Wardiman's idea may be worth a review

The following articles by art critic Amir Sidharta, curator of the Museum Universitas Pelita Harapan at Lippo Karawaci, Tangerang, examine the confusion created by the recent cabinet reorganization granting two ministries the management of arts and culture. Amir offers recommendations that may encourage further discussion to solve the problem.

JAKARTA (JP): Recently, the field of arts and culture has received considerable attention, particularly since there are two ministries now related to the subject.

Apart from the Ministry of Education and Culture, there is now also the Ministry of Tourism, Arts and Culture.

The assignment of two ministries to handle arts and culture is most likely related to the fact that 1998 has been designated the Year of Arts and Culture.

Two and a half months prior to the announcement of a new cabinet on March 14, the President designated 1998 the Year of Arts and Culture and directed that the theme be utilized for the advancement of tourism in conjunction with the current Visit Indonesia Decade.

The Indonesian art world has responded to the move with ambivalence. Some certainly consider the designation to be for the sake of tourism development, with tourism being more important than arts and culture.

Salim Said, a film critic and chairman of the Jakarta Arts Council, was quoted by the Suara Pembaruan afternoon daily as saying: "As an artist, I wait for the instructions of the Ministry of Tourism. Since 1998 is the Year of Arts and Culture, which is part of the tourism decade, then arts and culture are a part of tourism."

Many artists and intellectuals have said that the placement of arts and culture under tourism could diminish and eventually destroy the value of Indonesian arts and culture.

Playwright Ratna Sarumpaet said, "The government's understanding about art and culture is in the form of commercialism, the bottom line being tourism, commodities and foreign exchange."

Industry

Choreographer Sardono W. Kusumo claimed that the way in which arts and culture is "sold", with a focus on packaging it as a commodity for tourists, would hinder the advancement of Indonesian civilization.

Confusion is made even greater by former minister Wardiman Djojonegoro's "cultural industries" concept in which art is viewed as something that should be developed using an industrial approach.

Many artists have reacted negatively to the concept. Cultural observer Dami N. Toda said in the Kompas daily, "Minister Wardiman ... doesn't understand the value of Indonesian culture any more than seeing a heap of Busang (gold mine) treasure that needs to be processed with a high-tech match-and-link development strategy, a 'cultural industry' factory of the ministry."

In an excathedra manner, the former minister provided the "working morals" of artistic production to the laborers of the "cultural industry": "Art related personalities need to realize that the essence of cultural industry is the existence of a chain that includes the producer, the artists, and their consumers, the general public."

Dami criticized the former minister for thinking that the creative process was more of a mechanical production of art works by a "producer", rather than a creative process by an artist.

To be sure, in simple terms, the model of cultural industry as described by Wardiman places artists as producers and the public audience as consumers.

In openings of art exhibitions, Wardiman explained his concept by saying that artists were producers of art works, while collectors were the consumers. This producer-consumer chain is made complete, he said, by links bridging the two -- galleries which market the art works and critics who assist in public comprehension of art.

In effect, the "cultural industry" concept can be viewed separately from the creation of art itself, and even from the aspect of research, through another model that can be described as "pro-appreciative".

The model is made up of four components: the creative, the interpretative, the pro-appreciative and the appreciative.

The artist is the main part of the creative aspect in the model.

The interpretative aspect consists of institutions and personalities that research the goals, processes and final forms of artistic creation, as well as their communication to the public.

The pro-appreciative component sustains the development of public art appreciation, while the appreciative component is the appreciation of art works outside a consumer mentality. The consumption, rather, is closer to appreciation.

In terms of paintings, the components of the pro-appreciative model "chain" consist of the painter as the creator, and the museum, curator and critic as the "consumers".

Wearables

The pro-appreciative component is conducted by galleries and auction houses that trade in art works and by publishers and the mass media that distribute information to the general public.

This component also includes producers of souvenir items who merchandise art works, which can make people more aware and interested in art.

The appreciator in this "chain" include collectors who directly or indirectly become consumers of authentic works of art, and an audience that enjoys the creation and interpretation of art through exhibitions, books, documentaries, catalogs or articles, as well as art-related souvenirs like posters, postcards, T-shirts and other wearables.

In the model, the component that is the "cultural industry" as such is the pro-appreciative component, while the creative, interpretative and appreciative aspects are outside an "industrial" attitude.

The pro-appreciative cultural industry model can be used to reduce current confusion over how arts and culture should be viewed.

Some people, like painter M. Sulebar Sukarman, predicted last month that fine arts would be handled by the Ministry of Education and Culture, while crafts would be under the auspices of the Ministry of Tourism, Arts and Culture.

Many within the former ministry think that the latter will take care of the arts that can be sold for tourism.

If the pro-appreciative model is used, the creative and interpretative component should be the task of the Ministry of Education and Culture, while the pro-appreciative component would be managed under the Ministry of Tourism, Arts and Culture.

A cooperation between the two ministries, with the latter handling promotion and marketing, could actually reap positive results.

Tourism can take advantage of arts and culture and support the programs that can guarantee their development. As choreographer Sardono W. Kusumo said, the involvement of tourism may encourage an artistic climate.

The success of cultural industries is dependent on the ability of its creative, interpretative, pro-appreciative and appreciative components.