Page 11 - 香港中文大學中國文化研究所

特稿 Featured Article

On this occasion of ICS’s golden anniversary, however, it is perhaps time for us to ask ourselves: has CUHK
remained committed to the development of Chinese studies? To what extent can it still undertake the development
of Chinese studies in Hong Kong? What kind of conditions is the field of Chinese studies facing in an environment
of top-down, outside-in marketised competition, corporatised management, indicator-oriented assessment, and

standardised uniformity, in which both subjects of humanities and humanism have been severely affected? What
will its prospects be? The most serious problem of all is that a state of fierce competition and rivalry exists among
local institutes and practically the whole of the territory’s academia resulting in a frantic scramble for resources.
In pursuit of departmental and institutional fames, energy has been used up in triumphing over the counterparts.
In this state of wasteful internal exhaustion in the territory under the impact of survival crisis of individual
institutions, regrettably local strengths with solid foundation and proud legacy cannot converge to produce something
with original distinctive features that merits an international standing. Without a critical mass, it is difficult to put
out a grand masterpiece without concerted effort in Hong Kong. Yet the top-down pressure from those who control
research resources breeds a short-sighted research culture in academic departments and research units, which

focuses only on quick success in terms of the number of funded projects and funding amounts. The RGC’s external
overseas reviewers are often astounded by this phenomenon, which has seldom been seen elsewhere in international
academia. Unfortunately, most of them have chosen to remain reticent about it. (Yet I recall that a conscientious
foreign scholar once used the word “pathetic” to refer to this absurdity.) Ironically, this kind of “internationalisation
with Hong Kong characteristics” is impeding the continuity and development of the tradition of Chinese studies
with Hong Kong characteristics. This is most unwise and regrettable. How can Hong Kong break out of this loop?
How should CUHK approach the issue in its own way? Do we have no choice but just to follow suit? If that is the

case, the humanities might be the last defence safeguarding Chinese studies, but they are under threat as well and
unable even to fend for themselves.

As a pluralistic and inclusive community, Hong Kong used to be an ideal space for the study of Chinese culture
which is grand and profound, rich and diversified. Whether this space can remain or will be narrowed gradually
depends first on the working of our own critical faculties, self-reflective ability, and capacity to overcome.

中國文化研究所通訊 2017 年第 3 期
11
www.ics.cuhk.edu.hk © 香港中文大學 中國文化研究所 版權所有

ics_bulletin_2017_no3_printed.indd 11 10/10/2017 16:00:20