Sharo is a multidisciplinary artist and researcher from Taiwan whose work explores the sense of belonging, migration, and ways of living, particularly in the nuances of establishing a new identity within shifting geographical and cultural landscapes. Using ethnography study and visual art, she examines how personal memory and material life shape identity, influenced by her encounters with Invisible Trajectory in 2023-24 — the project of reviving the house collection of later modernist Chinese-Indonesian architect Herianto Sulindro in Zurich. Her background in anthropology, with a focus on the Chinese diaspora in Southeast Asia, informs her ethnographic approach to daily rituals and cultural practices. By blending research with performance, she creates participatory art and workshops that bridge academia and artistic expression, offering new perspectives on cultural adaptation and self-definition.
Introduction
“The same rice feeds a hundred kinds of people” is a Chinese proverb that describes how the same environment can nurture diverse individuals in society. Across Asia, studies of rice have highlighted how rice production and consumption are deeply intertwined with social organization, religious practices, and cultural identity. Rice-eating cultures are embedded within ecological landscapes shaped by thousands of years of agricultural innovation and interdependent labor structures. These systems have influenced festival rituals, gender divisions, kinship structures, and everyday customs. In this sense, rice functions not merely as sustenance but as a material anchor of relational life. Through migration across Southeast and East Asia, rice has also become central to the formation and negotiation of ethnic identity.
This paper explores the foodways of glutinous rice in Taiwan and examines how they have shaped fragmented identities through historical migration from the colonial period to the present. Glutinous rice, as a ceremonial and everyday grain, carries nutritional, symbolic, and cultural significance. From the settlement period of the Qing Dynasty, through Japanese colonization, to the early years of Kuomintang (Chinese Nationalist Party)Kuomintang rule, glutinous rice has appeared in different forms on Taiwanese tables; it can be found in Indigenous millet traditions, in Han Chinese celebratory offerings, and desserts from Southeast Asian migrants. These diverse practices point to layered histories of mobility, colonization, resistance, and revival.
Through the lens of a nonhuman material—glutinous rice—this paper examines postcolonial questions surrounding nativeness, belonging, and otherness. The naming of Taiwan itself reflects shifting outsider perspectives, while the treatment of glutinous rice across different historical periods—from colonial commodification to ritual persistence—reveals deeper anxieties and negotiations over identity and belonging.
Drawing on Mary Douglas’s Deciphering a Meal (1972), this paper approaches food not merely as sustenance but as a system of symbols. Douglas argues that meals communicate broader structures of meaning, distinguishing sacred from profane, holiday from everyday, inclusion from exclusion. Through this lens, glutinous rice is examined as a material form of social classification: its preparation, consumption, and ritual use encode cultural boundaries and express identity. By examining the contexts in which glutinous rice appears—Indigenous ceremonies, Han festivals, Japanese-standardized agriculture, and postwar revival—this paper traces how glutinous rice reflects and constructs identity in Taiwan across both geography and time.
By tracing the social and historical trajectories of glutinous rice in Taiwan, this paper aims to unpack how culinary practice reflects broader questions of identity, belonging, and cultural memory. It investigates how glutinous rice functions not only as food but as a material archive of social relations and a living site where historical memory, cultural identity, and belonging continue to be negotiated.
Glutinous Rice as a Socio-Ecological System
Glutinous rice, also known as sticky rice, differs significantly from other rice varieties in both its biological structure and cultural function. Containing almost no amylose, glutinous rice develops a characteristically sticky and chewy texture when cooked, making it ideal for shaping into ritual foods, dumplings, cakes, and ceremonial dishes across many Asian cultures. In contrast, long-grain indica rice, with its drier, fluffier texture, is more suitable for everyday meals and quick preparation, illustrating how cultivation choices reflect and adapt to sociocultural needs. Historically, glutinous rice has also been closely associated with the migration and settlement of the Tai peoples, who are believed to have originated in southern China and brought glutinous rice southward into regions such as Thailand and Laos about 1,000 to 1,500 years ago. As these communities migrated, they not only introduced cultivation techniques adapted to upland terrains but also helped spread ritual and culinary uses of glutinous rice throughout Southeast Asia (Sattaka, 2016).
From an agricultural perspective, glutinous rice is labor-intensive and often grown in small plots, particularly in upland and rain-fed environments where water control is more difficult. Compared to high-yield varieties, glutinous rice typically has lower productivity, but it remains resilient in marginal areas. Braudel (1979) points out in his comparative discussion of crop productivity that a hectare of rice paddies in France during the Lavoisier era could yield 11 quintals of consumable rice, producing over 7.35 million calories, whereas wheat under the same conditions would yield only about 1.5 million calories. This stark difference underscores rice’s energy efficiency and its fundamental role in sustaining labor-intensive societies.
In terms of distribution, Sattaka maps the prevalence of glutinous rice across the Greater Mekong Subregion, showing a broad spread across northern Thailand, Laos, northern Vietnam, Yunnan in China, and Myanmar. These regions share not only environmental similarities but also socio-historical connections through trade, migration, and shared ceremonial practices. The spread of glutinous rice is closely intertwined with the movement of people and the transmission of ritual, culinary, and agricultural knowledge across the region.
The social labor behind glutinous rice cultivation also reflects unique community dynamics. In many upland communities, rice farming requires coordinated family or village-level labor, reinforcing interdependent social structures. The cultivation calendar is often closely linked to communal rituals and agricultural festivals, making rice not only a staple crop but also a medium through which social cohesion and cultural identity are expressed. As Cuiping (2000) observes in her ethnographic study of the Jingpo communities in Southwest China, glutinous rice is embedded in kinship structures, where labor is organized along kinship and gender lines. Among the Jingpo people, for example, during soul-calling rites, ritual meals featuring cooked glutinous rice play a crucial role because glutinous rice is believed to attract and nourish the spirit. Its significance is deeply connected to kinship relations.
Food, Ritual Boundaries, and Social Inclusion
Importantly, the rice used must not be sourced from the maternal family, reflecting specific lineage boundaries and the social logic governing who can participate in these sacred exchanges. Different types of worship rituals carefully regulate who is allowed to consume the offerings, often limiting participation to certain patrilineal family members. In some cases, neighbors or individuals outside the kin group, who are not directly connected to the ritual’s familial context, may be invited to eat the offerings, reinforcing and negotiating social boundaries between the family and others. These practices echo Douglas’s argument that food categories and meal patterns encode rules of inclusion and exclusion. They highlight how kinship structures shape ritual behavior and define the boundaries of participation within spiritual and social spheres.
Therefore, glutinous rice should not be understood merely as a crop but as a socio-ecological system. Its production, distribution, and consumption reveal complex layers of historical continuity and transformation across Asia. By examining its agricultural, geographical, and social dimensions, we begin to see how glutinous rice serves not only as sustenance but also as a living archive of cultural memory and migration.
From Others to Native
While the name “Taiwan” (臺灣) reflects a space of geographical convergence and cultural intersection as understood by the indigenous Siraya people (Wen, 2000), the concept of what is “native” in Taiwan has been continuously redefined through the eyes of successive outsiders. From early Dutch colonizers to Qing settlers and Japanese administrators, glutinous rice became a focal point through which Taiwanese identity and belonging were both acknowledged and contested.
Glutinous rice has long played a role not only in dietary practice but also in the construction of symbolic and material infrastructures in Taiwan. During the Dutch colonial period (1624–1662), although direct documentation of glutinous rice consumption is limited, there is indirect evidence of its use in both daily life and architecture. The Dagregisters van het Kasteel Zeelandia (Daily Registers of Fort Zeelandia) describe how glutinous rice was mixed with lime and sand to form a binding agent in the construction of Anping Fort (then Fort Zeelandia), demonstrating its pragmatic value beyond the kitchen. Additionally, Favorlang-Dutch dictionaries compiled by Dutch missionaries include terms for cooked rice and porridge, suggesting rice’s centrality in local diets, even if specific varieties like glutinous rice were not always clearly distinguished.
Colonial Classification and the Politics of Nativeness
Beyond its practical applications, glutinous rice also appeared in colonial descriptions of indigenous ritual life. Dutch records described its use among Indigenous groups during feasts and ceremonies, often framed with a tone of exoticism or curiosity (Blussé, 1986). These portrayals reflect a colonial gaze that interpreted local dietary customs as markers of cultural difference, reinforcing notions of “otherness.” Such narratives not only exoticized Indigenous practices but also laid the groundwork for defining who was considered “native” to the island and how their ways of life were positioned with colonial norms.
Following the Dutch period, during the Zheng regime (1662–1683), agricultural expansion was a state priority. Although no specific records directly cite glutinous rice cultivation, it is reasonable to infer its presence given the crop’s prevalence in southern Fujian, the main source of Han settlers. Glutinous rice likely figured in both ritual and domestic use, especially among settler and Indigenous communities where sticky rice retained ceremonial value. Here, the boundaries between Indigenous and settler food practices began to blur, complicating simplistic distinctions of “native” versus “foreign” as settler communities appropriated and adapted Indigenous food customs, creating shared yet contested culinary identities.
Under Japanese colonial rule (1895–1945), glutinous rice became entangled with the colonial project of modernization and civilizing missions, which sought to classify and hierarchize local agricultural practices and cultural customs. Systematic documentation in Japanese agronomic surveys and Governor-General Agricultural Reports categorized glutinous rice as a minor, non-economic crop primarily associated with Indigenous peoples and rural communities (Taiwan Sōtokufu, 1920; Barclay, 2005). It was often described as “native” or “ethnic,” linked to ritual uses and special occasions rather than everyday consumption, in contrast to polished japonica rice, which was promoted for mass production and considered more modern and desirable. These classifications reflected a broader colonial ideology that constructed internal hierarchies of civilization and progress, positioning glutinous rice—and by extension its consumers—within an imagined spectrum of primitiveness versus modernity (Ching, 2001).
Glutinous Rice as Marker of Indigeneity
Through this lens, glutinous rice was framed not only as an agricultural product but as a cultural marker that signified indigeneity and social marginality. Drawing on Mary Douglas’s theory of symbolic order and pollution (Douglas, 1966), colonial perceptions of glutinous rice functioned to delineate who belonged within the dominant civilizational narrative and who remained peripheral. These processes of boundary-making were not merely top-down impositions; they interacted with local perceptions, where Taiwanese people themselves negotiated and reinterpreted what was “native” versus “other,” contingent on social, ethnic, and political contexts.
In this dynamic, “native” is less a fixed identity than a fluid and contested concept, shaped by historical power relations, migration patterns, and cultural exchanges. Glutinous rice, therefore, serves as a prism through which to explore these complexities—a foodstuff deeply embedded in ritual, identity, and social belonging that continues to evoke questions about the meaning of nativeness in Taiwan’s pluralistic society.
The history traced above illustrates how glutinous rice has never belonged exclusively to any single group or identity. Rather than asking who first used glutinous rice, we must ask how different communities—Indigenous groups, Han settlers, colonial administrators, and post-war migrants—positioned it within their cultural imaginaries. “Native,” in this sense, becomes a shifting and strategic claim shaped by power, policy, and everyday negotiation.
Ritual, Identity, and Contemporary Foodways
Among Taiwan’s Indigenous communities, glutinous rice continues to carry deep ritual and spiritual significance. In Amis llisin harvest festivals, glutinous rice is made into cinavu—steamed rice parcels wrapped in leaves and filled with meat or vegetables, which are offered to ancestors and shared in communal feasts, affirming kinship and territorial belonging (Chen, 2018). The Paiwan incorporate sticky rice mixed with millet in bamboo tubes during their masaru year-end ceremonies, where food mediates human-spirit relationships and marks cyclical renewal (Tan, 2001). These practices reflect how food is not only consumed but also embedded in cosmologies that tie people to land, history, and collective memory.
In Han Taiwanese society, glutinous rice similarly functions as a ritual medium, though with different symbolic inflections. During the Ghost Festival or Tomb-Sweeping Day, dishes like youfan (steamed glutinous rice with dried shrimp and mushrooms) are placed on family altars to nourish ancestors. The Dragon Boat Festival’s zongzi (rice dumplings wrapped in bamboo leaves) is often cited as a “traditional” Han practice, yet regional variations—especially in southern Taiwan—incorporate Indigenous leaf wrappings and ingredients, reflecting a syncretic culinary evolution (Anderson, 1988). Holo and Hakka communities also use glutinous rice in mi gao (sweet rice cakes) for wedding rituals, symbolizing auspiciousness and unity (Huang, 2013). These examples show how food rituals not only affirm ethnic identity but also enable the porousness of cultural boundaries through adaptation and exchange.
In more recent decades, the arrival of Southeast Asian migrants, particularly from Vietnam, Indonesia, Thailand, and the Philippines, has introduced new glutinous rice traditions into Taiwan’s culinary landscape. Markets and migrant-run food stalls increasingly feature items such as kueh lapis (layered sticky rice cake) and pulut inti (coconut-topped glutinous rice), especially within Malaysian and Indonesian communities. Rooted in the Peranakan or Nyonya food heritage, these dishes carry significant symbolic weight in their diasporic contexts, often prepared for religious celebrations or rites of passage (Tan, 2011).
Many glutinous rice dishes introduced by Southeast Asian migrants can be traced to cultural practices linked to the historic migration of Tai peoples across the region. As mentioned earlier, who played a key role in spreading glutinous rice cultivation and ritual uses throughout Southeast Asia (Sattaka, 2016). This historical continuity underscores how Taiwan’s migrant foodways are embedded in a larger cultural and migratory narrative, connecting present-day culinary practices with centuries-old traditions that cross borders and ethnic groups.
The growing visibility of these dishes in night markets and multicultural food festivals reflects not only demographic shifts but also evolving cultural discourses around inclusion, identity, and public space (Lan, 2008; Wu & Lin, 2020). Migrant food thus becomes both a vessel of cultural continuity and a site of everyday negotiation with Taiwanese society, complicating the notion of nativeness and expanding the island’s sensory archive of belonging.
Conclusion
Although rice is Taiwan’s staple, with wheat and other grains incorporated over time, glutinous rice retains a distinctive role in daily cuisine and ritual life. Its continued presence reflects not only dietary preference but also deep cultural symbolism, especially in ceremonial offerings. Glutinous rice weaves together Taiwan’s layered history of Indigenous, Han, colonial, and migrant identities.
This paper demonstrates that glutinous rice is more than sustenance—it is a material archive of social relations and a site where communities express belonging and negotiate differences. From Indigenous rituals to Han ancestral rites, colonial classifications, and migrant foodways, it reflects Taiwan’s pluralistic society and ongoing debates about nativity and otherness.
Although often overlooked in global food studies, glutinous rice’s everyday cultivation and consumption reveal crucial insights into the region’s history and culture. Studying its planting, preparation, and eating traces the links between land, ancestry, and identity, functioning as cultural genealogy passed through generations. Thus, the study of a single staple offers a valuable lens to understand the ties between food practices and collective identity.
Bibliography:
- Anderson, E. N. (1988). The food of Taiwan: Foodways and ethnicity. University of Hawaii Press.
- Barclay, P. D. (2005). Agricultural practices under Japanese colonial rule in Taiwan. Journal of Asian Studies, 64(2), 321–345.
- Braudel, F. (1979). Civilization and capitalism, 15th–18th century: The Structure of Everyday Life (S. Reynolds, Trans.). Harper & Row. (Original work published 1979)
- Chen, C.-Y. (2018). Ritual and kinship in the Amis ilisin harvest festival. Taiwanese Journal of Anthropology, 15(1), 45–68.
- Ching, L. T. S. (2001). Becoming “native”: The colonial discourse on indigeneity in Taiwan. Modern Asian Studies, 35(3), 573–608.
- Cuiping, L. (2000). Food and kinship: The social roles of glutinous rice among the Jingpo people. Ethnology Quarterly, 19(4), 123–139.
- Douglas, M. (1966). Purity and danger: An analysis of concepts of pollution and taboo. Routledge & Kegan Paul.
- Douglas, M. (1972). Deciphering a meal. In Implicit meanings: Essays in anthropology (pp. 119–146). Routledge.
- Huang, W.-C. (2013). Wedding rituals and symbolic meanings of mi gao in Hakka and Holo communities. Journal of Taiwanese Cultural Studies, 7(2), 88–105.
- Lan, P.-C. (2008). Migrant food and identity in Taiwan. Asian Ethnology, 67(2), 221–245.
- Sattaka, P. (2016). The spread and cultural significance of glutinous rice in Southeast Asia. Journal of Agricultural History, 40(1), 50–74.
- Taiwan Sōtokufu [Government-General of Taiwan]. (1920). Governor-General Agricultural Reports (Vol. 3). Taipei Government Printing Office.
- Tan, C.-H. (2001). Ritual food practices among the Paiwan: A study of masaru ceremonies. Indigenous Studies Review, 12(1), 33–57.
- Tan, Y.-F. (2011). Southeast Asian migrants and foodways in Taiwan: Cultural continuity and adaptation. Migration and Society, 6(3), 101–118.
- Wen, Z.-H. (2000). Taiwan di ming su yuan [The origins of Taiwan place names]. Taipei: Yuanliu Publishing House.
- Wu, S.-L., & Lin, J.-H. (2020). Food festivals and multiculturalism in Taiwan: Negotiating identity and space. Cultural Sociology, 14(4), 482–499.
