Robert Indiana, the artist who made the LOVE sculpture outside Taipei 101, passed away on May 19.
When the project was under review 12 years ago, I had strong opinions about it — had I had the power to vote, I would have voted against it. Unfortunately, I was a member of a higher-level committee in the three-level, three-instance review system, so my job was only to make sure that the procedure was legal.
I was against it because it was too expensive — NT$30 million (US$1.01 million) — and too old-fashioned — it would have been popular 50 years ago.
For someone with too much money, buying it might be alright — it would mean that we would have the same thing that other countries do. The thing is that other countries purchased their works when Indiana was a hot ticket, making the work more topical.
Today, it can be seen in so many cities around the world that people have become numb to it. Probably the only exception is Paris — because you cannot find this work outdoors in Paris. Parisians just do not believe in this kind of thing.
US artist Jeff Koons not long ago proposed to gift his sculpture Bouquet of Tulips to Paris. Although Paris Mayor Anne Hidalgo has agreed to accept it, some insightful people are opposed to the plan.
The original purpose of gifting the work was as a memorial for the victims of the 2015 terrorist attack in Paris, but the site proposed by Koons is not close to the place of the attack. Instead, it is near the Palais de Tokyo, a tourist attraction.
There are also fears that this four-floor-tall piece might block the view of other buildings — and the Eiffel Tower is just across the river. The mayor therefore proposed two alternative locations, but the artist rejected them. This makes people suspicious of Koons’ motives, thinking that perhaps he just wants to use Paris to his own advantage.
The proposed plan is that the artist will only provide the design blueprint and the subsequent expenditure of 3.5 million euros (US$4.124 million) is to be paid by the city’s residents.
Human life is short, but the life of art is long: Leonardo da Vinci’s Mona Lisa is very old, but it is still a masterpiece.
However, the LOVE sculpture is a different case. Indiana originally designed it for New York’s Museum of Modern Art as a Christmas card in 1964 and then used the image to design stamps.
It became a huge success because it was during the Vietnam War, when people were particularly receptive to love and peace. The artist then further developed it into a sculpture, which was just as successful, although the artist changed colors and letters — even Spanish and Hebrew versions were available.
This attracted a lot of criticism, with critics saying that Indiana was shameless and his work was excessively copied and transformed, with the result that the artist became a recluse.
The piece is design-oriented, and you feel neither the quality and texture of modern art nor the rebellious spirit of contemporary art. An advertising company might be able to make the same thing and at a lower cost.
However, people often believe in masters — they can be late bloomers, but others turn sour in their older age. Picasso, for example, was described as a paper tiger in his later years, because his works then were mostly variations of famous paintings from art history and were no longer original.
However, if the judges are not careful enough, they might still buy into the “master myth.” At Kaohsiung’s Zuoying Station, there is a piece of art made of junk, which cost about NT$15 million.
The materials are all old lights and fences from the Taiwan Railways Administration’s warehouses and it was only because the artist was famous French artist Arman that this piece was treated differently.
I happened to be a judge at this bid project and I voted against his work. However, the majority decides, and so this work was selected.
One of the reasons I objected was that the artist was still alive at the time of the bidding process, but passed away after winning the bid, so the work had to be completed by his assistants. Fearing for the quality, I voted against it.
Masters, masters, what waste is committed in your name?
Lu Ching-fu is a professor in Fu Jen Catholic University’s Department of Applied Arts.
Translated by Lin Lee-kai
As it has striven toward superiority in most measures of the Asian military balance, China is now ready to challenge the undersea balance of power, long dominated by the United States, a decisive advantage crucial to its ability to deter blockade and invasion of Taiwan by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). America expended enormous treasure to develop the technology, logistics, training, and personnel to emerge victorious in the Cold War undersea struggle against the former Soviet Union, and to remain superior today; the US is not used to considering the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN)
The annual summit of East Asia and other events around the ASEAN summit in October and November every year have become the most important gathering of leaders in the Indo-Pacific region. This year, as Laos is the chair of ASEAN, it was privileged to host all of the ministerial and summit meetings associated with ASEAN. Besides the main summit, this included the high-profile East Asia Summit, ASEAN summits with its dialogue partners and the ASEAN Plus Three Summit with China, Japan and South Korea. The events and what happens around them have changed over the past 15 years from a US-supported, ASEAN-led
Lately, China has been inviting Taiwanese influencers to travel to China’s Xinjiang region to make films, weaving a “beautiful Xinjiang” narrative as an antidote to the international community’s criticisms by creating a Potemkin village where nothing is awry. Such manipulations appear harmless — even compelling enough for people to go there — but peeling back the shiny veneer reveals something more insidious, something that is hard to ignore. These films are not only meant to promote tourism, but also harbor a deeper level of political intentions. Xinjiang — a region of China continuously listed in global human rights reports —
President William Lai’s (賴清德) first Double Ten National Day address had two strategic goals. For domestic affairs, the speech aimed to foster consensus on national identity, strengthen the country and unite the Taiwanese against a Chinese invasion. In terms of cross-strait relations, the speech aimed to mitigate tensions in the Taiwan Strait and promote the coexistence and prosperity of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) in China and the Republic of China (ROC). Lai is taking a different stance from previous Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) administrations on domestic political issues. During his speech, he said: “The PRC could not be the