On Jan. 16, the Presidential Office held a roundtable forum on the cultural and creative industry, and on Feb. 21 it held an important meeting on the economic situation. One of the strategies decided upon at that second meeting was to promote six key emerging industries, including culture and creativity.
Unfortunately, during the same period, buildings of cultural value were demolished including ancient kilns in Miaoli, the Chou Family Mansion and Garden in Sijhih (汐止), the Scholar’s House in Lujhou (蘆洲) and granaries in Sansia (三峽) and Yingge (鶯歌). Media reports also showed the dilapidated remains of a Shinto shrine in Hsinchu.
Sad to say, while the central government may be sincere in its pledges to protect cultural assets, local authorities feel free to demolish them. In the case of Miaoli’s kilns, the county government said it was exercising “local autonomy” in knocking them down. When it comes to promoting other kinds of cultural activities, however, these local officials never hesitate to ask the central government for money.
In Europe, the US and many other parts of the world, it is considered a great honor for a town or village to have something classified as a cultural asset. In Taiwan, however, when any such classification is proposed the response is likely to be overnight demolition. As a result, our cultural assets continue to disappear.
Divorced from material culture, creativity becomes an alienated and empty affair. Culture is inseparable from life, and this is especially true of tangible assets such as buildings and relics. It is natural that they should provide the inspiration and backdrop for cultural and creative activities. Regrettably, such cultural bases, including settlements built to house military dependents, are disappearing at an alarming rate.
What lies behind this destruction? The root cause is an outmoded attitude of putting development above everything else, of “out with the old, in with the new.” This is reflected in many laws that are not conservation friendly and lack the concept of “cultural justice.” Moves are now afoot to amend the 2005 Cultural Heritage Preservation Act (文化資產保存法). For this process to be effective, it is essential to build alliances between government ministries, departments and non-governmental organizations, and to think in terms of historic buildings and relics.
Some strategies that would more effectively protect cultural heritage are: Listing potential cultural assets in each area and taking them into consideration in regional and urban planning; including cultural heritage evaluation in all title deeds, which would require owners to keep them in proper condition but would not affect the right to buy and sell the property; employing cultural philanthropy trusts to foster “civic conglomerates” to help preserve cultural assets; adding a clause providing for citizens’ litigation to rein in government departments that fail to show proper concern for cultural assets; changing the law to give central authorities greater power to intervene at the local level to preserve cultural assets.
Of all the cities in the world, why have so many great artists and writers chosen to live in Paris, the city of which Ernest Hemingway wrote: “If you are lucky enough to have lived in Paris as a young man, then wherever you go for the rest of your life, it stays with you, for Paris is a moveable feast.”
Cultural feasts are to be had everywhere in Paris, and consequently the city has long been a hotbed of creativity.
If Taiwan’s creative industry is to prosper, we need to start by respecting our cultural heritage. By thinking globally and acting locally, we may yet see a day when Taiwan, like Paris, will be thought of as a “moveable feast.”
Juju Wang is a professor at the Institute of Sociology at National Tsing Hua University.
TRANSLATED BY JULIAN CLEGG
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of