As an art historian specialized in Taiwanese art history, I appreciate the Taipei Times’ feature, “Taiwan in Time: Private parts not allowed” (July 12, page 8) for showcasing a story about Taiwanese art. Such stories have been ignored in Taiwan for a long time, as the discourses were dominated by Chinese and Western art history. The article proves that Taiwanese art history is fascinating, which my own academic experience can also vouch for.
It reminded me of my research on the topic of “art and pornography” two decades ago, so I would like to share some of my knowledge.
First, the debate around “art or pornography?” is a general phenomenon of the modernization process in Asia, not to mention globally. China, Japan, Korea and Taiwan, etc. have all had such controversies. The most famous case is the one of Liu Haisu (劉海粟), a Chinese artist and former dean of an art college. Liu was accused of “damaging social customs” when he launched a nude painting course at the Shanghai Art School in the 1920s.
Pan Yuliang (潘玉良) was also accused of blasphemy because she had worked in a brothel.
Second, Lee Shih-chiao (李石樵) was not the only person involved in the controversy of art and pornography in colonial Taiwan. At the first edition of the Taiwan Fine Art Exhibition (台展) in 1927, Japanese artist Shiotsuki Toho was forced to cover a reclining nude’s private parts in his painting Summer (夏). In 1930, at the fourth Taiwan Fine Art Exhibition, Ren Rui-yao (任瑞堯) was forced to withdraw his painting Waterside (水邊) because the work depicted a child urinating.
Although the standards of censorship were not consistent, the incidents cannot be described as political conflicts, because Japanese artists were banned as well: Ethnic discrimination did not play a role.
Moreover, opinions on the issue at the time were diverse, and articles supporting the new trend of nude painting gradually started to appear.
In a nutshell, introducing Western nude painting to conservative societies always brings about uncertainty among the public and officials, and therefore the genre inevitably sees a period of compromise.
Third, the article concluded that Lee Shih-chiao did not have any “trouble” concerning this issue afterward.
Actually, he was involved in an even bigger scandal, known as “the matches incident.” In 1978, Lee’s painting Three Graces (三美圖) was investigated by police, as the work was suspected to be pornographic because it had been printed on matchboxes, a product used by the public. Thus, it was deemed to not be purely artistic, such as works displayed in a gallery, and was instead seen as a consumer product.
In 1975, Xie Xiao-de’s (謝孝德) painting Gift (禮品) depicted the lower part of a nude with a red ribbon around the ankle, symbolizing the reification of the female body. The artwork was also accused of being pornographic.
These two incidents are thought to be the peak of the controversy of art and pornography in Taiwan. Seminars were held about the issue. In 1961 and 1965, the first Taiwanese nude model, Lin Si-duan (林絲緞), was the subject of debates, due to her high exposure and widely known name.
In 1982, a controversial nude exhibition was held in Tainan, and nude sports sculptures were shown in Taoyuan.
From 1982 to 1986, the National Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hall in Taipei strictly refused any exhibition proposals that included nude paintings or performances with exposed body parts.
In 1991, the Taipei Fine Arts Museum initiated a rating system for art exhibitions. If there is any nude painting in an exhibition, a “not suitable for children” warning is placed at the entrance to the room.
In 1994, performing troupe Bony Labyrinth was accused of obscenity, causing a public kerfuffle.
The issue of art and pornography is complicated in any society, at any time. In Taiwan, it is implicated in the so-called “colonial modernization” and in social taboos.
Whether or not covering “private parts” in nude paintings is just the tip of the iceberg, there are other key points to be “covered” regarding art and pornography in Taiwan.
Liao Hsin-tien is a professor at the National Taiwan University of Arts in New Taipei City.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with