Art for social criticism benaficial, not destructive

Art for social criticism benaficial, not destructive

YOGYAKARTA (JP): When most people are unable to speak their
mind about the sociopolitical situation, artists express their
feelings through their work.

Work by local artists displayed at the Cemeti Gallery here
testifies that artists can speak without speaking.

The exhibition, called Slot in the Box, features 22 works of
art, including a refrigerator with a sign on its door which says
"Open Your Freezer -- Find the Fresh President." Inside the
refrigerator, there is bottled water and government officials'
uniforms symbolizing candidates available to succeed the
president.

The work speaks about politics, especially the general
election, in the language of art. Using symbols, such as lips,
ears and brains, the artists relay messages about irony and
sociopolitical criticism.

Artist Weye Haryanto, the creator of Lip Service
Democratization, said: "Indonesia's general election appears like
a festival of democracy, and democracy here is just that -- an
appearance."

Security guards patrol the gallery and will continue to do so
until after the exhibition concludes at the end of this month; a
practice which may not be beneficial, as no visitor has been
agitated by the works.

A non-governmental organization observer and a local
representative of British-based aid organization OXFAM, Mansour
Fakih, agreed the that government remains sensitive about art
portraying social criticism.

"Cultural and artistic expression of the current climate have
become politically risky," Fakih said.

He believes cultural works can restore people's human
qualities that have been stripped in the process of adjusting to
the great power that be in Indonesia.

He mentioned how literary and art works encounter obstacles,
such as government-imposed censorship or bans. Theatrical figure
W.S. Rendra, for instance, was not permitted to put on his play
Sekda through his theater company Bengkel Teater here in the
1970s because of its strong focus on social criticism of a
corrupt bureaucracy.

Rendra, also a poet, at another time failed to obtain permits
from local authorities to recite his poems, which are known to
carry strong messages of social protest against the
establishment.

Hardi, a painter, also experienced problems with security
authorities when he tried in the 1970s to display paintings at
the Taman Ismail Marzuki arts center in Jakarta due to the
sensitive issue of presidential succession.

Twenty years later the situation remains. In 1993, the work of
local artist Moeryono was banned because it portrayed the
suffering of slain labor leader Marsinah.

The bans are only a small part of what happens when art comes
face to face with power. When the media and people's
representatives are no longer able to voice people's aspirations,
then artists come forward.

"The people need to have some sense of control over (the
domination of) power, and artists are the ones that launch this
control," according to art and literary critic Bakdi Sumanto of
Gadjah Mada University.

"Artists are sensitive. If they sense something is wrong in
society, they react in their own unique ways," he said. "They
don't have any strategic position in a political community, but
they do have spectators, some fanatical, who listen to what they
have to say."

Sumanto said artwork which contains social criticism could not
be expected to function as a means to "enlighten".

"Social criticism through art serves only as a way to
maintain people's common sense," he said.

If the government chooses to impose bans on artistic
expressions of the sociopolitical situation, it's more about a
conflict of values, he said.

"The government doesn't want to be criticized publicly ...
(despite) criticism through art not being a threat.

"Because, no matter how harsh, social criticism through the
arts does not target the core of the problems. Artists speak
through symbols, and these should be differentiated from speeches
that agitate people," he said.

He believed that the power holders' oversensitivity reflects
"a sick society" because "criticism is treated as a threat".

Fakih agreed, adding that sometimes those in power go so far
as to treat critical artwork as something more dangerous than
scientific works.

As for the artists themselves, cultural acts are often nothing
more than giving voice to the oppressed. "It's a process to
awaken people's awareness that there is a process of
dehumanization going on, and which is affecting both the
oppressed and the oppressor," he said. (38)