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
Having lived through former British prime minister Boris Johnson’s tumultuous and scandal-ridden administration, the last place I had expected to come face-to-face with “Mr Brexit” was in a hotel ballroom in Taipei. Should I have been so surprised? Over the past few years, Taiwan has unfortunately become the destination of choice for washed-up Western politicians to turn up long after their political careers have ended, making grandiose speeches in exchange for extraordinarily large paychecks far exceeding the annual salary of all but the wealthiest of Taiwan’s business tycoons. Taiwan’s pursuit of bygone politicians with little to no influence in their home
In 2025, it is easy to believe that Taiwan has always played a central role in various assessments of global national interests. But that is a mistaken belief. Taiwan’s position in the world and the international support it presently enjoys are relatively new and remain highly vulnerable to challenges from China. In the early 2000s, the George W. Bush Administration had plans to elevate bilateral relations and to boost Taiwan’s defense. It designated Taiwan as a non-NATO ally, and in 2001 made available to Taiwan a significant package of arms to enhance the island’s defenses including the submarines it long sought.
US lobbyist Christian Whiton has published an update to his article, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” discussed on the editorial page on Sunday. His new article, titled “What Taiwan Should Do” refers to the three articles published in the Taipei Times, saying that none had offered a solution to the problems he identified. That is fair. The articles pushed back on points Whiton made that were felt partisan, misdirected or uninformed; in this response, he offers solutions of his own. While many are on point and he would find no disagreement here, the nuances of the political and historical complexities in
Taiwan faces an image challenge even among its allies, as it must constantly counter falsehoods and misrepresentations spread by its more powerful neighbor, the People’s Republic of China (PRC). While Taiwan refrains from disparaging its troublesome neighbor to other countries, the PRC is working not only to forge a narrative about itself, its intentions and value to the international community, but is also spreading lies about Taiwan. Governments, parliamentary groups and civil societies worldwide are caught in this narrative tug-of-war, each responding in their own way. National governments have the power to push back against what they know to be
RSS