Taiwan Today

An exhibition of Chinese art treasures will be inaugurated at the National Gallery of Art in Washington on May 27. These art treasures have been selected from the collec­tions of the National Palace Museum and the National Central Museum in Taichung. After Washington, they will be shown at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, in New York, the Museum of Fine Arts, in Boston, the Art Institute of Chicago, in Chicago, and the De Young Memorial Museum, in San Francisco. The total length of time for the tour of display in the five cities will be about one year. The Chinese Government has received many requests from other American museums to extend the total time of this art show, so that people in other American cities may also have a chance to see it. But, in view of the fact that many of the ancient paintings to be shown are in a very delicate condition and might suffer serious damage through hanging and handling for a longer period, the Chinese Government has not seen it feasible to accept such re­quests.

I

The National Palace Museum and the National Central Museum have inherited their present collections from the former Peking court. The palace collection is unique in many ways. First, because in China there had been nothing like a modern museum besides the Imperial Court to collect and preserve objects of art, and secondly, be­cause the history of the palace collection is an exceedingly old and long one. Emperor Chien Lung, a great patron of art of the Manchu dynasty, collected a greater number of objects of art during his sixty-year reign (A. D. 1736-1796) than any other emperor had done before him. To his collection were added the rich collections of the three preceding dynasties, namely, the Sung dynasty (A. D. 1127-1279), the Yuan or Mongol dynasty main passed on from one dynasty to another, though inevitably they suffered some losses at times of dynastical changes or wars. The art collections of the Palace Museum and the Central Museum therefore may be said to be dating from the Southern Sung regime, having had a history of some eight hundred-years. Finally, this collection is unique because its scope has been continuously expanding to assume a very comprehensive character. Besides paintings and calligraphies, a great variety of art objects such as bronze, porcelain, jade, tapestry and embroidery have been included, and their quality has set standards of evaluation for scholars and art experts alike. I cannot think of any other ancient civilization of the world that has handed down to posterity the master­-pieces of its great artists in a single collection that is comparable in size and value. These are the reasons why the Government of the Republic of China has considered the art treasures in the Palace Museum and the Central Museum as the greatest single cultural heirloom of the nation, and has done every­thing possible to salvage and preserve them in recent decades.

II

The art treasures in the Peking palace were not immediately taken over by the Re­publican Government after the revolution of 1911. Instead they were left in the palace as part of the special privileges accorded the Manchu Imperial House under the agreement concluded between the revolutionaries and the Manchu Court. They were transferred to the Palace Museum only after the last Manchu Emperor, Henry Pu Yi, had left his palace in 1924, fully twelve years after his formal abdication. During the intervening years the collection suffered a serious loss. Pu Yi and his entourage secretly carted away a large number of the rare editions of ancient books and some of the best works in calligraphy and painting to be kept in private or for sale. Had it not been for the establishment in 1925 of the Palace Museum which was entrusted by the Chinese Government to take hold of the art objects then remaining in the palace, they might have been all stolen and sold by Pu Yi, or carried away by him to Manchuria. In the latter case, they would have been all lost or destroyed when he fled from his "Manchukuo" capital of Changchun at the end of the Sino-Japanese War in 1945. Viewed in this light, if in no other, the Palace Museum has contributed significantly to the continued preservation of the palace art treasures.

The Palace Museum came into existence in Peiping on October 10, 1925. In 1933, in view of the growing threat of Japanese armed aggression in North China, the Chinese Government ordered the Palace Museum to move the art objects to the south. As the Palace Museum had then been in existence for more than seven years, almost all of its best works had been classified by this time. Therefore, over ninety per cent of the finest works orig­inally kept in the Palace Museum were moved first to Shanghai and later to Nanking. When the Sino-Japanese War broke out in the summer of 1937, these invaluable treasures were again transported by boat or overland, partly to Kweichow and partly to Szechuan for safe-keeping. As the Japanese pushed toward Kweichow in 1944, that part of the art treasures that had been transported to Kweichow was again transferred to Szechuan to be kept together with the other half. After the war, the entire collection in Szechuan was return­ ed to Nanking. But when Nanking was again threatened, this time by the Communist rebels in the winter of 1948, it was decided to have the finest works of the palace collec­tion shipped to Taiwan. That is how the largest part of the most valuable art objects the Palace and the Central Museums had taken over from the Manchu palace came to be safely preserved on Taiwan. In spite of all the dangers to which the art treasures were exposed on their successive transfers from place to place, they sustained no loss. This must be regarded as a fortunate turn of events for which we must all be thankful.

During the Sino-Japanese War, the art treasures had gone through various dangerous situations. Perhaps one or two incidents will suffice to illustrate what I mean. A part of the art collection arrived at Changsha in Hunan Province in August 1937, and was temporarily stored in the University of Hunan. But hardly had it left Changsha for Kweichow when the University buildings were razed to the ground by Japanese planes. Another part of the art treasures arrived at Hanchung, in Shensi Province, in April 1938, and was temporarily stored in the local Confucian temple. But hardly had it left Hanchung for Szechuan when the Confucian temple itself was destroyed by Japanese bombs. The superstitious might attribute these narrow escapes to intervention by some supernatural power. But we should actually be thankful to those who were responsible for the immensely difficult task of shipping the nation's most precious possessions to the rear for safe-keeping. It was through their selfless devotion to duty and their high degree of vigilance and readiness to move at a moment's notice that all the hazards on the long and tedious journeys through many provinces in the interior of China had been suc­cessfully overcome one after another.

III

As early as 1937 the Chinese Government had planned to hold in the United States a grand exhibition of the art treasures of the Palace Museum. The plan, however, had to be postponed first because of the outbreak of the Sino-Japanese War, and later because of the Communist rebellion and the resultant widespread disturbances in the country.

After the art treasures were transported to Taiwan in 1949, a movement again got under way, urging the exhibition of a choice selection in the United States. Many prom­inent Americans and Chinese interested in Sino-American cultural relations, such as Mr. Henry R. Luce, Dr. Hu Shih, Mr. William C. Bullitt, Mr. Lo Chia-luen and Dr. Han Lih-wu lent their full support to this movement. The Palace Museum sent a representative to the United States in 1953 to discuss the matter with representatives of the five American museums indicated above. An agreement in principle was reached, but the plan failed to materialize at once. What caused the delay appeared to be an apprehension entertained in certain quarters that the Chinese Com­munists would launch a malicious propaganda campaign if the Chinese art treasures should be sent to the United States for exhibition. The supposition was certainly well founded, considering the fact that the Communists are now attacking the forthcoming exhibition by accusing the American Government of plundering the Chinese treasures and the Chinese Government of selling them to the United States. But such vile propaganda can not in fact deceive anybody and should be simply ignored.

During the past two or three decades there has been increasing appreciation of Chinese classical art both in Europe and A­merica. A growing demand for thorough understanding and serious study of Chinese art by Western scholars and artists is clearly discernible. In the field of paintings, even those belonging to the school of abstract art seem to appreciate more and more traditional Chinese art and Chinese calligraphy. During the past ten years or so, many leading Amer­ican and European authorities of Chinese art had visited the Palace and Central Museums in Taichung. Having witnessed the many masterpieces housed there, they added their personal weight to the advocacy of an early realization of the deferred plan as mentioned above. Mr. Everett F. Drumright, upon his appointment in 1958 as Ambassador to China, took a great interest in this matter. His ardent zeal was reinforced by the enthusiasm of Mr. George K. C. Yeh in the Chinese Foreign Office, and that of Mr. Walter S. Robertson and Mr. Graham Parsons in the State Department. Thus in 1959 and 1960 when I visited New York and Washington and met on behalf of the Palace and Central Museums the representatives of the five American mu­seums and officials of the State Department, further progress was made in making arrange­ments for the exhibition. The American Government assured us that they would fully support the exhibition, accord the exhibits all possible protection, and undertake their transport to and from the United States in American naval vessels. From the above ac­count one can see that the forthcoming ex­hibition is really the outcome of public demand and government support in both free China and the United States.

IV

Altogether 253 pieces of objects of art will be exhibited in the United States. They were chosen last summer by a joint selection com­mittee composed of Chinese and American experts. From the very beginning, the committee decided to emphasize quality rather than quantity with understanding that each group of objects chosen must be representa­tive of the finest work of that particular branch of art to which they belong. In the end, nine categories of objects were selected, namely, painting, calligraphy, porcelain, tapestry and embroidery, bronze, jade, enamel, carved lacquer, and miscellaneous carvings.

Of the selected exhibits, painting clearly holds a dominant position, numbering more than a hundred masterpieces. They cover a period of some twelve hundred years from the beginning of the Tang Dynasty in the seventh century to the end of the reign of Emperor Chien Lung at the close of the 18th century. Most of the great masters and prac­tically all schools in this long period were represented. Originally the authorities of the Palace and Central Museums did not con­ template including calligraphy in the selec­tion; but upon the recommendation of the American members of the selection committee, ten masterpieces of Chinese calligraphy have been included, which cover different types of Chinese writing by famous calligraphers from the early Tang period to the very end of the Ming dynasty (1368-1644).

Next in importance in the list of the se­lected exhibits is porcelain. Some eighty masterpieces were chosen, including a good number of the rarest and finest pieces pro­duced in the Sung period, the Ming dynasty and the early Manchu period. For purposes of comparative study, they would fill the de­ficiencies of the porcelain collections in the American museums. A small number of enamel pieces have also been included in the selection. Though enamel was originally the product of Persian or Arabian artcraft, it began to be very well developed in China dur­ing the reign of the Ming Emperor Ching­-tai (A.D. 1450-1456) and has ever since become a popular Chinese object of art. Even the name enamel has been replaced by the Chinese nomenclature Ching-tai Lan (Ching-tai blue).

As regards bronze, some American museums have built up good collections. The selection committee, therefore, decided to send only five pieces, each of a unique nature. For instance, the Mao-kung Ting was chosen for its historical importance. It was a work of about 800 years B.C. and contains an inscription of some 500 ancient characters. It is extremely important for the study of ancient Chinese language and history.

Both tapestry and embroidery are very old Chinese artcrafts. Tapestry or Ke-ssu (literally, latitude weaving) is not merely weaving, but weaving and embroidery, some­times with painting. Embroidery is the art of delicate needlework. In choosing tapestry and embroidery pieces, the selection commit­tee followed the same principle as in the case of bronze; that is, only a few pieces were chosen, each representing a very fine and the earliest type of its kind. They were all works of the Sung period. No pre-Sung embroidery work has survived.

Jade was one of the most ancient artcrafts in China. Its origin can be traced back to the Shang dynasty (1766-1122 B.C.). It was as old as bronze. Jade work has been held in great esteem in China especially in connection with ritual instruments and official decorations. The jade pieces selected for the ex­hibition, though only ten in number, include works of the Han dynasty (206 B.C.-A.D. 219) as well as of the Sung, Ming and Manchu periods.

In the field of carvings, carved lacquer occupies the first place in the selection. Lacquer probably originated in the beginning of the Chou dynasty, that is, bout the twelfth century B.C. History indicates that there were lacquer chambers and gardens in the time of Chou. In the Han dynasty, lacquer reached a greater height than ever before, especially in West Szechuan. Carved lacquer is believed to have originated in the Sung dynasty, but no specimens from the Sung period are in existence today. During the Ming dynasty, the technique of making carved lacquer was very well developed. The pieces of carved lacquer selected for the exhibition include representative products of both the early and latter Ming period. In addition to carved lacquer, a number of other miscellaneous carvings of the Ming and Man­chu periods were chosen, including bamboo, boxwood and ivory carvings. The art of bamboo carving did not come of age until the Ming dynasty. The carvers were then not mere artisans, but intellectuals, that is, calligraphers or painters.

The selection committee has been consistent in picking the different categories of ob­jects for exhibition in the United States. It emphasized quality and representativeness. Considering the large size of the collections in the Palace and Central Museums which contain, for instance, more than thirteen hundred famous ancient paintings and some twenty thousand invaluable pieces of porce­lain, the committee has had a difficult job indeed. It however might be criticized on the ground that the selection has been made almost entirely from the experts' point of view and has not taken into consideration the possible reactions of the laymen or the general American public. Whether such criticism is legitimate and correct, I prefer not to pass any personal judgment now and would let the exhibition speak for itself.

V

Before concluding, I would like to say a few words about the intrinsic or peculiar value of Chinese art. As it may be rather hazardous to offer any theory or opinion that applies to all branches of Chinese art, I shall confine my observations to painting only.

It is true that, compared with the tradition and usage of Western art, the material, the tools as well as the methods and technique used by Chinese painters are all different and peculiar. In my opinion, however, the main difference between Chinese and Western painting does not lie there. Rather it is to be found in the different aims or motivations of the artists. Great masters in Chinese generally do not regard visual delight as the most important effect they want their work to produce upon the beholder. Their aim usually is to impart to the beholder a profound feeling of tranquility and contentedness. This does not seem to be true with western painting which in most cases seeks to stimulate rather than placate. Great European pictures of all ages, whether their subject be war, love or even religion such as the cruci­fixion of Jesus Christ, would cause in the observer a great excitement or stimulation rather than peace of mind. On the other hand, masterpieces of Chinese painting, be they landscapes, plants and birds, human figures or historical incidents, would make one readily forget his worries and cares and feel refreshed as if he had reached a state of Nirvana far above the commotion of the earthly world. If I may be permitted to use a medical metaphor, a good piece of Chinese painting is usually an effective tranquillizer. To say this, I am not eulogizing Chinese painting or criticizing Western art. I am merely comparing them. They may serve different but equally lofty purposes. Modern life has imposed, however, on civilized man an intolerable strain which art can do much to relieve. In this regard, Chinese paintings are not only good companions for the leisure class to help while away their time; they may well be a kind of spiritual aid and nutrition for the hard-working man of this age.

Furthermore, Chinese art is singularly reflective of the traditional Chinese philoso­phy of life. Many a masterpiece of traditional Chinese art especially in the field of graphic art may be described as being ultra-mundane. Even the subjects chosen by the Chinese artist for his paintings usually show an anti-materialist attitude. The serene world the Chinese artist labors to depict is, however, not a world void of passions; it is rather a world where passions find sublimation. Man's mind can thereby be purified; his vision elevated.

If the forthcoming exhibition can help generate a new recognition and a better appreciation in the Western world of the afore­ said characteristics of Chinese art, the efforts of its sponsors—the American and Chinese museums, may be regarded as being well rewarded.