A number of Thailand's most prominent artists have asked me to write to you about an issue of grave concern.   Recently, the foreign press has taken advantage of this issue, and, leaping to cliché-ridden conclusions about the nature of military coups, has made a lot of noise about blaming your government for these issues.  The foreign press is, as usual, applying completely irrelevant criteria to events in Thailand.  The problems I am about to write about were not caused by the recent military coup.  Rather, they are far-reaching problems of freedom and integrity which have been surfacing since the previous administration.  I hope by this letter to make you aware of these problems so that you may consider solutions.  I am also going to recommend some solutions to you which may seem surprising.  The artists of Thailand will thank you for taking these thoughts into consideration, and if even some of them are implemented, Thailand will grow into what it deserves to become, the true hub and genuine center of culture in the Southeast Asian region.

I want to say at the outset that I have been very reluctant to become the mouthpiece for all these artists.  Each one of them has a unique vision of the universe, and there is almost nothing on which any of them agree … except on this one issue which is at the heart of my letter to you.  There is not a single artist in this country, I believe, who would not agree with the essential substance of this issue.

It is already being said that the only reason I have agreed to take a stand in this matter is for personal gain, or in order to become famous.  In answer to this criticism, I feel I should quote the International Herald Tribune which printed, six years ago, that I am "the most well-known expatriate Thai in the world".  Having sold almost two million books and having won international awards more prestigious than any artistic award that is given in this country, I do not feel the need to become more famous. 

Rather, it is for those who do not have the clout to speak up that I am forced to speak.  Since the incident, I have had conversations with other artists and, without exception, all have similar tales to tell.  It is the revelation that what I experienced was only the tip of the iceberg that prompts me to write this letter.  I hope it will be the catalyst for a lively, truthful and practical discussion.  I hope that these issues will not simply be filed away as the eccentricities of a lone artist.  Please do not ignore the fact that we are talking about the entire national image of this country.  We are talking about the very basis of our existence, about what it means to be an artist, what it means to be Thai, and whether Thailand deserves to take its place as the rightful cultural leader of the Southeast Asian region.

About a month ago, the scheduled speaker at the SEAWrite Awards, Nobel Prize Winner Woye Soyinka, abruptly cancelled his appearance.  His reason was that he wanted to protest the fact that Thailand was no longer a democracy.  I was asked to speak in his place.

In my speech, I expressed outrage that an outsider would dare to posture about protecting my freedom when I was in fact, perfectly free.  I vigorously defended the recent politics of this country, and I stated that, "I am proud to stand here, in front of my prince, my peers, and my compatriots, and tell the world that right here, in this place and time, I have never felt more free."

Imagine my surprise, then, when a work of art which I created as a personal and deeply felt tribute to His Majesty the King of Thailand, which had its genesis over forty years ago in my childhood and which has gestated during the course of my entire life, became the subject of a preposterous censorship debate.

Before I get down to the issues, I would like to clear the air about the facts.  The international press has had sensationalist headlines such as "Ramayana Opera gives Junta the Jitters" and The Nation has talked about scenes that were "excised" from the opera that were never in the opera.  Over two hundred news items have appeared on every continent, and almost every one of them contains some factual error.  We can and should work to correct these misapprehensions which are damaging to the world's perception of this country.

I will summarize quickly because what happened to me is not that important except insofar as the lessons we can learn from it.

Two days before my opera was due to open, four officials of the Ministry of Culture came to me during the rehearsal.  They told me that they were concerned about Ravana's death scene in my opera because, in the words of the Madame Undersecretary, "Such a scene has not been presented in Thailand since 'khon' was invented, not in the hundreds of years of our tradition.  We have consulted 'khon' experts and National Artists and we would like to request that you alter the scene.  If you don't alter it, and a calamity befalls our country, your production will be blamed for it."

Now, the entire basis of this discussion was spurious.  "Khon" taboos have nothing to do with opera.  Experts do not all agree that the depicting the death of Ravana onstage is an ancient taboo.  Many Thai classical musicians have told me this is actually a very recent concept. 

The officials were also concerned about certain violent things which, according to rumor, were in the script of my opera.  Even though the script contained none of the violent things they were concerned with, they had already held a number of meetings to discuss them without inviting me to explain or defend the opera, and without reading the script.

The point is that, even though there was no real basis to their concerns, the director and I took them seriously.  I did not write this opera to offend traditionalists, but rather to open up the world of the Ramayana to a new generation of young people who know nothing and care nothing for Thailand's venerable past.  It was created to bridge the cultural gap and to be a completely new interpretation of the myth that speaks to people in the Twenty-first Century. 

Because we took their concerns seriously, the director and I found ways of staging the scene which compromised not a single note or word of the integrity of the work, but which still managed to take into consideration the worries of those few traditionalists.

An official of the Thailand Cultural Center watched the dress rehearsal and told me there was no problem.  The entire discussion was very Thai and very conciliatory.

However, the next day, I received a phone call from the Center.  They wanted me to sign a new contract, and told me the show would not be allowed to go on unless I signed it.

The contract had a number of specific stipulations about blood being seen and about Ravana falling to the ground … forbidding things that were not even in the production.  I had no problem with those.

However, there was also a blanket clause which stated that if anything whatsoever in the production transgressed against the morals or culture of Thailand, the Thailand Cultural Center could in its own discretion, without any kind of oversight or review, close down the show by force.

I signed the paper.  The production proceeded.  Unlike what many international papers have reported, not one note of my opera was cut.  The full integrity of my work as conceived by me and as staged by Hans Nieuwenhuis was preserved.

Even though I signed the document, other attempts were made to silence the production, including claims by the TCC that a secretary had mistyped the Royal Agenda leaving out the scene and that it was now too late to put it in, and an anonymous "poison pen" fax that was sent to HRH Princess Maha Chakri Sirindorn's office which urged Her Royal Highness not to preside over the event because its text was "obscene".  This sort of dirty, underhanded sabotage has always been typical of the way things are done in this country and is certainly not the fault of the current administration. 

In an interview with The Nation, the Secretary-General of the ONCC stated that the case of Ayodhya was ended to their satisfaction.  I agree.  Let us no longer harp on the case of my opera, which is only really a footnote.  Let us instead talk about matters of concern to all artists and indeed the entire population of Thailand.  That is, let us talk about that blanket censorship clause which the Ministry so blithely added to their contract, and which is a slap in the face to every artist on the face of this planet and a clear indication that the Ministry does not consider what artists have to say to be of any value.

Let me ask the question which must be asked:

By what authority did an official of the Ministry of Culture assume that the Ministry possessed the right to intervene in the creation of any work of art? 

That authority does not, I believe, exist in any Thai law.  It has never been present in any constitution of this country, nor is there any common-law application which could conceivably apply. 

Why has the Ministry of Culture, created with a mandate for nurturing, encouraging, and sponsoring the cultural life of this country, taken upon itself the role of the arbiter of that culture?

Who gave the Ministry of Culture the right to define, regulate, limit and attack the very thing which it is charged to protect?

To answer the question, we must consider the questions What is Culture?  What is the function of an artist in society?  and What is the reason for having a Ministry of Culture in the first place?

They are difficult questions and answers are not easy to formulate.  But some actions of the Ministry show that since it was created it has not seriously tried to answer these questions at all.

First and foremost, culture and tradition are not the same thing.  If culture is a tree, then tradition represents the roots of that tree.  It does not represent the whole tree.  If the tree bears fruit every season, we know that the roots are healthy. 

In addition, culture and morality are not the same thing.  If there is a need to oversee the moral life of this country, that is a job for a different Ministry, one which this government has not seen fit to create.

Everything that makes our society unique is part of Thai culture.  The gorgeous palaces and temples and the rich tradition of dance and drama are all Thai culture.  Thai food is Thai culture.  The exuberant, brash skyline of Bangkok with its heady acceptance of the clash of styles - that too is Thai culture.  The tolerance of lifestyle diversity, which is so strongly grounded in Buddhism - that is Thai culture.  The adventurous new films that are taking the west by storm - the ecstatic reinvention of the Thai language by Prabda Yoon, the daring paintings of Thawan Datchanee, the startling architecture of Sumet Jumsai, the jarring new theatrical productions of Patravadee, the brilliant rediscovery of the inner truth of khon by Pichet Klunchuen and yes, even my innocent little opera which dares to speak the truth about Ravana - these things are all Thai culture.  They are totally modern because they are created by modern people for people alive today.  And every single one of the artists I have mentioned - including myself - could not exist without the legacy of Thai traditional arts.  We are not the enemies of tradition.  We are its fulfillment.  In time, our work, too, will be thought of as tradition, and someone will struggle to break free of us, and that very struggle will be the proof of our power.

Second: why do artists exist?  Artists exist, General Surayud, to tell the truth.  Artists see the world as it is, and their job, in the language of metaphor, color, sound, words, or action, to show people who they really are.  Artists are your mirror, your voice, and your conscience.  No government in the history of this planet has ever succeeded in silencing artists.  Truth is never silenced.  Artists have been persecuted, their books burned, even tortured and killed.  In the end, it is always they who survive, and not the people who try to silence them.  Please remember that art outlives governments and ministries.  It outlives its creators.  It is the human race's only claim to immortality on this earth.

Let me try to answer the final question I have posed.  Why should a Ministry of Culture exist?

In the old days, General, we had a Fine Arts Department.  In the old days, Thailand was insecure about its identity.  Countries around us were shaking off colonialism.  We had an inferiority complex, and we needed, perhaps, an institution that could establish a continuity between Thai traditional arts of the past and the society of the present.  We needed a museum into which we could go and discover where we come from and who we are.

A Ministry of Culture is more than a Fine Arts Department.  The Fine Arts Department's mandate, I think, was to guard the roots of the tree.

But the tree has matured now.  Our society has come of age.  Thai Culture doesn't need a babysitter.  The function of a Ministry of Culture in today's society must be to look after the entire tree, to provide support services, and to be a safe haven that protects artists and protects their right of free expression.

It is important to understand that the Ministry of Culture doesn't own the tree.   It is the gardener, not the garden.  It is employed by the people of Thailand, and not the other way round.  It can't hack off any branches it doesn't like.  In fact, it cannot succeed if it tries, for if the tree is healthy, those bits will grow back.

Traditional arts are an important part of the Ministry's work, but they are not the whole picture or even the largest part of the picture.

When Senator Kraisak Choonhavan and others lobbied for the creation of this Ministry, they had in mind an organization that belonged to a Thailand that was a full participant in the cultural life of the world.  They knew that many artists are loners and lack moral and monetary support and they wanted the cultural live of the country to have a real home, a real center.

Under the Thaksin administration, the Ministry, while well-intentioned, immediately set off on the wrong footing.  By trying to censor old pop songs that kids today don't even listen to, and by making bizarre comments about fashion, the Ministry showed that it did not truly understand the reasons it had been created.

Under the Thaksin administration, however, there were so many other problems in terms of curtailment of freedom of expression that the matter of pop songs or hemlines in dresses seemed relatively minor … and while the Ministry came to be seen as a joke by many serious artists, few felt genuinely threatened.

Your government has a broad mandate to clean up abuses of power, corruption, bullying by government officials, and unreasonable restrictions on the people.

In the big picture, it may be easy to forget the plight of a few artists, but I would like to humbly ask you to move this question a little further to the top of your agenda.

It has been said that this minor incident of the unsuccessful censorship of my opera has provoked almost as much international attention as the coup itself.  This should be a warning that a government steps between an artist and the truth at its peril.

I should like to make a few suggestions about how a Ministry of Culture could actually enhance Thailand's cultural life.

First, it must be run by people who actually understand culture.  I would suggest that a broad-based committee of traditional and modern artists be created to advise the government on the selection of the Minister of Culture, and I believe such a committee should have veto power over such a selection.

Second, a Ministry of Culture must be an avenue for funding to reach the most creative people and institutions in our society.  Instead of charging the Bangkok Opera, Bangkok Symphony Orchestra and other institutions for the use of the Cultural Center, these services should be free of charge to such organizations.  Malaysia's new Istana Budaya has such a system, in which the state takes a percentage of the box office receipts but provides all infrastructure services, and in the case of the opera, allows gratis use of the National Symphony Orchestra.

Funding for these organizations as well as dance, film, literature and the visual arts needs to be made available.  I would suggest that institutions such as the Bangkok Opera, Patravadi Theater, Bangkok Symphony and so on receive the kind of annual grant that would allow them to concentrate on their artistic vision and not worry about fundraising.  Each of these institutions ought to be getting between fifty million and one hundred million baht a year in grant money with absolutely no strings attached.   This would be just a start, but it would be a signal to corporate donors to try to match these funds.  (Please note that this is minuscule compared to government funding for the arts in Europe.  I currently run my entire opera company for one year with the cost of 50% of the budget of one evening at the Metropolitan Opera in New York.)

There are also ways that our government can help that do not involve spending money.  There is already in place a mechanism for donations to artistic non-profit organizations to be tax-deductible, for instance, but it is poorly implemented with much bureaucratic obfuscation.  If this mechanism were put on a fast track, billions would flow into the arts from private and corporate donors and the government's contribution could easily be matched or even exceeded.

Then the government could do what the Republic of Ireland did a few decades ago —abolish the income tax requirement for artists completely.  When Ireland did this, at a single stroke the country became a haven for international famous artists world wide and the country underwent a huge cultural renaissance.  (This tax relief would not of course include income from non-artistic endeavors like teaching or commercial work.)  This is another way that the arts could be funded without straining the government's coffers.

The Ministry should attempt to be a central clearing house for artistic endeavors, providing infrastructure services like PR and ticketing.  It should be staffed by people knowledgeable about cultural matters so that the public can use the Ministry as a genuine resource.

The Ministry should reassess the entire procedure for creating National Artists which has become something of a joke.  I would suggest a total transparency in the selection process.  Nominations and vote tallies should be published.  I would also suggest that the award be made more meaningful by providing a lifetime subsidy for the awardees so that they can spend the rest of their lives creating in comfort as they deserve.  A reasonable lifetime grant for National Artists would be one million baht a year.  Anything less undervalues the award and continues the misconception that art has little real value.

Third, and most importantly of all, the Ministry of Culture must promote culture, not hinder it. 

Thailand is going through a major cultural renaissance right now.  Thai artists have never been more influential in the world.  In my field alone, Thailand has been praised as a new world epicenter for opera by two of the three most important magazines in the genre.  Thai film is making an impact.  So is Thai theater and Thai literature.  A Thai Ramayana musical has just played in New York's Lincoln Center.  We have a lot to celebrate.

Thailand is going to be the cultural leader of the region because we have the most innovative artists, the most uninterrupted traditions — untrammeled by colonialism — and the most tolerant artistic milieu.  The Ministry of Culture has not, so far, really participated in or even understood the process.  Unless it actually starts doing its job, it will become culturally irrelevant and might as well cease to exist.

Don't you think it is time for the Ministry of Culture to actually start learning something about the richness, vibrancy and diversity of this country's culture?  Don't you think it's time for the institution do its job, throw open its doors and say to the artists, "Here we are, we're here to support your vision, what would you like us to do for you"?

I think so, and I humbly ask the help of your government in realizing our common dream.

With my best wishes

and with the very best interests of this country in my heart,

I remain

Yours Faithfully

Somtow Sucharitkul

Artistic Director of the Bangkok Opera

Former Secretary, Science Fiction Writers of America

Former President, Horror Writers Association

Founder and Former Chairman of the Thai Composers Association (1976)

Sometime Permanent Representative of Thailand to the International Music Council of UNESCO

Representative of Thailand to the Asian Composers League (1974-1979)