It just so happens that this essay was written towards the end of the year. This is a period of time in which readers generally hope to have critical reflections on events and incidents that have already taken place, and this then creates a platform from which to take new steps in the upcoming year. But it is necessary to clarify here that it is not my intention here to write enthusiastically with a kaleidoscopic view or make predictions of that kind. The topic that is being proposed and confronted here indeed has been summarized from various bits and pieces of notes and observations regarding Indonesian contemporary art over the previous one to three years. It is also due to the complexities of this problem and minimal space to give comprehensive coverage, this essay is not intended as a study towards the future.

What still prevails in Indonesia these days is the increasing tendency in which contemporary art is geared towards lifestyles of the urban elite. This phenomenon has indeed already been taking place for several years, mostly since the boom that occurred during the mid 2000s. This situation probably reminded us of similar indications that arose during the fine art boom of the 1980s, in which the consumption of works of art was motivated by a capitalist economy that was centered in major cities, especially Jakarta. Industrial properties and petroleum exports, which developed rapidly at that time, not only enabled support of the national economy but also resulted in a new upper class that collected works of art.

The difference is that contemporary art these days is gradually integrated with a consumer culture as a key component of a sophisticated global lifestyle. This is clearly visible, for example, in commercial gallery exhibitions which are nearly always supported by multinational mass media corporations. In Jakarta, one of the magazines devoted to fashion, beauty and affluence is even able to organize an annual art fair. I assume that without the ubiquitous symbolic capital setting of contemporary which exists globally these days the merge between popular  mass media and the 'high art' descendant would have not happened so smoothly. The current works of art along with artists, curators and galleries take up large segments of feature columns in fashion, interior and leisure periodicals, which make them appear to become just as equal as famous film stars, television announcers or photo models. This is actually a phenomenon that had not yet risen during the previous art boom era.

What I wish to underline here is how the field of contemporary art in Indonesia is experiencing a broadening transformation in artworks as commodities par excellence. At least since 2008, galleries in Indonesian have competed to open stands in shopping malls, presenting works of art that are no different from commercial goods in shop windows. By strengthening the status of art as commodity, even the ‘artist’ also is a profession that is becoming more interesting to many persons. Artists themselves are now transformed into creative figures that produce unique and choice objects. It is permissible, for this matter is a new phenomenon that pleases many people. However, in this kind of situation, the principles of art production also lead to the risk of getting easily involved in industrial practices, in which the components of aesthetic values become increasingly integrated with the laws of mass production of consumer goods. The world of fine art operates as a mass culture corporation that has the purpose of producing momentary sensations through the birth of new works and stars through networking, branding strategy and competitive marketing.

Interestingly, the development of Indonesian contemporary art later on also gave rise to a different polarity. Besides a broadening of the art world through strategic integration with popular culture, consumer practices in fine art by the elite these days have also caused a closing off of public access regarding ‘exceptional works’. This is by no means something new—in 1992 Indonesian critic Sanento Yuliman once called this symptom as a kind of pemingitan (seclusion, isolation). There were several factors that supported this situation. The first was that it definitely was because Indonesia still did not yet have public (state) institutes that possessed the vision of making art as a part of a broader life of society. Secondly, the status of works of art as choice objects became increasingly exclusive, which led to the mechanism of art consumption taking place among elitist circles.  Artworks that had important historical values for Indonesia as a result were only stored inside national museums or exhibition spaces with difficult access, insufficiently cared for. At the same time at another extreme of this world, such works were also being kept in rooms in homes or offices of individual or corporate collectors.

There were various political situations and macro-economics in Indonesia that added to the influence of the development of Indonesian contemporary art during the last decade. After the momentum of reformation in 1998, there has not been a national political force that has been strong enough to determine the direction and development of artistic practice. The minimal impact of state interference in art is becoming more and more apparent in the domination of art market at the local level, the mechanism of which is established by the influential importance of participants, or group of particular supporters, who can be insular—especially in places such as Java and Bali. Active factors in local market speculation have recently become increasingly strong in their impact on the patterns of production and growing arbitrary consumption.

The absence of a central ‘institutional power’ has made Indonesian contemporary art like a building that is being constructed without a plan, lacking a blueprint. This condition is bemused by the character of contemporary art discourse that precisely rejects a singular aesthetic reference. It has been an assumption accepted by many people that patterns of plurality or diversity is the aesthetic principle that gives life to the domain of global contemporary art practices. In exhibitions in Indonesia these days we can come across mixed views in general; ‘conventional’ works such as paintings, graphic prints, even sculptures are next to photographs, installations, art performances, videos, as well as new media works that include pieces based on the internet, computer or interactive technology. Such ‘uniformed diversity’ can be seen in exhibitions at commercial galleries, art fairs, biennales and even non-profit spaces initiated by artists.

However unified and fragmented, I wish to give significance to a phenomenon that recently has attracted my attention, namely the focus of the press on video and new media art in various articles in mass media publications, exhibitions and competitions on a national scale. The phenomenon was indicated by the mushrooming of exhibitions that featured video, photography and computer art—which then were often generalized by the umbrella term ‘new media’—at several commercial galleries in Jakarta throughout 2011. The involvement of some commercial galleries as fringe venues in the fifth edition of OK Video, Jakarta International video festival 2011, as well as the decision of Bandung Contemporary Art Award 2010 to award the first prize to video work, in addition to a number of media reviews that covered these events, are just some other indicators.

This situation for me was ‘surprising’ enough when considered from a historical perspective, keeping in mind that video and new media art in Indonesia actually were not new phenomenon at all. Since the beginning of the 1990s, video and new media art have been practiced by many Indonesian young artists, and up to now is still the prime medium for a number of its pioneer. From the early 2000s, video as an artistic medium moreover has been discussed many times in research circles or communities of artists in Java and Sumatra through initiatives of artists’ groups such as ruangrupa and Forum Lenteng. Indonesia even has an international video festival that has been organized biannually since 2003, which up to now still is the largest event of its kind in Southeast Asia. So why did the moment for video just come up now? 

Within the culture of collecting that is developing at this moment, video and new media art in Indonesia also occupies status as a commodity. The invasion of video and new media art into private galleries in Indonesia is actually a sign that these kinds of art have been able to be absorbed by the local market. Seen from the materialist perspective, this is an interesting new phenomenon. It may lead to an assumption on the rise of a new consciousness or culture in the daily life of Indonesian society, which causes changes in the view and understanding of collecting contemporary art. As it has often been discussed in various writings, collecting video and new media art is basically full of contradictions. The most up to date video format in the form of digital ‘data’ is intangible, immaterial and has been made ubiquitous with the mode of internet distribution which is not in compliance with the principles of uniqueness and exclusivity. Here, the contradiction lies in the fact that even though video is naturally a medium that can be easily reproduced, the commercialization of video art has eventually reversed it back to an auratic work of art.

Nonetheless, we must also keep in mind that within in the current situation, the emergence of particular works or new artistic medium ini the market is always a result of distribution system and marketing strategies that are put into operation by the art market. The rise of video works, photography as well as new media art in Indonesia, has also been triggered by  mechanisms of this kind. I am unable to directly pinpoint the players, or group of participants, with the power in the market to bring about factors that are influential in the creation of this situation. But considering the patterns of production and consumption that have been arbitrarily in motion, I am convinced that this is not a phenomenon that can be separated from the motif of diversified investment, especially when ‘conventional’ works, particularly paintings, have become commodities that are no longer within reach. Seen in this context, the rise of video and new media art is not a symptom that is particular to Indonesian art market's idiosyncrasy. Rather, it is a common diversified market development which can happen with other types of art work.

Finally, I also wish to touch upon the issue of ‘publicness’ which always is crucial in the development of Indonesian contemporary art. With the continued absence of a state/public institution that has the capacity to make contributions to both art historical reference and contemporary development, in reality Indonesian contemporary art will always be confronted with an obscure direction. On the practical level, contemporary art scene has become more and more exclusive and public cannot have actual engagement with the art world. We never have the experience of attending good international exhibitions in their own country, which is often caused by minimal funds, facilities and infrastructure, along with government bureaucracy and policy.

The development of infrastructure also is obstructed by the absence of a system of upper local education that is able to produce reliable software and human resources with the vision to organize international activities. The organization of the recent Jakarta Biennale XIV, entitled Maximum City, in Jakarta, December this year reflect this critical situation. I personally am inclined to say that this exhibition shows many failures, not just due to the inferior curatorial selections, choices and placement of the works in the exhibition spaces, but also because the organization and administration were 'disordered'. It is no secret that this exhibition resulted in big disappointment not only from the public, but also from some of  participating artists. Purportedly, this biennale was initially organized to counterbalance the domination of the local market that had become increasingly elite. However, by quick observation, I personally feel that the final execution has made the event really far behind the goal.

Caption:

C-ARTS Show 2009. Exhibitions on Contemporary Art in Grand Indonesia Shopping Town, the biggest mall in Jakarta

Courtesy of C-ARTS

___________

Agung Hujatnikajennong is the curator of Selasar Sunaryo Art Space