THE1990s
The Making of Art with

078

Art Studies_02

Contemporaries

The Roleof International
CulturalInstitutionsin Asia
Hoo l:li_Ak

So I'd like to begin the discussions for
Session 3. We had presenters speak
about the overall picture of the situa tions in Singapore, Australia, and Japan
during the 1990s. I think we have beenable to see how different institutions
and organizations events in Australia,
Singapore, and Japan (particularly th e JapanFoundation and Fukuoka Asian Art Museum)

Kish, Sayaka

had engaged with the region. But I would
like to take note of other cultural institutions and organizations that did notcome up that were actively engaging in
projects within the Asian region. One isGermany's Goethe-lnstitut, the second
is France's Alliance Franc;aise,and third
is United Kingdom's British Council. I
think the Goethe-lnstitut and AllianceFranc;aisewere especially active andinfluential in countries such as Indonesia,
Thailand, and Vietnam. If my memory
serves me correct, I think they supported
expressions that dealt with "contemporary" issues and held positions that were"anti-authority." But I cannot remember
if this was all in the 1990s or the 2000s.
I wonder if Dinh could briefly speak
about the situation in Vietnam in relation with the Goethe -lnstitut and AllianceFranc;aise?
Dinh_Q Le

I think that both the Goethe-lnstitut
and the Alliance Franc;aisewere very
important in the 1990s; particularly the
Goethe-lnstitut, I would say. But as I
mentioned before, it depended on the
director, too . I think it was 1997 when
the Goethe-lnstitut opened in Hanoi, buteven before then, the German government had already been active in Vietnam,
by sending and placing German artists

Discussion

Session 3

in universities in Vietnam through the
DAAD (German Academic Exchange Service)
grants. Veronika Radulovic trained agroup of very bright young artists andthey did wonderful things in the early'90s . I think the international culturalorganizations have been very importantbecause they have the funding and theirconnection with the outside world thatenabled them to bring in new artist andpeople, and to introduce new ideas to theVietnamese. But I think now, the two programs seem to be floundering.
HoashiM,

Thank you. Alison, did you have aquestion?
6,,;,_cnCarro,

I just wanted to add something
about the Goethe-lnstitut. In my presentation, I was talking about the importance of funding and the relationship to agovernment policy, really, and its impact
on the arts . We talked about the Goethe
before this session. In Australia, it's notas high profile as it might be in aSoutheast Asian country where there isovertly less government funding.
What I wanted to add about the
Goethe is that, to me, despite its upsand-downs of personnel, funding, or
whatever-and it still seems to have anawful lot of money-is that its attitude isincredibly arm's length from government
sensitivity. I heard the director in Sydney
say, "If an artist wanted to do somethingthat is critical of the government, we
would accept that that is part of the way
in which the arts work. That's one of thegreat virtues of the arts; they will bechallenging to the status quo . We
accepted it as a reality ." I was really sosurprised to hear this.
I don't know of another funding
agency in the world that would be as

079

Chapter1

accepting as that . I know in Australia weare very sensitive and our government issensitive, so we tend to self-censor
things that are going to get one of ourmain policy-drivers offside. I don't know
about the situation here, but I don't know
if others have had that experience with
Goethe, but their principle is really
impressive to me .

I think this is also in considerationof what you have spoken about, say, acountry like Singapore with a certain
general lack of resentment against its
colonial past. In that sense, it is bothpractical and strategic-it was very
conscious of not falling into this idea of"nationalism" based on ethnicity . For
Singapore-being a multi-ethnic country-it will be extremely problematic to havea certain idea of "nation" centered on a
specific ethnicity or competing interestof those ethnicities .
Going back to the issues of colonial
institutions and locally-based Western
institutions; there were continuities. For
example, the Raffles Museum (renamed
National Museum after self-rule); they areretained to and transformed to a postindependence institution. And the role ofEuropean cultural institutions and cultural
centers such as the Goethe-lnstitut wasvery significant; significant, not necessarily in terms of the financial backing perhaps, but it provides to Singaporeans
opportunities to exhibit and see othertraveling exhibitions-an important link
for what was to be "contemporary" in
Singapore . For example, in 1991, thenNational Museum Art Gallery hosted a
traveling exhibition "Joseph Beuys'
Drawings, Objects and Prints." It was nota major exhibition, consisting primarily ofhis smaller-scaled works. But it was
extremely important because it provided

DAY 2 MAY 24, 2015

Singaporean artists a material encounter
with the contemporary. I think it catalyzed
many things. At that point of time, ofcourse, it intersected with many things
that were going on, not just in Singapore,but broadly in Southeast Asia that turntowards the conceptual.
So there was a role there; there is asignificant importance that we can attribute to the institutions like the Goethelnstitut and Alliance Franc;;aise.I thinkbroadly speaking, also, we have to think
about these sites as sites of "programming" if not "curatorship ." And we also
have to begin to think about what, in
terms of curatorial philosophy or curatorial approaches, they have provided,
which eventually shaped the way that we
think about curatorship, today.

I see. So, international cultural institutions, like the Goethe-lnstitut, also
exerted a certain level of influence on
curatorial practice . Kishi-san, have youcome across other cultural institutions
that have pursued projects and programsin the regions in question? Have you
encountered any in your research? Or
could you share with us your analysis on
the particular position of the JapanFoundation?

s
Regarding the Japan Foundation,
I have heard that prior to the establishment of the ASEANCulture Center in
1990, their overseas offices in Jakarta
and Bangkok had exhibition spaces
where they provided young local artists opportunities to show their works.
I would be interested to hear what
the other presenters here see of theirinfluences .
As for other cultural institutions,
I would say the Goethe-lnstitut was one

A son Carroll

At,madM,d,~Session3

080

TheMakingof Art withArt Studies_02

Contemporariesof the most important organizations inSoutheast Asia from the 1970s and '80s,
even before the "Asia-Pacific" framework emerged in the '90s . And I havealso heard that the Alliance Frarn;aisewas very important in Thailand.
The Publications that Shaped
the Discourse in Asia

So various institutions were playing theirroles in the region. When we pick up
cases in Japan, Australia, and Singapore,from around 1993, both Australia andSingapore started investing in the cultural projects that works in the regional
context of Asia in a systematic way withsome political interests, encouraging
projects to flourish and develop.
Simultaneously, in Japan, the former
ASEAN Culture Center, which later
became the Asia Center, began to initiate
their projects, too.
I would like to ask, whether or not,for example, the publications that
became available then enabled different
countries to think about contemporaneity, or perhaps, "synchronization," a term
I'm throwing in here out of convenience.
Did publications, for example, play a rolein synchronizing the different histories,
traditions, cultures, ethnicities, national
histories, and so on in the region?
A

I am not sure whether we can talkabout if in terms of "synchronization,"but "collaboration" and "networks,"
certainly, yes. I think in the 1990s, ofcourse, you have an emergence or plethora of new writings, new publications
that was significantly important. The
slides from my presentations mentioned
very few of them. The 1993 publication by
John Clark, ModernityinAsia, is really

01scvss1on

Sess,on3

significant in providing a survey of issues
and ideas that writers were grapplingwith across Southeast Asia . These are
not necessarily written in the sameconsistency, but, nevertheless, they are
significant as a kind of a gauge to thequestions and issues. For John Clark, he
was attempting to find ways in which
they could be collectivized meaningfully
as ways to indicate emerging trends,
ideas, and perspectives. I think you see
those names again and again in manydifferent publications.
Apinan Poshyananda, obviously,
features quite a bit, and then you haveother writers like Redza Piyadasa or
Somporn Rodboon. These are crucial indeveloping a building block that facilitates a whole range of transaction .
I think what we also want to think
about, though, is the fact that publications do not exist in a vacuum; they are
not an end product of an exhibition.
Rather, they are beginnings of otherthings . What I was trying to say about the
1996 "Modernity and Beyond" exhibition was that it was extremely crucial forthis exhibition to look at all those publications. In fact, it could not have beenrealized without all the publications thatwere issued prior to it.
I was talking a little bit about "curatorial parachuting" in the early developments of the Singapore Art Museum.
Yes, there was quite a bit of parachuting,but they were in some ways informed by
the many publications that were emerging both from the centers of Australia,
Japan, and even ASEAN. I think although
there had been writings that critiqued
ASEAN, its work in the 1990s are worth
mentioning. It is part of ... accumulations are our way to feel through thehistories, and these histories are reallycomplex and rich. For example, I wasreferring to Julie Ewington's idea aboutChapter1

the "installative" in "Five Elements: Is
installation the medium of South-East
Asia" (Art and Asia Pacific , Vol. 2, No .1, 1995)
as a device that defines a pan-Southeast Asian practice that-I am simplifying-the conceptual and the traditionalor the shamanistic. It was also something that could have been said by thoselike Brenda V. Fajardo or Flaudette May
Datu in who had done lot of work with the
Baguio Arts Guild. These were emerging through the forums of the ASEAN
Committee on Culture and Information(ASEAN COCI) workshops and aesthetic
symposiums (like one organized in Manila in
1993, "The Aesthetics of ASEAN Expression " )which were discussed some of theseissues, in particular ways to understandtraditions in terms of their comparabilities at that point of time.
So, I think we have to find ways toreflect also on things like the ASEAN
COCI publications and the symposiums/
workshops that were taking place,not just with the ASEAN, but also the
SEAMEO Project in Archeology andFine Arts (SPAFA). These were extremely
important .
Hoash1Ak1

Yes, looking back atthe 1990s, there
were a lot of "surveys," and I think there
was a situation in which many professionals were accumulating and analyzing
information, but that was not the means
to an end itself but, rather, a mid-point inan ongoing process of analysis, towards
something, towards creating something.
In this context-the term "informant" had come up a couple of times
but-Australia's APT, I think, maybe had
several sources from which to collectinformation. This is somewhat related
to the "parachuting" curators from thePhilippine's case in May's presentation
yesterday, but even though it is doubtful

DAY2 MAY24 , 2015

081

that anyone can understand everything
about a region from a two-to-three day
research trip, I think APT was initially trying to correspond with many local informants in order to pursue and look at the
many possible forms it could become.
Alison, could you share with us how theinitial stages of APT was like?
A

C,

II

Well, I think if you are looking at theearly days of the APT, I would say that
our information gathering was pretty
minimal. One of the reasons for that
was apart from going there and talking
to people in the very early days, there
was very minimal published information around. I was talking to Dinh lastnight about Vietnam in the early days.
I went to Vietnam for the APT in 1991
and there was a book that had just comeout of Hong Kong-Uncorked Soul"
Contemporary Art from Vietnam-and
there was a Time magazine article. Those
were the two things that I had as myresearch tools. Then, it was just meetingpeople on those very quick visits.
One of the things that I was very conscious of, if I can just follow on from that,was what Kishi-san said about the 1990s
being an era of formation. It started onvery simple terms; with people just stepping off that cliff of saying, "Yes, we aregoing to do this, and we are going to try
and see if it works."
I know for the APT, there was a very
real sense, before it had even opened ,that the first one might be a disaster.
I remember being in a taxi in Jakarta
with Doug Hall, the then-director of the
Queensland Art Gallery, saying, "Doug,
if this fails, you're not going to be in thebest books with the people that haveput money into this, i.e., your bosses,
the government of Queensland." Buthe was very aware of that. He took it on~

The Making of Art with
Contemporaries

082

his shoulders and I pay tribute to him forthat. It was brave. The rest of us weregoing along for the ride and having a very
good ride as it was. And then the ball got
going; the small number of people that
Ahmad has talked about were known toeverybody, the small number of publications gradually got bigger and bigger,
and slowly that sense of something forming steadily turned into the really complex
nest of activities that happen across theregion today, not just in SoutheastAsiaon one level, that is a part of it-but all thesort of connections be'tween Southeast
Asia and the rest of everywhere.
It has got to the stage now where
I keep hearing of things happening. In
the past I would know everything thatwas going on, so I thought. Now, there
is revelation after revelation of activ ity
after activity. All those young peopleand I do think there is an age factor here,certainly in Australia who were in thosedays under thirty, now maybe under
forty-five-who were excited by it . They
realized that it was exciting and they justran with it and they are still running with
it. We heard about Zoe Butt yesterday
who is in Saigon now ; she is a young
Australian. Likewise, there is Roger
Nelson in Cambodia; Russell Storer is the
new senior curator at the National Gallery
Singapore. People are doing all thesethings and it is that web of complex ity that keeps developing and growing .
Thank goodness and how exciting.
Just to take from there : one of t hethings that grew was something that
Ahmad said about moving into the the matic. That is certainly something that
happened through the 1990s. We started
off knowing that the audience needed tocome along with us, and were start ing
from a very basic level of information. So
we started off country -by-country just to
give people a sense of what was goingSess10n3

Art Studies_02

on. Then, gradually, that became too
obvious for the audience and then these
themes started to emerge . We now havea show like the one that's on here aboutthe "time of others" that can be presented across all these ideas and locales
and personalities. I also wanted to pickup on "time," because that was an issue
to come out of this show. But I am interested in that concept.

Alison just mentioned a few names ofpeople who were young in the 1990s,
but became key players in the 2000s
that probably are worth a quick introduction . You mentioned Suhanya Raffel inyour presentation ; she was one of thecurators for the APT, and is currently
the Director of Collections at the Art
Gallery of New South Wales. She hascontinued to do comparative research
between Asian and Western art. Thereis Professor John Clark whom I person ally think have been also influential asan educator. I have heard of many curators in Singapore and others who workin other parts of the Asian region to havestudied under him .
So, even while the "surveys" ofartistic practices of Asian regions andpublication ventures developed, both
serving to accelerate the disseminationof information , I also feel that, simulta neously, the seeds of individual , more
personal ties were fostered and sownback then, and have cont inued to growuntil today.
In Japan's case, then Kishi-san, youbrought up two cases in your presentation-the Japan Foundation and the
Fukuoka Asian Art Museum-but haveyou detected similar situations or formsof ties that are more personal and individual through your research of these
institutions and organizations? What do

083

Chapter1

you think were the roles of individuals, inJapan, within the framework of institutional exchange with those in the Asian
region?

I would say the members of theASEAN Culture Center and Asia Center
helped in maintaining ties with Asia into
the 2000s, not to mention the specialists such as curators and art historians.
From before then, the Fukuoka Asian Art
Museum has, of course, held exhibitions
whose curators have contributed to theart historical discourse of the regions inquestion.
an Entry Pointto

I think that those individual networks did
work, and have encouraged exhibitions
like the current "Times of others."
To bring the discussion back to
Singapore, Mashadi-san, being a curatorof the Singapore Art Museum during the
1990s, you witnessed the making of
history of art in Singapore and Asia. Laterwith the Singapore Biennale, "Asia" wasviewed in a biennale context as well.
Singapore is currently developing its newnational gallery, in addition to theSingapore Art Museum, to perhaps
research and collect artworks in Asia.
While these developments are
ongoing, as you critically point out inyour presentation, I agree that there may
be a sense of outward "spectacularization" of Singapore. Interestingly, Dinh's
presentation yesterday and your presentation today, there was a photo of thecityscapes with skyscrapers towering
next to a Ferris wheel, et cetera, that wereglistening in the night.
So what is the role that Singapore
is aspiring to play in this new decade? Is

DAY2 MAY24, 2015

it the continuum of the 1990s, or is it adeparture into something different?

That is quite a complex and evolving
situation. The entry point into Southeast
Asia was in particular ASEAN; ASEAN isa very specific political collective.
I think the question from them was tobuild up a kind of complexity that will go
beyond that initial attempt of foregrounding. The broader task, here, is to deal withor struggle with this broader contrast
between the kind of practical issues andthe vastness of the subject we are dealing with. For example, firstly, there isaccumulating collections. These are
expensive undertaking where most of
the things that you wish to acquire are
not available anyway. Secondly, there is
the question of the kind of histories thatyou need to represent . I think in
Singapore, in some ways, we have yet toarticulate what it is we want to represent
in the collection, and how do we want tonegotiate with the national histories ofthe various countries. I think APT has
done that very well in a sense that thecollection in Brisbane is very muchmarked by the interest in terms of engaging and negotiating directly with artists.
In Singapore, it was an attempt
to engage with national histories, andtherefore it can become frustrating if theright Juan Luna is simply unavailable.
In Australia, I think this kind of anxiety
is less so. I think that's very interesting.
And of course, by extension, the struggle involves the question of what sort ofcuratorial modalities do you create, do
you develop out of this contingency, outof this situation. Therefore, I think what
is interesting with the current situationis that Singapore is bringing in all kindsof curatorial talents, energies, ideas. The
eventual systems can potentially be very~The Makingof Artwith
Contemporaries

Session3

Art Studies_02084

open-ended, and the question is, whatsort of frameworks to make this productive? Do we want to remain subservient to an interest that is articulating very
specific histories and stories? Or do weneed to find ways that articulate a curatorial proposition that is open-ended
not overdetermined by specific expectations? I think what is crucial here isfor us to think about curatorial processthat is a way to accommodate a plurality of individual curatorial energies . What
does that mean? I think we need to pluralize our institutional purposes acrossmuseums; we should pluralize curatorial
thought, decenter approaches, and allow
for differing institution to function invery specific ways. Basically, it may notenough to have an institution like a modern art museum and a contemporary art
museum. That's not enough. We musthave other institutions that allow ourselves to develop multiple approaches.
This is where, I think, when we begin tothink about "sites of curation," we haveto think about it in the broadest terms
possible and to think about it in terms offinding ways to ensure that many things
are possible.
So the outcomes are not irreducible .
Curatorially, they involve ways in which
we can, perhaps, recuperate testimonies, memories, ways in which we deal
with the past which we are not able to
do today. Very specifically in Singapore,as I was showing the last slide, we have

Session3

to think about ways in which we begin
to engage with the effective populationof Singapore; "effective" meaning to be
inclusive. The very fact that there arepeople living in Singapore, whether they
are Singaporean citizens or contracted
professionals and labor, they form an
important social fabric with issues andpredicaments that condition their stay.
And, as museums, how do we begin torelate to these. How to address themas an audience, I think, is important . As
museums, we struggle to understandthat, and perhaps, to articulate certain
policies and curatorial actions.
H

I see. So we need to figure out systems within and outside museums where
we can be receptive to those versatile,
diverse forms of practices, maintaining aplural format, and not be narrowed down
into one or singular mode of practice.
Mashadi-san spoke a little about
the audience, too, toward the end, butwhile there were those who earlier
admitted that audiences were not theirconcern, how to address the audience inthe contexts of museums is an interesting issue and have come up a couple oftime today . I hope we can possibly touchupon that in the final session, when we
have everyone up on stage, but for now, I
would like to close Session 3.
Thank you very much.

Chapter1

MAY24, 2015085

Il::!Ul!l!l!I

Session3

086

The Making of Art wtth
Contempora ries

ArtStudies_02

PlenaryDiscussion
uu11

I •

11111

HoashiAki

/

('I

JSS

n

Plenary Discussion

087

Chapter1

f:!_o{l_§_hLl\kj

Session 3 was on the roles institutions played
specifically in the 1990s, so I would like to begin
by asking Gridthiya or Ade, as individual practitioners who were already active then, to sharewith us how you dealt with institutions, yourselves. As we have heard throughout theses sion, there were artistic engagements that wereindividual as well as institutional, whether it
was political, systematic, or involving museums
or other cultural institutions such as the JapanFoundation. So as individuals who worked in
the arts back then, what were your relationships
with these institutions like?
G 1dh_iyaGawP.eWQ.[!9.

Before I go into that, I thought I would add
a little comment on the last session's discussion
about the significance of the international cultural organizations, especially in Thailand andin relation to Southeast Asia. In Thailand, during the Cold War, the important international
cultural organization was the United States
Information Service (USIS), which is part of theState Department of the United States. Most of
the art activities and exhibitions came from thisorganization. I think that the first experimental
film laboratory and workshop were conductedin the 1960. Later, as already discussed, theBritish Council and Goethe-lnstitut played pivotal roles to develop the art scene, especially
the Goethe-lnstitut, because they helped bringin many workshops and important artists to thecountry.
One anecdote I would like to share is fromthe early 1990s. They invited the artist Rainer
Wittenborn for a workshop organized by thesenior curator, Somporn Rod boon at Silpakorn
University in Bangkok and there he met
Montien Boonma . From there, Wittenborn
introduced Montien to his artist and curator
friends, who were based in Brazil and his curator friends invited him to Arte Amazonas, where
he met Marina Abramovic':, and so on. So thisDAY2 MAY24, 2015

was how his connections grew. The same artist
introduced Montien to Rene Block, who invited
Montien to participate in the 4th Istanbul
Biennial in 1995. As a side note, this was thefirst time a Thai artist participated in the
Istanbul Biennial.
It is very interesting how important a role
the small workshops played in taking artists tothe next level, and I am interested in such connections and the impact they had on their subsequent careers. The Goethe-lnstitut, indeed,played a vital role for the artists. The British
Council is not that exciting for me, even though
they played a vital role in the 1980s. They arevery nationalistic but, of course, so are the otherinternational cultural organizations.
The mid-1970s, was the time when Thailand
established its first non-profit organization, theBhirasri Institute of Modern Art, which is also thefirst so-called "modern art museum." It was run
by an independent foundation and it lasted untilin the '80s. Since the Bhirasri Institute of Modern
Art was established, the influence of the Goethelnstitut and the British Council had declined . But
the art community gave moral support to theseorganizations . All the important international
exhibitions had come through them during theheight of the Cold War. Due to the omnipresent policy of Thailand, our country had to befriends with everyone then, so we got many very
interesting exhibitions from both the free world
and the communist countries. With the USIS,
through the Bhirasri Institute of Modern Art, we
had exhibitions of Alexander Calder and Henry
Moore in the early '70s, and we also had exhibitions from Russia, and the Eastern Bloc. It is very
interesting just to see the history of exhibitions
throughout this single institution in the '70s.
Then the French Embassy and the AllianceFranc;:aiseplayed quite interesting roles in thelate 1990s, too. They are the ones who brought"Cities on the Move" to Bangkok. Later, towards
the 2000s, the Office of the Contemporary Art
and Culture, and Ministry of Culture (OCAC)was~

Session3

TheMaklngofArtwith

088

Art Studies_02

Contemporaries

established in Thailand, so now, everything (official) is being monopolized by this organizations.

worked exactly like alternative spaces. That's
where we gathered and also held our meetings .

Actually, it's really interesting how, forexample, several international cultural organizations worked in Indonesia. It's really interesting tosee how Erasmus Huis, Goethe-lnstitut, Center
Culture! Franc;ais(CCF) or the current lnstitut
Franc;aisIndonesia (IFI),the Japan Foundation,
and also the British Council have changed theway they operate since the 1990s until now.
For example, the British Council hasn't
been really interesting for the last couple ofyears because, as far as I know, they havebecome to operate like a corporate entity rather
than a cultural center. Also, they create minimal difference because of their relation withthe government . I think the Goethe-lnstitut has
been more progressive, because theirtradition
has been to not directly depend on the government . As far as I know, Germany has the lnstitut
fur Auslandsbeziehungen (IFA),for example, justas the Netherlands have the Mondriaan Fund.
Their visions are to support artists from theirown countries to have their projects outside thecountry. Erasmus and the CCF have been moreconservative in a way because they are directlyaligned with the government. I mean, they are
actually like a part of the foreign affairs division
oftheir own administration . So, they are reallydifferent; a lot of the State's agenda is reflectedin their programs.
In the 1990s, the organizations became alittle bit like alternative spaces as well, which
is, again, interesting . When I was a student, forexample, I couldn't go to the Jakarta Arts Council
to consult about exhibition spaces. We didn't
have any space to exhibit our works. So, we went
to the Japan Foundation instead, for example.
When we [ruangrupa) published Karban Journal
in 2003, with a special feature on alternative
spaces in Jakarta, we also included several foreign culture centers because we thought they

I'd also like to add that experience wasaccumulated on both the personal and institutional/organizational levels, and what may becalled networks-or even friendships-werebuilt in the 1990s.
The Hiroshima City Museum ofContemporary Art (Hiroshima MOCA), establishedin 1989, was the first public museum devoted
exclusively to contemporary art. While assigning ourselves with the concept and tasks of thisnew museum, the Japan Foundation helped
organize the Asian art exhibitions in 1992, '94,
and '97. This is all before I joined Hiroshima
MOCA, but Hiroshima at the time pursued projects related to Asia, not limited to just culturalendeavors, so as to establish economic partnerships and expand Hiroshima's networks in theregion. One such project was the 12th AsianGames Hiroshima in 1994. To build on the partnership, Hiroshima City built new railways (theAstram Line)throughout the city, expanding transportation to the suburbs, and took various othermeasures in the attempt to "brand" itself widely
within Asia-an approach similar to the one that
Fukuoka took earlier.
However, Asia's tourist industry had not yet
matured enough to induce the expected economic outcomes, and the entire project failed.
This entailed a slight slow-down in our building the Asian collection as well. However, theJapan Foundation's endeavors later, somewhat,
triggered a come-back of working on the Asianartworks in the Hiroshima MOCA's collections.
And from that, the method of commissioning
artists to produce new works and incorporatingthem into our own collection developed.
In 2000, in trying to reconsider Japan not
only as a partner outside Asia, but as a collaborative member within Asia, through the Under
Construction project, the Japan Foundation

DSC J s/Chapter1

gave me the opportunity to think of Asia, not asa holiday resort, but as an object of research andinvestigation. Back then, there was Gridthiya as
our partner, Ahmad, as well for the first meeting, when we were all proposing the artistic conditions and situations specific to each other's
regions. As you can see, that friendship continues as well as our pursuit in researching Asia.
Interestingly enough, the Goethe -lnstitut
was mentioned earlier, but I am currently
involved in a project that, again, seeks collaboration with curatorial counterparts from Korea,
China, and Taiwan. Previously, the JapanFoundation may have been the only international cultural organizations to work on projects
related to Asia in this way. But now, there areopportunities to work with different organizations . And with funding from the Goethe, free ofpolitical influences, as Alison explained, theproject allows artists to seek socio-historicalissues such as the China-Taiwan-Hong Kong
divide and the North and South Korean peninsula divide with the involvement of Japan who
was once the occupier-but with Hiroshima as
simultaneously having the side of being thevictim-to pursue more complex and convoluted cultural-historical dimensions of Asia.
There is that cycle - I think Gridthiya used theterm "reincarnation"-of returning or revisiting
again; that our trajectories are still entwined .
I feel that very strongly even now.

As the talk was about the Goethe-lnstitut
before, in a more general sense, it was going
through my mind that I did some work while ago
trying to set up an Australian cultural center inIndonesia, because we have nothing like that
there. I went through the list of those who had
centers: everybody except Australia has a cultural
center in Indonesia; everybody except us nextdoor, with some money as I have been saying
and who is interested-and the Americans . That
was really interesting : the one who doesn't put

DAY2 MAY24 , 2015/089

money into cultural centers or activities from theirgovernment was the United States. Everyone
else believes in doing these things. We sort ofbelieve in it, but we don't do as much as weshould. But the Americans just don't do much.

They have Hollywood .
[laughter)

True; they have Hollywood . Hillary Clintoncame by, I think, and suddenly there was someinterest in America doing something cultural inIndonesia. But it just struck me how interestingthat was, and it made me wonder whether
America's reputation in the world, which is very
contested, complicated, and controversial,changed at all. They used to [ work on cultural
centers]-as Gridthiya said-they used to have the
USIS, but not anymore.

I think they don't need it because they have
Hollywood and McDonalds .

But their reputation doesn't go further thanthat, does it?

They opened the@america,now. When theycame to do a survey, I actually said exactly what
you said, "What you are going to do with it?"I think it may be a good time to ask Furuichi-san
to talk about the projects of the JapanFoundation, as one of the involved parties.
Kishi-san gave us a summary already, but is there
anything you could add to the discussion in terms
of projects in the 1990s, the 2000s, and now, one
like the exhibition on show now, "Time of others,"~

Session3

The Makingof Art wtth

090

Art Studies_02

Contemporaries

which was initiated by the Japan Foundation,bringing in partners and so on. Could you tell us if
an exhibition like "Time of others" would havebeen possible or not in the '90s? Or, what are thedifferences from back then, if any?

We were involved in an exhibition on
Southeast Asia about two decades ago, andof course, the situation in Southeast Asia haschanged vastly since then. The curators of the"Time of others" exhibition is Hashimoto Azusa
from the National Museum of Art, Osaka, Che
Kyongfa from this museum, the Museum ofContemporary Art Tokyo, Michelle Ho from theSingapore Art Museum, and Reuben Keehan
from the Queensland Art Gallery I Gallery ofModern Art. They have been working and looking at Asian art at different phases for over ten
years, even though they come from a relatively
younger generation. In other words, although
they are young, they have been interested in
Asia and when they got together, they were able
to discuss in depth the current situations andconditions in art. Thus this particular exhibitionmaterialized .
I think we got to this stage because we had
accumulated some experiences through the
1990s and the 2000s.
I am very curious how the art world and art
professionals in general are evaluating this kindof situation of these young curators. Formerly,
the Fukuoka Art Museum, before the Fukuoka
Asian Art Museum branched out, kindly recommended Asian artists [ from the exhibitions held
before the 1990s], meaning others were notequipped with enough information to doresearch and organize an exhibition on Asian art.
However, the situation has changed since . Now
that there's the Internet, information on Asia ismore accessible and we can pursue our own
researches independently and organize an exhibition on our own.

01

son

B~r.ominga Hin siaSo I think the question leads us to turning oureyes back to the "now ." I think it can be said
that there is a rising development in institutionalization/systematization [of the arts] in theregion; we already talked about Singapore's newnational gallery and Doryun spoke about Hong
Kong's M+ . Queensland Art Gallery has steadily
increased its collection from its years of organizing the APT.
I think the term "art hub" also came up
from Singapore, but Gwangju, Korea, is alsoplanning to construct a large art center that is tofunction as an art-hub, too. I think it is expected
to open this year. So with all of these kinds of
movements, Doryun, could I ask you what yourthought are on Southeast Asia seen from the perspective of M+?

The simplest and most correct answer isthat it's very important. But we haven't reallydone that much, to be honest. The person who
has been there longest M+ is five years and I havebeen there for less than two years. But it's impor tant to put in the context.
The collecting activities began in mid-2012
and really started in earnest mid-2013 or so, so
we have been doing this just for a couple of years.
And thanks to some large donations and the very
quick purchases that we have made over the last
three years or so, we have a collection of overfour thousand objects at this point. All of this isuseful, but also misleading information .
The most important point in relation to
your question, or at least what I often wonder,is why Hong Kong shouldn 't be understood
more as a juncture between East and Southeast
Asia. In fact, just to put in the simplest way,
Hong Kong is closer to Hanoi or Bangkok thanSeoul or Tokyo. But, of course, we know why it
is understood as part of East Asia, because, of

PlenaryDiscussion

091

Chapter1

course, it is part of the Chinese civilization and
it is very much a Confucian, Chinese-characterand culture-based region. But when you look at
the really fascinating history of how Hong Kong
was made into what it is today, from the time
when the British arrived, is that there is muchcontributions from Southeast Asia and South
Asia as part of the larger British Empire network.
I think that, even to the present day, the largest
non-Chinese population in Hong Kong is mostly
Filipino and Indonesian domestic workers. So,
there is population representation there that
doesn't have socio-political and cultural representation that matches the population economic
contribution. So as a public institution, is that a
big blind spot? Of course it is. But is it our job tocorrect that? Not exactly.
I think what we have to do institutionally as aplace that is located there, within the landscapeof museums, institutions, art scenes, and culture
scenes in general, vis-a-vis Southeast Asia, isslightly different from what we have to do for our
immediate audiences and constituencies. So,
these are all the extra questions that come along
to the very simple answer of, "Yes, Southeast
Asia is, of course, very important for us."!:l9i!~hi ~~iThat made me wonder, while institutions thatare to emerge from now on are most likely goingto have to endure the burden of taking many
responsibilities and being questioned about theirfairness about the system of museology itself,
there will be a burden of accountability from different directions.
On another note, then, there were cultural
centers-or overseas offices-of the JapanFoundation in Bangkok and Jakarta, which functioned as hubs. But how about in the Philippines
where the American influences, both culturaland historical, are deep-rooted? May, what do
you think about the relationships with Southeast
Asia or institutions? What I mean is, you spoke
about how your projects were "under the radar"

DAY2 MAY2 4, 2015

yesterday, explaining that while it did not receive
wide attention it allowed for more freedom. How
do you situate the Philippines, or yourself, withinthese issues, may I ask?
fl11udetteM.,y Q. MID

I think that it is already well-known that weare the only catholic nation in Asia and, geographically, we are oceans away from the mainarea that are called Southeast Asia. We have four
hundred years of the convent and fifty years of
Hollywood in our history; that's a cliche, ofcourse. So, popular culture is soaked with
Americanism and, anime also; the JapanFoundation need not behave like an outpost
when it comes to the popular mind.
I would like to answer your question by following up on Ahmad's call for "curatorial modalities" and "pluralism." Since I was not able to doso as clearly in my paper, I'd just like to briefly
say that there are a range of curatorial modalities
in the Philippines.
Baguio Arts Guild has, as I said, morphed
into different directions. There is the BenCab
Museum already by our national artist; BenCab[Benedicto "BenCab" Cabrera] has become anational artist. Tam-Awan, is a faction of BenCab;
it was founded by BenCab, but there was a conflict, so Tam-Awan went its own way. The TamAwan features traditional houses as hotels andthey also have very interesting cultural activities,
including the Tam-Awan Festival. KidlatTahimik
also has his own, very interesting spaces, andthey are also based on food. So they deal withfood and other activities, but mainly food. And
there is also Cafe by the Ruins, which, instead of
having any trace of the ruins, has become very
established in that region. VIVA EXCON continues to be a force, which is in itself, very interesting. I meant to say that collaborations such as
those between Baguio Arts Festival and VIVAEXCON created a multiplier effect; groups werecreated as a direct or indirect result of the BAA
and VIVA EXCON. For example, those who~

Sess1on3

TheMakingof Art with

092

Art Studies_02

Contemporaries

attended the BAA.
If you are talking about "Cities on the Move"as a mainstream exhibition, for example, we havethe Waiting Sheds, which is a project being donein Lucban, a town in the south of Luzon. Although
Lucban is a very sleepy town and has now given
homes to groups of artists who are doing very
low-profile residencies, it also may be the resultof all the jet setting, globetrotting, and collaboration that were funded and instigated by all theother institutions that are being mentioned here.
The theme of environment, environmental
hazards and disasters are being much attention
in the curriculums of the University of thePhilippines. For example, there is now a course
called Disaster Mitigation, Adaptation andPreparedness, offered by the College ofEngineering, but taught with an interdisciplinary
team. I represent the Art Studies Department inthat team. We are visited by disasters, and themost devastating was Typhoon Haiyan, local
name Yolanda; disasters have become very muchan academic preoccupation that extends beyond
academe. We collaborate with artists for example, and last semester, a group of artists installed,
performed and interacted with various sites in the
UP campus in Diliman. The project was entitled
Bakawan, or mangrove. It's a good collaboration;a group of ragtag artists collaborating with UPalong with the Vargas Museum, which also
conducts curatorial projects with the JapanFoundation. They have yearly calls for exhibition
proposals from curators and a lot of projects haveemerged from that.
The Museum of Contemporary Art and
Design or MCAD is part of the structure of the DE
LA SALLE College of St. Benilde (DLS CSB) and ishoused in the building of the DLS CSB School of
Design and Art or SDA. To my knowledge there
is no such other museum of its kind-one thatcombines Art and Design-in the Philippines.
We also have exhibitions based on smaller
themes such as "mangroves" and "disasters,"
but we also have larger, art historical themes.

The Metropolitan Museum of Manila had an art
historical survey curated by Patrick Flores titled,"The Philippine Contemporary: To Scale the Past
and the Possible" in 2013.
So, we do have a range of curatorial sites
and what I would like to say, here, is that we often
talk about "audiences," but I felt I would rather
talk about the "publics ." The "public" should not
be thought of as a large cluster, but as little niches
instead. It's better, I think, to have a long-term
model of economy where you don't have blockbusters but little niches . Maybe that's the modelthat is being followed now in the Philippines.

I see. Picking up the issue of the "audience" andthe "public," I had an image of the "public" asbeing a larger terrain that consists of these verysmall, niches groups, when you spoke of them .
Sadly, we are running out of time, so I would
like to open the discussion up to the floor. Would
any one like to ask a question?

I would like to ask a similar question for others. In her presentation yesterday, there was a
discussion on how artists can continue their practices within the control of the state . Artworks displayed with the support of organizations, such as
the Japan Foundation, Goethe-lnstitut, or otherforeign organizations seems, I think, to serve thepublic interest or have political agendas .
But how about showing them in a public museum in one's own country? I have theimpression that each country has its own obsta cles in showing politically-driven works in public
institutions.
Yesterday, as opposed to this tendency,
I think there were discussions on how theseworks with socio-political commentaries can beshown with the support from the international
cultural organizations. But there are still places

PlenaryD1scuss1on093

Chapter1

where artists do not have that luxury. In thosecases, artists find other means to work within thestate boundaries by teaching in universities, forinstance. What do you think curators can do toinform the works of these kinds of artists, who do
not have the freedom or means to show sociopolitically-driven works, to wider audiences?
To put it short, how can curators help to show
works that might have political problems with theauthorities?

I cannot show political controversial works
by Thai artists in Thailand . But I can show works
by Burmese or Vietnamese artists there . It has to
do with censorship. There are the limits, but I
think it's important for artists to make works
despite those limitations and constraints. As you
say, the distribution is very tricky . For example, it's
unclear whether Apichatpong Weerasethakul's
film recently screened in Cannes Film Festival canbe shown in Thailand . But we will try to make it
happen at some point . It has to be a collaborative
effort, too . People around the world universallyshare the mentality and the dangers of censorship, so that really is the challenge.

You remind me of the time of the first Asia
Pacific Triennial of Contemporary Art in 1993,
when the Suharto was still in the government inIndonesia and Dadang Christanto made a work
called For Those Who Have Been Killed. He
couldn't have made and shown that work, I think,in Indonesia. I remember the IndonesianAmbassador coming by and all of us were nervous about how he was going to respond, and hesaid, "It's fine here, but not at home." He copedwith that.
The other side to it was that it was also thetime when things were very difficult in Timor;
the mood of the folk in Australia was very proTimor, anti-Indonesian . We had to brief the visiting Indonesian artists about how to do deal with

DAY2 MAY24 , 2015

any protest. As it happened, that didn't eventuatebecause people saw the work and realized what
was going on .
The one final comment I would make is that
there was a discussion about artists making
controversial work for a place like Australia,
where it's not going to be an issue that is inappropriate as the way they might express themselves. There was a question about whether they
were doing work for its controversial nature perse, so I think they were tak ing it a step further
than was acceptable.

I agree with what Gridthiya has just said
about it being very difficult to show your own
works in your own country when it comes topolitical content. But I also think that the broader
question of practice is this separation between
curator and artist. In my experience, while there
is a certain convention in separating thoseroles-curators can only pick it up after the artist
have completed his work-I think part of theanswer is attempting to come to terms with theidea of the possibilities in which curators andartists co-develop ideas-not co-develop thework, but co-develop the ideas-as such that
one can begin to think about form versus theeffective content .
If the effective content is important, thenwe find ways and means in which the forms arenegotiated . So, I believe it requires us to breakfree from that framework where artist and cura tors are separated.

Thank you . On the note of encouragement inbreaking through existing conventions, I think wewould like to end the symposium . Thank you verymuch for joining us on over the course of thesetwo days. I think we were able to revisit some
important factors to think about the arts ofSoutheast Asia.

~The Making of Art with
Contemporaries

Post-S)'m_posium
Reflections

The1990s:
BuildingPlatforms
through
CreativeThinking

094

Art Studies_02

KamiyaYukie
Chief Curator,
Hiroshima City M useum of Conte mpor ary Art

Translated
bvAndrewMaerkle

Where was the urgency located in the art scenes of Southeast Asia in the 1990s?
The answer is that the urgency lay with in the personally-scaled, grass-roots activities of theartist-led initiatives that simultaneously emerged throughout the decade, but it could also befound in the three distinct cases of the pioneering art scenes of Thailand, the Philippines andIndonesia , which came to define artistic practice in the region .
In a region where art infrastructure was poor or nonexistent, there was a pressing need tocreate platforms for artistic activity, and the energetic practices of the organizers who tried
to address that lack through creative th inking have had a major influence on people's sharedsensibilities , extending to the present .
Against the backdrop of economic development in Southeast Asia in the late 1980s, andwithin a world map undergoing restruc t uring as it entered an age of rapid modernization
following the end of the Cold War, there were major changes in the political and economic
frameworks of the Asian region as well, and new developments could be seen in regional
exchanges that had formerly been cut-off by US-oriented relations. The creatives of the time
who saw and closely engaged with the se developments amid such socio-political fluctua tions were conscious of the need to respond to this situation on their own terms. It could besaid that the 1990s were the moment when these small but independently minded firststeps, propelled through art by individu al volition, became dynamically linked to new social
movements .

01

The speakers from Thailand, the Philippines and Indonesia who established emerging art
spaces and projects generally had experience studying overseas, something also shared by
the creatives who became the central figures behind artist-led initiatives . What links them isneither the study abroad in Western "art centers" as an elite chosen to acquire progressive
methods and theory in Western "art centers," nor emigration for the sake of escaping politicalturbulence and repression . Viewing thei r own countries from an objective position overseas,
these people came to doubt the singleness of their culture that aspires to the American culture , and strongly recognized the need for other options (Gaweewong), or perceived throughtheir experience from afar of their countr ies' political changes-such as the student movement and collapse of the Suharto regime in Indonesia in 1998- the need for establishingsocially committed, continued sites for activity alongside peers w ith whom they could shareand discuss urgent issues and a sense of crisis, as well as sentimental feelings (Darmawan).

A gathering of alternative spaces at the
Gwangju Biennale in 2002, "P _A_U _S E,"
and "Fixing the Bridge" in 2003 1n
Yogyakarta provided opportunities foralternative spaces dispersed around theregion to come together and deepen
exchange in one place.

Returning to their home countries and launching their activities in the 1990s, these people
brought with them questions about how to build up the art infrastructure , and sites andconditions for expression that their cou ntries lacked, exercising as organizers a mobilizing
force behind these ideas and their realization .

02

Connections Supported by the Network of Friendship

The eight organizers were led byNakamura Masato, as well as Ozawa
Tsuyoshi and Murakami Takashi. andparticipants numbered a total of thirtyfour artists and groups, including Aida
Makoto.

In the 1990s, curatorial practices that turned toward communities and society and invitedthe participation of ordinary people started gaining currency as a resisting force against
limitations that would confine the sites fo r exhibit ions to institutions such as museums . One

Kamiya Yukte

Chapter1

095

factor in this was the rise of internationa l exhibitions like biennales and triennales , which
may have been temporary, but nevertheless sought to establish local connections - a phenomenon that spread across the world all at once . Here, the unique practices in an Asian
region with no infrastructure became a mirror for reflecting a flexible, experimental andsocially attuned consciousness. This produced a situation that enabled both the UnitedStates and Europe, which were capable of sustaining museum systems, and Asia, which
was not, to share concerns and issues about curation .
Along with political and economic changes, what drove the networks in this alternative art
scene were the increasing proliferation of information and stimulation of movement thatbegan at the end of the 1990s. Far from beginning as public institutions, these small-scaleinitiatives started in isolation for all manner of reasons-from regional gaps to differences inlanguage or limitations of visibility due to limitations in funding-but their organizers, whoshared similar ambitions and embodied a DIY spirit of making whatever they didn't have,
gradually expanded their circles of solidarity and cooperation. Through their activities , a
network of friendship, which may have been somewhat na·ivebut was also underpinned bytrust, began to emerge. This also became a strategy of survival for small organizations to
support each other for the sake of coexistence. m.
Evoking what Darmawan has described as a "constellation of networks ," individual points
were connected into lines, linking and encouraging organizers in Asia and beyond. At thistime, the multicultural scene where talents who shared ideas and interests converged, suchas universities and the curatorial programs that were then starting up, as well as interna tional touring exhibitions, became a seedbed for fostering individual connections .
Sustainability and Being Alternative

But as small-scale organizations grew more and more successful , they also became a mainstream representing the region, leading to the danger that they could fall into the contradiction of growing more conservative in opposition to the goals they had when they were
established. What does it take to be alternative?
For the artistic practices in Southeast Asia in the 1990s that responded to conditions without art infrastructure, the ad hoc yet unavoidable choices in whatever spaces they could
find, which did not conform to precedents for what an art space should look like-as in thecase of ruangrupa (Jakarta , 2000 - ), which was set up in a residence rather than in a more
expensive business district, or Cafe by the Ruins (Baguio), which was established in a derelict
building left over from the 1990 earthquake-produced a form and spirit that were filled withorganic humor and could be called an alternative to existing conventions . These platforms
were the successors to FOOD, the restaurant founded by Gordon Matta-Clark and otherartists in the 1970s in New York's SoHo district out of the combination of the desire forexpression and the necessities of living.
At the same time, art festivals intervening into the city and society as events, rather than as
spaces or organizations, were also proliferating . These were especially notable in regional
cities like Chiang Mai (Chiang Mai Social Installation), Baguio (Baguio Arts Festival), Bacolod andYogyakarta. Even in Japan, which saw a museum building boom in the late 1980s, andwhere it looked as though infrastructure had been consolidated through new museums
opening in prefectures and cities across t he nation, there were cases of young artists who ,not receiving opportunities to work with museums, organized their own interventions into
urban space. For example, in 1993, artists organized the guerilla art event "The Ginburart" ~as a free public space in the pedestrian zone ofTokyo's Ginza district, while in 1994, 85
artists, including those responding to an open call, participated in "Shinjuku Shonen Art ,"held in the nightlife area of Shinjuku's Kabuki-cha, and the NPO Command N organized the
project "Akihabara TV" (1999-2002), turning the TV monitors of the Akihabara electronics
district into vessels for display.

The 1990s: Building ptatforms through Creat ive Thinking

~The Makingof Art with
Contemporaries

Post-~mJ:!osium
Reflections

096

Art Studies_02

It was difficult for such spaces and festivals without any public-administration base tosustain their funding, and many of them were short-lived. Even where they could obtainfunding from international sponsors, or create businesses such as shops and cafes for
supplementing their income, sustainability was a major challenge. Yet, conversely,social awareness and criticality reside precisely in the kind of provisional and flexible
mode of existence that does not allow organizations to ossify, and from my personal
viewpoint, there is an important significance in constantly questioning one's existing
conditions, or even in being short-lived, and irresolvable contradictions with sustainability are contained in that existential meaning .
As for the initiatives that sensitively filled in the gaps in artistic infrastructure, not only theircontinuation as organizations, but also their transmission of professional knowledge point to
the importance of their educational aspects . It could be said that the academic study andarchiving of documentation from these highly dynamic initiatives is also essential for the
future of continuing the practice of Asian art itself. ~Educationand the Future of the Alternative Art Scene

It is also important to understand the above mentioned alternative art scenes from theperspective of educational platforms. Organized by the Japan Foundation, the project"Under Construction"(2000-2003) bears noting, as it created a model for collaborative exhibitions in Southeast Asia . Instead of more academically oriented curators, the project invitedthe organizers of small art spaces across the region and art professionals in their twenties
and thirties who were deeply engaged in the regional art scene to come together for an
intensive discussion on Asia, starting out with eight participants from seven countriesmyself among them .
Inspired by the exchanges of ideas that began with a roundtable event, concerns that wereheightened through research trips to previously unknown neighboring countries ultimately
took shape, over a three-year process, in the form of a series of exhibitions. At the time,"Cities on the Move," which became a landmark exhibition of contemporary Asian art, hadbeen internationally touring since its debut in 1997 at the Vienna Secession, and its venues
in the United States and Europe, as well as the articles and dissemination of information
about it through major art magazines, in addition to the recognition for its curators, exerted
a powerful influence that could be picked up on all kinds of radars.
Starting with exchanges between young professionals who had spent their careers in Asia,"Under Construction" was in contrast under the radar, but it produced significant results as
an opportunity for developing new curatorial practices. It is important to not only introduce
current art scenes and emerging artists, but also to continuously engage in discussions on
how to approach Asia as a whole, what that would entail and what needs to be said about
Asia now. It is no exaggeration to say that the development of professionals who can confront Asia through art in an age of globalization and post-colonialism is the challenge for the
next level of energizing the Asian region . The familial, intimate relations of the alternative art
scene have an educational function of preparing the next generation of professionals tocarry on its critical awareness and sense of mission.

03
The Asian Cultural Complex (ACC), a cul·tural complex opening in GwangJu, Korea
in the fall of 2015, will include a centerfor collecting art-related archives that
addresses the entire Asian region, and
not Just one specific country This may
provide an impetus for shifting the understanding of art movements in Asia awayfrom isolated, provisional "points" toward
a connected, historical line.

The presentations by the symposium's speakers testify to the idea that art can be a medium
for transnational dialogue, rather than an object of exploitation by the privileged nations, andconfirm the importance for the future of platforms for professional development that canencourage flows of talent across Asia, as well as the building of systems that do not limit
such talent flows .

The 1990s: Building Platforms through Creattve Thinking

Chapter1

097

The1990s:
Asia as Medium

HoashiAki
Art Coordinator/ Project Manager,
Organizing Committee fo r Yokohama Triennale

The last session entitled "Artistic Engagements of Public Institutions: The Visualization andDiscourse of 'Asia'" aimed to first review the roles of public institutions, including publicmuseums and government-sponsored cultural institutions, in shaping the infrastructure
and art scene of contemporary art in Asia during the 1990s. Ahmad Mashadi, Alison
Carroll, and Kishi Sayaka, each presented their analytic views on key issues, events, andinstitutions that were significant in the '90s in Singapore, Australia, and Japan respectively .
After going through the presentations, what became apparent was actually not so much
how Asia became visualized or contextualized in discourses as originally anticipated, but
how the concept of Asia functioned as a media with which each country interacted to findtheir own new paths.
One of the obvious findings was that the initiatives, led by public institutions, especiallythe government-sponsored cultural institutions, had informed and encouraged cultural
exchange under the political climate that enabled them to inject the necessary financial
and organizational resources to activate the existing artistic interests, and more significantly, invest in the potential artistic resources that may bear fruit in the future. However,needless to say, each country had different interests in the region and took back different
experiences.

Singapore has always stood in the geographically center of Asia, whereas Australia andJapan have been located in the peripherals . Singapore has always been more in-synch
and contemporary with its surrounding countries than Australia and Japan, both ofwhich have had a longer duration of modernization that have enabled them to build
cultural infrastructures, such as museums and cultural policy, by the 1990s with thesupport of strong democratic societies.
As Mashadi stated in his presentation, it is perhaps true that "Singapore's current positionof privilege is remarkable." Being in the geographical center did not automatically grantSingapore any special role. It was Singapore who found it necessary to represent Asia in
its high-speed nation-building scheme, especially as "it was very conscious of not falling
into this idea of 'nationalism' based on ethnicity." Also, in a way conveniently, "a sense
towards the region was embedded" in its national collection, which had its origins in thecolonial institutions predating its emergence as a nation. The founding of ASEAN in 1967,
which came only two years after the birth of the country, also provided the city-state toform into a nation-state in tandem with Asia forming its regional alliance and identity. As
in the case of the inaugural exhibition of the Singapore Art Museum in 1996 in which theexhibited artists and artworks corresponded to the composition of ASEAN, ASEAN gave areason for its members, such as Singapore, to work with the region. Furthermore, anorganization like the ASEAN Committee on Culture and Information (ASEAN COCI) held
workshops and aesthetic symposiums which provided forums for understanding andcomparing traditions of its member countries .

Australia took its stride into the region during Paul Keatings' premiership from 1991 to '96 .
1993, which marked the mid -term of the Keatings' term in the government, saw theThe 1990s: Asia as Medium