Why is the Gwangju Biennale refusing to call Taiwan’s pavilion the 'Taiwan Pavilion'?

Taiwan’s government and participating artists accuse the Gwangju Biennale of censorship after it renamed its exhibition the “NTMoFA Pavilion”. Call it what you will – just don’t call it the Taiwan Pavilion. The Gwangju Biennale is the latest organisation to come under fire over how it refers to Taiwan, after changing its pavilion’s name from “Taiwan Pavilion” to “NTMoFA Pavilion”. Unlike other participants, whose pavilions are identified by country, Taiwan’s is recognised by the name of its organising body, the National Taiwan Museum of Fine Arts. The exceptional designation has prompted accusations of censorshipfrom Taiwanese artists and government officials. It has also brought the art world back into the fraught politics of Taiwan’s name. A pavilion by any other name In a statement posted on Instagram on 15 August, the 10 participating artists and curator Chen Hsiang-Wen said the project had been accepted as the “Taiwan Pavilion” in April, before the foundation changed its name without their consent. They said the NTMoFA had repeatedly objected to the name change and tried to negotiate with the foundation. They also condemned the decision as part of a political climate in which “diplomatic pressure and economic resources” are used to censor artists. Taiwan’s Ministry of Culture has backed its artists. It said the proposal was approved as the “Taiwan Pavilion” on 2 April and that an agreement signed on 23 April also referred to it by the same name. It was still called that until June, the ministry said, when the foundation began referring to it as the “NTMoFA Pavilion”. The Gwangju Biennale Foundation has rejected accusations of political censorship. In a statement released on 19 August, it described the dispute as an “administrative difference” and said it has no bearing on the exhibition’s content or freedom of expression. Naming and shaming China has long objected to Taiwan being called by its name. For years, European companies and cultural organisations have bowed to Beijing’s demands. In 2002, organisers of the São Paulo Biennial removed “Taiwan” from the pavilion’s name after China threatened to withdraw its artists from the event. Taiwanese artist Chang Chien-chi responded by shutting down his installation, while artists from other countries donated letters from their signs to spell “TAIWAN” above the delegation’s exhibition. Taiwan formerly participated as a national pavilion at the Venice Biennale, but after pressure from Beijing, it lost that designation in 2001. Since then, the Taipei Fine Arts Museum has organised Taiwan’s pavilion as a collateral event. The commercial world has faced similar pressures. In 2018, Chinese authorities contacted dozens of airlines and demanded that they stop identifying Taiwan as a country on their websites. Air France, British Airways and Lufthansa were among the European carriers that changed their references to Taiwan. The same year, the Marriott hotel empire came under fire in China after a customer questionnaire listed Taiwan, Tibet, Hong Kong and Macau as separate countries. Marriott apologised, and after its Chinese website and app were temporarily shut down, the company adopted “Taiwan, China” in its Chinese-language listings. But Europe has become less willing to play along lately. Last year, the EU rejected Beijing’s claim that UN Resolution 2758 recognised Taiwan as part of China. This July, the European Parliament went further, mentioning Taiwan 44 times in a recommendation on East Asia and describing it as a “reliable key democratic partner” of the EU.