Thu, Jun 29, 2000 page2

• A matter of national pride

  Following a recent claim by a DPP legislator that the National Palace Museum has become a national embarrassment, the museum's director has found himself under intense pressure to explain why his procurement budget has apparently been spent on fake artifacts

  • By Lin Mei-chun / STAFF REPORTER
  • • 
    • 
    • 

  Outraged at what he has in the past called the National Palace Museum's (故宮博物院) "deliberate purchasing of worthless specimens," DPP legislator Chen Chin-jun (陳景峻) called upon the institution to release a detailed list of purchases covering the past decade. Defending themselves meanwhile, purchasing advisors for the museum said they are rarely consulted.

  The legislator's request, made in a published letter, follows his allegation on June 19, when museum director Tu Cheng-sheng (杜正勝) presented his first policy report to the legislature. Chen openly called three artifacts on display at the museum "fakes."

  "We have collected sufficient evidence to prove these pieces to be fake ? which shows that either the museum's scholars lack the necessary academic training, or that the items were purchased because of a `special connection' between curio dealers and museum officials," said Li Ming-yueh (李明岳), one of Chen's aides.

  

  A visitor at the National Palace Museum inspects tiny jade ornaments, ostensibly Neolithic-period relics. The artifacts, claimed by many to be fakes, are at the center of a spiraling controversy in which the museum's management has been accused of academic incompetence and even fraud.

  PHOTO: CHIANG YING-YING, TAIPEI TIMES

  The artifacts in dispute are two Neolithic-period jade ornaments costing the museum over NT$420,000, and a stone palette, supposedly from the Shang Dynasty, sold to the museum for NT$1.35 million.

  Asked by the Taipei Times how the museum would respond, Lin Po-ting (林柏亭), a spokesperson for the museum, declined to reply, saying that he had not yet seen the letter.

  During an interview with the Taipei Times on Saturday, however, Tu said he was determined to get to the bottom of the matter.

  "If the artifacts are proven to be fake, the matter will need investigating from two standpoints: the academic and the legal," he said.

  "Artifact assessment is tremendously difficult because it requires a huge amount of knowledge, experience and technical expertise. If the counterfeit specimens were procured out of a lack of professional knowledge and experience, then the academic abilities of museum scholars would need to be improved," Tu said.

  "However, if they were purchased because of a `special relationship' between artifact suppliers and museum officials, immediate disciplinary action would have to be taken," he said.

  Tu added that such action would involve judicial measures.

  Addressing the possibility of the academic competence of museum researchers being brought into question, Tu said any constructive academic dialogue would be welcome.

  Iap Phok-bun (葉博文), a curio supplier, said, "For a long period of time, cultural and academic interaction between Taiwan and China was prevented by the political situation. This has led to gaps in our knowledge of excavations and, indeed, the whole field of archaeology in China. Despite being a national institution, the Museum is short of the most up-to-date information and technology to evaluate artifacts." He added, "What makes it even worse is the absurd belief in 'special channels.' Sometimes scholars consider certain antiques provided by artifact dealers to be authentic, as they are said to have been obtained from China through a 'special channel."

  Iap said that the value of artifacts is a matter of "professional judgement," not a belief in 'special channels.' Nowadays, he said, the chances of attaining authentic antiques from China are extremely slim.

  Wu Feng-chang (吳峰彰) manager of art dealers Gloria Art (鴻展藝術中心) and Huang Teng-yung (黃東庸)manager of Ban Gung Lu Antique, (半耕廬書屋),also an art dealer both echoed Iap's views, saying that it was not unheard of for the Museum to procure fake pieces simply out of ignorance.

  "To our knowledge, nine out of ten ancient artifact purchases are fakes," Huang said.

  According to Museum regulations, all specimens purchased for the Museum must be scrutinized at least twice --- first by museum researchers, then by a procurement committee comprising twenty scholars and other specialists from outside the Museum. Membership of the committee is for two-year renewable terms and carries no remuneration.

  NTU archeology professor, Sung Yuan-hsun (宋文薰), who said that he himself had been consulted frequently, said that he believed that no more than five of the committee's current twenty members had ever been consulted by the Museum.

  Enquiries by the Taipei Times did nothing to dent the credibility of such comments. Chang Pi-te (昌彼得) and Chang Lin-sheng (張臨生) have been questioned by legislators about the possibility of a conflict of interest arising from their concurrent positions, until May 20th this year, as deputy directors of the Museum and members of its procurement panel. Pan Yuan-shih (潘元石), Executive Director of Chimei Arts Foundation (奇美藝術基金會), Huang Chang-chien (黃彰健)of Academia Sinica, and Professor Chiao Yen-kuang (喬衍琯) of National Cheng Chi University, all of whom have been on the list for a number of years, told the Taipei Times that they had never been consulted by the Museum. Another procurement committee member, Chen Chieh-hsien (陳捷先) is a retired professor of history at National Taiwan University (NTU), currently residing in the United States. Shih Chang-ju (石璋如) of Academia Sinica, aged over 90 with a severe hearing impairment, was unable to be interviewed by telephone. The vacancy left by the death of Li Yu (李猷), an art critic, two years ago, has never been filled.

  Pan Yuan-shih, despite having never been consulted, stressed that the committee should play a central part in the procurement process in order to minimize miscalculation.

  NTU's Professor Sung admitted that it was difficult to assess the value of artifacts. "Usually two or three specialists are asked to assess a proposed purchase. Nonetheless, misjudgments can occur, even with the most careful examination by experienced people," he said.

  Chang Wei-hwa (張偉華), manager of Chang Wei-hwa and Co. (雲中居) a supplier of artifacts to the museum, rejected the allegation of "unlawful liaisons" between curio dealers and museum officials.

  He said such misconduct was unlikely because all deals made with the museum were subject to meticulous scrutiny. "A possible cause... is that restrictions to its [the Museum's] funding have greatly affected the quality of purchases."

  According to Iap, although museum officials were prudent about small transactions, "staggeringly enormous" sums could be frittered away in single, larger deals.

  "According to reports, the Museum spent more than NT$400 million in 1995 on a few statues of Buddha, whose market price proved to be no more than NT$100 million. What's all the more ironic is that the transaction was carried out in accordance with a wholly legal procedure. Where did the money go?" said Iap.

  Teng Shu-ping (鄧淑蘋), a curator specialising in jade at the Museum, was quick to reject allegations of wrongdoing.

  "We [museum curators] never buy any artifacts without the unanimous approval of the advisors," she said. "In addition," she continued,"the criteria [for evaluating artifacts] for museums are different from those adopted by private collectors . The (disputed) stone palette was purchased in 1998 for its elegant style and refined craftsmanship. While we were delighted with this bargain, I was not really surprised to hear the comment that its market value was no more than NT$100,000, because private collectors tend to prefer smaller items that can be held in edthe hand. It is therefore possible that private collectors had a negative influence on the stone palette's market value because of its size," Teng said.

  Teng went on to say that she was not apprehensive about the prospect of investigations because all purchases were made lawfully. "All documents relating to these disputed items have been prepared for inspection," she said.

  Lin Ming-yue apparently does not accept Teng's explanations. He continues to attack the composition of the procurement committee and the "insufficient expertise" of museum researchers. "How can such a large sum of money be spent upon decisions made by no more than four or five people? We request that the the committee be reconstituted with more experts and we also demand that the Museum make public its procurement list and transactional details for the past ten years for thorough investigations."

  Tu acknowledges that the composition of the committee indeed leaves room for criticism. "I have been working hard to recruit new members since I took office? It is indisputable that the academic abilities of museum researchers needs elevating," said Tu. He also promised immediate punitive action in the event that allegations of "special relationships" were proven true.
• Most Popular

  • 1

    Most Chinese oppose force to unify Taiwan: survey

  • 2

    LA Dodgers beat Braves to secure 7th straight win

  • 3

    Memes, social media disinformation fuel support for Burkina junta leader

  • 4

    CIA releases two Mandarin-language videos inviting officials to spill secrets

  • 5

    Notes from Central Taiwan: Taiwan’s health system is going to erode, not collapse