Epitomising the DPP critique of the institutionalisation of Chinese nationalism on Taiwan under decades of KMT rule, Tu Cheng-sheng, Director of the NPM from 2000 to 2004 (and subsequently Education Minister), in a 2004 interview described that institution as a “political symbol” and as “China’s thing” (Zhongguo de dongxi). Just like the Kuomintang, he commented, “it came from outside to rule Taiwan .” He represented his reforms (which included a proposal, never implemented, to abolish the NPM Director’s membership of the Executive Yuan) as an attempt to compel the NPM to draw closer to (zouru) Taiwanese society, rather than positioning itself simply as a shrine to the civilisation of the lost Chinese motherland. A centrepiece of the NPM’s permanent exhibition, removed during the museum’s latest refurbishment, was an account of the heroic efforts of the KMT, during the wars of the 1930s and 1940s, to save these treasures for the Chinese nation. In the early years following its reopening on Taiwanese soil in 1965, the NPM had also played a prominent role in the KMT’s “Chinese Culture Restoration Movement” (Zhonghua wenhua fuxing yundong)—the Nationalist riposte to Mao’s Cultural Revolution. Director Tu and his successor strove to reorient the NPM both towards Taiwan and towards “Asia” in general rather than China in particular. Whereas the NPM had previously confined itself almost entirely to China-themed exhibitions, under Tu temporary exhibitions were staged focusing on the “multicultural” elements of Taiwan’s early modern history. The controversial plans for a “Southern Branch” of the NPM (of which more below), to be devoted to exhibiting “Asian culture,” were also central to this re-orientation strategy. Both the emphasis on the “multicultural” character of Taiwanese history and identity, and the positioning of Taiwan , culturally and geopolitically, within an “Asian” rather than exclusively “Chinese” sphere, were central planks of DPP cultural policy.
- 瓢蟲Lv 78 years agoFavorite Answer
款批判民進黨在臺灣的國民黨統治，杜正勝，幾十年來的中國民族主義的制度化的故宮從 2000 年到 2004 年的主任 （和隨後教育部長），在 2004年的採訪中所述該機構作為一種"政治象徵"和"中國的事"(中國德溪)。就像國民黨，他評論說，"它來自臺灣規則外。"他表示他 (其中包括一項提議，永遠不會實現的情況下，取消行政院故宮董事成員) 的改革並為企圖迫使故宮靠攏 (zouru) 臺灣社會，而不是定位本身只是作為神社的中國人丟失的祖國文明。故宮的常設展覽，博物館的最新的翻新工程，期間刪除的核心的三、 四十年代，以保存這些寶藏中華民族的戰爭期間，國民黨的英雄努力的帳戶。初年後其重新對臺灣土壤在 1965 年，故宮也發揮了顯著作用在國民黨的"中國文化恢復運動"（中華文華福星蘊東) — — 毛澤東文化革命的民族主義還擊。主任杜和他的繼任者努力調整對臺灣和對"亞洲"故宮一般而不是中國特別是。而故宮了以前局限本身幾乎完全以中國為主題的展覽會下週二, 臨時展覽助興側重于臺灣早期現代歷史的"多元文化"的元素。有爭議的計畫為"南支"故宮 (的下麵更多） 的會致力於展示"亞洲文化"也是這一重新定位戰略的核心。這兩個強調的"多元文化"的字元的臺灣歷史和身份，與臺灣的定位文化和地緣內"亞洲人"而不完全的"中國"領域，, 是中央的木板，民進黨的文化政策。
- loboLv 58 years ago
Tu Cheng-sheng, Director of the NPM from 2000 to 2004 (and subsequently Education Minister杜正勝.故宮博物院館長後來成為教育部長.
“China’s thing” (Zhongguo de dongxi)中國的東西
Chinese Culture Restoration Movement” (Zhonghua wenhua fuxing yundong)中華文化復興運動