Director Wei Te-sheng’s (魏德聖) movie Warriors of the Rainbow: Seediq Bale, which tells the tale of the 1930 Wushe Incident, is proving very popular with the public, whether they be pan-blue, pan-green or swing voters.
If the media buzz surrounding the film helps people to learn more about the history of Taiwanese Aborigines and Taiwan in general, it can hardly be a bad thing.
The fear is that various interests will play on the theme for a while to get what they can out of it, and then they will throw it away and forgotten it.
Seediq Bale means “a true man” in the Sediq language. The movie tells the story of how Sediq chief Mona Rudao and other members of his tribe confronted the armed might of their foreign rulers.
Determined to preserve their own culture and dignity, they were willing to give up their lives rather than submit.
This spirit is similar to that of the many Taiwanese literary writers who have steadfastly resisted foreign colonialism by establishing a Taiwan-centric literary current.
As well as supporting the movie by buying tickets, we should also think about how to express this spirit in our educational and cultural establishments.
Let us take a recent major event on Taiwan’s literary scene as an example. Taiwanese author Chung Tie-min (鍾鐵民) passed away last month, and his funeral was held on Sep. 10.
His family and friends were there to bid him farewell, but President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and Premier Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) also sent representatives to deliver official eulogies in honor of Chung’s great achievements.
A lot of people in attendance had mixed feelings about this gesture, which was reminiscent of the fable of the weasel who, with ulterior motives, visited a mother hen to wish her a happy new year.
What kind of support did Ma and his government offer when Chung was preparing to set up a memorial hall in honor of his father, the writer Chung Li-ho (鍾理和)?
As everyone knows, after Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) accepted the surrender of Japanese forces in Taiwan and the northern part if Vietnam on behalf of the Allied Forces in 1945, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), which had come to Taiwan from overseas, tried to suppress Taiwanese languages, literature and culture.
Taking departments and institutes of Taiwanese literature as an example, it was not until 2000, 55 years after the KMT takeover, that the authorities approved the first master’s course in Taiwanese literature at a state-run university — National Cheng Kung University — followed by the establishment of an undergraduate department in 2002.
During the period when Tu Cheng-sheng (杜正勝) was minister of education under the Democratic Progressive Party administration, he encouraged the internationalization of research on Taiwan at universities, and he actively promoted the teaching of native languages to elementary and high-school students.
However, following the KMT’s return to government in 2008, these policies have been scrapped bit by bit.
Now, the government offers encouragement and funding for Chinese academics, students and literary writers to come to Taiwan.
In May this year, the Council for Cultural Affairs sponsored a seminar on the theme of “ a century of novels.”
The list of invited participants was full of Chinese writers, while writers who use the medium of Taiwanese native languages were completely excluded, along with their works.
In June, Taiwan-centric civic groups went to the Ministry of Education to demand the inclusion of Taiwanese languages in the formal curriculum of schools at all levels.
The ministry did not accept this request, instead announcing an additional mandatory course in senior high schools based on textbooks on basic Chinese culture that accounted for four study credits.
In light of this, who can say that the KMT has changed its anti-Taiwanese nature? Rather than conferring posthumous eulogies, it would be better for the KMT to sincerely face up to its past wrongdoings and turn over a new leaf.
What the authorities should really do is change the system in a way that will uphold the rightful status of Taiwanese literature and culture in education and the media.
Chiung Wi-vun is an associate professor of Taiwanese literature at National Cheng Kung University.
Translated by Julian Clegg
The first Donald Trump term was a boon for Taiwan. The administration regularized the arms sales process and enhanced bilateral ties. Taipei will not be so fortunate the second time around. Given recent events, Taiwan must proceed with the assumption that it cannot count on the United States to defend it — diplomatically or militarily — during the next four years. Early indications suggested otherwise. The nomination of Marco Rubio as US Secretary of State and the appointment of Mike Waltz as the national security advisor, both of whom have expressed full-throated support for Taiwan in the past, raised hopes that
There is nothing the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) could do to stop the tsunami-like mass recall campaign. KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) reportedly said the party does not exclude the option of conditionally proposing a no-confidence vote against the premier, which the party later denied. Did an “actuary” like Chu finally come around to thinking it should get tough with the ruling party? The KMT says the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) is leading a minority government with only a 40 percent share of the vote. It has said that the DPP is out of touch with the electorate, has proposed a bloated
In an eloquently written piece published on Sunday, French-Taiwanese education and policy consultant Ninon Godefroy presents an interesting take on the Taiwanese character, as viewed from the eyes of an — at least partial — outsider. She muses that the non-assuming and quiet efficiency of a particularly Taiwanese approach to life and work is behind the global success stories of two very different Taiwanese institutions: Din Tai Fung and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC). Godefroy said that it is this “humble” approach that endears the nation to visitors, over and above any big ticket attractions that other countries may have
A media report has suggested that Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) was considering initiating a vote of no confidence in Premier Cho Jung-tai (卓榮泰) in a bid to “bring down the Cabinet.” The KMT has denied that this topic was ever discussed. Why might such a move have even be considered? It would have been absurd if it had seen the light of day — potentially leading to a mass loss of legislative seats for the KMT even without the recall petitions already under way. Today the second phase of the recall movement is to begin — which has
RSS