HISTORY OF STEEL IN EASTERN ASIA EXHIBITION NOW ONLINE

[Battara]

After much thought and consideration, I will respond to this.

As the only person to be involved with both attempts at this exhibit I come to this with perhaps a strange perspective. First, Mabagani, I would have loved to have worked with you on this second attempt. You would have been such an asset and I was dissappointed that you turned down the opportunity. Yes mistakes were made, but I wish you could have been part to help us earlier. These were not intentional nor an attempt to slander any of my fellow Pinoy.

What saddens me is that the anger that this endeavor has generated. I remember a conversation I had with someone who knows Cato and they said that Cato is aware of the mistakes in his work and regrets them. I think as the writers we are open to feedback (yes we were in a hurry that is true) but not to have fingers waved in our faces. If any one feels insulted by what we attempted to do then I am sorry, none was meant.

[MABAGANI]

Worthy of headline news- "Macao Snubs Philippines"
Macao museum commits an international faux pas. The original blunder was placing the Philippines in an exhibit called "History of Steel in the Eastern Asia" 2006. What was a grand concept where the museum would host a display of antique weaponry from around the world during the 2005 East Asian Games in Macao, instead turns into a grand fiasco when coordinators revamped the show and misfit the Philippines section into an exhibit about Eastern Asia. In the study of cultures, the Philippines is properly categorized with Southeast Asia and nations with ancient ties to the Srivisaya and Majapahit empires. The coordinators were also informed of blatant historical mistakes after the museum went public with an online site. Instead of rushing to correct the errors made online like the haphazard hurry to finish printed text for the opening and hardcopy, the computer edition easily fixed with the clicks of a keyboard were ignored adding insult to injustice.

pm me

[ariel]

Gentlemen,
I do not have a dog in this fight and if any of you asks me to shut up, I shall do it with understanding and humility.

Nevertheless, it pains me to see this Forum turning into a shouting match with mutual accusations and acrimony. We have seen it happening elsewhere and it was not a pretty sight.

In the immortal words of Rodney King " Can we all just get along?"

[Rivkin]

I am a vile man, therefore preferring struggle to conformity... However, reading through articles, I liked all of them, with a few exceptions. I dislike the one by Cao Hangang.
Paleolithic Chinese, Chinese creating the art of bronze smelting, which becomes the envy of the world, and the rest, in the same style.

I guess those poor pharohs, scythians and chalybis, starting their day with grieving over the insurpassable quality of Chinese bronze...

I think this article is really bad. I enjoyed reading the rest of them.

[Rick]

Originally Posted by Battara

What saddens me is that the anger that this endeavor has generated. I remember a conversation I had with someone who knows Cato and they said that Cato is aware of the mistakes in his work and regrets them. I think as the writers we are open to feedback (yes we were in a hurry that is true) but not to have fingers waved in our faces. If any one feels insulted by what we attempted to do then I am sorry, none was meant.

I share Battara's feelings but I do not feel one bit apologetic.

I would much rather have seen this project followed through to completion by the original SFI team.

Frankly I'm tired of feeling that I'm being pilloried for having tried to help salvage this exhibition by contributing pieces. I'm also insulted by insinuations that contributions were made in order to get them "published" for personal gain.

[MABAGANI]

"Tolerance and lest we perpetuate misinformation"

Aside from the botched historical article in the Philippine exhibit, I also forwarded information to coordinators about incorrect categories and mislabeled swords. After bringing these matters to attention, nothing has been changed by the Macao Museum's administrator, in turn inaction is against EEWRS forum rules for inciting "INTOLERANCE", "FLAMES, INSULTS, BIGOTRY" and making statements that are now "knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane" towards the race and nation of the Philippines.

For the record, Filipinos members of EEWRS were treated unjustly as a consequence of the Macao HOS project. Filipinos were publicly bashed on the EEWRS, contributors received artifacts damaged and there was an account of money swindled from a participant. Filipino members wanted to be disassociated from the ill-fated unsatisfactory exhibit.

The article and exhibit for the Philippine section does not merit a critique because its an unresearched rough draft containing too many mistakes. The display itself had false catagories with swords placed in the wrong headings. The exhibit, at least the Philippine section, should have been canceled rather than "salvaged and rushed" and unsuitably grouped with Eastern Asia.

Inadvertently, during and after the course of the exhibit, EEWRS was unable to moderate effectively because a majority of moderators were part of the project. Before the start of the second exhibit attempt I caught the Macao Museum assembler's abusive intolerant nature in a posted thread and decide not to join. Had he been banned for breaking the forum rules this whole episode may not have occurred.

Keep in mind, next time someone plans to do an exhibit, world class museums book their events up to two years in advance, details worked out beforehand. Real museums conserve and protect artifacts including their history. Why the Philippines section was expected to come up with an exhibit practically from scratch in a few months and put in a display about Eastern Asia was senseless and the fallout was unnecessary. Unfortunately, people were misled into peril and would like to put the ordeal in the past.

IMHO this thread should be locked and the link to the HOS website removed "lest we perpetuate misinformation". Individual links (excluding the Philippines section) for each of the remaining exhibit sections could be listed for participants who were able to present decent work and research.

[themorningstar]

the agung plays its final note....


huun, jumanji kami ha mabagani....

[Rivkin]

I can hardly see any bigotry involved in disagreement over the exact dates of Moro-American war or who was the first european to arrive at Fillipines. After all the fuss I have seen no reference presented to the presence of anyone visiting the islands prior to Magellan.

[ariel]

Mabagani,
I can see you are upset .
I hear you.
Can you, please tell me what was factually wrong with the Ph. exhibit?
What caused such grief in the Ph. community? I Obviously, the exhibition touched a raw nerve; I would like to know what is it in order not to commit a similar transgression with my Ph. co-workers.
What is so offensive about including Ph. in the general realm of SE Asia? After all, that is where geographically it belongs, isn't it?
Please understand, I am not attacking you; on the contrary, I would like to learn from what obviously was an unpleasant experience by and for others.

[Tim Simmons]

I am not involved with this in any way. I would like a copy of the catalogue. As this is a post on the forum then anyone can reply.

That said, why do we always see this constant squabbling, belligerent postulating, pontificating, and fighting for the final word as if you are all scholarly masters when it comes to any weapons East of the Naga Hills?

[Andrew]

Originally Posted by themorningstar

the agung plays its final note....

This comment is uneccessary.

huun, jumanji kami ha mabagani....

Please post in English.

[David]

Originally Posted by MABAGANI

For the record, Filipinos members of EEWRS were treated unjustly as a consequence of the Macao HOS project. Filipinos were publicly bashed on the EEWRS, contributors received artifacts damaged and there was an account of money swindled from a participant.

Mabagani, i have little doubt that there could be some factual errors in the exhibit which need attending to. Hopefully, if your advised corrections are indeed correct these will be taken care of before the catalog is produced.
Just for the record though, i would like to know just when and where Filipinos have been publicly bashed on this forum, other then the explosive response by Antonio to your original posting which has been removed from this forum for what i feel were very appropriate reasons. And do you seriously believe that that response was racially motivated? Or that there have been other racially motivated argument or attacks on this forum that have not been agressively moderated?
Also for the record i would like to know what other artifacts besides Ron's (Spunjer) barong were damaged in transit. I keep hearing an unnumbered plural in regards to this accusation. I don't mean to lessen the tragedy of Ron's story, but there is a big difference between saying one piece was damaged and, say, ten pieces were damaged. So just for the record, what is the number of damaged pieces?
And just for the record, since an accurate record should be important in this case, just who was "swindled" out of money in regards to this exihibition and how?
It is certainly clear that some folks got their toes stepped on here and it is also clear that they are steppin' back, so to speak. I am in no position to judge just who has been right or wrong here, and i often say that there are at least three sides to every story, but i do believe we can discuss this subject calmly and sensibly without drawing the "race card" into the question.

[Tim Simmons]

I rather fancy it is something else.

[Andrew]

Originally Posted by MABAGANI

"Tolerance and lest we perpetuate misinformation"

Aside from the botched historical article in the Philippine exhibit, I also forwarded information to coordinators about incorrect categories and mislabeled swords. After bringing these matters to attention, nothing has been changed by the Macao Museum's administrator, in turn inaction is against EEWRS forum rules for inciting "INTOLERANCE", "FLAMES, INSULTS, BIGOTRY" and making statements that are now "knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane" towards the race and nation of the Philippines.

For the record, Filipinos members of EEWRS were treated unjustly as a consequence of the Macao HOS project. Filipinos were publicly bashed on the EEWRS, contributors received artifacts damaged and there was an account of money swindled from a participant. Filipino members wanted to be disassociated from the ill-fated unsatisfactory exhibit.

The article and exhibit for the Philippine section does not merit a critique because its an unresearched rough draft containing too many mistakes. The display itself had false catagories with swords placed in the wrong headings. The exhibit, at least the Philippine section, should have been canceled rather than "salvaged and rushed" and unsuitably grouped with Eastern Asia.

Inadvertently, during and after the course of the exhibit, EEWRS was unable to moderate effectively because a majority of moderators were part of the project. Before the start of the second exhibit attempt I caught the Macao Museum assembler's abusive intolerant nature in a posted thread and decide not to join. Had he been banned for breaking the forum rules this whole episode may not have occurred.

Keep in mind, next time someone plans to do an exhibit, world class museums book their events up to two years in advance, details worked out beforehand. Real museums conserve and protect artifacts including their history. Why the Philippines section was expected to come up with an exhibit practically from scratch in a few months and put in a display about Eastern Asia was senseless and the fallout was unnecessary. Unfortunately, people were misled into peril and would like to put the ordeal in the past.

IMHO this thread should be locked and the link to the HOS website removed "lest we perpetuate misinformation". Individual links (excluding the Philippines section) for each of the remaining exhibit sections could be listed for participants who were able to present decent work and research.

It sounds like you have a problem with the moderation of this site, in addition to the exhibit. Please address your moderation concerns to the Staff via email or PM.

[B.I]

This exhibition may have its faults (its not India and so thats not for me to judge) but I am surprised at the aggression fired against it. Surely we should applaud it for bringing the attention of arms to an increasingly ignorant general public.
We all want scholarly, and well researched additions to our libraries, but I think the bigger picture is being ignored. We also desperately need exhibitions and books to be pushed onto those that would not normally look to this subject. And these can happily remain on the ‘basic’ level. If we dont, and continue to sit here like a judge and jury, then I strongly feel we will slowly watch your hobby die.
This exhibition has been hounded on various platforms, and I think this is absolutely disgusting! A lot of effort was put into this, and it opened up many eyes by the efforts of Antonio and his staff.
I realise that the inaccuracies rubbed up some people the wrong way, but as in any academic book, this should not be so aggressively addressed. All books have their problems, for those that look hard enough. But, surely this is a starting point to discuss these issues, and further our knowledge. Can we not appreciate the exhibition for the efforts involved, and discuss any points we disagree with?
I made the same point about the book 'Arms and Armour from Iran'. Yes, it had many faults but the author somehow talked a publisher that had previously turned down weaponry books into accepting it, and has pushed his work through hard advertising and lecturing onto a much wider base than many previous books have managed. Is this a bad thing?
Of course it isnt. It means that were have a new book to discuss and it opens the doors for others to publish.
The same goes for this exhibition. Maybe Macau would never have even considered hosting an exhibition had Antonio not done all the work.
One book (or catalogue) could never be definitive, and so any inaccuracies should be noted and discussed by those than know better, and those that don’t will have an overall view, with a hopeful thirst to know more and discover these errors for themselves. If any book is taken as ultimate and faultless, then it is the problem of the reader in that he should question more.
Of course, this isn’t meant to excuse mistakes, but surely the exhibitions merits out weigh these inaccuracies! How many museums do we know of that are 100% accurate in their descriptions. Yes they should be pointed out, but surely not like this.
I cant speak for other countries (nor the US for that matter) but America ought to be wary of complacency when it comes to this hobby of ours. They, as a country, have a passion for guns, which luckily overlaps onto ‘white arms’, and the have the funds and museum space to continuously host permanent exhibitions. But, you should be aware of what is happening over here (UK).
I have watched museums gradually distance themselves from arms in general, due to their unpopularity as exhibits. This unfortunate view has been reflected in London arms fairs, which seem to attract fewer people each year. The auctions are the same. Most ‘top-end’ dealers will readily admit a decline in sales and hearken on to previous stories of a time when things were available and business was good.
Ebay is no judge of the current market, and forums do not show this decline. Everyone here is passionate, but will this go onto the next generation?
Baltimore is run by enthusiasts, who have done a fantastic job in organising events to instil this passion in lectures and dinners. But, without these few guys, the show would not be the same.
The Met still hold some great exhibitions centred around arms, but these too are run and organised by a select few. Without them, I wonder if the Met would not concentrate more on other popular exhibitions.
The V&A is a great example of this decline. When Tony North heralded the department, things were vastly different. However, when he retired, and was not replaced, the arms on show were soon taken down and put into storage (maybe permanently). The space was used for other exhibitions known to draw more of a general crowd. To keep a museum open and running, the general crowd must come first. We know that, even as passionate collectors. We must come second and it’s a fact we have to accept. There are still some very passionate people at the V&A, but these all have their own speciality and push for that primarily. I wonder what would happen if Donald Larocca retired? Yes, I am sure he would be replaced, and things would hopefully continue. As I said, the Met has the funds and the space, but I think people ought to be aware of the V&A as an example, before being so harsh with exhibitions that could potentially attract a ‘new’ crowd.
If Antonio’s work attracted just one new person into the fold, then it was all worth it. The layout looked fantastic, and the design alone would attract different people to view the exhibition. So, new eyes would see these weapons at their best, and potential collectors (all desperately needed) could be born.
It is a real shame that there were such obvious inaccuracies (apparently, from what I have read from others) but this still shouldn’t cause such a bad feeling towards this exhibition. I think it would be awful if Antonio decided not to host another, due to the harassment from this one. I know I would be reluctant to bother again if it were me. We surely learn from our own mistakes. I have heard this exhibition be called damaging to the academic field. How can this possibly be so?
The internet seems to have bred a new breed of academic. Very intelligent and educated. But hardly well read in what they criticise. You can give any individual essay to any college graduate, and he can tear it apart, word for word. But, all books, thesis and exhibitions should be looked at as a whole. The mistakes should be pointed out, but the efforts involved should always be applauded. Anyone can sit back, wait for someone to do all the work and then shoot it down. This doesn’t make them academic, not a good critic, as they are completely missing the point.
My point is that if any one good thing comes from anything, then it was all worthwhile. I really hope Antonio continues his efforts, and that people lighten up over this, and other, events.
This exhibition has not damaged anything (except maybe Ron’s pieces ), but I feel that the ‘village mob’ may prevent anything like this from happening again.
Well I, for one, sincerely hope not!

[MABAGANI]

Points taken.
But hold the applause and consider what's at stake.
We've heard "Publish or Perish" but I doubt it meant giving less than full effort, which is what happened in this case and at a sacrifice by incorrectly writing a country's history and abusing its people in the process.
There is also a big difference between collectors who want to write but plagiarize and regurgitate incorrect information to tout themselves as experts vs. collectors who have taken the time and effort to research producing insights and new theories. The better museum works I've seen have gone through or were connected to academic institutions to complete articles and essays or had their own research department to verify and approve written material to safeguard against or minimize errors. This is another reason why projects are scheduled two years out, painstakingly to produce a worthwhile endeavor.
Given the short notice, the outcome and fallout in this case I would have again opted to hold off publishing and left the Philippines out. Most importantly, no one or country deserves to be trampled on for the good of an exhibit or "catalog".

"Love God with all your heart, always bear in mind that love of God is also love of Country, and thus, too, is love of ones fellowmen" -Andres Bonifacio, Katipunan Revolution founder

[VANDOO]

AS I DON'T KNOW ALL THE FACTS I AM NOT AWARE OF WHY THERE IS INFIGHTING OR WHAT HAPPENED TO CAUSE THE INITIAL ANGER BUT SENSE IT IS PERSONEL AND HAS BEEN BREWING SINCE BEFORE THE EXHIBIT AND THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN A PROBLEM NO MATTER HOW ACCURATE THE EXHIBIT HAD BEEN.
THE EXHIBIT IS OVER AND THE MUSEUM DID CONSIDER THE PHILIPPINES IMPORTANT ENOUGH TO BE INCLUDED IN IT. IF THEY HAD NOT CONSIDRED THE PHILIPPINES TO BE IMPORTANT ENOUGH TO EVEN BE IN THE EXHIBIT THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN A SNUB. THEY DID HAVE TO RUSH THE EXHIBIT WHICH HAS LED TO MORE MISTAKES THAN WOULD USUALLY OCCUR. THERE WERE ALSO PROBLEMS AT THE START AS SOME PEOPLE WHO INITIALLY WERE GOING TO HELP PROVIDE INFORMATION AND ITEMS DROPPED OUT FOR SOME REASON. THAT ALSO CONTRIBUTED TO THE MISTAKES MADE AND MAY BE PART OF THE REASON FOR THE ANGER WHICH MAKES THEM FEEL THE PHILIPPINES SHOULD HAVE BEEN LEFT OUT ENTIRELY. BUT THEY WOULD PROBABLY HAVE BEEN MAD IF THEY HAD BEEN LEFT OUT ENTIRELY AS THEY ARE IN THE REGION AND DID PLAY A PART IN ITS HISTORY. I FEEL ITS UNFORTUNATE THERE ARE NEGATIVE FEELINGS AND ANGER OVER THIS EXHIBIT AND HOPE IT DOES NOT EFFECT THE CHANCE OF FUTURE EXHIBITS IN MACAU OR OTHER PLACES. I CAN'T JUDGE AS I DON'T KNOW HOW THE PHILIPPINES WERE INTENTIONALY TRAMPLED AND INSULTED . PERHAPS THE ONE WHO WROTE THE HISTORY SHOULD GET A POOR GRADE ON HIS DATES ON THE HISTORY TEST BUT THEY WOULD SURELY HAVE SCORED A LOT HIGHER ON THE TEST THAN I WOULD HAVE.

THIS IS NOT A CHALLENGE OR PUT DOWN ITS JUST HOW I SEE IT NO OFFENSE IS MENT.