Pameran Seni Keramik Kontemporer: A Progress Report

photo: Octora

Review on Pipeline mag.

http://pipelinemag.com/

HotWave #3, Cemeti Art House

'The Time, The Balance'




'Hari Pencerahan' (Enlightment Day) :
During the residency, I organized an event called Enlightenment Day. In this event, i brought together three practitioners of Kejawen (Javanese spiritualism) and art practitioners in Yogya. Theoretically, I intended to ‘use’ the skills of these ‘clever’ person in predicting the future of the art world that I feel is uncertain and desperately needs to be grounded. I want to bring these people together and see how they react each other: how (abstract) belief can be transformed into (black and white) a certainty.













'Plumblier'

'Compass'


'Untitled'

Review on Subversion

Oleh: Dinni Tresnadewi

Sore hari tanggal 14 Juli 2011, salah seorang anggota tim display di Galeri Nasional Indonesia tampak pucat pasi. Betapa tidak beberapa menit sebelumnya ia menemukan salah satu karya yang sedang dipamerkan di Gedung B sayap kiri Galeri Nasional telah dalam kondisi rusak. Karya yang dimaksud adalah sebuah vitrine/lemari pajang yang tampak dalam kondisi kosong dengan kaca pecah berhamburan di lantai ruang pamer. Si penemu karya rusak tersebut dengan agak segan menginformasikan kabar buruk ini pada kurator pameran. Sang kurator hanya mampu menahan tawa mendengar laporan tersebut. Apa pasal? Ternyata sang kurator sudah tahu duluan, bahwa “oknum perusak” yang memecah kaca karya tersebut, tak lain adalah si senimannya sendiri.

Seniman yang dimaksud adalah Leonardiansyah Allenda, seniman muda angkatan tahun 2003 dari program studi Seni Patung, Institut Teknologi Bandung. Saat itu Leo memang tengah berpartisipasi dalam Pameran Besar Patung Kontemporer Indonesia: Ekspansi. Karyanya, jika hendak dibandingkan dengan karya seniman lain, sungguh berbeda dan cukup menarik perhatian. Betapa tidak Leo menghadirkan sebuah Vitrine berwarna hitam—dengan ukuran umum sebuah lemari pajang; lebar 45 cm, tinggi 175 cm, dan panjang 85 cm—dalam kondisi kosong berlubang dengan pecahan kaca berhamburan di lantai sekitarnya. Cukup dengan kehadirannya di dalam sebuah konfigurasi pameran patung, kita sudah dapat mengidentifikasi bahwa Subversion karya Leonardiansyah Allenda ini merupakan sebuah karya seni dari genre patung, lebih tepatnya sebuah karya patung kontemporer. Lantas bagaimana bisa sebuah lemari pajang pecah dinyatakan sebagai sebuah karya patung? Dan teks apa yang sebenarnya hendak disampaikan Leo dalam Subversion?

Seni patung memang telah mengalami evolusi yang signifikan, terutama sejak paruh kedua abad 20. Patung menjadi kian toleran terhadap variasi bentuk dan kian giat menerobos batasan yang semula membingkai dirinya dalam pengertian yang kaku. Gejala seperti ini dijabarkan dengan sangat fasih oleh Rosalind Krauss melalui artikel berjudul “Sculpture in the Expanded Fields” di tahun 1978. Dalam artikel ini, Krauss menyatakan bahwa seni patung menunjukkan gejala perluasan diri hingga ke wilayah yang tidak bisa ditentukan batasannya. Tengok saja karya seniman Mary Miss yang berjudul Parameter/Pavillions/Decoy (1978), berupa dua gundukan tanah yang dipadu dengan sebuah liang galian berbentuk persegi, atau the Spiral Jetty (1970) karya Robert Smithson berupa spiral raksasa dari tumpukkan batu dan lumpur di Great Salt Lake, Utah, Amerika Serikat. Saat kedua karya ini terlegitimasi sebagai sebuah karya patung, maka seni patung bisa dikatakan beranjak dari pengertian dirinya yang konvensional. Patung menggeser diri dari logika monumentalitas ke logika nomadic[i], dan dengan suka cita melepaskan diri dari pedestalnya—bahkan menyerap pedestal menjadi bagian dari dirinya sendiri. Patung kini tak lagi menjadi monumen yang disorot spotlight sebagai bintang utama dalam sebuah ruang pamer, namun lebur dengan latar belakang dan ruang di mana ia berdiri. Ia menjadi sebuah objek “nomaden” yang memiliki otoritas penuh untuk menempatkan dan menyesuaikan diri dengan apa yang ada di luar dirinya, juga berkemampuan membina hubungan resiprokatif dengan ruang d­­an lingkungan yang melingkupinya.

Subversion karya Leonardiansyah memiliki logika serupa dengan apa yang diketengahkan Rosalind Krauss. Vitrine yang memiliki fungsi dasar sebagai lemari pajang, bisa disejajarkan dengan posisi pedestal bagi patung: yakni sebagai perangkat penunjang di mana suatu objek seni ditempatkan. Leo, alih-alih menghadirkan sebuah karya di dalam vitrine, menghadirkan vitrine itu sendiri sebagai sebuah objek yang memiliki otoritas penuh untuk menunjuk diri sebagai sebuah karya seni. Segaris pula dengan yang diungkapkan Krauss, Subversion berani melebur dengan latar belakangnya, dengan menjalin hubungan resiprokatif dengan ruang Galeri Nasional Indonesia. Hubungan dalam hal ini adalah hubungan kritikal yang kemudian mempertanyakan ulang fungsi kedua objek yang saling respon: Subversion sebagai sebuah karya seni dan galeri nasional sebagai sebuah institusi museum.

Untuk mempertanyakan hakikat dasar suatu objek sebagai karya seni (objet d’art), kita seringkali dihadapkan pada pertanyaan sederhana: Apa itu seni? Pertanyaan yang dapat dikatakan sulit tapi sekaligus mudah untuk dijawab. Sulit karena saat ini, seni telah turun dari menara gading yang semula mengisolasi dirinya dari kontaminasi dunia luar—membuatnya tercebur dalam banalitas hidup sehari-hari, membaur dengan segala hal, sehingga sulit memisahkannya dengan benda lain di luar seni. Mudah karena saat ia melebur dengan segala aspek kehidupan, satu-satunya cara untuk membedakannya dari objek lain adalah dengan sekadar memberi label bahwa suatu benda tertentu adalah sebuah karya seni. Tapi kemudian, siapakah yang memiliki otoritas untuk menunjuk suatu objek sebagai karya seni?

Seandainya pertanyaan ini dilontarkan di awal abad ke-20, maka jawabannya akan cukup mudah didapat, karena saat itu seni masih menjadi sebuah wilayah institusional di mana strukturnya terbangun dengan sekat dan taksonomi yang lugas. Museum merupakan institusi yang bertugas sebagai “regulator” yang memberi nilai sekaligus melindungi seni untuk tetap berada di wilayah yang terpisah dari wilayah keseharian. Museum menjadi sebuah vitrine raksasa yang memajang sekaligus memproteksi objek seni agar tidak terkontaminasi pengaruh dari aspek di luar seni.

Dalam Subversion, vitrine ditampilkan sebagai representasi dari galeri nasional Indonesia sebagai sebuah institusi museum di dunia seni rupa Indonesia. Kaca yang pecah berkeping tentu saja merupakan lapisan teks yang memiliki makna khusus. Menurut Leo, pecah-retaknya kaca vitrine mewakili kondisi terkontaminasinya museum oleh pengaruh kapital dalam perkembangan seni rupa. Campur tangan kapital memang sudah dimaklumi umum sebagai motor penggerak seni rupa global, bahkan bisa dikatakan bahwa kapital adalah tenaga penggerak segala aspek kehidupan dunia masa kini. Money makes the world go rounds adalah dictum yang diadopsi secara global sejak akhir abad ke-19. Melalui Subversion Leo mempertanyakan persoalan mendasar yang menggerogoti tubuh Seni rupa kontemporer, haruskah value sebuah karya seni diserahkan sepenuhnya pada mekanisme pasar dan kapital?

---

[i] Rosalind E. Krauss, Sculpture in the Expanded Field, The Originality of the Avant-Garde and Other Modernist Myths, London: MIT Press, 1986, hal. 280

Seri Katalog Data IVAA #2

"REKA ALAM"
Praktik Seni Visual dan Isu Lingkungan di Indonesia (Dari Mooi Indie Hingga Reformasi)


Trash Culture project in 2006 as part of IVAA catalog book #2:



Link to IVAA Online

Review on Ekspansi

Sculpture: disappearing or expanding?

Sculpture is possibly the most widespread artform in the entire world. This perhaps has largely to do with the fact that it is a form of art that survives, a fact derived from the material that allows it to exist alongside the passage of time – stone being the preferred choice. This materiality has given to the art of sculpture a durability unknown to its parallel notations on paper, textiles and paintings on fabrics. In the history of art, sculpture appears as the majority represented media – from the Greek figures of the Parthenon to the recently excavated Xi’an warriors which all helps to constitute a historical legacy that further allows a sculptural comprehension of the world throughout the ages. The different materials provide an understanding of its origin and the aeon. Simultaneously, it is sculpture’s endurance that predominates in our understanding of art and form of this world, since it has a tendency to be generally straightforward in its meaning resulting in its popularity.

Sculpture as ‘collective memory’

The concept of sculpture from the point of view within Western art history is well documented, and therefore acknowledged by society at large. Its comprises of scholarly undertaking over long research periods and dissemination, allowing a set of rules and ideals about the realm of the figurative, myths, narratives and other aspects of historical information to be circulated. In the long term, sculpture provides a sense of commemoration of the past as well as historical representation – according to given episodes or individuals in question. Its effect allows a perception of its monumentality in the public space. This sense of grandeur, which we recognise, is the manifestation of the spread of certain ideological truths through the use of religious, political or/and heroic figures from the folkloric or pagan past. The human tendency seems to be a celebratory one, where ‘heroes’ – from all the spheres of knowledge – gain importance through public sculpture. This transversal attitude towards a public symbolism is evident in disparate latitudes that stretch from the northern terrains of the Inuits in Canada, to the renaissance period, predominantly in Italy, as well as of the modern nation building of post independent states including Indonesia where the search for a national identity has justified its widespread use throughout Soekarno’s era.

The given dematerialisation of other art forms as mentioned beforehand, has proven sculpture to be the most effective media to arrange ‘facts’ for the distribution of information: sculpted objects travelled from ancient Rome to the corners of its empire to inform its population of the likeness of their Emperor’s features. The desire to historicise personalities and rulers with commemorative sculptures including the obelisk are still to be found in villages, towns and cities, within its squares, almost invariably on top of a secondary form, the pedestal. These forms of representation survive in our time untouched and remain as collective memory, the very intention of sculpture.

The logic of sculpture therefore is synonymous to the monumental or as an act of celebration: wars have been and are still represented as victory columns or memorials; political regimes use its possibility to publicly illustrate their ideals, thus commissioning sculptures that expresses higher goals through its ‘verticality’ and ‘solidity’. Sculpture, as a media, has been (and arguably still is) profusely employed as a way to deliver certain important ideas or ‘facts’. This aspect has permitted sculpture to be normally independent from its public other, architecture; the robustness in its form and presence in the public space allows its own centrality and physical presence – even though it has effectively contributed to enhance architecture. This has been the collective understanding of centuries of Western art and these virtues have spread due to the effectiveness of the model, to other domains and latitudes.

Modernity and change: the emergence of the ‘borderless’ sculpture

Modernity has brought into the realm of sculpture a wandering sense; from the advent of modernity a different moment is launched. Herein the art of sculpting loses some of its logic as its very base, the pedestal, and the upper form are questioned and separated and even set apart. Since the base has been disposed, the media of sculpture gains a new if not further autonomy. Freed from the historic intention of ‘monumentality’ and ‘memory’ that it had gathered for centuries, modern sculpture allows the form to be a space of experimentation. This has resulted in inventive and an extreme practices often results in opposition, even negates, of what had been sculpture’s history. The introduction of the ready-made object in the realm of artistic practice has further altered the panorama considerably: «why make something when you find a ready-made and present it as art? It is your ability to choose and select, not your ability to make that makes you an artist»^[1].

Artists have closely examined this possibility, incorporating this change in the freedom to deliver through experiments, which have further contributed to the emergence of environment art in the sixties. No longer busy investigating the disciplinary depths of a given genre, artists started to merge together various areas of discourse and experiment with diverse mediums into their work. The inclusion of non-art forms into the realm of sculpture added to sculpture’s new found autonomy, according to the American critic Hal Foster, helped in inverting the concept of Western art from the ‘vertical’ into the ‘horizontal’. Artists were no longer constructing but assembling disparate elements and therefore conceiving sideways, in a broadened space.

As a medium, ‘installation’ finally was theoretically framed in the nineties, in spite of been a practice since the sixties. Know then as ‘environment art’, its new name, installation art, has emerged since its arrival in the museum space. Its relation with the viewer – who was invited to enter the work – is one of its greatest virtues. The intimacy it provokes for the spectator was a necessity for museums to attract audiences: to be part of the work rather then merely to spectate, allowed a sense of inclusion and interactivity in the realm of the institutional space. In the same manner, large exhibitions including biennials commissioned works within their ephemeral existence to provide a sense of intimacy and memory. Installation art is characterised by its spatial location instead of a domination by its constituting materials, which was the paradigm of sculpture. What defines an installation is the occupation of space and sites through an accumulation of several elements, or composite pieces. Installation art in fact activates the nomadic spirit of modern sculpture.

The popularity of installation remains beholden to its conceptual posture, one which links its agency to the cultural, institutional and even social critique – instead of relying entirely on form. In other words, installation is more what it tries to accomplish than what it looks like. This tradition-breaking is a major enterprise in its process; somewhere in time, sculpture lost its possibility to tell the contemporary story – it could no longer use its narrative qualities, leading to all sorts of questioning of its relevance as practice and from this, installation art emerges to negotiate these complexities allowing sculpture to mediate alongside.

In taking into account this post-modern tendency to bring relativism and criticism into all the spheres of art, sculpture remained no exception. The period following the Second World War testifies to a plethora of experiments around categories including sculpture and painting, which has contributed to a sense of uneasiness to call ‘art’ to what is produced under the keeping of these nouns. Rosalind Krauss has assisted greatly in demystifying the turn of sculpture into installation art declaring it as a media in the ‘expanded field’. Thus, what was once a ‘highly ruled’ category suddenly emerges as an ‘open-space’ for further artistic explorations. The exhibition Expansion - The Great Exhibition of Indonesian Contemporary Sculptures, emulates this evidence, by bringing together a set of practices that can be included in the possibly borderless category of ‘sculpture’.

In the recent decades, artists have worked with these new guidelines that contain a greater freedom from previous conventions, breaking them and creating multiple spaces for discussion in regard to their work. This constant questioning of forms, of categorisation truly reflects the era in which we find ourselves. In these uncertain times, artists produce works that are necessarily ambiguous, allowing them to work in whatever way they wish, for any purposes they think of, or even without an intention. Contemporaneity is a period of information disorder as much as it is a period of freedom, one in which art is perceived not by its aesthetic values, but the questions it brings into debate, its potential meaning. This freedom that artists experience, further stimulates the public’s relation to the work. The public, that still remains outside of theories of art and its classification, is equally experiencing a sense of liberty when appreciating the artwork before them, an enjoyment derived from a place of ambiguity and multiplicity, a space for the discussion of the works.

All categories, especially those considered in the taxonomy of Fine Arts, including painting and sculpture that remained stuck in the academia, have now been reshaped and widened by artists in such a manner that the terms can refer to almost all if not to anything. The boundaries are so unclear that it is more accurate to refer to the practitioners as ‘artist’ rather then as a ‘painter’ or a ‘sculptor’. This situation is further explained from the increasing if not generous space of intervention that they offer. The profession of the artist has changed enormously, freed from specialisation and craft, increasingly using reproducible media, which permits a level of production never seen or experienced before. Nevertheless, there are still many artists that in a parallel context create value through craftsmanship, in employing various assistants in the manufacture of their work. We are the first spectators of art to witness and value both its strands.

Modern sculpture and installation as global practices

Despite the Western pre-eminence of the theoretical around art categories including sculpture, it goes without saying that it has been and remains a world practice. Its classical materials – stone being the most relevant – allowed its arrival in our time. Global Art History shows that the world still possesses a large amount of sculpture throughout its history. To a large extent, the understanding about non-Western art has been largely made through this media, a condition that derives from the durability of this material.

Indonesia is no exception, since sculpture has been a practice within the everyday. Archeological surveys in the archipelago have disclosed several Indian-derived sculptural forms, mortuary sculpture for deified royalty, which comprised male-female forms, and a tendency for frontal representation prevails in the islands of Java and Bali. Immemorial models, including the linga-yoni, as ancient as the first Indian influences in the archipelago – around the first century AD –, arrived in our times in the form of tugu, an obelisk form that can be found in many cities and towns, often located in specific sites. The most significant example is the grandiose Tugu Nasional, in Jakarta. These obelisks have been widely spread in the archipelago to celebrate the proclamation of independence of the Indonesian Republic and its subsequent heroes.

Syncretism, the layering of one element on top of the other, without either being eliminated, can be considered as one of Indonesia’s strongest features and has a constant presence in its artistic practice. In this way Indonesia’s past is memorialised by the use of a series of references including various interactions with western perspectives, which had a prolonged effect on the archipelago and have been further integrated into its existing artistic praxis.

On Expansion – The Great Exhibition of Indonesian Contemporary Sculptures

It is important to realise that the exhibition was proposed by the curators as a ‘survey’ exhibition, remaining free from notions of criticism. Expansion, it was hoped, would be a revelation of the current panorama regarding the field of sculpture, unveiling the country’s situation, in terms of context and material.

The historical character of Expansion derives from establishing this first attempt to assembly a single art media – sculpture in the expanded field – in one venue, at one time and in one expansive format. The previous show – the 2nd Jakarta Triennial, an Exhibition of Contemporary Sculptures –, «was held in 1998 at the Taman Ismail Marzuki, featuring 39 works from 32 sculptors, selected from a total of 55 sculptors from various regions»[2].

The scope of Expansion – with a greater national agenda – engaging works of 109 Indonesian artists as well as international artists living in the country, employing the various fields of expertise, from the fine arts, design, to architecture and archaeology, film and animation, thus comprehensively engaged to multiple understanding of the media.

Interestingly, the artists in Indonesia express a natural inclination towards installation as a form. This can be partly explained by a constant incorporation of one vital ingredient, that of ‘theatricality’. As Michael Fried described in his seminal article Art and Objecthood^[3], theatricality comprises the temporal and interactive elements that he perceived in installation. These aspects were alien in the sphere of intervention within painting or sculpture. The involvement of ‘theater’ in art works by artists from Indonesia can be perceived as a natural predisposition deriving from traditional manifestations that persist in our time.

This ‘theatricality’, that is conventional in the realm of installation art has been very evident in the work of Heri Dono, Eko Nugroho and Nasirun, three artists who explore the realm of the wayang theater and its ability to deliver information of the contemporary realm – one in which the traditional and the modern continuously clash; re-siting and re-inventing the historical Javanese culture which remains highly guarded as its ‘high art’ by society at large.

Yet in an art world becoming increasingly sociopolitical over the past decades, a further reason for installation’s popularity in Indonesia is perhaps linked to its elasticity and a capacity to bridge formal and separated categories. Artists from disparate generations refer to diverse subject matters: FX Harsono has been raising invaluable questions including those of ethnicity whilst Agus Suwage's life-size installations depicting the dead human body, expose its fragility as a living form.

Eddi Prabandono's work evolves as ‘process art’, permitting the disintegration of installations made beforehand, an aspect highly visible in the Luz Series, a work destroyed after its initial exhibition, which is then collected and displayed in the future. ‘Process art’ perhaps remains the least explored notation in the exhibition, being only further realised in the work of the Solo-based artist Aditya Novali. With Devotion – a set of melting crosses made of ice, cement and wax – the artist suggests the current growth of Islam in Indonesia versus the vanishing Christian and Catholic communities. Recently, some public Indonesian figures, of Christian or Catholic communities, have publicly stated the process of conversion to other forms of spiritualism including Buddhism.

These sociopolitical concerns were further materialised in the life-size installation Revolution Without America by Wilman Syahnur’s, depicting the Iranian leader Ayatollah Khomeini. Its life-like quality and the fact that one could sit beside his historical uncertainty made it both a popular and political work. It seemed to communicate many messages and references besides the point that «at this present moment, Indonesia might be one of the most highly crossed-cultured of the world’s societies […]»[4], manifesting the spirit of a globalising Islam and the current absorption of Arabic or Persian culture by Indonesian people, who proudly embrace the dressing codes that characterise its Arabic and Persian influences.

Albert Yonathan Setyawan, a Bandung-based artist, working in the same realm of religion and religiosity – which remains an extremely important aspect of Indonesian society – exhibited the Cosmic Labyrinth: the stupas, an installation comprised of a multitude of replicas of stupas[5] with a specific performative element of the sounds of Buddhist prayers and meditation chants.

In Long March to Java #3, Jompet Kuswidananto, presented his ‘invisible’ notations by depicting the human’s domination and need to incarcerate animals for their own use – horses in this case – as an animal used in war and transportation as well as a weapon to exploit personal strength in the taming of natural resources. The profound work had an immense power in allowing the audience to understand by abstaining to show the horse but only its human constrains of saddle, whip and bridle as they would be placed on a mounted horse.

Entang Wiharso presented a set of sleeping or lying sculptures that refer to women’s position in an unequal and bias world, so «[…] often placed in a position of victimised beings, thus presenting forms that show the prejudice of their unfair position in society»[6].

The project-room by Jakarta-based artist Iswanto Hartono, perhaps the most conceptual work in the exhibition, Untitled (with Missed Media), allowed the viewer to engage in an atmosphere of intimacy poignantly scattered with everyday objects creating an atmosphere of a solitude life. Whilst the Balinese artist Ketut Moniarta exhibited a work on aluminum depicting the Disney character, Bambi, crushed, exploring the fragility of our collective fantasies and the moral codes that refine our childhood narratives in these globalised digital days.

At a more conceptual level, the Bandung-based Leonardiansyah Allenda, who has often provocatively used the ready-made, exhibited a classic vitrine with broken glass (as if after a theft) entitled Subversion. With this installation, the artist established a critical dialogue with the Gallery Nasional – a public space expected to behave as a national museum thus legitimating value, but one that often fails to protect and preserve its historical works due to incommensurable circumstances including funding and support by the state. Eko Nugroho’s ready-made tried to propagate a controversy, in conceptually retorting to the manner national exhibitions are organised: the artist asked a local manufacturer of flower signs – commonly used in marriages and convention centres – to create a sign on a stand as his entry to Expansion. This work did not have to be returned back to the artist thus avoiding the cost of the return freight – a condition for the artists who participate in this exhibition and one which made many artist angry and despondent. This kind of criticality has little impact for the viewing community, used to struggle to make meaning of the artists’ notations, but provided an interesting institutional critique for the Indonesian cultural system.

In a more unexpected fashion Ichwan Noor’s 3-legged horse made from iron was an encouraging work that made metaphorically explicit by examining the strength the horse possesses even in hard circumstances such as the loss of a leg. Yogyakarta-based Andita Purnama large-scale installations made from a single material – old tape used in cassettes – provided a coming together for the fields of textiles and installation, two domains that traditionally have trouble in relating. Equally Maria Indria Sari presented a textile sculpture, with a toy-like formation, allowing the viewer to re-visit notions of infancy and babyhood – both relative but often dismissed.

Expansion – The Great Exhibition of Indonesian Contemporary Sculptures brings together these various tendencies and insights including the impact and unfolding of a past colonialism, the quest for identity or the social relevance of traditions. Simultaneously, Expansion contributed for an awareness regarding new media tendencies: artists choices various times derived from their backgrounds, revealing an interconnectedness unknown in the previous exhibitions referred to above. All these factors were further transmitted and elaborated in the ostensibly expanded medium of sculpture and installation. These dispositions have been radically influenced by the globalisation of our world wherein the ‘local’ exhibits international relevance and herein artists have felt the active participation in the increasingly important delivery of discursive messages.

Jakarta, 27^th September 2011

References:

Dormer, Peter, The Culture of Craft. Manchester and New York: Manchester University Press, 1997.

Foster, Hal (ed.), Postmodern Culture. London: Pluto Press, 1985.

Holt, Claire, Art in Indonesia: Continuites and Change. Ithaca and London: Cornel University Press, 1967.

Hopkins, David, After Modern Art 1945-2000. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.

Kieran, Matthew, Revealing Art. Abingdon: Routledge, 2005.

Krauss, Rosalind, «Sculpture in the Expanded Field», October, Vol. 8. (Spring, 1979), 30-44.

Reiss, Julie H., From Margin to Center, The Spaces of Installation Art. London: The MIT Press, 1999.

Stallabrass, Julie, Art Incorporated, The Story of Contemporary Art. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004.

Zijlmans, Kitty and van Damme, Wilfried (eds.), World Art Studies: Exploring Concepts and Approaches. Amsterdam: Valiz, 2008.

---

[1] Peter Dormer, «The salon de refuse?», in The Culture of Craft. Manchester and New York: Manchester University Press, 1997, 3.

[2] Id, ibid.

[3] Artforum, June 1967.

[4] Leonor Veiga, «Suddenly We Arrived... Polarities and Paradoxes of Indonesian Contemporary Art», in Indonesian Eye, Contemporary Indonesian Art. Serenella Ciputra (Ed.). Milano: Skira and Parallel Contemporary Art, 2011, 29.

[5] Stupas consist in structures of Buddhism, spread throughout Java. Stupa is a mound-like structure containing Buddhist relics, typically the remains of Buddha, used by Buddhists as a place of worship. Stupas are an ancient form of mandala, in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stupa.

[6] Leonor Veiga, «Regarding the Epic», Second Skin: Peeling Back the Layers [exhibition catalogue]. Yogyakarta: Black Goat Studio and Kalamazoo Institute of the Arts, MI, USA, 2011, 35.

HotWave #3 Cemeti Residency

Invitatiton: artist talk

HotWave #3 is a residency program organized by Cemeti Art House and Heden, The Hague (Netherlands), and Asia Link (Australia). This period I am given a chance to participate with two other artists Esther Kokmeijer and Nathan Gray. The program will take place for three months from September to November 2011 at Cemeti Art House

Link: http://www.cemetiarthouse.com/