The true value of creating a work of art lies in the sincerity of the process; there should be no exaggerated or dishonest propaganda. It is absurd for the National Palace Museum to say that the opening of its southern branch in Chiayi County was done without any political considerations.
The opening of a museum refers to the completion and inauguration of its exhibition hall. “Completion and inauguration” means that the construction work has ended and the museum is ready to be opened, while the end of construction work means that all internal and external facilities have been completed and are ready to use. These include exhibition halls, walkways, displays, recreational facilities, offices and restrooms, as well as external elements, such as plants, footpaths, lighting and parking facilities. Only after all these have been completed is it time to determine an opening date.
The shabby and chaotic environment around the museum on opening day raises an important question: What reason did the officials have to open the museum apart from political considerations?
The interpretation of art is subjective. Considering the issue from a traditional feng shui perspective, it can be said that some “political feng shui” was involved in the museum’s opening.
The animal head statues in Beijing’s Old Summer Palace are fire prevention measures that serve as water drainage. They depict low-ranking auspicious animals that are believed to attract good fortune and repel bad luck. Gargoyles that are used for decorative purposes in Western architecture fulfill a similar purpose.
However, the 12 animal head statues that represent the Chinese zodiac at the palace, whose replicas are being exhibited in the museum, are different. They were placed on high pedestals in an arrangement that changes their significance and echoes an image of the Son of Heaven traditional Chinese space arrangement.
The replicas at the museum are displayed in a Chinese-style courtyard and could be interpreted as trapped animals, although the dragon can fly and cannot be controlled. One interpretation is that Taiwan is controlled by Beijing throughout the year, while confrontation between the pan-blue and pan-green camps continues everyday. The Zhimei Bridge at the museum also echoes the Danbi Bridge in the Temple of Heaven in Beijing.
The museum’s opening has caused controversy and officials have been trying to cover its flaws by hiding behind the museum’s architect Kris Yao (姚仁喜), saying that the replicas were a part of Yao’s design and that they are significant contemporary artworks.
However, Yao is known for his good taste — the Water-Moon Monastery (水月道場) in Taipei is proof of that — and he would never have included the replicas in his design. As for the question of whether they can be seen as “public art,” it can be answered by checking a resolution by the branch’s public art installation committee.
After President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and Hong Kong actor Jackie Chan (成龍) attended the museum’s opening ceremony, the museum made an explanation about Chan’s donation of the replicas, but it was not convincing.
First, if the donation was made with honest intentions, why did the Jackie Chan Charitable Foundation keep a low profile, avoiding any promotion after the museum accepted the donation?
Second, if Chan thinks that the replicas would help people realize that such “cultural heritage” belongs to the whole world, why does he not have more of them made and share them with other museums around the world?
Last, some of the original animal head statues have never been recovered, so the replicas are copies of artworks whose authenticity are questionable. They are counterfeits with zero collection value.
Why is the museum treating them as works of art despite the criticism?
On Dec. 30, Chen Yi-ting (陳儀庭) and Chen Miao-ting (陳妙婷) allegedly vandalized the bronze dragon and horse heads displayed at the museum, bringing the issue under the spotlight. Politics should honor art and not go beyond it. Making a cultural decision based on political considerations sets the worst example.
After setting such a bad example, the museum should keep a low profile and take people’s advice to carry out the necessary adjustments quietly to make sure the facts are understood correctly.
Yang Chyi-wen is president of the Taipei National University of the Arts.
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