049

Chapter1

types to advance their ideas of the modern.
The ideological bent of this type of exhibition
mirrored the political and cultural polarization
caused by the Cold War that divided the world
into the capitalist-democratic and the communist blocs. The ideologically-based exhibition
as a new exhibitionary mode quickly became
an important vehicle adopted by avant-garde
artists who saw themselves as part of thebroader avant-garde movement internationally. Their avant-gardism allied with notions of
freedom, creativity, individualism, and a
detachment from politics, striving for" art for
art 's sake" exemplified by American Abstract
Expressionism. !.'!
Early modes of exhibitions in Southeast
Asia in the 1950s was dominated by Salon
exhibitions modeled after the French Salonde Paris that was initially organized by anart academy, the Academie des Beaux-Arts
in 1725, and later by a fine art society, theSociete des Artistes Frarn;:aisfrom 1881
onwards . John Clark's study of Salon-type
exhibitions in Calcutta and Tokyo forms thebasis in which comparative studies can bedone in the history of exhibitions understoodwithin the rubric of networked artworlds thatinvolved the art market, exhibitions, and discourse that determined how art was received,
legitimized and understood in Southeast
Asia.'.!2Other Salon-type national art exhibitions include the "National Exhibition of Art"
organized primarily for art students from the
Silpakorn University and Pochang to showcase their talents, and the 1959-1964 annual"Spring Painting Awards" organized by the
Department of Culture in Saigon. !tl
The shift from Salon-type exhibitions to
the new ideologically-based exhibitions that
promoted specific styles and ideologies began
in the 1950s and '60s across Southeast Asia.
Solo exhibitions that propel "avant-garde"styles like Cubism and abstraction were
mounted by individual artists like Ta Ty who is
described by the late art historian, Boitran
Huynh -Beattie, as being committed to"Cubism for a brief period of time before venturing into abstract art."~ In the Philippines,
the "First Exhibition of Non-Objective Art in thePhilippines" in 1953 featured non-representational works that included cubistic-semiabstract and symbolist paintings. This
exhibition marked the emergence of exhibitions based on propagating styles conceived
as "non-objective" "" that went against thedominance of the Amorsolo School featuring
realist and idealized landscape and figuretypes that embody the imagined Philippines .
The ideologically-based exhibition as a new
DAY 2 October1

exhibitionary mode produced exhibitionary
discourses that were different from the Salon
exhibition that previously dominated exhibitions in Southeast Asia . Salon exhibitions
rarely produced any critical exhibitionary
discourse beyond the official and salutary
foreword. In contrast, ideologically-based
exhibitions produced a new form of exhibitionary discourse that is rhetorical and polemical.
These characteristics of the ideologicallybased exhibitions often coalesce as art manifestos that form a critical part of exhibitionary
discourse which in turn "becomes a documentof alterity where a stance is shared and partisanship elicited ."!ili
The critical exhibition emerged in the
1970s. As a new mode of exhibition, it transformed exhibitions into a veh icle of dissent todirectly engage with the public sphere which
had united through shared causes by rebelling against social injustices, struggles against
American neo-imperialism, and resistanceagainst oppression . Critical exhibitions deploy
exhibitionary discourses as a vehicle to critically engage and shape new public spheres asa force for activism through collectivism. This
new exhibitionary mode called for a sociallyengaged form of conceptualism to produce
knowledge from multiple frames of reference
and theories from the marginalized: class, traditional art forms, and local knowledge could
be framed as an active agent in the processof decolonization and deimperialization inSoutheast Asia, a process that was also occurring concurrently in other art forms such as literature, as shown in Chen Kuan-hsing's book,
Asia as Method: Toward Deimperialization. 'l:i.
The emergence of both the ideologically-basedand critical exhibitions as new exhibitionary
types did not occur in an art historical vacuumin Southeast Asia. The ideologically-based
exhibition marked a shift away from the Salon
exhibition as the dominant exhibitionary typein the 1950s. The 1970s witnessed the birth ofthe critical exhibition that challenged the ideologically-based exhibitions by contesting thenotions of the "new" and the "real."

Th e Search for the New:Wha t is the Modem ?
The MAS burst onto the Singapore art
world, anointing itself as the harbinger of the"new ." But what aesthetic ideal was the MAS
championing as the "new"? The foreword in
the 1969 MAS exhibition explains: "the mainconcerns of modern artists are the beauty ofform, harmony of rhythm and creativity." ~Form was defined as "living lines, breathing
strokes, unique structures, or moving colors ."Compe ti ng Notio ns ofLhe- A\'ant -gard e- throu gh Exhibiti ona.1:-,'Disco urses in Post-\Var So uth easl Asia fro m th e 1950s to 1970s"'
See Eva Cockcroft, "Abstract
Expressionism, Weapon of the Cold
War," Pollock and After: The Critical
Oebate(2nd ed.), Francis Frascina, ed.
(New York: Routledge, 2000), pp.147154; Serge Guilbaut, "The New
Adventures of the Avant-garde in
America," Pollock and After: The Critical
Oebate(2nd ed.), pp.197-210.

John Clark, Modern Asian Art (Sydney:
Fine Arts Press, 1998), pp.175-190.

Boitran Huynh-Beattie, "Saigonese Art
during the War: Modernity versus
Ideology," Cultures at War: The Cold
War and the Cultural Expression inSoutheast Asia, Tony Day and Maya H.
T. Liem eds. (Ithaca: Cornell Southeast
As,a Program Publications, 2010), p. 96.

Ibid., p.91.

Patrick Flores,"The Demands of
Abstraction: Exhibiting the NonObjective in Manila in 1953," unpublished conference paper presented at
the ST PAUL St Gallery 2013 Curatorial
Symposium: From a History of
Exhibitions Towards a Future of
Exhibition Making, The ST PAUL St
Gallery, August 7-9, 2013.

Patrick Flores, "First Person Plural:
Manifestos in the Seventies in Southeast Asia," Global Studies: Mapping
Contemporary Art and Culture, Hans
Belting etal. eds. (Ostfildern: Hatje Cantz
Verlag, 2012). p. 229.

..-,
Chen Kuan-hsing, Asia as Method:
Toward Oeimperialization ( Durham: Duke
University Press, 2010).

..x
Author unknown, "Foreword," Modern
Art Society, exh. cat. (Singapore: Modern
Art Society, 1969), unpaginated.

C111!11r
al lll'lwlliou in \ .,ia 1960 1989•!J
Author unknown, 'Foreword," Modern
Art Society exh. cat. (Singapore: Modem
Art Soc,~ty. 1971). unpag111ated.

Author unknown, 'Foreword. Modern
Art Society. exh. cat. (Singapore: Modem
Art Society, 1965), unpagmatedII

B01tran, op.r:it.,p. 95

Manifesto of the Society of Sa,gonese
Young Artists, November 10, 1973

Bo,tran, op.c,t, p. 95.

Magtanggul Asa, First Exhibition of
Non-Ob1ectiveArt 111Tagala.exh. cat(Manila: House of Asa.1954), p. iii.
This exhibition featured 28 pa1nt1ngsby
drt1sts including Fernando Zobel,
Hernando R Ocampo, Nena Saguil,
L Lo<;s1n,Fidel de Castro, Jose Joya,
Conrado V Pedroche, Lee Aguinaldo,
Carl Steele, Vic Otzeya, and ManuelRodriguez among others

Ibid, p. 5'"

Ibid, p. 2

,Ibid, p. 5.

050"Beauty could be attained by the arrangement and composition of the elements of form
(space , rhythm, harmony, line and colors). "With
its proclaimed universality, "modern art istherefore an effective and essential means topromote better understanding amongst thevarious countries of the world. " The MAS 's
exhibitions broke away from the Salon exhibitions organized by art societies and art academies . It introduced the exhibitionary strategyof the manifesto that propagated "new"modern styles-abstraction and Abstract
Expressionism-that connected with theavant-garde modern art movement worldwide .
Unlike the Salon exhibitions which only sought
to promote artworks to establish the artists'
statuses, the ideologically-based exhibitions
advanced specific styles and ideas rather thana particular medium such as watercolor , andChinese ink paintings.
The MAS was not alone in its vision ofa global avant-garde modernist movementof which they are part of. The Hai Hoa Si Tre
Saigon (SSYA; Society of Saigonese Young Artists)
formed in the 1960s was identified by Boitran
as artists who "ventured into styles more
Symbolist and Expressionist than narrative.
One distinctive trait they all shared was a commitment to being apolitical, which meant thattypical Cold War politics, pitting the Northagainst South, or Russia against the UnitedStates were excluded from their art." Their
manifesto declared their position as modern
artists to "follow modern art movements closest to the tendencies that reside in the heartsof our Vietnamese audience ... Bring a positive
atmosphere to criticism, and exclude hypocriti cal diplomacy." • Their manifesto aligned them selves with modern art that was apolitical andtheir works explored styles associated with theavant-garde movements in Euro-America . Like
the MAS, Sang Tao conceived of the "new"as having the following urges: a break withacademic styles which were promoted by theart academies, the desire to connect with theglobal avant-garde modern art movements
based on formalism, and to "make it all happen
in an unprecedented record time" in order toconvey a sense of urgency in catching up withthe rest of the world. 'In the Philippines, the call of the avantgarde came in the 1953 "First Exhibition of
Non-Objective Art in the Philippines (FENOAP)"
dedicated with the words "to the avant-garde
artists of this country who have endured
untold sacrifices and cruel criticisms that Art
in Tagala might move forward to greater horizons" printed in the exhibition's booklet .' A
booklet on the exhibition, which included an
Yu Jin Seng

Art Studies_Ol

essay by Aurelio Alvero (he wrote by the pseudonym, Magtanggul Asa), was published in 1954,

where, by tracing the history of Tagalan art to
the European modernist avant-garde , the ideaof Non-Objective art was cast as the culmina tion of the leftward trend:
Impressionism painted what existed in
the eye. Expressionism, however, painted
what was in the mind 's eye. This painting of things that existed in the mind 'seye, irrespective of the actual physical, or
visual nature of the objects, was to reachits culmination in non-objectivism.
Alvero expands on the notion of NonObjective art advanced by this exhibition,
stating that the trend from the objective reliedon the "faithfulness of the object being reproduced" to the sense of the non-objective or the
subjective, " more popularly known as modernart." He continues , "in this new trend, the artist did away from the external object. He went
into the internal, which to him was more valuable. He fragmentalized his subject and finally
reassembled the fragments into a composition that completely eliminated recognizable
representation ." 'Modern art led by the avant-garde who
saw affiliations with their compatriots in EuroAmerica as a global, internationalist , anduniversal movement that propelled avantgarde styles based on formalism, and nonobjective art that depoliticized art was notalone in defining the notion of the "avantgarde ." Other competing notions of the avantgarde and even detractors from the tradition of
the Euro-American notion of the avant-gardevied to claim the status of the "new" and the"modern" in Southeast Asia through exhibitions . These exhibitions which I call "criticalexhibitions" adopted a critical approach to the"modern" and the " new" by opening theirscope to include alternative ways of thinking
and making art that departed from Westerncentric approaches and practices. These
alternative notions of the avant-garde sought
new trajectories away from the avant-garde
movement in Euro-America . The critical exhibition as a new mode of exhibition contributed
to the decolonization process in Southeast
Asia in the domains of culture, knowledge
production, and a politicized mentality or
psyche that shifted towards the region, local
contexts, and social conditions which functioned as the basis in which new perspectives,practices, and thinking could be produced .
Two critical exhibitions that adopted thisapproach in Southeast Asia come to the fore:
Presentation1

051

Chapter 1"Towards a Mystical Reality: A Documentationof Jointly Initiated Experiences by Redza
Piyadasa and Sulaiman Esa (TMR)" and the"Gerakan Seni Rupa Baru (New Art Movement)":
It seems necessary from the inset to statethat we are MODERN artists and as such,
we are not involved in traditional Asianart forms. We are however borrowing
from Asian philosophies in order to comeup with an attitude which we hope will
help enrich the international modern art
movement which needs to be consideredin global terms ... WE ARE HOWEVER
ATTEMPTING TO WORK OUTSIDE
THE WESTERN-CENTRIC ATTITUDETOWARDS FORM. WE ARE TRYING
TO SOW THE SEEDS FOR A THINKINGPROCESSWHICH MIGHT SOMEDAYLIBERATE MALAYSIAN ARTISTS FROM,
THEIR DEPENDENCE OF WESTERNINFLUENCES[emphasisas in the original]. "Redza Piyadasa and Sulaiman Esa's manifesto in the TMR exhibition catalogue claims
the status of the modern in block letters as arhetorical device, similar to the claim and exhibitionary strategy deployed by the MAS exhibition catalogues from 1964 and '65, using block
letter text as part of the graphic design of thecatalogue to lend weight and importance totheir words. Although TM R adopted the exhibitionary strategies of the manifesto from theavant-garde ideologically-based exhibitions,both Piyadasa and Esa were critical of the"Western-centric influence" of the avant-gardeon modern art and Malaysian artists who were
circumscribed by form that derived from subjectivity and perceptual senses.
The TM R's rejection of that which wasperceived as"avant-garde"artists of the New
Scene, who were motivated by style, departed
from ideologically-based exhibitions of theavant-garde in their concept of the "new."
Instead, TMR thrust the idea of conceptual andintellectual considerations as the basis fromwhich the "new" could be prospected .
"THAT ART IS BECOMING A VERY DIALECTICAL AND CONCEPTUAL ACTIVITY TODAY IS
INDICATIVE OF A NEW STATEOF AFFAIRSWHICH SUPPOSEDLY'MODERN' ASIANARTISTSARE YETTO BECOME AWARE OF!"[emphasisas in the original].'!J The conceptual,rather than the form, is the wellspring fromwhich the "new" and the "modern" emerged .
"WHEREAS THE WESTERN ARTISTAPPROACHES ART IN TERMS OF 'SPATIOTEMPORAL/SENSORIAL' CONSIDERATIONS,WE ARE APPROACHING ART FROM A
DAY2 October1'MENTAUM EDITATIVE/MYSTICAL'STANDPOINT." TMR has effectively rejected
perceptualism based on the human senses
and formalistically transmuted abstracted
forms that MAS, FENOAP, and the SSYA
exhibitions saw as a Euro-American obsession
which is antithetical to Asian sensibilities.
The conceptual as "new" began toemerge in the exhibitionary discourse of criti cal exhibitions in the 1970s. The 1974 MAS
exhibition catalogue featured an extracted
essay from Cheo Chai-hiang's article in a
Chinese newspaper. '' This foreword introduced the idea of how "contemporary art has
in fact reached a point when artists are prepared to adopt anything as a medium to workwith. What is important is not the execution ofan artwork but the idea behind it ... Similarly,
the 'non-art' attitude in art itself has become a
new notion, a new concept of contemporaryart." Art as an expanded field into art concepts rather than technique, proposed by Cheoin the 1974 MAS exhibition catalogue, marked
an openness of MAS's ideologically-based
exhibitions to the conceptual. Critical exhibitions advancing the conceptual as the "new"did not start or end in Singapore as flares of
the conceptual occurred throughout Southeast
Asia in the 1970s.
The Gerakan Seni Rupa Baru (GSRB)in
Indonesia came into being when artists from
Bandung, Yogyakarta, and Jakarta met to further the ideas of the Black December move ment. The GSRB was born in 1975, led by
student-artists propelled by a surge in student activism to challenge the authority of theconservative art academy with the manifesto,
Lima jurus gerbrakan Gerakan Seni Rupa Baru
Indonesia (TheFiveLinesof Attack). This manifesto called for the expansion of art into newforms beyond fine art, to include the "diverse
aesthetic values of traditional and ethnic art
forms," liberating art from "elitist attitudes"
and rejecting the universality of art.
The GSRB's attack on "elitist attitudes"
targeted the avant-gardist narrow conceptionof art as "fine art" that excluded other definitions of art, aesthetic values, and philosophies embedded in traditional art forms suchas those the TMR drew from Taoist and Zen
philosophies . Like TMR, the GSRB represented
a counter to the Western-centric avant-garde
and sought to break rigid artistic categories
and hierarchies that excluded "new art forms"
which do not fall into the categories of fine arttaught at art academies such as Academie
Seni Rupa Indonesia (ASRI;IndonesianAcademyof FineArts) in Yogyakarta. Both TMR and GSRB

Compe ting \ otionso fLl1C'- \\-ant -g-.
u-de- th rough Exhibitio nat:' Discou rses in Post-\\ ar So u1h,·as1 h ia from the 1950s to 19i0s.,
Redza P1yadasaand Suld1man Esa,
0w1uds a Myst,c~I Reality. A
Docur1entat1on of Jointly InitiatedExperiences by Redza P,yadasa andSula,man Esa 'repnnted m Narraw,:s mMalaysian Art Volume2 Reactions
New Cmical Strategies. Nur Harnm
Khairudd1n. Beverly Yong, dnd T K
Sabapathy eds (Kuala Lumpur Rogu
Art 201<1 p 3 <;4'IIbid, p.19

Ibid. p 50

Cheo Ch, 1-h1dng,"F0reword, ' Modern
Art Society exh cat (Singapore· Modern
Art Society, 1974). unpag1nated

Ibid

For an English translation of the F,ve
Lines of Attack, refer to Brita L
M1klouho-Makla1, Exposing Society s

Wounds. Some Aspects ofContemporary Indonesian Art Smee
1966(Adelaide· Flinders Un1vers1tyof
South Australia, 1991), pp. 25-26

C11ll11r
al 11,,l){'llion in \ sia 1g60 1g89

Manifesto of The Artists· Front ofThailand, 1975

Ap1nan Poshyananda, Modern M
in Thailandin the Nineteenth andTwentiethCenturies(New York: Oxford
University Press,1992), p.164·,fi

Ibid., p.165

Flores, "First Person Plural. Manifestos
in the Seventies in Southeast Asia,"
op. Cit., pp.224-71

052

privileged concept over technique by elevating intellectual engagement, or a critical attitude and approach to rethink art making, its
practices, and exhibitions that display art . The
ideologically-based exhibitions, which werepreviously dominated by the avant-garde , wer e
challenged by critical exhibitions that werebased on conceptual ism rather than a narrowformalism that were based on the avant-garde
movement in Euro-America.
The challenge spearheaded by TMR and
GSRB, as well as individual artists like Chea,
widened the scope of art by offering exhibi tionary sites of resistance against the Western centric avant-garde exhibitions that propagated the Euro-American avant-garde with
their imagination of a shared global, and universal, avant-garde . Instead, alternative ideas
based on Asian philosophies and aesthetic values from traditional art forms-which multiplied frames of references to self-reflexively
include theories, philosophies, and practices
from Asia, Southeast Asia, and local cultural
resources- provided alternative well-springs
from which the "new" in Southeast Asia could
emerge . It was, however, in the contested ideaof the "real" advanced by the critical exhibition, propelling the process of decolonization ,that offered an even more compelling challenge to the Western avant-garde-driven ideologically-based exhibitions .

Th e Real Challenge:Th e National, Soc ial, and Co lon ial
The "real" quickly became the battle cry
for artists who organized critical exhibitions .
They proclaimed the "real" as their conceptual weapon to engage in social, institutional,
and political critique to give real effect to socia lchanges that avant-garde artists appeared to
be detached from. It was from the feelings of
discontent-swelling from social, political ,and economic injustices suffered by the com mon person, the working class, and the disenfranchized-that critical exhibitions wereorganized by the Artists' Front of Thailand(TART),Kaisahan, and GSRB. These artist collectives adopted a critical approach in exposing the "real" conditions in their countries forsocial and political change.
TART was established in 1974 and they
too published a manifesto in 1975 outlining
their aim to oppose art produced for capitalist
and imperialist consumption. They adopted
strategies of institutional critique against theinstitutional structures of the state:We, who are not satisfied with what the
YuJm Seng

Art Studies_01" big people " have done and we, who
are conscious of the priceless Thai culture art 's conservat ion, innovation , anddevelopment for the " little people ", thenorgan ize ourselves into TheArt ists' Frontof Thailand . Our mission is to conserve,
innovate , and develop Thai culture art andmake it serve all Thai peop le in the correct
ways it should . 'TART's first exhibition took place on
October 1974. Like the GSRB, TART was driven
by broader student activism against military
dictatorship ofThanon Kittakachorn, the Prime
Minister of Thailand supported by General
Praphat. TART adopted the new exhibitionary
strategy of breaking out of the usual gallery
spaces, inh ibited by avant-garde exhibitions at
the Rajadamnern Avenue , to commemorate
the anniversary of the Thai military's fall fromgovernment in October 1973. •· In 1976, TART
organized a critical exhibition of paintings andbillboards as a protest against the American
military bases in Thailand due to the Vietnam
War . This resulted in an eventual military
crackdown and the arrest and killing of protesters. '" By intervening into public spaces, TART
resisted being subsumed by capitalism andused the terrain of art as a counter -hegemon ic
force . The anti -capitalist and anti -imperialist
aims of TART that directly engaged with the
public through critical exhibitions in public
spaces redefined the role of the artist as anactivist to produce art for the people to incitesocial change .
Like TART, the Kaisahan sought to manifest the realities of the Philippine condi tion against American nee-imperial ism andcapitalism . For the Kaisahan , "this means,
first of all, that we must break away fromthe Western -oriented culture that tends tomaintain the Filipino people's dependence
on foreign goods, foreign tastes and foreign
ways that are incompatible with their genuine
national interests." _;:Like TART and GSRB, theKaisahan was also part of the broader radicalization of student movements in Southeast
Asia in the 1970s. The insistence on departingfrom being Western -oriented and slav ishly
imitating the West merged into one voice in
TART, with its aims to preserve Thai culture,
and TMR that called for Asian mystical waysof thinking about and making art . TMR clearlyinsisted that :WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO SUGGESTQUITE SIMPLY IS THAT THE SCIENTIFICAND EMPIRICAL VIEWPOINT OFREALITY IS NOT THE ONLY VALID ONE
Presentation1

Chapter1

053

THERE IS. THE MYSTIC'S VIEW OF
THE UNIVERSE IS ALSO VALID FOR
THE MANY PARALLELISM THAT ARE
BECOMING APPARENT TODAY.~as an act of political resistance and engagement differed from the avant-garde exhibitions
that propagated formalism.

Conclu sion
The real for the TMR was one of multiple
mental realities that departed from the hegemonic rational and empirical view that forms
the basis of perceptual ism derived from ourhuman senses alone . The GSRB's manifesto
whereby the "universality of art was rejected,
implying that Indonesian art cannot be studied from imported foreign books" effectively
undermines knowledge dominated by theWest for local understanding and interpretations to emerge as the dominant form ofknowledge. Collectively, TMR, TART, GSRB,
and the Kaisahan adopted critical approaches
to question the institutional, economic, political, and mental structures that are based onWestern systems of knowledge through theexhibitionary discourses propelled by criticalexhibitions. These critical exhibitions collectively sought to decolonize the minds ofemerging public spheres within the context ofSoutheast Asia during a period of decolonization that increasingly rebelled against
American neo-imperialism as seen in the
Vietnam War, and the American bombing of
Laos and Cambodia . More importantly, these
critical exhibitions that challenged avantgardist claims to internationalism advanced
the critical tradition of leftist thought as analternative framework to address the historical question of colonialism in the process of
decolonization.
Critical exhibitions that adopted a critical
approach based on social and political engagement with the "real" were on firmer ground inarticulating their vision of the "national" by
expanding their frames of reference to themarginalized working classes and traditional
cultural forms rooted in the actual, social, andcultural experiences of the people who live inthe specific region. The Kaisahan firmly
entrenched their aims to commit themselvesin "the search for a national identity inPhilippine Art." B Like the Kaisahan, TART wasclear in that art was to serve the common
people and that any national art form had toemerge from traditional Thai cultural forms.
Both the Kaisahan and TARTshared a common
ideological connection with Mao Zedong's
1942 Yan'an Forum on Literature and Art,
stating that art must serve the people and therevolutionary cause, leading them towards a"national" that required art to incite social andpolitical revolutionary change . The desire topoliticize these ideologically-based exhibitions
DAY2 October1

This paper has mapped an exhibitionary
history of Southeast Asia with multiple entry
points by illustrating that competing notions of
the avant-garde was primarily contested in the"new" and the "real;" the former by those whoaligned themselves with the avant-garde
movements in the West, and the latter by
those who forged a new path for the "avantgarde" that multiplied frames of references by
expanding what art could be, and also beingsocially engaged in the self-reflexive process of
decolonization in the region. This paper has
shown that the notion of the "avant-garde"
itself was contested by ideologically-basedand critical exhibitions as new exhibitionarymodes. Critical exhibitions organized by TART,
the Kaisahan,GangawVillageArt Group(GVAG),
and TMR expanded the scope of what art
could be in which the Euro-American notion
became just one of the multiple frames of references from which artists in Southeast Asia
could draw from and power the process of
decolonization in the region. The exhibitionary
discourses of critical exhibitions made visible
the significance of local contexts as crucial
determinants in the role of art and artists asvehicles for dissent or exemplariness of universal formalist ideals. At stake was the scope ofwhat art could be as a vehicle of decolonization for the purpose of rediscovering diverse
forms of modernities by including alternative
forms of knowledge production located in realand concrete local practices and experiences.
The emergence of critical exhibitions acrossSoutheast Asia becomes a mediating site forconfronting and making visible the existenceof alternatives that can be harnessed for theprocess of decolonization in the socio-politicalorder circumscribed by the Cold War. The
political theorist, Chantal Mouffe describes,"critical dimension consists in making what
the dominant consensus tends to obscure andobliterate, in giving a voice to all those who aresilenced within the framework of existinghegemony." :!.'!

Competing No6ons oftJ1e-Avanl•brarde- through Fuxhibitiomuy Discourses in Post-\ Var SoutJ1easl Asia from the 1950sto 1970s

Nur Hanim Khairudin, Beverly Yong,and T.K.Sabapathy, eds .. op. cit., p. 46.
·1~1

Flores,"Social Realism: the Turns of a
Term in the Philippines," Aftera/1
Journal, Issue 34(AutumnlWinter, 2013).
• http://www.afterall.org1journall
issue.34lsocial-realism-the-turns-of-aterm-in-the-philippines(Accessed January, 2015)

Chantel Mouffe, Agnostics: Thinking
the World Politically (New York:Verso,2013), p.91.

Cultur a l l\e(,..llio11in \ sia 196o 1989054

Art Studies_Ol

MagpieModernityin Thai Art
Prapon Kumjim
Head of the Art Center, Center of Academic Resources, Chulalongkorn University

The title, "Magpie Modernity in Thai Art,"
is intended to reference a sense of eclecticisms by means of hoarding a range of domes tic and international cultural influences which ,at initial glance, may seem indiscriminate, but ,given the complex historical background, theamalgamation of diverse influences may
suggest an alternative narrative to how we
may improve our current understanding ofcontemporary Thai cultural sensibilities . This
paper aims to introduce several of my personalobservations that intersect aspects of cultural
rebellion in Thailand between the 1960s and'80s. It is by no means an attempt to summarize a historical overview of Thai art during thatera. The term "rebellion" itself can be somewhat problematic as to the general consensusof what exactly is considered as resistance to
one's government or ruler or defiance of any
authority, control, or tradition. In order to avoid
making awful summaries on what has alreadybeen mentioned in many articles and books
about modern art in Thailand, I have chosen to
limit my discussion to be based around only
seven artists. My seven artists have been
divided into three genres . Chalood Nimsamer(1929- ), Thawan Duchanee (1939-2014) , andChavalit Soemprungsuk (1939- ) will represent
the first genre which I will call "Post-Bhirasri,"in reference to the era after Professor Silpa
Bhirasri . The second genre will discuss Chang
Se Tang, also known as Chang Tang (1934-90)
and Pratuang Emjaroen (1935-) which I will call"Institutional Outsiders ." The third genre will
discuss early works during the mid-1980s by
Apinan Poshyananda (1956-) and Kamal
Phaosavasdi (1958-) which I will call
"Postmodern ists ."My rationale for separating the three
Prapon Kum11m

genres is based on notions of cultural rebellion and not necessarily about any particular timelines. Chalood , Thawan, and Chavalit
are still very much alive and active today, so
I believe that the socio-political turbulence inThailand since the 1960s have verified theirprofessional careers as senior artists . Cultural
rebellion in this context can also be seen as
defiance against notions of retirement or
artistic expiration . The genre of "I nstitutional
Outsiders" refers to influential artists from outside dominant institutions. Thirdly the genreof "Postmodernists" refers to the global phenomena that challenges the acceptance ofmodernism .

lnt.rodu ction toT hailand
The Thai kingdom was established in the
mid-14th century. Known as Siam until 1939,
Thailand is the only Southeast Asian country
never to have been taken over by a European
power. The Siamese Revolution in 1932 wasa bloodless transition (also known as coupd'etat) and was led by several key members ofthe military who had changed the Kingdom
toward a constitutional monarchy .
Even though Thailand was never colonized by any Western countries, we cannot
overlook the symbolism that colonialization had for Thailand as the colonializationof Southeast Asia reverberated through theentire region . Southeast Asian regional concerns impacted Thailand especially during
the 1940s as the country moved towards
political, cultural, and technological modernization . Since the late 19th century, several
generations of privileged Thai nationals havebeen educated overseas and have returned to
Presentation2

Chapter1

Thailand or have migrated to Europe, North
America, and, more recently, Australia . Thishistory explains a long tradition of elitist ThaiWestern international networks that haveexisted for several generations . I am particularly interested in the shaping of contemporary Thai identity and the semi-colonial statusthat uniquely positioned Thailand within
Southeast Asia.
The British expatriate art critic, Steven
Pettiforwho moved to Bangkok in 1992, referred to the Kingdom of Thailand as a fiercely
proud and independent nation. In Flavours:
Thai Contemporary Art, Pettifor discussed
how Thailand managed to retain self-rule in aturbulent region which witnessed the mightof European colonialism in the neighboring
Southeast Asian region .
In the 19th Century, Siam waged a delicate game of diplomacy, holding several
Western states at bay, while Laos, Vietnam,
Cambodia, Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia,
and the Philippines were divided up by
European overlords .
In order to understand contemporary Thai
culture from a historical context, I turn to Asian
cultural theorist Peter A. Jackson who has
explained in "The Thai Regime of Images"that in the 19th century, under the threat ofcolonization, Siamese elites began a processof "civilizing" the appearance of the state andits population . This was done by systematic
propaganda and enforced by the military andpolice. This entailed reshaping public displaysof Thai civilization for foreign consumption
through dress, public behaviour and manners,
but interestingly did not reshape the inner lives
or traditional values of the people . Jackson andThai historian Thongchai Winichakul both
agree that the 19th century regional colonial
encounter with the West facilitated the emergence of a "regime of images" initiated by theThai monarchy to convey to potential colonizers Siam's high level of cultural achievement
and its capacity for self-rule. As a result of this,Thai-ness as a form of hegemony emerged intandem with projects of modernization andnationalism, both of which followed the overthrow of Absolute Monarchy-where the kinghad absolute power to freely rule the Kingdom
until 1932, when the coup d'etat military-takeover had peacefully ended the 150-year reign
by the Royal House of Chakri (since 1782).
Cultural rebellion can be seen in the Thai
2004 musical-drama film The Overture (orHom rong) directed by lttisoontorn Vichailak.
It presents a fictionalized account based on
the life story of a Thai palace classical musician, between late 19th century through to
DAY2 October1

055

the 1940s. The film was the winner of several
awards in Thailand.
Military dictatorships had dominatedThai politics since the overthrow of Absolute
Monarchy in 1932 through to 1973. Interestingly, Field Marshal Sarit Thanarat , who staged
another coup in 1957, thereafter served as
Thailand's Prime Minister and had reintroduced the public role of the monarchy to beat the heart of the nation. King Bhumibol wasseen attending public ceremonies, toured
overseas as well as the provinces and patronized development projects . Under Sarit's dictatorship, the ancient practice of crawling infront of royalty during audiences, banned by
King Chulalongkorn, was revived in certain situations . King Bhumibol's birthdate (December 5)
in 1960 was declared the National Day, replacing the previous National Day, the anniversaryof the Siamese Revolution of 1932 (June24) .
The Australian political scientist Michael
Kelly Connors has observed that Thai military dictatorships from Field Marshal Plaek
Pibulsonggram's rule from 1938-1957 throughto Field Marshal Thanom Kittikachorn's ending of his dictatorship in 1973 had a significant
impact on representations of Thai identity .
Some traditional Thai folk music and some traditional dress were prohibited during dictatorship rule. The need for Thailand to be seen as"modernized" in the Western sense became athreat to national security . In the early 1970s,
the Thai government feared regional communism in Vietnam and Cambodia and right-wing
anti-communist propaganda became heavily
enforced as the national Thai identity of that
period . The ideology from th is era of nationalist
propaganda promoted anti-communism . The
suppression of individuality remains arguably
visible in contemporary teachings of art in Thai
schools .
Nidhi Eoseewong, an influential Thai
historian, recently wrote on the subject of"Understanding the Cultural Constitution":"in old Thai culture, power is unified and indivisible. Even the power of a god and the powerof a king are one and the same because theking is an incarnation of god . The concept of
a division of powers-legislative, executive,
and judicial-and balance among them is aWestern idea." This notion of old Thai culture remains an integral part of contemporary
Thai culture and to comprehend Thai modernity would be to tactfully navigate between theinvisible lines that separate the old and new
culture.
Confrontational works by the Australianeducated Thongchai Winichakul who published "Toppling Democracy " in The Journal of\lagpi e \fod emil) in Hla.i Art',t vc n Pett1for, Flavours. Thai
ContAmpcraryAn Baegkok Thav11>u
G llery 20CJI

t:,,d p 'O

"eter A. ,ackson,'T'1e Th, , R<"g11"1ot

lrT'agc~. 'iOJOURN. Journ.>lotSoc1, /lss 1e< ,n Scuthc • t A Id Vo1•~/\Jo 2
10. tol>e 2004) r,p 1ts' 21tl

lt:,1d p 181

M1ctiaeI I( lly Connors. 'Ttia,lar>ct Th
F c:-tsand F r)1c:-t10r>$'lf Ruhnc
Soothcast Asian Affa,rs "-11g poreIn tut of South ast Asian 'itud,es
2/JO~ pp 36', l84

1'11dh1fo~eewo119, 'Undr r<;I r>d1ncth,

c~tUfdl ':c nstItut1Cr, Banqk k h'

A gust 13 <0 4)• r" > www b1ngkokpost cm
opir 1rnvop1rno1 426370
underc;t.ndtng the ciJltLrrdl<onst1t Jt on
A, e ,e<l J ni Iv 201")

Cullur al l\,•bdli on in \si;, ,960 ,989

Thongcha1 W1nichakul,"Topphng
Democracy," TheJournal ofContemporary Asia, Vol. 38 Issue 1, 2008
(published onhne: November 23, 2007),
pp.11-37

Thongchai Wirnchakul, Siam Mapped:
A Hi:storyof the Geo-Body of a Nation(Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press,1994).

Ibid .
I"

Amb1ka AhuJa, "Leader inflames
Thailand with remarks," New York Times,
December 4, 2008.
• http //www nytimes.com/2008/02/
24/world/asia/241ht-thai 1 10331686
htmlJ J=O
(Accessed January, 2015)

056

ContemporaryAsia, c;.and the British educatedThai cultural critic Sulak Sivaraksa have beenhighly influential to international discourse
about Thai cultural politics. Thongchai's book
Siam Mapped : A History of the Geo-Body of a
Nation ·" argued a case for reassessing thehistory of 19th century Siam against theprevious cultural misinterpretation of thecountry by neighboring French and Britishcolonizers . Thongchai claimed that the
Siamese were not just passive bystanders
who provided a buffer state between the
British and the French. In addition, Thongcha i
has convincingly argued against historicaltheories that the Siamese were as much aplayer of Southeast Asian colonialization as
the Western colonialists.
In 1965, Thailand became an ally of theUnited States. The Thai-U.S. relationship wasstrengthened during the Vietnam War whichbegan in1965 and finished in 1975 whenthe Americans retreated from Vietnam . The
threat of expanding communism within theSoutheast Asian region was seen not only as
an immediate threat to the borders of Thailand ,but also a threat to the U.S."~ By that time,
fanatically anti-communist propaganda had
already taken root with in popular Thai culture. Not long after the end of the Vietnam
War, Thailand witnessed the massacre of
October 6, 1976. This was a violent crackdownby the state on leftist students and protestors
that occurred in the grounds of Thammasat
University (Bangkok) and on Sanam Luang (aname which literally translates as "Royal Ceremon ial
Grounds") in the historical heart of Bangkok.

li~.111

Silpa Bhirasri 120th Anniversary,
CMU Art Center,
September 15-30, 2014

The newspaper International Herald Tribune(February 24, 2008) published the official recordof the massacre issued by the Thai govern ment which stated that 46 people were
killed and hundreds more were wounded .
Conflicting reports by several human rights
groups and eyewitnesses suggested the death
toll to have been in the hundreds .~·Art Edu cation
Pohchang Academy of Arts, established in
1913,was the first art training establishment inSiam but in terms of modern art in Thailand, it
is without doubt that Professor Sil pa Bhirasri 's
legacy dominates the art scene in Thailand ;born Corrado Feroci (1892- 1962), he was an
Italian sculptor who worked mainly in
Thailand. r,...., He is widely considered thefather of modern art in Thailand. Feroci was
initially invited to Thailand to teach Western
sculpture at the Fine Arts Department of the
Ministry of Palace Affairs in 1923. Twenty years
Prapon Kum11m

Art Studies_Ol

later in 1943, he founded what later became
Silpakorn University (the leading art university).
Feroci became a Thai national in 1944 andchanged his name to Silpa Bhirasri. He was thedesigner and sculptor for many of Bangkok 's
best known landmarks , including the Democ racy Monument , Victory Monument , and thestatue of King Rama I. His birthdate , September
15, is observed each year in Thailand as Sil pa
Bhirasri Day which is celebrated across mostart universities in Thailand .
The unearthly and almost supernaturallegacy of Professor Silpa Bhirasri is someth ing
that may appear on par with the status of
demigods or guru in the Hindu sense as we
can see his shrine and images worshipped as
amulets that are worn by many artists and art
students . One of Professor Silpa's oldest surviving student is Chalood Nimsamer who fol lowed his professor 's footsteps to teach at
Silpakorn University as well as becoming influ ential for the avant-garde art movements ofthat period . During the 1960s, many ofProfessor Silpa's graduate artists went on tofurther their studies abroad ; Italy was usually
the destination but many attended art schools
in the United States and Europe. On theirreturn, these artists all contributed to thedevelopment of art in the following decade .
Chalood was awarded several national prizes
in painting, printmaking and sculpture , andwon scholarships to further his studies in Italy
and the United States. Even though his techniques were considered of modernist tradition ,his subject matter remained deeply local
which was very much a part of Professor
Silpa's teaching .~Thai art scene during the 1960s w as
highlighted by another significant event as His
Majesty King Bhumibol was known to havepainted regularly between 1959 through to
1967. His oil on canvas works ranged fromrealistic portraits through to abstract expressive brushstrokes . " Most importantly , he permitted the National Exhibition Committee toexhibit his works regularly during this period .
His textural marks and vibrant colors can becompared with the sound of jazz music that
the King played regularly with bands and musicians in court . Jazz, painting, sculpture andphotography became favorite mediums for theKing's artistic creation . In 1963, the King gave
an audience to Oskar Kokoschka, the Austrian
painter, during his visit to Europe," as mentioned by Rama IX Art Museum Foundation .
Unlike modern art movements in theWestern world, Thai art exhibition and criti cism did not gain much public attention during
the 1960s.
Presentauon 2

057

Chapter1

Post-Bhirasri

Both Thawan Duchanee fu.!..,Jand Chavalit
Soemprungsuk were awarded prestigious
scholarships by the Dutch government tostudy at the Rijksakademie in Amsterdam .
Interestingly, their artistic ideology could nothave been more different as visual practitioners. Thawan's interest in dramatic mythicalthemes and Chavalit's quest for abstract simplicity are both groundbreaking in their ideas.
In a personal conversation with Chavalit during
2011, he recalls his memory of Thawan at the
Rijksakademie and mentioned that their professors were not convinced byThawan's mythical tales. "The tales only work in Thailand"
according to Chavalit. Thawan Duchanee has
been a wealthy celebrity, household namelong before he was awarded the grand titleof National Artist in 2001. The mythical tales
behind his artworks in conjunction with flamboyant showmanship has sparked a wave of
patriotism through his neo-traditional Thai art.
Chavalit's career path took a different
turn as he chose to remain in Amsterdam as a
Dutch-sponsored artist . He has been returning

DAY 2 Octoberl

to Thailand regularly to exhibit his artworks.
I was amazed to learn that many of Professor
Sil pa's photographs during his later years
were taken by him during his student years at
Silpakorn University. Surprisingly according toChavalit, photography was not considered as
an art form which was worthy of credit duringthat time.
In stitutional Outsiders

Pratuang Emjaroen and Chang Tang wereboth self-taught artists who vividly responded
to dark events and social turmoil of the late1960s onward. Even though Chang had very
little formal education, his series of black-andwhite abstract paintings were inspired directly
by Chinese calligraphy and philosophy, reiterating notions that abstract and non-representational art should not only be a phenomena in
Western art .
Chang Tang's painting titled 14October
1973,a self-portrait with his eyes plucked andcut-off hands, together with Pratuang
Emjaroen's Dharma Adharma and Days ofDisaster(1973-74) illustrates social polarization\la gpie \l od('mil~ in Thai \ rt

riµ:.11'}
Chalood Nimsamer
Rural Sculpture, 1982,
dimensions variable, rural obJects

058

Cultural lleb,•llion in \., ia 1960 198g

and uncertainty as Thailand faced politicalturbulence. Pratuang, as founder of an artist
collective called Dharma Group, had painted
an image of the decapitated Buddha, peppered with bullet holes which eludes widespread apocalypse. As a matter of spiritual
principle, both artists deliberately pursued afinancially modest career, relative to what
they could have sold .
Furthermore, the 1970s was a period of
overwhelming heavy-handed treatment by thestate and frightful uncertainty for many artists
and liberal thinkers who were suspected ofharboring communist ideology. Many artists
were targeted and kept under state surveillance, as explained in conversation with artist
and social activist Vasan Sitthiket.

Pos b11oderni sls

Iiµ. ,1
Thawan Duchanee during his
postgraduate study in the Netherlands,

1964-68
fig. ,,
Apinan Poshyananda
How to Explain Art to a Bangkok Cock,
1985, video sculpture

Moving abruptly to the 1980s, I turn tothe next generation of artists who represent a
shift beyond the previously established artistic
disciplines. Apinan Poshyananda and Kamol
Phaosavasdi were both overseas graduate
instructors at the relatively new Faculty of Fine
and Applied Arts at Chulalongkorn University,
which is Thailand's very first university. In
terms of local art scene acknowledgement
and accreditation by organizations such as
the National Exhibition of Art in Bangkok,
Apinan had already received medals in painting and another in printmaking whilst Kamol
had received medals in sculpture and otherawards in painting before they began theirmove onto experimental practices.
In 1985 Kamol collaborated in Apinan's
video performance work, How to Explain Art
toa Bangkok Cock, fu!._( which was exhibited at
the distinguished Bhirasri Institute of Modern

Prapon KumJim

Art Studies_Ol

Art, Bangkok. The assemblage of objects,
prints, performance, and video sparked puzzlement and controversy amongst viewers asvideo installation was a new technology at thattime . Apinan's absurd depiction of the gaps
in communication between Western art and
Bangkok audiences remains a valid theme thatstill reoccurs today amongst young artists .
Later on that year, Kamol went on to do
an installation and performance work Songfor the Dead Art Exhibition 1'
at the same
venue . Outside the gallery, an additional
component of his exhibition was a real-lifesocial intervention during an inaugural faculty
speech at Chulalongkorn University towel come new students . Kamol installed a batteryof ringing alarm clocks and read his anti-aesthetic manifesto in the presence of a puzzled
crowd during a formal speech by the dean.
This was met with several abusive comments.
Nevertheless, the event had been witnessedand contributed to the avant-garde historyof Bhirasri Institute of Modern Art . Kamol'sdeliberate interrogation and intervention
within the very notions of Thai academic andartistic institutions mark a beginning of postmodern art practice in Thailand.

Conclu sionModern art in Thailand has shifted considerably since its glorified master plan tosocially engineer heroic national iconographysince the 1940s. Modern Thai art as an academic field of knowledge may not be the mostimmediate or realistic form of representation
for cultural rebellion in Thailand between the
1960s and '80s . The cultural strengths andbonds in Thailand exist in several complicatedlayers as well as regions, for instance at the

Presentation2

059

Chapter1

grassroots within the largest and most populous region known as lsan in Thailand 's
Northeastern region . The people are influenced by Mor lam which is a traditional Lao
form of song in Laos, and lsan encapsulates
the notion of traditional and avant-garde
culture that have combined ancient oral histories and contemporary concerns for centuries .
Mor lam musical broadcasts and public performances was utilized as a stage for cultural
rebellion and even pro-government propaganda between the 1960s and '80s.
Our present-day global standards havecatapulted contemporary art to be at the forefront of cultural translation and discussion to
the point that local Thai artists are no longer
at the mercy of local art scene influences andauthorities as they can connect directly withinternational patrons. We are now living ina time where local political protests need tohave banners in the English language, simply to access the mighty global voice of cablenews networks. Since the 1980s, artist Apinan
became Professor Dr. Apinan Poshyananda
after a prolific career as an academic andinternational contemporary art curator . He is
now the minister, holding the highest position
at Thailand's Minister of Culture, and, in many
respects, Thai contemporary art community is
feeling optimistic about the immediate futureof art in Thailand.

DAY2 October 1li;.:.1'•
Kamel Phaosavasd1
Song for the Dead M Exh,bit,on,
Bhirasri Institute of Modern Art,
Bangkok, 1985

\l ab'pie \l odrniit:'in Thai \rt

Cultur al l\ebe llion in \sia 1960 1989

~1·-.-.1rn_1_II

060

ArtStudies_Ol

Malaysia:A CulturalRebellion
Simon Soon
Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Art History and Film Studies, University of Sydney"'

T. K. Sabapathy, "Merdeka Makes Art,
or Does It?," Vision and Idea. ReLooking
Modern Malaysian M, exh. cat ..T.K.
Sabapathy, ed. (Kuala Lumpur: National
Art Gallery, 1994), p 61

Zainol Abidin Ahmad Shani, Meetmg

Modernity: Forty Yearsof the APS
Malays,an Mists Movement 1956 1996 (Kuala Lumpur· Bala, Seni Luk,sNegara, 1998).

Dolores Wharton, Contemporary Mistsof Malaysia. A Biographical Survey(Petahng Jaya: Asia Society and Union
Cultural Organisation, 1971).
This was an unattributed statement.

Let me begin by first rehearsing the standard narrative of Malaysian art, and from it weare able to then consider the broader implications of this narrative in relation to the theme of"cultural rebellion'.' Malaysian art from the 1960s
to '80s was bookended by two key historicalevents-the formation of Malaysia in 1963 andthe inauguration of the first ASEAN Symposiumof Aesthetics in Kuala Lumpur in 1989.
Our story begins with the clash between
proponents of abstraction and realism in the
1960s. This culminated in a walk out staged by
the Angkatan Pelukis Se-Malaysia (Malaysian
Painters Front) during the 1968 Salon Malaysia
exhibition who felt that they were prejudicedin the competition. "' The Angkatan were artists primarily though not exclusively promoters of realism, and felt that this was the most
relevant approach to advance an "art for society." It was also at the same time establishing itself as a welfare organization for painters
who came from humbler Malay origins, out side the purview of the English school systemor the Chinese cultural associations, playing
the role of offering free art classes and putting
together shows in their self-organized exhibition spaces since 1956. They were in many
ways a precursor to the artist's run/community
initiative today ."'On the other hand, the artistic milieu
that largely won the 1968 Salon competition,
though not exclusively committed to abstraction, was primarily English-speaking, trainedin Europe and America, and appealed to theuniversalist aspirations of modern art-bothmodernism and pop. This circle also actively
promoted the transformation of a regional
craft technique such as batik into a modern
painterly medium .
Simon Soon

Therefore, the disagreement was centred primarily on the best means to convey
the birth of a new nation. As an artist conferred of that period, "we are still trying tobuild a unified nation and culture from a pluralsociety . A Malaysian art can't be achieved
until the Malaysian society has an image." ~On the one hand, there was a desire to figure
the Malaysian subject through representational means; while on the other hand, there
was an attempt to encapsulate the mood andthe expressive aspiration of being associatedwith a new country and to stake its place inthe world .
Therefore, even as the latter tendency
won over the 1968 Salon, by 1969 such a
gestural and emotive turn was upstaged very
briefly by a calculated analytic turn towards
geometric abstraction in exhibitions such as"The New Scene." But this would not lastlong, for the 1970s really opened with the
racial riot of May13, 1969 in Kuala Lumpur.
Perhaps one of the least discussed responses
was a sculpture built by Lee Kian Seng for
Expo'70 in Osaka. Titled Unity, it was anexhortation for solidarity in the towering threefigures that are seen in embrace, yet, at thesame time, drenched in streams of red paint;a chilling reminder of the tragic bloodbaththat occurred a year ago.
If artists felt that a Malaysian image was
non-existent, then perhaps one of the consequences of the race riot was a conscious
effort to construct one, through the formulation of a National Cultural Policy at the
National Cultural Congress of 1971. Not only
are indigenous cultures and Islamic values prioritized, the participating majority at the congress also voted to champion "art for society"
Presentation3

061

Chapter1

rather than the modern ist "art for art's sake."
More significantly, under the suggestionof University of Malaya's Vice Chancellor,
Professor Ungku Aziz, a majority of congress
participants, who were made up of academ ics and civil servants, voted for increasing therole that the government should play in limiting the freedom of expression so that anotherclash amongst races would not repeat itself. !!!
This resulted in a walk -out amongst dissent ing group of artists . It was also an indicat ionof how much individual freedom a young
country like Malaysia was willing to give up in
exchange for security .
Artists responded to the policies later on,
not by tak ing sides in these two pole positions ,but by pushing their practice towards a different direction. The outcome was a number ofexperimental collaborative undertakings thatwere either multi -disciplinary or conceptual inmethod. Some of the key events of this period
include : 11... a conversation -driven workshop/
exhibit ion "Manifestasi Dua Seni (ManifestationofTwoArts)"-where visual artists were invited
to respond to works of local poets, 12 ... theestablishment of Anak Alam, an art collective
founded by Latiff Mohidin , which moved awayfrom the realism of the Angkatan towards
multi-disciplinary approaches in art makingthey would stage photography exhibitions toimpromptu street happenings to talks onpoetry at their artist's run space, !!,!
13 ... the formulation of a conceptual manifesto
by Redza Piyadasa and Sulaiman Esa. The
exhibition featured found objects that argued
for an alternative cognitive approach to thepractice of art based on Eastern spiritual ity intheir joint exhibition of found objects,"Towards
a Mystical Reality."!.'!!Lastly, 14 ... there was a
noticeable increase in government support forcontemporary art. This included the establish ment of a university-level art school in Penang,
the appointment of the first full-time director at
the National Art Gallery, as well as the creationof the Young Contemporaries Award since1974. But it also extended to the publishingunder the National Language Institute magazines such as Dewan Sastra and later Dewan
Budaya where a number of important aesthetic debates took place.
This also led to a number of sustained
attempts, in the late 1970s, in the writing of
Malaysian art history, most notably in three
exhibitions-a study of Malay art and craft
tradition "Rupa dan Jiwa" curated by Syed
Ahmad Jamal and the "First Nanyang
Painters' Retrospective" curated by Redza
Piyadasa in 1979, followed by Ismail Zain's
exploration of how traditional forms and ideas
DAY2 October 1

Syed Ahmad Jamal, Kunang Kunang:
Kenang-Kenangan Syed Ahmad Jamal
Seniman Negara, (Kuala Lumpur· Dewan
Bahasa dan Pustaka, 1999), p.117

For more information about Anak Alam,see Nur Hanim Kha1ruddin,"Anak Alam:
Behind the Scenes," Narratives in
Malaysian Art -Volume 2.·React,onsNew Critical Strategies, Nur Harnm
Kha1ruddin, Beverly Yong, and T K.
Sabapathy,eds. (Kuala Lumpur
RogueArt, 2013), pp. 24-30

ufi
Simon Soon, "An Empty Canvas onwhich Many Shadows have Fallen,"
Narratives in Malays,an Art - Volume 2.:
Reactions-New Critical Strategies, Nur
Harnm Kha,ruddin, Beverly Yong, and
TK. Sabapathy eds.(Kuala Lumpur:
RogueArt, 2013), pp. 55-69.

ri~.111

Anak Alam member Yusof Osman
performance of 1974

\l aJa~:,ia:.\ CulturaJHehcllion

Cuilu ral 11<-lw ll ion in \.sia 196o 1989

Redza Piyadasa,"Modernistand PostModernist Developments ,n Malaysian
Art in the Post-Independence Period,"
Modernity in Asian Art, John Clark, ed.
(New South Wales: University of Sydney
East Asian Studies No. 7 and Wild Peony,1993), pp .169 181,X

Redza P1yadasaed., Ismail Zam
Retrospect/Ve Exhibition 1964 1991,
exh. cat. (Kuala Lumpur· National Art
Gallery,1995)
O!J

001 Kok Chuen, "Strokes of Wry
Humour," TheStarOnhne,April 26, 1998
• http://wwwviweb.freehostmg.net/
PatrickNg.htm( Accessed July, 2014)

fil,,\'.,OJ

Redza Piyadasa, Bentuk Malays,a Tu/en,
1980, bromide image, acrylic on canvas,
106x70cm, pnvatecollection, Kuala
Lumpurliµ.1dIsmail Zain.Al Rumi, 1987,
computer-produced print,
National Art Gallery, Kuala Lumpur

062

influence contemporary art in the 1980,"Sen i
dan lmajan ." 'ilt
By the 1980s, three distinct paths could
be identified: 11··· a new investment in Islamic
discourse as a springboard for contemporary
art practices, 12--· a parallel engagement withbroader regional aesthetics also emerged,
13--· a continuation of postmodernist inquiry
into cultural identity as a direct result to someof the aesthetic calls made through "Towards
a Mystical Reality." ·· Then perhaps quite earlyon, the emergence of a digital art practice inthe computer-generated artworks of Ismail
Zain. ·' "£' The 1980s also marked to bolder
attempts at staging international events suchas the two-edition Kuala Lumpur International
Arts Festivals and the relocation of the
National Art Gallery to a larger space, the former Hotel Majestic, in 1984.
In many ways, this has fossilized into a
grand narrative and framework for the past
two decades for Malaysian art historians as
we continue to flesh out details through retrospective and other closer studies on a particu lar artist or movement .
But, what do we make of such narrative? This paper after all makes a strange
proposal. It proposes to examine the conceptof Malaysia as a "cultural rebellion :· As suchit assumes a number of things. Firstly, thatthe nation and its artistic production were
intimately connected, driven by perhaps an
impulse that have variously and contentiously
been argued as kunstwo//en . Secondly, that art
is an agential cultural space in the shaping of-..

Simon Soon

Art Studies_Ola national imaginary and discourse . Lastly, thevery concept of "nation" as a cultural rebellion
meant that the nation coming into being represented a breach .
The formation of Malaysia was thecoming together of four territories, all previously under varying levels of British controlSabah, Sarawak, the Federation of Malaya,and Singapore . Singapore, of course, would
leave Malaysia in a short two years' time. The
compact of Malaysia was significant, notleast because it caused the sundering of the
MAPHILINDO confederation . Filipino claims to
Sabah, and Indonesia's accusation of British
neo-colonialism meant that Malaysia 's forma tion was in and of itself a cause of neighboringunease against two nations that had alreadybeen independent since 1946.
As such I want to suggest that given theabove circumstances, Malaysia could serve asa unique lens through which we may understand the fraught concept of cultural rebellion . Because of how clumsy the articulationof a historical destiny appears in this national
compact-after all the ties that bind Borneo
to the Malay Peninsula was primarily colonialsince these were under varying levels of British
control-Malaysian art and the shaping of a
Malaysian image really had to begin anew, tobegin now . But the question has always been,"how does one arrive at this beginning?"
This beginning was closely shaped by
the Malayan-ization ethos of the preceding
decade and it pays to consider them. Two significant episodes were to have repercussions
on the overview of Malaysian art I am about tomake . In 1957, the year that Malaya gained her
independence from the British, Patrick Ng Kah
Onn won the First Prize at the First Southeast
Asian Art Conference and Competition heldin Manila for his painting Batek Malaya ."~Because the work went into a Philippine collection, a copy was produced the following
year. This copy was intentionally produced
for the acquisit ion by the National Art Gallery,
which was founded in 1958 in Kuala Lumpur,
realized by the Malayan Art Council established in 1952. The National Art Gallery would
be one of the first few public institutions in
Asia dedicated to modern art, consideringthat for example the Museum of Modern Art
in Kamakura was founded merely seven years
before in 1951,and the National Museum ofModern Art in Tokyo was established the following year. r..i=!, In these two episodes that
I have highlighted, a regional art conference
and competition as well as the establishmentof a public art institution for modern art weresignificant features that will continue to shape
Presentation3

Chapter1

Malaysian art.
In the first instance, some of the aspirations towards self identity as a region throughan art competition mirrors the aspiration of
Malaysia's founding as a federation -firstly
through the federation of Malaya, then subsequently that of Malaysia, where previously
smaller states came together to form a larger
political unit. More than historical ties, it was amarriage of modern convenience that embodied a contradiction, as former President of
the Art Association of the Philippines, Purita
Kalaw-Ledesma, noted, "the first was that all
men are brothers and art transcends all barriers because it is universal. The second-and
this may not be as diametrically opposite as it
may seem-was a belief in national identity_"'.!.'
This resulted in the formation of a later
regional unit that has continued to exist
today-ASEAN, which color and shape theway we think about Southeast Asia as a geographical, political, and cultural unit. Malaysia
shared, in many ways, similar features on anational scale-one of them being the anxiety
felt against perceived Communist threat.
The second feature was the role the state
played in the support of cultural and artistic
productions. So much so, it would be hardpressed to find anything outside the long armsof the state. As such, when we ask, "is it everpossible to view cultural rebellion through thelens of a nation?," do we also need to ask, "inwhat way did the nation inflect upon artistic
productions through cultural policies as wellas infrastructures?" More importantly, "if state
support was such a determining feature, what
was cultural rebellion? Where was the place of
cultural rebellion?"
The answer is contingent on what wehope to look for. One answer is that perhaps
nation is itself a form of cultural rebellion. It
rebelled against two earlier destinies. The firstwas the call issued forth from the Philippines
in search for a unity of the Malay races as
embodied in Wenceslao Vinzon's "Malaysia
lrrendenta" and Eduardo L. Martelino's
Someday Malaysia, based on Jose Rizal's
earlier desire for a unity of the Malay races .!!
The other was a rebuff to Sukarno's manifest
destiny, Indonesia Raya, or Greater Indonesia,
which perhaps also drew on Tan Malaka's
notion of an AS LIA-which was an irredentist
claim to a vast swath of land that stretchedfrom North Indonesia (the Philippines) to theSouthern continent of Australia. !.!In this way,
because Malaysia rejected seemingly older
and more expansive imagined historical ties,
after all no great monuments of its past is in its
orbit, its state-sponsored modern art was an
DAY2 October 1063

attempt to construct the new in order to stage
its difference. One could recall the words ofFrench historian and theorist of nationalism,
Ernest Renan, that "a nation is a daily plebi scite" •J-in the manner that the desire of apeople to live together through the formationof this strange place called Malaysia would
also require a new art to help produce its
imaginary horizons.
Herein lies the contradiction in the thinking of the totality of Malaysian art as an act of
cultural rebellion. If the state was so closely
involved in the production of contemporaryart, could there have been a space outside ofthis all-embracing narrative? Writ ing a critical review on the "Towards a Myst ical Reality"
exhibition, for example, Salleh Ben Jonedmockingly noted, "it wasn't supposed to be
an exhibition; it was supposed to be an 'experience,' a 'direct confrontation with (mysticalreality).' But it still had to be legitimized by thepresence of a representative of officialdom;
and he, of course, had to give one of thoseusual speeches." ,'<To seek out other narrat ives, one
approach is to identify artistic avenues outsideof state-sponsored institutions. As suggested
above, this presents a problem, for evenmany of the early artists' collectives, such as
Angkatan Pelukis Se-Malaysia and AnakAlam,received some form of patronage and support . In this sense, we might recognize how
the avant-garde was in many ways imbricatedwith the cultural visions connected to thestate. Perhaps a much more productive wayof thinking about cultural rebellion, then, is tounderline what is noticeably absent within thedominant narrative .
Let me consider three artists and theirpractices from different periods to suggest a
productive approach in this direction based on
my previous researches. By this I am not saying that these are artists who have not since
been recognized for their significant output by
Malays ia:A Culhwa l Rebe llion

National Art Gallery (1958-1984), 109,
Jalan Ampang, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Purita Kalaw-Ledesma and Amadis Ma.
Guerrero, The Struggle for Philippine Art(Quezon City:Vera-Reyes,1974), pp.68-69.

Wenceslao Vinzon's speech was awarded the Quezon Gold Medal in Oratory in
1932. Printed in Andres R. Camasura,ed., Philippme Encyclopaedia of
Eloquence (Manila: The Philippine Encyclopedia Company, 1936), pp.409-414;
Eduoardo LMartelino, Someday Malaysia(New York. Pageant Press, Inc., 1959).

Tan Malaka, "XI Federated Republic ofIndonesia," MassaAct1e(1926) reprinted
in Tan Malaka,AksiMassa (Jakarta: Teplok
Press, 2000). By the time Thesis (1946)
was published, the concept of ASLIA
suggested the inclusion of a new federation stretching from Southeast Asia toAustralia, based on the hypothesis thatthe world would achieve relative peaceand stability if there existed a number ofgiant nation states that were able tokeep each other in check.

Ernest Renan, "Ou'est-ce qu 'une nation?
(What is a Nation?)"originally delivered asa lecture in Sorbonne in 1882. Reprinted
in Ernest Renan,"What is a Nation?"
Becoming National.' A Reade, Geoff Eleyand Ronald Grigor Suny, eds. (New Yorkand Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996),
pp.41-55• http://www.nationalismproject.org1
what/renan.htm(Accessed July, 2014)

Salleh Ben Joned, "Kencing dan
Kesenian (Peeing and Art)," Dewan
Sastra, July 15 (1975), p. 58.

064

Cultur al Hel"' lli on in \ .sia 1g60 1989

1,1
At the stage of preparation, this essay
was being edited for publication ina special issue on queer theory andvisual cultures in Southeast Asia in

Intersections:Genderand Sexualityin
Asia and the Pacific, Issue 38 (planned tobe published In February or March, 2015).

Simon Soon, "Along Other Historical
Sightlines: Landscapes as Conditions ofBeing," unpublished conference paper
presented at the Tilting the World:
Histories of Modern and Contemporary
Asian Art: A Symposium ,n Honour
of John Clark, University of Sydney,
November 29-30, 2013.

'i
Amir Muhammad, " Mat Som," Writing
by Amir,September 17, 2008.
• http://amirmu.blogspot.com.
au/
2008/09/city-of-mud.html( Accessed January, 2015),x
Wong Hoy Cheong, " Contradictions
and Fallacies in Search of a Voice:Contemporary Art in Post-Colonial
Culture," FirstASEAN Sympos,um
on Aesthetics, Delia Paul and Sarifah
Fatimah Zubir, eds. (Kuala Lumpur:
ASEAN Committee on Culture andInformation, 1989), pp.117-125.

Iiµ;.o.~,Lat (Mohd. Nor Khalid), Mat Som(Kuala Lumpur: Serita Publishing 2004).
Original edition 1989.

the national cultural institutions . What I wantto highlight are three issues here: 1... the possibility of an occluded history that could challenge our understanding of the developmentof a specific medium, 12··· the developmentof long time -based projects that are able toexplore untold stories of the postcolonial city,
13·· · artistic medium whose circulation did notnecessarily rely on the museum as its defining
institution.
If we look at the 1960s, perhaps oneof the most overlooked outputs belongs to
Patrick Ng Kah Onn's batik paintings of malenudes . I have examined elsewhere that what
was registered in Patrick Ng's explorationof the batik was a critique of a national discourse that attempted to position the batik
medium as Malaysia's contribution to modern
art. It also queers the very representational
schema of well-developed native women byturning its scopo-philic pleasure towards themale body. In doing so, it also signals a com pact built around homosocial intimacy anddesire that was occluded from the dominantnarrative of Malayan and Malaysian art of the
1950s and '60s .!}The second of this is Nirmala Dutt
Shanmughalingham's photographic collageStatement Ill . I have also suggested elsewhere
the radically unsettling manner in which hertime-based documentation of squatter population was able to draw out some ethicalSimon Soon

ArtStudies_Ol

coherence issues related to progress and thegrowth of a postcolonial city. !!•In her sociological reportage of a squatter community, oncein 1975 and then again in 79, her methodical
and factual statements direct conceptual preoccupation with aesthetics towards politicalinquiry to bring to our attention sections of the
population left behind in Malaysia's economic
growth . As such, through a documentary
approach to art making, she also deconstructs
both universalist and utopian claims of progress in modernization .
The last of this could be found in perhaps
an undervalued comic book by Lat-Mat Som.
lliL!!l Lat, a Fukuoka Asian Culture Prize winner,
is perhaps more famous for his two othergraphic novels -Kampung Boy and Town Boy.
But what endears me about Mat Som is its brilliant study of Kuala Lumpur in the 1970sencapsulated in the story of a young journalist
who has arrived from the countryside, to strikeout in the capital of Malaysia. Reviewing Mat
Som, writer Amir Muhammad notes," in him[Mat Som, the protagonist], the values of thevillage and the city struggle to reconcile ." !;One striking example is the scene where we
encounter a rain-drenched Mat Som in a
moment of despair . He seeks solace by reciting painter/poet Latiff Mohidin's signature
poem of 1976, Songsang-which can beloosely translated into English as "a misfit ."Mat Sam's character is one who doesn't
really belong; he represents those who are
different, struggling to find his voice as awriter and his place within a city wherechange is the only constant.
In sketching out these examples, I am
also reminded here of Anak Alam painter
Zulkifli Dahlan's Kedai-Kedai (Shops) !i.iLliliwhere
naked humans roamed through the familiar
city streets with carnival-esque abandon. The
absurd quality of this painting, which depicts
naked men roaming nonchalantly along thestreets of Kuala Lumpur, brings into sharp
relief some of the qualities that are embodied in all three works . What binds the works
that I have brought up here is a direction of
sympathy, an artistic practice that was turned
towards the others, to recognize their time andplace within the complex fabric of time that
we call "contemporaneity."
If they represented isolated instances, tograpple with the conditions of modernity infits and starts more so to negotiate questionsof values within urbanscape, by the end of the
1980s a conscious effort was being attempted
to imagine this as a series of linked solutions
to formulate an artistic direction for contemporary art in the 1990s. This took place at the
Presentation3