Simple is Hard to Do: Some Thoughts on Shanghai Expo 2010

August 17, 2010 at 12:00 am (Current Affairs, Guest Writer, Travel)

An article by guest writer Low Sze Wee. Refer to “About the Writer” at the end of the post.

In June, despite media reports of huge crowds and long queues, I decided to spend two days with a friend to visit the much-anticipated and talked-about Shanghai Expo. Much of the hype turned out to be true. The mass media reported daily on the latest Expo attractions. Virtually all the major shopping malls and hotels in town had Expo information booths, manned by eager volunteers handing out tips and maps. There were plenty of vendors (both legal and illegal) selling all sorts of Expo-related merchandise including the ubiquitous blue Expo mascot Haibao (literally translated as Sea Treasure). And it was obvious that the Expo had been overwhelmingly embraced by the local Chinese. An hour before the Expo opened at nine in the morning, queues had already formed at the main train station leading to the site. Many local families were determined to spend the entire day at the Expo, in order to make the best use of their single-entry day tickets. Queues, sometimes stretching for as long as four hours, were therefore, common for the more popular pavilions such as China, Japan, Italy and Germany.  And visitors were prepared for long waits, with many bringing along umbrellas and even small portable folding stools with them on their outing!

On our first day at the Expo, we made sure that we were amongst the first to arrive in the morning and headed straight for the much-publicised Italy pavilion. This meant that our queue was a relatively painless 15 minutes. However, for the rest of the day, we gave the popular pavilions a miss as we were not keen to stand in the sun for few hours just to get into them. Hence, we took our time to have a leisurely stroll around the extensive grounds to admire the unusual pavilion architecture, check out the various free performances in the public areas, and occasionally drop into the smaller pavilions (such as those from South America, Eastern Europe and Southeast Asia) that were not so popular and hence, less crowded.

For our second day, we changed our tactic and instead, visited the Expo in the evening. This turned out to be a wise choice. The weather was cooler and many of the pavilions looked even more stunning with special lighting effects at night. More importantly,  the crowds were noticeably thinner and we were able to visit some popular pavilions such as those from United Kingdom (UK), Australia and Morocco without queueing! However, we were still not able to visit the China pavilion. To visit the latter, a reservation pass (separate from the Expo admission ticket) was needed and all passes had been given out for that day. The friendly volunteer advised us to either turn up early the next morning to queue for a pass or join a local organised group tour with access to group passes. Unfortunately, as we had already made plans for the next day, we had to sadly give the China pavilion a miss. However, we consoled ourselves with the knowledge  that we could still visit the pavilion in the future as there were plans to preserve it after the Expo ended.

Sze Wee outside the China pavilion

China pavilion at night

Upon our return to Singapore, friends and family asked for our favourite pavilions. For me, some pavilions were truly outstanding for the simple reason that they achieved what they had set out to do. The Expo is a high-profile  platform for countries to project themselves internationally. This year, the Expo is especially prominent because its primary audience (that is, the Chinese themselves) is increasingly regarded as a market that the rest of the world cannot ignore. In the years to come, the Chinese will form one of the world’s largest consumers of goods and services. The Expo, being held in China this year, represents an unparalleled opportunity for the various national pavilions to create positive impressions and greater awareness of what each country has to offer, be it in terms of national identity, tourist attractions or business opportunities.

So, from amongst the various pavilions  we managed to visit, which ones stood out the most?

Firstly, first impressions still count. With so many countries jostling for attention, it was difficult to stand out from the crowd, more so since many pavilions had to have similar features such a spacious entrance lobby, a sizeable audio-visual theatre and large ramps to bring visitors through the various levels in each building. In that respect, the Australia, UK and Spain pavilions stood out visually, both day and night, through the use of unusual claddings for their building facades.

The Spain pavilion used a humble and simple material – willow – as its inspiration as well as cladding. The building was conceived as a series of baskets, some open at the top and some enclosed, to create courtyards, circulation and multi-purpose spaces. The entire steel structure was covered with more than 8000 flexible panels of hand-woven wicker. Made by craftsmen from Shandong province, the panels came in shades of brown, beige and black, depending on how the willow was treated (whether stripped of its bark or not). This cladding gave the pavilion an organic look, with its undulating surfaces reminiscent of gigantic golden waves suspended in motion. To me, this pavilion represented a successful combination of the modern and the traditional, cleverly making use of a familiar material and technique found in both Spain and China, to connect the two countries.

Spain pavilion

Spain pavilion (photograph from Shanghai Expo official website)

Likewise, the Australia pavilion used a common material to distinguish itself. In this case, the undulating building was completely encased in steel produced and donated by an Australian steel manufacturer. The steel structure, which had been allowed to weather into a rich rust colour with rugged textures, recalled the famous natural icon – Uluru, also known as Ayers Rock – a monolithic rock formation in the Australian outback. In the day, its vivid façade was striking against the clear blue sky, whilst at night, the structure had the appearance of a glowing modernist sculpture.

Australia pavilion in the day (photograph from Shanghai Expo official website)

Australia pavilion at night

For me, the most unique cladding was found on the curvaceous UK pavilion, which was entirely covered with some 60,000 transparent acrylic rods, vibrating gently in the breeze. Upon entering the pavilion, visitors were confronted by a surreal luminous womb-like chamber comprising thousands of seeds encased at the ends of each rod, which were in turn, lit by fibre optic filaments. At night, this had the added advantage of illuminating the pavilion from within, allowing the whole structure to glow. The award-winning design had been variously described as a hedgehog, giant hairbrush, durian (by some Singaporeans) and a dandelion (by the Chinese)! Although not the largest pavilion in the Expo and despite its lack of cutting-edge technological gadgets, the unusual cladding captured public imagination, and judging by the long queues, it was undoubtedly one of the most popular pavilions.

Queues at the UK pavilion

UK pavilion at night

Secondly, it struck me that simple ideas worked best. To achieve multiple aims like adhering to the Expo’s theme of “Better City, Better Life”, and showing the best that a country had to offer, in ways that are meaningful, of interest to an international audience, and at the same time, of relevance to China, may result in pavilions that try to tick every box and end up pleasing no one.

For the UK pavilion, its brief was to “change perceptions of Britain amongst the coming generation of Chinese; away from their old image of us, as a land of swirling fog and cobblestones, old buildings and old attitudes” and for them to “understand contemporary Britain, the home of creative Industries and artistic talent.” In that respect, the concept of the pavilion as a ‘Seed Cathedral’ was breathtaking in its simplicity, and astounding in its radical unconventionality. It drew on the UK tradition and love of parks and gardens, and sought to highlight the importance of maintaining a direct connection with nature. Instead of relying on the familiar (London Beefeaters and William Shakespeare comes to mind!), it capitalised on the key strength of a unique national asset like the Kew Gardens and its valuable role in preserving the world’s natural biodiversity through its Millennium Seed Bank programme. The latter seeks to collect seeds of 25% of the world’s wild plant species by 2020. The idea of a seed bank is both simple and symbolic. Seeds represent change and growth, as well as the potential for future innovation and discovery in diverse fields. At the same time, the pavilion’s cutting-edge design was seen as a means of changing Chinese perceptions of the UK as a country with a strong sense of heritage but not usually known for its creativity or technological innovations. More importantly, a partnership between UK and China was forged because the seeds in the pavilion were sourced in China from the Kew Garden’s Chinese partner, the Kunming Institute of Botany. And to keep alive the memory of the UK ‘dandelion’ after the Expo ends, the acrylic seed rods would be distributed to schools across China as a unique keepsake.

Interior of the UK pavilion at night

Close-up view of the rods containing the seeds

The Denmark pavilion took a different, but equally successful approach. The organisers literally transported what was possibly their most famous, if not most-loved tourist icon from Copenhagen to Shanghai. Although Denmark has yet to become a key tourist destination for the Chinese, the stories by Danish writer Hans Christian Andersen are well-known to Chinese readers. Likewise, through past media reports and tourist campaigns,  many Chinese would be familiar with the statue of a little mermaid, based on Andersen’s much-read children’s fable of the same name, perched on a rock by the sea in Copenhagen.

The Denmark pavilion was designed as a series of pristine white curved ramps, forming a sculptural embrace around the Little Mermaid, so that visitors could catch glimpses of her from most locations within the structure. The pavilion sought to present Denmark as a family-friendly, natural, beautiful and active country, and convey what Danes love to do in the city of Copenhagen. So, visitors could have a picnic on the roof, explore the playground, or take an indoor or outdoor bicycle trip within the pavilion. Although I did not get a chance to enter the pavilion, the wonderful thing was that there were enough perforations in the pavilion for me to see what was happening inside and even the back of the mermaid statue without having to go in. Here, I was struck by the ingenuity of the design. By giving tantalising peeks into the pavilion, it probably did more to whet the appetites of those standing outside, and entice them to queue to have a better look at the Little Mermaid, than any amount of on-site banners or posters of the statue could have done! This ‘see-through’ approach was also adopted by the Italy pavilion. Although primarily constructed of concrete, the building had a large entrance lobby, entirely covered in glass. This ensured that the centrepiece of the lobby – a replica of a grand architectural façade – remained visible to all visitors passing by the pavilion, both night and day.

Italy pavilion with its glass entrance (photograph from Shanghai Expo official website)

The architectural façade replica in the lobby of the Italy pavilion

The decision to use the statue as the main focus in the Denmark pavilion was a publicity triumph. The statue’s journey from Copenhagen to its eventual installation in its own pool of Danish seawater in the centre of the pavilion in Shanghai, was covered extensively by the international media (including Singapore’s newspapers). And the story did not end there. The Danish also took the opportunity to create a dialogue between both countries by commissioning well-known Chinese contemporary artist Ai Wei Wei to produce a site-specific installation in Copenhagen at the location vacated by the statue. Ai’s proposal comprised projecting real-time images of the Little Mermaid in Shanghai onto a screen erected on her empty pedestal in Copenhagen. In this way, Danish audiences could have a chance to share in the Little Mermaid’s trip to the East, as well as to see for themselves how well-loved their icon was in Shanghai.

Denmark pavilion (Photograph from Shanghai Expo official website)

Queues outside the Denmark pavilion

Man outside the pavilion taking a photograph of the Little Mermaid

Screen shot from the Ai Wei Wei artwork website www.mermaidexchange.com

Like the UK pavilion, the Danish strategy succeeded brilliantly. Both projected an aspect of their national identity through either a well-known institution (Kew Gardens) or famous icon (the Little Mermaid). By using actual artefacts (seeds and sculptures), they provided authentic experiences as well as great photo opportunities for the camera-toting Chinese. Both concepts also included active participation by the Chinese in the realisation of the pavilions (through the contribution of Chinese seeds and Ai Wei Wei’s concurrent installation). The use of national icons or assets ensured that the concepts were simple and easy to grasp. More importantly, it ensured that these pavilions were hard to replicate, and even harder to forget.

Note: All photographs were taken by the author unless otherwise stated. Detailed information about each pavilion and additional photographs of the pavilions were derived from the respective countries’ related websites or the Expo official website.

About the Writer

Trained as a lawyer, Low Sze Wee graduated with a Masters’ degree in History of Art from the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London in 1999. He joined the Singapore Art Museum in 2001 where he eventually became its Deputy Director (Curation and Collections), responsible for developing the museum’s art collection. In 2009, he joined the National Art Gallery of Singapore as its Deputy Director (Curation and Collections). He is now on secondment to the Ministry of Information, Communications and the Arts, working on heritage policy matters.

Since 2001, he has curated or co-curated a number of exhibitions including 20th Century Chinese Paintings in Singapore Collections (2003), the Singapore Exhibition at the 50th Venice Biennale 2003, Embracing Infinity: Works by Tan Swie Hian (2004), Convergences – Chen Wen Hsi Centennial Exhibition (2006),  Xu Beihong in Nanyang (2008), Homelands – Home and Nation in the Art of Ong Kim Seng (2008) and The Story of Yeh Chi Wei (2010).

In 2007, he was given the NHB Research Award. Three of his exhibitions - Convergences – Chen Wen Hsi Centennial Exhibition (2007), The Big Picture Show (2008, co-curated with Ong Zhen Min) and Xu Beihong in Nanyang (2009, co-curated with Chow Yian Ping) – garnered the annual NHB Exhibition Awards.

2 Comments

Guest Writers Have Enhanced My Blog

August 16, 2010 at 12:00 am (Guest Writer)

In order to enlarge the scope, depth and to add value to my blog, I decided last year to introduce a guest writers series as a regular feature of my blog. Seven of my invitees graciously accepted my invitations to share their varying life experiences with viewers. Despite their disparate backgrounds, they all have a common love for reading and writing. Among them were a renowned retired surgeon with two books on Chinese culture to his credit, a retired CEO and former senior politician who travels widely, a well-known botanist and a keen bird-watcher, a retired senior business executive who collects Chinese ceramics, a computer expert with a nose for good food, a creative jewellery designer who is also a fine painter and an internationally acclaimed historian of Chinese mathematics. Judging from the encouraging and positive feedbacks their articles had generated from viewers of many countries, they had made a favourable impact on them. Their pieces have continued to draw viewers even now.

Encouraged and gratified by the success of the first Guest Writers’ Series, I am embarking on a second series for this year. Once again, I was fortunate and privileged to find six good guest writers who had spontaneously consented to be part of my blog and that each will contribute an article on a topic of his or her choice, which will give you a glimpse of their varied and rich life experiences. I have no doubt that their pieces, too, will be good and insightful reads and will go down well with viewers. Among them are a distinguished university administrator and marine biologist with an impeccable record of public service, a prominent museum professional of outstanding curatorial flair, an illustrious squash personality who is well-known both in Singapore and internationally, a UK-trained barrister and former senior lecturer of a leading polytechnic, a legal director of an international bank and a retired international award-winning university don. You are welcome to comment on their pieces, which will be fed back to them for their response if needed. In the next few months, I will take a break from my own monthly inputs, which have now reached more than 60, unless the urge for me to write so overwhelms me that I might pen an article or two in between those of my guest writers!

I now have much pleasure to present my first guest writer of this series, Mr Low Sze Wee, whose contribution, “Simple is Hard to Do: Some Thoughts on Shanghai Expo 2010″, which appears immediately after this posting. Happy reading!

Lam Pin Foo

Leave a Comment

Would Tensions in Korea Over Warship Sinking Lead to War?

July 18, 2010 at 1:00 am (Current Affairs)

On 26th March this year the Cheonan, a South Korean warship with a crew of 104 onboard, mysteriously exploded and sank almost immediately with a loss of 46 lives. The others were subsequently rescued at sea.

This incident occurred in the Yellow Sea, at a stretch of waters that has been claimed  by both South and North Korea to be within its territorial waters. It lies 16 km from the North Korean coast and 160 km from the South Korean mainland. Regrettably, the Korean Armistice Agreement of 1953 did not cover the sea boundary line dividing the two Koreas. Since then tensions had from time to time arisen between both sides and had led to many naval clashes, the latest of which took place barely two months before the sinking of the Cheonan. These waters are rich fishing grounds and are regularly patrolled by the navies of both sides. Also, at the time this war ship was sunk, a joint South Korea-United States anti-submarine naval exercise was being held 75 nautical miles from the scene of this incident, despite objections of the other Korea.

The sinking created a national uproar in South Korea and the finger of accusation was understandably pointed at North Korea. However, the Seoul Government was initially cautious in not wanting to attribute the sinking to the hostile action of  North Korea until more concrete evidence was established to prove that the warship was indeed sunk by them. After the Cheonan was successfully lifted from the seabed, the South Korean Government and its staunch ally the US then convened an international investigation panel, with members representing Australia, Britain, Canada, South Korea, Sweden and United States, to ascertain the cause of the sinking. In late May the panel concluded from the technical and scientific evidence adduced before it that the Cheonan was sunk by a torpedo fired from a North Korean submarine, similar to the one employed by them in 2003 which the Seoul Government had recovered from the sea.

This finding led to international condemnation of North Korea, especially among South Korea’s allies and countries friendly to them. The North Korean Government emphatically denied their role in this incident and put forth their own theory as to why and how the sinking occurred. China, North Korea’s long time ally also disputed the cause of the sinking which could have been due to the South Korean-American naval exercise activities at the Yellow Sea. An opinion survey conducted in South Korea showed that one in four polled believed that the sinking had nothing to do with North Korea. A research team from the University of Maryland in United States also did not agree with the official findings of the international panel, based on the technical evidence they had relied on.

Armed with the panel findings the Seoul Government  declared that they would take strongest counteractions against North Korea and would defend itself in the event of further military provocation from its arch-enemy. It would also refer this matter to the United Nations’ Security Council with a view to its condemning North Korea over the sinking of the Cheonan and sanctioning international punitive actions against them. The North Korean Government reacted angrily to South Korea’s threat which they denounced as constituting acts of war and  that they would strike back with all its military might and other means at its disposal.

As tensions over the Cheonan episode reached a fever pitch, it did seem possible that a major war could break out between the two Koreas, which might also involve their respective allies, with devastating consequences not only for the two protagonists, but also for the world. Realising the explosive situation and the danger of escalating it, the Security Council urged both sides “to refrain from any act that would further heighten tensions in the Korean Peninsular and it would continue its consultations with both states. Fortunately, sanity prevailed between Seoul and Pyongyang and they had refrained from taking any aggravating actions that could lead to war. With the passing of the ensuing months, the likelihood of war, for the time being, seemed to have receded. However, the strong stands taken by both sides over the warship sinking remains undiminished, pending the outcome of the Security Council’s resolution on this matter.

More than three months after the Cheonan sinking was referred to it by South Korea, the Security Council finally came out with a resolution condemning the sinking of the warship, but did not blame North Korea or any other country as the guilty party. It went on to add that this resolution “underscores the importance of preventing further attacks or hostilities against South Korea”. The resolution had disappointed South Korea and its allies, but was enthusiastically received by North Korea as a “diplomatic victory” for them. Some international political analysts were of the view that the resolution was crafted in this way so as to facilitate the resumption of the long stalled six-party conference between the two Koreas and their respective allies aimed at establishing a nuclear-free Korean Peninsular on terms that would be acceptable to all parties concerned. This prediction was proved to be correct as North Korea immediately confirmed that they would now agree to the re-convening of the said conference that would help bring stability to the two Korean states and elsewhere. After the UN resolution, South Korea and the US reaffirmed that the interrupted naval exercise would be resumed soon, despite protestations  from North Korea and China. We shall wait and see if the danger of war arising from this episode has finally been aborted.

The meteoric rise of South Korea from the ashes of the 1950-53 Korean War  to become a First World nation in 1980s is matched by only the rise of Japan in Asia in the late 1960s. In 1953 South Korea’s GDP was less than US$100, comparable to the then poorest Asian and African countries. At  more than US$28,000 today, it is not that far behind that of Britain and France which are among the richer countries in Europe. It is also a member of the OECD, a collection of affluent industrialised countries. That is not all. South Korea is now the 12th largest economy in the world, and is among the global leaders in shipbuilding, micro chips, television , mobile phone and motor vehicle productions. Its multinational brand names like Samsung, Hyundai-Kia, LG and others are household names for quality and reliability throughout the world. It also has one of the world’s highest internet and mobile phone users. In the 2007 world financial upheaval, China and South Korea were the first of the major economies to come out of recession and to resume their very impressive economic growth which have continued into the present time.

Unfortunately, Korea is still divided into two separate states, a legacy of WWII. Although ultimate merger between these two ideologically poles apart states has been talked about between the two Korean governments since the last decade, its realisation remains a distant dream and unlikely to be fulfilled for many years to come.

My wife and I had a very enjoyable holiday in South Korea in 1997 in the midst of the Asian Financial Crisis, which adversely affected its economy. It had to be rescued by a multi-billion dollar loan from the International Monetary Fund in order to get on top of this predicament. To its credit, it came out of this crisis after only one year and was able to pay back the loan without financial strains. We were most struck by its dynamic, creative, efficient and hardworking people and thoroughly enjoyed its scenic beauty and its numerous ancient villages where the traditional way of life still thrives. Our memorable trip there has left a deep impression on us and we look forward to going back there again in the near future. Upon my return from South Korea, I wrote an article of this visit, which was published in Singapore’s Sunday Times in 1997, and I would like to share it  with my readers. It appears immediately after this posting.

Lam Pin Foo

Leave a Comment

Don’t Take Pictures, Until We Say Yes

July 18, 2010 at 12:00 am (Travel)

This article first appeared in the Singapore Sunday Times on 3 August 1997.

It is beyond dispute that the affluence achieved by the Republic of Korea (South Korea) within a short span of one generation is one of the great economic miracles of this century. From a paltry per capita income of below US $100 in 1953, this ballooned to more than $10,000 in 1995, a hundredfold increase in 42 years.

In 1994, it became the second Asian country, after Japan, to join the Organisation of Economic and Cultural Development (OECD), a prestigious grouping of wealthy industrial nations. One of the dynamic Asian Tiger economies, its resounding success epitomises the ultimate triumph of human spirit and enterprise over seemingly insurmountable odds and the devastation of civil war. Throughout its turbulent history going back more than two millenia, Korea was compelled to seek accommodation with its two bigger and more powerful neighbours, China and Japan, or face the wrath of invasion by them.

Japan colonised the country from 1910 until the end of World War II in 1945. The north came under the sphere of influence of the Soviet Union and the south the United States. Three years of bitter and shattering civil war (1950-1953) followed. The South Koreans, supported by American and United Nations (UN) forces, were pitted against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea) with Chinese soldiers fighting alongside them. An armistice was finally concluded at the obscure village of Panmunjom, about 60 km from Seoul. Under the armistice agreement, Korea was carved into two halves. A demilitarised Zone (DMZ) reflecting the battle lines, a 4000 m wide no-man’s land ringed with guard posts and barbed wires, winds some 230 km across the Korean peninsula, from the west to the east  coasts, serves as the boundary separating the two Koreas.

A Joint Security Area (JSA), a tiny strip of land in the middle of the DMZ at Panmunjom, with conference facilities managed jointly by the UN and the North Koreans, was set up to enable the protagonists to meet and resolve disputes on the armistice terms. A visit to Panmunjom is a unique travel experience, de rigueur for the discerning visitor. It is the last flash point of the Cold War and a legacy of history. The journey by coach takes approximately ninety minutes from Seoul. When our multinational group of forty arrived at the UN military camp with anticipation and mounting excitement, we were subjected to a stringent security check.

Our American military tour guide gave us a thorough briefing on the Korean War and the salient features of the camp and that of the JSA. All tour members had to sign a declaration form exonerating the UN from any legal liabilities, should deaths or injuries occur while we were there. Panmunjom is potentially a danger zone and hostile actions might take place at any time without warning. We were cautioned on the need to observe the code of conduct strictly at all times. The taking of photographs was absolutely prohibited, except at designated stops, for our own safety.

The moment we were all waiting with bated breath was the tour of the JSA. On arrival, we were hurriedly escorted into the conference room where the opposing parties meet periodically to thrash out complaints of armistice violations and to trade insults. We were allowed only five minutes for briefing and photography with a UN guard in attendance. Outside the conference room, one of the North Korean duty guards was taking snapshots of our group, possibly for record purposes. Both the Seoul and Pyongyang authorities allow group visits to Panmumjom and the conference room is available for guests.

From a vantage point near a UN guard post, we looked across to North Korea, and the village houses and farms were faintly visible. Their propaganda broadcast, aimed at their southern cousins, could be heard loud and clear. In front of us was the Bridge of No Return, where tens of thousands of prisoners-of-war were swapped after the Korean War. All around us, soldiers of the opposing forces kept up round-the-clock watch duty in their respective guard posts or watch towers. The soldiers had powerful binoculars trained on each other’s territory. No fewer than 404 meetings have so far been held by the parties at the JSA. These have now become less frequent after the end of the Cold War, as other means of communication have become possible.

Over the years, Panmunjom had witnessed several shootouts between the duty guards on both sides. Two incidents will illustrate the uneasy truce prevailing there. In 1976, two American officers were killed by the North Koreans over pruning a tree at the JSA by the Americans for security reasons despite objections. The Communists contended that they had planted and nurtured the tree. In another incident in 1984, a Russian diplomat, visiting the JSA as a guest of North Korea, suddenly ran across to the UN side to seek political asylum. The Communist guards immediately pursued him across the boundary line and,in an exchange of fire, a UN guard and three North Koreans were killed.The Russian defector secured his freedom. As recently as 16 July of this year, soldiers of both sides fired at each other when the North Koreans were said to have intruded into the South Korean side of the DMZ , near Panmunjom, the first serious flare up since 1984. These episodes mirror the fragility of peace in Korea. Hostilities could break out there at any moment, with global ramifications.

Modern Seoul and Ancient Kyongju

Apart from Panmunjom, there are a number of interesting places to visit on a trip to South Korea. Seoul, the capital, is not an ideal city for sightseeing, compared with what Beijing, London or Paris have to offer. Its ancient monuments have been largely obliterated by successive wars, and the refurbished palaces and mega-theme parks are not as captivating as those in China, Japan and United States. But it is an impressive and highly developed business city, with its ultra-modern skyscrapers, quality department stores, chic shops, luxury hotels and efficient public infrastructures like the Olympic Park complex. This makes it the best place to experience what makes South Korea tick.

If you had to choose only one destination outside the capital, you would be amply rewarded if you went for Kyongju, ancient capital of the unified Silla dynasty (AD 668-935). It is only about four hours by express train or coach from Seoul. The Silla era was the golden age of Korea , in which art and culture flourished. Many of its splendours have been preserved in Kyongju. It is truly an open-air museum of Silla antiquities, scattered all over the plains and mountains of this tiny city and its outskirts.

We made the superb National Museum our first stop. This gave us an overview of Korean art and served as an excellent introduction to the numerous relics found there. Among the world-renowned national treasures are the Pulgaksa temple with its twin eighth-century pagodas; and the perfectly sculpted marble sitting Buddha at Sokkuram Grotto is a wonderful sight to behold and one of the oldest extant anywhere. Other famous landmarks include a cluster of twenty royal tombs at beautifully landscaped Tumuli Park and  Buddhist sculptures and frescos on Mount Namsan. At Yangdong Folk Village are eighty 15th and 16th century traditional aristocratic houses, some still inhabited by the original owners’ descendants.

Hotels and restaurants in South Korea are mostly expensive. In compensation, public transport, including taxis, trains and buses, is surprisingly affordable and of a very high standard.

Beneath an unsmiling and seemingly stern exterior, most Koreans are helpful and hospitable. We received their courtesy and kindnesses time and again during our 12-day stay in the Land of the Morning Calm.

Travel tips

  • Singapore Airlines and Korean Air have regular scheduled flights to Seoul.
  • The best times to go are in April and May, October and November. The rainy months of late June and July should be avoided.
  • No visa is required for Singaporean tourists.
  • Very few Koreans speak English and knowledge of a few essential Korean phrases will be most useful and will enhance your enjoyment of your holidays.

Lam Pin Foo

2 Comments

« Older entries