Vietnam: A Lonely Planet Guidebook (2014)

 


The 12th edition of Lonely Planet’s guidebook about Vietnam was published in July 2014. It is written by Iain Stewart, Brett Atkinson, Damian Harper, and Nick Ray. In this book the territory of Vietnam is divided into the following sections:

** Hanoi

** Northern Vietnam

** Central Vietnam

** The Southeast Coast

** The Southwest Highlands

** Ho Chi Minh City (formerly Saigon)

** The Mekong Delta

In addition to these seven sections there is a section about Siem Reap & the Temples of Angkor (15 pages). Excuse me! Is Siem Reap in Vietnam? No, it is not. Were the temples of Angkor built by the Vietnamese? No, they were not. While the Temples of Angkor are famous, and deserve their fame, they are in Cambodia. There is no reason whatsoever to have a chapter about them in a book about Vietnam.

Sometimes the authors and editors of Lonely Planet make some strange decisions. Here is another example: Lonely Planet’s guidebook about Egypt includes a list of the top attractions in Egypt. One of the attractions listed is the ancient city of Petra which is located in Jordan!

Vietnam is a large country. Most visitors do not have the time nor the desire to visit every part of the country from north to south. We visited the northern part of Vietnam - Hanoi (the capital), Dien Bien Phu (a small town, but an important location for the modern history of Vietnam) - and we took a three-day cruise in Halong Bay.

Even though we only visited the northern part of the country, I feel I am able to judge the quality of the guidebook as a whole, because I get similar results when I look at the chapter about Hanoi, the section about Dien Phu and the section about Halong Bay.

What do other reviewers say about it? Many reviewers give it five stars, but they do not explain why they do it. In fact, many five star reviews contain less that ten words. Here are a few examples:

** “Great.”
** “Good book.”
** “Great guide.”
** “Useful and informative.”
** “Very useful book.”
** “Great stuff.
** “This book is full of useful information.”

As you can see, my review is longer than this. I cannot give the book five stars, and I want to explain why. There are many good things to say about this book. But there are also some negative things, and if you ask me they should be mentioned as well.

My first point

I have a problem with several maps in this book. The Old Quarter of Hanoi is shown on pp. 54-55, but the legend appears on page 56, so I have to turn the page when I am going from map to legend. If I wish to read about any of the items marked on the map, I will have to go to a third page or a fourth page. The area around Hoan Kiem Lake is shown on pp. 58-59, but the legend is on page 60, so I have to turn the page when I am going from map to legend.

Sometimes they get it right. The area west of the Old Quarter is shown on page 62 and the legend on page 63. These two pages face each other, so I can see the map and the legend at the same time. This is the right way. This is how it should be done. Why can’t they do this every time?

My second point

Some information is out of date. Obviously, we cannot blame the authors for not reporting changes that take place after their book is published. But it gets worse. Some information is inaccurate, and sometimes important information is not mentioned at all. Here are some examples.

HANOI

** Hoa Lo Prison on page 57. The price of a ticket is now 30,000 Dong. Toilets are not free. You must pay 1,000 Dong for a visit to this facility. A small guidebook with interesting illustrations and English text is sold at the ticket office for 20,000 Dong.

** St. Joseph Cathedral on page 57. When the main gate is closed, you can enter via a small gate to the left. After this you can enter the cathedral via a side door on the left. Entrance is free.

** The Jade Mountain (Ngoc Son) Temple on page 57. The price is now 30,000 Dong. The temple is open from 7-18 on weekdays and from 7-21 on weekends.

** The Temple of Literature on pp. 58-59. The price of a ticket is now 30,000 Dong.

The Ho Chi Minh Mausoleum Complex on pp. 59-61:

** Visiting the mausoleum was not as time-consuming as I feared. I had read about waiting in line for three or four hours. We visited the mausoleum on Ho Chi Minh’s birthday, 19 May. There was a long line, but it was moving quickly. The whole process took about half an hour. As you approach the mausoleum, you pass a sign which says in English: “No telephone.” What they want to say is “No photo.”

** Lonely Planet’s description of the Presidential Palace is confusing. First we are told we can visit this place if we buy a ticket. Later we are told it is not open to the public. This description is unfortunate. Here are the facts: you may enter the park next to the palace, and you may view the building from a distance, but you are not allowed to enter the building itself.

** The Ho Chi Minh Museum is now open from 8-12 and from 2-4.30.

** Entrance to the one pillar pagoda is free. According to Lonely Planet you must buy a ticket. This not true. You do not have to buy a ticket to visit this small monument that was reconstructed in 1960.

** A bust of Frank Loseby was erected in the park west of the mausoleum in September 2014. For obvious reasons, this monument is not mentioned by Lonely Planet. Therefore I will add a few words about it here: Frank Loseby (1883-1967) was a British lawyer who lived and worked in Hong Kong. When the British police arrested Ho Chi Minh in this city in 1931, Frank Loseby was one of the lawyers who defended him and secured his release almost two years later. If Ho Chi Minh had been handed over to the French authorities in Vietnam, he would most likely have been executed in 1932 or 1933.

Ho Chi Minh did not forget. In 1960 Frank Loseby, his wife and his daughter were invited to Hanoi as official guests of the North Vietnamese government. Ho Chi Minh accompanied them on a visit to the one pillar pagoda which had just been reconstructed at the time.

** The Vietnam Military History Museum on page 61. The price of a ticket is now 40,000 Dong. The price to use a camera is now 30,000 Dong. This was the only time where we had to buy a separate ticket to use a camera. This was also the only time where nobody checked our tickets after we had bought them.

** The Imperial Citadel on page 61. Admission to this site is not free, as stated by Lonely Planet. To enter this area you must pay 30,000 Dong. However, it is absolutely worth a visit. As stated by Lonely Planet, you can see the results of recent archaeological excavations and you can enter two underground bunkers that were used by military and political leaders during the American phase of the Vietnam War. Unfortunately, there are almost no signs to help you find the bunkers. You can only find them if you look for them. The large bunker is known as revolutionary relic D67.

** Sofitel Metropole is one of several hotels listed on page 71. The description of this place is incomplete and out of date. Therefore I will add a few words about it here.

The Metropole is a five star hotel; the most famous hotel in Hanoi and in Vietnam. It is one of the most famous hotels in Asia, and in the world, similar to the Mandarin Oriental in Bangkok and the Raffles in Singapore. There is a book about it written by Andreas Augustin. It was published in 2001, when the hotel could celebrate its one hundred year anniversary. Here is a link: Sofitel Metropole Hanoi. The book is not mentioned by Lonely Planet.

During the American phase of the Vietnam War (around 1965) the hotel built a small underground bunker for foreign guests. It was used by actress Jane Fonda and folk singer Joan Baez, to mention just two names. When the war ended in 1975, the entrance to the bunker was closed and its existence soon forgotten. It was discovered by chance in 2011 and because of its historical value it was restored in the following year. Since 2012, the hotel arranges a daily tour about the history of the place which includes a visit to the bunker. The tour is free, but you can only sign up for it if you are a guest at the hotel. The tour is very interesting. It is one of many benefits you will enjoy if you decide to stay at this hotel for a few days.

In 2013 Joan Baez returned to Vietnam, to Hanoi, and to the Metropole, for the first time since 1972. During her stay she revisited the underground bunker that she had used during the Christmas bombing in 1972. While in Hanoi, she painted a painting of a young boy which she donated to the hotel. It now hangs in the lobby of the old wing, not far from the exhibition that is called the Path of History.

The following articles are available online:

*** “The Hotel, the Bunker and Me,” by Andreas Augustin, the Most Famous Hotels in the World, 11 November 2011

*** “Vietnam War bunker discovered, reopened under luxury hotel” by Gemma Price, CNN Travel, 7 June 2012

*** “Joan Baez Circles Back to Hanoi” by Chris Parnell, Let's Travel Magazine, 9 May 2013

None of this is mentioned by Lonely Planet.

** Regarding taxis in Hanoi (page 89): according to Lonely Planet, flag fall is around 20,000 Dong. When we were there, flag fall was only 12,000 Dong. If you need a taxi, get your hotel to call one for you. This way there is less risk of being ripped off. It is also good if you know where you are going. Some taxi drivers will use the meter, but then they will take a zigzag route in order to make the trip much longer, instead of going in a straight line from A to B.

DIEN BIEN PHU

Lonely Planet has only three pages about this location which is very important for the modern history of Vietnam (pp. 123-126). While the information given is helpful, it is not always up-to-date, it is not always accurate, and some relevant facts are not mentioned at all. The map on page 124 is too small and therefore it is not easy to see the exact location of the items that are marked on it. If there were sign posts in the town this would not matter much, but there are almost no sign posts anywhere in this town. Here is some up-to-date information about the sights in Dien Bien Phu:

** The A1 Hill. The price is now 15,000 Dong.

** The Bunker of Colonel Christian de Castries. The price is now 15,000 Dong. This monument is not on the first road along the western side of the river, but on the second road along the river.

** The Dien Bien Phu Museum. The price is now 15,000 Dong.

** The Vietnamese Cemetery. Free admission from sunrise to sunset.

** The French Memorial. This monument is not on the first road along the western side of the river, but on the second road along the river. Not far from the western end of the new bridge (known as the A1 Bridge). When we were there, the gate was closed, but not locked. We simply removed two small stones, opened the gate and entered the area.

** On page 125 the authors mention the old bridge (known as the Muong Thanh Bridge) and then they say:

“Near the southern end of the bridge – though not much more than an overgrown crater - is the bunker where Chief Artillery Commander Pirot committed suicide [in 1954].”

This passage is not accurate. The spot is near the eastern end of the bridge, not the southern end. Moreover, there is no bunker, there is no crater. There is a small area covered with grass and a marker about the Pirot episode with text in Vietnamese. The area is fenced off. There is no public access. If you start from the eastern end of the bridge and walk ca. 100 m through the market, you will find the marker on your left side, i.e. the northern side of the road.

** Lonely Planet does not mention the hill that is known as D1. A huge victory monument cast in bronze was erected on the top of this hill in 2004. A staircase with more than 350 steps leads to the top of the hill. At the foot of the hill there is a huge stone relief which shows famous scenes from the battle of Dien Bien Phu in 1954.

** Lonely Planet does not mention the hills that are known as C1 and C2. They are located north of the A1 Hill, on the eastern side of the main road that is named after the famous General Giap, who lived to be more than one hundred years old (1911-2013). You can climb these hills one by one, although there is not so much to see apart from a marker with Vietnamese text.

** Dien Bien Phu is a small town. You can often walk from one monument to the next. If you need a taxi, ask your hotel to call one for you. Flag fall is 9,000 Dong. If you need transport from the airport to your hotel, do not worry. It is a small airport, but there are taxis around when a plane has just landed. Based on our experience, the taxi drivers in this provincial town are quite honest. They are not as tricky as their colleagues in the capital of Hanoi.

** Muong Phang is a village located ca. 35 km east of Dien Bien Phu. This is where General Giap had his headquarters during the battle in 1954. Today the area is open to the public. A ticket is 15,000 Dong. Less than one km from the entrance to the military headquarters there is a huge stone relief and a building with an art gallery. A ticket is 15,000 Dong.

Our hotel provided a car and a driver when we asked about this place. An interesting excursion from Dien Bien Phu; a half day tour (four hours). Here is a link with some information: A relic of the Dien Bien Phu campaign.

Muong Phang is not mentioned by Lonely Planet.

HALONG BAY

There are more than one thousand islands in Halong Bay. It is a famous location and the fame is well deserved. The views are spectacular, in particular if you are fortunate enough to see this area in nice and calm weather, as we were.

There are many ways to visit this place. A one day cruise. Two days, one night. Three days, two nights. Obviously, you will have to pay more the longer the cruise is, but this is not the time to be stingy and worry about the many zeroes that you see on the Vietnamese paper money.

Lonely Planet covers this location on pp. 101-113. In my opinion, the information is not very helpful. Given that there are many options from many companies, I was expecting and hoping to find a list of the major companies with some information about the cruises that they offer. In the same way as hotels in a city are listed and ranked. Lonely Planet does not do this. In my opinion, the layout of this chapter is not very helpful. The only list they offer appears on page 106 where they mention three very expensive companies.

Perhaps this is a case where it is better to go online and use the internet to find a cruise that is right for you. Do not only read what the companies say about themselves. Remember to study the reviews written by customers who have taken the cruise.

CONCLUSION

Based on my experience in Vietnam, I will say that this guidebook is helpful and useful in many ways. But there are flaws as well. It is not always up-to-date, it is not always accurate, and some important facts are not mentioned at all.

When I judge this book, I also want to point out that this is not the first edition. There are flaws here which should not be found in any book and certainly not in the 12th edition of a guidebook. Therefore I think a rating of four stars is fair.

I hope Lonely Planet can do better next time.

PS. Not everything about Vietnam is charming. Here is one example: gender-based abortion, a long recognized phenomenon in India and China, has soared in recent years in Vietnam. On 30 May 2015, the Bangkok Post published a DPA report about a Vietnamese women who had 18 abortions in a vain attempt to give birth to a son. As far as I can see, this trend is not mentioned by Lonely Planet. There are a few lines about the Vietnamese family on page 439 and a few lines about Vietnamese women on page 442, but nothing about the preference for boys.

***

Iain Stewart, Brett Atkinson, Damian Harper, and Nick Ray,

Vietnam: A Lonely Planet Guidebook,

12th edition, 2014, 512 pages

 ***

The Triumph of Art at Thorvaldsens Museum (2005)

The Triumph of Art at Thorvaldsens Museum: ‘Løve’ in Copenhagen by John G. W. Henderson was published by Museum Tusculanum Press in 2005. While the title seems clear enough, the subtitle calls for an explanation, and one will be offered in due course.

John Henderson is Professor of Classics at the University of Cambridge and a Fellow of King’s College. This is what we are told on the back cover of the book. However, since the book was published, he has retired. On Cambridge University’s website, he is identified as Emeritus Professor of Classics.

The foreword is written by Stig Miss, who is the current director of Thorvaldsens Museum. As you can see, the name of the institution is written without an apostrophe, because it is the Danish name.

A British scholar has written a book about a Danish museum. But the focus is not on the numerous works of art that are on display inside the museum. Nor is it a new biography about the famous artist. The focus is on the building that houses his collections. To be more specific, it is about the frieze that is painted on three of the four exterior walls. Really? Can he write a whole book about the walls of a building? It sounds rather strange, but once you get into this world, I think you will find that there is a lot to say about this topic. This frieze is worth a detailed study. Here is what the author says in his introduction:

“This is a book about the outside of a museum. It may sound odd, first off, but in no time at all you’ll find yourself agreeing that the particular exterior we shall explore does grace one of the most characterful buildings you can visit anywhere.”

Further on he adds:

“Here is a feast of striking images, a strong narrative line, and a telling prompt to get real about all the ways in which people interact with statues, and statues with people.”

Finally he says:

“A brightly-coloured frieze wraps around the walls of the Museum, showing scenes that celebrate the saga of its foundation. All the city turns out, afloat or ashore, to welcome the fêted genius back home for retirement and heroization; and a shipment of his masterpieces is displayed in process of unloading and transportation into the museum, where, to this day, they await the visitor in the galleries inside. The murals are lovely compositions, rich in detail and nuance. They bring together in civilised Copenhagen an ensemble of striking images that celebrate a genuinely pan-European civilisation. Their clean-cut classicism presents a thoughtful and challenging homage to art and artist embedded within this culture.”

The main text is divided into four chapters. Here is the table of contents:

CHAPTER ONE. Welcome to Thorvaldsens Museum

*** The Story of the Artist and his Legacy

CHAPTER TWO. Walls and Images

*** Reading the Murals of the Museum

CHAPTER THREE. Copenhagen is not Paris

*** Myth, Ideology, and Politics Visualised in a Classical Tradition

CHAPTER FOUR. ‘Løve i København’

*** Tribute to the Artist as Hero

At the end of the book we find notes with references and additional comments, a bibliography, an index of works of art and monuments, and a general index.

The book is beautifully illustrated. Some illustrations are line drawings in black-and-white, while all new photos are in colour.

As you can see from the table of contents, chapter one offers a brief summary of Thorvaldsen’s life and his works, while chapter two gives a presentation and an interpretation of the frieze on the exterior walls of the museum.

In chapter three Henderson tries to place the frieze in context. He mentions three relevant precedents: the frieze of the Parthenon in Athens, the reliefs on the Arch of Titus in Rome, and Napoleon’s spoils from Italy. The French emperor’s spoils are shown in six illustrations:

** Figure 12: the spoils leaving Italy

** Figure 13: the spoils arriving in Paris

** Figure 14: the spoils arriving at the emperor’s museum (a vase)

** Figures 31-33: the spoils arriving at the emperor’s museum (a sketch)

In chapter four Henderson explains the subtitle of the book: ‘Løve’ in Copenhagen. “Løve” is the Danish word for Lion. But who is the lion, and what is it doing in Copenhagen? An answer will be given later, at the appropriate moment.

First I will offer some basic information about the museum and the frieze. Thorvaldsen returned to Denmark in September 1838. The museum was built in the following ten years (1839-1848). The man in charge was architect M. G. Bindesbøll (1800-1856). The frieze was created in three stages, between 1846 and 1850. The man in charge was painter Jørgen Sonne (1801-1890):

STAGE ONE

The south wall facing parliament (Christiansborg). The work on this section, which comprises panels 30-50, took place 1846-1847. The theme: the monuments are being carried into the museum. I call this section 2.

STAGE TWO

The north wall facing the canal. The work on this section, which comprises panels 22-1, took place 1847-1848. The theme: Thorvaldsen is welcomed home by a flotilla of row boats in Copenhagen harbor. I call this section 3, because it is the culmination of the frieze.

STAGE THREE

The east wall facing the church (Slotskirken). The work on this section, which comprises panels 23-29, took place 1849-1850. The theme: the monuments are loaded from the frigate ‘Rota’ to a barge and onto dry land. I call this section 1. From here you can go left to section 2 or right to section 3.

AN INTERESTING BOOK

Henderson has written an interesting book about an interesting work of art. Before turning to the frieze, he offers some background so the reader will understand the time and the place. The frieze itself is carefully studied. He has a good eye for details, but he is also able to give us a broad view of the whole project.

He gives a presentation and an interpretation. He will tell us not only what we can see. He will also ask: what does it mean? Why is it there? What is the point? What is the reason?

The text is well-written; it has a good flow. There is an illustration of everything that is mentioned in the text. It is a quick read. The main text covers less than one hundred pages. It is illuminating, it is instructive.

Once you have read this slim volume, you will understand the meaning and the message of the frieze. You will know where the inspiration came from, and you will know it is not just a modern copy of an ancient work of art. It was modified to fit the world of Denmark in and around the year 1848, which was incidentally a turbulent chapter in the history of this country: the absolute monarchy was replaced with a constitutional monarchy, which is still in place.

Henderson loves the frieze that is wrapped around the museum. This is no secret. This is why he had to write this book. I understand him. I love the frieze as well. It offers a wonderful kaleidoscope of Copenhagen and Denmark in and around the pivotal year 1848.

Henderson has many good observations. One of them comes when he describes the frieze as “Dickensian.” He uses this word two times, on page 49 and again on page 87. All social classes of society are shown. Whether we like what we see or not, is not relevant. The point is that we get to see the upper class, the middle class, and the lower class.

Sonne’s frieze can be compared with a triumph in ancient Rome, where Thorvaldsen is the imperator, the flotilla of rowboats on the north wall represents his jubilant army, while the monuments that are carried into the museum on the south wall represent the spoils of war. But the parallel is not completely accurate. Thorvaldsen is no general, he is an artist. Furthermore, he did not steal the monuments, he created them. As Henderson says in chapter three: Copenhagen is not Paris.

I like this book. It is easy to say something positive about it. I would like to give it five stars, but I cannot do that, because while I was reading and enjoying it, I also discovered that it has some flaws.

THE FIRST PROBLEM: THE LAYOUT

Text and illustration do not follow each other. To give just one example, the boy who fell overboard is shown on page 44, where we have panels 22, 21, and 20. But the text about this episode is found on pp. 50-51. In order to compare one with the other, the reader must flip several pages back and forth. This is not the right way. This is not how it should be done.

The text that belongs to a certain illustration should be placed next to it so the reader can see both at the same time, without having to turn the page. A good and simple system would be to place the illustrations on the left-hand pages and the relevant text on the right-hand pages. Sadly, this is not what we have here.

The frieze appears as a long-running band on the top of the pages in chapter two. This may give us an idea of what the frieze looks like, but it is not helpful when you have to write a commentary. On one double spread, for instance pp. 44-45, there are nine panels. It is not possible to present the information that is relevant for these nine panels in the space below them. This means the text runs away from the illustration.

Apart from the author many other people were involved in the production of this book. I cannot understand why none of them could see that the layout chosen is most unfortunate.

All 50 panels are shown as line drawings in black-and-white. In addition, section 3 – with panels 30-50 on the south wall - is shown with modern colour photos.

THE SECOND PROBLEM: HENDERSON’S APPROACH

When reading the frieze, Henderson will jump back and forth among the panels. He is not systematic. He does not take them one by one, as he should. The lion, which appears in panel 50, is not even discussed in chapter two. It is postponed until chapter four.

Moreover, Henderson does not always say all that can be said about a panel. Some characters are anonymous, but several can be identified. I think he should mention every person who can be identified, but he does not do that. I want to know who they are. I also want to know if they were in Copenhagen in September 1838 or not. Henderson does not provide this information in a systematic way.

He could easily have done this. In his source, a lithography published in 1889, the names of characters who can be identified are written below each panel, but in his book the size of the original illustrations has been reduced so much that it is in most cases impossible to read the letters.

Regarding the east wall, panels 23-29: nobody is overlooked.

Regarding the south wall, panels 30-50: Henderson mentions M. G. Bindesbøll, who is standing on the top of the staircase. But he does not mention J. H. Lund, chief of construction, who is standing next to him. Why not?

Regarding the north wall, panels 22-1: several characters who can be identified are overlooked. Henderson fails to mention:

** Martin Hammerich (1811-1881) - panel 17

** Johanne Luise Heiberg (1812-1890) - panel 14

** Two politicians, Orla Lehman and L. N. Hvidt - panel 12 (Henderson says we have a boat with “Men of Learning,” but he fails to give any names)

** Jørgen Sonne and his brother Edward Sonne - panel 6 (the artist placed himself and his brother in a boat, even though none of them were present in Copenhagen in September 1838 when Thorvaldsen returned to Denmark; it is a case of artistic license)

** The Puggaard family - panel 5

The Stampe family appears in panel 4. Henderson mentions this family, because they were patrons of Thorvaldsen during his last years in Denmark, but he fails to identify the four family members one by one.

In panel 1, many characters can be identified, but Henderson mentions only a few of them. H. W. Bissen, creator of the Victory chariot placed on the roof of the museum, is mentioned several times in this book. He appears in panel 1, but Henderson does not tell us about it. This panel is the most important in this section, because it is the culmination of the welcome. Obviously, it would be a good idea to say as much about it as possible, which includes identifying as many characters as possible (and explaining why they are included).

As stated above, Henderson has a good eye for detail. On page 40 he mentions a family connection between Bissen and Sonne:

“Bissen (from 1852, Sonne’s brother-in-law: small country…) had conjured up the Victory chariot…”

However, not all relevant family connections are mentioned: M. G. Bindesbøll was the nephew of Jonas Collin, a high ranking official, who played an important role in the creation of Thorvaldsens Museum. Collin (1776-1861) is shown in panel 1, but he is not mentioned anywhere in this book.

Here is another example: Maria Puggaard is seen in panel 5. In 1844 she married Orla Lehmann, who is seen in panel 12. Neither of them is mentioned by name.

THE THIRD PROBLEM: THE LION

Henderson postpones this topic every time it pops up, and I have done the same in this review to show you just how annoying it is. The lion is the subject of chapter four. The statue of the lion can be seen in panel 50, the last panel on the south wall.

We know this motive is important even before we start reading. On the front cover we have panel 1 where Thorvaldsen comes ashore. On the back cover we have panel 50 where the statue of the lion is being moved into the museum. Since these motives are placed on the covers, they must be very important.

As Henderson finally explains in chapter four, the lion is the Lucerne Lion, also known as the Dying Lion Protecting the Royal Arms of France. On page 91 Henderson gives the following background:

“Back in 1792 [in] Paris during the Terror, the royal Swiss Guard billeted on the Tuileries went down fighting the French revolutionaries to the last man. In 1819 Thorvaldsen was approached for a monument, and a colossal version of his idea was duly hacked out of the side of a cliff at Lucerne (1821, by L. Ahorn).”

The monument is still there; it is an important attraction in Lucerne.

In other words: the lion is a symbol of the brave soldiers who fought and died rather than surrender to the enemy. And in the long procession of monuments on the south wall the lion is the first. Why is that? On page 92 Henderson says:

“… the sculptor is the lion he must be, and must be the lion he is. There is no other way to be first and foremost; a ‘King’ he must be.”

The lion is the king of the animal kingdom and Thorvaldsen was the king of art in the nineteenth century. While I like and accept this interpretation, I have to point out that Henderson makes a factual mistake when he claims the Swiss Guard “went down fighting the French revolutionaries to the last man.”

An inscription placed below the monument in Lucerne tells us how many died and how many survived. Here are the numbers:

** Died: 26 officers and 760 soldiers. Total 786.

** Survived: 16 officers and 350 soldiers. Total 366.

If Henderson had spent a few minutes digging for the truth, he might have avoided this factual mistake. It is not necessary to go all the way to Switzerland. You can look it up on the internet. It is a shame he did not do that.

CONCLUSION

In a way I can understand why Henderson wanted to postpone discussion of the lion until the last chapter. But I still think it is an unfortunate decision. He should have said everything he wanted to say about panel 50 in chapter two.

When we get to the end of the book we finally understand the subtitle: ‘Løve’ in Copenhagen (or the Lion in Copenhagen) is a metaphor for what we see on the walls of the museum: the triumphant return of Thorvaldsen – the king of art – to Copenhagen.

Making critical remarks does not mean that I do not like this book. I do like it. But as you can see, there are some flaws here, and therefore I cannot give it five stars. I believe four stars is a fair conclusion.

PS # 1. Amazon charges more than 30 British pounds for this book. I think it is a high price. I know it is a hardcover book, and you must pay for this, but the total number of pages is only 120.

PS # 2. For more information, see the official website of Thorvaldsens Museum, which comes in two versions: in Danish and in English.

PS # 3. There is an interesting chapter about Thorvaldsens Museum and the frieze in a book written by the Danish historian Jens Engberg: Power and Culture (published in three volumes in 2005). Unfortunately, this book is only available in Danish. The Danish title is Magten og kulturen. The chapter about the museum is in volume 2, pp. 112-128.

***

John G. W. Henderson,
The Triumph of Art at Thorvaldsens Museum:
'Løve' in Copenhagen,
Museum Tusculanum Press, 2005, 120 pages

***

 

George Henderson, Emeritus Professor of Classics at Cambridge University

This picture is borrowed from Cambridge University’s website

***

For more information, see my blog:

Thorvaldsen’s Museum

***