RESUME ART TALK A Forum for Discussing Art, Bali, 2012

RESUME ART TALK

A Forum for Discussing Art, Bali, 2012

- 4 NIGHT MAY ART TALK IN DENPASAR -

The art market in Indonesia is anyway livelier than those in Europe. While it is true that today our art market seems to undergo some “crisis”, it won’t last long.  

Such optimism is among a lot of results of a four-day art talk in Bali running from the end of April through early May 2012. The forum was initiated and organized by hendrotan from Emmitan CA Gallery, Surabaya, and took place in Ballroom Padma Resort, Legian, Kuta, Bali. 

The participants were Tjipjanto Soerjanto (collector), Putu Rabin (collector), Djunaidi Januar (collector), Tjandra Winata (market player), Koes Karnadi (publisher of books on art), Tony Hartawan (Tonyraka art gallery owner & art dealer), Chusin Setiadikara, Gung Man, Mangu Putra, Made Djirna, Agus Cahaya (artists), Jean Couteau (culture and art observer), Kusuma and Martha (Kendra Gallery staff members), Arif Bagus Prasetyo (curator), and hendrotan (collector, gallery owner, art dealer) as the host. 

Discussions covered topics around art infrastructure, Indonesian art’s ‘go international’ art market situation and prediction, and concepts of art collecting. 

Art Infrastructure 

One major purpose of the Art Talk is to exchange views on issues and problems around Indonesian art. Awareness has been developing that issues of infrastructure and its operation remain fundamental hindrances to the provision of a wholesome climate for Indonesian art to progress. So continuous attempts by all the stakeholders at improving or establishing art infrastructure and its mechanisms are doubtlessly needed for the betterment of Indonesian art and for its bright future. 

All the Art Talk participants agreed that actually the infrastructure of Indonesian art is actually quite complete. Indonesian art world has artists in a great number, higher learning institutes for art, museums, galleries, collectors, art dealers, curators, art observers/critics, art magazines, auction houses etc. However some significant part of the infrastructure doesn’t function well yet. For example, there is no representative art museum founded on a mature concept, professionally managed, and capable of comprehensively representing the developments and achievements of Indonesian art. Art galleries still function as just “art shops”. Curators’ knowledgeability does not improve; their ideas come from recycling earlier ones at hand, as a consequence of the minimal fee paid to them. Media specializing on art barely exists and is hard to survive. Art critics are scarce as a result of minimal rewards for criticism. Auction houses are often involved in the manipulation of the prices of artworks, and so on. 

Besides, some clear and binding rules, or guidelines at least, for stakeholders of art in carrying out sound and responsible dealings among them as infrastructural elements are lacking. Art education institutions, artists, galleries, art dealers, collectors, auction houses and other parties involved tend to “play” just freely, individually or as small strategic alliances, for the sake of advancing their own short-term pragmatic interests. Not many are willing to care about any greater and long-term interest of Indonesian art. 

As a result the world of Indonesian art feels like a “jungle” where all means are sanctified for achieving one’s or a group’s goals. This is because ethical codes or norms that should have regulated the behavior of the occupants and to orient them to common interests are simply nonexistent. The most obvious example is the absence of a sort of “trading regulations” in the country for artworks, a fact that speculators often cunningly use to enhance exaggeratedly the prices of works by certain artists so to make huge profits in their trading in art. Auction houses may take part in such manipulation of price by collaborating with art dealers or art managers or artists, and they could even play the part of art dealers or art managers themselves. Artists can arbitrarily set high prices for their works when art market is booming, then sell them at low prices when the market is slowing down. Galleries are disadvantaged in that consumers can buy artworks directly from the artists at lower prices. No information system exists, which should have provided transparent and credible information to help identify the “real prices” of artworks; this condition opens the door for speculation and manipulation. Other examples abound. Such chaotic business in art that reflects confused infrastructural procedures undermines the trust of collectors, dealers/market players and auction houses in the value of art and, in turn, corrodes the economic base that sustains the life of art itself.

So it needs actual strategic measures to improve the entire art infrastructure and its operation. Among the steps to take is making a thoroughgoing study of problems around Indonesian art infrastructure then finding the best possible solution, which includes the formulation of guidelines toward orderly infrastructural operation. Results of the study, along with formulated infrastructural improvement measures, will then be inputted and integrated into the existent art education system at the higher learning institution level. As the prime institution in the production of artists that are main actors in the world of art, art academy is seen as a strategic gate toward instilling awareness of the importance of system as well as sound and solid art infrastructure.

I, Arif Bagus Prasetyo, proposed the establishment of a body that gathers all the stakeholders of art throughout the country in the form of an association called Indonesian Art Community. Through the association, attempts at improving infrastructure and procedures will be communicated more conveniently to art community components and they can be implemented in well-structured and integrated working programs. The organization can, for instance, serve to help developing the database and information center of Indonesian art. Comprehensive and updated data on Indonesian art, both in the country and abroad, will also enhance the profile of Indonesian art in the international world. Not less importantly the organization will enable the uniting of all the components of Indonesian art community so that art can make a strong bargaining position in relation to other parties, for instance the government. The interests of Indonesian art can be voiced more forcefully. Say, about the needs for a representative contemporary-art museum in Indonesia and for bureaucracy facilitation regarding sending in and out of artworks to and from the country. 

Indonesian Art’s ‘Going International’

In the context of Indonesian art “go international” has two meanings. One, “go international” in the sense of market and marketing. Indonesian art can be regarded as “going international” if works of Indonesian artists are accepted by the international market. When works of an Indonesian artist often show and sell at galleries or dealers or prestigious auction houses in New York or Berlin or London or Paris, when works by certain artists have standard “international prices” that are relatively stable and regarded reasonable by market actors in Asia, Europe or America, we have some of the indications that the artworks of those particular artists already go international. 

According to hendrotan, up to now the West still dominates the international art market. Therefore to “go international” Indonesian art has, willy-nilly, to penetrate the West first in the sense that it has to win recognition or legitimization from American and European markets. Yet it is not easy. hendrotan said further that even prominent avant-garde works by artists from China, with their soaring prices at auctions in Hong Kong, Taipei and Beijing, still have to wait to be recognized by the international market dominated by the West. Also, works by Chinese masters of avant-garde art don’t have yet economic values as stable as the values of works by masters of Western art like Andy Warhol, Joseph Beuys and Francis Bacon. hendrotan said that dealers from Western countries face problems in making transactions on Chinese avant-garde contemporary artworks. 

In hendrotan’s view there are two effective ways to open the way for Indonesian artists to “go international”:

1. Onstage. Indonesian artists themselves go directly to centers of art in the West, live and work there, actively develop and maintain their social relationships with experts of art in the art world. If they have professional attitude and produce works with groundbreaking ideas capable of rousing artistic sense in its entirety, some experts and the art world in question would hopefully recognize and trust them. Then the international market might accept them. 

2. Backstage, by improving our art infrastructure. Sound and strong infrastructure of Indonesian art, coupled with orderly and proper procedures, will attract international market players of financial business to step into Indonesian art market. If that happens, given such big business opportunities art galleries from abroad (in New York, Berlin and London)  would hopefully open their branches in Jakarta. In time, such galleries would take  Indonesian artists “going international” in the true sense of the phrase. 

 Differing from hendrotan, an artist contended that Indonesian art could be regarded as “going international” once artworks by Indonesian artists gain international reputation, in the sense that connoisseurs abroad recognize the high quality of those works regardless of their market prices. “Go international” implies international recognition of some high cultural value (instead of economic value) of Indonesian artworks. We may check and measure such recognition by observing the levels of “visibility” of Indonesian art, with respect to its creativeness and discursive aspect, in the international scene. 

For instance, is Indonesian art significantly present as a premier invitee in prestigious international art forums like, say, Venice Biennale or discussed in authoritative journals and studies of international art like the Art Forum magazine?

Jean Couteau reminded that the craving for “going international” could just bring not too good effects on the creative development of Indonesian art. International concerns might lead to disregard for national and local concerns. Thematic exploration in Indonesian art could shrink to just particular themes that suit international taste, namely those international curators have interest in. Attempts at internationalizing Indonesian art have the risk of impoverishing Indonesian art that actually possesses very rich creative potencies. 

Currently, said Couteau, thanks to resistance to the West’s domination in the realm of world art, developed countries in Europe and America begin to pay attention to art from developing countries including Indonesia. However their attention tends to go only to artworks dealing with problems similar to those facing them, issues that become common concerns of developed and developing countries. Walking side by side with globalizing capitalistic economy, the internationalization of art has the risk of generating ‘monoculture’, uniform interest and cultural-artistic taste, which will eventually generate new domination where the kind of art with certain concepts of internationality marginalize other kinds of art that are regarded as lacking the “international” vision. 

Art Market Situation & Prediction

Lately complaints about the inertia of Indonesian art market have often been heard. Some of the art talk participants attributed the inertia to the disappointment of many consumers making investments in artworks during the Indonesian art boom some time ago, in addition to the undesirable climate of global economy currently. A lot of people bought artworks at high prices then because they had been led into believing that they would later profit from trade in art. It had turned out, however, that the artworks acquired at high prices had to see the monetary values collapse in a relatively short time. The unstableness of price, which severely harms market’s trust in artworks, is an effect of our sloppy art infrastructure highly susceptible to tricks and manipulation. Improvement of infrastructure and procedures was again offered to be the way toward restoring market’s trust in Indonesian artworks.

hendrotan believed that good artworks have good market. This is to say that market will respond positively to works that are not claimed as good only by the artists making them but also by experts and connoisseurs among the art community that include gallery managements, curators, collectors, art dealers/market players, and critics. Market’s enthusiasm correlates with the tastes or preferences of experts/connoisseurs directly concerned with the establishment of artwork qualities. Artists who believe they have made high quality works for solo exhibitions, yet experts/connoisseurs do not give their recognition, and necessarily market has no interest in those works, will have to introspect and make more profound explorations. “Don’t give up, and try to improve the quality of your works,” hendrotan gave encouragement to such artists.

However a participant of the Art Talk challenged hendrotan’s observation. The salability and unsalability of works on solo exhibitions is not the yardstick for the quality of the works. Good artworks are neither necessarily comprehensible to all experts/connoisseurs in a given art community, nor automatically attractive to market. A lot of other factors have their parts in determining the commercial success or flop of a work; they include, for instance, trends in art, economic situations, business tricks, marketing strategies, and promotional schemes. Manipulation and conspiracy can even be used to curiously render mediocre works brilliant, enticing, so that people crowd around to buy.

Most of the Art Talk participants were optimistic about the prospect of Indonesian art market. The conviction that Indonesian art market has a bright future was based, among other things, on the relatively good rate of economic growth in Indonesia (and Asia) and the growing middle class that needs artworks as a symbol of prestige. As observed by Jean Couteau, the art market in Indonesia is anyway livelier than those in Europe. While it is true that today our art market seems to undergo some “crisis”, it won’t last long. 

Concepts of Art Collecting

According to hendrotan, there are at least three methods by which collectors build their collections of artworks:

1. Vertical Collecting. Collectors collect particular kinds of works, for example drawing, or    works of particular artists. 

2. Horizontal Collecting. Collectors collect any works that are good and liked (contemporary, post-war, modern, traditional works). This is the most popular method.

3. Concurrency Collecting. Collectors collect only works that sustain their ideas/thinking. This method prevails among young collectors with progressive and critical thinking.

Most collectors taking part in the Art Talk said that they collect artworks based on liking and capacity. They would buy any work, of any artist, from any source (galleries, artists, art dealers, auction houses etc.), as long as they like and can afford the works. While claiming that they buy artworks not for the sake of making investments, they will be delighted if the prices of works they have collected undergo increases at market. Some of the collectors said they were proud when works of certain artists they had bought currently have increased prices – though now they cannot afford them. ***

-Arif Bagusprasetyo, 14 May 2012-

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RESUME ART TALK

Forum Bincang Seni Rupa, Bali, 2012

- 4 NIGHT MAY ART TALK IN DENPASAR -

Pasar seni rupa di Indonesia masih lebih bergairah jika dibanding pasar seni rupa di Eropa. Kalau pun sekarang pasar seni rupa kita terkesan mengalami “krisis”, itu tidak akan berlangsung lama. 

Semangat optimis ini merupakan salah satu dari sekian banyak hasil art talk di Bali, yang berlangsung selama empat hari pada akhir April - awal Mei 2012. Forum bincang seni rupa yang diprakarsai dan diselenggarakan oleh hendrotan dari Emmitan CA Gallery, Surabaya, bertempat di Ballroom Padma Resort, Legian, Kuta, Bali.

Para pesertanya adalah Tjipjanto Soerjanto (kolektor), Putu Rabin (kolektor), Djunaidi Januar (kolektor), Tjandra Winata (pemain pasar), Koes Karnadi (penerbit buku seni rupa), Tony Hartawan (pemilik galeri Tonyraka & art dealer), Chusin Setiadikara, Gung Man, Mangu Putra, Made Djirna, Agus Cahaya ( para perupa ), Jean Couteau (budayawan dan pengamat seni rupa), Kusuma dan Martha (staf galeri Kendra), Arif Bagus Prasetyo (kurator), dan hendrotan (kolektor, pemilik galeri, art dealer) merangkap tuan rumah.

Perbincangan mengangkat tema seputar infrastruktur seni rupa, go international seni rupa Indonesia, situasi & prediksi pasar seni rupa, dan konsep pengoleksian karya.

Infrastruktur Seni Rupa 

Salah satu tujuan penting dari Art Talk adalah bertukar-pikiran mengenai problem infrastruktur seni rupa Indonesia. Selama ini telah banyak disadari bahwa infrastruktur dan alur-lintasnya masih menjadi masalah mendasar yang menghambat terciptanya iklim yang sehat untuk kemajuan seni rupa kita. Karena itu jelas diperlukan upaya terus-menerus dari semua pihak yang berkepentingan untuk memperbaiki atau menciptakan infrastruktur dan alur-lintasnya, agar seni rupa Indonesia semakin baik dan memiliki masa depan cerah.

Peserta Art Talk sepakat bahwa infrastruktur seni rupa Indonesia sebetulnya cukup lengkap. Dunia seni rupa di Indonesia memiliki perupa dalam jumlah besar, perguruan tinggi seni rupa, museum, galeri, kolektor, art dealer, kurator, pengamat/kritikus seni rupa, majalah seni rupa, balai lelang dan sebagainya. Namun banyak di antara infrastruktur itu belum menjalankan fungsinya dengan baik. Sebagai contoh, belum ada museum seni rupa yang representatif, dibangun dengan konsep matang dan dikelola secara profesional, serta mampu mewakili perkembangan dan pencapaian seni rupa Indonesia secara komprehensif. Galeri seni rupa masih berpraktek sebagai sekadar “art shop”. Kurator pengetahuannya tidak bertambah, gagasannya daur-ulang dari yang ada, dikarenakan minimnya fee yang diterima. Media seni rupa sangat sedikit dan sulit bertahan hidup. Kritikus seni rupa begitu langka karena minimnya reward terhadap kritik. Balai lelang kerap terlibat dalam praktek manipulasi harga karya seni, dan seterusnya.

Selain itu, tidak ada kejelasan tatanan atau aturan-main yang  mengikat, atau setidak-tidaknya dapat dijadikan pedoman, bagi para stake holder (pemangku kepentingan) seni rupa dalam menyelenggarakan hubungan yang sehat dan bertanggung-jawab di antara berbagai infrastruktur seni rupa. Perguruan tinggi seni rupa, perupa, galeri, art dealer, kolektor, balai lelang dan para pihak lainnya cenderung “bermain” sebebas-bebasnya, sendiri-sendiri atau dalam aliansi-aliansi strategis kecil, demi mengedepankan kepentingan pragmatis jangka-pendek masing-masing. Tak banyak yang peduli pada kepentingan seni rupa Indonesia yang lebih besar dan berjangka-panjang.

Akibatnya, dunia seni rupa Indonesia terasa seperti “hutan rimba”, di mana segala cara dihalalkan untuk mencapai tujuan sendiri atau kelompok, karena memang tidak ada kode etik atau patokan normatif yang mengatur perilaku penghuninya dan mengacu pada kepentingan bersama. Contoh yang paling jelas, tiadanya semacam “tata niaga” seni rupa di Indonesia kerap dimanfaatkan oleh para spekulan untuk melambungkan harga karya perupa tertentu secara tidak wajar dan mengeruk keuntungan besar dalam jual-beli karya. Balai lelang bisa ikut terlibat dalam praktek manipulasi harga karya melalui kolaborasi dengan art dealer atau art manager atau dengan perupa, bahkan dapat bertindak langsung sebagai art dealer atau art manager itu sendiri. Perupa bisa bebas mematok harga mahal untuk karyanya ketika pasar seni rupa sedang booming, lalu menjual murah karyanya manakala pasar sedang lesu. Galeri dirugikan karena konsumen dapat membeli karya secara langsung kepada perupa dengan harga lebih murah. Tidak tersedia sistem informasi yang transparan dan terpercaya untuk mengetahui dan menentukan “harga real” karya, sehingga membuka peluang spekulasi dan manipulasi. Masih banyak contoh lainnya. Carut-marut bisnis seni rupa yang mencerminkan kekacauan alur-lintas infrastruktur seni rupa itu merongrong kepercayaan kolektor, dealer / pemain pasar dan balai lelang kepada nilai seni rupa, dan pada gilirannya menggerogoti basis ekonomi yang menunjang kelangsungan hidup seni rupa itu sendiri.

Karena itu dibutuhkan upaya strategis nyata untuk memperbaiki segenap infrastruktur seni rupa beserta tatanannya. Salah satu langkah perbaikan yang akan diambil adalah dengan mengkaji secara mendalam problematika di seputar infrastruktur seni rupa Indonesia dan mencari jalan pemecahan terbaik, termasuk merumuskan pedoman untuk menertibkan alur-lintasnya. Hasil kajian dan rumusan perbaikan infrastruktur ini selanjutnya akan coba diintegrasikan ke dalam sistem pendidikan seni rupa di perguruan tinggi. Sebagai lembaga terpenting yang menghasilkan perupa, aktor utama di dunia seni rupa, akademi seni rupa dipandang sebagai gerbang strategis untuk menanamkan kesadaran tentang pentingnya tatanan dan alur-lintas infrastruktur seni rupa yang kuat dan sehat.

Saya, Arif Bagus Prasetyo, mengusulkan dibentuknya wadah yang menghimpun segenap stake holder seni rupa di Tanah Air, dalam bentuk paguyuban Masyarakat Seni Rupa Indonesia. Melalui paguyuban itu, upaya perbaikan infrastruktur dan alur-lintasnya akan lebih mudah disosialisasikan kepada komponen-komponen masyarakat seni rupa, dan dapat diimplementasikan dalam program kerja yang terstruktur dan terpadu. Wadah ini, misalnya, dapat dimanfaatkan untuk membangun database dan pusat informasi tentang seni rupa Indonesia. Data dan informasi yang lengkap dan termutakhirkan tentang seni rupa Indonesia tentu sangat berguna bagi banyak pihak, baik di dalam maupun di luar negeri, termasuk untuk memperkuat profil seni rupa Indonesia di dunia internasional. Tak kalah pentingnya, paguyuban dapat menyatukan kekuatan seluruh komponen masyarakat seni rupa Indonesia, sehingga seni rupa memiliki posisi tawar yang kuat di hadapan pihak lain, misalnya pemerintah. Kepentingan seni rupa Indonesia akan dapat disuarakan dengan lebih nyaring. Contohnya, bagaimana agar Indonesia memiliki museum seni rupa kontemporer yang representatif, birokrasi keluar-masuk karya ke dan dari luar negeri dipermudah dsb.

Go Internasional Seni Rupa Indonesia

Dalam konteks seni rupa Indonesia, “go international” memiliki dua arti. Pertama, “go international” dalam arti pasar. Seni rupa Indonesia dapat dianggap “go international” jika karya perupa Indonesia telah dapat diterima oleh pasar internasional. Ketika karya seorang perupa Indonesia sering muncul dan diperjualbelikan di galeri atau dealer atau balai lelang terkemuka di New York atau Berlin atau London atau Paris, manakala karya perupa tertentu memiliki patokan “harga internasional” yang relatif kokoh dan dianggap reasonable bagi para pelaku pasar di Asia, Eropa atau Amerika, itulah sebagian dari tanda-tanda bahwa karya perupa bersangkutan telah menginternasional. 

Menurut hendrotan, sampai sekarang Barat masih mendominasi pasar seni rupa internasional. Karena itu, untuk “go international”, seni rupa Indonesia mau tak mau harus menembus Barat terlebih dahulu, dalam arti mesti dapat pengakuan atau legitimasi di pasar Amerika Serikat dan Eropa. Namun itu tidak mudah. Bahkan, lanjut hendrotan, karya seni rupa garda-depan Cina yang ternama pun, dengan harganya setinggi langit di pelelangan Hongkong, Taipei dan Beijing, juga belum diakui oleh pasar internasional yang dikuasai Barat. Karya para master seni rupa garda-depan Cina juga belum memiliki nilai ekonomis yang sekokoh dan sestabil karya para master seni rupa Barat, misalnya Andy Warhol, Joseph Beuys dan Francis Bacon. Selama ini, menurut hendrotan, para dealer bule kesulitan membuat transaksi karya-karya kontemporer gardan-depan perupa Cina.

Dalam pandangan hendrotan, ada dua cara yang efektif untuk merintis jalan perupa “go international” bagi seni rupa Indonesia:

1. Onstage. Perupa Indonesia terjun langsung ke pusat seni rupa di Barat, tinggal dan berkarya di sana, aktif membina hubungan sosialnya dengan berbagai pakar komunitas seni rupa. Dengan cara ini, bilamana sikap si perupa profesional dan menghasilkan karya yang memiliki gagasan terobosan yang menggedor seluruh indra artistik, barulah dapat diharapkan akan muncul pengakuan dan kepercayaan dari pakar komunitas dan artworld-nya. Berlanjut pasar internasional akan menerimanya.

2. Backstage, yakni melalui perbaikan infrastruktur. Dengan infrastruktur seni rupa Indonesia yang kuat, sehat dan alur-lintasnya tertata dengan baik, maka akan menarik pelaku pasar internasional bidang financial (perdagangan saham dan mata uang) masuk ke pasar  senirupa Indonesia. Dengan peluang bisnis yang besar tersebut maka galeri-galeri dari luar negeri (New York, Berlin dan London) diharap akan membuka cabang di Jakarta. Pada gilirannya nanti, galeri-galeri itu akan mengantar perupa kita go international dalam  arti sesungguhnya.

Berbeda dengan hendrotan, seorang perupa menyatakan bahwa seni rupa Indonesia dapat disebut “go international” jika karya perupa kita mendapatkan reputasi internasional, dalam arti diakui bermutu tinggi oleh para connoisseur di luar negeri, tanpa pandang berapa harganya di bursa benda seni. “Go international” berarti adanya pengakuan internasional terhadap tingginya nilai kultural (bukan nilai ekonomis) dari karya seni rupa Indonesia. Pengakuan ini dapat diukur melalui tingkat “keterlihatan” seni rupa Indonesia, baik dari sisi kreativitas maupun wacana, di mata internasional. Misalnya, apakah seni rupa Indonesia hadir secara signifikan sebagai undangan premier dalam ajang seni rupa internasional yang bergengsi misalnya Venice Biennale atau dibicarakan dalam jurnal dan kajian seni rupa internasional yang berwibawa, misalnya Art Forum magazine dsb. 

     

Jean Couteau mengingatkan bahwa keinginan yang menggebu-gebu untuk “go international” justru dapat berdampak kurang baik bagi perkembangan kreatif seni rupa Indonesia itu sendiri. Concern internasional bisa mengakibatkan terabaikannya concern nasional dan lokal. Jelajah tematik seni rupa Indonesia dapat menyempit ke selera internasional, yakni ke tema-tema tertentu yang diminati oleh para kurator internasional. Usaha internasionalisasi seni rupa Indonesia berisiko memiskinkan seni rupa Indonesia yang sesungguhnya memiliki potensi kekayaan kreatif yang sangat besar.

Dewasa ini, menurut Couteau, sebagai salah satu hasil dari perlawanan terhadap dominasi Barat di kancah seni rupa dunia, negara-negara maju di Eropa dan Amerika mulai menoleh pada karya seni rupa dari negara-negara berkembang, termasuk Indonesia. Namun perhatian ini ditengarai lebih terarah pada karya-karya yang mengusung problematika serupa, hanya berkutat pada permasalahan yang menjadi concern bersama di negara maju maupun negara berkembang. Berjalan seiring dengan globalisasi ekonomi kapitalistik, internasionalisasi seni rupa berisiko menimbulkan monokulturalisme, keseragaman minat dan selera kultural-artistik, yang pada gilirannya menciptakan dominasi baru, di mana ragam seni rupa dengan konsep keinternasionalan tertentu meminggirkan ragam-ragam seni rupa lainnya yang dianggap tidak bervisi “internasional”.

Situasi & Prediksi Pasar Seni Rupa                         

Belakangan ini santer terdengar keluhan tentang lesunya pasar seni rupa Indonesia. Selain karena imbas iklim perekonomian global yang kurang bagus, beberapa peserta Art Talk menengarai bahwa kelesuan pasar seni rupa Indonesia saat ini disebabkan oleh kekecewaan banyak konsumen yang berinvestasi pada karya ketika terjadi boom seni rupa Indonesia beberapa waktu lalu. Banyak yang membeli karya senirupa dengan harga tinggi karena tergiur janji keuntungan jual-beli benda seni, tapi kemudian gigit jari karena karya yang dibeli dengan mahal itu harganya jatuh dalam tempo relatif singkat. Ketidakstabilan harga yang merusak kepercayaan pasar terhadap karya seni rupa ini merupakan akibat dari carut-marut infrastruktur yang rawan trik dan manipulasi. Pembenahan infrastruktur dan alur-lintasnya kembali dikemukakan sebagai cara untuk mengembalikan kepercayaan pasar kepada karya seni rupa Indonesia.

Hendrotan percaya, karya yang bagus pasti memiliki pasar yang bagus. Dalam arti, pasar akan merespons positif terhadap karya yang bukan saja diklaim bagus oleh perupa sendiri, tapi juga harus diakui mutunya oleh “mata elang” pakar komunitas seni rupa yaitu galeri, kurator, kolektor, art dealer / pemain pasar, kritikus. Minat pasar berkorelasi dengan selera pakar komunitas yang langsung berhubungan dengan penentuan mutu karya. Bila perupa yang merasa telah membikin karya bagus pada waktu perhelatan pameran tunggalnya, tapi karyanya tidak dinyatakan bagus oleh pakar komunitas, dan serta merta tidak diminati pasar, seharusnya berintrospeksi dan bereksplorasi yang lebih dalam lagi. “Jangan putus asa, dan berusahalah meningkatkan kualitas karyanya,” saran hendrotan. 

Tapi seorang perupa peserta Art Talk menyanggah pandangan hendrotan itu. Laku-tidaknya karya-karya di pameran tunggal sang perupa bukanlah tolok-ukur tinggi-rendahnya mutu karya. Karya bagus belum tentu dimengerti oleh pakar komunitas senirupa atau diminati pasar. Banyak faktor ikut menentukan kesuksesan atau kegagalan komersial karya, seperti trend seni rupa, situasi ekonomi, trik dagang, strategi pemasaran, kiat promosi dan lain-lain. Bahkan manipulasi dan konspirasi pun bisa digunakan untuk menyulap karya yang bermutu rendah atau biasa-biasa saja menjadi terkesan berkilau, menggiurkan, dan diserbu pembeli.

Hampir semua peserta Art Talk berpandangan optimis terhadap prospek pasar seni rupa Indonesia di masa depan. Keyakinan bahwa pasar seni rupa Indonesia memiliki masa depan cerah antara lain didasari oleh adanya tingkat pertumbuhan ekonomi di Indonesia (dan Asia) yang relatif bagus, juga bertambah besarnya kelas-menengah yang membutuhkan karya seni sebagai simbol prestise. Sebagaimana yang diamati oleh Jean Couteau, pasar seni rupa di Indonesia masih lebih bergairah dibanding pasar seni rupa di Eropa. Kalau pun sekarang pasar seni rupa kita terkesan mengalami “krisis”, itu tidak akan berlangsung lama.

Konsep Pengoleksian Karya

Menurut hendrotan, paling kurang ada tiga metode yang digunakan oleh kolektor untuk mengoleksi karya seni rupa :

1. Metode Koleksi Vertikal. Kolektor mengoleksi ragam karya tertentu yang spesifik, misalnya  khusus drawing atau khusus karya perupa tertentu. 

2. Metode Koleksi Horisontal. Kolektor mengoleksi karya apapun yang bagus dan yang disukai (karya kontemporer, post war, modern, tradisional). Metode ini paling populer.

3. Metode Koleksi Segaris. Kolektor hanya mengoleksi karya yang mendukung ide/pemikiran sang kolektor. Metode ini biasanya dipakai oleh kalangan kolektor muda yang berfikiran progresif dan kritis.

Hampir semua kolektor yang berpartisipasi dalam Art Talk mengaku mengoleksi karya seni rupa berdasarkan kesukaan dan kemampuan. Mereka membeli karya apapun, kreasi perupa manapun, dari mana pun sumbernya (galeri, perupa, art dealer, balai lelang dsb), sepanjang karya itu disukai dan terjangkau harganya. Meski mengaku membeli karya bukan untuk tujuan investasi, mereka senang jika karya yang dikoleksi mengalami peningkatan harga di pasar. Sebagian kolektor mengaku bangga jika karya seniman tertentu yang dulu dibelinya jadi melambung tinggi – meskipun kini harganya tak terjangkau lagi oleh kantong sang kolektor. ***

-Arif Bagusprasetyo, 14 Mei 2012-