Revision as of 06:11, 8 April 2022 editLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,294,796 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Hanfu/Archive 2) (bot← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 20:38, 23 September 2024 edit undo199.175.128.1 (talk) →is Hanfu really modern chinese traditional dress??: ReplyTag: Reply | ||
(22 intermediate revisions by 9 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Talk header |
{{Talk header}} | ||
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|vital=yes|1= | |||
{{Vital article|class=C|level=5|topic=Everyday life|link=Misplaced Pages:Vital articles/Level/5/Everyday life|anchor=General (39 articles)}} | |||
{{WikiProject |
{{WikiProject China|importance=high}} | ||
{{WikiProject Fashion|importance=High}} | |||
{{WPCHINA|class=C|importance=high}} | |||
{{WikiProject Fashion|class=C|importance=High}} | |||
}} | }} | ||
{{User:MiszaBot/config | {{User:MiszaBot/config | ||
Line 14: | Line 12: | ||
|algo = old(180d) | |algo = old(180d) | ||
|archive = Talk:Hanfu/Archive %(counter)d | |archive = Talk:Hanfu/Archive %(counter)d | ||
}} | |||
{{Broken anchors|links= | |||
* <nowiki>]</nowiki> The anchor (#Hairstyle and teeth blackening) has been ] before. <!-- {"title":"Hairstyle and teeth blackening","appear":{"revid":958514087,"parentid":957320128,"timestamp":"2020-05-24T06:52:45Z","removed_section_titles":,"added_section_titles":},"disappear":{"revid":978561339,"parentid":978560807,"timestamp":"2020-09-15T17:11:21Z","removed_section_titles":,"added_section_titles":},"very_different":"32≥30","rename_to":"Feudal customs"} --> | |||
* <nowiki>]</nowiki> The anchor (#Qujupao) has been ] before. <!-- {"title":"Qujupao","appear":{"revid":1009413954,"parentid":1007441794,"timestamp":"2021-02-28T13:12:02Z","removed_section_titles":,"added_section_titles":},"disappear":{"revid":1094655936,"parentid":1094646204,"timestamp":"2022-06-23T20:13:16Z","removed_section_titles":,"added_section_titles":}} --> | |||
* <nowiki>]</nowiki> The anchor (#Zhijupao) has been ] before. <!-- {"title":"Zhijupao","appear":{"revid":1009413954,"parentid":1007441794,"timestamp":"2021-02-28T13:12:02Z","removed_section_titles":,"added_section_titles":},"disappear":{"revid":1094655936,"parentid":1094646204,"timestamp":"2022-06-23T20:13:16Z","removed_section_titles":,"added_section_titles":}} --> | |||
* <nowiki>]</nowiki> The anchor (#Youren/ right lapel) is no longer available because it was ] before. <!-- {"title":"Youren/ right lapel","appear":{"revid":1093251304,"parentid":1092961099,"timestamp":"2022-06-15T12:36:29Z","removed_section_titles":,"added_section_titles":},"disappear":{"revid":1096856384,"parentid":1095394503,"timestamp":"2022-07-07T02:33:02Z","removed_section_titles":,"added_section_titles":}} --> | |||
* <nowiki>]</nowiki> The anchor (#Zuoren/ left lapel) is no longer available because it was ] before. <!-- {"title":"Zuoren/ left lapel","appear":{"revid":1093251304,"parentid":1092961099,"timestamp":"2022-06-15T12:36:29Z","removed_section_titles":,"added_section_titles":},"disappear":{"revid":1096856384,"parentid":1095394503,"timestamp":"2022-07-07T02:33:02Z","removed_section_titles":,"added_section_titles":}} --> | |||
* <nowiki>]</nowiki> The anchor (#Pipa-shaped collars) is no longer available because it was ] before. <!-- {"title":"Pipa-shaped collars","appear":{"revid":1089995717,"parentid":1089994860,"timestamp":"2022-05-26T19:33:18Z","removed_section_titles":,"added_section_titles":},"disappear":{"revid":1092961099,"parentid":1092942764,"timestamp":"2022-06-13T18:09:20Z","replaced_anchors":{"Pipa-shaped collars":"Pipa-shaped collars/ pianjin"},"removed_section_titles":,"added_section_titles":},"very_different":false,"rename_to":"Pipa-shaped collars/ pianjin"} --> | |||
}} | }} | ||
== A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion == | |||
==Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment== | |||
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: | |||
] This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between <span class="mw-formatted-date" title="2020-09-06">6 September 2020</span> and <span class="mw-formatted-date" title="2020-12-06">6 December 2020</span>. Further details are available ]. Student editor(s): ]. | |||
* ]<!-- COMMONSBOT: discussion | 2022-04-07T10:52:10.044619 | 汉代 国博首场中国古代服饰展.jpg --> | |||
Participate in the deletion discussion at the ]. —] (]) 10:52, 7 April 2022 (UTC) | |||
== A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion == | |||
{{small|Above undated message substituted from ] by ] (]) 22:07, 17 January 2022 (UTC)}} | |||
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: | |||
* ]<!-- COMMONSBOT: discussion | 2022-06-02T05:36:45.706122 | Thin silk skirt, unearthed form Mawangdui Tomb.png --> | |||
Participate in the deletion discussion at the ]. —] (]) 05:36, 2 June 2022 (UTC) | |||
== is Hanfu really modern chinese traditional dress?? == | |||
==Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment== | |||
] This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between <span class="mw-formatted-date" title="2020-09-09">9 September 2020</span> and <span class="mw-formatted-date" title="2020-12-18">18 December 2020</span>. Further details are available ]. Student editor(s): ]. Peer reviewers: ]. | |||
Baizerman, Suzanne, Joanne B. Eicher, and Cathleen Cerny. "Eurocentrism in the Study of Ethnic Dress." Dress 20 (1993): 19–32. | |||
{{small|Above undated message substituted from ] by ] (]) 22:07, 17 January 2022 (UTC)}} | |||
Blumer, Herbert. "Collective Behavior." In An Outline of the Principles of Sociology. Edited by Robert Park. New York: Barnes and Noble, 1939. | |||
Boas, Franz. "The Social Organization and the Secret Societies of the Kwakiutl Indians." Report of the U.S. National Museum for 1895. Washington, D.C.: U.S. National Museum, 1897. | |||
Ellwood, Charles. An Introduction to Social Psychology. New York: D. Appleton and Co., 1918. | |||
Frater, Judy. "Rabari Dress." In Mud, Mirror, and Thread: Folk Traditions in Rural India. Edited by Nora Fisher. Santa Fe: Museum of New Mexico Pres; Ahmedabad: Mapin, 1993. | |||
Freeman, Richard. Travels and Life in Ashanti and Jaman. New York: Frederick A. Stokes Co., 1898. | |||
Harrold, Robert, and Phylidda Legg. Folk Costumes of the World. London: Cassell Academic Press, 1999. | |||
Hendrikson, Carol. Weaving Identities: Construction of Dress and Self in a Highland Guatemala Town. Austin: University of Texas, 1995. | |||
Kennett, Frances. Ethnic Dress. New York: Facts on File, 1995. | |||
Lentz, Carola. "Ethnic Conflict and Changing Dress Codes: A Case Study of an Indian Migrant Village in Highland Ecuador." In Dress and Ethnicity. Edited by Joanne B. Eicher. Oxford: Berg, 1995. | |||
Mera, H. P. Navajo Women's Dresses. General Series Bulletin No. 15. Santa Fe, N.M.: Laboratory of Anthropology, 1944. | |||
Sapir, Edward. "Fashion." In Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. Vol. 6. New York: Macmillan, 1931. | |||
Sumberg, Barbara. "Dress and Ethnic Differentiation in the Niger Delta." In Dress and Ethnicity. Edited by Joanne Eicher. Oxford: Berg, 1995. | |||
Tarrant, Naomi. The Development of Costume. London: Routledge, 1994. | |||
Underhill, Ruth. The Navajos. Norman: University of Oklahoma, 1956. | |||
Weir, Shelagh. Palestinian Costume. Austin: University of Texas, 1989. | |||
Welters, Linda. "Introduction." In Folk Dress in Europe and Anatolia. Edited by Linda Welters. Oxford: Berg, 1999. | |||
Westermarck, Edward. Marriage Ceremonies in Morocco. London: Macmillan and Co., Ltd., 1914. | |||
Wilcox, R. Turner. Folk and Festival Costume of the World. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1965. | |||
== Strayacj == | |||
{{ping|Strayacj}} Both Hanfu and Xianbei clothing influenced Korean clothing. Xianbei influence is not a valid excuse to remove the content here. ] (]) 10:36, 15 December 2021 (UTC) | |||
{{ping|Esiymbro}} any sources? The origin of official costumes is not Hanfu, the costume of the Han Chinese. It is clear that Korean royal official costumes in the past were influenced by China, such as the Tang and Ming Dynasty, but Hanbok does not mean official costumes and you have to distinguish between official and casual clothing. In addition, official costumes are not the origins of the Han Chinese, but the Xianbei. Hanfu was only the clothes of the people of the Han Dynasty, or it was to distinguish between the costumes of other ethnic groups and the costumes of the Han Chinese. | |||
according to reference like upward, Hanfu is not traditional dress of modern china. their revived Hanfu is like roman Toga and greek Kiton . | |||
# No one here is saying that Korean costumes originated from Hanfu, but that they are influenced by it. | |||
accordinf to definition of tradition. Hanfu is nor traditional dress of modern chinese. ] (]) 05:23, 14 November 2022 (UTC) | |||
# Have you actually read the content you reverted? If that is not enough, there are dozens of sourced statements on ''Hanfu influence on Hanbok'' at the article ] and other related articles. The burden is on you to find sources to support your own history revisionist claim that Hanfu did not have any influence whatsoever on Hanbok. ] (]) 11:20, 15 December 2021 (UTC) | |||
:Hanfu is the traditional clothing of the Han Chinese, because they are 100% restored according to the clothing of the ancients ] (]) 21:37, 14 November 2022 (UTC) | |||
{{ping|Esiymbro}} Please present it based on historical records. And since culture is interacting with each other, it cannot be said that Hanfu necessarily influenced Hanbok. Again, the concept of hanbok is not official clothes, but casual clothes. The concept of Hanfu also means the clothes worn by the people of Han Dynasty, and Hanfu was also influenced by the costumes of various ethnic groups. If so, how would you explain that Goryeo's hanbok influenced Hanfu of the late Yuan Dynasty and the early Ming Dynasty? 可以拿过来历史文献上的记载啊 | |||
:according to your funny logic, hanbok is not the traditional dress of south Korea, since south korea was established in 1948. It has nothing to do with Ancient Korea. ] (]) 22:47, 15 November 2022 (UTC) | |||
::The word 'Hanfu' didn't even exist before 2000. It's a made up 'modern word' by Chinese government's cultural propaganda. Plus, what is transitional clothing? Doesn't it mean continued generation to generation? Clothes that Chinese people call 'Hanfu' is forgotten and discontinued clothing at least hundreds years ago. So how Chinese revived so called Hanfu? Easy. Good references were there. Korean Hanbok and Japanese Kimono. ] (]) 20:31, 23 September 2024 (UTC) | |||
:It’s even funnier to use western materials to talk about Chinese culture. Ancient Rome and Ancient Greece have perished, but China has always existed. ] (]) 22:56, 15 November 2022 (UTC) | |||
:It is very likely that those sources are outdated by many decades. Back in the days, there were not much critical studies of non- American/European clothing. This was reflected in the literature of that time when authors did not see non-Western countries as having fashion and believed that non-Western (traditional) clothing was static and unchanged with time, which was itself a bias view on clothing, apparel, jewelleries, garments of others non-American/European people. Because they were not familiar with the clothing of others, they could not neither observe nor record differences in fashion. For them, traditional clothing became something static when it was not. | |||
:Hanfu cannot be compared with the roman toga and the greek kiton; the ancient greeks and romans are old civilization which do not exist anymore. Same with ancient Egypt, the ancient Egypt civilization does not exist. Chinese civilization is remains one of the oldest civilization with a continuous history; hanfu still existed in the 20th century but showed a decline at last from the mid-20th century. The early 21st century shows a progressive return to popularity. As such, hanfu has never ceased to exist. Hanfu also falls in the Webster's Third International Dictionary definition, "an inherited or established way of thinking, feeling or doing: a cultural feature preserved or evolved from the past" . Regardless of how the forms, styles, fashion have changed with time and socio-historical contexts , it still follows an established way of thinking, feeling, and doing, being a cultural feature which has been preserved and evolved from the past. ] (]) 12:44, 22 November 2022 (UTC) | |||
::Exactly, you admitted. 'Hanfu' is a modern word that didn't even exist before 2000. It was created by Government led cultural operation. The question is why it is different from Roman Toga and Greek Kiton while Chinese has stopped wearing their old clothes for at least hundreds years? ] (]) 20:38, 23 September 2024 (UTC) | |||
Traditional dress may be defined as the ensemble of garments, jewelry, and accessories rooted in the past that is worn by an identifiable group of people. Though slight changes over time in color, form, and material are acknowledged, the assemblage seems to be handed down unchanged from the past.Traditional dress or costume is a phrase used widely both by the general public and writers on dress. | |||
- 结赞以羌、浑众屯潘口,傍青石岭,三分其兵趋陇、汧阳间,连营数十里,中军距凤翔一舍,诡汉服,号邢君牙兵,入吴山、宝鸡,焚聚落,略畜牧、丁壮,杀老孺,断手剔目,乃去。 | |||
《新唐书》 | |||
It conjures up images of rural people dressed in colorful, layered, exotic clothing from an idealized past in some faraway place. This notion of traditional dress has been scrutinized and found inadequate by many researchers and scholars, but its uncritical use continues into the twenty-first century. | |||
- 漢裳蠻,本漢人部種,在鐵橋。惟以朝霞纏頭,餘尚同漢服 | |||
《新唐书》 ] (]) 11:52, 15 December 2021 (UTC) | |||
"traditional costume." In Webster's Third International Dictionary, tradition is defined as "an inherited or established way of thinking, feeling or doing: a cultural feature preserved or evolved from the past" (1993, p. 2422; italics by author). | |||
It appears that this discussion is origins vs influences. The Xianbei influence and contribution is important in the development of Han Chinese identity and Han Chinese clothing; content should not be removed just because some clothing were initially introduced by other ethnics. | |||
# Ethnically speaking, the Xianbei and the Han dynasty Chinese were indeed different. However, the Xianbei and other nomadic groups which entered China during the Sixteen dynasties period became "Han people" after more than 100 years.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Zhang |first1=Qizhi |title=An introduction to Chinese history and culture |date=2015 |publisher=Springer Berlin Heidelberg |location=Heidelberg |isbn=9783662464823 |page=131}}</ref> According to Charles Holcombe, ''"Many descendants of the Xianbei and of the other non-Chinese groups who had ruled north China from 304 until 581 had lost their separate identities and simply became Chinese during the Tang era. The term 'Han,' which had first begun to be used as an ethnic label to distinguish the conquered subject population ruled by the Xianbei elites during the Northern Wei Dynasty, came to refer to all of the people of the Tang dynasty.''"<ref>{{cite book |last1=Holcombe |first1=Charles |title=A history of East Asia : from the origins of civilization to the twenty-first century |date=2017 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |location=Cambridge, United Kingdom |isbn=9781107118737 |page=100 |edition=Second}}</ref> | |||
Often made in the family for personal use, traditional dress uses materials commonly available where the maker lives. These materials and styles are often assumed to have evolved in response to environments-wool in cold climates, cotton in warm. But traditional dress often also incorporates imported materials obtained by trade. Exotic fabrics or notions can be incorporated into a people's dress and become "traditional," as Indian madras has for the Kalabari Ijo of the Niger Delta. Although no one knows where it originated, a print cloth called ondoba, said to have arrived with the Portuguese in the fifteenth century, "belongs" to the Nembe Ijo of the Niger Delta. | |||
The royal courts in Korea introduced Chinese court clothing, which may explain why some Koreans do not seem to perceive those clothing as Hanbok but rather dubbed them as Gwanbok. However, some clothing which was originally (or hypothesized to have been) of Chinese origins are still considered as Hanbok nowadays. | |||
For Hanfu, this is different because court, official, casual and commoner clothing can be considered Han Chinese. The Court official clothing of the Han Chinese ruled dynasties can be considered as Hanfu because it diverted from its initial Xianbei origins. | |||
# The court official clothing (i.e. the one with round collars) designed by the Imperial court of Han Chinese ruled dynasties has both the influences of the Xianbei and the Chinese. | |||
# The Xianbei contributed by introducing the round collared robe with tight sleeves as an outerwear in the Central plains; this in turn provided the court official's robe basic shape (i.e. round collar). | |||
# The Han Chinese contributed by turning a round-collared robe into an official robe which adheres to a strict hierarchichal system and societal norms: developing the clothing systems for officials through imperial edicts, regulating the colours based on social ranking (品色服), adding social ranking badges in some dynasties. The round collared robes evolved with time in China to the point that they are structurally different from those initially introduced by the Xianbei (e.g. loose sleeves, wide and large sleeves, pipa sleeves depending on the time period; decorations and colour system to indicate ranks). Those structural changes and the implementation of a clothing system are Chinese innovations, designed by the Han Chinese. | |||
The word "tradition" refers to an old culture that has been passed down to the present, because it is difficult to see that Hanfu is already a tradition the moment you substitute this word. A tradition is called a tradition if it has been passed on for at least three generations from the old days, and it can be recognized as a tradition if there are no interruptions or forgotten things in the middle. This similar concept is also used for UNESCO World Heritage listing. No matter how much they restore the lost Tang music, it cannot become a World Intangible Heritage. Even though relics excavated from tombs in the past are restored, restoration or re-creation does not conform to the concept of tradition. The form of hanfu they speak of differs from dynasty to dynasty, and it is not known how the masses wore it or how it was made. | |||
On the influence of Goryeo hanbok on Hanfu during late Yuan and early Ming. The term Goryeoyang was dubbed in the late Yuan dynasty, it means "Goryeo style" but it can be a lot of things, including Goryeoyang clothing. This subject however does not seem to be widely studied in English sources (it is very hard to come across some sources). Most research/books talk about the influence of Mongol fashion in Yuan on the Chinese, not Goryeo. Some sources talk vaguely on the popularity of Goryeoyang in the Mongol Court but not much outside the court; they do not discuss the influence on Han Chinese clothing (Mongol were different from the Han; their clothing were also different; in Yuan, Han Chinese could wear Mongol or Han clothing); moreover, there is not much information on the description/ appearance of Goryeoyang-fashion. | |||
Thats why,does not conform to the concept of tradition. | |||
# There is one study in English by Kim et al (2015)<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Kim |first1=Jinyoung |last2=Lee |first2=Jaeyeong |last3=Lee |first3=Jongoh |title="GORYEOYANG" AND "MONGOLPUNG" in the 13th-14th CENTURIES |journal=Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae |date=2015 |volume=68 |issue=3 |pages=281–292 |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/43957480 |issn=0001-6446}}</ref>; the authors says that the Goryeoyang female clothing was common in the court (i.e. Mongol court) because there were many Goryeo women who served. The Goryeoyang clothing was found in the '''court dress''' (i.e. Mongol court) at the end of Yuan court (Empress Gi only became first empresses in 1365 and Yuan ended in 1368). The authors clearly says that it is a square-collared (banryeong) banbi (half-sleeves) (方領過腰半臂) which was short compared to the ones worn by the Mongols which were long and narrow. The authors also added a modern interpretation of Goryeoyang clothing in the paper which can be seen here: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Goryeoyang-and-Mongolpung-in-the-13th%E2%80%9314th-Kim-Lee/00eb328be57a608854ff337aaa2d6a9216584c58/figure/0 (The square collar banbi); this illustration come from the a Korean study by . The illustration appears to be itself based on an old poem from Yuan (no visual artefacts of Goryeoyang fashion in Yuan?). | |||
# This is also the only description of Goryeoyang clothing which can be found in the entire study. Based on this study, we do not know how influential Goryeoyang female clothing was throughout the entire country or how influential it was on Han Chinese people. | |||
# Not much information is known on the continuity of Goryeoyang clothing influence in the Ming. A direct quote from a book by Park (2021), ''"Like the Mongolian style, it is possible that this Koryo style continued to influence some Chinese in the Ming period after the Ming dynasty replaced the Yuan dynasty, a topic to investigate further"''<ref>{{cite book |last1=Park |first1=Hyunhee |title=Soju : a global history |date=2021 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |location=Cambridge, United Kingdom |isbn=9781108842013 |page=125}}</ref> | |||
# In Ming, there was a popular form of skirt called maweiqun (马尾裙, lit. 'horse-tail skirt'), also known as faqun (发裙). The maweiqun was initially introduced from Joseon (Not Goryeo). It was not popular in the early Ming but in the Mid-Ming from the reign of Chenghua to Hongzhi (1465~1505). Therefore it cannot be referred as Goryeoyang clothing by definition. It was also an exotic fashion in Ming rather than Chinese.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Baghdiantz McCabe |first1=Ina |title=A history of global consumption : 1500-1800 |date=2015 |publisher=Taylor & Francis |location=New York |isbn=9781317652656 |page=178}}</ref> Therefore, it is not included as Hanfu. | |||
In conclusion, more research should be done to understand the extent of Korean influence on Hanfu whether it is from Goryeo or Joseon. Perhaps more research can be found in Korean or Chinese sources, but in English, it is very limited. On the other hand, most (if not all) English sources cited in this article clearly states than Hanbok was influenced by Chinese clothing. They do not use the term Gwanbok. BTW The term hanfu means Han Chinese clothing,<ref>{{cite book |last1=Huang |first1=Y |title=Contesting Chineseness : ethnicity, identity, and nation in China and Southeast Asia |date=2021 |publisher=Springer Singapore |location=Singapore |isbn=9789813360969 |page=298}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Ho |first1=Wei |title=Modern Meaning of Han Chinese Clothing |journal=Journal of the Korea Fashion and Costume Design Association |date=2009 |volume=11 |issue=1 |pages=99-109 |url=https://www.koreascience.or.kr/article/JAKO200916263468106.pdf}}</ref> not Han dynasty clothing. | |||
{{Reflist}} ] (]) 04:08, 12 January 2022 (UTC) | |||
For example, it can be seen that the traditional clothing of modern Italy and Greece is different from the toga of ancient Rome and Greece. In other words, Italy and Greece do not define traditional culture that has been passed down to the present by excavating ancient relics that have not been worn until modern times, restoring what the ancient Romans wore, and wearing them. Even if the ancient Egyptians are unearthed and worn by modern Egyptians, they cannot be their traditional attire. In fact, the traditional clothing of the Egyptians is only recognized as the traditional clothing worn by the Egyptians in Galabe. In case of Hanfu, there is no evidence like photo and other record to proove that Chinese people had have worn Hanfu in modern periods | |||
== A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion == | |||
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: | |||
== Citations about Influencing other Cultural Dress == | |||
* ]<!-- COMMONSBOT: discussion | 2022-04-07T10:52:10.044619 | 汉代 国博首场中国古代服饰展.jpg --> | |||
Participate in the deletion discussion at the ]. —] (]) 10:52, 7 April 2022 (UTC) | |||
I just checked the citation regarding Hanbok being influenced by Hanfu—the one from the National History Museum of Korea in its issu digitized magazine form. | |||
I understand many nationalists from China, Korea, and really whatever other country’s cultural dress is in question get riled up and HEATED about this discussion on origin. Regardless, I must point out that having actually read the magazine no where in it does it support the claim Hanbok was influenced by or descended or associated with etc etc. with Hanfu. | |||
I’m sure there’s a credible English source out there somewhere that acknowledges connection or influence from Hanfu. But nowhere in the Hanbok section is China or any Chinese dynasties even mentioned. Ergo, this citation is pointless, it does not support the assertion made. Should the citation be removed or some sort of tag placed indicating the need of a stronger citation? It’s kind of like no one actually read the magazine. I feel like this also prompts a round of review on the other citations for clarity. Hopefully they all support what is being said in the article as written, but it is clear the current source for Hanbok is insufficient. Maybe some fashion studies journal article about Hanfu/Hanbok would have the line needed? ] (]) 18:19, 5 July 2024 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 20:38, 23 September 2024
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Hanfu article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 6 months |
This level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
|
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:52, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:36, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
is Hanfu really modern chinese traditional dress??
Baizerman, Suzanne, Joanne B. Eicher, and Cathleen Cerny. "Eurocentrism in the Study of Ethnic Dress." Dress 20 (1993): 19–32. Blumer, Herbert. "Collective Behavior." In An Outline of the Principles of Sociology. Edited by Robert Park. New York: Barnes and Noble, 1939. Boas, Franz. "The Social Organization and the Secret Societies of the Kwakiutl Indians." Report of the U.S. National Museum for 1895. Washington, D.C.: U.S. National Museum, 1897. Ellwood, Charles. An Introduction to Social Psychology. New York: D. Appleton and Co., 1918. Frater, Judy. "Rabari Dress." In Mud, Mirror, and Thread: Folk Traditions in Rural India. Edited by Nora Fisher. Santa Fe: Museum of New Mexico Pres; Ahmedabad: Mapin, 1993. Freeman, Richard. Travels and Life in Ashanti and Jaman. New York: Frederick A. Stokes Co., 1898. Harrold, Robert, and Phylidda Legg. Folk Costumes of the World. London: Cassell Academic Press, 1999. Hendrikson, Carol. Weaving Identities: Construction of Dress and Self in a Highland Guatemala Town. Austin: University of Texas, 1995. Kennett, Frances. Ethnic Dress. New York: Facts on File, 1995. Lentz, Carola. "Ethnic Conflict and Changing Dress Codes: A Case Study of an Indian Migrant Village in Highland Ecuador." In Dress and Ethnicity. Edited by Joanne B. Eicher. Oxford: Berg, 1995. Mera, H. P. Navajo Women's Dresses. General Series Bulletin No. 15. Santa Fe, N.M.: Laboratory of Anthropology, 1944. Sapir, Edward. "Fashion." In Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. Vol. 6. New York: Macmillan, 1931. Sumberg, Barbara. "Dress and Ethnic Differentiation in the Niger Delta." In Dress and Ethnicity. Edited by Joanne Eicher. Oxford: Berg, 1995. Tarrant, Naomi. The Development of Costume. London: Routledge, 1994. Underhill, Ruth. The Navajos. Norman: University of Oklahoma, 1956. Weir, Shelagh. Palestinian Costume. Austin: University of Texas, 1989. Welters, Linda. "Introduction." In Folk Dress in Europe and Anatolia. Edited by Linda Welters. Oxford: Berg, 1999. Westermarck, Edward. Marriage Ceremonies in Morocco. London: Macmillan and Co., Ltd., 1914. Wilcox, R. Turner. Folk and Festival Costume of the World. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1965.
according to reference like upward, Hanfu is not traditional dress of modern china. their revived Hanfu is like roman Toga and greek Kiton .
accordinf to definition of tradition. Hanfu is nor traditional dress of modern chinese. 175.213.48.82 (talk) 05:23, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hanfu is the traditional clothing of the Han Chinese, because they are 100% restored according to the clothing of the ancients 63.157.97.218 (talk) 21:37, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
- according to your funny logic, hanbok is not the traditional dress of south Korea, since south korea was established in 1948. It has nothing to do with Ancient Korea. 63.157.97.218 (talk) 22:47, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
- The word 'Hanfu' didn't even exist before 2000. It's a made up 'modern word' by Chinese government's cultural propaganda. Plus, what is transitional clothing? Doesn't it mean continued generation to generation? Clothes that Chinese people call 'Hanfu' is forgotten and discontinued clothing at least hundreds years ago. So how Chinese revived so called Hanfu? Easy. Good references were there. Korean Hanbok and Japanese Kimono. 199.175.128.1 (talk) 20:31, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
- It’s even funnier to use western materials to talk about Chinese culture. Ancient Rome and Ancient Greece have perished, but China has always existed. 63.157.97.218 (talk) 22:56, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
- It is very likely that those sources are outdated by many decades. Back in the days, there were not much critical studies of non- American/European clothing. This was reflected in the literature of that time when authors did not see non-Western countries as having fashion and believed that non-Western (traditional) clothing was static and unchanged with time, which was itself a bias view on clothing, apparel, jewelleries, garments of others non-American/European people. Because they were not familiar with the clothing of others, they could not neither observe nor record differences in fashion. For them, traditional clothing became something static when it was not.
- Hanfu cannot be compared with the roman toga and the greek kiton; the ancient greeks and romans are old civilization which do not exist anymore. Same with ancient Egypt, the ancient Egypt civilization does not exist. Chinese civilization is remains one of the oldest civilization with a continuous history; hanfu still existed in the 20th century but showed a decline at last from the mid-20th century. The early 21st century shows a progressive return to popularity. As such, hanfu has never ceased to exist. Hanfu also falls in the Webster's Third International Dictionary definition, "an inherited or established way of thinking, feeling or doing: a cultural feature preserved or evolved from the past" . Regardless of how the forms, styles, fashion have changed with time and socio-historical contexts , it still follows an established way of thinking, feeling, and doing, being a cultural feature which has been preserved and evolved from the past. Gyuligula2 (talk) 12:44, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- Exactly, you admitted. 'Hanfu' is a modern word that didn't even exist before 2000. It was created by Government led cultural operation. The question is why it is different from Roman Toga and Greek Kiton while Chinese has stopped wearing their old clothes for at least hundreds years? 199.175.128.1 (talk) 20:38, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
Traditional dress may be defined as the ensemble of garments, jewelry, and accessories rooted in the past that is worn by an identifiable group of people. Though slight changes over time in color, form, and material are acknowledged, the assemblage seems to be handed down unchanged from the past.Traditional dress or costume is a phrase used widely both by the general public and writers on dress.
It conjures up images of rural people dressed in colorful, layered, exotic clothing from an idealized past in some faraway place. This notion of traditional dress has been scrutinized and found inadequate by many researchers and scholars, but its uncritical use continues into the twenty-first century.
"traditional costume." In Webster's Third International Dictionary, tradition is defined as "an inherited or established way of thinking, feeling or doing: a cultural feature preserved or evolved from the past" (1993, p. 2422; italics by author).
Often made in the family for personal use, traditional dress uses materials commonly available where the maker lives. These materials and styles are often assumed to have evolved in response to environments-wool in cold climates, cotton in warm. But traditional dress often also incorporates imported materials obtained by trade. Exotic fabrics or notions can be incorporated into a people's dress and become "traditional," as Indian madras has for the Kalabari Ijo of the Niger Delta. Although no one knows where it originated, a print cloth called ondoba, said to have arrived with the Portuguese in the fifteenth century, "belongs" to the Nembe Ijo of the Niger Delta.
The word "tradition" refers to an old culture that has been passed down to the present, because it is difficult to see that Hanfu is already a tradition the moment you substitute this word. A tradition is called a tradition if it has been passed on for at least three generations from the old days, and it can be recognized as a tradition if there are no interruptions or forgotten things in the middle. This similar concept is also used for UNESCO World Heritage listing. No matter how much they restore the lost Tang music, it cannot become a World Intangible Heritage. Even though relics excavated from tombs in the past are restored, restoration or re-creation does not conform to the concept of tradition. The form of hanfu they speak of differs from dynasty to dynasty, and it is not known how the masses wore it or how it was made.
Thats why,does not conform to the concept of tradition.
For example, it can be seen that the traditional clothing of modern Italy and Greece is different from the toga of ancient Rome and Greece. In other words, Italy and Greece do not define traditional culture that has been passed down to the present by excavating ancient relics that have not been worn until modern times, restoring what the ancient Romans wore, and wearing them. Even if the ancient Egyptians are unearthed and worn by modern Egyptians, they cannot be their traditional attire. In fact, the traditional clothing of the Egyptians is only recognized as the traditional clothing worn by the Egyptians in Galabe. In case of Hanfu, there is no evidence like photo and other record to proove that Chinese people had have worn Hanfu in modern periods
Citations about Influencing other Cultural Dress
I just checked the citation regarding Hanbok being influenced by Hanfu—the one from the National History Museum of Korea in its issu digitized magazine form.
I understand many nationalists from China, Korea, and really whatever other country’s cultural dress is in question get riled up and HEATED about this discussion on origin. Regardless, I must point out that having actually read the magazine no where in it does it support the claim Hanbok was influenced by or descended or associated with etc etc. with Hanfu.
I’m sure there’s a credible English source out there somewhere that acknowledges connection or influence from Hanfu. But nowhere in the Hanbok section is China or any Chinese dynasties even mentioned. Ergo, this citation is pointless, it does not support the assertion made. Should the citation be removed or some sort of tag placed indicating the need of a stronger citation? It’s kind of like no one actually read the magazine. I feel like this also prompts a round of review on the other citations for clarity. Hopefully they all support what is being said in the article as written, but it is clear the current source for Hanbok is insufficient. Maybe some fashion studies journal article about Hanfu/Hanbok would have the line needed? 2601:14D:8600:2E30:254A:11FA:7FF0:C116 (talk) 18:19, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Categories:- C-Class level-5 vital articles
- Misplaced Pages level-5 vital articles in Everyday life
- C-Class vital articles in Everyday life
- C-Class China-related articles
- High-importance China-related articles
- C-Class China-related articles of High-importance
- WikiProject China articles
- C-Class fashion articles
- High-importance fashion articles