Michael A. Szonyi(宋怡明) is Director of the Fairbank Center for Chinese Studies and Professor of Chinese History in the Department of East Asian Languages and Civilizations at Harvard University. He is a distinguished historian specializing in the Ming, Qing, and modern Chinese periods. In the 1980s, while still a teenager, Szonyi came to China by chance to teach English. This extraordinary experience, during a transformative period in China, left him with a lasting bond with the country. He subsequently studied Chinese language and history, earning degrees at the University of Toronto and the University of Oxford, and embarked on a scholarly path centered on China. Over the years, he has visited China frequently, conducting extensive fieldwork in rural areas. His major works include “Practicing Kinship: Lineage Organization in Late Imperial China” and “Cold War Island: Quemoy on the Front Line”.

In the late 2021, Szonyi gave an exclusive interview to China News Service’s W.E. Talk, where he reflected on his deep connections with China and shared his views on China’s place in the world. As a Western scholar of China, Szonyi argues that there is no such thing as a “clash of civilizations” between East and West as proposed by Samuel Huntington. He believes that the commonalities between Eastern and Western societies—and their peoples—far outweigh their differences. As he put it, “What we share as human beings vastly exceeds what distinguishes us and what differentiates us because of where we happened to be born.”

The following is an excerpted transcript of the interview:

As a Canadian, how did you develop an interest in China and decide to devote your life to studying it?

My interest in China began in the 1980s. I had just graduated from high school and didn’t want to go straight to university—I wanted to do something interesting abroad instead. I searched for opportunities around the world, sending out hundreds of letters, and was fortunate to be offered a job teaching English in Wuhan. At just 17 years old, I went to Wuhan and stayed for several months. China was then in the early years of Reform and Opening-up, undergoing a remarkable transformation and the atmosphere was filled with excitement—I was deeply captivated. I couldn’t speak Chinese at the time, so I carried a Xinhua Dictionary with me and traveled across much of China by walking, hitchhiking, and taking trucks. I became fascinated with the country and wanted to follow its development and changes. When I returned to Canada for university, I began learning Chinese and later chose to study Chinese history.

For me, making China the focus of my career was never a deliberate plan. I was simply fortunate to develop an interest in China during a period of extraordinary transformation, and that is where the story began.

Michael A. Szonyi in Wuhan, 1984. (Photo provided by Michael A. Szonyi, via CNS)

You once mentioned that the most important academic experience during your Ph.D. was conducting field research in rural Fujian. Why was this experience so significant to you?

At that time, I went to Fujian to collect research materials and stayed in the ancestral hall of a local village. From an academic perspective, this experience showed me the importance of visiting the actual sites where history unfolded. Historians usually work in libraries and archives, but when you go to the real locations of historical events, you gain an entirely different understanding of how history develops. This insight has guided my research ever since.

On a personal level, living in rural China—sharing meals and drinks with farmers, learning about their daily lives and histories—gave me an experience and perspective quite unlike most other China scholars. From casual conversations with them, I learned a great deal about their interests, concerns, and the challenges they faced. This had a profound personal impact on me and deepened my interest in both modern China and its history.

Michael A. Szonyi conducts research in Kinmen, Taiwan, 2005. (Photo provided by Michael A. Szonyi, via CNS)

You’ve said that when researching historical issues, you prefer to explore macro-level questions from a micro-level perspective. In your view, what are the characteristics of ordinary Chinese people throughout history? How do they compare with those in the West?

Most historians tell history through the perspectives of nobles, elites, or the state. But when history is viewed from the perspective of ordinary people, very different patterns emerge. That’s why I have always sought to study history at the micro level. To me, the essence of historical research is to understand how people thought and made decisions within the context of their time—and to recognize how they differed from us today. In fact, when making such comparisons, I find that people in the past were not so different from modern people, and that East and West are not so different either. At the core, we all share the same human nature. This is precisely what makes studying history fascinating. Whether we study people in ancient China, Chinese scholars study people in ancient Europe, or anyone today studies people from other countries, we can all discover these similarities.

My most recent book examines the military household system of the Ming dynasty. Each household was required to provide one person for military service. This service could be regarded as a kind of tax. Military households accepted the obligation, but they also sought ways to reduce uncertainty and minimize risks. Their attitude toward this “tax” is, in fact, quite similar to how I think about paying taxes today: I want to know how much I owe, I don’t want to pay more than I should, and I hope the system is fair. Of course, the taxes I pay to the U.S. government are very different from Ming military service obligations during the Yongle era, but the way people thought about these obligations was strikingly similar.

In April 2013, people in San Francisco, the U.S., lined up to mail tax returns on the deadline for annual tax filing. (Photo by Chen Gang, CNS)

In my view, although people from different cultures speak different languages and face different environments, they can essentially understand each other. Different cultures and civilizations are shaped by distinct traditions, but these traditions do not automatically influence our choices or shape our lives — our choices are not entirely controlled by tradition. Ultimately, human nature is the same.

Harvard Professor Samuel Huntington argued in his “clash of civilizations” thesis that future global conflicts would primarily occur between different civilizations. Do you think such a clash exists between East and West? How can mutual understanding be improved?

The short answer is no. I believe the “clash of civilizations” thesis is meaningless. Huntington was a distinguished scholar, but his theory rests on a fundamental misunderstanding of how societies function. Conflicts certainly exist, but the claim that different civilizations inherently seek different goals is not supported by evidence. A civilization never speaks with only one voice or acts in only one way. Huntington pointed, for example, to a clash between Islamic and Western civilizations. While the U.S. has conflicts with some groups in the Islamic world, it cannot be said that the entire Islamic world is in conflict with the U.S. or with Western values. Many of today’s differences stem from the policies and practices of states in recent centuries, not from deep historical or civilizational divides.

To a certain extent, my profession is about helping the U.S. and other English-speaking societies better understand China. In my view, there are no fundamental barriers to mutual understanding across cultures—this is the optimistic conclusion one can draw about human nature. The reality, however, is that people often fear the unknown and respond negatively. Yet these problems can be addressed. I have always supported people-to-people diplomacy, and I firmly believe that when individuals meet face-to-face, many problems can be resolved.

Many of my students, if they spend time in China, will gain a deeper understanding of the country. More importantly, if some of them later become leaders in business or politics in the U.S., their experiences in China will contribute positively to U.S.-China relations. Such exchanges matter not only today but also for the future.

A group of 17 teachers and students from two universities in Germany and South Africa visited Guizhou Province for a summer camp in July 2017. Photo shows the students were experiencing traditional rice cake making in a Miao village. (Photo by Huang Zhixin, CNS)

John Fairbank, one of the most renowned China experts in the U.S., played an important role in helping American society understand China. As one of the most influential centers for Chinese studies in the world, what role do you think the Fairbank Center at Harvard University plays in promoting U.S.-China exchange?

In today’s world, the Fairbank Center can collaborate with experts across various fields—politics, business, technology, and more—to help people in those sectors gain a better understanding of contemporary China. Our most important responsibility is to ensure that governments recognize the value of students acquiring knowledge. No matter how U.S.-China relations develop in the future, a better understanding between the two countries is beneficial to both.

Additionally, we can serve as neutral, scientific, and objective observers between the two societies, which applies equally to China and the U.S.. When American scholars discuss topics related to China, they are not representing the U.S. government, but rather speaking from the results of their research. Currently, many China studies centers, including the Fairbank Center, face similar challenges: some Chinese people assume we represent the U.S. government, while some Americans believe we are influenced by the Chinese government or speak on behalf of China.

At the academic forum “Chinese Civilization and Path” in November 2019, Professor Michael A. Szonyi shared his reflections on the relationship between Chinese civilization and China’s path. He believed that China’s developmental path is closely linked to its historical legacy, and the political wisdom and governance experience of ancient China still play an important role in providing insights for governance today after thousands of years of evolution. (Photo by Zhang Xinglong, CNS)

Currently, U.S.-China relations are at a critical stage. In 2020, hundreds of Chinese students, including those admitted to prestigious universities such as Harvard, were denied U.S. visas. What is your view on this?

U.S.-China relations in the field of education are currently at a critical stage. Academic exchanges between the two sides have been disrupted—China has taken measures mainly in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, while the U.S. has acted out of security considerations. The U.S. should do a better job in managing issues related to intellectual property and sensitive technologies. Denying visas simply because someone is Chinese or has connections with the Chinese Communist Party is misguided.

I hope that U.S.-China relations can improve. We share common interests in many areas, including climate change and economic prosperity. We need to find ways to improve our relations, and I believe education can play an important role in this process.

About the Interviewee:

Photo of Michael A. Szonyi.

Michael A. Szonyi was born in 1967 in Toronto, Canada. He is currently Professor of Chinese History in the Department of East Asian Languages and Civilizations at Harvard University and Director of the Fairbank Center for Chinese Studies.

Szonyi is a historian specializing in the Ming, Qing, and modern Chinese periods. He is skilled in employing historical anthropology and field research methods to study the social history of southeastern China.

Szonyi obtained his bachelor’s degree from the University of Toronto and his doctoral degree from the University of Oxford, during which he conducted research visits at National Taiwan University and Xiamen University. He has taught at McGill University and the University of Toronto and has been teaching at Harvard University since 2005.

His major works include “Practicing Kinship: Lineage Organization in Late Imperial China”, “Cold War Island: Quemoy on the Front Line”，and “The Art of Being Governed: Everyday Politics in Late Imperial China”.

*This article was originally written in 2021, and describes the situation at that time.

(By Sha Hanting)