For three decades now, scholars of Thai studies have been struggling with the question of whether Thailand's independent status endowed the country with a unique historical trajectory. In 1978, Benedict Anderson was one of the first western scholars to argue that the concept of Thai exceptionalism was always assumed rather than critically demonstrated. As other researchers took up this challenge, they did so without a clear notion of how to engage post-colonial theory in a country lacking a western imperial state. The ambiguous allure of the West, an edited inter-disciplinary volume on Thai–West relations, represents the most ambitious attempt so far to answer Anderson's call for a methodological shift.
Rachel Harrison's introduction states the editors' main goal: to draw Thailand into a comparative debate with the broader field of post-colonial thought (p. 3). At present, the issue of terminology remains a critical obstacle. In the foreword, Dipesh Chakrabarty lays out the problems inherent with using European systems of classification within non-western contexts, which helps explain why there is no consensus among the contributors on how best to define Thailand's relationship with the West. Peter Jackson relies on the Maoist concept of semi-colonialism to describe Thai collaboration with demands of the global economy. Michael Hertzfeld prefers ‘crypto-colonialism’, suggesting the Bangkok elite purchased ‘nominal political independence at the expense of massive economic dependence’ (p. 174). Tamara Loos finds both these terms counter-productive, since they further entrench the binary form of analysis instead of dismantling them. Moreover, the emphasis on the ‘colonised’ aspect of Thai society ignores the imperialist activities of the Thai monarchy. At the conclusion of his chapter on intellectual discourse, Thongchai notes that a workable language for discussing the scope of Euro-American centrism continues to elude scholars. It appears that the term for identifying western influence in Thailand remains TBA — to be announced.
As the title suggests, each essay seeks to undermine the binary categories of ‘colonised’ v. ‘un-colonised’ by focusing on areas of ambiguity. For example, in some cases these categories function in unexpected ways. Thanes Wongyannava examines the popularity of Foucaultian theory among Thai academics in an effort to understand the tension between localisation and globalisation. Despite a general aversion to European theorists, Thai scholars have embraced Foucault due to their veneration of global (American) trends, yet actively localise his work by emphasising its empirical aspects rather than the theoretical origins. Loos focuses on the pluralistic legal system employed by the monarchy to help govern the Southern provinces in order to demonstrate that the Thai elite acted as both coloniser and colonised. By allowing the practice of Islamic law, but limiting its jurisdiction to family courts, the Thai emulated the colonial administrations in order to resist them. Likewise, Thongchai's essay effectively deconstructs the bifurcated view of a ‘spiritual’ Thailand as opposed to a ‘material’ West, and offers a critique of Thirayut's concept of ‘post-westernism’.
Peter Jackson's afterword includes an intriguing discussion of hybridity theory as a model for discussing on the volume's main themes: Thai accommodation of and resistance to western power. Drawing from the work of Bhaba and Canclini, Jackson argues that hybridity defines the Thai state's strategy for appropriating from powerful civilisations in order to legitimise domestic rule. The final result was that western imperialism strengthened the control of Siamese rulers rather than weakening it. For Jackson, an even more intriguing question involves how Thailand's subaltern populations have responded to western influence, which they consume largely through the medium of elite hybridisation. Perhaps, as May Adadol and Macdonald suggest, the excessive westernisation of subaltern artists is a conscious attempt to resist the power of self-westernising elites.
The use of hybridity theory to demonstrate the dual role of western imperialism in constraining and empowering the Thai elite offers exciting potential for the analysis of post-monarchical regimes as well. It could certainly shed light on how the Phibun regime (an unfortunate omission from this volume) responded to Japanese hegemony. During the Second World War, Phibun struggled to maintain his legitimacy at home by arguing that his government could shield Thailand from undesirable Japanese cultural influence while attempting to follow Japan's path to industrialisation. In his relations with Tokyo, Phibun embraced Pan-Asianism as a means to recover territory lost to the West, yet also hoped to win Thailand a privileged position within Asia's New Order by reminding the Japanese of his country's continued independence.
While it may be an exaggeration to state that Thai studies are completely isolated from the post-colonial debate, it is certainly true that a more sustained conversation between Thai and South Asian specialists would benefit both parties. Ambiguous allure, with its collection of wide-ranging and insightful essays, is a much-needed step in that direction.
