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,(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。
在所有中国传统习俗中,缠足也许是最难以为现代人所接受和理解的:它被普遍视为一项令国人难以启齿的尴尬遗产,即使是传统文化的坚定拥护者,也不会为之辩护,更不用说倡导延续这一旧俗了。人们对缠足有着鲜明的道德判断——它无论如何不能算是一项“好”的传统,最好不要去提...
评分之前看完写了这样一段短评: 令人手不释卷的那种好看,尤其翻译也好,不过第四、五章看得我很晕。作者尤其敏感的是近现代中国的男性精英在落后的焦虑之下,使用民族-国家和种族进化的话语重新规训和打压女性。她认为在缠足史中女性并非是全然被动的受害者,而是仍然具有一定的...
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 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...
同时参照着看看。
评分在关于缠足和不缠足的争论中,又或者是缠足的历史中,女性在哪里?她们的感受,疼痛又或是自豪究竟是从何而来?把女人的事情还给女人,整篇文章在我看来就是对于那个男性臆想的讽刺,HEAR THE UNHEARD VOICES,真好看。
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。
评分在关于缠足和不缠足的争论中,又或者是缠足的历史中,女性在哪里?她们的感受,疼痛又或是自豪究竟是从何而来?把女人的事情还给女人,整篇文章在我看来就是对于那个男性臆想的讽刺,HEAR THE UNHEARD VOICES,真好看。
评分读了一篇中文译本的书评,受了些误导,以为作者是在强调女性在缠足传统中的主动权,而淡化了女性受害的实质。其实作者只是为了说明历史不会像教科书里写的那样齐整、同质。历史一定是杂乱的。在每一段突显“进步”的大型叙事下,一定有无数代表“反动”的剧情。被高歌称颂的“反”缠足运动中,其实充满了矛盾、反复、虚假,和不久即被官方叙事淹没的声音。
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.quotespace.org All Rights Reserved. 小美书屋 版权所有