On Jan. 16, the Presidential Office held a roundtable forum on the cultural and creative industry, and on Feb. 21 it held an important meeting on the economic situation. One of the strategies decided upon at that second meeting was to promote six key emerging industries, including culture and creativity.
Unfortunately, during the same period, buildings of cultural value were demolished including ancient kilns in Miaoli, the Chou Family Mansion and Garden in Sijhih (汐止), the Scholar’s House in Lujhou (蘆洲) and granaries in Sansia (三峽) and Yingge (鶯歌). Media reports also showed the dilapidated remains of a Shinto shrine in Hsinchu.
Sad to say, while the central government may be sincere in its pledges to protect cultural assets, local authorities feel free to demolish them. In the case of Miaoli’s kilns, the county government said it was exercising “local autonomy” in knocking them down. When it comes to promoting other kinds of cultural activities, however, these local officials never hesitate to ask the central government for money.
In Europe, the US and many other parts of the world, it is considered a great honor for a town or village to have something classified as a cultural asset. In Taiwan, however, when any such classification is proposed the response is likely to be overnight demolition. As a result, our cultural assets continue to disappear.
Divorced from material culture, creativity becomes an alienated and empty affair. Culture is inseparable from life, and this is especially true of tangible assets such as buildings and relics. It is natural that they should provide the inspiration and backdrop for cultural and creative activities. Regrettably, such cultural bases, including settlements built to house military dependents, are disappearing at an alarming rate.
What lies behind this destruction? The root cause is an outmoded attitude of putting development above everything else, of “out with the old, in with the new.” This is reflected in many laws that are not conservation friendly and lack the concept of “cultural justice.” Moves are now afoot to amend the 2005 Cultural Heritage Preservation Act (文化資產保存法). For this process to be effective, it is essential to build alliances between government ministries, departments and non-governmental organizations, and to think in terms of historic buildings and relics.
Some strategies that would more effectively protect cultural heritage are: Listing potential cultural assets in each area and taking them into consideration in regional and urban planning; including cultural heritage evaluation in all title deeds, which would require owners to keep them in proper condition but would not affect the right to buy and sell the property; employing cultural philanthropy trusts to foster “civic conglomerates” to help preserve cultural assets; adding a clause providing for citizens’ litigation to rein in government departments that fail to show proper concern for cultural assets; changing the law to give central authorities greater power to intervene at the local level to preserve cultural assets.
Of all the cities in the world, why have so many great artists and writers chosen to live in Paris, the city of which Ernest Hemingway wrote: “If you are lucky enough to have lived in Paris as a young man, then wherever you go for the rest of your life, it stays with you, for Paris is a moveable feast.”
Cultural feasts are to be had everywhere in Paris, and consequently the city has long been a hotbed of creativity.
If Taiwan’s creative industry is to prosper, we need to start by respecting our cultural heritage. By thinking globally and acting locally, we may yet see a day when Taiwan, like Paris, will be thought of as a “moveable feast.”
Juju Wang is a professor at the Institute of Sociology at National Tsing Hua University.
TRANSLATED BY JULIAN CLEGG
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then