'Mutant' fails to evolve further than cartoon

'Mutant' fails to evolve further than cartoon

TOKYO (JP): Art was not the first thing that came to mind when
people heard of an exhibition called The Mutation being held
here. Thoughts turned instead to the artistic namesakes of
Leonardo, Raphael and Michelangelo of the Mutant Turtle Ninjas!
When informed it was an art show, many people assumed it was an
Indonesian twist on the Japanese cartoon show.

The famed turtles may have no direct relationship with The
Mutation: Painstaking Realism in Indonesian Contemporary Art. But
art critic Jim Supangkat, the show's curator, believes foreign
influence in the New Order is the main force behind the
emergence, or reemergence, of the genre he terms "painstaking
realism".

Supangkat explained recently that the exhibition was intended
to show the genre can not be observed using the discourse of the
American photo-realists.

The curator said painstaking realism emerged after Indonesia
reopened its doors to the world in the late 1960s and early 1970s
under the New Order. "After the abortive communist coup in 1965,
the effects of globalization became evident, and the visual
experience of Indonesian artist became extremely rich, stimulated
by the emergence of advertisements, high-quality printing, and so
forth," he said.

The idea of mutation, which Supangkat defines as "where a
substance is transformed into another substance", is a curious
one. Unfortunately, the exhibition fails to carry through in
conveying it. The curator has not defined what the original
substance is, or what is the mutant substance it has become.

He hinted at "Sudjojono realism" as the original substance,
but did not elaborate sufficiently on this matter. Neither has
this been clarified through the exhibition. More study is
obviously needed.

The notion of painstaking realism is very much a technical
one. According to Masahiro Ushiroshoji, curator of the Fukuoka
Art Museum, Supangkat admits that painstaking realism "does not
have a clear concept and is far from being a movement". The
weakness of the curatorial concept is due to its emphasis on
technique. The title fails to further explain the presence of a
discourse beyond its meaning as an adjective of a technical
process.

The works of the nine artists in the show differ in technique
and style. As the notion of painstaking realism is a technical
one, the placement of at least two of the artists in the category
of seems questionable. Even some of the works of one artist may
technically depart from the definition. The exhibition could have
benefited from a more intensive selection process.

It is also questionable whether a discourse based on the use
of similar techniques in painting can be established. It may face
the same fate as American photo-realism, which Supangkat claims
"did not last or due to the basic thinking being quite vague and
its position like minimalism, being wedged in between the end of
modernist development and the emergence of contemporary art".

One interesting point is that all the artists, with two
exceptions, studied at either the Indonesian Art High School
(Sesri) or the Indonesian Academy of Art (ASRI). This warrants
further research to investigate whether a common discourse indeed
exists, and whether a movement may emerge. (Amir Sidharta)