{August 15, 2003 ထုတ္ မာယာမွ ျပန္လည္ကူးယူေဖာ္ျပပါတယ္။}
With reference to the Ba Hlaing Committee " Report of the commissions of the National Museum Collection and Exhibitions", 1945, L.F.Taylor, " A Burma Provincial Museum, JBRS, xiv, i, April 1924, 1-20; "Museum Architecture, Museums and Art Galleries", Encyclopedia Britannica xv, 1959, 990-1001; G.H.Luce, "Draft Scheme for the Burma Museum," JBRS XXXIII, ii, August 1950, 94-130; Min Naing, Guide to Museum, 1980, and puting together my collections of several hours at the Museum of America, Canada, England, France, Holland, India, Indonesia, Japan, Singapore and Thailand, I felt that I have had some knowledge in museums and write this note on the New Museum, Bagan. I visited that Bagan Museum on three successive days of 16th to 18th June 1999. Its silhouette that I saw from a distance so disheartened me that I loath to get even closer to it. I think I shall have to give some comparisons here so that I could make others understand what I mean to say. The Silhouette of the Great Shwedagon as a person sees from the ocean liner at the mouth of Yangon river is so awe-inspiring that he would never forget it. That might even inspire him to learn Buddhism together with its art and architecture. The Bagan Museum is just the opposite. Would you blame the architect for making this monastery? The decoration, both the interior and exterior are so grotesque that they destroy the entire lovely silhouette of Bagan. The grackle and gracious Grawdawpalin now looks small and insignificant besides this ugliness that they call museum. I may be wrong but I do not think a true architect would make such a design for museum. The building has successfully obliterated the former admirable Bagan scene which was magnificent through ancient.
While I was at Bagan about forty members of the Association of Myanmar Architects were having a two-day seminar on Bagan monastic establishments at the Kumudra Hotel. Aung Khine, chief of the Bagan archaeological zone presented a paper at the seminar and he would know who was responsible for the design of the museum. Only one of the architects at the seminar made a casual remark that it was ill-conceived and poorly accomplished. As a result, the Bagan scene is defaced. People used to say that " Ananda is beautiful, Grawdawpalin is graceful and Thabyinnyu is high and magnificent." Many a temple or pagoda, still has it own charm though it is in various stages of ruin. Now, because of this ungainly thing in their middle, they pale or fade out. That is intolerable. In London, no skyscraper is allowed near the St. Paul Cathedral. Tokyo disallowed any tall edifice around Tenoheka's Palace. When encircled with bridges and towers the Sule Pagoda has been reduced almost to nothingness. In Chicago, however, within 'the loop' of some fifty, sixty storied buildings, the Empire State Building of one hundred and thirteen stories make not so much of an interference in the silhouette as seen from Lake Michigan. At Lhasa in Tibet, Potala (palace) creeps up the mountain side and makes no disturbance to the panoramic view. The Mandalay Palace, lost its former splendor when its teak pillars were substitute with concrete ones. Surely Bagan lost its magnificence when this big museum appeared.
Soon after one has entered the museum gate, he would be confronted by a huge Hpyu Saw Hti with bow and arrow. He was an archer born of the Sun God and a she-serpent. Being a half-breed, he would look either a god or serpent either a demi-god or semi-serpent. And another anarchronism is that he uses the bow Rama. A Mongol archer's bow would be more suitable. The animals he killed from the pedestal but they all look very much alive and threatening.
The entrance to the Museum is covered with replicas of the dado from the Kyauk Ku U-Min. The building does not any decorations. It is a building to exhibit the antiques, etc. It is in no way to become an exhibit itself. Profuse decoration is barbarous. You would even hate to see an elderly fish monger cutting fish with hands wearing dozens of gold bangles. Words would fail to express one's disappointment. Immensely huge columns are lacquered with floral designs and protected with a warning "Don't touch." A column is supposed to stand tall, with no cut in the middle. It is a nice thing that should not be ignored. In classical style, the columns simply looks grand with only whitewash. It should have a base, shaft, capital and entablature. Nothing shall cut across it. That would distract the column from its grandeur. The top would have architrave and frieze. The cornice fall from the ceiling. The entablature varies between the Doric, Tuscan, Ionic and Corinthian pillars. Myanmar architecture doesn't have them. If they are introduced now why not use them properly.
The exhibit are put on a pedestal, a table or a stands which is again profusely decorated. There is no sense in overdoing these things. That reminds one of a pagoda museum, where curious are dumped helter-skelter with no precise information on each exhibit. This system, if you could call it a system, is hopeless.
The curator would not possibly be able to explain why the statues of Aniruddha and Kyanzittha are shown among the headless or handless images of the Buddha. It is worse than the intentional change of some very able asiti (eighty) disciples into Abeyadana, Kyanzittha and Arahan in temples Abeyadana and Ananda (Nanda).
The Museum curators, guides, and attendants are nice and they could to help us visitors. We extend Sadu twice to them in as much the same way as Kyanzittha on his death-bed to his son Rajakuma "Good indeed, good indeed" for all the meritorious deeds that the son had done on behalf of his dying father.
Than Tun
15 September 2001
No comments:
Post a Comment