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
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.
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
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
RSS