Should the National Palace Museum set up a branch museum? If so, what kind of branch museum, and where? If we look at these three questions from a purely professional viewpoint without considering any political implications, then we have three layers of questions. The first layer has to do with museum management systems, the second with the museum's objectives and the third with its social responsibility.
Since proposing the establishment of a branch museum, National Palace Museum Director Tu Cheng-sheng (杜正勝) has expressed his view at many conferences about the museum becoming a global or at least an Asian museum. Everyone now knows his standpoint clearly, but not everyone agrees. Except for a handful of people, many in museum circles believed it was the National Palace Museum's internal matter. Few people cared how Tu persuaded the Executive Yuan to expand the museum's collections. And they had no say in the issue anyway. The matter attracted no media attention until a public announcement was made. I guess the attention was because the decision had political implications. It could mean "de-sinicizing" the National Palace Museum, or it could be a move aimed at pleasing voters in central and southern Taiwan. No more guesswork here.
Most opponents of the museum's plan to set up a branch look at the issue from a professional viewpoint. The call for a branch museum first came from political circles. The museum has several hundred thousand items of national treasures in its collection. As the museum exhibits them in turn, it takes a long time to make one round. Why not set up a branch in the south so as to benefit more people? This argument is tenable in terms of common sense. For this reason, the early conferences reached positive conclusions on the matter. But the real professionals always shook their heads. There are many other museums around the world with larger collections, but none of them have thought of setting up a branch. The storage of national treasures requires massive long-term investment in professional manpower and facilities if the safety of the collections is to be ensured. Setting up a branch is an impractical idea.
In terms of objectives, the museum attracts more than two million visitors per year. With the continuing expansion of its structure and with new projects under way, the museum should already have enough space for development, opponents argue. Some experts believe that the museum has fallen far behind the world's major museums in terms of exhibition quality. Even the Shanghai Museum has surpassed it. The museum should give some more thought to raising the quality of its exhibitions or propose some innovative exhibition concepts. For a long time, the museum has neglected education. The traditional belief is that the National Palace Museum is only for preserving historic relics, but the primary mission of modern museums is in education. The museum has made some improvements in this regard, but there is still much more room for expansion. It is worthwhile putting more manpower into studying the objectives and methodologies of education on ancient relics. Though the top museum in Taiwan, the National Palace Museum still has much more work to do to become a first-class museum. Why the hurry to expand its turf now?
Setting up a branch museum is significant only in the context of social responsibility. In the new thinking about museums, support is gradually moving away from large, concentrated museums that represent a country's status and symbolize wealth. The new thinking advocates museums scattered in various areas so as to get closer to the people. A large gap exists between the National Palace Museum setting up a branch and the concept of putting museums into a community context. But sending collections to central and southern Taiwan -- instead of having the people there go on a pilgrimage to Taipei -- is at least one step in that direction.
Tu's plan for an Asian museum has complicated the matter, however. Whether or not the National Palace Museum should change its character is a matter of opinion, on which there can be endless disputes. From a professional viewpoint, it is not a feasible project, regardless of any political implication. It is too late for us to start collecting Asian items now. Even if we set up an Asian museum, it will only be an empty shell incompatible with the National Palace Museum's status. An Asian museum set up on a few dozen hectares of land without any collections will be somewhat like a theme park.
The Louvre Museum of France has no branch, but its collections have become so large that it has set up separate museums to move some out. Once a separate museum is set up to fit with the character of the collections, it is no longer a branch museum because it needs a set of different facilities and different experts. If the National Palace Museum wants to set up branch museums, it should do so in accordance with the categories of its current collections. If the government wants to set up an Asian museum, then it should be a separate museum. Why should it be called a branch of the National Palace Museum?
I once suggested that exhibition centers be set up in all cities nationwide dedicated to the National Palace Museum so as to serve people from throughout the country. The relatively bigger ones among them can be called branch museums. My idea actually came from the Guggenheim. The National Palace Museum can run these exhibition centers and plan round-island exhibitions of its collections. This is compatible with the spirit of modern museums, but neither the museum nor the local governments were interested. After so much has been said, the government's policy-making just can't get away from political considerations.
Han Pao-teh is director of the Museum of World Religions.
Translated by Francis Huang
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.