Inheritor System & Policy

Core viewpoint：Subsidies follow the designation list; quotas are coordinated at city level, and frontline workers are not on the list.

《Interview with a Scholar of Intangible Cultural Heritage》

Editorial note: Q = interviewer; Fan = Professor Fan. In editing, I have tried to keep the original wording and cut repetition and meaningless filler; obvious transcription errors have been restored from context.

Q: Professor Fan, sorry—I can see you're probably very busy over there.

Fan: It's fine, go ahead.

Q: I just have six questions to ask you. The first is about the system of ICH inheritors. From an expert's point of view, a frontline production worker who has done this for decades, a lifetime, versus the person in charge of organizing production and sales, who may have done it before but has been away from the frontline for a long time—who do you think should be...? I mean ICH inheritors. If they apply, who academically should be the inheritor?

Fan: What we call inheritors—when we talk about inheritance, it's actually representative inheritors. We're talking about evaluating representative inheritors. From the very beginning we faced this problem: between a technical expert, a skilled worker, and an entrepreneur, who should be named representative inheritor? At the time, we basically leaned toward finding the skilled technical person as representative inheritor. We tried not to name the boss. Because we have ready examples—many examples. Someone originally did sales, did something else, then entered this industry and became a boss. Although he more or less knows how, you can't say he doesn't know, but he hasn't actually been doing this all along.

For example, the typical case is Huiliu of Lu'an Guapian. I know that boss. He originally sold auto parts and components, then spent ten or twenty million, twenty or thirty million, to build this enterprise. It also makes Lu'an Guapian. It used to be Yixiaotang; later it became Huiliu, a very influential entrepreneur. But when we evaluated, they pushed him as inheritor, representative inheritor. But I knew the situation, so I consciously avoided it, kept him out, didn't name him. So if you ask this question, to answer simply: we definitely look for the person who truly knows this traditional craft very well, as a production expert, as representative inheritor, and not the enterprise boss as representative inheritor.

Q: What I feel now—including when I go to ICH enterprises, what I've seen, several I've investigated—is basically factory directors or managers. I know many cases of the problem you're describing. For example, Huiliu just mentioned, or in tea, Wang Chang of Qimen, or the boss of Tianzhihong's Qimen red tea. When he became a national-level representative inheritor, there was a lot of objection. Complaint letters were even sent to the Ministry of Culture, the Ministry of Culture and Tourism. But actually, I've been thinking about this question all along. When we evaluate inheritors, it depends on what your purpose is. What is our purpose in evaluating inheritors? If evaluating inheritors is about who does it best, who has the most comprehensive skill, who has mastered the traditional craft best, then we choose that person—that's one value orientation. But there's another value orientation: although his skill is very good, if he himself isn't the entrepreneur organizing production, he can't pass on the craft himself; he might even have to change professions.

In that situation, the entrepreneur, like Wang Chang, his role is actually to keep this craft going. A typical example is Zhou Meihong, from our ink factory, the Hu Kaiwen Ink Factory in She County. He was in the first batch of national-level ICH inheritors, evaluated under me, and I also evaluated him at the national level. Although he's said to make ink, he actually entered the factory as a kid, right after high school. He kept doing this in the factory. Although his skill isn't the best, after he became boss, he did it at first, later simply stopped. But his role as representative inheritor truly served to pass on the craft and keep the enterprise running. In fact, for the continuation, inheritance, and development of this ICH project, he played an important role. Compared with any specific person in his factory being named representative inheritor, he was more beneficial to the project's development.

Q: I see. I also investigated government departments. Their attitude is that in principle it should be a frontline production worker. But in fact, the forms they have to fill out—and many ICH workers I investigated are illiterate—they simply can't apply. Also, they need you to pass on this thing, including giving talks at schools. Some of them have one day off a week, some have no day off. In that situation, I feel frontline workers have no way at all to apply as inheritors.

Fan: Actually, ICH projects differ by category, and there's also the question of inheritors. I've always said there's a lot to be done there. I myself—well, I don't need to write articles now, and I'm not evaluated on writing articles, so I don't write much. But I think about many ideas quite a lot.

Q: Could your students also work on this?

Fan: I don't take graduate students now. I just talk about these things with some colleagues sometimes. Because the categories of ICH inheritors—there are ten categories of ICH projects in our country, ten major categories—and different categories are different. What we just discussed is traditional craft. For example, opera is a very complex matter. The question of opera inheritors is different from traditional craft itself.

For example, I make ink. Ink making is relatively complex. Take inkstones—inkstone making is group inheritance, collective inheritance. It's a project where a single person—as long as I learn the craft and my artistic level is relatively high, I don't depend on others, I can do it myself. That's one category. Ink making is basically also possible: one person can do it from start to finish. Of course, soot-making he doesn't need to do; he gets equipment. It can also be inherited by an individual. One person can do almost the whole thing; he just doesn't need to make the soot himself. Xuan paper, though, is divided into work sections, different stages. Raw material processing is also very important. You say, I don't do raw materials, I buy raw materials completely; I'm a paper-lifter, I'm a paper-dryer. The most important stages are raw material processing, lifting/forming, and drying—basically three major aspects. So it's like, do I choose a paper-lifter or a paper-dryer? Either is possible, but it's not a single person. You say you lift paper well, okay, but if you can't dry paper...

Q: My second and sixth questions can be linked. Just now we talked about how currently I understand ICH inheritors are basically one person per craft, but this is very problematic. What I just said—besides craft, traditional craft is like this. For Xuan paper, naming one person is actually nonsense; he can't represent it. And its production is collective. I saw online articles saying some scholars propose group ICH inheritors, but this doesn't seem to have entered official documents yet.

Fan: Right, but the group thing—I talked about that long ago. I hadn't finished what I was saying. Traditional craft itself has this problem, but compared with opera, it's minor. Opera is the most typical. You say you're a dan actor, an actor. They give it to you. However famous you are, like Yan Fengying, a grandmaster of a generation. Now people we all know—Wang Danhong, Li Longbin, representative inheritors—they actually can't revive the whole of Huangmei opera, or other opera genres.

People like Mei Lanfang back then were true representatives of Peking opera—that's who should be evaluated. Who? He was both a star and a troupe leader. He was the head of the troupe, and he was the actor. Someone who combines management, business, and performance—that person is most suitable as inheritor. Now in our country's current system there are a few people, for example Cao Bangping in Wuhu. He's also this type: he can perform himself, and from performing became a troupe leader. He runs a private enterprise himself. He's very suitable as representative inheritor. But for state-owned ones, like our Anhui Performing Arts Group, like Wang Danhong I mentioned, like Huang Xinde—early on Huang Xinde and Li Longbin, later Shan Hong, and others. Among Huangmei opera, the only one who truly meets this standard is Han Zaifen. Right. She's both troupe leader and actor. She's suitable as inheritor.

People like Danhong—they have no way. Our relationship is very good. He has no way. What can he do? He wants to remount some classic plays, plays he himself performed. Even remounting those classics won't work. No money. The unit doesn't support you. You can't pay out of your own pocket. Who would you find to perform with you? So in that case, representative inheritor is just an honor, and it doesn't truly pass the project on. It's very hard to continue the inheritance; he has no ability to pass it on.

Moreover, what I just described is the ideal situation: there's a troupe leader, he's the boss, he puts up the money, hires people, supports a troupe—that's all easy. If it's a state-owned enterprise, you're finished. Why finished? Our Huangmei operas, The Fairy Couple and The Female Prince Consort, later they did Dream of the Red Chamber, what Beach... that Dream of the Red Chamber, and Huizhou Woman, and so on. Except for Han Zaifen, on this side, apart from The Fairy Couple and The Female Prince Consort, the Shen Huang side, basically no works came out. The reason is the system. It's a state-run unit. Any individual is just an element, not the overall manager of the system. Choosing any one person as representative inheritor not only doesn't help inheritance, it often has a negative effect. Because originally it was the two of us, eight of us, ten of us working together. Then you get chosen and I don't. Fine—then you see what you do. The rest of us won't buy it. You just take a certificate home, and then you find every step is difficult, you can't move an inch, you can't do anything. That's the awkward situation now.

Q: You should be—in this area—could you make policy suggestions? If your ideas were suggestions for policy, would they help push this forward?

Fan: You can write articles to explain it theoretically. Just raising problems—everyone knows them. You can't say officials, leading cadres, don't know. That's impossible; they definitely know. But just talking about it is useless. Where's the biggest difficulty? With group inheritors, how do you do it? How do you recognize them?

Like I said, opera is the hardest. Opera is the hardest. It's not just acting. To act, the premise is a director. To direct, the premise is a script. There are scripts, good scripts, people who write scripts. Then through a director. Actually the director is more important than the actor. Choosing a director as inheritor is more important than an actor. Without a good script, the director—if I'm a good director, like film people Zhang Yimou and them—he doesn't write the script himself, but if he directs well, does well, he's good at discovering scripts, discovering scripts and adapting them into screenplays. The script is the first most important. The screenplay is the first most important. Then I have a good director, I turn it into a play. The director is the organizer. Actually directors—those of us who are leading cadres are all playing the role of director. Then the director also needs a premise: an investor, investment.

Actually the market now, I feel, this may be the biggest and most controversial problem. When I was a kid, I went to the theater almost every week. I'm from Jing County. My grandmother took me every week. But our theater—I remember by the time I was in middle school it was gone. Our theater collapsed, then was used for something else. So I feel it's still about whether people are willing to pay for this, so that there's sustained economic input. This seems to get at the root. Actually, if you follow this logic as a starting point and deduce from it, there's a problem.

Q: Go on—why is there a problem?

Fan: There are no audiences who love watching opera anymore. Then no matter how you do opera, it won't work. It just won't work. Actually, that's not right. What should audiences be? The reason—when I was little, every county had a troupe. Why was that possible then? Because there was no film, especially no television. There were films, but they couldn't replace opera. Later television, and especially now with self-media, everyone doesn't even watch TV. You see, now people don't watch TV. In that situation, how does it exist? How can it exist?

This question, actually—first, don't expect current opera, except for a few especially hit operas, don't expect it to have a particularly large market return. As a country, as a country with cultural confidence, it invests a lot of money every year. But now the money invested is all wasted. Why? The whole system has problems.

Q: What kind? What's wrong with the system?

Fan: For example, every year the state spends—just the arts fund—you should know at Anhui Normal University. Every year the money we get for opera, just opera, as arts fund support, is very large, including new work creation and talent training projects. Let's talk about work creation—that's big money. But where's the problem? Last time Wang Chang'an and I were chatting about this. His arts fund ruined opera. Ruined it how? Take Huangmei opera. Now we'd rather watch The Fairy Couple and The Female Prince Consort, second-rate—I say second-rate, even provincial second-rate—a second-rate troupe performing The Fairy Couple and The Female Prince Consort, and we'd rather watch that than, say, Han Zaifen's The Immortal Sun or similar new scripts she created. Why?

The reason is opera—people who watch opera, like The Fairy Couple and The Female Prince Consort, we've seen them how many times, but we still love watching. Why? Because they're classics. What's a classic? Something you never tire of watching. Opera—not only that—what is the state funding for? Anything it supports for new work creation has to be new. For example, this year they give you 4 million. You have to spend money on composition. I only mentioned the director; I haven't mentioned composition, costumes, makeup, props. This whole series—costumes, makeup, props—it's a systematic project. Really, I'm talking systems theory, systems engineering. It's a systems project. Then after you spend 4 million, it looks like a lot, but actually it's sprinkled like pepper, everything innovated. That innovation—think about it—innovation forced out by throwing money at it once, how could it be a classic? Right. Yes.

How do classics come about? Repeated performance, repeated performance, infinite performances. Then the actors, as they perform, practice makes perfect. At a certain point, they think about why the audience doesn't like this part. Hey, when they talk about this, the audience one by one cries and applauds. Then that part where I sing, nobody responds, seems no reaction. It's the same as our classes. When I lecture this part, students don't respond; when I lecture that part, students get excited. If you lecture repeatedly, don't you gain experience? I know where the punchlines are. I see. Before, when we listened to The Female Prince Consort, we just waited to hear the most classic passage. Yes, yes, that's the principle.

So this problem—how to handle the market? You have classic plays. Like in Hefei, they sometimes give us tickets to watch opera. The same—like Han Zaifen's group came. Some people went then; now not many go to see The Immortal Sun. I went to see it, including the Judge Bao play our school performed before—also 4 million in new funding. There was also one called Storm on the Dabie Mountains. The composer was one person. I went to watch, watched half, watched two-thirds, then left. My wife and I went back. Couldn't stand it. I'm especially afraid—that kind of can't-stand-it isn't that it's bland; it's that I'm disgusted, it makes me want to vomit. It used bel canto to sing Storm on the Dabie Mountains, to sing our—because I'm from Jinzhai—the red story of the Dabie Mountains. He used that kind of opera, Western opera, Western singing. Innovation for innovation's sake. I didn't see a bit of feeling in it, not a bit.

Then they say, well, I say, look—for example, why did Red Guards on Honghu Lake, why did Red Soviet... why did that film become a hit? It started as an opera. It was performed many times by a troupe in Wuhan, many times, and finally made into a film. In the film, it became a hit. Why? Its singing, its content, was very close to our culture, our lives. To put it plainly, to sum it up in one sentence: you must create classic opera. Don't always innovate. If you're always innovating, that's absolutely failure. So audiences are cultivated.

When I was dean of our arts college, for the development of our opera, one idea I proposed was: use classics to cultivate audiences, then create new works. But that doesn't mean you can't produce new works; don't innovate—no, never innovating won't work either. Every so many years, create one opera, forge a new classic. Look at The Fairy Couple and The Female Prince Consort. All of us, insiders and outsiders, know them. If in ten or even twenty years there's one new work that can compare with them, that's a great success, very remarkable, and it can be performed infinitely, all over the country.

Q: Hearing you say this, I understand, and I really agree. Because it's impossible that just to get funding, they keep innovating. That new thing, without repeated rehearsal, can't become a classic. That 4 million ultimately buys a script, music, a bunch of actors performing. Everyone gets paid, and then who do they perform for? For experts, for leaders. After they watch, it's done. No meaning, no value. Next year they apply again. If you take that same script to apply again, it won't be approved. There's a new script, and it starts all over. It's like many patents and research achievements in our country's universities—they never become real productive forces.

Fan: I think you should still write articles. I studied linguistics—I studied phonology. My advisor is 90 now, but he still writes sometimes. He feels—because he's retired, he has no assessments, no benefit considerations—he simply feels some things should be written. I'm writing books. These years I've been writing books. This year I'm editor-in-chief of a set by several professors at Anhui Normal University, including President Shi Hua—the 12 books of A General History of Anhui Culture. Two of them are the ICH volumes. I went to look the first time. I also took part in the dialect section. That time you didn't go—it was another teacher. You had something then, so I didn't see you. No, that time when they handed out the plaques, I was there. Each of us got a plaque like an editorial board member. I didn't go. Oh, so I went to look the first time. The first time I didn't know. Then I was editor-in-chief of the ICH volume. We had 600,000—they said 500,000, finally about 600,000—two volumes, upper and lower. That's not a small number of words. Hu Chi and I co-edited. I was first editor-in-chief; I brought Hu Chi in as second. We were the editors of that sub-volume. Then across the province, Lu Juan on your side, dance and so on. At the time, because this isn't my specialty, but I'm fairly interested, when the table of contents came down, I specifically looked at the ICH volume. Yes, we're still writing. I myself am writing the traditional craft section, about 100,000 words. Because the ICH I mainly investigate is this craft area. I investigated the Xuan Brush Factory and the decorative bricks in Jing County—water-ink decorative bricks. I've written about decorative bricks, I know. Then this Xuan brush—I wrote a book, Xuan Brush. You can find it online. Yes. At the Xuan brush place, what I felt more strongly is that their Xuan Brush Factory once had over 100 people; now the frontline workers are only four. So one is the final brush trimmer—that's different. The 100-some people earlier were the Jinjian Xuan Brush Factory, which was equivalent to a collective enterprise. But now the people are very... Now it's each... you mean Wushenyan? The boss I'm talking about—Wu Shenyan, the former Jing County Xuan Brush Factory, Wu Shenyan. His boss Wu Shenyan. His daughter—yes, surname Wu. That area I've done a lot on; I've written about it.

Q: I'd like to ask, because government departments say their material interests—for example, every year although not much, they give some money to ICH inheritors—and cultural rights. For example, when I investigate workers at the Xuan Brush Factory and other factories, I ask, "Do you know what you're doing is ICH?" He says, "We're not ICH. The boss is ICH." I feel the workers themselves don't have this cultural self-awareness. So this benefit—later I asked government departments, is this benefit given to individuals or to their collective? They said it's only to individuals, definitely individuals. The money is very little. Every year the money for true inheritors is very little. National-level inheritors get 20,000 a year per person; provincial-level get 8,000. But that money is subsidy money; it's not much. The core, the real big money, is what I just said, similar to arts fund projects. They have ICH protection funds every year. Each project—some have over a million, national-level ones over a million, provincial ones up to 300,000-400,000. Is this given to the inheritor or to the project, to the protection unit? The protection unit—does that have to do with the inheritor? You're talking about the inheritor—he's a worker. He has an employment relationship with the boss, the entrepreneur. The funds go to the protection unit, either the boss, the enterprise, or the county cultural center. It's all used to write this book, or build a museum, or expand some equipment. It won't be given separately to anyone as a subsidy. That money isn't paid as subsidy.

Fan: I understand, I understand. And now, because I just came into contact with this—because my child was doing a summer research project, I went along, and I got interested. At the time I thought, ordinary ICH inheritors—almost all I meet no longer engage in production. And the person who has done production all his life—he seems unable to represent ICH culture. So I feel, as an outsider...

Q: The problem you're raising is like this. Currently, it's not entirely that ICH representative inheritors are not in the organization. This phenomenon exists—probably half, about half. What does that mean? Some people, for example, representative products of a feast—he's definitely still producing. If he doesn't produce, who gives him money? Right. If it's a collective project, one person—say Xuan paper—how much work can one person do? He's more like an organizer. Opera is often like what I just said: Wang Danhong and them are already in their fifties or sixties. When he became famous, he started in his twenties. He won the Plum Blossom Award around thirty. Then he makes special appearances. Like he often helped our school with The Drunken Concubine. He occasionally appears. Normally he plays the role of a teacher, leading students, letting students go on—that's what they call transmission. If they're still on stage, students have no chance to appear. That kind is also understandable. But some people—indeed, like our Xuan Paper Factory, Xuan Brush Factory—She Zhengjun is still doing it. Wu Xinyan—Wu Xinyan should still be doing it too. She more or less still does it. Her daughter and them are all doing it. Her daughter is in it. Her daughter definitely has to do it; she depends on it every day to live. For handicraft categories, most are still doing it. But Xuan Paper Factory, like Xing Chunrong and them—he was originally a factory director-level, deputy factory director-level person. So they originally didn't do it. But when recommending, it's impossible to recommend a frontline worker. They definitely recommend those with skill, more comprehensive, older workers, who then became deputy factory directors. Their chances are greater. That's the phenomenon. There are also some like Wang Chang, who does tea. I've also changed my view of him. Before, he drove. Wang Chang—he wasn't making tea. But later, after he bought this factory, after he became boss, he actually also made improvements to the tea and so on. He personally did some design, some guidance. It's not that he completely doesn't participate.

Q: Yes, that's it. The last question: group ICH inheritors, as they propose—do you approve?

Fan: Although it sounds like it should be a group, in practice it's hard to operate. How do you operate? Like our country is a socialist country, we have public ownership. This property belongs to the public, the people. The people must have someone to represent them, right? Then our Communist Party represents them, as the leading party, and state-owned enterprises as the substantive representatives. There has to be an organization. Our country also has a problem: the whole association—industry organizations, industry associations. Logically, industry associations could be the inheriting group. The ideal would be an industry association as the inheriting group. An industry association is the collective organization of our industry. But in China that also doesn't work. I used to firmly believe industry associations were good. Later I found it doesn't work. For example, the president of the tea association is Wang Chang himself. So if the industry association—he's the president—does he represent the industry association? If you hand it to the industry association as the inheriting unit, then either nobody manages it, or it becomes the president managing it. You have no way to implement it. Right, you have to implement it. If you don't implement it, just talking about an empty concept is useless.

Q: What you just said—about funding—the state spends so much on ICH protection every year. That is, some important ICH doesn't need to go through the market and have others pay for it; it can survive. But these—well, that's not what I mean. What I want to say—this can't be explained in three sentences. What's the concept? Many ICH projects, if they relied entirely on selling themselves—like opera relying on ticket sales to survive—the project would have gone under long ago. After the state invests money, it gives subsidies. For example, Hefei in recent years did one—last year, a very good thing—invested 20 million. What did it do? It was called "A Hundred Operas Enter Anhui." I went to see famous opera genres from all over the country, like Henan Bangzi opera—Henan Bangzi. When I was little I saw one... my brain isn't working... there was a film, Henan Yu opera. Yu opera. The Yu opera Third Troupe, Fourth Troupe—Third Troupe. They performed one about educated youth going to the countryside. That troupe came to perform, and they were all the most representative actors. Very wonderful, all traditional classic plays. And when we bought tickets, how cheap? 10 to 30 yuan. Cheapest 10, most expensive 30. Were there many viewers? Full houses, every time packed. Not propaganda—spontaneous. People knew about it and bought tickets themselves. Everyone knew. I bought tickets too, my wife and I. It wasn't organized, not a group, not tickets given out. That's great. But tickets were very cheap. If sold at normal price, they should be one or two hundred, at least over a hundred. At 10 to 30 yuan, it's a benefit ticket. Really good. Yes. Everyone watched, very moved. It's still these classics. I saw several opera genres—Yu opera, Shanxi Jin opera. This time I went to Guilin. Guilin's Gui opera. Gui opera, and others. All quite good. Anyone who can win the Plum Blossom Award—of course now the Plum Blossom Award has scandals. Once a bunch of people manipulate it, it's finished; it's not what ordinary people truly like. But Plum Blossom Award winners are indeed high-level. Most are still okay. Actually there are good ones, good ways. As long as it's good opera, after I watched, I found that watching live is like listening to a concert live—absolutely not the same effect as watching on TV. On TV, there's a screen between you. Live, it's face to face. You're infected by it so strongly. You feel, ah, really. When I was little, I didn't understand it, but I often—once or twice a week—went to the theater. Ah yes, and Beating the Golden Branch, Jin opera's Beating the Golden Branch. I saw the film as a child. Oh, this activity is pretty good. The money was actually spent usefully. That's how it should be spent. That 20 million wasn't wasted. Yes.

Q: Listening to you is very rewarding. And I started just going locally myself—well, it's good you're interested. But indeed, doing ICH—in the short term you can't produce obvious results.

Fan: I do ICH because my situation is special. I got my PhD in 2001, and in 2001 I was made professor. So I had no pressure. The state only started doing ICH in 2005. I was an expert evaluating ICH.

Q: Your specialty—what was your PhD in?

Fan: My undergraduate major was physics at Anhui Normal University. Physics. Yes, I did my undergraduate at Anhui Normal University, Department of Physics, graduated in '85. Then in '88 I started graduate school. My master's was in physics—history of science, history of science and technology. History of science and technology, like you studying literary history. Then later I got into ICH. I started my PhD in '97, from March '97 to graduation in '01. Four and a half years, four years and three months. After my PhD, because before my PhD I was at Anhui Medical University, School of Humanities—I was the first, later the first dean of the School of Humanities. When I was running the School of Humanities at the medical university, I taught philosophy and logic. This was extremely important for my later development. If you do scholarship, logic is actually very important. Because you're more the comprehensive type—able to connect things. Then during my PhD, it was still history of science and technology, but my PhD was on history of technology. My master's was history of astronomy. History of astronomy. Oh, I should have my daughter—she said she... Because Professor Fan has a lot going on at home, I hurried, I didn't let her come. I came to ask myself. She's about to be a senior in high school, and she plans to study physics, plans to study astronomy. Good, good. She should come and see. She's also interested in ICH. I said I'd ask first, might be faster. I was afraid she'd waste my time—waste your time—so I... Then my PhD—because my doctoral dissertation was the papermaking volume of the Complete Works of Chinese Traditional Crafts. My doctoral dissertation was that book. And it was President Lu Yongxiang of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, then already vice chairman of the National People's Congress, the general editor of a series called Complete Works of Chinese Traditional Crafts. My doctoral dissertation was the papermaking volume, one of 14 volumes. That book was only published in '05. Published in '05. But the papermaking volume—handmade paper is ICH. Later it became ICH. I'll look for it. I'll look—this book should still be available online. You can still buy it online. Okay. The papermaking volume of Complete Works of Chinese Traditional Crafts is my doctoral dissertation. Of course if you look, you can only find Complete Works of Chinese Traditional Crafts: Papermaking and Printing. Papermaking and Printing. A book combining two doctoral dissertations—papermaking and printing. I was first author of the papermaking volume; second author was my advisor. The book Papermaking and Printing was signed by my advisor, my senior fellow apprentice, and me. Mr. Zhang, Mr. Zhang Minlun. I'll take a look. Later, if there are related questions, or if I continue to be interested, I'll ask you again. Okay.

Q: Today I'm really sorry. I know your family is so busy. If there's a chance, I'd like to hear you talk again. It's very interesting. Then I'll treat you to a meal. Next time—next time you come to Wuhu, give me a chance. Okay. Thank you, Professor Fan. Then you go ahead and get busy.

Fan: Okay, okay. Anyway, ICH—as long as you talk to me about it, ICH is definitely my old trade. For me, later, because of my doctoral dissertation, in '05 I suddenly became an ICH expert. My starting point was high. The reason is my doctoral dissertation started in '97 on handmade paper. So when the state started doing ICH, I had already been working on it for years. Yes. I heard—Qian Jia introduced you to me, said Professor Fan is very impressive, doing ICH. No, Qian Jia and I are on very good terms. Qian Jia recently broke a big scandal. They told me—it's not his problem, not his personal problem, right? Oh, is it not his personal problem? I'm not clear. I heard him say a bit, and I didn't want to ask in detail. Right, right, I didn't want to ask either. But when I meet him, he's very respectful to me. Yes, yes. He said when it comes to you—he feels ICH, this field, your school's program—you brought it out. Right, definitely. In Anhui, those doing ICH research, including evaluations, mainly you built it and brought it out. I can't say that. I'm an important member. In the province, in this field, a few do quite well. One is Hu Chi, as we just said. Hu Chi also—although a few years younger, when I was an expert evaluator, he was already working there as staff. Are ICH inheritor evaluations decided entirely by government departments, or by experts—do you experts participate? It's actually government-led, experts evaluate, like evaluating professional titles. Oh, like that. Right, I've been involved from the very beginning. So who defines this is actually still an expert evaluation process. In '97—no, '07—I wrote an article, searchable, about several problems in ICH evaluation. I wrote about three problems, published in the Journal of Anhui University, a Category II journal. At the time I wrote "Several Problems in ICH Evaluation." Actually it touched on the questions you're asking now. Okay, I'll find it. Yes, '07. I published an article, not long. I submitted it, and after a few months they published it. They called me and said, hey, we need this kind of thing—both theoretical thinking and practical operation. I said these are confusions I encountered in evaluation. I thought them through and wrote an article. Writing articles like this is useful for their policy making. Would they adopt the things you propose? How much influence? I'll tell you, it should influence them. But actually the whole ICH field—because I've experienced 20 years of ICH. Last year was 2025, right? 25 years—they call it 20 years of ICH protection. At the time Jianghuai—called Jianghuai Forum? No, Jianghuai Spring... Jianghuai Chunqiu. The magazine Jianghuai Chunqiu is run by the provincial CPPCC. They organized an issue, several articles, and asked me to write the opening article, called "20 Years of ICH Protection: Achievements, Problems, and Prospects." They made it a column. The first article. I wrote it. That article, you can find it online. From it you can see what we did in the 20 years of ICH protection, what achievements, what problems. It's in Jianghuai Chunqiu. Which year did you say? Last year's. Search 2025. Search my name, author Fan Jialu. Then you'll find it. Okay. If it becomes a public article, or is there a special channel for experts like you? I just said—actually, what I want to say is: ICH protection started with the Ministry of Culture. Then there was no Ministry of Culture and Tourism, only the Ministry of Culture. The Ministry of Culture organized and led it. Later people changed one after another. Our country is like this: one leader, one strategy; one leader, one line of thinking. So it changes. Then these experts are mainly Beijing experts. I was actually always a member of the Ministry of Culture's National Expert Committee for the Protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage. There were 18 people nationwide. I was one. In our province, besides Beijing, there were only 8 people. That was rare. July '06, searchable online, National Expert Committee for the Protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage. Then after changes, I worked until 2010. After 2010, when I was vice president of Huangshan University, after 2010 basically the minister changed. The whole work was mainly Beijing experts. What I want to express is that as personnel change, the wind vane, the direction, is constantly shifting. So whether our suggestions reach their ears—some people will think, will read articles; some just go by gut. This problem is very... Our province is the same. The division chief—I worked with our department director in the same team, so we're on good terms. I told him, the ICH division chief can't be changed casually. If you rotate someone who knows nothing about ICH into the ICH division chief post, isn't that a joke? I think it's simply intolerable. He told me, "Dean, you—when I operate this, I know. But our cadres—you can't expect one division chief to solve it. If cadres aren't rotated, the situation of them being hunted/cornered is too serious." Oh, so he says they must rotate. Otherwise they'll get caught? That's the problem. Do you feel that over 20 years, if there are policy changes, overall is it better? Overall there are good changes, but there are also people—government behavior always... Overall, it's definitely moving in a good direction, but the problems inside—he can't cover everything, can't be comprehensive to every detail. Right, the important thing, the ultimate goal, is to pass on the more representative ICH. Now this involves another topic: in the first 20 years, the first however many years were basically protection-first, rescue first, protection first, reasonable utilization, and finally what's it called? Inheritance and development. Actually now the direction has changed again. Protection has been done well enough. Now the core is utilization, transforming into cultural industry. That line of thinking is changing again. So these things I can only tell you roughly, because every question has detailed issues. Yes. I've found ICH is too complex. Yes. What's inside involves a whole field. It's not one problem, not a specific event. It's a big field. Okay, then that's all for today. I've taken up so much time. It's fine. Next time I have a chance, I'll ask you again. Best if we can sit down and listen to you. Just chatting like this is very interesting. Yes, yes. Okay. Then you go ahead. Okay. Thank you, Professor Fan. Okay. Goodbye.

《Cultural Center: Interview with the ICH Department》

Editorial note: Q = interviewer; Tong = Director Tong. In editing, I have tried to keep the original wording and cut repetition and meaningless filler; obvious transcription errors have been restored from context.

Q: Director Tong, hello.

Tong: Hello.

Q: Should we turn on video? I haven't used Tencent Meeting for a long time. I just downloaded it again. Can you see me?

Tong: I can't see you now, but I can hear you.

Q: Let me check my video. Can you see me now?

Tong: Okay, I'll turn it on. Hello.

Q: This is my daughter. Sorry to trouble you today, and for having to download Tencent Meeting again.

Tong: It's fine. I happen to be on duty at the center this morning, and there's nothing to handle right now.

Q: This is one of her summer assignments. We investigated two ICH sites, and she needs some survey questions for government departments. I'd like to ask you a few things. First, when evaluating ICH inheritors, what is the most important standard?

Tong: This is timely—our Xuancheng Municipal Culture and Tourism Bureau has just started the application work for the seventh batch of municipal-level ICH inheritors, and it's explained fairly clearly there. The number of years is indeed an important standard. Because an inheritor should be someone who, in the ICH project he practices, is relatively authoritative, someone who has long worked on the front line. And “inheritor”—from the literal meaning, “inheriting” means inheriting from his master. Who is that? This person should be working locally; he can't be an outsider. For example, our Xuan paper—it should be local. Locally, doing Xuan paper, his master is local, his master's master is also local. That way there's a three-generation inheritance relationship. Also, the word “transmitting”—its important meaning is that he should transmit it to his apprentices. That is the important meaning of “inheritance.” Above, there's a master; below, there are apprentices. And in the ICH project he practices, he should have many years—at least at our county level, 10 years or more. At the municipal level, we think it should be more, the more the better. As for what you said—organizing production, providing tools and materials, sales, factory director—but not actually doing it, generally we do not accept such people's applications as inheritors. They must be on the front line, long engaged in this ICH work, mainly for the inheritance of the craft. Applicants must be frontline producers, so we generally don't accept organizers.

Q: I'd like to add: for example, a person was originally doing this—making paper or brushes—he was frontline, doing it himself. But later he may have become factory director and had no time for frontline work, and there was a gap. Can such a person?

Tong: In that case, generally we don't quite approve either. A person like that should have long been on the front line and must also take apprentices. If you only use past achievements to be evaluated, it's like evaluating professional titles: before you were evaluated as intermediate, when you apply for senior, only achievements during your term count. For example, if he was doing production 10 or 20 years ago, but in the last 10 years he hasn't been on the front line and hasn't passed on the craft by taking apprentices, generally we also don't... we don't encourage him to apply.

Q: But currently what I see—including in other places I've visited—basically inheritors who feel they are still engaged in this labor, still doing this, are relatively few.

Tong: Sorry, I just got a call from Director Wang of the provincial department's ICH office. He was asking about the Xuan brush ICH company matter, so I was delayed. Please continue.

Q: Just now I was saying—including in other places, I saw their ICH inheritors almost don't have time for frontline production, because they basically have to go—some go into schools, some do guidance, and some have to organize production, like sourcing materials, sales, and so on. Situations like that.

Tong: Well, for example, he previously was on the production front line for many years, right? Then as time accumulates, he may also transition into an operator. But at the same time, what you just said—going to schools to spread knowledge—that is also an obligation of our ICH inheritors. That is, you should go to campuses and explain ICH-related knowledge to the public. That is also an obligation. For example, when he participates in a certain activity, he needs to do publicity and display. At the site, he demonstrates his ICH craft, displays his works, etc. These are all obligations he should fulfill, things he should do. Also, for example, in managing raw materials—his control over raw materials, raw materials also affect the inheritance of the ICH craft. These are all related to the ICH craft, not contradictory.

Q: Oh, so that also counts. When evaluating, he should participate in more public welfare activities, go into schools, promote to the public, display ICH knowledge. That is something he should have, not just production.

Tong: Mm.

Q: Second question: because I see many ICH things are not made by one person from start to finish; there may be many processes involved. If one person wants to apply as an inheritor, when applying, does he need to record the contributions of other participants?

Tong: No need. You mainly say—for example, Xuan paper has many processes, right? You are a paper-lifting worker, or a paper-drying worker, or a paper-cutting worker. You only need to present your own craft characteristics, your contribution in this ICH craft. For example, some of the better works you produced, like commemorative Xuan paper, some Xuan paper with names—you participated. Your role in this craft—present that. Your campus activities, which ICH exhibitions you participated in—you only state your own. In your inheritance process, you took on an apprentice, etc. You only need to do your own part.

Q: I was thinking: in one ICH item, there may be some they call master craftsmen, some they consider not very important, and some processes with particularly high technical content. For example, is it that a certain type of process—say, a very important one—applying as inheritor is better, more advantageous, while some they consider easily replaceable are less likely to be approved as inheritors?

Tong: That's right. For example, some core ICH skills are harder to inherit and make a greater contribution. When we evaluate applications, we pay more attention and give more weight and support to those. That's how it is.

Q: Because I searched online for Anhui Province's ICH management measures and Jing County's. It says first, exquisite skill; then ten years; then mastery of core skills. That means he has to be in it—for example, he can't be doing miscellaneous tasks. That won't do, right?

Tong: Right, right. That is, if you make something, what is its core skill? To become an inheritor, you must master the most important process. You must master the whole process. You are a master craftsman. Only then are you qualified to teach others, right?

Q: Third question: we see many frontline workers, some have done it for decades, a lifetime. But when I ask them, “Do you know what you're doing is ICH?” they say they're not ICH—they say, for example, the boss or their factory director is ICH. I want to know: can frontline practitioners, even those doing the most core work, participate in applications?

Tong: Of course they can. Of course. Some—the bosses you mentioned—because, for example, as I just said, he was originally in the factory, he had the most core skills, he could master them. But later, for historical reasons—for example, some factories went bankrupt, and he personally bought it and became the operator. He changed from a worker to an entrepreneur. But the core skills he mastered weren't lost. He can still, for example, control the incoming raw materials, and when recruiting workers he teaches, checks at training, teaches some skills, etc. He hasn't lost these skills. Frontline practitioners—as long as you've worked in this industry for a certain number of years, have mastered the core skills, and can pass them on and take apprentices—are also qualified to apply.

Q: I'm wondering: if both types of people apply at the same time, which type has more advantage? One type has always been doing one thing, never left the post, maybe rests one day a week. The other also masters it, but for example he has already been recognized as a county-level inheritor, and now applies at a higher level. He can go to schools to give talks, meaning he has more external representational rights. If two such people apply for ICH, which has more advantage?

Tong: Then we look at the materials. It's not just your core skills. For example, your situation with apprentices, awards for your works, participation in public welfare activities, publicity and display activities, etc. We have all aspects. When filling out the project application form, it's fairly clear. We make a comprehensive evaluation based on the application form and performance conditions.

Q: That is, externally, I feel the frontline person who may have been doing it all along may not have the conditions for external publicity—he's just doing it every day.

Tong: Mm.

Q: Fourth: I see that at all levels, the government has some support for ICH inheritors. Is this support for the individual inheritor or for the craft? Can it benefit ordinary frontline workers?

Tong: It cannot benefit all practitioners. It must be ICH inheritors at various levels, individual ICH inheritors. For example, national-level: the Ministry of Culture and Tourism gives 20,000 yuan per person per year. For our county, Jing County, the matching amount is 5,000. For provincial-level inheritors in Anhui, our Provincial Department of Culture and Tourism gives 7,000 yuan per person per year; Jing County matches 2,000. For municipal level, so far Xuancheng City has no subsidy, but Jing County gives 2,000 per year. For county level, we give 1,200 per year. These are fixed subsidies for ICH inheritors at each level.

Q: Actually, you must be very clear about this. When I visit their ICH sites, I feel that whether boss or worker, carrying on is really not easy. The things they produce—we went to the Xuan brush factory, they said Jing County's Xuan brushes are unquestionably good in quality, but like Jiangxi brushes, they may use poorer raw materials, yet can sell at very low prices on the market. Xuan paper has also been hit hard. It feels like for the government, it gives these conveniences, but actually the bosses—I feel it's still very hard for them to keep the enterprise going.

Tong: Right. Now, especially traditional crafts, traditional culture—fewer and fewer young people like calligraphy and painting, so demand for Xuan paper and Xuan brushes is also lower. So we need to do more to pass on and promote the importance of fine traditional culture. It's even more important to inspire young people's love for traditional fine culture.

Q: Yes, yes. The government is helping them now. I heard them say that in applying to go into schools, government support in this area may be better. Sometimes people visit, do campus activities.

Tong: In Jing County, I think as early as 2021, the state promoted the double reduction policy. Our Jing County Culture and Tourism Bureau and Jing County Education Bureau jointly issued a document, notifying all compulsory education schools in the county. We collected the list of inheritors willing to participate, project names, phone numbers, and put them all at the end of the joint document, sent to each school. Each school, nearby and voluntarily, chose bilaterally. They would connect with the inheritors and invite them to include this ICH class in after-school services every afternoon. That way each school gives them, like teachers, a certain after-school service subsidy. We also agreed with the Education Bureau: the school pays part, and our culture and tourism department subsidizes more than 100 yuan per class. Each class—about 200-plus classes, more than 200 yuan per class. For inheritance, we also encourage them to go into schools. We've carried out this activity for more than five consecutive years.

Q: They seem quite enthusiastic. They feel the government is doing a good thing. On the other hand, our teachers and students also want to understand some ICH knowledge of Jing County, want to experience it. Our inheritors are also fairly proactive and very willing to participate in the connections.

Tong: Mm.

Q: Last question: the current recognition system—from your perspective, for the different ICH processes, including managers and frontline workers—how fair do you think it is?

Tong: Because I do this work, I feel that currently it can fairly reflect participation in applications. We mainly follow the ICH Law and Anhui Province's ICH regulations. For example, what conditions applicants should have—we follow national, provincial, and municipal documents, and adjust application standards according to our county's actual situation. But roughly similar. For example, in Jing County, to apply as a county-level inheritor, you should be local to Jing County, engaged in this industry, for how many years, master core skills, take apprentices, participate more, have works—if he has been doing related work all along, then after he voluntarily submits application materials, our Cultural Center, which is the ICH Protection Center, will organize an assessment team to go to his home, to his workshop. You must show us on site that it's really you, whether you can actually perform the craft. It must truly reflect your skill level. Through this frontline on-site inspection, we ensure the authenticity of the inheritor and his mastery of the craft. So this is our first step.

Q: Also relatively new: I saw that experts doing ICH at Sun Yat-sen University proposed something called group inheritors. It hasn't entered policy yet. They think that one craft's contribution cannot be completed by one person, so one craft should have a group of inheritors. What do you think of this suggestion?

Tong: I think it's necessary. Because some ICH projects cannot be completed by one person; they need several, even a dozen people to work together to pass on the craft. For example, some operas, right? You can only sing one role. For example, for a play, or Peking opera, it's divided into sheng, dan, chou, etc., various roles. Their performance skills and methods differ. To fully present the opera culture, it needs many roles to show it. I think it's necessary.

Q: Now experts are calling for this by writing papers. I don't know if government departments have seen things like this, or if it hasn't been accepted yet. What's the main difficulty?

Tong: You mean group?

Q: Yes, group inheritors.

Tong: This mainly differs by place. In some places, one person can complete it. In some projects, it requires many people. Local conditions differ. For opera—Huangmei opera, Peking opera—some places have it, some don't, right?

Q: For example, Xuan paper, like paper-lifting. Because I'm from Jing County, my family used to live near the chemical fertilizer plant, in the Xiao Wang Xiao Li area. All along there were Xuan paper factories. I've seen quite a few. They actually have many processes. Situations like that. I don't know if your government department has channels to make suggestions to government departments—to give more people the opportunity to become inheritors.

Tong: For inheritance, first it must be top-down. We must follow relevant national, provincial, and municipal regulations to form a system. If currently the provincial, national, municipal systems haven't come down, then our county generally won't have such a system. It can only be that scholars write suggestions upward. Only after, for example, our Ministry of Culture and Tourism, our provincial department, have such a system, do we implement it. A system like that is generally very hard for a county to formulate.

Q: Okay, okay. Thank you. Sorry to trouble you. If there's anything you think I should add, please say so. No problem.

Tong: You're welcome to come back to your hometown anytime. I'll take you to see Jing County's ICH.

Q: Okay, thank you. I went to high school at Jing County Middle School, then left Jing County. A few years ago I went back to do dialect fieldwork.

Tong: Oh, dialect, right.

Q: I was also from No. 1 Middle School?

Tong: No. I tested into Xuanshi in '93, went to Xuanzhong, went to technical secondary school.

Q: Oh, Xuanshi. Then that's it. If we think of more questions later, we'll ask you.

Tong: Okay, you can reach me by WeChat or phone, okay?

Q: Okay, okay. When you come to Wuhu, be sure to contact her father, let us play host.

Tong: Oh no, no need to be polite. You're also welcome to come home and look around.

Q: Okay, okay. Sorry to trouble you.

Tong: It's fine.