The West China Border Research
Society was, of course, concerned with research -- both conducting it and
defining it. The pages of their Journal
ring with exhortations to "thorough scientific investigation" and
affirmations of the importance of research. (vol 8 p. 186) As David Crockett Graham wrote in 1934,
"I need not argue with you today as to the value of research. The fact that you are members of this
society and attend its meetings is evidence that you appreciate its
value." (vol 6 p.viii) The importance of scientific research may
have been taken for granted, but its meaning was continually considered and
reconsidered in the public writings of Society members. What developed was a unique understanding of
ideas like "science" and "research," attuned to the distinctive
historical situation of the West China Border Research Society. A sense of the Society's separateness from
the scientific mainstream shaped this understanding, which emphasized elements
of humanism, populism and pragmatism as essential for research.
Though a research institution in its
own right, the Society tended to take a stance set apart from the mainstream of
academia. Although they cherished the
ideals of science, these writers and researchers often discussed the scientific
establishment from a certain psychological distance. For example, A.J. Brace devoted most of his 1935 Presidential
Address to an indictment of scientific orthodoxy, as implicitly contrasted with
the Society's own values. The Foreword
to the Journal's 1938 issue spoke of "the high pressure expert" who
came from academic institutions of the Western world to work, coldly and
professionally, on the Society's turf. (vol 10 p.8) That same issue's Presidential address, delivered by R. Gordon
Agnew on May 21, 1938, criticized academia far more sharply. Agnew blasted mainstream science for
"trying to find out for the hundredth time wat everybody knows, and then
expressing it in language that nobody understands." (vol 10 p. 241) He further noted that a survey of doctoral
theses recently published in America bore that criticism out far too well. In every case, the writers pointed out the
deficiencies of modern science and pointed to the West China Border Research
Society's unsullied committment to true research.
Physical, ideological and
institutional factors contributed to the Society's sense of distinction from
the mainstream. One obvious factor was
geography. Carrying out their research
in China's remote border regions, they worked far from the university centers
of America and Europe. Society writers
never hesitated to note the great distances they had traveled. "An occasional visitor made his way up
here," the editors noted in 1938, "but rarely could he stay for
long." (vol 10 p 7) They described the life of research in West
China as a lonely and remote one.
Literally, physically separated from the academic life of the West, they
developed a self-perception of separateness from the mainstream of science.
Their work as missionaries largely
accounted for this persistent geographic isolation, and
this role also contributed profoundly to their feeling apart from the
scientific establishment.
Outside experts could come into West China and depart quickly,
"their notebooks crammed with information and their boxes full of specimens." (vol 10 p 7) But David Crockett Graham could not return home to an office in
Chicago or London. Neither could J.
Huston Edgar or J. Beech. These men
were tied to their area of study, and their explorations always proceeded
outward from their missionary post.
Researches was conducted either at the post - as with Graham's study of
the Ch'uan Miao people among whom he worked - or on vacations, "odd
moments plucked from busy lives."
(vol 10 p 7)
Mission work necessitated their
geographic isolation, but it also provided an ideological component to their
self-perception as outsiders in the scientific community. "We
are missionaries," W.R.
Morse said to the audience at the Society's June 1933 meeting, "and the
religious principle for which we strive are those which we as teachers,
preachers, and laymen can and should preserve by our actions as scientists."
(vol 6 p. iv) For Morse and his
colleagues, "the religious principle" was inseparable from their
scientific work. It was also integral
to their identities as scientists. The Journal of the West China Border Research Society was a
scientific publication written by missionaries, and this characteristic made
them feel apart from the secular establishment of Western science. /The work of the West China Border Research Society was
carried out almost entirely by missionaries, and this key characteristic made
them feel apart from the secular, materalistic establishment of Western
science. (vol 7 p. 138) As we
will see, this role also shaped their understanding of "research" in
important ways.
Lastly, an institutional factor also
affected the Society's self-perception with regard to the mainstream. Founded in 1922, the West China Border
Research was a young institution, preceded in its work by groups like the Royal
Asiatic Society. (older, better funded,
more respected... see p 140 of volume 7, the Foreword to vol 10, and references
to the society's small size, low funding...)
If the West China Border Research
Society saw itself as separate from the scientific mainstream, how did its
values differ from the orthodoxy of academia?
As an institution based far off the beaten path, and imbued with
spiritual ideals, how did it conceive of the research it so valued and
treasured? And if Society members often
contrasted their own ideals of science with the values of an errant
establishment, what was this superior conception of research like? First, their understanding of research was a
work in progress. From the first issue
of their Journal and their earliest meetings, the Society members stated and
restated the meaning of the research they advocated, with subtle shifts and
changes at each turn in their path/discourse.
Second, the understanding of science that emerged from this process was
a deeply nuanced one; influenced by their role as missionaries, this view
valued interaction with the people and applicability to real-world problems as
essential components of research.