It was encouraging to hear about the establishment of a preparatory office for the National Indigenous Peoples’ Museum, which is to be constructed north of Kaohsiung’s Chengcing Lake (澄清湖). The office’s establishment has attracted a lot of public attention surrounding the museum’s design and development. However, a museum is more than a static exhibition space — it should also serve as a home for collective memories, a platform of cultural exchange and a crucial foundation for indigenous groups as they look forward to the future.
For a museum to truly belong to indigenous people, it should tell cultural stories with its architectural design. Its exterior should incorporate elements of traditional indigenous dwellings, along with images of mountains and oceans or ancestral totems, allowing visitors to feel the spirit of indigenous groups upon approaching. Entering the museum should feel like a journey through daily village life — from oral histories passed down by elders to hunting rituals and traditional arts — allowing the culture to naturally flow between visitors’ every step.
In our digital age, a museum for indigenous people should also make good use of technology. Through the use of augmented reality, virtual reality and interactive projections, young visitors could do more than just view the exhibitions — they could participate in traditional harvest festivals or step onto tribal hunting grounds. Technology is not merely a supportive or supplementary tool for exhibitions — it is key to the rebirth of cultural acceptance and understanding.
That being said, the core focus of a museum should never be the objects on display, but the people. In the past, many stories about indigenous people were told by outsiders, leading to the oversimplification and distortion of indigenous cultures. Future museums must allow indigenous people to tell their own stories. From design and curation to guided tours, indigenous people must take center stage. Only then can a museum truly become a source of pride and a home for indigenous communities.
More importantly, a museum should not merely be a place for exhibitions — it should reach into communities and connect with local life. Through tribal tours, handmade craft workshops and even integration with indigenous cultural tourism, more people can engage with indigenous cultures firsthand, thereby creating more opportunities for local communities to grow and thrive.
Shifting focus to the international stage, Taiwan’s indigenous groups are a vital part of the global Austronesian language family. Indigenous people’s museums can also serve as a window to cultural diplomacy. By organizing international exhibitions, curatorial collaborations and digital collections, Taiwan can make its voice heard on the Austronesian cultural map and share its own story with the world.
Yu Tien-min is an assistant professor at Da-Yeh University.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康), former chairman of Broadcasting Corp of China and leader of the “blue fighters,” recently announced that he had canned his trip to east Africa, and he would stay in Taiwan for the recall vote on Saturday. He added that he hoped “his friends in the blue camp would follow his lead.” His statement is quite interesting for a few reasons. Jaw had been criticized following media reports that he would be traveling in east Africa during the recall vote. While he decided to stay in Taiwan after drawing a lot of flak, his hesitation says it all: If
When Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) caucus whip Ker Chien-ming (柯建銘) first suggested a mass recall of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators, the Taipei Times called the idea “not only absurd, but also deeply undemocratic” (“Lai’s speech and legislative chaos,” Jan. 6, page 8). In a subsequent editorial (“Recall chaos plays into KMT hands,” Jan. 9, page 8), the paper wrote that his suggestion was not a solution, and that if it failed, it would exacerbate the enmity between the parties and lead to a cascade of revenge recalls. The danger came from having the DPP orchestrate a mass recall. As it transpired,
Sitting in their homes typing on their keyboards and posting on Facebook things like, “Taiwan has already lost its democracy,” “The Democratic Progressive Party is a party of green communists,” or “President William Lai [賴清德] is a dictator,” then turning around and heading to the convenience store to buy a tea egg and an iced Americano, casually chatting in a Line group about which news broadcast was more biased this morning — are such people truly clear about the kind of society in which they are living? This is not meant to be sarcasm or criticism, but an exhausted honesty.
Much has been said about the significance of the recall vote, but here is what must be said clearly and without euphemism: This vote is not just about legislative misconduct. It is about defending Taiwan’s sovereignty against a “united front” campaign that has crept into the heart of our legislature. Taiwanese voters on Jan. 13 last year made a complex decision. Many supported William Lai (賴清德) for president to keep Taiwan strong on the world stage. At the same time, some hoped that giving the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) a legislative majority would offer a
RSS