Best Museums in the World

As of November 2018, I've visited fifty countries. Below are my favorite museums. 

1. Museum of Islamic Art in Qatar (Doha). Even the building itself is a work of art designed by I.M. Pei. (FYI: the National Museum of Qatar opens on March 28, 2019.)

2. National Palace Museum of Taiwan aka Chinese Taipei (Taipei). The best organized museum of Asian art I've seen so far--quite a feat when one considers the vast amount of artifacts to classify. 

3. Checkpoint Charlie Museum aka Wall Museum in Germany (Berlin). One of the simplest and most unique museums in the world. 

4. Oklahoma City National Memorial Museum in USA. Well-designed exhibitions, including interactive multimedia. Take note of the fact that two Palestinians were wrongfully arrested at the beginning of the investigation into the bombing. 

5. Museum of Anthropology aka Museo Nacional de Antropologia in Mexico (Mexico City). Should be re-named the Museum of Ethnography. A vast treasure trove of artifacts and history. 

6. Museum of Natural History in Austria (Vienna). Hate the city, love the museum. Quite possibly the best natural history museum in the world, suitable for both children and adults. 

7. British Museum (London). Make sure you see the Rosetta Stone. If you like this museum, try the Louvre in Paris. (Note: I liked the British Library, which also has temporary exhibitions, much more than either the Louvre or British Museum.) 

8. House of Terror aka Terror Háza of Hungary (Budapest). Very heavy-handed but worthwhile. Several startling video clips throughout the museum. Be sure to grab an explanatory leaflet at the entrance of each section. 

9. Aga Khan Museum in Canada (Toronto). A good experience if you're unfamiliar with Middle Eastern art and sculptures. 

10. The Amana Heritage Museum in Iowa, USA (Amana). I loved learning about self-sufficient, religious German pacifists who moved from New York to Iowa to seek better lives. How would locals treat them during the wars? How did they adapt? 

11. Dresden Castle aka Residenzschloss and, to a lesser extent, Zwinger in Dresden, Germany. These two museums are within walking distance of each other. The larger one, which houses one of the most complete currency exhibitions in the world, is Dresden Castle. I saw three items belonging to Martin Luther: 1) a drinking glass converted into a goblet; 2) a book (Hauspostille); and 3) an insignia designed by Luther himself showing a rose, a heart, and a cross. 

Honorable mentions: 

12. Topkapi Palace Museum in Istanbul, Turkey. It holds items relating to the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) plus "the tray used by Abraham; the staff of Moses; the sword of David; the robe of Joseph; the swords of the Prophet Muhammad’s companions; and the shirt, mantle, praying mat, and chest of Muhammad's daughter Fatimah." I was struck by how the Prophet Muhammad's (PBUH) possessions were ordinary on the outside--mostly one color--but when opened, contained ornate designs. An interesting metaphor, perhaps, for some of Islam's practices and customs.

13. War Remnants Museum in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. 

14. International Museum of the Baroque in Puebla, Mexico. 

15. Dresden Castle, which is actually several museums in one location. One of the buildings contains items owned by Martin Luther. 

16. Islamic Arts Museum Malaysia in Kuala Lumpur. 

Bonus I: my favorite waterfalls are 1) Niagara Falls, Canada; (tie) 2) Sipiso-piso in Medan, Sumatra/Sumatera, Indonesia; Madakaripura in Probolinggo, Java, Indonesia; 3) La Fortuna in Alajuela Province, Costa Rica; 4) Casaroro Falls, Valencia/Dumaguete, Philippines; 5) Air Terjun Banyu Anjlok, in Jepara, Indonesia; 6) Air Terjun Sarasah near Padang, Indonesia. (I hope one day to visit Argentina's Iguazu Falls and perhaps Rio Celeste Waterfall, Tenorio Volcano National Park, Alajuela, Costa Rica.) 

Bonus II: my favorite libraries are 1) Bodleian Library (Oxford, England); 2) Biblioteca Palafoxiana (Puebla city, Puebla, Mexico); 3) library@harbourfront aka Bukit Merah Public Library (VivoCity, Singapore); 4) Qatar National Library (Doha, Qatar Foundation, Qatar). 

Honorable mention: Biblioteca Publica Universitaria y Fondo Antiguo (Morelia, Mexico). 

A Land without a Crucible: How to Appropriate Cultural Collapse

In Trump's America, liberals have been reduced to 1) begging for money from the government, blind to the military-industrial complex's willingness to give them as much or as little money to keep them occupied as long as defense expenditures grow (one dollar for you, ten dollars for me); and 2) antagonizing every different-minded man, woman, and child on their quest to save the country. 

Warren Hinckle's characterization of American liberals has never been more apt: in 1973, he called them "horror[s]" because of their tendencies towards "self-righteousness and self-importance." (Another Hinckle gem: asked why he worked in conservative bars frequented by police officers, he responded if anyone could find a good liberal bar, he'd visit one.) 

Today's liberals can tell you about the Gulf of Tonkin but not why such an incident would be allowed to occur, or why otherwise intelligent people would feel compelled to engage in such maneuvers. Some might know about "domino theory" but not why it--and laying down dead body after dead body--would be considered reasonable in light of all available intelligence. I've heard the best minds of my generation rail against biased media (aka propaganda) using the terms "collateral damage" and "cultural misappropriation" without irony, captaining the English language to advance misunderstandings down empty harbors. Modern-day radicals are more likely to go apoplectic over a friend's recycling habits than wedding diamonds that, even if not bloody, destroy the earth while tilting local economies into de facto slavery. (Yes, Australia has done well with mining--it's the lack of economic diversification without proper safeguards that's the issue.)

Banally, America's intellectual malaise isn't intentional, making it harder to identify villains and vanquish them. I recently attended a Berkeley, California event celebrating books and, one might assume, critical thinking. Yet, every interview was the equivalent of a slow pitch softball game (no offense to softball players, some of the toughest athletes out there), as if organizers believed their primary job was to ensure audience members wouldn't face foul balls of complexity. Lesson: never choose interviewers who are friends or colleagues of the speaker. There's a reason journalism exists (existed?) as a profession--to create independence and therefore more freedom to ask difficult questions. Perhaps sponsors believed if they weren't nice, speakers wouldn't return, but anyone incapable of discussing potential deficiencies in his or her ideas isn't worth inviting back. 

Another lesson: whether intentional or unintentional, the result is the same. (Bonus, on war: "What does it matter to the dead, the orphans, and the homeless whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty or democracy?") None of the book festival's inanity was by design, or rather, everything was done to maximize happiness and to promote ideas. (At least they didn't require people to submit questions on index cards or limit themselves to two minutes.) 

At one booth, I discovered a book selling for 17.95 USD available for 9.99 USD online and asked for a discount. The vendor said he couldn't compete with Amazon because "we can't lose money on every book we sell." I responded that after building the online infrastructure, including the delivery infrastructure (initially subsidized by consumers paying for shipping), Amazon and publishers were both making money pursuant to an agreed-upon price split. It's true Amazon's R&D expenditures and forays into new areas (e.g., a mobile phone) cause it to report losses, but Amazon is no longer losing money on most book sales, especially not on the Kindle. (It does take a loss on some books like Harry Potter but gains brand loyalty as a result of its discounts and events.) Hoping to engage on a difficult question, I wondered out loud how brick and mortar bookstores could compete in a modern capitalist economy. Devoid of ideas, the vendor shrugged his shoulders and gave me a curt goodbye as his final rebuttal. At no point did he reveal any shame in opening the conversation with a misrepresentation. If we are living in a post-truth society, the cause is our post-humility culture. 

Former NY mayor Michael Bloomberg in National Geographic.

At another event, cultural appropriation was mentioned negatively, inspiring a well-meaning African-American audience member to explain the issue was rooted in economics. Meanwhile, none of London's black or brown residents would think to complain about their city's most popular food, the colorful chicken tikka masala. (It's as if the British have bigger fish and chips to fry.) Unbeknownst to most Americans and Europeans surrounded by dozens of foreign restaurants is a real-life government conspiracy: stealing the best people and ideas from other countries by any means necessary. Such a plot has existed since humans realized it was easier to steal than to invent, to build, or even to maintain the infrastructure--both physical and abstract--necessary to accept change gracefully. 

Stealing and appropriation occur because they allow Country A to gain the benefits of Country B's inventions with as little displacement or sacrifice as possible--at least for Country A. Immigration, something I've heard liberals support, is literally cultural appropriation personified. Unless the goal is to build walls or ghettos--something I've heard liberals oppose--the main reason different people should enter your hamlet or megapolis is so you can discover the best they have to offer until you're the lovely country of Indonesia but without the pollution, traffic congestion, and banking crises. 

Any other philosophy means you support using people for labor without any meaningful exchange of ideas, something Immanuel Kant warned us about in 1781: "So act that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, always at the same time as an end, never merely as a means." (I remember when liberals told us melting pots and mixing were good for society, then they told us they meant we should be like salad bowls (healthy, with distinct colors), and now I think they're saying we shouldn't mix at all unless everyone pays for every idea they stole. I can't predict the next iteration, but I suspect lasagna will be involved.) 

Why we are discussing imposing informal or formal rules on what people should do or say rather than a more equitable process to capture or spur innovation, I don't know. Such discourse would require complex knowledge of different disciplines, along with sustainable funding mechanisms for new ideas that protect the displaced. To this end, I just want to say one word to you. Just one word. Philosophy. There's a great future in it. Will you think about it?

© Matthew Rafat (2018)

"Our drones will never be called terrorists, and our guns will never defeat nationalism. We change the world by how we look at it." -- Pico Iyer 

American Culture

America has always struggled to establish a unique culture. One satirist, when asked, "What do you think about American culture," remarked, "I support one." Indeed, America's history shows a remarkable similarity with Edward Norton's villain in 2003's The Italian Job--someone who lacks morals and wins, but who is miserable despite obvious prowess. 

If you get the sense we've been here before, you're not wrong. It's deja vu with larger numbers, more consumer debt and more vested interests, and one can realize this merely by reading old articles by Hunter Thompson and old interviews by Bill Moyers (I feel like the words, "national treasure," should always follow a Moyers reference in the same way Muslims follow Muhammad's name with "peace be upon him" to show respect).  

America's saving grace lies in its ability to absorb new immigrants willing to forget the past but not their own values and who come with unbridled, unjustified optimism possible only because they've swallowed all the right propaganda. In The Italian Job, one scene generates sympathy for the villain. We see him with all the toys wished for by all the people he's screwed over, and we realize he has no real desires of his own. The end result of his depraved genius is his ability to absorb other people's dreams and effectuate them--at any cost, moral or otherwise. Are you with me so far?  

Without our ability to make other people's dreams come true, we're just a bunch of jingoistic, oil-addicted ciphers in one of the most violent, segregated countries in the world. In 2017, anyone with 20/40 vision can see America's grand experiment losing to Edward Norton's villain in an alternative ending, with no comeuppance. If we're lucky--really lucky--we'll experience reformation at some point, and the movie will change from The Italian Job, alternative ending, to American History X: "Life's too short to be pissed off all the time. It's just not worth it." 

Copyrighted by Matthew Rafat (2017)