Shipwrecked: Tang Treasures and Monsoon Winds

We debated long and hard whether to go to the The ArtScience Museum. It markets itself as a premier arts space for travelling exhibitions. It has no permanent exhibition of its own. Among the friends and I, we're just not very supportive of a museum that doesn't possess the soul of art. Doing it for the sake of appearances doesn't quite cut it.

I'm not too pleased with the S$30 adult admission fee, not when this museum is owned by a casino. One can argue that they run on separate accounts, but in reality, you and I know, it's not quite that. I've yet to criticize their 'single admission' policy which does not put children's needs into consideration. 2 mothers were trying their best to persuade museum staff to let them out to feed the children and be let back in after. But no. Each time you get out, you pay another S$30 to be re-admitted. Honestly, the blanket admission policy sucks. MBS can jolly well get its money from the casino to supplement the museum. That would draw it a truckload of goodwill. But no. It has chosen not to do that.

But curiosity won, so we went for the sole purpose of viewing Shipwrecked: Tang Treasures and Monsoon Winds. A Singapore government-linked company has bought the collection from a private salvage company. That itself, raises eyebrows. But you know what, Singapore is all about commercialism and capitalism. This collection is RIGHT AT HOME at The ArtScience Museum. Hey, nobody asked the taxpayers if we would like to spend USD$32 million to own these Tang treasures. (Not rightly so, as BeanBean has pointed out, but I'm just prejudiced.) The least this museum could do is to offer free admission to school children and to be greedier, Singaporeans. But no, charge everyone S$30 for admission. At least today we had a 20% off admission fees on an OCBC credit card and free parking for spending more than S$20 at MBS.

The Belitung shipwreck and its treasures. In spite of it being of the most important archeological finds of the century, the collection is embroiled in a fierce debate over supposed unprofessional and unethical retrieval of the wrecks which resulted in the Smithsonian Institution postponing the planned 2012 exhibition to perhaps 2013. The friends and I, we've our opinions on this matter. I leave you to form yours.

This bowl was fired in China's Hunan, Changsha kilns, circa 825-50. It's described as "glazed stoneware with underglaze iron-brown and copper-green pigments." Within the bowl, the potter (I assume, since the wordings aren't particularly poignant or poetic in the style of Tang poems) had inscribed, “孤鹰南天远，寒风切切惊，妾思江外客，早晚到边停。” The English translation of the poem is close, but indicated that it's a "lonely goose", which puzzles me. GOOSE? Yes, geese fly south. BUT..... I'm fairly sure that '鹰' means 'eagle'. Am I missing something....like a poetic affectation of sorts?

Also, many of the Chinese translations don't match the English version. When describing pachisi (parcheesi), randomly, they put into the Chinese description "印度". Nowhere in the English description contained the word "Indian". When it comes to translations and worse, to have to read them, I'm a purist.

I've alot of issues with the descriptions of the items. They're properly and accurately dated, of course. But the descriptions are weak, and vague. It's almost as though they rushed through the cataloguing and decided to put everything as 'big jar', 'medium jar', 'small bottle'. Otherwise it's 'big ewer', 'medium ewer', 'small ewer'. Seriously. There're some half-hearted attempts at trying to decipher what could have been the items meant for trade and what could been used for daily storage on board the ship. There're so many different types of birds drawn on the Changsha bowls and they're just generally identified as BIRDS. Right. There're many different kinds of birds you know. It's just a feeling that the treasures haven't received the right treatment from the professionals who know how to write an interesting, factual and informative lines for them.

There're plenty of beautiful art pieces on display. I'm happy to have a chance to admire them. A sizeable haul, I'd say. They don't just ooze history. They speak of a life back then, and bear witness to shipping routes and trading trends, habits and lifestyles of the society of the era. However, imho, I opine that the sociological and anthropological aspects of the wreck haven't been thoroughly analyzed. The videos and graphic displays have been done well and provide substantial information of trade routes in the 9th century. Attempts at audience interaction are obvious in a simple board game, cut-outs to take home, spot the patterns of ceramic ware, machines to emboss ceramic patterns, etc. It's a very good effort. More can be done, of course. But it's a good curation pertaining layout and display.

Still it's the ultimate irony. This collection belongs to ultimately, the Singapore government, and by virtue of the meritocracy that it pushes for, everyone, including Singaporeans will have to pay to view this collection. Why is this not hosted at the National Museum. Scheduling conflicts aside, if this is a collection we can be proud of, then it ought to be placed in our national heritage venues and be open to the public for a nominal sum of admission fees. It's quite stunning, yes. But the question of purchase, while legal, is dubitable, and methods of retrieval are now marred in deep controversy. It calls into question of not just why the (to the world) Singapore government has to acquire this collection (actually, it's not difficult to guess), it also makes the world question what Singapore views as historical and how sincere is the subsequent value placed on it, especially when it seems that we don't consider a host of other environmental and ethical issues, not much different from how we tear down buildings and clear land to build new ones in the name of shiny progressive urban development.