083

Chapter1

Ushirosh6ji Masahiro

I was here from a little before noon and since I haven't got a full grasp of the whole frameworkof the discussions I may not be able to offer much effective comments . Nevertheless, I think it isvery meaningful that the museums of Korea, Singapore, and Japan are planning to co-organize an
exhibition, and this kind of seminar has been held to discuss the various issue raised here.
10 years ago, I had the opportunity of working in the "Cubism in Asia" exhibition too . Then
there was also the "Realism in Asian Art " exhibition, a sequel to that exhibition, which traveled toonly Korea and Singapore, excluding Japan .
In the past, the "wealthy Japanese" would use its abundant funds to have exhibitions of Asianart for the Japanese public . That had been the case in the past and we were criticized for it. At thetime, I was really sensing the weakening presence of Japan in the Asian framework, exemplified in
its absence in the "Realism in Asian Art" exhibition . In that sense, I have high hopes for this project .
I had been involved in visiting Southeast Asia during the end of 1970s and also in the 1980s forvarious exhibition projects, and I think that was around the time when I first encountered the use of
the phrase "Third World" in a positive light, which was in the Philippines, I think. It may have also
been used self-deprecatingly, but either way , I was hesitant to use the word "Third World"when I
spoke about the countries in Southeast Asia . But, as Suzuki-san suggested, "Third World" can now
be used in a productive manner or in a positive sense which make me feel that, maybe, times havechanged, or maybe we or Japan has now become part of the Third World, I don't know. But myquestion is somewhat related to what Lee-san mentioned earlier, which is: how would other countries in Asia see Japan, when we, the Japanese, use the word "Third World" to describe ourselves.
I am a bit concerned that we have to be very careful in this issue.
Hayashi Mi~hlQSuzuki-san, any thoughts?
Suzuki Kltl§\JQ

From the late 1960s to the '70s, there was a frequent use of the term "Third World" inJapanese journalism; the term appeared especially frequently in expressions of left-wing ideologies. At that time, everyone was aware that Japan is not the Third World . Despite this, theJapanese people had developed a certain fantasy for the Third World revolution precisely
because we had been searching for a new way of constructing relationships with other Asian
countries, taking into consideration of the fact that Japan was the colonizing party and looking
back on the history of Japan in that role. I'd like to point out that through this, Japan was trying tolook for a way to re-read the "Third World" concept . But to clarify, I'm not suggesting any optimism by saying, "Japan is the 'Third World"' or that "Japan can form a solidary relationship with
Asia ." I'd like to just point that out so that I'm not misunderstood.
Hayashi Michio

Are there any other questions from the floor?

It is true that it was probably in the 1970s when members of the Black Tent and various othermarginalized artist groups, who had a certain role in society, actively traveled widely not only to
Asia but also to Europe and the United States and formed their own networks. But I think this was
only possible because the time had come where they could connect and form "artificial" networks
as a group. This is related to the diagram Hayashi-san showed earlier, but probab ly such networks
did not need to be formed artificially in the 1950s and '60s; there must have been a close connection among the people. The reason behind this, for instance, is when we also include Taiwan, Korea,
or even India into the scope, there were quite a number of Japanese who were born and lived in
Taiwan or Korea. Even when they came back to Japan in 1945, they still kept in touch despite thefact that diplomatic relations hadn't yet been resumed . I think Mr . Navin Rawanchaikul held a small
exhibition for the Yokohama Triennale showing letter exchanges between an Indian living in Japan
since the 1930s, I believe, which had survived. So in Japan too, there are foreigners who have stayedsince the pre-war, and their communities or networks were very strong and tight.
These types of networks were between individual people; not artificial. It was something thatwas based on their everyday lives. So in a sense it is difficult, perhaps, to capture such a network
within our framework of art history. Perhaps it was a different phase: if you compare the relationships
during the 1950s, '60s and post-70s, the relationship itself among the people in Asian countries was
DAY2 Octobe r 1

Discussion on Sess ions I and ll

Choi Eunju
Chief Curator,
National Museum of Modern andContemporary Art, Korea
Ushirosh611Masah1ro
Professor,
Kyushu University
Kataoka Marni
Chief Curator,
Mori Art Museum
Lee Mina
Chief Curator,
Museum of Modern Art,
Kamakura & Hayama

Cultural ll ehd lio11in Asia 1g60- 1989

084

Art Studies_Olvery different. So when you say networks "started," I feel that maybe you are misunderstanding it.
Especially because no one here actually knows what happened in the 1950s and '60s.
Just the other day, I met Kim Byungki, a Korean artist based in Los Angeles and born in 1916 in
Pyongyang, Korea. He is 98 years old and is still an active artist. There will be a large retrospective
exhibition at the National Museum of Modern and Contemporary Art, Korea from this December .
But he literally is a walking dictionary . He came to Japan in the 1930s for study-abroad and his
memories from back then and the present are totally connected. He can speak on endlessly, saying"what is the point of Murakami Haruki publishing this in 2002?"
So in this seminar and the discussions so far, you have all bracketed the 1950s and '60s, but for
Mr. Kim, for a living human, there is absolutely no severance there. So I think we need to be awareof the dangers of framing the periods we have not contemporaneously experienced with theories
and concepts. I feel this especially when we look at it from the artists' perspectives. There are somany intelligent people discussing here today, so things seem very clear now . But, and this is what
I think Mr. Ushirosh6ji is similarly feeling, I think there are issues that are left behind on the reverse
side of these discussions, and I think it is important to keep these issues in our minds .

Th e En croachm ent of Capitalism and Globalism:
Co-optation and Identi ty PoLitictl~<!ShJ_Mictuo

I think you pointed out a very important issue. I agree with you, Lee-san, about the various cultural networks, which started since the 1970s, have somewhat of an artificial sense. I wanted toaddress it in my presentation as a phenomenon of the "age of simulacra." That is, within thecultural dynamics from the 1970s and into the 1980s, "Asia" itself was being represented as an"exotic" and enchanting location in the various cultural representations in Japan . Even Japan
itself became an exotic place. In the DISCOVERJAPAN campaign, the catchphrase on the secondline was, in fact, "Exotic Japan." In other words, Japan was re-symbolicized or re-edited as an
object of consumption . It was under this kind of condition or circumstance where various contacts with the rest of Asia developed. For instance, GODIEGO, the music group, emerged whosesongs about Asia (the Silk Road etc .) were a major hit . And it was from the 1980s that the Japanesemusic industry spread to Asia . So I don't think we can neglect the question of capitalism whentalking about these issues.
However, I can't remember if there was a reference to "peer-to-peer" connections earlier, but
I don't think it is just a question of music bands having concerts overseas and becoming popular.
When artist groups like the Black Tent, or Takahashi Yuji for that matter, went abroad and madedirect contact with local individuals in various places in Asia, I have an inkling suspicion that there
must have been something going on which cannot be reduced to the effects of capitalism, commercial success, or spectacle. So I think we need to trace those various phenomena, and I believethat Suzuki-san is thinking along a similar line.
l,,ee_Mina

I think what is significantly different with the "peer-to-peer" relations since the 1970s, compared to the relations to the past, is that it has continued to the present. Even/ am familiar withthese connections. And those connections and activities, by Takahashi Yuji as you mentioned, hasand still continues to have tremendous effect on the present; and this is not only a domestic phenomenon but a more expansive and continuous one . I think that is one difference, a significant
difference from the period before 1970, and so I feel that it's important to discuss this in depth.
It really has a lot to do with what Patrick was alluding to earlier; of how to conceive of thesenot from a geographical standpoint, but from a different one . I think these connections I raised now
may be a useful element in thinking about this.
~uzuk1 KatS!JQ

I think these movements of making networks of the theatrical or musical groups were on
the verge of being co-opted by capitalism at that time . So I understand what you are saying, Leesan, but I think the 1970s was really the brink point of either creating alternative spaces or being
absorbed into the capitalist system .

Disc ussion

Chapter1

085

ttayash1 Mic;hlo

This question of capitalism facilitating the exchange of people, information, or travel aroundthe globe, all those things always accompany this ambivalence, I think . Creating networks and"peer-to-peer" communication could just end up being or creating another spectacle of facile
relational art.
Ultimately, if I oversimplify the story, when this concept of relational art became really important in the 1990s and afterwards, relation itself was in many cases commodified, don't you think?
No offense to the curators, but going to triennales and biennales, making contacts with people,
enjoying your time there, and then coming back is a form of leisure or tourism. This is paying
money to buy a fictional, virtual relationship with other local cultures or people and so on. You
consume it, but then, when you come back, nothing changes.
So how can we overcome this dilemma of the relationship itself being commodified or an
object of consumption?
Yu Jin SeQg

A quick response to defend that before it falls apart. I think a lot of this sense of criticality thatemerged in the 1970s, which Suzuki-san was talking about, wasn't simply about developing relationships or networks . I think there was a desire to evoke action. So it wasn't just something to talkabout; there was a real, concrete desire to evoke social change through action which could be seenin the works of the artists, in what they wrote and said. So I don't think it's as frivolous as something
we can pack up and go home, I think.
Lai YID9.:Ying

In forms of art, what is the outcome of cultural rebellion? I really agree with both Ms . Choi and
Yu Jin. When we talk about "cultural rebellion," I've been thinking what kind of imagination were
the people, the artists, holding? What kind of utopia or truths were they seeking? What were thegaps missing in reality? What were their reactions to the dominant authority, political, and social
taboos? For the whole day we have had wonderful presentations, but in each country, the situation,
the political and cultural climates are all so different. So I still need more time to reflect on thesethings . But, I think if we can try to find some universal value for the artists-maybe they are working hard to change their lives or to change the society-we can find out what they are trying to go
against in their forms of rebellion or resistance.
That's what I tried to present in my presentation today: what the artists were trying to do intheir productions, because they are artists and because art is the final result of their reaction to theworld. And it's the reaction of their rebellion against culture. So maybe this is one answer for cultural rebellion. Art works, projects, or performances are the final outcome created by artists that
help us to re-examine the time they witnessed and meditated.
P_i_LiTo follow up on Yu Jin's part on cultural rebellion in the 1970s and how the networks worked:
we should really be careful about another kind of self-projection to the outer world . For example,
during the 1960s and the70s, the Japanese Communist Party, the left-wing, projected themselves
onto the revolution in China.
Also I will give another example as a feedback for Simon's question about the animation in
China. If we really want to go that far, animation in China during the Communist Party period isquite interesting because there was a lot of avant-garde art in Shanghai during the 1930s. After theliberation in 1949, they got jobs in the Shanghai Animation Film Factory, which had already undergone nationalization, and they did lots of quite avant-garde, experimental works, such as using ink
to make animation and so on.
And then, during the 1970s, the Japanese film director Miyazaki Hayao, who admired this kindof achievement of Chinese animation, thought it would be good to show how these kinds of socialist productions were produced. So he went to China in the 1980s with the intent of using them forthe post-production of his own animation films. But when he actually went to China, he was so disappointed because China at that time was in the period of marketing economy and so on, so people
didn't do that anymore . So Miyazaki was quite left-wing, and you can see how this kind of culture is
projected onto other things. That's another layer of our discussion I think.

Going back to Prof. Lai's question, "what kind of image can we have for the future," I think, is an
DAY 2 October 1

Discussion on Sessions I and U

Cuilur a l Hebellion in Asia l1960- 1989

Scs:-.io11
I a11dII

086

Art Studies_Olinteresting and difficult question. In my personal opinion and in the case of Japan, I described itas the "age of revolution" being displaced by the "age of identity politics." So, to me, artists who
were actively engaging in rebellious practices in Japan, or other countries too maybe, were notreally trying to change society as a totality. They may have, in fact, been simply trying to create aspace where they can live and sustain their activities, and by doing so, they were changing the
fabric of society. That's something I see in their practices . It's not like they have a "totalist" visionof a society to aspire for; their practices were rather a resistance against the present social system that was really oppressive to their activities. So they felt the need to make fissures andcracks in society to create this small space where they could sustain themselves. I think that
could be a very meaningful platform to connect with other platforms of other parts of the world.
Lai Ying-ying

Also, museums can be forms of dominant authority for artists. I'd like to comment on thedefinition of the "museum" because eventually this project is going to be realized in a museum.
Whether rebellion can be embraced or can be celebrated in a museum. The establishment of theart museum in Taiwan certainly provides an open forum for artists; it serves not only for the public
but also for the contemporary artists to present and argue for their ideas. The development of art
museums in Taiwan, as the dominant system , has been constantly challenged by artists. Most of
the major art museums in Taiwan are funded by public sectors. Museums were highly regarded
as temples housing treasures, but artists also believe that they provide an open stage for them . If
the museum operation goes wrong, artists protest, claiming their rights and demands in front of
the museum. In Taiwan, the museum's functions are constantly challenged by the artists.
Hayashi Michio

That's how museums should be. Unfortunately we have to wrap up the discussion maybe in a coupleof minutes. But if there is anyone in the observers' seat who wants to ask a final question, please.
Kataoka Marni

Just a quick question. I just wanted to hear from some of you what "1989" means to you.
Because the term is ending at 1989 so from the Western sense it's of course the end of the Cold War
and the year of the "Magiciens de la Terre" exhibition. But for each of you or in your own countries,
what does it mean?
Hayashi Michio

That is a loaded question which I don't think we have enough time for . So maybe we can open thediscussion tomorrow with it.
On that note we're going to wrap up today 's session. Thank you to all the panelists and observers.

We'd also like to thank everyone for bearing with us for so long. We look forward to seeing some ofyou again tomorrow. Thank you.
Discussion to Continue to Following Day

Discussion

Chapter1

087

088

11

,I

,,·1·

ArtStudies01

OIi

Cultural Rebellion in Asia 1960 1g89

Day3
Session DI
PlenaryDiscussion.......
I layashi \lichio
Through discussions on the preceding presentations,the notion(s) of "cultural rebellion" in Asia and the prospect fora possible exhibition will be further examined.

..,,

11111

090

ArtStudies_Ol

Good morning. Welcome to the third day of this international seminar. We have a number of topics
that came up in yesterday's presentations and discussion so we'd like to discuss them first. Carrying
on from yesterday, the moderator will be Prof. Hayashi.
H,~ni M

Good morning, everyone. I hope you all had a good evening and are well-rested. Kataoka -sanposed a question last night for us to start today 's session, but I'd like to say a few things before
we go into that.
This morning we have a couple of hours to further discuss the issues that were raised yesterday. Toward the end, I'm hoping that we can exchange more concrete ideas about how to ultimately
structure this into an exhibition format. Obviously, though, this kind of discussion will go into multiple directions, and yesterday I had a feeling that we spent too much time on abstract theoretical ideas. So today, we should also discuss factual problems and questions . In that regard, I reallyencourage you all to ask each other questions for this session; since we have heard each other's
presentations and also have the papers, please feel free to raise them.
Having said that, I would like to begin with the question that was posed last night, the question
about 1989: what is the meaning of the year " 1989" to each of you, and each of our respective countries; what is the meaning of the end of the Cold War for each cultural, national, or regional context?
Thinking about that, of course, may lead to oth er questions such as the impact of the Vietnam War
and the relationship between communism and rebellious practices etc. Furthermore, it also necessarily raises the question of the periodization of this proposed exhibition plan: is "1960" a goodstarting point to think about all th is? Should we include earlier decades, from the 1950s or not? That
could be another question . But for now, let's start with the "1989" question .

Th e Year 1989 as a Th res hold in the Asian Arts

Prap, ,n l\t. J n

So I did a little homework; 1989 was a part icularly optimistic time for Thailand. The end of theCold War brought at least political optimism, as well as marketable opportunity. At that time General
Chatichai Choonhavan became the first elected Prime Minister after 12 years of dictatorship , and,since the Cold War was over, he turned our neighboring enemies into a potential marketplace.
Subsequently, Thailand saw a rapid rise in the economy, up to 13% between 1988 and when anothercoup took him down in 1991.
So 1989 was a particularly optimistic time ; for example, the Vice President of the United States
visited Thailand during that time. I would say, internationally, the only tarnish that later became
quite a significant one was Thailand's relationship with Saudi Arabia. This is still fairly big news as
to what exactly is the truth, because the blue diamond was stolen from a Saudi prince which was
followed by the assassination of the Saudi police in Bangkok. So there's that kind of sensitive topic
with the Middle East. The Thai workforce for the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia, took thebrunt of this incident; a huge workforce of Thai nationals was ejected from Saudi Arabia. And that
sentiment kind of continued throughout the M iddle Eastern region .
H

M,Is that incident, the stealing of this blue diamond , related to the 1989 end-of-the -Cold-War context?
Or was this just a coincidence?

There're several theories, but if we base it on hard evidence, I think, it could possibly be justrandom . Although, if we tie it up to this potential of the Third World ideology, I think it has somesignificance because it eradicated certain potential good will, and the potential networking with the
Middle East was heavily tarnished during that ti me. Those are my two main points on 1989.
H, f, h Mict">io

In your presentation, Prof. Kumjim, I think you mentioned that there was a rebellious movement in
the 1970s which had a sympathetic attitude toward communism. How did those artists respond toD

01

Chapter1

091

Cultur al l\i>lw llion in \s ia 1g6o 1989

this political climate change of 1989 and the end of the Cold War?
Pr3pon Kum11r1

Quite a few artists had left Thailand; quite a few cultural movers or influencers migrated to theWest and took refuge during that time . So t hey were , to my understanding, beginning to returnaround the early 1990s, especially the performance art group, if I remember correctly.

So they migrated in order to avoid arrest?
p ,r

ur

That was the claim . Persecution is potentially worse than arrest, I think; that kind of systematic
persecution . That's the fear, much more than the physical arrest itself. That idea of self-censorship issomething that still continues today. Our censorship law is over 80 years old .
c.~

rv11ch10

That law is still in effect?
p, pon Kumj1mVery much so. I guess the big problem right now is the lese-majeste because it's a draconianlaw against the majesty . Unfortunately it can be used as a political mudslinging tool to generate
hate crimes and hate speech . That works both ways; for those who are for and those who areagainst that law . So, it's still a continuing mess.
Hwa ,hi Mich,

I see, thank you . Maybe we should move onto another speaker for the 1989 issue. Pi Li, I think 1989
was a big deal for China.

Yes, 1989 is a very important year for China. First and foremost, the students' protest in
Tiananmen Square. As I wrote in my paper, however, the 1989 students' protest was not just in that
year; it extended from 1979, to '83 and '87, and finally to '89. Nevertheless 1989 was the important,critical time also because of the end of the Cold War, the closure of the Cold War system . So thegovernment rather took more strict action and students were killed in Tiananmen Square on thenight of June 4. So far, nobody has claimed responsibility, and no one has apologized . So that tragic
memory has not been forgotten; every year even now, in Hong Kong or in Beijing, on June 4,
there're still big events in remembrance of that incident . That's the one thing.
DAY 3 October 2

PlenaryDiscussion:Toward the Exhibition

092

Art Studies_Ol

The second, again as I wrote in paper, was the "China/ Avant -Garde" exhibition in China in
February 1989. So, the exhibition was in February and the Tiananmen Square incident was in June.
Lots of these kinds of accidents totally changed the arts ; it really was kind of a turn toward the antihuman. Like we see later on, you have cynical realism and the political, they really doubted this kindof humanist sentiment.
Also, after 1989 the government took measures to rapidly reform the economy of China. So,
now, the whole social issue had changed. So after 1989 and the end of the Cold War, what we callthe "post-Cold War situation ," these certain changes brought Chinese contemporary art to theattention of the international world; the "China /Avant-Garde" exhibition, I just mentioned, of 1989 or
the inclusion of Chinese artists in the Venice Biennale in 1993, for instance. So the internationalsociety was very attentive to that.
This type of wide attention also changed art production in China, which soon followed with
openings of foreign exhibitions and galleries and the entrance of overseas collectors . These werecompletely new situations and environments for the Chinese art community in the 1990s, and still
has a huge impact today .
After 1989, the "Magiciens de la Terre" exhib ition was also still very important because there
were three Chinese artists exhibited in that show, Huang Yong ping, Gu Dexing and Yang Jiechang
who then met artists like Nam June Paik and those kind of artists. Later, Huang Yongping and Yang
Jiechang decided to stay in France and information from abroad was channeled back . So after 1989,
I would say, we saw the whole, new generation of globalization, the first international communication among the non-Western countries . I think t hat's pretty important for us actually .
Adele TanCan I just add a small footnote because there is a kind of inadvertent repercussion, I suppose,of the Tiananmen Square incident. In 2009 , the TankMan Tango,a dance by the Australian artist ,Deborah Kelly, was conducted at the Substation in Singapore which was incidentally founded by
Kuo Pao Kun. Although it hasn't been proven, apparently, they went ahead with the TankMan Tango
event without permission, and, because of this , people have made the link that the Substation has
since kind of lost its long-term license to operate without needing to submit scripts to the Censorship Board . So clearly there's something to be said about the memory or commemorating thememory of the event of Tiananmen in a small space like Singapore.
So, I think, there is some symbolic capital in the Tiananmen Square incident itself . Of course,
our strongman, Lee Kuan Yew, has always supported the actions of Deng Xiaoping in sending thetroops out to the Square. But in terms of Singapore, I don 't think 1989 made such a huge impact asmuch as 1987, when they had the Operation Spectrum, a crackdown on a supposed Marxist conspiracy which were made out of mostly people associated with the Catholic Church . So there 's asense of yoking church and revolution together .
Hayashi Mich10

I think one of the missions of this project is to somehow find a way to sustain the historical memories and maintain the resistance against historical amnesia . What happened in Japan really, as I saidin discussing DISCOVERJAPAN, was that wha t should be discovered was, in fact, concealed by the
new "discovery" of Japan. Against this general tendency for collective amnesia, we should find away to sustain these meaningful memories for the present.
Going back to you, Pi Li, your talk this time is obviously about the 1960s and '70s; it is before
1989. On the other hand, Suzuki-san, you set up 1989 as the end of this era or climate of cultural
rebellion. So, is it correct to say that you're seeing a continuity rather than discontinuity between the
1960s, '70s, '80s and after 1989?
Suzyk1Katsuo

Yes, that's right .
f'i_LiThat is also on the beginning period of my topic. In the previous discourse, many people sawgroups such as the Stars Group as kind of the first rebellion and the beginning of contemporary art.
However, in my recent study of the No Name Group, we can already see such clear acts of resistance there in 1974. Actually the whole group had very strong, clear agendas of what they wanted
to do. That's one thing.
In the meantime, though, as I continued my research, I needed to find out where their")1 cu~ ionChapter1

093

Cultur al Helwllion in \sia 196o 1g89

information and resources came from, and also how they came to learn these things, because mostof the catalogues had already been burned .
So, I found that they had a some connections with Japanese art . Since they couldn't go toschool, they attended night schools whose founders are two female artists who studied in Japan in
the 1930s.
Another thing is, I also did some research in Shanghai on animation film . So during the 1930s
in China, there was the very strong movement called the Storm Society (*illU) which was the firstmodern art movement inspired by Cubism .
So where did these artists go? Some of them escaped to Taiwan, like Li Zhongsheng and somestayed in China . Despite the fact that they didn't have much public influence, they still had their students so they could transmit this kind of information. In the '70s, even in Shanghai, there were stillsome underground activities which were quite strong , especially ink and abstraction. Also artists
such as Lin Fengmian studied in France, and Guan Liang studied in Japan . So this kind of modernism can be considered a continuation from that .
So these underground activities suddenly come into being at the end of the 1970s and become
modernist . So I think there's still some connection between the 1930s modernism and the 1970s
underground arts . That's the second.
The third thing I'd like to add, is that even within this kind of government and commission
works, there were still exceptions . For example, the very famous ink painter, Shi Lu was put in jailduring the whole Cultural Revolution. We saw some very radical practices, similar to Expressionism,in how he painted with ink in the late 1950s. So I just feel that during the 1960s and '70s, there werestill many things happening in China.
Hayashi Michio

This information network-how people became aware of the other possibilities-is a very, very importantquestion, just as Ms . Park mentioned about the lnformel movement and all those things . Japanese andKorean artists actually shared the same information, reacted and used those different sources.
But what is really ironic is that this information network is established and based on the tragic
memory of colonialism. Japan invaded and occupied China and Korea, and this kind of cultural
network was created after the political domination . That's really an ironic thing that we need to beaware of in planning this exhibition .
Speaking of 1989, I think Pi Li's comments are very interesting, and I am curious, Prof. Lai,
what happened in Taiwan in relation to China?
Lai Ying-ying

I think it's very important to indicate a certain period that we are going to discuss, but when
we talk about a specific year, sometimes it's also very dangerous since we are trying to cover a large
region, from Southeast to Northeast Asia . So instead of pinning down a particular year of political orcultural importance, I would like to suggest having different decades-from the 1960s to the '80s,
for instance . The reason is that the most crucial year for Taiwan, first, of course, is 1949 when the
KMT (Kuomingtang , National People's Party) government moved over to Taiwan. That was also the year
when they announced the martial law. The whole operation system changed suddenly from the colonized Taiwan to the KMT-controlled Taiwan . There was censorship, political control, and imprisonment of many Taiwanese and some newly immigrant Chinese from Mainland China . Many people
were killed and imprisoned for years in the name of Communism. We call the period from the late
1940s to '60s as the time of "White Terrorism." Then in 1987, the KMT government lifted the martial
law, which again marked a critical year. So for the Taiwanese situation, it seems that 1987 is more
important politically than the year 1989.
Culturally, however, the 1980s actually is the decade in which Taiwan somehow started toenjoy some form of democracy or economic prosperity . Lots of students, who had studied
abroad, actually returned to Taiwan in the 1980s and started to teach in universities or work forart institutions . I personally went back to Taiwan in 1984, and started working for the first modern art museum in Taiwan .
So that means the 1980s is really a time when international communication and cultural
exchanges flourished . The Council of Cultural Affairs was set up in 1981 too, advocating the government's engagement in the arts and cultures . So for Taiwan, culturally, 1989 doesn't really ring a bell.
For Taiwan, I would rather say, 1987 or even 1980s was significant . So instead of having a specificyear, maybe trying to cover decades can be a better idea.

DAY3 October2

Plenary'Oiscussion:Towardthe Exhibition

094

Art Studies_01

Hayashi Michie

I see. There is no connection between the 1987 crackdown of the communist conspiracy in
Singapore and Taiwan, is there?
Ad~~,:an

No. I completely agree with that sense of the 1980s being a kind of new beginning of sorts. I
think in Singapore too, there was more active interest in arts policy, the National Arts Council, and
Kuo Pao Kun got his cultural medallion in 1989. There was this sense of "how to redo theater." For
Kuo Pao Kun, he was really interested in finding a new means of making theater or making performance that was attuned to the ground situation in Singapore, the multi-linguistic realities ofSingapore. So his plays ended up not having the same kind of didactic, social realist mode. Instead,he was looking at techniques and the methodo logy of writing these different tongues into the structure of playmaking. So that guided a lot of reflection of what it is to be in Singapore without justdoing the same mimetic representational style .
Hayashi Michie

Going back to Taiwan, Prof. Lai, I'm curious that you mentioned in your presentation the kind ofavant-garde artists who were associated with magazines, like Theater and Echo. What happened tothose people in the 1980s?
Lai Ying-ying

The group first started with a small number of people who were from different fields suchas art, design, photography, literature, and experimental films . The Theater magazine was discontinued in 1968 because some members went abroad to pursue further study or better career
opportunities . From the 1970s, many of them committed themselves to the movie industry, andbecame directors, producers, photographers etc.
Huang Hua-cheng, for instance, was invited and moved to Hong Kong and worked for thevery famous Shaw Brothers for a couple of years. However, he returned to Taiwan to venture
into the advertising business. So in a way, the artists might have been trained as artists, but they
crossed disciplines into other fields of profession, such as movie, TV programs, graphic design,
advertisement, etc . They expanded their territory, and that is why I use the term "Complex art"
to try to embrace the versatile artists working in various different fields . It's not only painting or
sculpture, but it's really the belief and attitude in art that eventually started a cultural revolution ina developing society from the 1960s.
Hayashi Michie

So did these artists go abroad to look for other opportunities because of the situation in Taiwan?
Was it really hard for them to stay in Taiwan, and is that why they left?
La, Yinq-ying

Lai Ying-ying

It was very much the situation for the Taiwanese after World War 11.As you can see, there was
the martial law and then we had tragic incidents like the 228 massacre and White Terrorism. So
people were really terrified and living under the shadow of the authority; under the controlling
power and system of the government.
So regardless of their background, whether from China or Taiwan, if they had the slightest
opportunity to go abroad, they did . It was not until the late 1970s and '80s, after the people survived
from the sad incidents, that the society regained its energy and opened up again. With the open
atmosphere of the society and the booming economy, many artists returned to Taiwan recognizing
a better possibility for careers from the 1980s. Also, the economic prosperity meant that the art
market also started to flourish, so many artists were invited to come back to Taiwan for exhibitions.
Hayashi Michie

I briefly asked Pi Li informally about that just yesterday. So there was no interaction between
Chinese and Taiwanese artists through Theater and Echo and other connections?

There were some . The first connection, I think, would be in the late 1970s and early 1980s. For
example, the very famous Chinese writers Hualing Nieh Engle ran this kind of writing campus in
Ohio University, in the United States. The Chinese artist, Ai Oing, the father of Ai Weiwei, was also
01scuss1on095

Chapter1

Cuhura l 111-l,dlion in \.,ia 1960 1989

there. He met his classmates or friends , like Xiao Ging and Liu Kuosung there .
Later, Xiao Ging and Liu Kuosung visited China and brought back all kinds of information
about contemporary and modern ink . So that's the first contact, in 1979 to 1981. Also to add as anextension, Wu Guanzhong met Zhao Wuji in Paris on his way to his show in London in 1979. So
Wu Guanzhong, Zhao Wuji, and Zhu Dequn were all classmates in Hangzhou . I think that from1987 to 1993 is kind of the important period in relation to 1989.
There are other series of events which are quite important, too . For Korea, Roh Taewoo won
the first presidential election in 1987; Ronald Reagan gave his speech in front of the Berlin Wall, asking Mikhail Gorbachev to "tear down this wall;" then in 1988, in Poland, the workers union gained
power . So I think there are a series of important events from 1987, 1992, and also 1993.
Park Hyesunq

As Pi Li said, yes, the first presidential election was conducted. But he still came from the army.
And, as you know, we had the Seoul Olympics in 1988, and after that, just as Japan experienced
economic prosperity after the Tokyo Olymp ics, Korea had a similar situation . Despite this economic
growth, politically it was still very restricted and was not so democratic; there were so many demonstrations and rallies, for which many were punished . In fact, our new museum, the Seoul galleryof the present-day National Museum of Modern and Contemporary Art, Korea, is built on the spot
where the information center was during the dictators' period, which actually was initially a hospitalduring the Japanese occupation. So it has experienced the long history of colonization, decolonization, post-colonization etc. over the years.

Park Hyesung

Hayashi Mich10..

Do you acknowledge that in your building? Is there some kind of explanation about the history of
the building?

.
.

f_._·.:· ···}':

Park Hyesunq

Yes. So I think it is very meaningful that we have this kind of museum on the political site . In
relation to culture, the story is a little different . Minjung art , the art for the public or for the working
class, had taken root since the late 1970s and it was booming during the 1980s.

Hayashi M1ch10

Choi Eunju

Allow me to explain, because I've experienced all kinds of situations in Korean contemporaryart, including Minjung art. Minjung art or "People's art" in Korea occurred in the late 1970s, and the
movement was constructed by several groups all of which made announcements about their art tothe public . In 1995, our museum organized a very special exhibition titled, " 15 Years of Minjung Art"
held at the Gwacheon gallery . After the exhibition, many people and artists told me, "People's art
in Korea is diminishing after the exhibition. " That means, the artists lost their logic and purpose forthe public, for the movement, and for the ideological concepts. So, after the exhibition, they took up
other logics, such as environmental movement, feminism, ecological movement and so on . I thinkthat is a very important aspect to understand Korean People's art .
Hayashi Michio

So in the Korean context, therefore, unlike the Chinese context, what I'm sensing is a kind of disjunction, maybe, from the 1960s, '70s to the '80s; there is kind of a break between the end of the 1970s
and the '80s . As I understood it, Minjung art was critical of the previous generations of rebellious
artists. So what is the connection between them? Is my understanding correct? I'm pretty sure
Minjung artists were critical about so-called "monochrome painters" in the 1960s and '70s . But what
was their relationship to the AG group and these new conceptual and performance-oriented artists?
Park HyesungThis is just my opinion, not a Korean artists' opinion . I agree with Pi Li's view, because he wanted
to focus on the early movement of the 1970s, not the Stars Group. I am in the similar position . Not all
Minjung artists criticized the AG group because Minjung artists wanted to use media which werefamiliar to the public. So they chose traditional woodcut print. I think, maybe, they were influenced
by the Russian woodcut movement, as I recall them having a style that was similar to Socialist
Realism . But, in fact, they are not really realists in their point of views or styles . Their attitudes, I
think, made it realism.
So their weak point is that communication could take place only with works that used media
DAY3 October2

PlenaryOiscussion:To"ardthe Exhibition

096

Art Studies_Ol

which were easy for the public to understand which, in turn, had the revolutionary possibility forsocial change . But artists of the 1960s and '70s, I think, chose different media-even though the
public could not understand their intention or as easily at that time-in the hopes of opening theirclosed eyes. As time passed, however , some Minjung artists and critics recognized that aspect. The
early movement of 1960s and '70s has someth ing special: the potential to change social and aesthetic attitudes .
Choi Eunju

So I think Minjung art in Korea in the 1980s presented a certain socio-political revolution especially if we think about it in terms of the Gwangj u crisis and military dictatorship . Previously, some of
the Korean M injung art artists worked on figur at ion, whether it be human figures, landscape or evenhyperrealism . Although I initially thought that f iguration could not capture the meaning of the public
or of the movement, the Gwangju crisis and military dictatorship stimulated artists who had potential attitude about the public.
Hayashi Michio

With all these kinds of movements that we are discussing today , it really is a shame that we don't
have a representative from Indonesia. Could Yu Jin, Simon or Patrick possibly fill us in a little on theIndonesian situation?
Patrick Flores

I think what was important in Yogyakarta was the opening of the Cemeti Gallery in 1988. I think
it is 1988, if I' m not mistaken . So I think Cemet i was an important platform for Indonesian contemporary art. In fact, if I'm not mistaken, Mr. Ushirosh6ji stated in one of his recollections that it
was his visit to Cemeti that changed his outlook of Asian contemporary art . It was like a profoundmoment for Mr . Ushirosh6ji when he visited Yogyakarta at that time.
Hayashi Mich10

Could you explain a little more about Cemeti?
Patrick Flores

Cemeti is an artist -initiated space founded by a couple, Nindityo Adipurnomo, an Indonesianartist, and Mella Jaarsma, a Dutch artist who has lived in Indonesia for quite a while . It's like analternative art space and one of the pioneers in the region which was founded in 1988. It releaseda catalogue, like a retrospective, of all of its efforts after 10 years. In 1998, they published a book on
Cemeti after 10 years of its activities . So the establishment of Cemeti is an important moment, I
think, if 1989 is the year to be discussed .
Yu Jin Seng

To add, I think Cemeti was a site of resistance in Indonesia, in Yogyakarta. One of the mostimportant exhibitions was "Slot in the Box," which took up the issue about Indonesian politics;
Indonesia at that time had three political parties that you could vote for, but no matter which party
you chose, it didn't make a difference on the president -elect because all the three parties had, ultimately, already decided on a particular president . So there was a performance by FX Harsono thatreally brought all these issues to the front where he created a work with three slots for you to place
your vote, but it all goes into one box in the end . He did this performance during the week of theIndonesian election where there are several days in which one cannot engage in any political activities; so it is like a cooling-off period. However, he did this performance during that particular cooling-off week, which was, I think, a really powerful political gesture of resistance .
Hayashi Michio

So there was a danger of him being arrested?
Yu Jin Seng

Absolutely, he could have been.
Hayashi Michio

Ushirosh6ji-san, Patrick had mentioned you earlier, so if you 'd like to share a little about your experiences, please.
Discussion

097

Chapter1

Cultural n..bcllio11i11\sia ,goo1989

Ushirosh6ji Masahiro

I think that Prof. Flores is talking about the time I worked with the Japan Foundation ASEAN
Culture Center and Fukuoka Art Museum for the "New Art from Southeast Asia 1992" exhibition .
Japanese art critics and curators traveled to conduct research between 1991 and 1992 for this exhibition. That was when we visited Cemeti. I felt that their connections and activities really created amajor opportunity for us to be able to ident ify the new directions and developments, which were
happening at that time in Indonesia and also across all of Southeast Asia. And I wrote about that in
the Cemeti's 10th anniversary catalogue. So to be specific, it wasn 't 1988 to 1989 that I visited the
Cemeti , but rather a little bit later.
Hayashi_Mi _chio

Thank you. So continuing on the 1989 end of the Cold War issue, who hasn't spoken? Patrick?
Patrick Flores

In the Philippines it's not exactly the year 1989, but there were early years of a post-authoritar ian scene, after Marcos left in 1986. So it might be important to point that out ; that the so-called
People Power Revolution in the Philippines preceded or antedated the events, I think , in Poland or
Eastern Europe that led up to the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989. It's like the Velvet Revolution, I think ,and the Solidarity Movement in Poland came after 1986, if I'm not mistaken . So it all started in 1986.
At the same time, though, after 1986and by 1989, we also felt that the promise of 1986 was slowly
being betrayed . We had faith in the democratic space that was opened up after the fall of Marcos , butwhat actually happened was that the old oligarchy , which Marcos wanted to suppress, returned to
power through the new president who belonged to that old oligarchy that opposed Marcos .
The communist leaders were also released after 1986 and then there was a brief period of this
euphoria for democracy. But that space became increasingly limited in the years to come . I think it
was around this time that Corazon Aquino , the successor of Marcos, declared an all-out war against
all insurgents . So there was this abrupt shift from the democratic space to an all-out war, and she
encouraged paramilitary groups like local militias in the countryside . So it deteriorated . She wasalso besieged by all sorts of coups ; coup d'etat was also very prevalent at this time in the history of
the country.
In terms of the art scene, however , th ere was an effort to decentralize cultural policy, which,during the Marcos period, was concentrated in Imelda Marcos's Cultural Center of the Philippines(CCP). So CCP was remodeled or reprogrammed to become less elitist creating outreach projects ,more like people-oriented efforts in keeping with the promise of the People Power.
The Metropolitan Museum of Manila , which was established to organize international exhibitions, changed its focus and had a slogan , "Art for all." So it became very populist; from the modernism of Arturo Luz of the 1970s, it shifted to a more populist trend-with a bilingual education
program and more accessible exhibitions because it was largely focused on modern art during the
Marcos period.
It was also during this time that a new binarism tended to characterize the art scene: there wasa strong conceptualist movement inspired by Roberto Cha bet on the one hand, and the continua tion of Social Realism from the 1970s on the other . So there was this divide, and it seemed like con temporary art was governed by this divide ; either you were a conceptualist or you were carrying onwith the social realist aesthetic . So it was very strong binarism until maybe the mid-1990s .
So this was a legacy of the 1970s tha t persisted through the 1980s. But 1989 was a postauthoritarian scene, which meant there was euphoria on the one hand, and , on the other hand, afeeling of betrayal.
Hayashi Michio

In this post -1986 situation, you mentioned a kind of dispersal of political powers, cultural centers,
and also the emergence of local militia and activities . I'm not really familiar with the Filipino politicalsituation but if I may ask, were the local militia groups, in any way, connected to the extremist leftist
ideology or were they more right-wing?
Patrick Flores

No, they were against the left. They were anti -communists that the government encouraged aspart of a low -intensity conflict program of t he CIA. So they were like paramilitary and were equippedwith arms .

DAY3 October2

PlenatJ Di.scussion:Towardthe Exhibitio n098

Art Studies_Ol

Hayashi MLGbiQ

So they're really like the militia group in the United States.
f>atric_k_
Flgr~_l;Yes, they were. They were also overly religious; almost like the fundamentalists. So, they had
strange rituals, parading heads-they beheaded some of the victims and they would parade thedecapitated heads around town or scoop out the brain . So there were some really extremist groups
in the countryside. And there is a film that documented that : Lino Broka's Orapronobis, I think, in1988 or 1989. It talked about the failure of the People Power; the afterlife of the People Power, which
was a failure .
Patrick Flores

That's the title of the documentary film?
P<l_tfu:::k_FlgresYes, Orapronobis. It is Latin for "pray for us." It was by a social realist filmmaker who was very
influential in the 1970s.

I see. What about the Vietnam War? Was the anti-Vietnam War movement active in the Philippines
during the 1960s or '70s?
Patrick Flores

I think it was part of the general youth protest movement. Or should I say, it radicalized theyouth sector. And the youth sector became the nucleus of the leftist movement, and later theCommunist Party and the National Democratic Front.
Hayashi M~h1Q

I ask this because in Japan there are so many radical art practitioners who are more or lessconnected to the new leftist ideologies and they were really critical of the Vietnam War and theAmerican intervention into Vietnam etc . So I wondered what the situation was in thePhilippines .

I think Lyndon Johnson-was it? When he visited Manila, he was met with the youth pratestors with the slogan, "Lyndon Johnson, how many children did you kill today?" So the youth movement was very strong and developed into a communist party.
H<1VMbiMichiQThi, could you maybe follow-up on that? Including the question about 1989.
Nguyen TrLnhToi

Sure. For Vietnam, really, the destiny of the country since the 1950s has always been so tied up
with the up-and-down of the Cold War . So, obviously when the Cold War ended in the late 1980s,
this also completely changed everything in Vietnam . It also marked the beginning of opening
Vietnam to the world .
For three decades [prior to 1989], Vietnam was really in isolation and had relationships with only
Eastern Europe or the Socialist Bloc. As I discussed yesterday about the movements in the 1950sand onwards, these artists had to work underground without ever being recognized, being able topublish or exhibit anything. So in the late 1980s, finally after three decades, they were brought backinto their respective artists', writers', and musicians' associations and started to be able to publish
works. Moreover, from the late 1980s there started to be solo exhibitions for the first time, because
before that, in the past decades, there were never solo exhibitions . They were always state-sponsored or collective group exhibitions because in a socialist country you're not supposed to have solo
exhibitions.
Y1.LJinSeng

Also Bui Xuan Phai's solo exhibition at the Salon Natasha. Did it start in 1983?
Yu Jin Seng

D1scuss1onChapter1

099

Cultur:il lkh,·llion in \.si;i 196o 1989

No, I thought it was later.
Yu Jin Seng

He had his first solo show in the 1980s, didn't he?
Nguyen Trir:i.h_Thi

Yes, that was the very first one . He w as also a painter from this movement .
Ha_yilshi Michio

One second . Natasha is .. . ?
Nguyen Trinh Tb1Nquyen Trinh Thi

Natasha Kraevskaia is the wife of Vu Dan Tan, one of the artists I mentioned yesterday . He wasa little bit younger than the Nhan Van-Giai Pham generation but he was also one of the outsiders . So
he never participated in official network.
Also, 1989 is a really significant year because at this point Vietnam was under increasing pressure from the West to pull out from Cambodia after 10 years. So in 1979, you could say that Vietnam
liberalized Cambodia or from the Khmer Rouge. At first, maybe it was a good thing because theVietnamese troops helped Cambodia to get rid of the Khmer Rouge, but the troops stayed making
it like an occupying force. And they stayed until 1989; Vietnam finally had to pull out the troops inexchange of establishing diplomatic relationships with the West . So that is a very important year; itreally opened up the relationship for Vietnam to the world.
From then on, Vietnam started to have diplomatic relations again with the United Statesand different countries started to establish embassies and set up ASEAN as well. So it was like anentirely new era. Although, it was also a strange situation because despite the fact that the gov ernment already opened up and set up th is kind of relaxed policy to many artists in the last few
years since 1987, because of events like the Tiananmen Square inc ident , in 1989 they stopped andrevised the policies saying, " okay, maybe we have to be more careful here ." So it kind of tighten
up a little bit.
Economically it really became open to other countries and established relationships , but culturally the policies always fluctuated from open to closed, relaxed to tightened etc . It has been likethat until today.
Hayashi Michi9

So Vietnamese artists began to interact w ith artists of other countries after 1989?
Nguyeo Trinh Thi

Yes. I think 1991 was the first internat ional exhibition outside of Vietnam , in Hong Kong .
Hayashi Michio

On Vietnamese art?
Nguyen Trinh Thi

Yes, that is the first one . So they showed different works from different generations , including
Bui Xuan Phai and Nguyen Tu Nghiem from the Nhan Van-Giai Pham period , also Vu Dan Tan froma later period, and there is a generation called American-Vietnam War generation . So all kinds of different representatives .
Adele TanI have a quick question for Thi. Because of Vietnam's participation or intervention in Cambodia
with the Khmer Rouge, China subsequently attacked Vietnam in order to punish its involvement
which, I think, led to a Sino-Vietnamese split. So were there any repercussions on the cultural front
or artistic front?
Nguyen Trinh Thi

With China? Yes, Vietnam has a very special relationship with China; a kind of love-hate relationship . During the Cold War too, because Vietnam was like a puppet, in a way, that had to dance inbetween Russia and China . So sometimes Vietnam was very close to China and then sometimes it
DAY3 October2

PIC'11ar, l)i-.(•us')io,1:To,,ardtl1(•Ex.l1ibitio11

100

Art Studies_Ol

was opposite. If Vietnam became closer to the Soviet Union, then China would really hate that.
So the 1979 situation was really like a triad between China, Vietnam, and Cambodia . So China
actually supported the Khmer Rouge to position herself against Vietnam . In fact, they came to thesouth of Vietnam with troops and helped Cambodia to reclaim their land back from southern
Vietnam . Vietnam, then, retaliated by extradit ing a lot of Chinese from Chinatown in Saigon anddeported them back to China, despite the fact that they had already lived there for generations .
To continue, then the Chinese governmen t started a border war with Vietnam which ended up
being quite a large war . It was hidden from the public, they didn't say anything about it, but now
information started to come out and it was revealed that many people died during that war. I don 't
know how many, but a lot .
Adgl!)_lan

I'm interested in the Khmer Rouge period too, because it seems like the complicity of ASEAN
supporting and propping up, by actions or non -actions, the Khmer Rouge was because it wasafraid of the communist scourge from Vietnam . So there were these trading blocs. So inadvertently
ASEAN stood by China in order to stave off Vietnam .
Hayashi Mjcf1jQ

The quest ion of ASEAN's position and the issue of religion or the metaphysical is something I also
wanted to ask. But maybe we could go into that later if we have time .
Yu Jin and Simon haven't shared their ideas on 1989. So let's take a break after that. Yu Jin, if
you please.
Yu.JinSeng

Let me talk briefly about Indonesia first since we don 't have an Indonesian representative here.
In Indonesia in the 1980s, I think what would be interesting is to shift a little from theater and takea look at the domain of literature . There was a big kind of discussion aboutsastra kontekstua/ inBahasa Indonesia; in English it's called "conte xt ual literature" which was very dominant at the time .
It came out in the 1980s by Arief Budiman. So there was discussion about contextual literature as are-politicization of literature. Because in the 1970s there was a de-politicization of art, literature, culture and so on in Indonesia under the new order, under Suharto.
So in the 1980s, people like Arief Budiman moved away from the realm of literature to talkabout contextual literature as a way to return literature to the social level, to be socially engaged, totalk about " context," be it social, political contexts. And there was this shift from the 1970s whereby
literature was very much about formalist exper imentation; so they experimented with sound andother very formalist aspects of literature . So the 1980s was a resistance against that through sastra
kontekstua! in Indonesia , which is in a way an interesting entry point to talk about all domains of cultural production in Indonesia, including artistic production as well ; we see the formation of Cemeti
which we talked about earlier, too. So there was a desire for re-politicization or the desire to be moresocially engaged in the 1980s.
Regarding Singapore, I think what is important is also the establishment of the Artists Village
in 1988. And one of the important performances by Tang Da Wu actually was at the Lorong Gambas
space which was a farm that they transformed into an artist's space. He actually responded to the
Tiananmen Square incident, which I believe was probably the first ever response to the incident bya Singaporian . He performed using a wheelbarrow to symbolize the tank , which ultimately ran over
him and he was crushed under it. If I remember correctly, he did that performance in 1990 at theArtists Village in Singapore .
So the establishment of the Artists Village in 1988 kind of opened up alternative practices in
Singapore. So that was really significant because then it pushed practices towards the performa tive, the installative, to deal with socio -political issues as well in Singapore . So I think 1988 wasreally a significant year, even when we look at Cemeti also in 1988.
Hayashi Michio

Thank you . Simon?
Simon Soon

The only thing I could perhaps flag about Malaysia is that during the 1980s there was this sortof Islamic movement following the 1979 Iran Revolution. However, I must admit, when you spurred
us to think about 1989, I felt I really don't know that particular year very well. I was perhaps a little
Discussion