Wardiman's idea may be worth a review

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.