Art should not be altered
When the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) unveiled a giant globe to the public, it was described to the student body as a “new sculpture on campus by Turner Prize-winning artist Mark Wallinger,” which is essentially an elaborate way of saying “a piece of art.”
How then, can the LSE defend its initial decision to rerepresent Taiwan as part of China in response to the political backlash from Chinese students? The main issue here is not the debate of who is and is not part of China, or who is or is not Chinese — but rather, the desecration of art.
All maps are political — this is a fact of life. However, if the school wishes to present a globe as a sculpture as opposed to a mere map, it must understand the difference. Maps can be changed and have been changed many times throughout history when nations and borders change. Art, however, does not and should not be changed. Although the concept of “what is art” has limitations and moral boundaries, the essence is that its creation is birthed through an artist whose decisions are conscious and intentional.
The facts in this case remain that Wallinger consulted UN maps, but ultimately still chose to represent Taiwan in a different color and named as the “Republic of China.” This is a decision that the artist took and we as viewers are not allowed to “correct.”
What we are allowed to do is to disagree with the artist’s choices, vision and presentation, but in no way are we within our rights to push for any modification of a work of art by superseding the artist’s decision.
The beauty of art is that it is long-standing; not only in the physical form, but also the message it sends. Art is in many ways, political and beyond our understanding of aesthetic beauty. We are allowed to disagree, dislike and even hate art, but rather than pushing for it to be taken away, torn down or altered, we should have a discussion.
One of the main purposes of art is to provoke discussion, as it is often a reflection on society.
The statement is there for us to take or leave.
The Chinese who pushed for the alteration without sincere discussion, as well as the school for bowing to this pressure, do not comprehend that merely entertaining this idea of changing any part of the globe is a violation of the sanctity of art.
In the Taiwan-China case, the situation remains complicated and gray, thus the right reaction would have been to open a real dialogue between the two sides to address the issue while respecting the artist.
Art does not simply exist to suit our own individual tastes. If I am offended by nudity, do I go covering up Michelangelo’s David? This situation sounds ridiculous and the same principle must be applied to Wallinger’s globe. In art, just because you do not like or agree with something does not entitle you to change it.
Before I am accused of bias, I must add that I have the most insight on this situation because I am literally half-Taiwanese and half-Chinese, as I have a parent from both countries. They have never let this issue come between them or negatively affect others, because they know that only through love and tolerance can divisive issues be overcome.
The LSE did not encourage proper discussion among its student body and rather than promote community, it promoted intolerance.
Sincerely
Disappointed
Name withheld on request
Many local news media over the past week have reported on Internet personality Holger Chen’s (陳之漢) first visit to China between Tuesday last week and yesterday, as remarks he made during a live stream have sparked wide discussions and strong criticism across the Taiwan Strait. Chen, better known as Kuan Chang (館長), is a former gang member turned fitness celebrity and businessman. He is known for his live streams, which are full of foul-mouthed and hypermasculine commentary. He had previously spoken out against the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and criticized Taiwanese who “enjoy the freedom in Taiwan, but want China’s money”
A high-school student surnamed Yang (楊) gained admissions to several prestigious medical schools recently. However, when Yang shared his “learning portfolio” on social media, he was caught exaggerating and even falsifying content, and his admissions were revoked. Now he has to take the “advanced subjects test” scheduled for next month. With his outstanding performance in the general scholastic ability test (GSAT), Yang successfully gained admissions to five prestigious medical schools. However, his university dreams have now been frustrated by the “flaws” in his learning portfolio. This is a wake-up call not only for students, but also teachers. Yang did make a big
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) concludes his fourth visit to China since leaving office, Taiwan finds itself once again trapped in a familiar cycle of political theater. The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has criticized Ma’s participation in the Straits Forum as “dancing with Beijing,” while the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) defends it as an act of constitutional diplomacy. Both sides miss a crucial point: The real question is not whether Ma’s visit helps or hurts Taiwan — it is why Taiwan lacks a sophisticated, multi-track approach to one of the most complex geopolitical relationships in the world. The disagreement reduces Taiwan’s
Former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) is visiting China, where he is addressed in a few ways, but never as a former president. On Sunday, he attended the Straits Forum in Xiamen, not as a former president of Taiwan, but as a former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chairman. There, he met with Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference Chairman Wang Huning (王滬寧). Presumably, Wang at least would have been aware that Ma had once been president, and yet he did not mention that fact, referring to him only as “Mr Ma Ying-jeou.” Perhaps the apparent oversight was not intended to convey a lack of
RSS