Recently, some media and elected representatives severely criticized certain newly-built or planned cultural facilities. I personally think that such criticism misses the point.
Take for example the cultural centers in Hsinchu and Changhua counties. Both used to be old, decrepit buildings. The Hsinchu center was a half-completed farmers' center built more than 10 years ago by the local government with NT$80 million. It had been abandoned for many years, and was a mockery of the government's performance.
To clean up the whole mess, the Ministry of Economic Affairs created a budget to remodel the center into a tourist spot. Today, the Hsinchu County Government is reluctant to outsource the center, and plans to run it directly.
As for the Changhua center, it is a historic spot that used to be a barn. Thanks to the famous architect Jay Chiu's (邱文傑) design, the building is now a masterpiece. Before long, this cultural venue in Lugang Township will probably be bought out by business interests.
These problems are nothing new. Many people insist that we must have the "software" before investing in the "hardware" in regard to the construction of cultural facilities. They regard these new culture centers as "housing for mosquitos."
But most of these people are completely unaware of the actual situation regarding the development of Taiwan's cultural facilities.
All arts and cultural groups know how difficult it is to get into the National Theater or Concert Hall. Often painters have to fight for decent exhibition space, and otherwise have to make do with outdoor activities. And because they usually perform so many functions, county cultural centers are usually all booked up.
About 80 percent of these facilities were built during the late former president Chiang Ching-kuo's (蔣經國) administration almost 30 years ago.
At that time, they, too, were criticized as homes for mosquitoes. If the building of venues should follow demand -- hardware following software -- then Taiwan's cultural facilities would have been inadequate.
After having invested in highways, a subway system, railways, seaports, airports, and industrial complexes, Taiwan should now put its public resources into the construction of local cultural centers, township and community arts and cultural facilities, and even international exhibition and performance halls.
But such calls often face unreasonable opposition. I am worried that if we do not start now, it will become more and more difficult in the future. If the government did not make the decision almost three decades ago, we might never have found the land suitable for the National Theater and Concert Hall and local cultural centers. Thus, the development of Taiwan's culture cannot simply depend on idle talk.
In fact, it is more correct to say that the existence of hardware provides a boost for the development of software content. With such space and facilities, people have a greater chance to approach arts and culture, while creators and performers have a greater chance to give full play to their talent. That being so, the audience for arts and cultural activities will naturally grow, and these people will support more activities.
Such space and facilities are the soil necessary for the growth of arts and culture. Otherwise, where would arts and culture grow? They are just like our sports facilities. We cannot delay the construction of baseball fields until Taiwan's baseball team wins the world championship, or gymnasiums until our athletes win Olympic gold medals.
Similarly, we cannot delay the construction of arts and cultural facilities until after audiences have increased.
The quantity and quality of the arts and cultural facilities in Japan, Europe, and the US is good. A small town of less than 100,000 people may have a number of facilities, including music halls, theaters and museums.
There are over 10 world-class museums in Berlin alone.
We must understand that arts and cultural creation and appreciation, as well as society's cultural vitality, mainly depends on the public's initiative and local citizens' participation.
Chen Chi-nan is the chairman of the Council for Cultural Affairs.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers