On April 28, Executive Yuan spokeswoman Kolas Yotaka stated on Facebook her opposition to central government officials taking part in worship ceremonies for Cheng Cheng-kung (鄭成功), also known as Koxinga, who used Taiwan as a base to resist the Qing Dynasty after it overthrew the Ming Dynasty in China.
Considering Koxinga from an Aboriginal point of view, Kolas sees him as an invader.
In contrast, Minister of the Interior Hsu Kuo-yung (徐國勇), who is reputed to be a descendant of Koxinga, said that he should be seen in a positive light for having resisted unification with China.
These points of view might seem contradictory, but they actually describe different aspects of Koxinga.
RE-ENACTMENT
Events take place at which people worship Koxinga or dress up as him to re-enact history. There is nothing wrong with that, as long as they do it to recreate history rather than to draw questionable parallels between the past and the present.
One example of the latter is that during Japan’s 50-year rule over Taiwan, they extolled Koxinga, whose mother was Japanese, as a national hero.
Japanese rule was followed by the dictatorship of Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) and his son Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國), who praised Koxinga’s Tungning Kingdom as a model for “counterattacking the mainland.”
To re-enact history, a depiction should be multidimensional, not made from a single point of view.
For example, the Mount Rushmore National Memorial in the US is also known as Presidents’ Mountain, because it features the heads of four of the most important US presidents.
However, Mount Rushmore was originally territory of the Sioux people. Only after the Sioux were defeated by white people did the federal government take possession of the land. Later, the heads of four presidents were carved into the mountainside, much to the annoyance of Native Americans.
In 1948, the Sioux began work on a statue of Sioux leader Crazy Horse, who fought against the federal army, on Thunderhead Mountain, 27km from the presidential memorial.
People who travel to this area can observe how the US has opposing viewpoints of its history and yet has been able to bring them together and stand united.
In Taiwan, when commemorative activities that recreate the landing of Koxinga’s forces in Taiwan are held, why not include some people playing the role of the Siraya people?
Why not combine the event with worship of Pingpu Aborigines’ home spirits in the vicinity of Tainan’s Koxinga Shrine?
People can live for a long time and go through all kinds of experiences. No one is completely good or bad.
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
A multidimensional re-enactment of Koxinga would be a better way to teach future generations about the many aspects of Taiwan’s history. It would provide a more appropriate historical account of Koxinga himself.
There are differences in the way memorial activities for Koxinga and Chiang Kai-shek are conducted. Koxinga never ruled the whole of Taiwan. No military police are assigned to patrol the Koxinga Shrine. Nobody has ever had to stand to attention and salute a statue of Koxinga.
It should therefore be much easier to make memorial activities for Koxinga more multidimensional than to do the same thing for Chiang Kai-shek.
Chang Ching-wei is a postgraduate student at National Tsing Hua University’s Institute of History.
Translated by Julian Clegg
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under