Recently, the government seems to have taken a broad view of culture.
It has turned its ideals into actions and is using events on the scale of the Olympic Games and World Exposition as a benchmark for creativity and strength in art and culture.
It continues to build large cultural centers, and internationally renowned performance groups and artists have displayed their creativity, causing a sensation with every performance.
Appearances by internationally recognized performers are major art and social events.
Many industrialists and art collectors with a passion for art often sponsor events and establish art awards and build museums and concert halls. They are in the news as often as the artists themselves.
From another perspective, massive spending on cultural events seems to have become the government’s way of showing that it cares about cultural affairs.
Little by little, this has led to increases in the government’s budget for culture, which now stands at 4 percent of the annual budget.
Furthermore, the formation of a NT$30 billion (US$952.4 million) art development fund has been named as a key policy.
The cultural events that appear in the news are mostly huge, glamorous events.
In particular, at a time when the arts industry has become so popular, any event that meets these requirements has the potential to be hyped.
Meanwhile, more and more luxury houses are built and decorated as art galleries, with paintings that cost a fortune.
A “rich and well-mannered” society seems to have formed among the rich and powerful.
While the cultural and artistic visions of the government and the social elite are set higher and higher, budget distribution and cultural content are becoming biased and formalistic.
The budget for one large show can be as much as the annual budget for the Taipei National University of the Arts, which actually trains artists.
Once the hardware is installed, the operational and management funds allocated by the government are extremely limited, while various “special budgets” for cultural development can be increased at any time.
The gap between the rich and poor in Taiwan is reflected in different living standards, eating habits, modes of dress and so on.
In the same way, spiritual aspects such as culture and art are now beginning to display a similar degree of polarization.
At one extreme, creative artists, performers and the audience are moving in a sophisticated, “high-class” direction, and traditional and folk arts are following suit.
Tickets to performances by famous groups and artists can cost upward of NT$10,000, but are still hard to come by.
At the other extreme are the small, unnoticed art and cultural groups that may have to pack it in at any time due to a lack of funds, the unemployed who don’t have the opportunity to experience art and cultural activities and those who habitually watch TV every day and seldom take the initiative to attend such activities.
Currently, the energy and appeal of domestic art and cultural groups is uneven and the public funding available to them is limited.
Most do not have many opportunities to perform. Even if they can join tours organized by social groups and government agencies to perform at schools and communities, it can be difficult for them to get much response from the audience, who prefer famous groups or artists.
In today’s cultural atmosphere, those in art circles know how hard it is to survive on ticket sales alone and they must, therefore, maintain good public relations.
Gaining endorsements from leading artists and getting to know the influential social elite and political heavyweights have therefore become important parts of the arts world. That is the only way to obtain a government contract or sponsorship and thus a chance to move to the other, wealthy, extreme of the spectrum.
Taiwan today thirsts for the political and economic benefits of hosting events with the power of an Olympic Games or a World Exposition.
From the perspective of the arts industry, it is necessary to host large international events and boost the tourism sector while integrating resources, training local talent and improving the standard of living of the Taiwanese public, and doing so would indeed be a step forward.
This does not mean, however, that the scale, content and budget allocation for large activities should be unlimited; there should be standards for evaluation and room for discussion.
For example, what is the value of such activities and what is the connection to local culture? How are the hundreds of millions or billions of NT dollars for the grand openings of such activities budgeted for? Is it really necessary to spend tens of millions of NT dollars to invite great masters of art to perform in Taiwan?
Culture itself is not unchangeable, and it cannot be cloned.
Nor is it a faucet out of which culture flows out automatically and continuously.
There may be many underlying major theories, but it is merely formed by common behavior and the experience concluded from this behavior.
Taiwan’s cultural development is becoming polarized and the public often only has the choice between engaging or not engaging in art and cultural activities.
Those who are interested in spending a fortune do so, while those who are not interested, or cannot afford it, live their lives without art or without the ability to nurture their passion.
This is a cultural misfortune indeed.
To promote cultural affairs, we must have a grasp of the essence of culture and understand the overall environment, as well as possess professional, creative, and practical abilities.
How can we help disadvantaged arts citizens and cultural groups break out of this situation?
Answering this question would be the first step to building a healthy cultural environment in Taiwan.
Chiu Kun-liang is a professor in the Department of Theater Arts at Taipei National University of the Arts.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
In a summer of intense political maneuvering, Taiwanese, whose democratic vibrancy is a constant rebuke to Beijing’s authoritarianism, delivered a powerful verdict not on China, but on their own political leaders. Two high-profile recall campaigns, driven by the ruling party against its opposition, collapsed in failure. It was a clear signal that after months of bitter confrontation, the Taiwanese public is demanding a shift from perpetual campaign mode to the hard work of governing. For Washington and other world capitals, this is more than a distant political drama. The stability of Taiwan is vital, as it serves as a key player
Yesterday’s recall and referendum votes garnered mixed results for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). All seven of the KMT lawmakers up for a recall survived the vote, and by a convincing margin of, on average, 35 percent agreeing versus 65 percent disagreeing. However, the referendum sponsored by the KMT and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) on restarting the operation of the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant in Pingtung County failed. Despite three times more “yes” votes than “no,” voter turnout fell short of the threshold. The nation needs energy stability, especially with the complex international security situation and significant challenges regarding
Much like the first round on July 26, Saturday’s second wave of recall elections — this time targeting seven Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers — also failed. With all 31 KMT legislators who faced recall this summer secure in their posts, the mass recall campaign has come to an end. The outcome was unsurprising. Last month’s across-the-board defeats had already dealt a heavy blow to the morale of recall advocates and the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), while bolstering the confidence of the KMT and its ally the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP). It seemed a foregone conclusion that recalls would falter, as
The fallout from the mass recalls and the referendum on restarting the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant continues to monopolize the news. The general consensus is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has been bloodied and found wanting, and is in need of reflection and a course correction if it is to avoid electoral defeat. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has not emerged unscathed, either, but has the opportunity of making a relatively clean break. That depends on who the party on Oct. 18 picks to replace outgoing KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫). What is certain is that, with the dust settling
RSS