Whispers of an Embattled Minority
When a friend invited the author for dinner in a Tibetan restaurant here in Taipei, the author's first thought was, well, a complete blank. What the hell is Tibetan food? And it is all the more embarrassing that the author has no clue, as most Chinese people are brainwashed to some degree that Tibet is an inseparable part of China, and by the same logic, Tibetan food ought to be considered an inseparable part of Chinese cuisine. But the bigger question here is, how does a Tibetan restaurant, in a land where few Tibetans reside and few locals know about Tibet outside casual trips and political news, even survive and prosper?
Its the standard dilemma of a demographically tiny minority that faces a powerful mainstream culture. Modern East Asian states, at least in the author's opinion, are defined essentially by their "cultural monolithic" nature. To put in different words, each state has a very concrete image of what its culture looks like, and then expect citizens and long-term residents to ascribe to those physical manifestations of culture in order for them to, well, "belong." It is, in essence, an open support for cultural assimilation, happening unconsciously through everyday actions and exposures, despite possible verbatim on the contrary.
Now, this poses a major threat for demographically minuscule communities like that of Tibetans in Taiwan. Large populations bringing foreign cultures can easily compel the mainstream to accept their cultural traits and set up institutions to prevent their own cultural heritage from getting lost (Mexicans in the US being a good example), but communities with small populations relative that of their new host societies must depend on effects for their own cultures to gain significant resonance among locals in order for it to be accepted. Chinese food in early days of Chinese immigration to the West is perhaps the best example of such.
To gain resonance with locals through a complete foreign cultural concept is no easy task. It simultaneously (and rather paradoxically) require two elements, the uniqueness of a trait that is attractive to locals as an exotic element and the localization of the said trait so that the locals can adopt it into their daily lives. By consciously "bastardizing" unique features of a potentially popular cultural trait, an immigrant minority can turn what is originally foreign into what is mainstream over time. This strategy has been extremely effective for items such as food, fashion, and even religions when different communities band together in collective effort.
The strategy does not work, however, for those traits that are fundamentally divisive by whatever standard, whether it be for a local or a foreign audience. This has unfortunately been the case for Tibet. Walking through the little Tibetan restaurant, the author was firmly greeted by a portrait of Dalai Lama having a meal, next to a TV showing a MV featuring mainland Tibetan singers bellowing out the latest Tibetan pop songs with the bright lights of Chinese cities as the backgrounds. A mainland Tibetan trader spoke to the author about his shops in California while the flag of the Tibetan government-in-exile flew behind him.
It is all the more ironic to consider why Tibetan exiles are here in Taipei in the first place. Considering that many Tibetans fled their homeland out of spite for the Han Chinese's excessive Sinicization efforts, it is a wonder that some Tibetans end up in a place that speak that dread Mandarin and, along with Hong Kong, provide quite a bit of pop culture influence to mainland China. Interestingly, perhaps to counter this, the Tibetan place has a fair bit of Indian food on the menu, along with my light-flavored Tibetan dishes that remind the author a little too much of regular Chinese stir-fries and stews.
The minority's survival as a unique culture depends upon how steadily it holds onto its own culture in the overwhelming threat of assimilation. Being small in number, being without notably famous cultural exports, and even being without a true, accessible homeland for centuries, as the Jews have shown, are obstacles that can be overcome. But the overcoming is based on the precondition that the members of the community remain unified in ideology and attitudes about what they want to project to those outside their community. They can argue about their own identity among themselves, but they must give a unified outward image.
Without that unified impression that the foreigners can easily perceive and accept, the minority, like the Tibetans here in Taipei, will remain embattled. Divided in ranks, whether it be politically pro-/anti-China, culturally pro-Chinese/Indian (across a border of mutual ignorance), or socially among the traditionalist old/pragmatic young, the community enable the mainstream culture to filter through its respective schisms, slowly chipping away one cultural trait after the other until only the obvious and the nominal are present. By that time, no whimpering from the dying cultural identity will be taken seriously by any busy local.
Its the standard dilemma of a demographically tiny minority that faces a powerful mainstream culture. Modern East Asian states, at least in the author's opinion, are defined essentially by their "cultural monolithic" nature. To put in different words, each state has a very concrete image of what its culture looks like, and then expect citizens and long-term residents to ascribe to those physical manifestations of culture in order for them to, well, "belong." It is, in essence, an open support for cultural assimilation, happening unconsciously through everyday actions and exposures, despite possible verbatim on the contrary.
Now, this poses a major threat for demographically minuscule communities like that of Tibetans in Taiwan. Large populations bringing foreign cultures can easily compel the mainstream to accept their cultural traits and set up institutions to prevent their own cultural heritage from getting lost (Mexicans in the US being a good example), but communities with small populations relative that of their new host societies must depend on effects for their own cultures to gain significant resonance among locals in order for it to be accepted. Chinese food in early days of Chinese immigration to the West is perhaps the best example of such.
To gain resonance with locals through a complete foreign cultural concept is no easy task. It simultaneously (and rather paradoxically) require two elements, the uniqueness of a trait that is attractive to locals as an exotic element and the localization of the said trait so that the locals can adopt it into their daily lives. By consciously "bastardizing" unique features of a potentially popular cultural trait, an immigrant minority can turn what is originally foreign into what is mainstream over time. This strategy has been extremely effective for items such as food, fashion, and even religions when different communities band together in collective effort.
The strategy does not work, however, for those traits that are fundamentally divisive by whatever standard, whether it be for a local or a foreign audience. This has unfortunately been the case for Tibet. Walking through the little Tibetan restaurant, the author was firmly greeted by a portrait of Dalai Lama having a meal, next to a TV showing a MV featuring mainland Tibetan singers bellowing out the latest Tibetan pop songs with the bright lights of Chinese cities as the backgrounds. A mainland Tibetan trader spoke to the author about his shops in California while the flag of the Tibetan government-in-exile flew behind him.
It is all the more ironic to consider why Tibetan exiles are here in Taipei in the first place. Considering that many Tibetans fled their homeland out of spite for the Han Chinese's excessive Sinicization efforts, it is a wonder that some Tibetans end up in a place that speak that dread Mandarin and, along with Hong Kong, provide quite a bit of pop culture influence to mainland China. Interestingly, perhaps to counter this, the Tibetan place has a fair bit of Indian food on the menu, along with my light-flavored Tibetan dishes that remind the author a little too much of regular Chinese stir-fries and stews.
The minority's survival as a unique culture depends upon how steadily it holds onto its own culture in the overwhelming threat of assimilation. Being small in number, being without notably famous cultural exports, and even being without a true, accessible homeland for centuries, as the Jews have shown, are obstacles that can be overcome. But the overcoming is based on the precondition that the members of the community remain unified in ideology and attitudes about what they want to project to those outside their community. They can argue about their own identity among themselves, but they must give a unified outward image.
Without that unified impression that the foreigners can easily perceive and accept, the minority, like the Tibetans here in Taipei, will remain embattled. Divided in ranks, whether it be politically pro-/anti-China, culturally pro-Chinese/Indian (across a border of mutual ignorance), or socially among the traditionalist old/pragmatic young, the community enable the mainstream culture to filter through its respective schisms, slowly chipping away one cultural trait after the other until only the obvious and the nominal are present. By that time, no whimpering from the dying cultural identity will be taken seriously by any busy local.
Comments
Post a Comment