[Guo Ping and Zhang Jie] 2021 Annual Report on Research on Intangible Cultural Heritage in China
pick
Important: Research on intangible cultural heritage in China will continue to heat up in 2021, and intangible cultural heritage education and the establishment of intangible cultural heritage disciplines, the construction of cultural ecological zones, the protection and utilization of intangible cultural heritage, and rural revitalization have become hot spots.
The subjects of intangible cultural heritage research are more diverse and the perspectives are richer, which fully reflects the cross-cutting characteristics of intangible cultural heritage protection actions; scholars are based on the framework of international conventions and taking into account developments in the same field abroad, and reflect more deeply on theoretical and practical experience., forming a number of profound academic achievements.
At the same time, there are still some outstanding problems in intangible cultural heritage research.
Due to the scattered and fuzzy research subjects, the construction of intangible cultural heritage disciplines is still in the experimental period, and systematic research on intangible cultural heritage theory, intangible cultural heritage history, and intangible cultural heritage methodology is lacking.
Therefore, diversified integration, clarifying the main body, building an intangible cultural heritage system with China characteristics, and promoting the scientific protection and inheritance of intangible cultural heritage have become important directions at this stage.
Keywords: intangible cultural heritage education; intangible cultural heritage discipline; protection and inheritance system; intangible cultural heritage communication; rural revitalization Author profile: Guo Ping, professor at Feng Jicai Institute of Literature and Art, Tianjin University; Zhang Jie, doctoral candidate at Feng Jicai Institute of Literature and Art, Tianjin University.
Fund Project: Ministry of Education Humanities and Social Sciences Research and Planning Fund Project "Memory and Transformation of Village Culture Since the Late People's Republic of China: A Study on the Oral History of Rural Residents in Qi County, Shanxi" Project No.: 17YJA850003) Phased achievements.
introduction
In 2021, the research on China's intangible cultural heritage (or "intangible cultural heritage" for short) has continued to be popular for more than ten years, forming a number of in-depth and professional theoretical and practical research results, and promoting the study of intangible cultural heritage (or "intangible cultural heritage" for short).
Policies and substantive measures related to the construction of disciplines have been introduced, driving the protection of intangible cultural heritage towards a scientific path in all aspects such as confirmation, filing, research, preservation, protection, publicity, promotion, inheritance and revitalization.
A series of landmark events will occur in the field of intangible cultural heritage protection in China in 2021.
The General Office of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China and the General Office of the State Council issued the "Opinions on Further Strengthening the Protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage", which will provide guidance for the future from three aspects: improving the protection and inheritance system of intangible cultural heritage, improving the level of intangible cultural heritage protection and inheritance, and increasing the popularization of intangible cultural heritage dissemination.
Time points out the direction for intangible cultural heritage protection work;"Intangible Cultural Heritage Protection" has been included in the undergraduate majors catalog of ordinary colleges and universities.
Universities have taken new steps in cultivating intangible cultural heritage professionals and implementing the concept of intangible cultural heritage protection and inheritance into national education to social education; The 14th discipline category of China's first cross-disciplinary master's degree authorization site in "Intangible Cultural Heritage" has been established in Tianjin University, opening up a pilot project for the long-term construction and development of intangible cultural heritage disciplines and intangible cultural heritage education; The list of the fifth batch of national intangible cultural heritage representative projects was announced to the public, and 325 projects including extended projects have become one of the focuses of attention and participation by the academic community...
Looking at the research results of intangible cultural heritage in 2021, it mainly covers the following aspects: First, carry out in-depth exploration of theoretical and other aspects around the establishment of intangible cultural heritage disciplines; second, continue to carry out discussions on intangible cultural heritage related concepts, protection concepts, protection mechanisms and inheritance paths; The third is to focus on the spread of intangible cultural heritage and conduct case studies based on the practice of different types of intangible cultural heritage and different communication methods.
1.
Subject construction and educational practice of intangible cultural heritage
1.
Rational thinking from action to discipline
Since it entered the field of academic research, the protection of intangible cultural heritage has attracted widespread attention from scholars in relevant disciplines.
With the gradual deepening of practice and theoretical research on intangible cultural heritage protection, the concept of intangible cultural heritage disciplines has emerged and been put into action.
Some universities have independently set up secondary intangible cultural heritage disciplines, which has had a certain impact on talent training and academic research.
On September 22, 2020, at a symposium of expert representatives in the field of education, culture, health and sports hosted by General Secretary Xi Jinping, Professor Feng Jicai of Tianjin University clearly proposed the establishment of an independent Intangible Cultural Heritage under the title of "Establishing a National Scientific System for Intangible Cultural Heritage Protection".
The importance of the discipline of cultural heritage.
With the promotion of the government, universities and scholars, in April 2021, the Office of the Academic Degrees Committee of the State Council issued the "Notice on Promoting Some degree-awarding Units to Carry out Pilot Work on Talent Training in the Direction of Intangible Cultural Heritage." Since then, the "Opinions on Further Strengthening the Protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage" issued by the General Office of the CPC Central Committee and the General Office of the State Council clearly stated that "strengthen the disciplinary system and professional construction of intangible cultural heritage in colleges and universities, and support qualified universities to independently add master's and doctoral programs." A series of policies have provided institutional support for the disciplinary shift of intangible cultural heritage, marking that my country's intangible cultural heritage protection actions have entered a new stage-"Intangible cultural heritage science" has become an important keyword for intangible cultural heritage research in 2021.
In the past decade or so, research on exploring intangible cultural heritage from a disciplinary perspective has never stopped.
In 2021, relevant scholars will trace and define the concepts of "intangible cultural heritage" and "intangible cultural heritage" based on previous views, and review and sort out the history of the subject, trying to clarify the positioning and characteristics of intangible cultural heritage as an independent discipline.
Specifically, it involves three aspects: First, as an interdisciplinary and integrated research category, is it necessary for intangible cultural heritage to become a new discipline independently based on existing related disciplines such as folklore, anthropology, and art? Second, should intangible cultural heritage become a discipline be regarded as a first-level discipline or a second-level discipline, and under which subject category should it belong? Third, as a practical concept, a policy concept, and a specific political and economic concept in a specific historical stage, how can intangible cultural heritage achieve its academic turn?
The main views on the positioning of the discipline of intangible cultural heritage are as follows: First, it is juxtaposed with other related disciplines.
For example, based on the close relationship between folk literature and art, folklore and intangible cultural heritage, Huang Yonglin and Deng Qingyuan suggested that intangible cultural heritage be listed as first-level disciplines under the category of law, folklore and ethnology.
Yuan Li and Gu Jun pointed out that intangible cultural heritage studies and existing disciplines such as art and folklore have different understandings of the nature of intangible cultural heritage, project selection criteria and intangible cultural heritage protection concepts.
Therefore, in the research based on intangible cultural heritage events, intangible cultural heritage studies can more accurately solve problems that are difficult to solve in existing disciplines in intangible cultural heritage protection, and propose three theoretical frameworks of intangible cultural heritage studies from the perspectives of "what is","why" and "how to do".
The second is to integrate intangible cultural heritage studies and cultural heritage studies.
For example, scholars such as Wang Fuzhou, Pan Lusheng, Xiang Yunju, and Zhang Bo suggested that a first-level discipline of "cultural heritage studies" should be established under the category of "cross-disciplines" to integrate cultural heritage research.
The knowledge, technology, methodology and other related subject systems required by the Institute include three secondary disciplines: intangible cultural heritage, heritage and natural heritage.
Among them, Xiang Yunju believes that the positioning of intangible cultural heritage studies can also consider establishing a new category of cultural heritage studies with a first-level discipline of intangible cultural heritage studies, or establishing a first-level discipline of intangible cultural heritage in the history category, advocating the integration of material cultural heritage and intangible cultural heritage.
Discipline integration of intangible cultural heritage.
Zhang Juwen believes that the concepts of disciplinary nature and academic nature are different, and cultural heritage itself has the characteristics of multi-disciplinary nature.
At this stage, cultural heritage research should pay more attention to its academic nature.
Peng Zhaorong started from the relationship between biology, ecology and culture, and through a comparative analysis of objects, non-objects and history, clarified that one of the reasons for the difficulty in positioning the subject of intangible cultural heritage is that the absence of natural history leads to the lack of connection between disciplines related to intangible cultural heritage.
Therefore, it is most reasonable to classify intangible cultural heritage as natural history.
Huang Yonglin and Xiao Yuanping practiced the concept of building a cross-independent intangible cultural heritage discipline in the "Course on Intangible Cultural Heritage", clarifying the connotation and classification, characteristics and value, protection and utilization, fieldwork and theoretical research of intangible cultural heritage, etc.
Based on theoretical and practical issues, we conducted in-depth research on important categories and content of intangible cultural heritage.
2) Subject construction and talent training in intangible cultural heritage education
1.
The construction of intangible cultural heritage disciplines from the perspective of new liberal arts
The proposal of the construction of new liberal arts provides a cross-cooperation platform and institutional support for the subject construction of intangible cultural heritage studies.
The subject setting of intangible cultural heritage studies is undoubtedly an effective attempt to build new liberal arts.
Zhang Bo pointed out that the mission of universities and the protection of intangible cultural heritage are a coupling relationship-universities are the natural and actual subjects of intangible cultural heritage protection, and at the same time emphasized that the construction of intangible cultural heritage disciplines requires a new liberal arts perspective.
Song Junhua believes that the establishment of the discipline of intangible cultural heritage urgently needs to build its own independent disciplinary paradigm.
The disciplinary paradigm of intangible cultural heritage can be constructed through subject reference, policy guidance, and institutional guarantees, including factual paradigm, practical paradigm, critical paradigm and explanatory paradigm.
Qiao Xiaoguang pointed out that the relationship between universities and intangible cultural heritage is mainly reflected in the relationship between living cultural traditions and the college educational knowledge system, the relationship between knowledge production in ethnic communities and scholars, and the relationship between intangible cultural heritage and university education.
He also suggested that universities and heritage communities establish cooperative relationships.
Wang Fuzhou published the book "Intangible Cultural Heritage Morphology" in 2019 and has been committed to deepening the theoretical theory of intangible cultural morphology in recent years.
It pointed out in the article that material cultural heritage and intangible cultural heritage are two forms of existence of cultural heritage.
The two have structural identity and present disciplinary characteristics of intersection, integrity, continuity, applicability and uniqueness.
Therefore, the construction of discipline groups should be carried out through the perspective of "Grand Heritage View" to understand the structure and system construction of cultural heritage.
In terms of basic theoretical courses of disciplines, it is recommended that relevant colleges and universities combine their own professional advantages and characteristics to cultivate compound talents in the fields of management, cultural and creative industries, education and research in a targeted manner, and the curriculum of cultural heritage studies should give full play to the interdisciplinary nature of intangible cultural heritage.
Since my country comprehensively launched intangible cultural heritage protection work in the early 21st century, folklore scholars have the highest participation in academic circles.
This is closely related to the folk survey practice carried out by China folklore scholars in the 20th century.
Based on this, many folklore scholars discuss the relationship between intangible cultural heritage and folklore from the perspective of subject system and methodology.
Yang Lihui believes that my country's "intangible cultural heritage education" is actually an extension of the long-standing practice of local folk education.
She used the education practice of famous folklore scholar Zhong Jingwen and the School of Liberal Arts of Beijing Normal University as cases to demonstrate in detail the existence of direct continuity between the two.
At the same time, she pointed out that the concept of "intangible cultural heritage" has brought two major changes to contemporary folklore education in China.
One is the shift of education concept from the guest position to the theme position, that is, from the perspective of external observers of culture to the perspective of internal holders of culture.
The second is the integration of academic folklore and public folklore.
Gao Bingzhong also clearly pointed out that intangible cultural heritage studies inherit and follow the objects, academic methods, values and academic achievements of folklore, but intangible cultural heritage studies are different from the traditional basic discipline running model.
He believes that intangible cultural heritage has been positioned as a cutting-edge and cross-disciplinary subject based on greater consensus.
It is using the momentum of the construction of new liberal arts to call for theoretical integration and methodological innovation, and has become a prominent study.
2.
Intangible cultural heritage education and intangible cultural heritage construction
Strictly speaking, before intangible cultural heritage entered the subject system, intangible cultural heritage education mainly referred to the education of inheritors, which was mainly divided into three types.
One was to provide a comprehensive ability improvement platform for inheritors of intangible cultural heritage projects to enable them to obtain better inheritance ability; The second is to hire inheritors of intangible cultural heritage projects to offer intangible cultural heritage practical courses on campus to improve students 'hands-on ability and recognition of traditional culture; The third is to open intangible cultural heritage majors in universities and vocational colleges to cultivate academic inheritors and their research and management personnel in related fields.
Since the construction of intangible cultural heritage disciplines was officially put on the agenda, intangible cultural heritage education has been given broader academic connotation and social significance, and its conceptual scope has been expanded to research, design, management and other aspects.
The Intangible Cultural Heritage Inheritor Research and Training Program was initially piloted by the Ministry of Culture in dozens of universities across the country in 2015, becoming an important practical case of intangible cultural heritage education in my country.
However, the program was once questioned by academic circles in the early stages of its implementation.
By sorting out the practical experience of the inheritor research and training program, Wang Chenyang clarified that there is no conflict between intangible cultural heritage inheritors and university education, improving the effectiveness of intangible cultural heritage protection in participating colleges and universities.
Wu Xinfeng and Bai Xianai believe that between the inheritance of formal intangible cultural heritage education and rural revitalization, colleges and universities need to carefully consider issues such as intangible cultural heritage education to support intellectual talents and aspirations, the spirit and ethical principles of the Intangible Cultural Heritage Convention, and the industrialization of intangible cultural heritage and its derivatives.
Starting from the practice of research and training of Hakka ancient prose at Gannan Normal University, Wu Yujun believes that academic contention has clarified the problems existing in the field of intangible cultural heritage and research and training plans, and the research and training plans have been improved.
At present, doubts are gradually decreasing and consensus is increasing.
It is necessary to strengthen basic research and advocate harmony without difference.
Xu Ke and Guo Keran discussed how to use ethnic vocational education to enable intangible cultural inheritors to adapt to the changes in social division of labor, so as to realize the logic of intangible cultural inheritors from "personal development" to "integration into the social community." Lei Xianfeng pointed out the shortcomings of "elite" research and training, and proposed implementation strategies such as guiding cultural confidence and setting up courses based on regional cultural characteristics, as well as an evaluation mechanism with diverse subjects and diverse indicators.
Based on the educational inheritance of intangible cultural heritage in Xizang schools, Shao Huifang believes that "cross-border" thinking should be used to mobilize all relevant subjects of school intangible cultural heritage to conduct multi-dimensional interactive coupling.
Learning from foreign cultural heritage education experience can provide a reference path for my country's intangible cultural heritage education and discipline construction.
Based on their experience in intangible cultural heritage related work in Japanese universities, He Bin and Ma Wen introduced Japan's practical history of protecting cultural property and providing institutional guarantees for education at the legislative level since the 1940s, as well as Japanese universities 'efforts to open cultural heritage majors.
The setting of disciplines and courses.
Accepting university education and completing required course credits is one of the shortcuts to obtain the qualification of a scholar and artist.
In order to cater to the talent needs of various museums, colleges and universities often set up diversified supporting courses based on their professional characteristics, which laid an important foundation for the subsequent discipline construction and teacher training of Japanese cultural property.
It can be seen that the beginning of Japanese universities 'intervention in cultural property education was to cultivate professional talents for museums.
South Korean scholars Zheng Ranhe and Pang Jianchun divided the intangible cultural heritage education implemented in their country into three aspects: education of skill inheritors, education of specialized talents and universal education.
They listed in detail the course catalogs of intangible cultural heritage related majors in several representative universities, presenting a curriculum that combines practice and theory.
The characteristics of intangible cultural heritage education in South Korea are reflected in the expansion and specialization of intangible cultural heritage education objects, forming a dual-track education model that combines apprentices and apprentices with schools.
Lisa Gilman, editor-in-chief of the American Journal of Folklore, reviewed the status of intangible cultural heritage education in southern Africa and the United States, and proposed that existing definitions and subject structures related to intangible cultural heritage must be challenged to eliminate hidden colonial legacies in institutional structures, curriculum systems, and barriers to entry for students or professors.
She advocated improving the quality and quantity of training for staff in the cultural sector.
College students must not only learn theoretical and academic ideas about culture, but also learn practical skills on how to do specific work.
Generally speaking, countries that are at the forefront of cultural heritage protection in the world usually include intangible cultural heritage under the cultural heritage discipline system.
2.
Research on the protection mechanism of intangible cultural heritage
With the gradual advancement of national strategies such as "three districts and three states" and "targeted poverty alleviation" in recent years, the construction of cultural and ecological reserves, rural revitalization, integration of culture and tourism, and revitalization of traditional crafts have become important realization paths for this strategy.
In this process, as a place, the inheritance and protection of intangible cultural heritage of important cultural resources and local development needs leverage each other.
1) Spatial protection of regional cultural ecology
Geographical space and cultural space together constitute the inheritance field of intangible cultural heritage.
Academic circles have successively proposed protection methods and concepts for intangible cultural heritage such as productive protection, holistic protection, and process protection.It is worth noting that these three concepts all point to the importance of cultural ecological space.
Therefore, the construction of cultural ecological space has become one of the important topics in the academic community to discuss the living inheritance of intangible cultural heritage in recent years.
Cultural and ecological reserves are an important measure formulated by my country for the overall ecological protection of intangible cultural heritage since 2007.
They have been in the process of continuous exploration and development for more than ten years, becoming an extension of the path of regional cultural and economic protection and development.
The "Opinions on Further Strengthening the Protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage" once again emphasized the importance of improving the regional overall protection system for improving the intangible cultural heritage protection system.
Chen Huawen conducted an in-depth interpretation of this and pointed out that this system is important for continuing The historical context and strengthening cultural confidence are of great significance.
Lin Jifu discussed the important value of intangible cultural heritage under the construction of cultural and ecological reserves in promoting targeted poverty alleviation and sustainable social and economic development in ethnic minority areas.
At the same time, it carried out progressive research on the spatial issues of cultural and ecological protection from the three levels of "spatial cognition","spatial production" and "spatial empowerment", and further emphasized the overall relationship and linkage mechanism between the construction of cultural and ecological reserves and the protection of intangible cultural heritage and rural revitalization.
Zhao Ervenda analyzed relevant theories and research on cultural ecological reserves.
Zhou Jie sorted out the theoretical context of cultural ecology and its practice in ecological museums, intangible cultural heritage communities, and cultural and ecological reserves, and discussed the theory, practice and mechanism of the cultural and ecological protection system from the perspective of industry-city and humanistic integration.
In addition, some scholars discussed problems and countermeasures in the construction of cultural ecological reserves.
Fu Anping paid attention to the performance evaluation system of cultural and ecological reserves, and proposed the necessity, principles, evaluation subjects and specific indicator content of performance evaluation.
Zhang Zhiying discussed the construction goals, construction effectiveness and existing problems of the national cultural and ecological reserve.
Chu Guoshuai discussed the multiple "identity attributes" of my country's cultural and ecological reserves and their future construction.
Huang Zhongshan discussed the development context, protection concepts and protection strategies of intangible cultural heritage from the perspective of urban cultural ecology.
Fan Yongqiang took the cultural and ecological changes of Shehuo folk sports as an example, analyzed and proposed a symbiotic path for the ecological development of Shehuo culture.
Yang Yi discussed the living inheritance path of intangible cultural heritage from the perspective of cultural ecology, and advocated that inheritors of intangible cultural heritage should take the initiative to self-adjust and self-innovate when facing changes.
Han Shunfa, Lu Song, Wen Dongni, Chang Yuanyuan, Li Yajuan, Zhang Xinyou, Ying Kui, Zhang Hongmei, Yan Huili and other scholars discussed the spatial distribution characteristics of intangible cultural heritage and its influencing factors from a multidisciplinary perspective.
In addition to the overall protection of geographical and cultural ecology by establishing cultural and ecological reserves, factors such as the increase of social mobility and the development of communication technology have promoted the extension of the scope of cultural ecology, and the protection of cultural ecology is no longer limited to the concept of geographical space.
Gao Xiaokang believes that community cultural inheritance groups), media cultural communication media) and scene cultural ecological environment) are the factors that affect the activation of intangible cultural heritage value and the ecological basis of intangible cultural heritage inheritance.
They are also the memory carrier that constitutes historical identity, and further proposed that The theoretical research on intangible cultural heritage protection should focus on the historical research of intangible cultural heritage from the memory and spiritual levels, that is, the construction of a new cultural and ecological history.
Based on the goal of cultural identity, Yan Bin and Wang Lifeng proposed development paths such as rebuilding collective memory, giving symbols and symbols, and creating a shared ecology.
In addition, Wang Mingyue and Ma Zhiyao also proposed a view of "discrete spatial form" that is different from "regional space".
2) Research on the concept, mechanism and path of intangible cultural heritage protection
1.
Research on protection concepts based on the framework of the Convention
Since UNESCO promulgated the Convention for the Protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage in 2003, a series of policies and regulations related to the protection of intangible cultural heritage have been formulated and improved at home and abroad, and the core terms and concepts among them have been repeatedly discussed by academic circles.
"Community" was proposed by the Convention as one of the main bodies of the protection and inheritance of intangible cultural heritage and has become a research hotspot in recent years.
Lu Wei reflected on the expression logic of communities, groups and individuals in the Convention and the Ethical Principles from the perspective of academic use of concepts, and proposed that communitarianism should avoid suppressing universal human rights.
Meng Fanxing believes that although intangible cultural heritage holders are the first group in the protection and inheritance of intangible cultural heritage, their ability to exercise power is very limited, and relevant stakeholders should jointly promote the ecological construction of intangible cultural heritage protection.
Zhang Ling translated into Chinese the booklet "Intangible Cultural Heritage and Sustainable Development" issued by UNESCO in 2015, providing policy guidance for the sustainable development of the world's intangible cultural heritage from four aspects: inclusive social development, environmental sustainability, inclusive economic development, and peace and security.
Wang Wei sorted out the expansion of the conceptual connotation of "sustainable development" in relevant documents, and suggested re-understanding and adjusting existing intangible cultural heritage protection concepts and policies based on sustainable development.
Huang Yonglin and Liu Wenying elaborated on the dual natural and social attributes and characteristics of the "cultural space" of intangible cultural heritage.
An Xuebin discussed the unique humanistic attributes, practical attributes, historical attributes, civilized attributes, intangible attributes, and social attributes of intangible cultural heritage and their symbiosis and resonance relationships.
With the enrichment of experience in intangible cultural heritage protection and the deepening of theoretical discussions, scholars continue to conduct in-depth research and interpretation of policy documents and expand relevant concepts.
Tang Lulu interpreted the Convention and believed that its implementation needs to overcome global, regional, and global localization issues, as well as differences between international rules and local practices.
Zhang Jiyun traced the organizational structure, main functions and work history of UNESCO in the field of heritage protection, providing a reference for an in-depth understanding of the purpose of relevant documents.
After the release of the "Opinions on Further Strengthening the Protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage" in 2021, scholars interpreted it from different perspectives.
Starting from three aspects: improving the investigation record system, representative project system, and representative inheritor system, Xiao Fang emphasized that improving the intangible cultural heritage protection system is the key to the protection and inheritance of intangible cultural heritage in the new era.
Peng Zhaorong discussed the classification form of intangible cultural heritage based on the measures of "strengthening classified protection" proposed in the "Opinions", pointing out that the establishment of the classification form depends on the special goals and purposes of different classification institutions, rather than that any single discipline can be independently completed.
Song Junhua further discussed the shortcomings in my country's current intangible cultural heritage list system in terms of concept, operation, and utilization, and the need for improvement space.
2.
Exploration of mechanisms and paths for intangible cultural heritage protection
How to inherit and activate it in a living manner is still a hot topic in the academic community to discuss the inheritance mechanism of intangible cultural heritage.
Xiao Fang and Wang Hui believe that the path to integrate intangible cultural heritage into contemporary life can be discussed from two aspects: individual people and public life.
On the one hand, it integrates intangible cultural heritage into the entire process of education and people's aesthetic life, and on the other hand, it is suitable for contemporary social production forms and reconstructs the ethical relationship between the local elite authority system and people's life.
Zhang Lili and Diao Qiuyu put forward the concept of ecological construction for the living inheritance of intangible cultural heritage, and suggested that it be regarded as a cultural life body to consider its development laws.
Enhancing regional cultural identity is one of the important goals of cultural ecological space construction and is of great significance to the living inheritance of intangible cultural heritage.
Ji Zhongyang and Gao Pengcheng discussed the construction strategies of cultural identity from the aspects of cultural consciousness, cultural needs, cultural memory, etc., and pointed out that local intangible cultural heritage generated by the people can be used as an effective resource for building regional cultural identity, but we should also avoid and be vigilant against the "cultural autism" caused by the exclusion of local consciousness in this process.
Yang Cheng believes that maintaining the original environment of intangible cultural heritage by suppressing social development and modern needs in certain areas is contrary to the "original intention" of the emergence of intangible cultural heritage.
Improving the adaptability of intangible cultural heritage to the current living environment is the key to its survival.
In the book "Research on Cultural Identity of Intangible Cultural Heritage: Analysis Based on China Experience," Wang Yuan systematically explained the inherent mechanism and development path of the survival of intangible cultural heritage from the perspective of cultural identity.
Zheng Tuhas the book "Meditations on the Protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage", which presents folk scenes, collective memories and reflections on protection practices in daily life from the perspectives of ancient villages, folk literature, and beliefs.
In recent years, research results on intangible cultural heritage from the perspective of anthropology have gradually increased.
Peng Zhaorong discussed from an anthropological perspective the contradictory dilemma between the "homogeneity" of global development and the "heterogeneity" of heritage protection faced by the return of "localism" of cultural heritage.
Zhou Xing and Huang Jie conducted a relatively systematic and comprehensive review of the results of domestic and foreign anthropologists participating in the research on the protection of intangible cultural heritage in China, providing a reference for anthropological research on intangible cultural heritage.
Wang Hailong elaborated on the guiding role of anthropological thoughts in the protection and inheritance of cultural heritage in North America.
In addition, some scholars have conducted multi-angle discussions and reflections on the protection subjects and protection systems of intangible cultural heritage.
Huang Yao and Wang Wei systematically sorted out the function and mechanism innovation of the Convention for the Protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage around human rights factors in the field of intangible cultural heritage protection, which has certain reference value for deeply understanding and reflecting on the current inheritor protection mechanism.
Gui Rong and Yuan Ting believe that there are many problems in the practice of heritage society, and intangible cultural heritage should be given the realistic legitimacy of "living" in the present, a cooperative check and balance mechanism for relevant entities should be established, and a future-oriented heritage mentality and creativity should be encouraged.
By analyzing the inheritor system of Jiangyong Nvshu, He Yan believes that the recognition standards of inheritors by local people can be used as a reference indicator for the government to identify and assess representative inheritors.
Yang Minkang believes that the process of collective inheritance and construction of intangible cultural heritage includes the segmented presentation and corresponding relationship of "inheritance, construction, and innovation", and incorporates the "collusion" of officials, academic circles, and non-governmental organizations and the main body of scholars.
Participation awareness.
Song Junhua discussed the inter-subject sexual relationship and action logic of intangible cultural heritage protection.
Yao Hui further discussed how heritage projects can reshape the subjectivity and intersubjectivity of communities and build a consensus system to ensure the survival of intangible cultural heritage.
Liu Xin and Su Junjie believe that it is very important for intangible cultural heritage related work to truly reflect the actual situation of the project itself with dynamic concepts.
There is a conflict between the government's "all-round" role and the concept that intangible cultural heritage has the inheritance subject as the core.
Some scholars have paid attention to the impact of the market and capital on inheritors.
Wang Li pointed out that in the process of commercialization of intangible cultural heritage, its main body is not only the intangible cultural heritage "inheritor" of public law acts of intangible cultural heritage protection, but also the role of intangible cultural heritage "practitioner" as a carrier of private rights.
Attention should also be paid to the limitations and adjustments of the nature of community sources on intangible cultural heritage and the actions of practitioners.
Xing Haiyan and Tan Xueyi believe that the capital transformation of ethnic cultural resources can improve the social status of holders of ethnic cultural resources and have an impact on their inheritance activities.
Their main initiative will also affect the mutual transformation of capital to varying degrees.
Wang Yancang and Huang Jing proposed an intellectual property protection model of "classified policies and joint protection" for the innovative intellectual achievements of inheritors in the process of inheriting intangible cultural heritage.
German scholars Demingli and Markeli discussed how to encourage cultural practitioners to participate in market reform and development in various ways and achieve self-management under the protection of the intangible cultural heritage system.
Greek scholar Karampamppas Panas introduced the complex relationship between national policies and the marketization of intangible cultural heritage in the context of Greece's fiscal austerity policy.
In other respects, Song Junhua and Bai Xuexiao summarized the speeches of scholars attending the "New Era Intangible Cultural Heritage Protection and Discipline Development Forum" held in November 2020.
They generally believed that the direction of intangible cultural heritage protection research in the new era includes promoting basic theoretical research on intangible cultural heritage protection.
Research and the construction of intangible cultural heritage disciplines, strengthening research on the relationship between intangible cultural heritage protection and national strategic strategies, and strengthening innovative research on intangible cultural heritage protection.
Xu Yawen sorted out the paradigms, trends and prospects of international cultural heritage management and research, and pointed out the eastward shift of the right to speak in cultural heritage management.
Gao Bingzhong discussed the transformation trend from "feudal superstition" to "cultural heritage", and also defined the legitimacy and future of superstition.
Tan Meng pointed out from the perspective of cultural property that the change of contemporary traditional culture has gone through a circuitous path from alienation to return, and the logic of its change lies in the relationship between traditional culture and the subject of life.
Zhou Wen and Xiao Liao discussed the paths for intangible cultural heritage protection entities in underdeveloped areas to participate in the construction of regional intangible cultural heritage collaborative protection mechanisms from the perspective of local university libraries.
3) Research on intangible cultural heritage in the context of rural revitalization and integration of culture and tourism
Since the rural revitalization strategy was proposed in the report of the 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China in 2017 and the official merger and listing of the Ministry of Culture and Tourism in 2018, rural revitalization and the integration of culture and tourism have become important opportunities to promote the activation and value transformation of intangible cultural heritage resources.
Through a combined search on China Knowledge Network with the themes of "rural revitalization" and "intangible cultural heritage" or "cultural tourism integration" and "intangible cultural heritage", it is found that the number of relevant research results has increased significantly since 2018.
1.
Intangible cultural heritage protection and utilization promote rural revitalization
Xiao Fang and Huo Wen took the practice of Guizhou Yangdeng Art Cooperative as a case study and believed that participatory art rural construction achieved the effect of stimulating villagers 'subjective consciousness, promoting villagers' artistic identification, and conforming to the path of rural revitalization and development.
Zheng Lihong used the "Seeing the Mountains" school-local cooperation project to reflect on the discourse power of "design poverty alleviation", and innovatively proposed and created a circular development model in which "rural design" objects and objects integrated, which is of great significance to the development of "post-design poverty alleviation" work.
Enlightenment value.
Mao Qiaohui noticed that new folk festivals transcend regional cultural space.
Ritual performances attached to folk festivals align traditional folk time with modern social order, which is conducive to the consolidation of village communities, thus promoting the comprehensive revitalization of rural areas.
Tan Zhiman cited "Sayeerho" as an example to point out three major changes in its protection practice, namely, the inheritance space has shifted from family to community, the inheritance model has shifted from individual spontaneous participation to systematic training and performances organized by the inheritance base, and the intangible cultural heritage inheritor's role has been transformed from an institutional arrangement to a sentimental new township sage identity.
From the perspective of reshaping rural public life, Tan Meng believes that there is a coupling mechanism between the development of intangible cultural heritage and the rural revitalization strategy that interacts with each other and links up and down.
Wang Ruiguang advocated fully integrating the protection and inheritance of intangible cultural heritage into rural cultural construction, improving the operating mechanism of rural culture, and promoting the integration of intangible cultural heritage elements and rural cultural forms.
Xue Shiyi and Zhu Qiang emphasized the important role played by the industrialization of ethnic intangible cultural heritage in Yunnan in promoting border economic and cultural prosperity and regional stable development.
Regarding the "double innovation" inheritance and development of intangible cultural heritage, Li Siying believes that a multi-industry cooperation model can be adopted to break through the passive "protection" and "inheritance" model.
Zhang Junfu took the protection and inheritance of Hezhou Huaer in the process of urbanization as an example, and proposed three paths: recognizing its current situation of "acclimatization", restoring and reconstructing the cultural and ecological field, and transforming the intangible cultural heritage industry.
Li Ning and Nie Hongtao believe that the current development of intangible cultural heritage and creative industries is facing difficulties such as vague authorization subjects, tampering and distortion of traditional cultural values, and infringement of cultural and creative products, and draw on the relevant legal protection experience of the United States, France and other countries to propose countermeasures.
The integration of culture and tourism is one of the effective ways to promote rural revitalization, but the intervention of capital is undoubtedly a double-edged sword for the sustainable development of intangible cultural heritage and its village ecological space.
Yuan Li and Gu Jun discussed the positive and negative impacts caused by the introduction of intangible cultural heritage into scenic spots from two aspects: "merits" and "demerits".Xiao Fang and Zhou Qianqian targeted traditional festival intangible cultural heritage and proposed the principle of balance between inheritance and development to realize the transformation of cultural resources into tourism resources.
Li Yu and Sun Jiuxia used a case study to explore the connection between the local and public nature of intangible cultural heritage and regional cultural performances and integration of culture and tourism.
Zhang Han and Sun Jiuxia cited the case of the Xijiang Qianhu Miao Village Scenic Area realizing the cultural reproduction of intangible cultural heritage through static cultural symbols and dynamic micro performances, and proposed that this process of cultural reproduction is actually a transformation from cultural resources to economic resources.
process.
Su Junjie proposed the value construction process and "authentic interaction" relationship of seven groups of stakeholders in China's cultural heritage tourism, and emphasized the perspectives, roles and needs of the "people" of each stakeholder in the integrated development of culture and tourism.
In addition, Xie Rongjian screened and sorted out the relevant results of domestic ethnic minority cultural heritage tourism, and summarized them into the relationship between protection and development, sustainable development, development models, specific development countermeasures, resource evaluation, spatial structure, tourism poverty alleviation, community participation, etc.
Eight hot spots.
Tian Lei believes that the driving mechanism for the integration of intangible cultural heritage and tourism lies in three aspects: industrial development, market demand and technological upgrading.
Liu Zhonghua and Jiao Jipeng used scenario theory to explore a new path for the coordinated development of Shanghai's cultural memory institutions in "intangible cultural heritage + tourism".
Zhao Chonghua and Liu Yunxiu believe that intangible cultural heritage has become entangled in the process of integrating it with the cultural industry, resulting in the formation of many shackles of intangible cultural heritage.
2.
Revitalization of traditional crafts promotes targeted poverty alleviation
With the country's inclusion of "Revitalization of Traditional Crafts" in the "Thirteenth Five-Year Plan" for the first time in 2015, the Ministry of Culture and others jointly issued the "China Traditional Crafts Revitalization Plan" in 2017.
The research results with the theme of traditional crafts have increased year by year.
As an important starting point for rural revitalization and targeted poverty alleviation, it has become one of the hot spots in the field of intangible cultural heritage.
Fang Lili is very concerned about the revitalization of contemporary handicrafts and social transformation.
In the article "Handicraft and the Reshaping of Contemporary China's Lifestyle," she thinks about the practice of contemporary handicrafts from the perspective of traditional China's cultural genes and philosophical views.
Through an overall analysis of the research team's research samples in 11 handicraft rejuvenation fields across the country, it is found that the changes in the development of contemporary handicrafts are mainly reflected from selling products to selling "culture."In the transition from "product reproduction" to "cultural space reproduction", the interactive cooperation between elite artists and folk artists has provided the possibility of building an "Ecological China." Pan Lusheng proposed from the perspective of endogenous momentum that the revitalization value of traditional crafts lies in the contemporary transformation of their applicability.
It is necessary to cultivate emerging cultural industries and craftsmanship spirit and promote the return of traditional crafts to contemporary life.
Based on many years of practice in intangible cultural heritage protection, Lu Pintian considered in parallel the relationship, development, and future between the intangible cultural heritage connotations such as folk customs, folk art, and arts and crafts with China society and human production and lifestyle in his collection.
In his collection, Peng Mu summarized the theoretical thinking and protection practice on the contemporary inheritance and development of handicrafts in the past ten years, and carried out theoretical speculation and practical reflection with the concept of productive protection as the core.
Yao Li and Tian Zhaoyuan took Dong embroidery as a case study and believed that in the process of marketization, the applicable value of intangible cultural heritage should be viewed from the perspective of demand and recognition.
Mou Xiaolin pointed out that traditional handicrafts have the advantages of high-end development due to their high cultural added value, and put forward relevant suggestions.
Zhou Yang pointed out the capitalization shift of intangible cultural heritage and emphasized that the sustainable development of Qinhuai lanterns requires it to return to daily life and realize the transmission of social memory.
Yang Yingxi and Chen Xiumei believe that "consensus innovation", as a discourse practice, can effectively eliminate possible misunderstandings and differences in the practice of intangible cultural heritage innovation.
Through continuous surveys in Karuo District, Changdu City, Zhou Yuhua and Xie Yue summarized and analyzed the effectiveness of its traditional handicrafts protection work, and proposed countermeasures to address the backlash of commercial development on traditional skills.
It is precisely because intangible cultural heritage represented by traditional handicrafts has valuable characteristics that it has become an important starting point for economic development in remote and poverty-stricken areas in recent years.
However, once intangible cultural heritage is bundled with the market economy and develops, it will often be protected.
The development concept of inheritance is inconsistent, which is also a long-term consideration and debate between the government and academic circles.
Bortolotto Chiara, an Italian scholar who chairs the UNESCO Chair on "Intangible Cultural Heritage and Sustainable Development", faces the normative problem brought by different heritage rationales and believes that the Convention for the Protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage "" allows commercialization but not excessive commercialization "reflects the tension and fragile balance between different organizations that manage traditional culture, and is a reconciliation between the exclusive intellectual property system and the heritage management system.
In addition, scholars such as Zhang Lili, Liang Zhenghai, Wei Xiuyu, and Guo Yinman discussed the innovation of traditional crafts from the aspects of product design, ecological concept and experience center construction.
3.
New media applications and intangible cultural heritage communication
1) Research on the archival of intangible cultural heritage
The archival construction of intangible cultural heritage is an important work carried out based on the Convention for the Protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage and domestic laws and regulations related to intangible cultural heritage.
Since 2003, the research on intangible cultural heritage archives in my country has continued to grow.
Zhang Yun and others discussed two characteristics of the current research on intangible cultural heritage archives in my country, that is, applied research is gradually replacing theoretical research and gradually showing a trend of interdisciplinary and diversified integration.
They believe that the archiving and protection of intangible cultural heritage documents will become a research hotspot in the next stage.
By sorting out the event history of UNESCO archives and documents, Bamoqubumo presents the global process of sustainable development and cultural heritage protection strategies from the perspective of international cultural policies, providing a more comprehensive and accurate understanding of sustainable development for the academic community.
Provide a reference for the connotation, role and function of the development agenda.
Guo Cuixiao took the directory database as an object, conducted a statistical analysis of the project application files in the database, discussed the specific situation of the intangible cultural heritage classification system in practical application and made suggestions.
Feng Li systematically elaborated on the practice of filing the Thangka census under the expression of "filing" in policy documents related to the protection of intangible cultural heritage and the multi-subject cooperation working model gradually formed during the practice process, and summarized and reflected on the working mechanism of the project., filing principles, filing standards, and existing problems.
Based on the explicit circulation model of tacit knowledge, Hualin and others provide specific practical paths for the archiving of Tibetan ecological ethics and cultural heritage.
In addition to the research on archival intangible cultural heritage, the research on the oral history of inheritors is also in continuous progress.
Relatively speaking, the interview results are relatively rich, and in-depth discussions at the theoretical level are still lacking.
Yang Wenhao believes that oral history of intangible cultural heritage is moving from pre-disciplinary to disciplinary.
At present, relevant research at home and abroad is still limited to the collation or extended research of historical materials.
Only by entering the stage of comprehensive research based on intangible cultural heritage history can the issue of objectivity be fundamentally solved.
Guan Quexiancuo and Liu Dongmei summarized the contents of the 2021 Workshop on Oral History of Thangka Inheritors in China, including the main views held by relevant scholars on field surveys and text writing of the oral history of Thangka Inheritors from the perspective of theoretical discussion and case study.
Some of these views have certain enlightening significance for the recording and research of the oral history of the inheritors in my country.
The speeches of the inheritors at the meeting also promoted the elitist turn of their own identity to a certain extent.
Based on the practical experience of "Recording of Representative Inheritors of National Intangible Cultural Heritage" carried out in recent years, Song Benrong systematically summarized the basic process and case thinking of the inheritors 'image oral history in the early stage preparation, interviews, and post-stage preservation, editing, and sorting.
Ma Weihua and Zhang Yuhong believe that the "Image Ethnography", which combines the dual characteristics of research methods and research texts, opens up another possibility for the protection of intangible cultural heritage inheritors.
With the rapid development of information technology, intangible cultural heritage archives are gradually developing towards digitalization, data, and visualization, attracting the attention of relevant scholars in the fields of archives science and information technology.
Bian Yuan believes that the collation of archives resources for digital humanities has become a general trend.
He analyzes the theoretical basis and model of subject participatory digital archiving of cultural heritage, and proposes implementation strategies.
In response to the social needs of cultural memory, Li Yong and others proposed a path to build a characteristic information database for intangible cultural inheritors of "activation → review → reconstruction".
Hualin and others put forward suggestions on cross-industry integration of archival digital resources based on the current distribution and preservation of various archival resources.
They believed that this integration would help comprehensively build ethnic memory, break industry boundaries, and realize the co-construction and sharing of archival resources.
Zhao Xueqin and others took the intangible cultural heritage archives of shadow puppets in Hua County as an example to discuss the application of knowledge maps in intangible cultural heritage archives.
2) Research on the dissemination of intangible cultural heritage through new media
With the development of network technology, new media platforms represented by Short videos have been rapidly popularized.
The diversified development and integration of communication media have greatly expanded the scope of traditional social interaction, promoted the generation of new interactive methods, and achieved considerable effectiveness in the popularization and inheritance of intangible cultural heritage.
The 2021 research results on new media intervention in intangible cultural heritage protection still focus on exploring practical paths for protection and utilization.
Gui Rong sorted out and studied the application of new media in the field of foreign cultural heritage, and pointed out the many problems faced by the application of new media technology in the field of intangible cultural heritage and the future development direction.
Tan Guoxin and He Qimin believe that the current digital communication of intangible cultural heritage mainly focuses on three modes of communication: mass media, digital collections and the Internet.
The digital communication of intangible cultural heritage does not rely on material carriers.
Different intangible cultural heritage communication content determines that it must be selected.
Adapt media.
Yuan Zhoufei took the creative derivation and dissemination of New Year paintings as a case study, and believed that fusion technology made the dissemination of New Year paintings show the characteristics of cross-border, sharing and interactivity, and derived various forms of New Year paintings expression and usage customs, providing online The possibility of online and offline immersive experience and living inheritance, and the rational use of contemporary thinking and elements are conducive to the modern connection of local memory and local emotions in traditional folk customs.
Nie Hongtao and Han Xinyue discussed the effective use of intangible cultural heritage image records.
They believed that the protection and inheritance of intangible cultural heritage should connect tourists, scholars, media and other relevant parties with each other, and the "flexible use" of image records must preserve its value core to achieve the unity of economic benefits and social benefits.
They also emphasized the copyright issues involved in the recording, development and utilization of images.
Yang Hong and Zhang Lie pointed out the narrative characteristics and narrative needs of the special exhibition of intangible cultural heritage.
Different forms of display methods and multi-sensory experience methods can enhance the narrative function of the exhibition and recreate the authenticity of the exhibition.
Liu Hui and Zhang Junlong summarized the inheritance methods of traditional culture into "storage-display","development-industry" and "communication-propaganda".
Each of the three types has its own focus and advantages and disadvantages.
In response to this situation, the Weinan model adopts live broadcast platform linkage and new media The integration of communication and scene-based narrative has achieved certain results.
Although the widespread application of new media technology has a significant effect on improving the dissemination of intangible cultural heritage, it still faces certain difficulties.
Reflecting on the involvement of new media in intangible cultural heritage communication from different perspectives can help form a healthy long-term mechanism for intangible cultural heritage communication.
Gan Yuan and Xie Chun believe that we should be vigilant about the risks hidden in the advantages of new media technology.
They also proposed promoting the integration of culture and technology to promote the development and utilization of resources, and using big data storage to form a "digital community" for intangible cultural heritage information dissemination.
Suggestions for a communication system.
Peng Hui and Qin Feng conducted a statistical analysis of the content and likes of Short videos under the topic of "Intangible Cultural Heritage Partners" and found that such videos have problems such as uneven quality and limited interaction scope, which makes it difficult for intangible cultural heritage Short videos to develop in a long-term manner.
Qi Huayi believes that modern media is an important influencing factor in the production and dissemination of human culture, and proposes effective expansion communication paths for Guizhou Miao music culture.
There are also scholars who think about the value transmission of intangible cultural heritage Short videos from the perspective of video marketing.
Xiao Mengya proposed a combination marketing method of "recommendation algorithm + Short videos" and provided a specific reference path for the intangible cultural heritage industry to realize the sustainable development of cultural inheritance, cultural innovation and cultural output.
In addition, the widespread use of new media has become an important means of reshaping the identity of intangible cultural heritage inheritors.
Based on field inspections of Bai villages in Dali, Sun Xinru and Zhao Yajing proposed that WeChat, as an important resource for rural elites to build their personal cultural identity authority, expand social relationship networks, and an important communication channel for rural social governance, plays an important role in the inheritance and dissemination of national culture.
play an important role.
Yuan Mengqian believes that the most fundamental crisis of intangible cultural heritage in the context of modernization lies in the rupture of folk local cultural identification and participation.
Short videos platforms coexist with advantages and disadvantages.
While empowering inheritors, they also dominate information production to a certain extent, resulting in the inability of inheritors to participate in depth.
Through the research results of many scholars, it can be seen that new media communication has unique advantages in maintaining the survival of intangible cultural heritage, but there are various problems such as improper application of the right to speak in terms of communication ethics, communication validity, and communication subject relationship.
conclusion
2021 is a year in which China's intangible cultural heritage research has made breakthroughs in many aspects.
It is mainly reflected in the following seven aspects: 1.
Intangible cultural heritage research has officially embarked on the path of disciplines, and the academic discussion on the theory of intangible cultural heritage and the positioning of intangible cultural heritage has reached a new level.
Intangible cultural heritage is an independent new discipline.
The concept has gained consensus to a greater extent, and its attribution has entered the stage of professional exploration.
2.
Intangible cultural heritage education tends to develop rationally.
Colleges and universities are more people-oriented in the practice of intangible cultural heritage discourse.
They not only play the role of guiding and cultivating talents for the protection and inheritance of intangible cultural heritage, but also practice the implementation of intangible cultural heritage content into national education and the relationship between inheritors.
A two-way creation mechanism is formed.
3.
The interpretation of concepts and concepts in international conventions and related documents and the practice of localization are more realistic and detailed.
On the one hand, scholars have made new contributions in translating and introducing documents, and on the other hand, they have learned from foreign cultural heritage protection and inheritance.
New progress has been made in concepts and experience.
4.
Promote the scientific development of the protection and inheritance of intangible cultural heritage, pay attention to major national development strategies, such as the construction of cultural and ecological reserves, rural revitalization, revitalization of traditional crafts and targeted poverty alleviation, etc., and give full play to the role of intangible cultural heritage as practical learning.
5.
The academic community has further grown and the concept of coordinated development has been deepened.
Universities such as Beijing Normal University, Sun Yat-sen University, and Tianjin University have made new achievements in establishing intangible cultural heritage research institutions, holding intangible cultural heritage forums, and creating cross-disciplinary degree points in intangible cultural heritage.
6.
Academic journals and academic columns on intangible cultural heritage have increased, and "China Intangible Cultural Heritage" has become a new platform for systematically publishing intangible cultural heritage research results.
7.
Research on various aspects of intangible cultural heritage continues to advance and is connected with the digital era, and methods such as quantitative research and qualitative research are being used more.
There are obvious shortcomings in the research of intangible cultural heritage in the following aspects: 1.
There is no consensus in the academic community on how to integrate and integrate relevant disciplines on the basis of having independent disciplinary character, thereby embarking on the path of discipline system construction.
2.
There is still chaos in intangible cultural heritage education, no scientific training system has been formed, and the role of colleges and universities as "cultural brokers" is not clear.
3.
The homogenization phenomenon is relatively obvious in the research on intangible cultural heritage events.
Most of them are to sort out the experience of protection and inheritance or carry out extended research based on this.
It is difficult to form extensive and far-reaching academic influence through theoretical introduction, analysis or improvement.
4.
In the protection of intangible cultural heritage, especially the implementation of relevant major national strategies, universities pay more attention to scientific research activities, and the practice of cooperation with communities is still insufficient.5.
The lack of intangible cultural heritage teaching materials, especially the basic theory of intangible cultural heritage, intangible cultural heritage history, intangible cultural heritage methodology, intangible cultural heritage management, etc., also shows from another aspect that the construction of intangible cultural heritage disciplines has a long way to go.
(This article is published in "Folk Culture Forum", No.
2, 2022.
The annotations are omitted.
See the original issue for details)