跳到主要內容區塊

Institute of Ethnology

Site Search
closeTopSearchArea
Full-time Research Fellows
Home > Research Faculty > Full-time Research Fellows
Lin, Wen-Ling (Lin, Wen-Ling)
Research Fellow
Office:R2519
Tel:+886-2-2652-3441
Employment:2018.08~
Overview

My research uses multi-sited ethnographic method with sociocultural and historical sensibility to investigate various aspects of indigenous groups in Taiwan, including visual and digital technology, gender culture, and road infrastructure in remote areas. Specifically, three topics are entailed in my research in recent years.

"Contemporary Indigenous Studies: Film Media, Photo Archives and Digital Technology" echoes visual anthropology's discernment for the cultural "other", and the aesthetics and politics of its representation. I pay continuous attention to the production, digital applications, the issues presented and the positions put forward in Taiwan’s indigenous films, as well as the reorganization and connection of internal or external social relations initiated by film production and digital intervention. The study of the indigenous photo archives focuses on the "re-visiting" of the time and space of photo-images, and adopts the sensory ethnographic method, which explores the pathology of the study of the ethnographic senses of the senses, to explore memories, places, emotions, and the institutionalization of Taiwanese indigenous studies. The issues I am most concerned with in respect to Taiwan's indigenous people and their digital technology are to observe and analyze how indigenous peoples use social media, the internet, and mobile technology to connect online and expand virtual discursive space, and how they deploy digital technology to advocate land ownership, cultural dignity, self-determination, and rights in language, education, and traditional livelihood.

"Sex/gender" studies is based on the intertwined phenomenon of correspondence and interaction between sex/gender/sexuality and the cultural concept of gender and its social system.  More specifically, my research interests in sex/gender studies concern two communities--transgender groups and gendered other of indigenous people. Transgender studies pays attention to gender as a component of personal identity, body shaping, and self-awareness, and extends the scope of research to transgender, transsexual and medical systems, and transgender people in the framework and norms of gender duality. I focus on the social and cultural issues involved in establishing intimate relationships, getting married, getting jobs, and raising children.  In the study of the aboriginal gendered "other", I undertake my long-term observation of the social changes and cultural transformation of the aboriginal people, paying attention to how ethnicity constitutes their identity and how bloodlines, kindship, and place identity constitute their social networks that have a profound impact on the survival of the gendered "other".

The study of "Road Infrastructure of Indigenous Homeland” continues the recognition of the marginality of aboriginal ethnic groups in remote areas and extends to the political and economic distribution and deployment of the road infrastructure. As an important part of infrastructure, roads can build networks that promote the flows of goods, people or ideas and allow them to communicate across space. However, the mobility and communication promoted by infrastructure are not homogeneous. Different places, people or national borders have different or similar connections; they may or may not be connected to each other. This study moves on different scales, focusing on the construction of aboriginal homes, the changes in human-land relations, the patterns of state governance, and the connections and changes in space and power displayed. On the other hand, it will also explore the changes brought about by these political forces, how to influence the perception, boundary or meaning construction of individuals and ethnic cultures.


Research Interests
  • New Media and Contemporary Indigenous Studies; Visual Anthropology; Gender Studies; Digital Anthropology

Field of Research
  • Taiwan

Publications
    • 2017
      〈從田野到視野:跨性別/肉身的體現、重置與挑戰〉,《台灣人類學刊》第15卷第1期:53-102。(TSSCI)
    • 2013b
      〈製作「原住民」:轉換中的技術載體,轉化中的文化身分〉,《台灣人類學刊》第11卷第1期:155-187。(TSSCI)
    • 2013a
      〈疆域走出來:原住民傳統領域之身體行動論述〉,《台灣社會研究季刊》 第91期:33-92。(TSSCI)
    • 2012d
      〈跨文化接觸:天主教耶穌會士的新竹經驗〉,《考古人類學刊》第77期:99-140。
    • 2012c
      〈人類學學識、影像的展演╱介入與公共化策略:民族誌影展在台灣〉,《文化研究》第14期:53-100。(TSSCI & THCI Core)
    • 2012b
      〈應用人類學的倫理挑戰:美國經驗的啟發〉,《華人應用人類學刊》 第1期:117-135。(與劉紹華合著)
    • 2012a
      〈部落「姊妹」做性別:交織在血親、姻親、地緣與生產勞動之間〉, 《台灣社會研究季刊》第86期:51-98。(TSSCI)
    • 2005
      〈翻轉漢人姓名意像:「請問『蕃』名」系列影片與原住民影像運動〉, 《台灣社會研究季刊》第58期:85-134。(TSSCI)
    • 2003
      〈台灣原住民影片:轉化中的文化刻寫技術〉,《考古人類學刊》第61期:145-176。(TSSCI)
    • 2002
      〈視覺性與人類學知識的條件〉,《考古人類學刊》第59期:4-41。(TSSCI)
    • 2001
      〈米酒加鹽巴:「原住民影片」的再現政治〉,《台灣社會研究季刊》 第43期:197-234。(TSSCI)
    • 2017
      〈台灣偏鄉原住民族女性長者的數位生活〉,劉璧榛編《文資、觀光、博物館與影像媒體:當代台灣原住民族的文化展演》,頁345-374。台北:南天出版社。
    • 2015b
      〈人類學學識、影像的展演╱介入與公共化策略:民族誌影展在台灣〉,重刊於蔡石山編《台灣海洋文化的吸取、轉承與發展》,頁285-338。新竹:交通大學。
    • 2015a
      〈跨文化接觸:天主教耶穌會士的新竹經驗〉,重刊於蔡石山編《台灣海洋文化的吸取、轉承與發展》,頁339-386。新竹:交通大學。
    • 2014
      〈跨性別者的成家之道〉,黃應貴主編《21世紀的家:台灣的家何去何從?》,頁169-200。新北市:群學。
    • 2011b
      〈無權「成家」:性/別的苦難政治經濟學〉,丁乃非、劉人鵬編《置疑婚姻家庭連續體Querying “Marriage-Family Continuum”》,頁247-268。台北:蜃樓出版社。
    • 2011a
      〈文化理解與視覺性:人類學知識的另類途徑〉,馮品佳、趙順良編《(洞)見:視覺文化與美學》,頁340-375。台北:書林出版社。
    • 2009
      〈螢幕中的台灣原住民〉,喬健主編《異文化與多元媒體》,頁209-227。台北:世新大學。
    • 2005
      〈轉化中的文化身份:以台灣原住民影片為例〉,喬健、李沛良、李友梅與馬戎合編《文化、族群與社會的反思》,頁151-173。高雄:麗文文化。
    • 2003
      〈記憶與辨識:影像再現中的平埔族群〉,潘朝成、劉益昌與施正鋒合編《台灣平埔族》,頁105-135。台北:前衛出版社。
    • 2016.01- 2017.12
      高等教育中的原住民知識建構與實踐-(總計畫及子計畫)原住民族歷史與社會議題教學資源網站建置計劃(兩年期) (MOST 105-2420-H-009-005-MY2)
    • 2015.08- 2016.07
      原住民族數位介入的跨文化比較研究(MOST 104-2420-H-009 -001 -2R)
    • 2013.09- 2016.07
      當代台灣性/別政治軌跡-性別科技人才培育計畫(三年期) (NSC 102-2630-H-008 -001 -MY3)
    • 2014.08- 2015.07
      數位時代的台灣原住民族權利運動(MOST 103-2410-H-009 -037)
    • 2012.08- 2014.07
      性別如何製造:台灣變性醫療的一項田野研究(兩年期) (NSC 101-2410-H-009-020-MY2)
    • 2010.08- 2011.07
      部落「姊妹」做性別:交織在勞動生產與社會連帶之間 (NSC 99-2410-H -009-059)
    • 2010.01- 2010.12
      跨文化接觸的客家族群:一個視覺取向的研究3/3 (99-0399-05 -0301)
    • 2009.01- 2009.12
      跨文化接觸的客家族群:一個視覺取向的研究2/3 (98-0399-05 -0301)
    • 2008.01- 2008.12
      跨文化接觸的客家族群:一個視覺取向的研究1/3 (97-0399-05 -0301)
    • 2007.11- 2009.07
      科技、社會與跨性別(兩年期) (NSC 96-2629-H-009 -001 -MY2)
    • 2007.08- 2008.07
      原住民影像研究:照相、記憶與地方視野(NSC 96-2412-H-009 –003)
    • 2007.01- 2007.12
      早期傳教照片中的客家族群
    • 2006.08- 2007.07
      原住民媒體研究:螢幕記憶的形構、再現與文化(再)生產 (NSC 95-2412-H-009 –008)
    • 2006.01- 2006.12
      紀錄影像中的客家族群
    • 2005.03- 2006.02
      蘭嶼原住民媒體資料庫建置與數位典藏計畫
    • 2005.03- 2005.12
      客家族群傳播與文史資料庫建置計畫
    • 2004.08- 2005.07
      身體、認同與影像:台灣性別體系中的「她者」2/2 (NSC 93-2412-H-259 –001)
    • 2003.08- 2004.07
      身體、認同與影像:台灣性別體系中的「她者」1/2 (NSC 92-2412-H-259 –002)
    • 2002.08- 2003.07
      科技與文化的界面:原住民影片的文化實踐 (NSC 91-2420-H-259 –002)
    • 2002.08- 2003.07
      Transgender Formations in Taiwan: Culture, History and Theory (3/3) 於社會契約之外:台灣同志書寫及T/婆文化中的另類社區3/3 (91-2411-H-008-003-BC)
    • 2001.08- 2002.07
      Transgender Formations in Taiwan: Culture, History and Theory (2/3) 於社會契約之外:台灣同志書寫及T/婆文化中的另類社區2/3 (90-2411-H-008-014-BC)
    • 2000.08- 2005.07
      電腦多媒體應用與人類學課程
    • 2000.08- 2003.07
      Transgender Formations in Taiwan: Culture, History and Theory (1/3) 於社會契約之外:台灣同志書寫及T/婆文化中的另類社區1/3 (89-2411-H-009-024-BC)
    • 2000.08- 2001.07
      原住民影片製作:觀點、作品、影響 之探討 (NSC 89-2412-H-259 –002)
    • 2017
      〈從多種物質的裂隙中存活:以道路邊坡人工植被為例〉,「2017 台灣科技與社會研究學會年會」,高雄醫學大學2017.03.25-26.
    • 2016
      〈去殖民的高等教育:「台灣原住民族」的改寫、重新建檔與超連結〉,「台灣人類學與民族學學會2016年年會」,台北台灣大學。2016.09.10-11.
    • 2016
      “Database and Website Development to Support the Teaching of Indigenous History and Social Issues in Taiwan’s Higher Education.” Society of Applied Anthropology 76th Annual Meeting. Canada: Vancouver. 2016.03.29-04.02.
    • 2014
      “Sisters Making Gender: Interweaving Consanguinity, Affinity, Neighborship, and Productive Labor.” The 113th Annual Meeting of American Anthropological Association. D.C., USA. 2014.12.03-07.
    • 2014
      〈當代台灣原住民社會的數位生活:傳承、斷裂與創新〉,「台灣原住民族國際學術研討會」,南港中央研究院民族學研究所。2014.09.15-17.
    • 2012
      〈跨性別者的性別勞動〉,「台灣人類學與民族學學會2012年年會」, 南港中央研究院民族學研究所。2012.10.06-07.
    • 2012
      〈跨性別者如何「成家」〉,「什麼是家?」學術研討會,南港中央院民族學研究所。2012.07.02-04.
    • 2012
      〈製作「原住民性」:轉換中的技術載體,轉化中的文化身分〉,「第四屆國際漢學會議」,南港中央研究院。2012.06.20-22.
    • 2012
      〈跨文化接觸:耶穌會士的新竹經驗〉,「2012台灣海洋文化的吸取、轉承與發展」研討會,新竹交通大學。2012.06.01-02.
    • 2012
      〈疆域走出來:原住民傳統領域之身體行動論述〉,「蕪土吾民:2012年文化研究會議」“We” People on the Fallow Earth?--The Thirteen Annual Conference of the Cultural Studies Association (Taiwan),台北台灣大學。2012.01.07-08.
    • 2011
      〈從瑪格麗特.米德說起:看見田野中的多元性/別〉,「性別與人類學知識」研討會,南港中央研究院民族學研究所。2011..11.18-19.
    • 2011
      〈跨性別的性/別越界:擾動的親屬連結、轉化的親人關係〉,「台灣人類學與民族學學會2011年年會」,南港中央研究院民族學研究所。2011.10.08-09.
    • 2011
      〈民族誌影展在台灣:人類學學識、影像的展演╱介入與公共化策略〉,「『把人類學家帶進來』:公共人類學工作坊」, 新竹交通大學。2011.06.10.
    • 2011
      〈影像空間中的跨文化接觸:1950年代耶穌會士與客家族群的遭遇〉,「台灣海洋文化的吸取、轉承與發展」國際研討會—人社中心年度成果發表暨十七屆人文聯盟會議,新竹交通大學。2011.05.27-28.
    • 2011
      “Transgender Sexualities of Indigenous Men in Southern Taiwan” The 71th annual meeting of SfAA on “Expanding the Influence of Applied Social Science.” Seattle, USA. 2011.03.29-04.02.
    • 2010
      〈跨文化影像中的客家族群〉,「台灣客家族群的聚落、歷史與社會變遷」研討會,新竹交通大學。2010.12.11-12.
    • 2010
      〈民族誌影展在台灣:人類學學識、影像的展演╱介入與公共化策略〉,「台灣人類學與民族學學會2010年年會」,南港中央研究院民族學研究所。2010.10.02-03.
    • 2010
      “Through Thousands Years: The Dual Power of Films by Indigenous People.” The 70th annual meeting of SfAA on “Vulnerabilities and Exclusion in Globalization.” Mérida, Mexico. 2010.03.24-27.
    • 2009
      〈科技、社會與跨性別〉,「98年國科會『性別與科技研究計畫』成果研討會:人文社會領域對性別研究的關懷」,台北。2009.12.08.
    • 2009
      〈跨文化(影像)空間中的客家族群〉,「四溪計畫期末研討會」,新竹交通大學。2009.12.12-13.
    • 2009
      〈原住民「姐妹」:親屬版圖的另類實踐〉,「置疑『婚姻家庭連續體』國際工作坊」,新竹清華大學亞太/文化研究室。2009.12.11-12.
    • 2009
      〈認識原住民「姐妹」的可能途徑〉,「性別與原住民族議題國際研討會: 在地與全球的對話」,高雄縣那瑪夏鄉達卡努瓦村。2009.07.09-13.
    • 2009
      〈跨性別運動在台灣:性/別版圖的(再次)廓清與(可能的) 挪移〉,「社會運動的年代」學術研討會,高雄中山大學。 2009.06.12-13.
    • 2008
      〈原住民影片的原住民形象〉,「大眾傳播媒體中的原住民」學術研討會,台北台灣大學。2008.10.31.
    • 2008
      〈螢幕記憶中的台灣原住民〉,「異文化與多元媒體」學術研討會,台北世新大學。2008.05.16-17.
    • 2008
      “In Search of Self: Understanding Multiple Trans-embodiments.” International Conference on “TransSomatechnics: Theories and Practices of Transgender Embodiment.” Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, British Columbia. 2008.05.01-03.
    • 2008
      “Taiwan Indigenous Television: Formations, Representation and Cultural (Re)production of Screen Memories.” The meeting of SfAA on “The Public Sphere and Engaged Scholarship: Challenges and Opportunities for Applied Anthropology.” Memphis Marriott, USA. 2008.03.25-29.
    • 2007
      “Taiwan Indigenous Image Movement.” The meeting of SfAA on “Global Insecurities, Global Solutions and Applied Anthropology in the 21 Century.” Tampa, FL, USA. 2007.03.27-31.
    • 2007
      〈掉格的衛星訊號:螢幕記憶中的原住民〉,「城流鄉動:2007年文化研究會議」,台北台灣大學。Urban Flows-Rural Moves: The Eighth Annual Conference of the Cultural Studies Association (Taiwan). 2007.01.06-07.
    • 2006
      “‘What’s Your Real Name? ’: Taiwan Indigenous Image Movement.” International Conference on Cultural Diversity and the Contemporary World: Minor Forum for Visual Anthropology & 5th International Conference on Visual Anthropology. Sun Yat-Sen University, China. 2006.11.24-26.
    • 2006
      〈沿著民族誌影像的邊緣〉,「底邊階級的傳統與現代:兩岸三地人類學與傳播學交流合作工作坊」,台北世新大學。2006.05.13-15.
    • 2005
      〈在地影像與民族誌:關於「想像」座落的物質條件問題〉,「族群與社會國際學術研討會」,花蓮東華大學。2005.04.16-17.
    • 2004
      〈「請問貴姓」翻轉漢人姓名意象:原住民影像的社會╱文化運動〉,「靠文化‧By Culture」,文化研究學會2003年會,台北東吳大學。2004.01.03-04.
    • 2003
      〈轉化中的文化身份:以台灣原住民影片為例〉,「第八屆現代化與中國文化研討會」,上海大學。2003.11.16-19.
    • 2003
      〈台灣原住民影片:轉化中的文化刻寫技術〉,南港中央研究院民族學研究所「週一演講系列」學術活動。2003.10.13.
    • 2003
      〈米酒加鹽巴:「原住民影片」的再現政治〉,「國科會87至90年度人類學門專題補助研究成果發表會」,南港中央研究院民族學研究所。2003.09.26-27 .
    • 2003
      “Technologies of Differentiation and Visual Transformation: As Life, As Indigenes.” International Conference on “XV ICAES 2K3 Humankind/Nature Interaction: Past, Present and Future.” Florence, Italy. 2003.07.05-12 .
    • 2002
      〈苧麻編織的泰雅彩虹:製造溝通的「原住民影片」美學〉,「真實與再現:紀錄片美學」, 2002台灣國際紀錄片雙年展國際學術研討會,台北文化大學。2002.12.14-15.
    • 2002
      〈記憶、差異與辨識:影像再現中的平埔族群〉,「民族識別與身分認定研討會」,台北輔仁大學。2002.06.15-16 .
    • 2002
      〈多媒體╱超媒體民族誌:一種「連結」文化的可能路徑〉,「揭開數位文化的神秘面紗」研討會,花蓮東華大學。2002.06.07-08.
    • 2002
      〈民族誌影像的生產與再生產〉,「人類學的比較與詮釋─慶祝陳奇祿教授八秩華誕國際學術研討會」,台北台灣大學。2002.04.26-27.
    • 2001
      “Indigenous Film: Politics of Representation and Translation.” International Conference on ”Seeking Taiwanese Perspectives: Interdisciplinary Reflection Dialogue.” 美國西雅圖華盛頓大學。2001.06.23-25.
    • 2001
      〈米酒加鹽巴:「原住民影片」的再現政治〉,「影像與民族誌研討會」,南港中央研究院民族學研究所。2001.04.14.
    • 2017.12
      「基礎設施研究」專題導言,《台灣人類學刊》第15卷第2期:1-6。(TSSCI)
    • 2017.09
      〈推薦《整妝上陣 Guru, a Hijra Family》〉,2017臺灣國際民族誌影展。 (more)
    • 2017.07
      主編《人類學視界》第21期。
    • 2017.07
      〈原住民偏鄉的道路基礎設施:同時卻不共代的速度與環境感知〉,《人類學視界》第21期,頁21-27。
    • 2017.07
      〈「人類學基礎設施研究」專題前言〉,《人類學視界》第21期,頁4-5。
    • 2012.09
      〈不只是行動,公共人類學的介入與思辯〉,「公共人類學」專題引言,《文化研究》第14期:8-10。(TSSCI & THCI Core)
    • 2012.08
      〈馬躍.比吼的原住民影像運動〉,《原住民族文獻》第4期,頁28-29。
    • 2012.06
      〈咖啡的「真實」顏色:《黑色收成》與全球資本衝擊之下的在地文化發展〉,《人類學視界》第9期,頁29-30。
    • 2012.04
      〈數位影像說故事:我們要的生活方式〉,《芭樂人類學》。 (more)
    • 2012.03
      〈「公共人類學專題」前言〉,《人類學視界》第8期,頁23。
    • 2011.12
      〈《Alis的心願》:我們要的生活方式〉,《台灣立報》。2011年12月01日。
    • 2011.11
      〈彩虹的故事:用紀綠詮釋原住民文化〉,《台灣立報》。2011年11月03日。
    • 2011.08
      〈另類「爸爸」節〉,收錄於《芭樂人類學》。 (more)
    • 2010.09
      〈人類學(者)的一項公共參與:以擔任紀錄片評審為例〉,《人類學視界》第5期,頁2-5。
    • 2010.04
      〈「原創」與「多元」鑲嵌的力道:《美洲古文明的時光膠囊》推薦 序〉, 陳小雀著《美洲古文明的時光膠囊》Time Capsule of The Ancient American Civilizations,頁2-3。台北:頑石創意股份有限公司。
    • 2009.12
      〈兩個「千年」走過的痕跡〉,比令.亞布與賴愷筑合著《Yaba的話:一個當代泰雅人的傳統沉思》,頁210-212。苗栗縣大湖鄉雪霸國家公園。
    • 2009.12
      《知本卑南族的出草儀式:一個文獻》The Headhunting Ritual of the Pinuyumayan (Puyuma) in Jhiben: A Document。山道明、安東著。陳文德主編,林文玲德文校譯。台北:中央研究院民族學研究所。ISBN(ISSN): 978-986-02-0952-5(精裝)
    • 2009.10
      〈走過噤聲、失語的年代:比令۰亞布的兩部影片〉,林文玲主編《台灣國際民族誌影展:2009身體與靈魂》中英文專刊,頁20-22。
    • 2009.10
      〈身、心、靈的影像觀想〉,林文玲主編《台灣國際民族誌影展:2009身體與靈魂》中英文專刊,頁12-14。
    • 2008.09
      〈記憶現場—如果是現場,為何須要去記憶?〉,《人類學視界》第2期,頁35-36。
    • 2008.03
      〈性╱別的天堂有國界〉,《人類學視界》創刊號,頁24。
    • 2007.10
      〈邊緣聚焦:澳洲原住民的螢幕記憶〉,林文玲主編《台灣國際民族誌影展:2007在地發聲》中英文專刊,頁78-80。
    • 2007.10
      〈馬躍۰比吼的原住民影像運動〉,林文玲主編《台灣國際民族誌影展:2007在地發聲》中英文專刊,頁56-58。
    • 2007.09
      〈神聖的遺產:愛德華۰寇帝斯美國印地安人影像展〉,《藝術家》第388期,第65卷3期,頁314-319。
    • 2007.09
      〈穿越時空的記憶:愛德華۰寇帝斯美國印地安人影像展〉, 《臺灣博物》第95期,第26卷第3期,頁34-41。
    • 2006.02
      〈大衛۰馬杜格的影像實踐〉,大衛۰馬杜格《邁向跨文化電影:大衛۰馬杜格的影像實踐》,頁5-9。台北:麥田。
    • 2005.09
      〈「家的變奏」:跨越族群、階級、性╱別與文化的影像交流〉, 林文玲主編《台灣國際民族誌影展:2005家的變奏》中英文專刊,頁18-23。
    • 2005.09
      Judith與David MacDougall的人類學電影,林文玲主編《台灣國際民族誌影展:2005家的變奏》中英文專刊,頁36-38。
    • 2005.09
      〈參與,超越觀察的自我設限-Judith與David MacDougall的 人類學電影〉,《文化視窗》第79期,頁58-61。
    • 2005.02
      〈石頭的時間紋路:我看「石頭夢」〉,《文化視窗》第72期,頁40-42。
    • 2003.09
      在光的周圍畫影像:經驗移動、經驗Jean Rouch的三部影片〉, 胡台麗主編《台灣國際民族誌影展:2003遷徙故事》中英文專刊,頁16-18。
    • 2003.09
      〈遷徙的故事:第二屆臺灣國際民族誌影展概述〉,《文化視 窗》第55期,頁88-91。
    • 2003.08
      〈山海、故事與影像開啟的多重記憶行動〉,《Kalas No Niyaro’部落的智者—勒加۰瑪庫Lekal Makor紀念影展》專刊,頁21-22。
    • 2003.07
      〈走一趟故事,才不會遺忘:深刻意涵的紀錄片「現場記憶」〉,《公視之友》第63期。
    • 2001.05
      〈從米德身上作文章〉,《兩性平等教育季刊》第16期,頁70-74。
    • 2001.03
      〈差異的民族誌影像閱讀〉,《文化研究月報》第1期。
    • 2000.12
      〈叫我唱歌,我就會唱歌;叫我講故事,我也講故事〉,《真實邦 ㄗㄚ' 阿美影展Reel Amis Real Pangcah》專刊。

My research in the past 5 years is mainly divided into three directions: (1) Indigenous people and digital technology; (2) Transgenderism and Taiwanese transgender medical care; (3) Gendered otherness and male “sisterhood” in indigenous tribes. Topical divergence notwithstanding, these research subjects have called my attention to the significance of “the visual” in the contemporary cultural constitution. The cultural formation of visuality has gradually become a distinctive system of meaning expressed via new media and digital technology; its emergent discourses, moreover, feed back into academic research, social education, ethnic culture, identity politics and public debates, The main concern of my future research lies in how visuality and its expressions of perception and meaning appear in certain socio-cultural domains, and move in and out of different sites and sights through human interventions. The re-connections, shifts, and transformations of the visual across different fields constitute “the phenomena of transvisuality,” which will be the overarching theme of my future research projects.

It has been well noted that how people see and what they can/not see depend on who/where they are. In other words, the socio-cultural contexts in which the visual/the seeing is situated shape and organize the visible and invisible things; the contexts also regulate the relations between the visible and invisible, and determine their meanings. The tribal “sisters” have been an invisible group of the gendered “other,” and the indigenous peoples are themselves the ethnic/cultural others vis-à-vis the mainstream society. Both the gendered otherness of the tribal sisters and the ethnic/cultural otherness of the indigenous peoples are condensed and come into shape in certain locations and viewing relations. Nonetheless, we can open up new epistemological angles concerning stereotyping of indigenous peoples and rigid imaginations in social issues with the methodology of crossing, transcending, or traversing enabled in the transvisual field. Many indigenous tribal members have moved from the position of the other to the “I” position. They call on participants with different subject positions, manage a variety of media, and enunciate diverse propositions and discourses about ethnicity, culture, and rights via cyber and real-life networks. These cultural contexts embedded in political economy, and the discourses of ideology or experiential systems entangled with multiple-original historical traditions manifest the mediations, interconnections, and practices of transvisuality, wherein the contemporary indigenous peoples’ ways of defining oneself and viewing the world emerge. 

1. Tribal “Sisters” and “Brothers,” and the Transvisual/translocal A-dju 

Studies on A-dju (“sisters”)—indigenous men who identify themselves as women living in the tribes--have revealed that they differ from the contemporary gender identification mode that focuses on individuals. The existence of gender is woven into daily lives and social relations whereby kinship, blood relation, and geopolitics are still effective. The gender of tribal “sisters” highlights the social interaction implications of gender, the continual operation of relationality, and the dynamic process of mutual recognition. Although those who were born in the 1960s-70s and their younger generations all refer to each other “sisters,” factors such as changes in the tribal living environment, education, livelihood, religion, and the declining birth rate, coupled with the cultural environment and the availability of resources and information exchange channels, result in different gender survival strategies for the “sisters” of each tribal generation. The phenomenon is one of the topics that enable continuous follow-ups by researchers who study indigenous peoples’ gendered otherness.

Because of the dual structures of gender and the differing situations of norms, lesbian couples, lesbians, and “brothers” (transgender women) living in the tribes do not produce the tribal “sister”-like visibility and scale of assembly. Many of them have experienced marriage and childbearing and parenting in the past; they have ordinary female identities, statuses, or life courses, and are therefore more “invisible” or difficult to clearly identify compared with the “sisters.” The lesbian couples, lesbians, and “brothers” often define and identify each other as siblings and relatives by becoming sworn brothers or sisters. From here, they initiate lesbian couple associations in which members regularly pay a fixed amount into a mutual fund in anticipation of accidents, illness, or emergency needs. The phenomenon of tribal lesbian couples, lesbians, and “brothers” is the second topic for subsequent studies on indigenous peoples’ gendered otherness.

The contemporary sociocultural context, urban and rural segmentation, mobility, and intergenerational differences, are highly compressed in space–time. Because of the constraints or possibilities of various rights and obligations (e.g., gendered positions, social roles, division of labor, and inheritance), tribal lesbian couples, lesbians, and “brothers,” as well as “sisters,” display distinct possible developments in the establishment of families and households. From here, the childbearing and parenting of tribal lesbian couples, lesbians, and “brothers” and “sisters” serves as the third topic for my future research on indigenous peoples’ gendered otherness. Indigenous “sisters” and “brothers” whose main field of life is not within the tribe and who call themselves LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer) differ from the tribal “sisters,” “brothers,” and lesbian couples in terms of identity, positionality, and location. Therefore, they adopt contrasting paths, thinking, and appeals on topics of affirmative action such as marriage, partners, and childbearing and parenting. The author will cite and compare observations and experiences from transgender studies for an in-depth exploration of these topics, with the aim of sorting out the dynamically generated relationships among the modern state, gender governance, and ethnic cultures.

The indigenous LGBTQ have established a Facebook community page called “Alliance of Indigenous A-dju Protection” (AIADJUP). They use A-dju as the symbol of indigenous diverse gender identities. They call on indigenous friends everywhere to support the events involving gender issues and indigenous rights through the Facebook interface. The AIADJUP claims that their main missions include protecting indigenous multi-gender fields, regaining interpretation rights, creating images and imagination of A-dju, circulating and shaping meanings, getting feedbacks, and proceeding social intervention. They intend to challenge and subvert the existing perspective on the indigenous gendered other. They also recognize that ethnicity, locality, class, and self- situateness are intersected and collaborated with gender. Not only that the tribal sisters who have transformed into A-dju have become the significant image icon to call on Taiwanese indigenous LGBTQ, films and stories on related topics have also been published. I will follow up on the developing issue and phenomenon and use them for future research.

2. The Interface of the Image: Transvisual Research on the Photo Archives of Indigenous Peoples in Taiwan 

Continuing research on indigenous images and digital media, the second research topic will be a combination of the sensory ethnography of photos and the implementation of digital database on the indigenous peoples in Taiwan. Specifically, the author intends to focus on the “field photos” in the digital archives from the Institute of Ethnology at Academia Sinica for analysis and discussion. Since the 1950s, a large number of “field photos” have been taken by researchers from the Institute of Ethnology during their fieldwork, which included the nine classified indigenous ethnic groups at the time. The images recorded various contents such as characters, festivals, material cultures, and environments of the indigenous peoples. These photos left realistic image “data” on Taiwanese indigenous ethnic groups in the 1950s; the bygone characters, cultures, and environments condensed in the images, and the traces of the development of Taiwanese indigenous studies “written” into the photos all narrate the numerous scenes and their important implications of transcultural encounters. Through the interfaces of photo images and dynamic image materials, I will “return to the scene” to conduct a self-reflective sensory ethnographic research which will reveal the nesting of space-time in photo images, trigger the memories, emotions, experiences of participants, and narrate the stories about ancestors, traditions, cultures, places, and natural environments.

The revisit of the locations of these field pictures is based on the materiality of the photo. The photo’s materiality allows one condensed image to circulate in many locations through different channels and media (such as the contemporary digital interface) and experience its own biography. This research will also be conducted through collaboration with indigenous peoples, using photo objects and image materials as mediation to interview local tribal residents to explore their own viewpoints, stories, perspectives, and memories, and to discover the key locations of the events and artifacts documented in the photos. Special attention will be paid to the relevance between the photos and their environment, the traces of photo materiality and the important implications of people’s participation and agency that might be revealed in the traceable material remains.

Because the observer and the photographer cannot break away from their cultural background to conduct the so-called objective picture taking or viewing, even the panoramic viewpoint cannot reconcile the multiple possibilities of reading provided by photo records. An endless deference and divergence of signification thus forms. This illustrates the multivocal potential of the “silent” photos. The distinctive character of photo to be both silent and meaningful will “make sounds” to people in different contexts, material/interface, or relationality by different means to demonstrate its capacity for multiple narrations. The photo image “condenses” the bygone characters, things, cultures, places, and environments; it also let the photographer/researcher to form and condense their ways of seeing or professional viewing through photos. The professional views condensed in the photos buried the development of Taiwanese indigenous studies and the essential figures who established the disciplinary systems of Taiwanese anthropology.

The indigenous knowledge system that is instituted through words and professional disciplinary framework has been developing into shape since the Japanese period. This knowledge system often appears as the “other’s” cultural knowledge in the professional fields of anthropology, ethnology, history, sociology, and indigenous studies. In recent years many scholars have attempted to construct indigenous-centered knowledge system and obtained significant outcome. Given their well intention, however, I have observed that the discussions about the traditions, histories, cultures, revitalization, and rights of indigenous peoples in Taiwan are difficult to access by ordinary people in respect to their concepts, viewpoints, data, discourses, meanings or representational media. Therefore, a knowledge barrier exists. My research will explore the embodied, emplaced, and multisensory paths of knowing, understanding, and acknowledging through multiple interfaces of visual images by revisiting the self- reflective characteristics of sensory ethnographies. It will set up multiple conversations regarding knowledge attributes, classification categories, media interfaces, and audience in order to advance the value and application of the Taiwanese indigenous knowledge system.

3. Transvisual Connections: Digital Intervention and Contemporary Indigenous Rights Movement 

Indigenous peoples around the world use digital technology, interactive media, and the Internet for a wide range of activities, such as access to community-provided services, cultural revitalization, reconciliation, pan-indigenous connection networks, public relations, sovereignty movements, liberation movements, and common-goal partnerships. The premise of enjoying the benefits of these technologies is that the infrastructure for information and technology must be in place. Because of differences in indigenous peoples’ countries, governance, economic conditions, and resource environments, the ways they connect to the internet as well as the problems they are trying to resolve are also distinct. In the digital world, not everyone begins at the same starting point, shares similar hardware and software equipment, and has unlimited internet access. The digital “marginal situation” depicts indigenous people in rural areas where access to digital tools and high-speed internet connection is still far more limited than that in mainstream society. The “marginality” of the digital age will no longer merely be a term closely related to “spatial” concepts or geographical locations. Rather, it is a complex that simultaneously embodies a spatial metaphor including both center and periphery, which involves tangible and intangible “distance,” the “sense of distance,” and “distance barriers,” and is located within a specific space–power relationship.

The development of the situation of the digitally disadvantaged beyond the conceptual category of substantial space requires an understanding from the perspectives of political economy and geographical location development, which extends into the topics of information poverty, social exclusion, and digital human rights, in order to investigate vital matters of profound social structures, economic interests, and social distribution. In addition to the topic of social distribution, indigenous peoples’ internal disparities must also be addressed, in order to reflect the perspective of digital technology application in developing countries or the global south. Distinct access to and usage of digital objects among indigenous peoples as a result of conditions such as age, literacy, reading and writing skills (the ability to send text messages), economic conditions (e.g., the ability to afford a smart phone or pay phone bills), education levels, genders, and language skills (e.g., English ability) are analyzed.

Under the multiple contributing factors of globalization, political economy, international situations, regional relations, and governance patterns, Taiwanese indigenous youths have developed diverse forms of expression with the help of digital technologies and new media. They attempt to critically participate and intervene in discourses and positions that are already formed or ongoing statutes and policies, and continuously drive appeals and assertions of rights, self-determination, and sovereignty that are in line with indigenous peoples’ interests and continual development. This observation is carried out by tracking ethnic self-determination, the construction of sovereignty and land discourse, and reflections on relationships with the state, as well as the forms and substances of autonomy and self-determination that have been proposed during indigenous social and cultural events in recent years. In particular, the observation will focus on how these discourses or assertions link transregional global indigenous peoples through distinct media (bodies, texts, images, forums, incidents, performances, and arts) to produce, manufacture, disseminate, and debate the form and connotation of autonomy, self-determination, and the concept of sovereignty, as well as subjectivity and the advocacy for difference.

Following the methodology advocated by transvisuality research to cross, transcend, and traverse, this study on indigenous peoples’ marginal situation, distinct digital item usage, and their social intervention in the digital environment will be conducted through exploring and analyzing visual materials such as photos, images, youtube videos, maps, and cultural images. I will examine the interconnections of these visual materials, and the ways they are appropriated, dissected, translated, rewritten, juxtaposed, or reorganized in the cyber spaces for the purpose of producing, enacting, and distributing diverse expressions and appeals to fight for the rights of contemporary indigenous peoples of Taiwan. The meaningful narratives constructed by indigenous peoples through diverse visual materials reflect the increasing importance of visuality in shaping the notion of culture. My research direction will be focused on how the changes in production and reception caused by modernist image circulation, and the shifts, competition, and comparison of its aesthetic forms and cultural environments in various situations and cultural frameworks facilitate changes in recognition, signification, and the visual field.

回上一頁