On 15 November 2017, Dr Sharon Siddique spoke at our monthly Singapore Platform for East-West Dialogue. She explained how colonialism still colours Singapore’s views, and why it is important for Singapore to get to know her neighbours better.
The following is a selection of tweets highlighting some of the main points she made.
#SharonSiddique: Even after seven decades, we’re still stuck in the post-colonial phase. But have we truly rid ourselves of Western influences? #NTUParaLimes#SGEastWest
#SharonSiddique: The concept of Bhumiputra (Sons of the Soil) is integral to Malaysia’s idea of Malay. To complicate things, Malays are under the protection of the Sultans. #NTUParaLimes#SGEastWest
#SharonSiddique: An Indonesian friend agreed that Singapore is a pearl. But they cannot forget, how it was created—a grain of salt entered the system and irritated them. #NTUParaLimes#SGEastWest
#SharonSiddique: We have to rebalance Singapore’s frozen colonial moment. We’re good on Malaysia, unfamiliar with Indonesia, and poor with regard to Riau Islands. #NTUParaLimes#SGEastWest
#SharonSiddique: There’s a creeping sense of colonialism when you are more familiar with London and New York, than any of the provinces of our neighbours. #NTUParaLimes#SGEastWest
#SharonSiddique: Open yourself to the many fascinating avenues in your neighbour. For starters, take a ferry to Tanjung Balai Karimun #NTUParaLimes#SGEastWest
#SharonSiddique: Knowing our neighbours can only be a source of strength. But we are more comfortable with being global than neighbourly. #NTUParaLimes#SGEastWest
#SharonSiddique: We never left colonialism since WWII, nor have we entered a new era. But we’re at the tipping point into something new. What it is, we don’t know. #NTUParaLimes#SGEastWest
#SharonSiddique: It’s important to look closer to home. Singapore seems to assume that the constellation of nation states will always be there. But who’s to say this won’t change?#NTUParaLimes#SGEastWest
#SharonSiddique: I was in Bonn the year the Berlin Wall fell. Before that, I attended several diplomatic functions with my husband, and no one thought the wall will be breached. Likewise, we can’t expect things will stay the same for us. #NTUParaLimes#SGEastWest
Bilahari Kausikan speaking at Singapore Platforn for East-West Dialogue
On 11 October, Bilahari Kausikan, Ambassador-at-Large at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, spoke at our monthly Singapore Platform for East-West Dialogue. He focused on why a small country should not behave like a small country.
The following is a selection of tweets highlighting the main points he made.
The reality of Singapore’s standing on the world stage
BK: If you’re a small city state, you have to understand that you’re intrinsically irrelevant on the world stage. #SGEastWest#Politics
On 19 September, Professor Wang Gungwu spoke at our monthly Singapore Platform for East-West Dialogue. He focused on the different conception of law by the East versus the West.
The following is a selection of tweets highlighting the main points he made.
The East and West have interacted for a long time
Prof. Wang: The East and West has always been in dialogue one way or another. The first one started with trade. #SGEastWest#NTUParaLimes
Dr Michael Puett answering questions at the Singapore Platform for East-West Dialogue
The Singapore Platform for East-West Dialogue is a series of monthly informal meetings, where a speaker from academia, government, or industry discusses issues related to such a dialogue from their own field.
In this second article about the session with Michael J. Puett, Walter C. Klein Professor of Chinese History and Anthropology at Harvard University, ISAAC TAN highlights some of the questions posed to him and his initial reflections about the discussion.
Questions for the Professor
The first question was how one should teach the next generation to appreciate the diversity and complexity of the world. This is in consideration that many aspects of society are intertwined, and the rise of extreme movements has made the world more volatile.
Puett prefaced his reply by pointing out that neo-liberalism harks back to liberalism which shaped the political system based on self-interest. Just as the economy collapsed in the 1920s, and right-wing movements rose in the 1930s, we are experiencing a similar pattern now because we adopted an ideology wholesale. The key to educating the next generation is to get them recognise that there is an “incredible fear of the kind of world that has been created” that is driving these movements. From there, we should respond to those fears by actually changing the system, but “we ought to have the discipline of not trying to [invent] new grand –isms to solve it.”
When asked whether there is an event today that parallels the fall of the Berlin Wall, Puett replied that the failure of the neo-liberal system is such an epoch. The silver lining is that the rise of right-wing movements have made people less complacent, and they are starting to consider what can be done to solve the problem.
Another interesting question that arose is whether one should view the practice of creating rituals as a sort of trans-cultural Confucianism, whereby the rituals created should be based on societal context, instead of importing the exact practices that Confucius was in favour of.
Puett agreed with the notion, and pointed out that Confucius emphasised what the Zhou rituals achieved, rather than the actual details of said rituals. Similarly, the rituals one decides to create or adopt should break us out of the patterns and ruts that we fall into. Hence, it would not make sense for us to perform the Zhou rituals because it has no resonance in our society.
As the session drew to a close, someone remarked that at first glance, all this seemed to be in the arena of the educated, and those who are actively looking for solutions. He asked if there is hope for the masses who are often bogged down by various worries, and understanding such concepts would be the last thing on their mind.
Puett replied that the hope lies in the momentary and fragmentary moments of interactions when people really connected. The sense of “joyousness that come from these relations where people are really connecting with each other” should be the focus. These are the moments in which people break out of their patterns, and open up for the possibility for change. Once people recognise these moments and start striving for it within their relationships, even if the connection breaks down shortly after, there is hope for change. This applies to everyday relationships and those on the societal level. Therefore, this is accessible to everyone.
Initial Thoughts: Singapore’s Lack of Identity—A Boon?
When it comes to extrapolating the idea of ritual to a macro level, Puett consistently emphasised that different sectors of society should be based on different systems, so as to prevent society from being shaped by a single totalising ideology. But what about a society’s sense of identity?
Since achieving independence, Singapore has been trying to articulate what a Singaporean identity is to very little success. The most recent discussion arose last year, when Minister for Education (Higher Education and Skills), Ong Ye Kung, was asked whether Singapore was ready to do away with race categorisation.
He replied, “The Singaporean identity itself is rather quite empty. What fills up a Singaporean identity is the identity of various races and all the traditions and cultures that we bring forth and create this tapestry [with].”
Undoubtedly, those who equate national identity to national unity will feel anxious about such comments. But what if there is a kernel of truth in it (regardless of whether it justifies maintaining the current system of racial categorisation)?
Puett explained that some classical Chinese philosophers argued against there being an essential self. Could this be applied to national identity, and what does it mean for Singapore to embrace it?
Rather than trying to piece together an identity by citing several buzzwords, we should truly take a look at what we have.
Racial diversity is often mentioned as one of Singapore’s plus points, but the demographics happened partly due to happenstance, and largely because of colonialism. Apart from advertising a set of statistics disguised as a strength, perhaps we ought to come up with dialogic practices in order to engage and learn from the plethora of cultures we have at close proximity.
Of course, this is easier said than done, but engaging with such complexity is the training we all need. Instead of being crippled by this existential anxiety, it could be turned into a strength which results in a society that is sensitive and adaptable.
Only then, could Singapore truly be a platform for East-West dialogue, and not just a title for a series of meetings and discussions.
Isaac Tan received his B.A. Philosophy (Honours) from the National University of Singapore. He is currently the Communications Executive of Para Limes.
Michael J. Puett speaking at the Singapore Platform for East-West Dialogue, held at Blujaz Café.
The Singapore Platform for East-West Dialogue is a series of monthly informal meetings, where a speaker from academia, government, or industry discusses issues related to such a dialogue from their own field.
In this first of a two-part series, ISAAC TAN writes about the session by Michael J. Puett, Walter C. Klein Professor of Chinese History and Anthropology at Harvard University. Puett spoke about how Chinese philosophy offers an alternative viewpoint of the self and one’s relations to the wider world.
A Generation Who Failed
16th August 2017 — His opening remarks were surprising to anyone acquainted with Dr Michael Puett, and his cheerful disposition, because it was uncharacteristically gloomy.
“Let me give you an example of a generation that, in retrospect, faced a major moment in world history and failed.” He went on to list the reasons for such a failure: “They did not try to learn from other cultures; they did not try to build a cosmopolitan world; they did not try to engage in ideas from different cultures, and bring them together. And the results were, I would say, catastrophic.”
He acknowledged that the generation was his, and he pointed to the fall of the Berlin Wall as the pivotal moment where his generation took the first step in the wrong direction. Given that the Cold War was a clash of ideologies, the end of the war thus signalled which side had the better ideology. As such, the 1989 generation (as Puett calls it) began building a new world, “where one set of ideas, from one tiny piece of Western culture, became the only ones that were taken seriously.” That set of ideas is neo-liberalism.
Such an ideology assumes an essential self. All one has to do is to find oneself, and structure one’s life according to who one is, in one’s self interest. It is so entrenched in society that people are, as Puett noted, “judged on the degree to which [they] do this.” This can be seen in both the political and economic systems where people are encouraged to act according to their self-interest to be successful.
Puett then highlighted a profound implication: “What we were really saying is you don’t need to learn anything else; you don’t have to wrestle with ideas; you don’t even have to take ideas seriously because that’s happened—we wrestled with the big ideas and solved it.”
What contributed to the various problems that we have today is that when they were faced with a potential problem, the previous generation felt that if they raised a generation who were true to themselves, some of them will become great innovators, and they will be able to solve those problems. In that sense, the 1989 generation saw that those were not the problems for them to solve.
Puett proceeded to urge the audience of mostly young adults to take his generation as a wonderful example of what not to do. He added, “Take for granted that one single idea, if it becomes the assumption that guides a life or an entire world, will almost be dangerous.” Instead, one has to “work across different cultural traditions, allowing ideas from different traditions to contest and challenge your fundamental assumptions.”
An Alternative View
As for the essential conception of the self, is there an alternative view of the self that a society can adopt which might ameliorate the problems we have today?
Puett cited an alternative offered by classical Chinese philosophy which does not view the self as a stable entity. Rather, the self is “a mess of different energies, emotions, dispositions, and tendencies.” As such, our encounters with others and the wider world “draw out” certain emotions in us, and we respond to them accordingly. The danger is, added Puett, “that from a young age, we cease to really respond to the real world around us” because we “fall into patterns and ruts of responses.”
The solution is to break these patterns and ruts is through doing rituals. Such a process allows you to “see the world from a different perspective”, and “interact with those around you in a completely different way than you otherwise would.”
To illustrate his point, Puett raised an example of a Chinese ritual performed by father and son: “The son would have to walk into a ritual space, and play his own father. And the father will have to play the role of being the son to his own son, and interact as such. Each, in other words, being forced to see the world not only from a different perspective, but from the complicated perspective that is driving this complicated pattern.”
Of course, this does not mean that the father and son will immediately have a harmonious relationship. Rather, the ritual is a continuous process and by slowly being aware of the various perspectives, one becomes more attuned to the situation and will be able to find an appropriate response to the situation. Therefore, this opens up the possibility of being able to change the world. This can be seen in the stories about Confucius, who is able to sense the situation, the patterns and ruts of others, and react appropriately.
But how does this translate to political and economic systems? “You want to intentionally create different spheres, where people are not simply seamlessly being pushed in terms of one focus, namely self-interest,” advised Puett. “If you have an economic system that’s aimed at gaining wealth, then you create a political system explicitly focused on meritocracy to emphasize different sides of human beings.” The different spheres will ensure that society is constantly forced to break out of the patterns of a sphere guided by a single vision. This enables a society to be keenly aware of the complexities that arise in a particular area.
In concluding his talk, Puett clarified that creating rituals to break one’s patterns and ruts does not mean replacing neo-liberalism with Confucianism. That is merely replacing one totalising ideology with another, and by extension, repeating the same mistake committed by his generation. Instead, one should work towards a “cosmopolitan approach to life”, where one actively learns from other ideas and cultures, and employing them to challenge fundamental assumptions. Such a process will then result in a society where people are able to see the complexities of the world, and work with them.
While it may sound Utopian, Puett argued that it is achievable because all one has to do is to begin with the mundane and slowly expand it to society as a whole. In each interaction, one could alter one’s reaction to see how things turn out. Soon, one will be adept at assessing and dealing with the complexity of each situation. This shatters any illusion of the world being stable, and that change is possible. If the current and future generations learn to see that, then they will be creating “a world where people can flourish.”
Isaac Tan received his B.A. Philosophy (Honours) from the National University of Singapore. He is currently the Communications Executive of Para Limes.
18–20 November 2015—In acknowledging that Singapore’s port activities is one of the main sources of her economic success, Para Limes— together with Maritime Port Authority of Singapore (MPA) and NTU School of Art, Design, and Media (ADM)—organised the Exploring Maritime Heritage Dynamics conference as part of its series of heritage science conferences. The main question for the conference was, How does maritime heritage contribute in the development of tools and capabilities to plan, design, and sustain competitive future scenarios that focus on the sea and its peculiarities as a main resource?
Over the course of three days, speakers from academia, government agencies, and heritage organisations spoke on a wide range of topics which include history of various ports and trading routes in Asia, arts projects related to maritime cultures, and maritime infrastructures and facilities.
In conjunction with the conference, a maritime heritage trial was organised for the speakers for them to visit the sites that were key to Singapore’s maritime history. Some of the places include Fort Canning, Clarke Quay, Boat Quay, Raffles Quay, Collyer Quay, Keppel Road, and Tangjong Pagar Terminal.
The following is a selection of photos from the conference.
Day One: 18 November 2015
Guests arriving and registering for the event.
L to R: Prof. Alan Chan (Dean of Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences, NTU), Jan Wouter Vasbinder (Director of Para Limes), Prof. Dorrit Vibeke Sorensen (Chair of School of Art, Design and Media, NTU), and Prof. Bertil Andersson (President, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore)
Assoc. Prof. Dorrit Vibeke Sorensen (Chair of ADM, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore) gives the opening speech of the conference.
Prof. Bertil Andersson (President, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore) giving the opening speech.
Prof. David Abulafia (Professor of Mediterranean History at University of Cambridge) gives his keynote lecture, “Writing the History of the Sea.”
Panel 1: Historical Interdependence among Maritime Cities in Asia
Kwa Chong Guan (Honorary Adjunct Associate Professor and Visiting Fellow at the Archaeological Unit of the Nalanda-Sriwijaya Centre at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore) gives his talk, “The Idea of a Maritime Silk Road, and its Consequences.”
Prof. John Miksic (Southeast Asian Studies Department, National University of Singapore) gives his talk, “Location Isn’t Everything; the Mobility of Southeast Asian Ports.”
Kwa Chong Guan and Prof. John Miksic at a panel Q&A, chaired by Prof. David Abulafia.
Panel 2a: Rise and Fall of Hubs along the Maritime Silk Routes
Assoc. Prof. Asmahan Al-Garoo (Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat, Oman) gives her talk, “Rise and Fall of Maritime Hubs in Pre-Islamic Arabia.”
Prof. Mei Qing (College of Architecture and Urban Planning, Department of Architecture, Tongji University) gives her talk, “Quanzhou/Zayton (718-1549): Landmarking the Rise and Fall of a City Port through History.”
Assoc. Prof. Moain Sadeq (Department of Humanities, Qatar University) gives his talk, “Islamic Maritime Connections and Trade with China and the Mediterranean during the Abbasid and Mamluk Periods.”
Prof. Mei Qing, Assoc. Prof. Asmahan Al-Garoo, and Assoc. Prof. Moain Sadeq at a panel Q&A, chaired by Prof. John Miksic.
Panel 2b: Rise and Fall of Hubs along Maritime Silk Routes
Assoc. Prof. Federico De Romanis (University of Rome Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy) gives his talk, “Rise and Fall of South India Maritime Hubs from Antiquity to the Sixteenth Century (Muziris, Mangalore, Calicut, Cochin).”
Dr Dhiravat Na Prombejra, (Independent scholar and former Associate Professor at Department of History, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand) gives his talk, “Ayutthaya as an International Port (1351-1767).”
Dr Donna Brunero (Senior Lecturer, Department of History, National University of Singapore) gives her talk, “Embracing the Ocean: New Currents for Teaching Maritime History.”
Dr Dhiravat Na Pombejra, Dr Donna Brunero, and Assoc. Prof. Federico De Romanis at a panel Q&A, chaired by Kwa Chong Guan.
Day Two: 19 November 2015
Prof. Roger Kain (Dean and Chief Executive, School of Advanced Study, University of London, UK) gives his keynote lecture, “Marine Charts and Maps in the University of Chicago Press: History of Cartography Project.”
Prof. Alan Chan moderating the Q&A session following Prof. Roger Kain’s keynote lecture.
Panel 3: Maritime Space
Assistant Prof. Cheong Siew Ann (School of Physical & Mathematical Sciences, NTU) and Assoc. Prof. Andrea Nanetti (School of Art, Design and Media, NTU) give their talk, “Interactive Global Histories and the Maritime Space (1205-1533).”
Assoc. Prof. Angel Cattaneo (The Portuguese Centre for Global History, New University of Lisbon, Portugal) gives his talk, “Building a World Unified by Maritime Networks. Fra Mauro’s mappa mundi between Venice and Lisbon, ca. 1450.”
Prof. Evelyn Hu-Dehart (Department of History, Brown University) gives her talk, “The Manila Galleon Trade: The Forgotten Silk Road of the Spanish-American Empire, 1565-1815.”
Assistant Prof. Cheong Siew Ann, Prof. Evelyn Hu-Dehart, Assoc. Prof. Andrea Nanetti, and Assoc. Prof. Angelo Cattaneo at a panel Q&A, chaired by Prof. Roger Kain.
Panel 4: Maritime Heritage and the Arts in International Maritime Centres
Dr Stephen Davies (Founding Director of the Hong Kong Maritime Museum and Lecturer, University of Hong Kong) gives his talk, “Maritime Cultures: What Were They, When Were They, and Where Did They Go?”
Prof. Harold Thwaites (Faculty of Arts, Sunway University, Malaysia) gives his talk, “The Atlas of Maritime Buddhism Project.”
Venka Purushothaman (Vice-President (Academic) and Provost, LASALLE College of the Arts, Singapore) gives his talk, “Reading Maritime Cultures: Visuality and Critique of Ports.”
Venka Purushothaman, Dr Stephen Davies, Prof. Harold Thwaites at a panel Q&A, chaired by Assistant Prof. Kristy Kang (ADM, NTU) (extreme right).
Panel 5: Maritime Infrastructures, Research Facilities, and Heritage Dynamics
Prof. Malcolm Tull (School of Management and Governance, Murdoch University, Australia) gives his talk, “Maritime Infrastructure and Heritage Dynamics.”
Agamemnon Tselikas (Director, Centre of History and Palæography of the National Bank of Greece Cultural Foundation) gives his talk, “The Anticythera Mechanism: Research Facilities and Heritage Dynamics between Humanities and Technologies.”
Auron Tare (Director General, Albanian National Coastline Agency) gives his talk, “Sazani Island (Albania): A Management Project.”
Andrea Bonifacio [Deputy Director, Marco Polo System G.E.I.E (Municipality of Venice)] gives his talk, “Maritime Heritage: Networks of Mediterranean Institutions in Global Context.”
Andrea Bonifacio, Auron Tare, Agamemnon Tselikas, and Prof. Malcolm Tull at a panel Q&A, chaired by Assoc. Prof. Laura Longo (ADM, NTU) (extreme left).
Day Three: 20 November 2015
Highlights of the Singapore Maritime Trails Tour
Panel 6: Maritime Education: Inspiring the New Generations
Khong Shen Ping (Dean, MPA Academy) delivering his opening speech for the panel.
Fang Jiayun (Deputy Manager, Community Engagement, MPA) gives her talk, “Building a Strong Maritime Identity.”
Frederick J. Francis (Senior Lecturer, Singapore Maritime Academy, Singapore Polytechnic) delivers his portion of the talk, “Embracing Maritime Silk Road Heritage from Ground-up with the X-factor.”
Albert Teo (Vice-Commodore, Youth Skipper Flotilla Society) delivers his portion of the talk, “Embracing Maritime Silk Road Heritage form Ground-up with X-factor.”
Frederick J. Francis, Albert Teo, and Fang Jiayun at a panel Q&A, chaired by Khong Shen Ping (standing).
Cheryl Lim (Executive, Singapore Maritime Foundation) giving her talk, “Profiling Maritime as the Industry of Choice.”
Zhang Rui (Assistant Manager, International Maritime Centre, MPA) delivers his portion of the talk, “Towards a Future-Ready Maritime Workforce.”
Wong Kai Cheong (Deputy Director, Shipping, MPA) delivers his portion of the talk, “Towards a Future-Ready Maritime Workforce.”
Wong Kai Cheong, Zhang Rui, and Cheryl Lime at a panel Q&A, chaired by Khong Shen Ping.
Assoc. Prof. Andrea Nanetti and Assistant Prof. Cheong Siew Ann delivering the closing remarks of the conference.
