychological needs of young scholars who prefer description over criticism and decentering themselves from society. This kind of thought could be compared to Scrots’s study on ancient clothes, which amounts to a sort of (anesthesia method), while (empirical research) offers a better (anesthetic effect). Because it turns something that requires self-discipline into an option for spontaneous acceptance, thereby creating the illusion of actively engaging with reality. From this perspective, Qian’s stance seems to be providing theoretical backing for the more prosaic shallowly practical and morally trivial “general” observations that most people make in today’s society.
In my own biased view, the spirit of human (humanities) lies in digging deep into something deeply particular to understand the world in a completely new way rather than cautiously describing it in order to avoid making bold assumptions or conclusions. In an unstable world like now, intellectuals cannot afford to get lost in details; they should seek the big picture and avoid losing their sense of purpose when things change so drastically. To analyze a problem without taking a stance is not always possible, but one must first have a clear conclusion before acting on it. Sometimes, correction is needed before action can be taken, and mistakes made after actions are often easier to correct than before they happen.
In certain historical moments, an objective description might seem questionable morally because public opinion could already be divided into those who support and those who oppose. Clearly distinguishing right from wrong, which would inevitably lead to conflict and danger, is not something that can be left to ordinary people to decide. As Tom Third mentions in his discussion of Hitler, if one writes a report on the atrocities committed by the Nazis as if they were an ordinary weather forecast, he might unintentionally support Hitler’s actions because he has already accepted what is normally regarded as aberrant and unacceptable."
I understand why this reader makes these points, but I believe they have put all their hopes into Qian Biao’s teachings. After all, a human (humanities scholar) should not undertake such a historical mission. We should be asking: Who is responsible for choosing Qian Biao to the frontlines? After all, Qian seems to know exactly what he is doing when he writes:
The essence of anthropology lies in accurately and vividly describing the invisible unnoticed and unacceptable multiplicity of social contradictions that mainstream society simply refuses to acknowledge. It is through these descriptions that we can grasp the thoughts of those whose beliefs are unacceptable from the mainstream’s point of view, and by drawing on our own experiences with minorities, we can challenge the central theories. This approach allows us to free ourselves from mainstream discourse.
To clearly understand one’s own identity what one should study for whom one should write, one must first determine one’s mission and its purpose. If today’s words of power are causing you concern, perhaps the best course is to meticulously describe them on paper in a clear deliberate way. These descriptions might seem weak from afar, but they could evoke resonance across many corners of the earth if they have something concrete to say about people’s lives. They might even become an organized force with some degree of control.
In summary, Qian seems to be fulfilling the duties of a records-keeping official, particularly documenting things that don’t conform to mainstream views and challenging mainstream theories wherever possible. He also strives to explain their causes origins and why they occur. However, he does not identify himself as a hero or revolutionary; he is far from being a great idealist who merely wants everyone to acknowledge his existence. His goal is to create harmony in societyharmony between individuals and groups between different levels of powerand it’s especially important that this harmony include enough room for negotiation.
One of the most notable features of Qian’s work is its emphasis on creating a buffer zone providing space for dialogue, and offering possibilities for change. To achieve this, he proposes that there be people willing to analyze and record major social changes in their spare time. These people could be journalists non-fiction writers anthropologists or anyone else who has both the drive to investigate and the patience to listen. The ideal candidate would need to possess a sense of responsibility an ability to approach things objectively, and also the courage to observe and the resolve not to get carried away.
Achieving this requires balancing several factors. Qian’s supporters seem to think that this balance can be achieved in a straightforward waywithout letting emotions cloud judgment or risk losing perspective. However, I remain skeptical because such an approach has led many people who support radical change to become very persuasive and aggressive. Radical change is not always the right answer, even when it seems to be the only option available. No matter how tempting this reaction may seem, we must resist the urge to adopt such a stance.
In addition to the above, I find myself more inclined toward Qian’s mode of thinking because he constantly reminds us that there are no absolute truths and that people should not accept everything they hear from others as indisputable. He also emphasizes that everyone has their own opinions but we shouldn’t allow ourselves to let certain groups become too powerful or to ignore the possibility of radical change.
In his book The Method , Qian explains:
To truly understand something one must first know oneself and one’s position in the world. To think about things without taking a stance is difficult enough, but to act on those thoughts while avoiding becoming attached to them is even harder. The kind of courage he describes suggests that he doesn’t want to be just another mouthpiece for whoever happens to be in power at any given time.
His work emphasizes the importance of carefully analyzing and recording everything before making a judgment or taking action. He also stresses the need to understand how different groups interact with one another how they relate to authority and those outside their own ranks. In order to achieve true harmony we must create spaces where everyone can express themselves without fear of persecution, even if that means allowing disagreements to remain unresolved for a long time.
For many people maintaining harmony is difficult because it requires both courage and patience. While the desire to change things may be great the ability to tolerate uncertainty is not always easy to find. Without a certain level of tolerance any attempt at change will inevitably fail, no matter how well-intentioned it is.
As for whether I agree with his views on public discourse I must admit that I don’t fully understand them. His analysis suggests that public speaking should be reserved for those who are willing to give up their own opinions in order to make the world a better place. This idea seems too absolute and perhaps even harmful. We shouldn’t just accept whatever others say without questioning it, but we also need to encourage people to express their views if they have them. The idea that one should never express an opinion is both impractical and counterproductive.
In his reply to the reader’s comments another user writes:
Within the margins of public opinion there are always many voices speaking out against the mainstream. However I believe that most people are not really ready to listen let alone pay attention to such differing opinions. We all have our own ideas about what should be done and when we’re forced to make choices it’s only natural for us to look for ways to achieve our goals.
Qian’s work attempts to create a space for dialogue that is not dominated by any single viewpoint, but instead allows for different perspectives to be heard. This approach requires a lot of patience as well as the courage to listen without preconceptions or biases. The more people are willing to engage in open discussion the more likely it is that they will find common ground.
However I think that Qian’s work also has some limitations. While he encourages us to express our views and to challenge conventional ideas his focus on individual experience may not be sufficient for tackling larger societal issues. Without a broader perspective we’re at risk of getting lost in the details and losing sight of what really matters.
Ultimately I don’t think that Qian’s work alone can solve any major problems, but it does provide us with valuable insights into how to navigate our own lives and relationships. By taking the time to reflect on these ideas we may be able to gain a deeper understanding of ourselves and those around us, which will help us make better decisions in the future.
I find myself being drawn to Qian’s approach because it emphasizes careful observation patience and the willingness to listen to others’ perspectives. It also highlights the importance of finding common ground among diverse groups, while rejecting any attempt at dogmatism or authoritarianism. While I don’t fully agree with all of his arguments I can see how they might be useful in certain contexts.
In conclusion Qian’s emphasis on creating a space for dialogue and challenging mainstream ideas seems to have inspired many people to think differently about their own lives and the world around them. While his work may not provide all the answers we seek it does encourage us to ask difficult questions and to consider alternative perspectives. By doing so we can gain a better understanding of ourselves and others, which will ultimately help us build a more inclusive society for everyone.
