Search

This paper takes up the study of Tibet in Australia, Hong Kong and Singapore. Tibet studies are defined through scholars working in universities in the specified countries/regions who have published works in which the Tibetans and the Tibetan areas of China are focal. The methodology is to analyse selected published works on Tibet as well as to interview selected scholars. The paper attempts to draw some characteristics of Tibet studies in the regions or countries specified, defined according to factors such as discipline, priority of language, area of interest, approach or political stand. It reaches no grand conclusions, but finds that the spectrum of Tibet studies in the places considered is fairly wide and, though not comparable with several other countries, the value is quite high in terms of quantity and quality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In combination with their strategy to recruit foreign talent, Singaporean state authorities have increasingly focused their attention on community integration schemes for Chinese professional newcomers. The government facilitated such integration with the creation of the Kowloon Club in 1990. The Kowloon Club is not only a government experiment that has been repeated three times since then, but also the only new migrant association that does not explicitly target Mainlanders. Through in-depth interviews with the Club’s leadership, I explore the ethnic adaptation of the Kowloon Club membership as it negotiates the evolving sense of Chineseness found in state designs and Singaporean society. Much like the emergence of the 1997 Hong Kongese identity, the Kowloon Club’s activities have shifted in strong reaction to the racialized category put forth by state authorities and embodied by Mainlander professionals in that the Club’s activities now symbolize and help patrol what Chineseness means as everyday performance in the city-state. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]