[Hu Yufu] The contradiction and coordination between intangible cultural heritage protection standards and cultural diversity
pick
Important: The intangible cultural heritage protection standard is a binding text formed through multi-party consultations and consensus, and certified by official agencies.
It manages protection work in an institutionalized form, regulates the order of productive protection, and records and preserves core skills, which is fundamentally in line with the concept of protecting cultural diversity.
Judging from the characteristics of folk culture, there is always a tension between standardization and localization.
The introduction of standardization will not lead to the simplification and solidization of culture and inhibit the vitality of cultural innovation.
As a public cultural matter, the concept of "best order" for standardizing intangible cultural heritage protection work can provide institutional guarantee for promoting the development of cultural diversity.
While determining the essence of project inheritance, it also provides for the diversity of cultural expressions and inheritance forms.
Leave room for development.
The collaborative participation of multiple entities in the standard formulation process can ensure that the cultural connotation of relevant projects is fully presented in the standard text.
Keywords: intangible cultural heritage protection standards; standardization; cultural diversity Author profile: Hu Yufu 1988-), male, native of Linyi, Shandong, doctoral candidate in folklore at the China Intangible Cultural Heritage Research Center, Sun Yat-sen University.
Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510275); Fund Project: This article is one of the phased results of the 2016 major project of the Key Research Base of Humanities and Social Sciences of the Ministry of Education,"Research on China Standards for Intangible Cultural Heritage Protection" Project No.: 16JJD850016)
preface
In modern society,"standards" and "standardization" have entered all aspects of people's social life and have played a huge role in promoting industrial production, social progress, and economic development."Actively implementing standardization" has become a national strategy.
[1]However, in the field of cultural studies, many researchers view the issue of modern standards with a negative or resistant attitude, and some scholars become pale when talking about standards.
Especially in the face of the rapid development of modern industrialization in the West, the introduction of popular culture research theories such as "cultural industry"[2],"mechanical reproduction"[3] and "McDonald's"[4] has had a profound impact on contemporary cultural cognition.
In the concepts of some scholars,"standardization" is equivalent to "fixation","unification" and "rigidity", which is incompatible with the traditional culture inherited in a living manner.
[5]In research in fields such as intangible cultural heritage protection and folk tourism,"standardization" and traditional culture are basically placed in opposition [6].
In contrast to academic research, there have always been actions to actively explore standard-setting in the practice of intangible cultural heritage protection.
According to the author's preliminary search, there are more than 100 local standards and group standards related to national intangible cultural heritage projects that have been formulated and implemented.
These standards involve: (1) technological processes, such as the "Shanxi Knife Noodle Production Specifications"(DB14/T 1213 - 2016);(2) Standards for derivative products of the project, such as "Tujia Brocade"(DB43/T 1019 - 2015);(3) Basic content of the project, such as "Mongolian Costume Part 1 Terms"(DB15/T 506.1 - 2012), etc., and are mainly concentrated in three categories of projects: "Traditional Art","Traditional Skills" and "Folk Customs (Clothing)".
Although the relevant standards are set for intangible cultural heritage projects, most of the creators are quality supervision and standardization research practitioners, and few people engaged in intangible cultural heritage protection work participate.
Moreover, the texts formulated are limited by the standard writing format, and the living process is technically quantified, resulting in most standard texts lacking cultural connotations.
In view of this, this paper attempts to clarify two seemingly contradictory understandings in the academic community on standard-setting issues, trace the development of the concept of cultural diversity, and combine practical standard-setting examples to reveal the relationship between standardization and cultural diversity in the protection of intangible cultural heritage.
1.
Standardization: The "natural enemy" of cultural diversity?
In mid-March 2018, the just-established Tianjin City Pancake Cuisine Association proposed to "formulate group standards to standardize the production of pancake cakes and achieve standardized operations, so as to change the current situation and restore the traditional snack appearance of pancake cakes." [7]For a while, discussions about the standardization of local snacks were sparked.
An analysis of relevant reports from newspapers and periodicals shows that all parties have different opinions and it is difficult to reach a consensus.
Generally speaking, among these disputes, there are support voices and believe that there should be normative formal standards [8] to promote the healthy development of the Tianjin Pancake Cuisine Project [9]; at the same time, some skeptics asked: "Pancake Cuisine Should there be standards?" [10]Is the taste of pancakes and dumplings authentic after standardization? [11]; Some people even directly deny it, believing that setting standards will restrict the experience on the tip of the tongue;[12] Some people also hold a neutral attitude and believe that the diverse form of "pancake dumplings" should be tolerated,[13] Retain tradition and persist in innovation.
[14]Despite the controversy caused, through the efforts of all parties, the "Tianjin Local Traditional Famous Food Production and Processing Technical Specifications Tianjin Pancake Cuisine"(T/TJCY002 - 2018)(hereinafter referred to as the "Pancake Cuisine Standard ") is still in the form of a group standard It was formulated and officially implemented on May 26, 2018.
[15]
The controversy caused by the formulation of pancake rice standards is no accident, but a microcosm of the standardization of local snacks and traditional diets in recent years.
Through relevant searches, it can be found that Hunan cuisine, Shaanxi Roujiamo, Shanxi sliced noodles, Yangzhou fried rice, Lanzhou beef ramen, etc.
have all formulated relevant standards, and there will always be a heated discussion before and after the formulation of the standards.
In the face of standard-setting, why is there such controversy? This in itself is a very worthwhile issue.
On closer inspection, the root cause lies in two different perceptions of standardization: standard setters hope to use standards to regulate the inheritance order to protect intangible cultural heritage production skills.
This is a recognition of standardization based on the perspective of intangible cultural heritage protection work; Opponents, starting from the characteristics of intangible cultural heritage inheritance, believe that the introduction of standards will formally fix the cultural characteristics of intangible cultural heritage projects, which is contrary to the principle of promoting cultural diversity and is not conducive to the development of culture.
Obviously, this is a perception of standardization based on basic cultural characteristics.
The promoters of standard formulation are generally industry managers, industry associations, standardization practitioners, government quality supervision departments and other entities.
They uphold modern concepts such as market order, quality and safety, and hope to formulate relevant standards from the perspective of industry development., standardize the chaotic market ecology, allow more practitioners to have standards to follow, work according to standards, and follow the technical route of cultural protection.
At the same time, setting standards is also a process of modernizing traditional cultural production methods and adapting to market rules.
For example, traditional snacks in various places, facing the impact of Western fast food such as McDonald's and KFC, the biggest obstacle to survival is the standardization of production and operation management.
In fact, standardization has become a necessary way for Chinese snacks to go global.
[16]
Most of the people who hold a negative attitude towards standard-setting are workers engaged in cultural protection and scholars in cultural research.
They believe that culture is passed down in a living manner and constantly mutates in inheritance to form diverse manifestations and cannot be cured through standards.
The reference of some standard setters to establishing "authentic" products and retaining "original ecology" has often become the focus of criticism from opponents.
For example, the uniqueness of China traditional culture or cultural skills represented by snacks will probably lose its characteristics once it is fixed in a standard form.
The appeal of snacks in various places stems from the different styles formed by regional eating habits, which represent the "Place Identity" of a region.[17] Therefore, to a certain extent, it is difficult for snacks to achieve standard flavors such as Pizza Hut and KFC.
If a so-called "authentic" taste is formulated, it will not only fail to regulate the industry, but will also make the cultural diversity displayed by this project disappear.
At this level, it seems reasonable to believe that standardization is the "natural enemy" of cultural diversity or traditional culture.
So, what is the standard? What is standardization? In the Standardization Work Manual,"standard" refers to "a normative document formulated by consensus and approved by recognized bodies, commonly used and reused in order to obtain the best order within a certain range." [18]"Standardization" is "the activity of formulating common use and repeated use clauses for real or potential problems in order to obtain the best order within a certain range." [19]According to this definition, we can understand standards and standardization at three levels.
First, a standard is a consensus that is reached through multi-party consultations and has a certain scope of application.
It is not universally applicable; Secondly, a standard is a text whose formulation is approved by recognized institutions and is normative and binding; thirdly, the purpose of formulating standards is to achieve the best order, that is, to standardize order and rationalize it to achieve the best effect.
Starting from this concept, standardization and cultural protection are not contradictory.
There is no problem in introducing standardization into the field of cultural protection itself.
The problem is that many people are biased against standardization and understand standardization with a solid thinking, instead of carefully studying the types and content of standards, and trying to improve the standard formulation process and implementation method.
This opinionated stance and way of thinking itself is the real problem.
2.
The relationship between cultural diversity and standardization
Since the end of World War II, while pursuing the reconstruction of the international political order, international forces with UNESCO at its core are also seeking a new understanding of culture.
On the big scale, it has experienced the transformation from "conflict of civilizations"[20] to "coexistence of civilizations"[21], recognizing the diverse characteristics of human culture.
Especially after entering the 1990s, economic globalization has brought about cultural dialogue and exchanges between countries, and has also created a pattern of cultural hegemony among developed countries.
In cultural exchanges, the culture of developing countries is often in a weak position, vulnerable to erosion by Western culture, and facing the potential danger of disappearance.
Driven by information technology and marketization, the powerful Western culture continues to expand, and global culture has a tendency to become single.
Faced with crises such as the disappearance of potentially weak cultures and the wave of global cultural convergence in the process of economic globalization, UNESCO formulated the UNESCO Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity (hereinafter referred to as the "Declaration ") in 2001.
"Cultural diversity" means that "culture has different forms of expression in different times and places.""It is the common heritage of mankind and should be recognized and affirmed in the light of the interests of present people and future generations." [22]The "Declaration" is the first international convention on "cultural diversity", formally establishing the concept of cultural diversity, describing the importance of cultural diversity to sustainable development of mankind, and exploring mechanisms to safeguard cultural diversity at the international level.
This mechanism is also the Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions formulated by UNESCO in 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the "Convention on Cultural Diversity ").
The Convention recognizes that cultural diversity "refers to the many different forms through which groups and societies express their culture." These manifestations are passed down within and between them." It also clarifies that each State party needs to "take measures to protect and promote the diversity of cultural expressions within its territory in accordance with its own special circumstances and needs" to protect its cultural heritage.
[23]
UNESCO's discussion and practice on "cultural diversity", in the words of Liu Feifei and Shan Shilian,"is not only a reasonable response to the current situation of strong expansion of Western culture, but also a profound concern about global cultural convergence." [24]Judging from UNESCO's exploration history, the attention to "cultural diversity" is closely related to the exploration of the world heritage system.
With the development process of global economic, political and cultural integration, theories and actions to protect cultural heritage have also continued to develop.
"Cultural diversity" as a manifestation of the cultural characteristics of human society was first proposed, and then promoted as a concept to understand human civilization.
It is currently manifested as a public cultural matter as a global cultural heritage protection activity.
[25]In today's China has become a government-led public cultural work with the participation of the whole people."It has formed a movement of widespread participation, redrew the cultural map of China with heavy colors, and created a new history." [26]Intangible cultural heritage protection work is to continue the vitality of the living inheritance of traditional culture in a government-led form and protect the culture of traditional society with the concept of modern society.
One of its purposes is to "let intangible cultural heritage enter modern life." [27]Therefore, the key to intangible cultural heritage protection is to properly handle the contradiction between traditional culture and modern social order to ensure the sustainable development of tradition.
The "Medium and Long-Term Development Plan for Cultural Standardization 2007 - 2020" formulated by the former Ministry of Culture in 2007 proposed to "form a standard system involving safety, environmental protection, quality, process, function, technology, inspection and testing, qualifications, rating, and protection of consumer rights and interests in the cultural field.", with work goals such as "promoting the orderly development of the cultural industry" and "promoting the standardized management of the cultural market" in a standard form.
[28] Article 33 of the "Intangible Cultural Heritage Law of the People's Republic of China" implemented in 2011 states that "the state encourages scientific and technological research related to intangible cultural heritage and research on methods for the protection and preservation of intangible cultural heritage." In 2015, the State Council issued the "National Standardization System Construction and Development Plan (2016 - 2020)".
In the column "Key Standardization Points in the Cultural Field", it clearly proposed the tasks of "carrying out research on standards for the protection and utilization of cultural heritage" and "carrying out research on standards for cultural inheritance in China." [29]It can be seen that the inheritance of cultural heritage and the order and standardization of cultural industries have entered the country's cultural policy decision-making, demonstrating an important orientation for encouraging and supporting the construction of cultural standardization at the national level.
The concept of standardization has been introduced into the protection of cultural heritage in some developed countries in Europe and the United States, and practice has proved to achieve good results.
For example, the United Kingdom pays attention to the definition of basic terms related to heritage protection, emphasizes the formulation of basic standards for investigation and recording, and at the same time formulates technical standards related to heritage restoration; the United States adopts an open standard setting method in heritage protection, invites extensive public participation, and connects with international standards.
[30]These practices can also be used for reference in my country's cultural heritage protection work.
As the standardization of cultural characteristics and its relationship with cultural diversity, some scholars have revealed it in academic research.
Wang Xiaobing's research on the etiquette of offering sacrifices to Confucius reveals the role played by feudal rulers, represented by dynasties and monarchs, in unifying the standards of offering sacrifices to Confucius, thereby achieving top-down etiquette standardization.
However, the local spread of Confucius sacrificial rituals in various parts of East Asia has shown various manifestations.
[31]Li Fan is concerned about the standardization of Mazu belief in Jiaodong.
The author points out that while the sacrifice of gods tends to be standardized, it will also be integrated into the local sacrificial space, which does not fully present a standardized appearance.
The author calls it semi-standardization.
[32]With the development of globalization, marketization, and heritage, and the publicity of mass media, some festival customs, cultural rituals, etc.
have gradually shown a trend of standardization.For example, Chen Zhiqin used the Dragon Boat Festival as an example to pay attention to the "pan-time and space" tendency of festival customs.
That is, dragon boat racing, eating rice dumplings, planting mugwort, hanging calamus, etc.
have transcended the limitations of region and time and space to become common symbols of Dragon Boat Festival customs, and to a certain extent It presents the image that the same Dragon Boat Festival is generally celebrated across the country.
But at the same time, local festival customs are still prevalent in various places.
The coexistence of this local custom and the increasingly unified customs across the country constitutes the current Dragon Boat Festival landscape.
[33]Yue Yongyi further narrowed the symbol of the Dragon Boat Festival to two elements: rice dumplings and dragon boats, pointing out that while the Dragon Boat Festival became increasingly heritage, some classic festival elements gradually formed universal festival activities, thus forming a standardized Dragon Boat Festival.[34].
As the above-mentioned scholar research reveals, standardization is also a basic feature of culture, but it is often just a trend, forming a tension with the simultaneous localization forces, and complete unification and standardization will not occur.
Standardization also includes localization and localization.
The crisis brought about by globalization has stimulated the cultural consciousness of protecting ontological culture within culture, which is a resistance to the simplification and standardization that globalization may bring.
During the formulation of UNESCO's Cultural Protection Convention, attention has been paid to the danger of introducing cultural cognition concepts such as cultural solidification and standardization into the protection of intangible cultural heritage, and preventive measures have been proposed, such as in the Convention for the Protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage.
The concept of authenticity and integrity is not used in the Convention, which is intended to avoid the understanding and practice of essentialism in cultural protection;[35] In the "Ethical Principles for the Protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage", it is clearly pointed out that "authenticity and exclusiveness should not constitute problems or obstacles to the protection of intangible cultural heritage." [36]
3.
Standardization: Institutional guarantee for cultural diversity
Introducing the concept of standardization into the protection of intangible cultural heritage is to achieve the "best order" for intangible cultural heritage protection, and to learn from the concept of standardization to promote the orderly development of intangible cultural heritage protection.
Its main work includes monitoring and evaluating the intangible cultural heritage protection work to ensure that the work is carried out under scientific management; secondly, standardizing the order of inheritance of specific projects, mainly targeting the production and operation order in productive protection; at the same time, adopting the concept of standardized records, making up for the shortcomings in the empirical inheritance of traditional culture through the textual recording of core elements.
(1) As a standard for protection work-management of protection work
From the perspective of public cultural affairs, intangible cultural heritage protection requires a reasonable and orderly process.
Under the guidance of international conventions, national legislation and other relevant normative documents, the census, identification, declaration, recording, review, protection and other work of intangible cultural heritage protection are carried out in accordance with certain norms or under unified norms.
Intangible cultural heritage protection is a new thing.
In my country, it is mainly government-led and carried out from top to bottom.
Relevant institutional settings, staff, management systems, and working mechanisms have never been seen before, and are constantly improved in protection practice.
For example, as an effective recording method, digital protection is widely used in various places.
However,"due to the lack of unified technical requirements and technical specifications, various units in various places are in their own way when digitally processing and managing cultural and artistic archives.
Some units simply carry out digital permanent preservation work, which instead causes some materials to be damaged during the digitization process." [37]Therefore, by building a scientific and effective management system, monitoring and evaluating intangible cultural heritage protection work, and connecting local work platforms, it will help to standardize protection work.
Some scholars have long proposed that there should be a "red line" awareness in the concept of intangible cultural heritage protection,[38] declaration, identification and other work need to be standardized, and [39] establish "strict scientific management and standardized operating procedures." [40]With the deepening of intangible cultural heritage protection work, some scholars have proposed the "post-application period".[41] This reflects an understanding of the shift in intangible cultural heritage protection work in my country, that is, intangible cultural heritage protection has shifted from heavy declaration to heavy protection, and heavy declaration to heavy management.
Some scholars have also carried out relevant explorations from different angles, such as standard docking in digital protection [42], standardized construction of intangible cultural heritage archives [43], refined management [44], thinking on the project and inheritor list system [45], legislative construction [46], etc.
Other workers engaged in standardization research have tried to introduce standardization into intangible cultural heritage protection and exploratory proposed a framework for standardization of intangible cultural heritage protection [47].
At the national protection practice level, the National Technical Committee for the Standardization of Cultural and Art Resources has formulated the "Standards for the Digitization of Intangible Cultural Heritage." In local protection practice, some regions have formulated standards for protection assessment.
For example, Ningbo City, Zhejiang Province, has established a "three-in-one" model, which includes responsibilities and evaluation systems and has been implemented locally to quantify indicators for intangible cultural heritage protection work in the region.
[48]Huzhou City has formulated the local standard of the "General Guidelines for the Protection and Inheritance of Intangible Cultural Heritage", which stipulates the content and requirements for the protection and inheritance of intangible cultural heritage in Huzhou City.
[49]The research and practice of these protection work methods and operating procedures is conducive to the scientific and standardized direction of intangible cultural heritage protection.
(2) As a standard for product quality-a norm for inheritance order
At present, productive protection is mainly implemented in the fields of traditional art, traditional skills and traditional medicine and drug processing.
The derivative products or services of these projects can be divided into two categories, namely, products for direct consumption by people in terms of food, clothing, housing and transportation, and products that meet people's artistic and aesthetic needs.
For products for direct human consumption, the use of raw materials, production environment, product form, product quality, etc.
of traditional crafts conflict with modern social order, market safety standards, ecological and environmental protection, and people's consumption needs to varying degrees.
For example, the "Xinfan Medicinal Bath Case"[50],"Nie Linjiao Plaster Case"[51],"Qian Wanlong Soy Sauce Stopped"[52] and "Royal Glaze Stopped"[53] have appeared in recent years, all highlighting the embarrassment of traditional culture's inability to adapt to modern society.
In order to produce environmentally friendly, safe and high-quality products, and ensure that the production process meets environmental protection and quality inspection requirements, traditional craft projects need to establish a set of standards that can be in line with contemporary society and the market.
"With standards, there is a threshold and a rule of the game.
On the one hand, it can improve the quality of folk art and standardize the chaotic price system.
On the other hand, it can enhance the sense of cultural responsibility of folk artists and encourage them to make more exquisite, more market-value art." [54]From this level, standards are actually a constraint mechanism on production behavior.
For products that meet the people's artistic and aesthetic needs, judging from the development of the intangible cultural heritage project itself, the project continues to change and innovate with the development of the times, specifically reflected in the replacement of raw materials, the creation of tools, and the development of technology.
While these changes allow the project to continue to improve, they are limited to the boundaries of knowledge exchange and the personalities of artists, making it difficult to form a unified consensus, resulting in chaotic production and communication order and lack of supervision, which to a certain extent affects the sustainable inheritance of intangible cultural heritage and is not conducive to protection and Reasonable use.
Therefore, it is also necessary to carry out regulations that are in line with the requirements of modern society from relevant aspects such as raw material use, production environment, and processing processes.
In Article 7 of the 2012 "Guiding Opinions of the Ministry of Culture on Strengthening the Productive Protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage", it is proposed to "encourage associations to formulate relevant standards and standards for representative projects of intangible cultural heritage in terms of raw materials, traditional craft processes and core skills.
Standardize, support associations in carrying out industry management, industry services, industry rights protection, etc., and promote the healthy development of productive protection of intangible cultural heritage through industry self-discipline and industry supervision." [55]This opinion emphasizes the use of industry associations to formulate corresponding technical standards and product standards.
The "China Traditional Crafts Revitalization Plan" formulated in 2017 also proposed "strengthening quality awareness, quality awareness, brand awareness and market awareness","introducing a modern management system, carrying out extensive quality improvement actions, strengthening total quality management, and improving traditional craft products The overall quality and market competitiveness" and "encouraging local governments to establish traditional craft industry organizations, and industry organizations to formulate product quality industry standards" and other major tasks.
[56]Its goal is to allow traditional crafts to enter the modern market system more reasonably and healthily.
From the perspective of the development of traditional industries, the reason why those time-honored brands that have been around for hundreds of years can last for a long time and become famous is that they uphold certain principles or standards in production and operation.
For example, Beijing Tongrentang Pharmacy, founded in 1669 (the eighth year of the Kangxi of the Qing Dynasty), has experienced more than 300 years of development.
When making medicine, it has always adhered to the ancient motto of "Although the processing is complex, we must not dare to save labor, and although the taste is expensive, we must not dare to reduce material resources", adhering to the principle of "no one will see it when cultivating, but knowing it carefully." [57]It is precisely because of adhering to this standard that it strives for excellence in the pharmaceutical process, and the results are unique in efficacy, becoming a well-known time-honored brand.
Although this is not a standard text in the modern quality system, it already has a sense of standards.
Therefore, as a cultural industry, as Yan Ping said,"Standardization is an important technical guarantee for promoting the close integration of culture and art with modern science and technology, improving the quality of cultural products and services, and obtaining the best economic benefits." [58]The origin of the formulation of the Tianjin Pancake Cuisine Group Standards was the action taken against the chaotic market for Pancake Cuisine.
The first is that the production methods are not uniform.
Pancake dumplings are traditional snacks in Tianjin, which have been recorded in the Qing Dynasty.
There are currently dozens of popular practices on the market, forming different flavors.
However, there is no authoritative definition of which flavor is authentic and can represent the craftsmanship of old Tianjin.
Secondly, in terms of materials, the traditional pancake dumplings are made by mixing mung beans, millet and five-spice powder.
Add dumplings or dumplings, flour paste, chopped green onion, and chili sauce, and then add eggs.
Various materials are currently available on the market, such as black sesame seeds, beef, peanuts, lettuce, ham and even sea cucumber.
In the eyes of local people, these are not authentic pancake dumplings, but new things that appear innovatively.
Thirdly, hygiene standards are uneven, and pancake dumplings are sold in two forms.
One is a mobile stall and the other is a fixed shop.
In order to reduce costs, some producers lack supporting facilities in sanitary equipment, disinfection equipment, etc., and there are corresponding hidden dangers.
Finally, pricing is confusing.
Prices for pancake cakes range from four to five yuan to more than ten yuan.
The most expensive sea cucumber pancake cakes sell for 78 yuan each.
Therefore, in order to regulate market order, industry associations discuss and formulate standards.
At first glance, the text of the "Pancake Cuisine Standard" that has been implemented includes detailed regulations on pancake Cuisine classification, food raw material requirements, production sites and facilities, equipment requirements, processing process control and institutions, personnel management requirements, processing technology requirements, labeling, packaging, transportation and storage.
The quality of raw materials is formulated in accordance with the corresponding national food safety standards, so that the ingredients comply with food safety standards.
[59]To a certain extent, this is conducive to the supervision work of law enforcers and regulators.
Producers are self-disciplined in production, and consumers can safeguard their legitimate rights and interests and ensure the healthy operation of the industry.
Of course, the formulation of this standard does not fix "pancake dumplings".
Only those that meet this standard are authentic pancake dumplings, and those that do not meet the standards are not.
This standard is actually stipulated in terms of raw materials, quality, hygiene, etc.
during the processing process, and is a recommended standard and does not force every practitioner to adopt it.
The effect of standard-setting will not be immediate in a short period of time, and the effect of specific implementation will not be reflected after a long period of implementation.
(3) As a standard of process flow-record of core skills
Through research on the craftsmanship of making wooden boats in the Chuanjiang River, Lan Yong proposed two methods of inheritance of standard and empirical technologies.
The inheritance of technology in the West belongs to standard inheritance, focusing on quantitative and scientific textual records; China belongs to an empirical inheritance method, and the learning process of technology lacks textual records and relies mostly on oral transmission.
In the inheritance of Chuanjiang wooden boat skills, compared with Western countries, my country has the problems of "weak textual style" and "weak text accuracy." The author proposed that "there is a huge contrast between advanced China traditional technology and backward technological inheritance methods." [60]Such problems exist universally in my country's intangible cultural heritage, and there is often a dilemma that modern people find it difficult to copy or imitate in the face of ancient complex and superb skills.
The reason for this phenomenon is the unique inheritance method of my country's traditional culture.
Compared with the scientific knowledge formed in the West in modern times, which is characterized by quantification, controllability and accuracy, the biggest feature of China's traditional culture is uncertainty.
For example, in martial arts, medicine, and food culture, words such as "moderate amount","a little amount","certain amount" and "understanding" are all manifestations of uncertainty and uncontrollability, which also determines the way of cultural acquisition, not through the teaching of scientific knowledge, but through oral teaching and experiential learning.
In traditional industries, proverbs such as "you can only understand it, but not in words","the master leads you into the door, and practice it in the individual","it is not difficult to learn, but it will not be difficult to learn it" all illustrate this way of learning.
Therefore, it takes a long time to master a good craft.
In many projects, it can be found that the products made by rapidly growing young inheritors often lack the "charm" that the previous generation achieved only after years of understanding.
It is precisely because of this experiential inheritance method that many skills lack records, and few systematic texts have been passed down.
Even if modern people want to copy past technologies, it is difficult to find reference models.
In the current protection of intangible cultural heritage, creative culture and creative industries are also emphasized.
However, products designed by designers are often not recognized and cannot reflect the essence of intangible cultural heritage culture.
The key reason is that they do not master core skills.
The ancients said that "all changes are inseparable from their own sect", and "sect" refers to core skills or core elements.
For example, the evolution of folk literature and fairy stories, no matter how they are adapted, they are still based on several fixed motifs [61]; traditional skills have gone through several generations.
People have made changes in raw materials, craftsmanship, equipment, etc., and what has been passed down is their core skills.
The core skill is the connection between the economic value and humanistic value of a traditional craft, and is the soul of a craft.
[62]In the "Guiding Opinions on Strengthening the Productive Protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage", the phrase "Adhere to the integrity of traditional craftsmanship and the authenticity of core skills" appears as many as seven times, which shows that traditional skills have irreplaceable cultural values.
The inheritance of cultural values is the core of productive protection, while the output of economic value is the means, and the two promote each other.
In inheritance activities, attention to economic interests, product development, and technology introduction often ignores the protection of traditional crafts, resulting in the current situation of economic profit growth and cultural protection lagging behind.
Therefore, it is necessary to keep a complete record of core skills based on recording the complete process flow.
One of the results of standardization is the formulation of standard texts.
This text is a certain consensus reached after many consultations and discussions among many parties.
What the standard wants to protect is the core components of intangible cultural heritage, and ensure the inheritance of its cultural connotation through technical standards.
Therefore, standardization is a prerequisite for ensuring cultural diversity.
Some people may question that standard text records will fix skills and processes.
In fact, this is not the case because the standard itself has certain room for flexibility.
Standard texts are only models for a certain period of time.
With the innovations and needs arising from social development, standards will also change in a timely manner, and the revision of standards will keep up with the progress of process technology.
As a local snack,"pancake dumplings" have a history of more than 600 years in Tianjin, but the word first appeared in Ta Kung Pao in the 1930s.
In the book "Jinmen Snacks" published in 1986, there is a relatively detailed record of the skills of making pancakes and dumplings.
It is ground into mung beans, soaked, peeled and ground into paste, added seasonings to form slurry, burned with a small fire, poured into the slurry, and then paneled.
[63]This is a more comprehensive record of the craft of pancake dumplings.
The core part of pancake dumplings lies in the production of "dumplings" and "dumplings", which are not recorded in "Jinmen Snacks".
Usually, the stalls don't make them themselves, but buy them elsewhere.
In the formulation of standards for Tianjin Pancake Cookers, the Pancake Cookers Association believed that many of the popular Pancake Cookers on the market were not "authentic" Pancake Cookers and lacked standards in terms of technological processes.
The relatively "authentic" ones were the practices recorded in "Jinmen Snacks".
In the appendix to the "Pancake Cooker Standard", the framers selected the "Halal Jinlaowei" pancake cooker making process (dry powder type) and the "Puyuanhe" pancake cooker making process (water-grinding type) as pancake cooker making process.
Representative process.
It can be seen from the records therein that detailed records have been made from the selection of raw materials to ingredients, grinding, blending, and finished products.
Some refer to the records in "Jinmen Snacks", and there are also content added based on modern operations and production.
In particular, the production of "dumplings" and "dumplings" are described in detail, which to a certain extent retains the core production skills of pancake dumplings.
conclusion
Based on the above discussions, the following conclusions can be drawn:
First of all, we should distinguish between the cognition of standardization based on two logics, namely standardization as the understanding of cultural characteristics and standardization as normative protection activities.
As a form of cultural expression, intangible cultural heritage indeed cannot be quantified and measured, and cannot and should not be fixed or have a unified standard; however, the work and activities carried out as a form of protection of cultural expressions need to be regulated to achieve "The best order".
These tasks need to be carried out through interaction between the government and local parties in intangible cultural heritage protection.
Based on this understanding, standardization and cultural diversity are not completely opposed but should be complementary.
What is important for cultural protection is to ensure an orderly inheritance environment, rather than to regulate the expression of cultural connotations.
A sound inheritance environment needs to rely on the interpretation of diverse cultural connotations and supporting implementation standards.
As the above-mentioned research on the standardization of cultural characteristics reveals, standards as a model are only a reference.
In fact, people will still improve and innovate based on the specific conditions of various places in the process of practice, so they will instead promote the development of cultural diversity.
For example, Zeng Guojun and others conducted research based on the Taiwanese brand "Xian Yuxian" and proposed that the relationship between standardization and authenticity in local diets is "Standardization is the guarantee of authenticity, and authenticity is the foundation of standardization." [64]Inspired by this, the relationship between standardization and cultural diversity can also be expressed as "Standardization is the guarantee of cultural diversity, and cultural diversity is the foundation of standardization."
Third, the development of standards related to intangible cultural heritage protection is still in its infancy and requires the collaborative participation of many parties to highlight the characteristics of cultural industry standards.
As a public cultural undertaking, intangible cultural heritage protection will inevitably introduce a standardized management model as the country vigorously promotes the standardization of public services.
At present, there is still controversy about introducing the concept of "standards" into intangible cultural heritage protection, and no general consensus has been reached.
Therefore, it is necessary to face existing problems directly through academic research and protection practice and find answers in practice, rather than just staying at the level of topic controversy without further discussion.
The formulation of standards is a systematic and long process from appeal to formulation to implementation, requiring the coordinated participation of multiple forces.
Therefore, the development of intangible cultural heritage protection standards requires the government to play a leading role, coordinate the relationship between academic circles, inheritors, industry, industry associations, consumers, etc., and form a mutual dialogue.[65] On the basis of consultation, the standards formulated can not only adapt to the management needs of modern society, but also continue the vivid life of diversity of cultural expressions.
(The original text was published in "Cultural Heritage", issue 6, 2018.
See the original text for annotations and references)