Superficial values muddly local art market
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.