Superficial values muddly local art market

By Chandra Johan

JAKARTA (JP): Tentacles of the global art market began to reach into Asia and the Asia-Pacific region several years ago. Indonesia has been part of this trend, with some classifying the development as a second art boom.

Art dealers, galleries and hotels here have displayed works of internationally recognized painters. In September, the Darga Gallery in Ubud exhibited paintings by Picasso, Renoir, Matisse and other greats. At auctions held by Sotheby's and Christie's in Singapore last October, paintings by such famed Indonesian painters as Raden Saleh, Sudjojono and Sudjana Kerton sold for prices equivalent to billions of rupiah.

The rapid development of the art business in Indonesia has not been accompanied by a similar enhancement in the role of art criticism.

This is despite the importance of art critics in establishing consensus on the merits of a work, a crucial determinant of its material value.

The Jakarta Post interviewed Jim Supangkat, an independent curator and critic, on directions in the local art market.

Question: Aside from buying mass-market art, the elite here is now brave enough to buy works of the masters.

Answer: Yes. This is an adaptation of world trends. The international markets, represented by auction houses, have shifted their attentions to Asia and the Asia-Pacific. This means that with Europeans and Americans still recovering from a long recession, auction houses are tempting the rich in Asia and the Asia Pacific, currently considered more affluent. At first, the auction houses sold Asian works, but now they have shifted to items from Europe.

Q: But trends eventually pass. Isn't that something undesirable?

A: I don't want it to be judged as a bad or good indicator. What is clear is that the trend has managed to do what it was meant to do, thanks to art dealers. One can see that this trend is no different from fashion. For instance, in the summer we may have to wear yellow clothing. There is no specific reason, just as long as it is yellow. That is the trend, no explanation necessary.

Q: But the rich are becoming more extravagant, sometimes paying fortunes for pieces even when the worth is unclear. Do they really understand the function of the works?

A: Now, there lies the problem. I consider it perfectly acceptable, in fact it makes a lot of sense, if paintings are hung as showpieces. It is obvious the works are appreciated. I know of a collector who gets inspiration to work from a particular painting.

But how could these paintings be so expensive that they cost more than furniture? That does not make sense. I could understand if the paintings were milestones or considered artifacts. Like the paintings of van Gogh and Picasso, for example. They are universally recognized works. That recognition is from the Europeans and Americans.

Q: Why do you use the term milestones?

A: It's like this. In Europe and America, a painting becomes quite expensive when it proves particularly significant to many people. Take Van Gogh's paintings. Removed from questions of whether it is justified or not, thousands of books agree that his work have indicators pointing toward modern thinking. His body of work became a milestone because it gave people a specific direction. His works are unique. They may be expensive, but who wouldn't want to own one? Everybody agrees on their value.

Q: Hasn't that happened here?

A: No. People replace the value with a substitute that is in line with mysticism. It is like a jimat (something charmed). A charm requires no explanation; the point is it charmed. Europeans and Americans do not automatically accept that something is commendable, but they base their perceptions on debate, discussions, research, books and other factor. They do not believe the work is defined by absolute truths. Only after reaching agreement can we ascertain a work's value.

Q: This requires agreement, talks and discussions. Is that custom missing from Indonesian painting exhibitions?

A: No such tradition exists. There is the exhibition and then the sale. If it is not discussed, then how is one to find its real value? Where is it to be hung? In hotels, banks, buildings? It does not make sense.

I suspect that there is a dukun (soothsayer) system going on to decide which is the charmed piece. Believe it or not; if the "soothsayer" says the work costs Rp 100 million, people will buy it. This runs contrary to the tradition of modern art and modern tradition. In modern tradition, no "soothsayer" puts an absolute value on a painting. That is garbage. How can you determine the value of something without involving different people?

Q: But we have qualified people for that, like art critics...

A: Art critics alone are not enough. That would be putting one group -- the critics -- in the role of soothsayers. We need an agreement involving the curator, art historians, the artist himself or other artists, art lovers and collectors. Only when the opinions of these people are organized and researched can a suitable value be agreed upon.

Q: Who do you think should initiate this sort of system in Indonesia?

A: Anybody could. Ordinarily it starts with art dealers or promoters. Promoters have a personal relationship with their artists, and therefore have confidence in the value of the artist's work. Once he exhibits the works, art critics will crop up. Discussions will begin, and debate will start on the value of the work.

Other critics will become involved. There will be differences in opinion. There might be an interested curator who will try to bring in other artists to join the debate. An art historian might take part. That is basically how the process should be.

We start the struggle at a small gallery, then move on to a bigger venue, like a museum perhaps. Once it reaches the museum, people will start talking about it and reach agreement.

That is how real value is determined. It is not based on gossip about eccentric artists with weird lifestyles, death wishes or many wives. That has nothing to do with art.