When someone shares with you something of value, you have an obligation to share it with others.
Sunday 22 May 2011
Flagship of cultural heritage tarnished
It’s seen as a sacred place by millions, but the theft of artefacts, inept management and greed at the Palace Museum in the Forbidden City has stunned a nation
It’s seen as a sacred place by millions, but the theft of artefacts, inept management and greed at the Palace Museum in the Forbidden City has stunned a nation
Priscilla Jiao 22 May 2011
A string of scandals have rocked the Forbidden City, raising concerns that the crown jewel of Chinese cultural heritage is entrusted to the wrong hands.
The reputation of the Palace Museum, which manages the Forbidden City, was tarnished overnight when a 28-year-old amateur burglar stole nine artefacts on May 8.
The theft of these artefacts, on loan from Hong Kong’s Liangyi Museum, was followed by museum officials - grateful for the arrest of the burglar - presenting Beijing police with a banner with the incorrect character printed on it.
The same week, the already angry public was stunned to learn that one of the palace’s best halls was turned into a private, members-only club for billionaires.
These embarrassments have shed light on security loopholes and mismanagement, prompting some observers to say the nation’s cultural heritage has been degraded by inept museum management and commercialisation.
The Palace Museum, which manages the five-century-old site that served as an imperial palace from the Ming dynasty to the end of the Qing, houses 1.5 million cultural relics in the centre of Beijing.
The Forbidden City gets its name because it was off-limits to anyone except those with the emperor’s permission. It has been a museum open to the public since 1925 and survived the Cultural Revolution, when it was closed for five years. Now members of the public can enter for 60 yuan (HK$72).
It is deemed by millions of Chinese as not just another museum, but a sacred place housing the elite of traditional Chinese culture.
Culture critic Zhu Dake said the Forbidden City, as China’s main cultural symbol to survive amid the decline of traditional heritage, the loss of relics during the Cultural Revolution and rapid modernisation, was seen as “an isolated island in the middle of a flood”.
“People are very disappointed as they had too high an expectation of the museum as being a rare survivor of traditional culture,” Zhu said. “They are disappointed by the deteriorating cultural situation in the country.”
For decades, mainlanders believed the museum was heavily guarded and impregnable to burglars. Six thefts have taken place at the Palace Museum since 1959, but the latest was simply carried out by an opportunist who seized the moment, police said. This explanation did not sit well among internet users.
The burglar was arrested on May 11 and on May 13 museum officials sent a banner to the municipal Public Security Bureau to thank officers for catching the thief. The slogan, “Protect the motherland’s prosperity” instead read, “Shake the motherland’s prosperity”.
Also on May 11, CCTV anchorman Rui Chenggang wrote on his microblog that museum officials had been renting out Jianfu Hall, which burned down in 1924 and was rebuilt in 2005 under the sponsorship of Hong Kong tycoon Ronnie Chan Chi-chung. The hall had essentially become a profit-making club for the world’s richest people, with 500 membership cards on sale for 5 million yuan each. Chan’s sponsorship was intended only for cultural preservation and he had no connection with the club, media reports quoted the China Heritage Fund, founded by Chan, as saying earlier.
The museum at first tried to deny Rui’s accusation, saying that although the hall was reserved for VIP receptions, it had no intention of recruiting and charging members. It later said all decisions relating to the club were made by a subsidiary, Beijing Forbidden City Cultural Development, and the museum administration was unaware of the commercial activities in the hall.
Yet mainland media and internet users soon posted evidence online, such as photos of the opening ceremony of the elite club on April 23 and membership forms handed out to tycoons invited to the ceremony. In one photo, Ji Tianbin, a deputy director of the Palace Museum, was among billionaires, including Ma Huateng, chief executive officer of Tencent, and Wang Shi , chairman of Shenzhen Vanke.
Officials simply tried to cover up one mistake with another, Zhu said. But under growing public pressure, museum authorities apologised, blaming the slogan error on its security department and the existence of the club on a subsidiary company.
Forbidden City Cultural Development has reportedly sacked all its employees in Jianfu Hall, apparently believing one of them leaked the photos of the opening ceremony.
“I am extremely concerned that such uncultured people could properly preserve and safeguard precious cultural assets,” wrote one internet user. “The loss of a few artefacts has cost the confidence of people towards the Palace Museum as the guardian of Chinese culture.”
Zhu said: “Everyone makes mistakes. The key is how you react to them. The Chinese bureaucratic system has a habit of denying mistakes, stifling dissenting voices. The managerial officials only mess up when no other options are available.”
The National Palace Museum in Taipei, a non-profit organisation, descended from the same institution as the Palace Museum in Beijing, and houses part of the Beijing museum’s former collection.
Internet users compared the two resumes of the museum chiefs and found that Chou Kung-shin in Taipei had a career as an art academic and has a PhD in art. Beijing chief Zheng Xinmiao’s only qualification is as a Communist Party official.
Wu Zuolai, a Beijing-based cultural scholar, said it was not appropriate for a party official to serve as director of a national-level museum. “The head should be an influential cultural figure with a renowned social reputation,” he said. “In that case, he/she would care for the reputation of the museum.
Instead, he said, “the museum is controlled by officials and is in danger of becoming a tool for making profits”.
Liang Baiquan, former director of Nanjing Museum, said “the precious cultural resources of the common people were hijacked by the privileged class. This shows that society is courting quick profits and is a sign of moral degradation”.
2 comments:
Flagship of cultural heritage tarnished
It’s seen as a sacred place by millions, but the theft of artefacts, inept management and greed at the Palace Museum in the Forbidden City has stunned a nation
Priscilla Jiao
22 May 2011
A string of scandals have rocked the Forbidden City, raising concerns that the crown jewel of Chinese cultural heritage is entrusted to the wrong hands.
The reputation of the Palace Museum, which manages the Forbidden City, was tarnished overnight when a 28-year-old amateur burglar stole nine artefacts on May 8.
The theft of these artefacts, on loan from Hong Kong’s Liangyi Museum, was followed by museum officials - grateful for the arrest of the burglar - presenting Beijing police with a banner with the incorrect character printed on it.
The same week, the already angry public was stunned to learn that one of the palace’s best halls was turned into a private, members-only club for billionaires.
These embarrassments have shed light on security loopholes and mismanagement, prompting some observers to say the nation’s cultural heritage has been degraded by inept museum management and commercialisation.
The Palace Museum, which manages the five-century-old site that served as an imperial palace from the Ming dynasty to the end of the Qing, houses 1.5 million cultural relics in the centre of Beijing.
The Forbidden City gets its name because it was off-limits to anyone except those with the emperor’s permission. It has been a museum open to the public since 1925 and survived the Cultural Revolution, when it was closed for five years. Now members of the public can enter for 60 yuan (HK$72).
It is deemed by millions of Chinese as not just another museum, but a sacred place housing the elite of traditional Chinese culture.
Culture critic Zhu Dake said the Forbidden City, as China’s main cultural symbol to survive amid the decline of traditional heritage, the loss of relics during the Cultural Revolution and rapid modernisation, was seen as “an isolated island in the middle of a flood”.
“People are very disappointed as they had too high an expectation of the museum as being a rare survivor of traditional culture,” Zhu said. “They are disappointed by the deteriorating cultural situation in the country.”
For decades, mainlanders believed the museum was heavily guarded and impregnable to burglars. Six thefts have taken place at the Palace Museum since 1959, but the latest was simply carried out by an opportunist who seized the moment, police said. This explanation did not sit well among internet users.
The burglar was arrested on May 11 and on May 13 museum officials sent a banner to the municipal Public Security Bureau to thank officers for catching the thief. The slogan, “Protect the motherland’s prosperity” instead read, “Shake the motherland’s prosperity”.
Also on May 11, CCTV anchorman Rui Chenggang wrote on his microblog that museum officials had been renting out Jianfu Hall, which burned down in 1924 and was rebuilt in 2005 under the sponsorship of Hong Kong tycoon Ronnie Chan Chi-chung. The hall had essentially become a profit-making club for the world’s richest people, with 500 membership cards on sale for 5 million yuan each. Chan’s sponsorship was intended only for cultural preservation and he had no connection with the club, media reports quoted the China Heritage Fund, founded by Chan, as saying earlier.
The museum at first tried to deny Rui’s accusation, saying that although the hall was reserved for VIP receptions, it had no intention of recruiting and charging members. It later said all decisions relating to the club were made by a subsidiary, Beijing Forbidden City Cultural Development, and the museum administration was unaware of the commercial activities in the hall.
Yet mainland media and internet users soon posted evidence online, such as photos of the opening ceremony of the elite club on April 23 and membership forms handed out to tycoons invited to the ceremony. In one photo, Ji Tianbin, a deputy director of the Palace Museum, was among billionaires, including Ma Huateng, chief executive officer of Tencent, and Wang Shi , chairman of Shenzhen Vanke.
Officials simply tried to cover up one mistake with another, Zhu said. But under growing public pressure, museum authorities apologised, blaming the slogan error on its security department and the existence of the club on a subsidiary company.
Forbidden City Cultural Development has reportedly sacked all its employees in Jianfu Hall, apparently believing one of them leaked the photos of the opening ceremony.
“I am extremely concerned that such uncultured people could properly preserve and safeguard precious cultural assets,” wrote one internet user. “The loss of a few artefacts has cost the confidence of people towards the Palace Museum as the guardian of Chinese culture.”
Zhu said: “Everyone makes mistakes. The key is how you react to them. The Chinese bureaucratic system has a habit of denying mistakes, stifling dissenting voices. The managerial officials only mess up when no other options are available.”
The National Palace Museum in Taipei, a non-profit organisation, descended from the same institution as the Palace Museum in Beijing, and houses part of the Beijing museum’s former collection.
Internet users compared the two resumes of the museum chiefs and found that Chou Kung-shin in Taipei had a career as an art academic and has a PhD in art. Beijing chief Zheng Xinmiao’s only qualification is as a Communist Party official.
Wu Zuolai, a Beijing-based cultural scholar, said it was not appropriate for a party official to serve as director of a national-level museum. “The head should be an influential cultural figure with a renowned social reputation,” he said. “In that case, he/she would care for the reputation of the museum.
Instead, he said, “the museum is controlled by officials and is in danger of becoming a tool for making profits”.
Liang Baiquan, former director of Nanjing Museum, said “the precious cultural resources of the common people were hijacked by the privileged class. This shows that society is courting quick profits and is a sign of moral degradation”.
Additional reporting by Choi Chi-yuk
Post a Comment