The cultural landscape of Taiwan has been recently enhanced by another monument. The Anti-Japanese War Memorial, inaugurated on Oct. 25 in Taipei, aims at shaping the historical consciousness of the Taiwanese regarding the Japanese occupation. Indeed, monuments always fulfill a function. To the public eye they give a meaning to the past. In this case, the monument celebrates two historical events: the (Chinese) victory in the anti-Japanese war and the liberation of Taiwan.
From the start, the construction of this monument caused controversy. Former DPP mayor Chen Shui-bian (
Socio-historical context puts another perspective on the issue. One of the problems is that not everyone in Taiwan shares the belief that the two events are related to each other. For many local Taiwanese, the monument merely legitimizes the KMT's nationalist interpretation of Taiwan's past and thus offers a biased historical message.
These arguments cannot be understood without knowing about early postwar KMT ideology and cultural policies. Between 1895 and 1945, Taiwan was a Japanese colony. Japanese language, customs and manners had penetrated Taiwan society. Following retrocession, the KMT assumed that the Taiwanese population was no longer in touch with its Chinese cultural heritage. In order to nationalize and nurture a Chinese traditional culture on Taiwan, the transition from the Japanese colonial "motherland" to the Chinese "fatherland" had to be drastic and efficient. A complete re-education took place tantamount to an institutionalization forgetting of the past.
The local languages such as Taiwanese (Minnanyu) and Hakka, along with Japanese, were banned from the public sphere. In the school curriculum, the orthodox version of Chinese history was taught while Taiwan's past was suppressed. References to Taiwan's past could result in being mistaken for a pro-independence stand or sympathizing with the "communist bandits." Historical research on Taiwan served the national interests: its interpretation was encapsulated in the broader context of Greater China.
As a result of the political developments in the past two decades, claims to represent the whole of China are slowly giving way to a regard for Taiwan as a separate cultural entity. Accordingly, the study of Taiwan's past has become a new de facto academic discipline. Academia Sinica and universities around the island encourage students to research the rich past of Taiwan. In the field of Taiwan historical studies, the Japanese colonial period has become one of the more popular research topics.
This academic development has been further supported by social developments. The cultural discourse on "being Taiwanese" has come to dominate the public sphere. Secondary schools provide instruction in the basics of Taiwan (local) history and the population has the opportunity to visit exhibitions on Taiwan's culture and society over the past 100 years. The Taiwanization of society is present everywhere.
Against this background, the Anti-Japanese War Memorial poses a problem. It assumes that the shared memory of the Taiwanese is identical to the shared memory of the Chinese. Assuming that the anti-Japanese war on the mainland was also Taiwan's war cuts right across Taiwan's colonial past. It completely ignores Taiwan's colonial experience. As such, if we accept that both fought the same war, it leaves no room for arguing against the notion that the KMT "liberated" Taiwan from the Japanese. From this point of view, the resentment it has created should not be dismissed lightly.
A true reappraisal of Taiwan's past is indeed the missing link. The Anti-Japanese War Memorial should be an invitation to re-examine Taiwan's colonial past in a different light. It is a gesture to one segment of Taiwan's society, the soldiers who fought against the Japanese in China, commemorating their sacrifice and appeasing their children and grandchildren. Maybe, another monument is needed to honor the local Taiwanese who lived through the colonial period in Taiwan. This would be a gesture to ease the anger and frustration of those who feel they have been deprived of their recent past for four decades.
In that respect, what should be stressed is that during the colonial period, Taiwan's elite engaged in social, political and economic campaigns to enhance Taiwan's own culture in the struggle against the forces of Japanese cultural domination and assimilation. There is a need to show public and collective respect to these heroes. Among them, not all were fortunate enough to leave behind a legacy of written manuscripts and diaries, a legacy that can earn an author a bust, a memorial hall or the publication of one's collected works. A collective homage to the anonymous heroes of Taiwan's colonial past might exert a strong healing influence on society. In the future, efforts to erect a monument taking into account the diverse memories of Taiwan's colonial past should be given serious thought. The issue remains a burning one, and much remains to be done in order to build up a common consciousness of Taiwan's colonial past.
Ann Heylen is associate researcher at the Taipei Ricci Institute, a Jesuit research center focusing on Taiwanese and Chinese culture, past and present.
Taiwan’s fall would be “a disaster for American interests,” US President Donald Trump’s nominee for undersecretary of defense for policy Elbridge Colby said at his Senate confirmation hearing on Tuesday last week, as he warned of the “dramatic deterioration of military balance” in the western Pacific. The Republic of China (Taiwan) is indeed facing a unique and acute threat from the Chinese Communist Party’s rising military adventurism, which is why Taiwan has been bolstering its defenses. As US Senator Tom Cotton rightly pointed out in the same hearing, “[although] Taiwan’s defense spending is still inadequate ... [it] has been trending upwards
There is nothing the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) could do to stop the tsunami-like mass recall campaign. KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) reportedly said the party does not exclude the option of conditionally proposing a no-confidence vote against the premier, which the party later denied. Did an “actuary” like Chu finally come around to thinking it should get tough with the ruling party? The KMT says the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) is leading a minority government with only a 40 percent share of the vote. It has said that the DPP is out of touch with the electorate, has proposed a bloated
In an eloquently written piece published on Sunday, French-Taiwanese education and policy consultant Ninon Godefroy presents an interesting take on the Taiwanese character, as viewed from the eyes of an — at least partial — outsider. She muses that the non-assuming and quiet efficiency of a particularly Taiwanese approach to life and work is behind the global success stories of two very different Taiwanese institutions: Din Tai Fung and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC). Godefroy said that it is this “humble” approach that endears the nation to visitors, over and above any big ticket attractions that other countries may have
A media report has suggested that Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) was considering initiating a vote of no confidence in Premier Cho Jung-tai (卓榮泰) in a bid to “bring down the Cabinet.” The KMT has denied that this topic was ever discussed. Why might such a move have even be considered? It would have been absurd if it had seen the light of day — potentially leading to a mass loss of legislative seats for the KMT even without the recall petitions already under way. Today the second phase of the recall movement is to begin — which has
RSS