In the above article, "Music and politics are inseparable," Ho Tung-hung (
First, the article proposes that politics and music are insepar-able. Shocked's brave anti-US and anti-war position moved people to admiration, and her lyrics display a deep concern for social issues. While A-mei, on the other hand, has bowed to China and admitted to having committed a mistake by singing the ROC anthem at President Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) 2000 inauguration.
Here, I want to say that the idea of music and social engagement as mutual reflections of each other is but one way for artists to express themselves, but not the only way. To put it another way, there is nothing inherently good or bad, right or wrong in the difference between singer Luo Da-you's (羅大佑) lyrical social criticisms and Fei Yu-ching's (費玉清) performance-oriented singing.
The idea that artists have certain social responsibilities as a result of their popularity is true, but there isn't only one way to act on those responsibilities. During the March presidential election, for example, some artists clearly expressed their green or blue political biases, while others were of the opinion that as artists, being public personalities, should abstain from influencing their audience's political views.
Throughout the so-called A-mei incident, the singer was unwilling to take a strong stand and therefore chose to deal with protests in a low-key manner. To say that she "bowed to China and admitted her mistakes" is going a bit too far. If she committed any mistake, it was her wavering on her legitimate right to sing the national anthem for fear of being labelled a "green artist."
If we were to ask politicians, Taiwanese businesspeople or artists working on either side of the Taiwan Strait about the issue of unification, the status quo or independence for Taiwan, no one would be able to give a clear, satisfactory answer -- so why should we expect A-mei to come out and take a vocal stand?
Further, the article also casts in a negative light A-mei's visits to the disaster areas in the wake of the 921 Earthquake in 1999 and the flood-damaged areas brought on by Tropical Storm Mindulle last month. This is regretful, and it makes us wonder what benevolent and philanthropic actions one must undertake in order to be considered sincere. Ho suspects that A-mei's visit to indigenous people following the earthquake was insincere. He also claims that the singer did not contribute some of the "astronomical amount of money" she makes to the charity benefit for which she performed following last month's flooding disaster, but merely attracted a lot of media attention.
Let's leave aside the issue of the truth about her visits to the disaster areas, since we don't know if the author's understanding of the issue following his own visit is complete. Does charity have to be anonymous, and do donations have to be monetary to be considered sincere? Is it not a positive thing when artists promote public concern for social issues?
Following the 1999 earthquake, many public personalities made generous donations -- including A-mei -- who donated NT$1 million to charity. This time she chose to give a charity concert to solicit donations from the public. Wasn't that a meaningful gesture? When is a charity concert or fund-raising initiative sincere enough to satisfy this author? I don't believe there is a formula for how artists should engage in the public sphere. Thus, it is preposterous to label such charity hypocritical.
Perhaps what we really should examine is how much sincerity other actors, singers or TV show hosts have displayed as they have performed in Taiwan, China and Hong Kong in recent years.
Ethnic Taiwanese born overseas can work freely on either side of the Taiwan Strait when things go well, or work in their home country when things are not going so well. In any case, artists who were born and raised in Taiwan have nowhere else to go. For the Taiwanese people, unfortunately, their nationality still falls in a grey area to some extent, and many people are afraid to confront this issue. I hope that society at large will be able to take a more tolerant approach to musicians who come under political pressure.
Kuang Tsai-yun is a graduate student at National Chengchi University.
Translated by Perry Svensson
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
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
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.
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
RSS