Over the last decade, the field of Southeast Asian Studies has been inundated with issues of its “territory” (or the definition of what comprises Southeast Asia), relevance and future. The methodology of approaching Southeast Asian Studies has also come under constant scrutiny providing much fodder for debate. One significant suggestion was that the field of Southeast Asian Studies should “break out of the comfort zone” (Van Schendel, Bijdragen, 2012:168(4)). This paper will explore some of the ways of approaching Southeast Asian Studies beyond that comfort zone by examining other/alternative units of studying Southeast Asia in place of the traditional (or statist) perspectives that tend to confine the field within the scope of the national/ nation-state boundaries. The paper will also provide some personal observations of the author on the current state and limitations to teaching and researching Southeast Asian Studies in the region.
목차
Abstract Ⅰ. Is Southeast Asian Studies relevant? Ⅱ. Breaking out of the “comfort zone”: Other ways (units) of approaching Southeast Asian Studies Ⅲ. The Language Conundrum: Teaching Southeast Asian Studies in Southeast Asia Ⅳ. Limitations in Southeast Asian Studies in the region Ⅴ. ‘Failure’ to develop a distinct methodology Ⅵ. Sustaining Southeast Asian Studies Ⅶ. Conclusion: Rebranding Southeast Asian Studies References
본 연구소는 아시아 지역 및 관련 국가의 정치, 경제, 사회, 역사, 문화, 언어등에 관하여 지역연구 방법론을 통한 학제적 연구에 그 목적을 두고 아시아 각 지역의 최신 정보 및 자료의 수집, 정리, 분석, 제공에 중점을 둔다. 이와 관련하여 국내외 대학 및 연구기관과의 학술교류에 주력하여 지역연구부문 최고의 중점 연구소로의 성장을 목표로 한다.