
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or
Uncertainty about the way a state should be working is not necessarily produced by having multiple voices offering competing ideas about it. As Maura Dykstra’s Uncertainty in the Empire of Routine: The Administrative Revolution of the Eighteenth-Century Qing State (Harvard UP, 2022) shows, one relatively uncontested pole of political power is perfectly capable of generating uncertainty on its own including, paradoxically, through the very act of seeking surety.
As Dykstra documents in a fabulously intricate study of administrative and court documents, searches for routinised and carefully monitored ways of running the empire during the Qing dynasty (1636-1911) motivated a range of reforms to the bureaucracy and those that managed it. Over the course of the dynasty’s first centuries these were relatively successful in granting the central authorities in Beijing greater oversight. Yet the imperial centre did not always like what it saw, and the more it got to know about activities in the provinces, the more it came to doubt whether all was well across the realm, a process which eventually culminated in a vast crisis of imperial self-knowledge.
Ed Pulford is an Anthropologist and Lecturer in Chinese Studies at the University of Manchester. His research focuses on friendships and histories between the Chinese, Korean and Russian worlds, and indigeneity in northeast Asia.
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/chinese-studies
5
1010 ratings
Uncertainty about the way a state should be working is not necessarily produced by having multiple voices offering competing ideas about it. As Maura Dykstra’s Uncertainty in the Empire of Routine: The Administrative Revolution of the Eighteenth-Century Qing State (Harvard UP, 2022) shows, one relatively uncontested pole of political power is perfectly capable of generating uncertainty on its own including, paradoxically, through the very act of seeking surety.
As Dykstra documents in a fabulously intricate study of administrative and court documents, searches for routinised and carefully monitored ways of running the empire during the Qing dynasty (1636-1911) motivated a range of reforms to the bureaucracy and those that managed it. Over the course of the dynasty’s first centuries these were relatively successful in granting the central authorities in Beijing greater oversight. Yet the imperial centre did not always like what it saw, and the more it got to know about activities in the provinces, the more it came to doubt whether all was well across the realm, a process which eventually culminated in a vast crisis of imperial self-knowledge.
Ed Pulford is an Anthropologist and Lecturer in Chinese Studies at the University of Manchester. His research focuses on friendships and histories between the Chinese, Korean and Russian worlds, and indigeneity in northeast Asia.
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/chinese-studies
4,204 Listeners
57 Listeners
581 Listeners
26,339 Listeners
1,810 Listeners
590 Listeners
342 Listeners
142 Listeners
126 Listeners
15,457 Listeners
87 Listeners
330 Listeners
1,105 Listeners
344 Listeners
150 Listeners