[Bai Xianbo] Discussion on Several Issues Concerning Grassroots Intangible Cultural Heritage Protection in the Era of Standardization

[Abstract] With the promulgation of the 2011 Intangible Cultural Heritage Law of the People's Republic of China as a symbol and beginning, the "standardization era" of intangible cultural heritage protection in my country has arrived.

From the perspective of grassroots workers, there are often some problems in the implementation process of existing laws, regulations and protection work norm systems, mainly including the contradiction between traditional standards and contemporary standards, the parallel existence of different standards, the lack of coordination mechanisms among government functional departments, and conflicts of interest between relevant entities.

Faced with these problems, grassroots intangible cultural heritage protection workers should strive to improve management levels and business capabilities on the basis of recognizing the nature of intangible cultural heritage protection work, and improve working methods and work efficiency through measures such as establishing inter-departmental coordination mechanisms., be a good guardian of intangible cultural heritage.

[Keywords] Grassroots management coordination mechanism for intangible cultural heritage protection standards in the era of standardization of intangible cultural heritage protection

[China Map Classification Number] G122 [Document Identification Code] A [Article Number] 1674-08902018)06-001-10

[Introduction to the author] Bai Xianbo (1982-), male, Mongolian, native of Shenyang, Liaoning Province, librarian of the Cultural Heritage Protection Department of the Museum of Shunde District, Foshan City.

Foshan, Guangdong, 528300)

* This article is one of the phased results of the 2016 major project of the Key Research Base of the Ministry of Education,"Research on China Standards for Intangible Cultural Heritage Protection" project approval number: 16JJD850016).

Foreword: The "standardization era" of intangible cultural heritage protection has arrived

Since May 2001, when Kunqu Opera art was included in the first batch of the United Nations "Oral and Intangible Cultural Heritage List of Humanity", the protection of my country's intangible cultural heritage (hereinafter referred to as "intangible cultural heritage") has been carried out for nearly 20 years.

It has experienced the development process from national and folk cultural protection to intangible cultural heritage protection *, from concept to practice *, from the "List" era * to the "post-application period"*, and then to the "standardization era".

The so-called "standardized era" of intangible cultural heritage protection refers to the period of intangible cultural heritage protection guided by laws, regulations and various standards and norms.

Since 2004, my government has successively issued the "Decision of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress on Ratifying the Convention for the Protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage"(2004) and the "Opinions of the General Office of the State Council on Strengthening the Protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage in my Country"(2005), Decision of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress on Ratifying the Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions "(2006),"Measures for the Management of Special Funds for the Protection of National Intangible Cultural Heritage"(2006),"Notice of the General Office of the Ministry of Culture on Printing and Issuing the" Measures for the Management of Intangible Cultural Heritage Marks in China "(2007)," Interim Measures for the Identification and Management of Representative Inheritors of Cultural Heritage Projects "(2008)," Guiding Opinions of the Ministry of Culture on Strengthening the Construction of National Cultural Ecological Reserves "(2010),"Notice of the General Office of the Ministry of Culture on Strengthening the Management of Subsidy Funds for Representative Inheritors of National Intangible Cultural Heritage Projects"(2010), etc.

During this period, the establishment of my country's intangible cultural heritage protection standards was still at the stage of factual standards.

The promulgation of the "Intangible Cultural Heritage Law of the People's Republic of China" in 2011 marked that my country's intangible cultural heritage protection work has risen to the stage of legalization and standardization.

Since then, the "Notice of the Ministry of Culture on Strengthening the Protection and Management of Representative Projects of National Intangible Cultural Heritage"(2011), the "Guiding Opinions of the Ministry of Culture on Strengthening the Productive Protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage"(2012), and the "National Intangible Cultural Heritage" A series of laws, regulations and related documents such as the Interim Measures for the Protection and Management of Cultural Heritage (2016), as well as the successive formulation and implementation of various project standards.

This further shows that the construction and research of standards will become the focus of my country's intangible cultural heritage protection work at this stage.

The issue of intangible cultural heritage protection standards has also become a new topic of general concern in my country's academic circles.

As early as 2006, Mr.

Liu Kuili and Mr.

Zhang Yingmin expressed their attitude on the issue of intangible cultural heritage protection standards in their jointly published article: In today's era, standardization has become a social need and development trend.

However, in the process of intangible cultural heritage protection, the emphasis on local characteristics and unique manifestations of traditions has led to similar paradoxes full of contradictions.

For example, on the one hand, we require the promotion of Mandarin.

At the same time, in order to protect local operas, folk literature and other intangible cultural heritage projects, we have to emphasize dialects.) It is difficult to find the answer to both.

In 2010, Mr.

Li Xin expressed another idea in his article: Although the establishment of standards for intangible cultural heritage protection is difficult and complex in theory and practice, it is for intangible cultural heritage protection., the establishment of standards still has rules to follow.

When determining the protection standards for intangible cultural heritage, we must follow the following basic principles: 1.

The establishment of intangible cultural heritage protection standards must be based on the premise of reflecting the basic characteristics and nature of intangible cultural heritage; 2.

Only those cultures and customs that do not violate the spirit of civilization and progress should be protected and developed.

International standards such as the Representative List of Oral and Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity and the Convention for the Protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage have provided a theoretical basis for countries to determine their own standards for intangible cultural heritage protection.

Their discussions were of pioneering significance at a time when my country's intangible cultural heritage standards were relatively weak.

In 2011, the local standard of Zhejiang Province "Lake Brush Making Technology and Technical Requirements" DB33/T327 -2011) was released and implemented, replacing the original standard DB33/T327 -2001).

In August 2012, the local standard of "Mongolian Clothing" in the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region was officially implemented.

* In 2012, the local standard of Zhejiang Province "Technical Regulations for Longjing Tea Processing" DB33/T239 -2012) was released and implemented, replacing the original standard DB33/T239 -1999).

In 2012, the local standard of Anhui Province "Intangible Cultural Heritage Protection Top Valley Dafang Production Skills" was released and implemented in 2013.

In 2013, the local standard of Henan Province "Luoyang Water Mat Quality and Service Specifications" was released and implemented.

In 2015, the local standard of Hunan Province "Tujia Brocade" was released and implemented.

In 2015, Messrs.

Sun Xiangyu and Zheng Yaoxing took the intangible cultural heritage of traditional music in Fujian Province as an example to discuss the necessity, possibility and effectiveness of standardized protection of intangible cultural heritage, and proposed "dot triangle" and "ring-axis" model protection methods.

* In the same year, Mr.

Wang Xiaobing explored the relationship between "standardization" and localization in the context of globalization through textual research and inspection of the Confucius Sacrifice Ceremony.

* Mr.

Wang Haiying initially established a standard framework for intangible cultural heritage protection: "According to the unified planning of government departments, establish a comprehensive and systematic standard system from the top level, taking the entire process of protection work as the main line, and realizing the protection of intangible cultural heritage.

Comprehensive standardization of work enables standardization throughout the protection work."* This standard system for intangible cultural heritage protection includes three levels.

The first level includes confirmation, documentation, research, preservation and protection, inheritance, dissemination and development; the second level is to divide several standards under each protection process; the third level is a subdivision of several standards such as value evaluation standards, census evaluation standards, application evaluation standards, etc.

In 2016, the local standard of Jiangxi Province "Jingdezhen Traditional Porcelain Making Crafts" was released and implemented.

In 2017, Mr.

Lu Xiaoshan discussed the establishment of intangible cultural heritage protection standards for handicraft skills by classifying and discussing the concept of traditional folk embroidery and picking handicrafts, as well as analyzing the relationship between aesthetic forms and cultural characteristics, taking the Yao people in Longhui, Hunan as an example.

Feasibility.

* Mr.

Liu Liying discussed the possibility of establishing standards for the protection of sports intangible cultural heritage: promoting the standardization of sports intangible cultural heritage protection can better inherit and develop sports intangible cultural heritage, which needs to be simplified, unified, comprehensive and complete; clear hierarchy, coordination and unity; Multi-party cooperation, dynamic openness; basic principles of process monitoring, optimization and promotion.

Sports intangible cultural heritage protection standards can be constructed from three parties: symbol standards, guarantee standards, and execution standards, and promoted according to the steps of formulating development plans, implementation preparations, exploring demonstration areas, comprehensive implementation, and evaluation feedback.

Soon, based on the research results of their predecessors, Mr.

Wang Xiaobing and Hu Yufu discussed why standards were needed for intangible cultural heritage protection, the composition of the intangible cultural heritage protection standard system, the establishment process and significance of intangible cultural heritage protection standards, and concluded that the intangible cultural heritage protection standard system consists of three major parts: intangible cultural heritage protection work standards, intangible cultural heritage item classification standards, and intangible cultural heritage item standards.

The process of establishing standards for intangible cultural heritage protection should fully reflect the spirit of democratic consultation.

The theory of communicative rationality and negotiation advocated by Habermas can provide theoretical guidance.

It can be judged from the above facts that the "standardization era" of intangible cultural heritage protection in my country has arrived.

Issues related to intangible cultural heritage protection standards from the perspective of grassroots workers

In 2015, due to work scheduling, the author officially participated in the intangible cultural heritage protection work in Shunde District, Foshan City, Guangdong Province.

The specific work content includes: on-site investigation, declaration, and identification of intangible cultural heritage projects, inheritors, and inheritance bases, inheritance and dissemination of intangible cultural heritage projects, etc.

In this article, the author will discuss some of the current intangible cultural heritage protection standard issues from his own perspective, that is, as a business backbone working in a county-level "intangible cultural heritage protection center", in order to seek advice from teachers and friends in the intangible cultural heritage protection research community.

The contradiction between traditional standards and contemporary standards

Traditional standards refer to representative intangible cultural heritage projects.

In the process of occurrence and development, they have long formed a standard and habit that has been agreed into customs, and have certain stability, contemporary nature and limitations.

For example,"Jinbang Milk Making Skills" is a traditional handmade technique for making milk in Jinbang Community, Daliang Street, Shunde District, Foshan City, Guangdong Province.

It is named after the origin.

In 2018, this project was officially included in the seventh batch of district-level intangible cultural heritage lists in Shunde District, Foshan City.

For a long time,"Jinbang Milk Making Skills" has continued the traditional manual production method of hand-to-hand operation and the small workshop production and business model.

So far, this method cannot be replaced with modern machinery, and its scale is difficult to expand.

From the perspective of modern people, this traditional manual production method operated by hand and the small workshop production and business model have certain food hygiene safety hazards.

According to the Food Safety Law of the People's Republic of China,"Food producers and operators are responsible for the safety of their production and operation.

Food producers and operators should engage in production and operation activities in accordance with laws, regulations and food safety standards, ensure food safety, be honest and self-disciplined, be responsible to society and the public, accept social supervision, and assume social responsibilities." Article 4)

The hidden dangers of food hygiene and safety under the traditional manual production method of "Jinbang Milk Making Skills" and the small-workshop production and management model have formed a seemingly irreconcilable contradiction with the food production and operation stipulated in the Food Safety Law of the People's Republic of China in modern society.

The parallel existence of different standard systems, the management departments are independent, and there is a lack of coordination among them

Due to the diversity and complexity of intangible cultural heritage itself, intangible cultural heritage often forms a status quo of multi-management during the application and management process, such as the national-level intangible cultural heritage project "Xiangyun Yarn Dyeing and Finishing Skills".

This project is the core production skill of Xiangyun Yarn, a famous real silk fabric in my country.

It is an intangible cultural heritage of traditional handicrafts that was created, developed and passed down to this day with the prosperity of the silk industry in the Pearl River Delta region during the late Qing Dynasty and the Republic of China.

In June 2008, the "Xiangyun Yarn Dyeing and Finishing Skills" declared by the Shunde District Museum of Foshan City was officially included in my country's "Second Batch of Intangible Cultural Heritage List"; in December of the same year,"Xiangyun Yarn Dyeing and Finishing Skills" was included in the second batch of municipal intangible cultural heritage representative projects in Shenzhen; On June 12, 2009, Liang Zhu, director of Shunde Lunjiao's "Chengyi Sunning Factory", was rated by the Ministry of Culture of my country as the national intangible cultural heritage representative inheritor of the national intangible cultural heritage representative project "Xiangyun Yarn Dyeing and Finishing Skills"; In December 2014,"Xiangyun Yarn Blank Yarn Weaving Skills" was successfully declared as a representative intangible cultural heritage project in Nanhai District, Foshan City.

On the other hand, in 2005, Shenzhen Xiangyunsha Garment Co., Ltd.

was the first to successfully obtain the title of "Geographical Indication of Origin of Xiangyun Yarn" issued by the General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine of the State; on April 23, 2008, the "People's Republic of China Textile Industry Standard·Granula Silk Garment"(FZ/T 43021-2001) was released and implemented on October 1, 2008; On April 21, 2009, the "People's Republic of China National Standard·Granula Silk" GB/T 22856-2009) was released and implemented on December 1, 2009; On December 20, 2011, the People's Republic of China Textile Industry Standard·Granula Silk "FZ/T 43021-2001) was released and implemented on July 1, 2012; In 2011, Shunde District, Foshan City, Guangdong Province was awarded the title of "Geographical Indication of Origin of Xiangyun Yarn" issued by the General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine of the State; on December 20, 2011, the "People's Republic of China Textile Industry Standard·Granula Silk Craft Jewelry"(FZ/T 43021-2001) was released and implemented on July 1, 2012; In 2016, the new "People's Republic of China Textile Industry Standard·Granular Silk Garment" was released and implemented, with the standard number FZ/T 81016-2016, replacing FZ/T 81016-2008, and the implementation date is September 1, 2016.

The above-mentioned confirmation of "geographical indications of origin" and the promulgation of product standards related to Xiangyun Yarn are actually a standard system independent of my country's "Intangible Cultural Heritage List System".

However, the protection standards lack relevant intangible cultural heritage departments and experts in the formulation process.

It is obvious that they cannot meet the requirements of intangible cultural heritage protection standards.

There is a conflict of interests between interest subjects, protection subjects, and even inheritors, making it difficult to establish protection standards

Intangible cultural heritage can bring economic and social benefits, so the phenomenon of relevant entities competing for benefits often occurs.

In order to maximize benefits, some entities even resort to fraud and confuse the public, making it difficult to establish protection standards.

For example, in "Xiangyun Yarn Dyeing and Finishing Skills", the main stakeholders of this project are merchants and local governments.

Among them, merchants run through the entire Xiangyun Yarn industry chain, from raw material producers of Xiangyun Yarn to manufacturers of Xiangyun Yarn, and then to manufacturers of finished Xiangyun Yarn, they all participated in the initiation, writing and application of relevant product standards.

Some also name their own companies after the homophonic alias of Xiangyun yarn, declare their products as products protected by geographical indications of the origin of Xiangyun yarn, declare "Xiangyun yarn dyeing and finishing skills" and other intangible cultural heritage of local and national, declare themselves as inheritors of "Xiangyun yarn dyeing and finishing skills", etc.

Local governments try their best to support the relevant activities of local enterprises and exercise checks and balances on the behaviors of other local governments and enterprises.

Subjectively, their actions are not all for the purpose of protecting the national-level intangible cultural heritage project "Xiangyun Yarn Dyeing and Finishing Skills", but have even become the source of disputes over Xiangyun Yarn's interests.

The various behaviors of businessmen in the Xiangyun yarn industry chain are often not for better protection and inheritance of intangible cultural heritage, but to safeguard their own interests.

Therefore, the various types of protection measures they have launched related to "Xiangyun yarn dyeing and finishing skills" cannot truly achieve the re-prosperity of "Xiangyun yarn dyeing and finishing skills".Facts have also proved that there are "fake intangible cultural heritage","incompetent intangible cultural heritage inheritors", etc.

in these measures, and there is even suspicion of taking the intangible cultural heritage project "Xiangyun Yarn Dyeing and Finishing Skills" as its own.

For example, a raw material manufacturer of Xiangyun yarn launched the intangible cultural heritage project of "Xiangyun Yarn Blank Weaving Skills".

In fact, all major silk reeling factories in the Pearl River Delta in the late Qing Dynasty and the early Republic of China also produced Xiangyun yarn, which means that there are no specific raw material producers for "Xiangyun Yarn Dyeing and Finishing Skills".

As long as silk is good, sometimes cloth can replace silk.

The so-called "Xiangyun Yarn Blank Yarn Weaving Technique" is actually a silk weaving technique.

If it is called "Xiangyun Yarn", it will be suspected of "gaining popularity" or "fake intangible cultural heritage".

Judging from the various protection measures related to "Xiangyun Yarn Dyeing and Finishing Skills", the manufacturers of Xiangyun Yarn only proposed the "National Standard of the People's Republic of China: Lang Silk"(GB/T 22856-2009), and whether this standard can replace the protection standard of intangible cultural heritage "Xiangyun Yarn Dyeing and Finishing Skills" is debatable.

At the same time, so many product standards related to Xiangyun Yarn are all in the name of "national-level intangible cultural heritage projects", which is also suspected of confusing the public.

The dispute over interests among merchants in the Xiangyun yarn industry chain is only one aspect of the contradiction among merchants, while the contradiction between merchants in the same industry is another aspect of the contradiction among merchants.

This contradiction is mainly manifested in the fact that some enterprises are inferior and disorderly competition.

The former runs through the entire Xiangyun yarn industry chain, which is also the origin of the birth of a series of Xiangyun yarn related product standards; The latter is mainly reflected within Xiangyun yarn manufacturers.

After "Xiangyun Yarn Dyeing and Finishing Technology" was successfully declared as a national-level intangible cultural heritage project, a large number of Xiangyun yarn production companies were born, but this was only the superficial prosperity of "Xiangyun Yarn Dyeing and Finishing Technology".

The market demand for Xiangyun yarn has not expanded because "Xiangyun Yarn Dyeing and Finishing Technology" was declared as a national-level intangible cultural heritage project.

The birth of similar companies has caused disorderly competition among Xiangyun yarn production companies.

Later, they closed down one after another.

The Xiangyun yarn production industry has become more depressed, which has had a greater negative impact on the intangible cultural heritage of "Xiangyun yarn dyeing and finishing skills".

The government is the spokesperson of the people's interests, so their interests and demands are basically the same.

Judging from the government-related protection measures for "Xiangyun Yarn Dyeing and Finishing Skills", the conflicts between local governments are mainly manifested in "Who is the origin of Xiangyun Yarn?" and "Who is the location of the intangible cultural heritage project 'Xiangyun Yarn Dyeing and Finishing Technology'?" In these two aspects, they are full of the people's innate simplicity, but they do not understand what "geographical indications of origin" and "intangible cultural heritage" are; perhaps they do not want to understand.

In their view, as long as a certain culture appears locally, they are the legitimate descendants of that culture! Therefore, in "Who is the origin of Xiangyun yarn?" and "Who is the location of the intangible cultural heritage 'Xiangyun Yarn Dyeing and Finishing Technology'?" On the issue of ", Shenzhen, Shunde, and Nanhai all consider themselves to be the legitimate descendants of this culture.

In addition, Guangzhou, Zhejiang and other places also consider themselves to be the origin of Xiangyun yarn.

However, in fact, only Shunde Lunjiao's" Chengyi Sunning Factory "has truly retained the living inheritance of" Xiangyun yarn dyeing and finishing skills ".

How to be a good guardian of intangible cultural heritage

Faced with the above problems, as a grassroots worker, how to do a good job in intangible cultural heritage protection, the author puts forward the following thoughts:

Recognize the essence of intangible cultural heritage protection

Intangible cultural heritage protection is a global action initiated by UNESCO.

This movement originated from the increased concept of vulnerable ethnic subjects and the enhanced awareness of ownership of traditional culture.

For example, in 1973, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Religion of the Bolivian Government reported that various existing conventions related to cultural protection only focused on the protection of tangible cultural objects, but did not pay attention to expressive cultural forms, such as music, dance, folk art, etc.

These cultural forms are facing the most serious commercial export of secrets and other proposals submitted to the Director-General of UNESCO.

* Bolivia proposed this bill not to seek help protect or preserve its customs, but to oppose inappropriate use of customs by foreign countries and possibly domestic countries); cultural disaster arising from modernity: That is, global concerns about the increasingly fading national and folk culture.

For example, in 1993, the South Korean government submitted a proposal on establishing a living cultural property protection system within the framework of UNESCO in response to the fact that the "Proposal for the Protection of Folk Creations" passed by UNESCO in 1989 failed to attract great attention from member states.

The proposal is regarded as the direct origin of the current intangible cultural heritage protection work.

Different from the Bolivian government's demands to protect intellectual property rights, the main purpose of the South Korean government's proposal is to protect the inheritance of national culture) and so on.

* Therefore, intangible cultural heritage protection has gone through the process of protecting "folk creations" to "intangible cultural heritage", and the specific names, concepts and connotations of its protected subjects have also changed many times.

The word intangible cultural heritage is a foreign word to the people of our country.

It is easy to equate it with the original word "traditional culture" in my country.

However, in fact, only after it is recognized as a representative intangible cultural heritage project, the related protection behaviors and measures can be considered intangible cultural heritage protection.

Such mistakes are easy for ordinary people to make in specific practice, as are experts, scholars, and even grassroots managers.

For example, the promulgation of "Jiangxi Province Local Standards·Jingdezhen Traditional Porcelain Making Crafts" clearly stated in the introduction that the purpose of formulating this standard is to: "It is conducive to the protection and inheritance of national intangible cultural heritage"*, but the author searched the intangible cultural heritage network in Jingdezhen City and only found the first batch of Jingdezhen handmade porcelain techniques at the national level 2006), the first batch of Jingdezhen traditional porcelain kiln workshops at the national level 2006), the first batch of Jingdezhen porcelain customs at the provincial level 2006), the second batch of Jingdezhen traditional blue and white porcelain production techniques at the provincial level 2007), the second batch of Jingdezhen traditional firewood kiln firing techniques at the provincial level 2007), Jingdezhen porcelain brush-making skills, the third provincial batch of Jingdezhen sculpture porcelain hand-making skills, the third provincial batch of Jingdezhen color glaze porcelain firing skills, the third provincial batch of Jingdezhen color glaze porcelain firing skills, the third provincial batch of Jingdezhen porcelain production skills, the third provincial batch of Jingdezhen ceramic decoration skills, the fourth provincial batch of Jingdezhen traditional ancient colored porcelain production skills, the fourth provincial batch of Jingdezhen traditional ancient colored porcelain production skills, 2013), Jingdezhen's traditional exquisite porcelain making skills, the fourth provincial batch of traditional ceramic calligraphy skills, the fourth provincial batch of traditional ceramic calligraphy skills, the fourth provincial batch of Jingdezhen's traditional thin-body porcelain making skills, the fourth provincial batch of Jingdezhen's traditional Dou color porcelain making skills, the fourth provincial batch of Jingdezhen's traditional blue and white bead and clear material calcination technology, the fourth provincial batch of Jingdezhen's green and white porcelain making skills, the fourth provincial batch of Jingdezhen's provincial batch of 2013), The fifth provincial batch of Fuliang water pestle making skills 2016), the fifth provincial batch of Fuliang traditional ceramic glaze fruit making skills 2016), the first municipal batch of Jingdezhen porcelain worship customs 2007), Jingcheng Town Fenghuo Xianshi The first batch of municipal level 2007), the first batch of municipal level firing Taiping Kiln in Mid-Autumn Festival 2007), the second batch of municipal level of municipal level of Jingdezhen traditional underglaze red porcelain firing skills 2009), the third batch of municipal level of Jingdezhen traditional ceramic carving skills 2015), Jingdezhen's traditional bone-colored porcelain drawing skills, the third batch at the municipal level (2015), the fifth batch at the municipal level of traditional sagger making skills in Jingdezhen City), the fifth batch at the municipal level of Jingdezhen's traditional ceramic straw packaging skills, the fifth batch at the municipal level of Jingdezhen's traditional carmine pigment blending and firing skills in 2018) and other intangible cultural heritage representative projects,"Jingdezhen Traditional Porcelain Making Skills" are not included.

* It can be seen that the parties have problems with improper use of terms in relevant standard documents.

Therefore, my country's intangible cultural heritage protection work is a top-down movement promoted by my government in the context of the global launch by UNESCO and aimed at protecting my country's excellent traditional culture.

From the perspective of work flow, excellent traditional culture must first be confirmed by representative projects of "intangible cultural heritage", that is, whether the object to be protected is our country's excellent traditional culture, whether it is worth protecting, whether it conforms to the "intangible cultural heritage" definition, whether the classification is accurate, whether the historical origin and inheritance pedigree are clear, whether the content is rich, whether it is unique and representative in the local area, whether the protection plan is reasonable, etc.

Secondly, identify the representative inheritors, inheritance bases, etc.

related to it.

Finally, there are various specific protection methods, such as the construction of cultural and ecological reserves, productive protection, living protection, sustainable development, etc.

Self-denial and public service and avoid being trapped by interests

Intangible cultural heritage protection is by no means easy.

It is easily influenced by stakeholders, and it is often difficult to achieve one's original intention as a result of the work.

Faced with such problems, we must be mentally prepared.

Generally speaking, the subjects of intangible cultural heritage protection include: government functional departments, academic circles, business circles and news media, etc., but never include inheritors.

The inheritor belongs to the inheritance body and is responsible for inheritance; the protection body is responsible for publicity, promotion, promotion and other peripheral work.

If we confuse their differences, it will be easy to turn "folk customs" into "official customs" and "true heritage" into "false heritage".

* In specific practical work, some interest entities, especially unscrupulous businesses,"kidnap" the government,"bribe" experts,"deceive" the media, replace inheritance entities, and practice cultural marketization and commercialization in the name of protecting intangible cultural heritage.

Real cases abound.

Therefore, as we work at the forefront of intangible cultural heritage protection, it is crucial for us to stick to our own opinions and preserve our original intentions.

Be humble and studious, and strive to improve your business capabilities as a front-line manager of intangible cultural heritage protection

Intangible cultural heritage protection standards refer to: the application and identification standards for a series of representative projects, representative inheritors, and inheritance bases, protection planning and reasonable development and utilization standards around representative intangible cultural heritage projects.

At present, due to the existence of relevant laws, regulations, rules and regulations, the application and identification standards for representative projects, representative inheritors, and inheritance bases are well-documented, but protection planning and reasonable development and utilization standards are relatively weak.

Taking the application and recognition standards for representative intangible cultural heritage projects as an example, as early as March 26, 2005, my government issued the "Opinions of the General Office of the State Council on Strengthening the Protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage in my Country" issued by the State Council [2005] No.

18), clarifying the importance and urgency of protecting and utilizing my country's intangible cultural heritage, proposing "protection first, rescue first, rational utilization, inheritance and development","government-led, social participation, clarifying responsibilities, Form a resultant force; Guidelines and working principles such as long-term planning, step-by-step implementation, integration of points and aspects, and emphasis on practical results.

Emphasis is placed on conscientiously carrying out the census of intangible cultural heritage, establishing a directory system of representative intangible cultural heritage works, strengthening the research, identification, preservation and dissemination of intangible cultural heritage, establishing a scientific and effective intangible cultural heritage inheritance mechanism, and establishing a coordinated and effective working mechanism.

It also attaches annexes such as the "Interim Measures for the Application and Evaluation of National Intangible Cultural Heritage Representatives", the "Inter-Ministerial Joint Conference System on Intangible Cultural Heritage Protection", and the "List of Members of the Inter-Ministerial Joint Conference on Intangible Cultural Heritage Protection".

In the few years when the list system of representative intangible cultural heritage projects has just been implemented, due to the uneven professional qualities of practitioners and other reasons, there have been heavy declarations and light protection in the application work of intangible cultural heritage projects; heavy declarations and light surveys; attention is paid to the application work in understanding, and there is a lack of corresponding professional knowledge, skills and methods in operation; In terms of text writing, the text is irrelevant, is not standardized, answers are not relevant, does not grasp the key, is rough and simple, has many shortcomings, is vague, the structure is messy, is unintelligible, and is full of nonsense, which seriously affects issues such as expert review and voting.

In response to the above problems, the late Mr.

Wu Bingan specially wrote the article "Essentials for Writing Intangible Cultural Heritage Project Application Text", which clarified that before filling in the application form for intangible cultural heritage projects, six important preparatory tasks such as project heritage identification, project classification identification, and project representativeness must be done.

Identification, project inheritance identification, project authenticity identification, and project specific expression identification, and further interpretation of the basic requirements and basic contents of each column on the application form.

* This article has become one of the important guiding documents for grassroots workers, so this article can be regarded as a standard for writing application forms for representative intangible cultural heritage protection projects.

Coupled with scholars 'research on the basic attributes of intangible cultural heritage, such as what is intangible cultural heritage *, the basic characteristics of intangible cultural heritage *, etc.

Generally speaking, my country's current intangible cultural heritage protection work will basically not be identified in the identification of representative projects.

There will be major mistakes, and the institutional framework and expert guidance and control basically ensure its authenticity and reliability.

The problem arises in the protection aspect.

Identify which inheritors are representative inheritors of representative intangible cultural heritage projects, how to ensure that these people can bear corresponding obligations, exercise corresponding rights, and enjoy the reasonable rights that should belong to them; how to do a good job in representative intangible cultural heritage projects Protection planning and rational development and utilization of this project are all key issues.

But the reality is that many people regard the application and dissemination of representative intangible cultural heritage projects as intangible cultural heritage protection itself, which is what scholars often say: emphasizing declaration and neglecting protection.

Although many scholars have long realized that there is a difference between intangible cultural heritage declaration and protection, and have published a series of papers specifically discussing the protection of intangible cultural heritage *, many discussions are basically at the theoretical stage, and few can be truly put into practice.

There are few *, and some opinions are constantly controversial *.

Up to now, my country's representative inheritors identification system for representative intangible cultural heritage projects still has problems such as chaotic identification mechanism, unscientific identification procedures, single identification types, unreasonable identification standards, and insufficient government support.

* As for disrespect, abuse, and even infringement of legal rights of intangible cultural heritage projects and inheritors, it also occurs from time to time.

For a long time, two completely different models of intangible cultural heritage protection have been formed in practice.

One is the preservation model, which is to preserve and protect intangible cultural heritage through filing, research, display, etc.

census, declaration, dissemination, etc., so there are census standards, filing standards, informatization standards, digitalization standards, collection and management standards, inheritance display standards, website construction standards, inheritance training standards, etc.

One is the protection model, that is, what measures are taken to ensure the vitality of intangible cultural heritage.

This model is divided into three routes: conservative, radical and eclectic.

The conservative route emphasizes the "authenticity" and "original ecology" of intangible cultural heritage, believes that inheritance and inheritance are greater than development and innovation, adheres to the cultural standard of intangible cultural heritage, and opposes the commercialization and industrialization of intangible cultural heritage."Rescue","preservation","protection","inheritance","original ecology","original flavor", etc.

are its key words.

The radical line emphasizes the "variability" and "vitality" of intangible cultural heritage, believes that development and innovation are inheritance and inheritance, insists on the advancement of heritage with the times, and affirms the commercialization and industrialization of heritage.

Productive protection is seen as a compromise route.

* In fact, this is a question of grasping the "degree" in intangible cultural heritage protection.

Mr.

Yuan Li proposed that the protection of intangible cultural heritage should be "people-oriented" and inherit intangible cultural heritage in accordance with the inherent laws of intangible cultural heritage.

The so-called "people-oriented" means "taking the protection of inheritors as the 'starting point' to protect intangible cultural heritage, turning 'non-material' into 'material', and turning' invisible 'and' intangible 'into' visible 'and' touch'"; Inheriting intangible cultural heritage in accordance with the inherent laws of intangible cultural heritage, that is," starting from the research laws, protecting intangible cultural heritage by discovering and utilizing laws."* This view is correct, but it is difficult to implement in reality.

Because intangible cultural heritage protection not only involves inheritors, but also involves many stakeholders.

Protecting intangible cultural heritage by discovering and using laws is easier said than done.On the one hand, discovering laws is not easy and requires a lot of on-the-spot research, as well as the keen observation and insight of the investigators; on the other hand, it is not easy to use the laws, and it is necessary to understand the laws and find practical application methods.

But the reality is that although scholars have proposed a series of principles for the protection of intangible cultural heritage, the relevant debate has never ended, and there are few specific measures and action guidelines to follow.

Although some of the intangible cultural heritage protection measures currently being implemented have evolved into de facto standards for intangible cultural heritage protection, it does not mean that these measures and standards are correct and do not need improvement.

Taking the current implementation of the identification system for representative inheritors of intangible cultural heritage and its protection measures as an example, Mr.

Xiao Fang believes that: to implement the protection of representative inheritors of intangible cultural heritage, the government needs to regularly provide living subsidies to the inheritors; Grant the inheritors honorary title to create favorable conditions for their access to living resources; enhance the social reputation and social status of the inheritors, and provide inheritance space and inheritance conditions; Purchase medical insurance for the inheritors so that they have no worries; Keep abreast of the lives of inheritors in a timely manner and solve their difficulties to the best of our ability; attach importance to spiritual exchanges with inheritors, establish cultural confidence and cultural consciousness of inheritors; regularly provide commendations and rewards, etc.

* Mr.

Liu Xiaochun pointed out that the system of officially identifying inheritors of "intangible cultural heritage" is the result of a game of forces from multiple parties.

While stimulating the cultural consciousness of the inheritors, it also changes the ecological relationship between the inheritors and frustrates other unofficial inheritors.

The enthusiasm of inheritors to inherit "intangible cultural heritage".

* Mr.

Yuan Li and Mr.

Gu Jun focused on the subjects of intangible cultural heritage, which actually included three categories: individual inheritors, group inheritors and group inheritors.

However, in reality, they only expressed their views on issues such as selecting individuals.

Faced with the inconsistent opinions of the academic community, perhaps only by being humble and studious, thinking actively, and learning by analogy can we become a qualified grassroots intangible cultural heritage protection worker.

Establish inter-department coordination mechanism, improve work processes, and improve work efficiency

In the process of exploring standards for intangible cultural heritage protection, the author deeply felt the confusion and trouble caused by the diversity and authority differences of standard formulation entities.

As grassroots workers, the opinions of superior agencies and leaders must be listened to, and the opinions of experts and scholars must also be referred to.

However, they are not a unified whole.

Even in the same system, there are various voices.

In this context, it is particularly important to integrate and coordinate the opinions of all parties with authoritative departments taking the lead.

In the past, we adopted a strategy of joint departments.

Under this strategy, my country's intangible cultural heritage protection work has been carried out vigorously.

However, there are not enough joint departments, and our work has not been focused on the construction and research of intangible cultural heritage protection standards.

Come on.

In future work, we can consider uniting with more relevant departments to jointly carry out intangible cultural heritage protection work and establish a long-term and effective coordination mechanism to improve work efficiency.

IV.

Conclusion

Marked by the promulgation of the "Intangible Cultural Heritage Law of the People's Republic of China", my country's intangible cultural heritage protection work has gradually transitioned from the "list era" and "post-application era" to the "standardization era." The construction and research of intangible cultural heritage protection standards will become the focus of my country's intangible cultural heritage protection work at this stage.

At present, my country's intangible cultural heritage protection standards are still based on factual standards.

In the implementation process of existing laws, regulations and protection work normative systems, there is a contradiction between traditional standards and contemporary standards, the parallel existence of different standards, the lack of coordination mechanisms among government functional departments, and Issues such as conflicts of interest between relevant entities are particularly prominent.

Faced with these problems, grassroots intangible cultural heritage protection workers should be humble and studious on the basis of recognizing the nature of intangible cultural heritage protection work and the current status of intangible cultural heritage protection standards, strive to improve management levels and business capabilities, and jointly establish coordination mechanisms through departments.

Measures to improve working methods, improve work efficiency, and be guardians of intangible cultural heritage.

(This article was published in "Cultural Heritage", No.

6, 2018, and the annotations are omitted.

For details, please refer to the original issue)