WHO DETERMINES THE QUALITY OF ARTWORK?
by hendrotan, owner of Emmitan Contemporary Art Gallery
Write on February, 2th , 2012
This article has been published in the magazine of Visual Arts on March - April 2012 (page 56 - 59)
* This article can be read also in the web of Visual Arts.
www.visualartsmagazine.info
Note :
Having an utmost desire is being highly enthusiastic or ambitious; when the pursuit of it is for the sake of one’s love for family, fellow humans, improving human’s life in the world, and safeguarding the preservation of nature, so that it necessarily implies ethical control in doing things, it is virtuous. Eternity lies only in MOVEMENT: pushing to expand, pulling to contract, and circling to rotate. Dear friends, death does exist and it is actually beautiful; it changes the old and gives space to the young. This is philosophical; I bid you all to ponder on this.
From me, hendrotan
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RESULTS OF LATEST RESEARCH HAVE CHALLENGED THE PREVAILING OPINION THAT COLLECTORS ARE NO LONGER CRUCIAL IN DETERMINING THE QUALITY AND ORIENTATION OF CONTEMPORARY ART.
The title above – an interrogative one – is itself questionable with regard to what the real issue is: quality of artwork already accomplished and shown to the public, or, artwork in process at artists’ studios or workshops?
Before answering it, clarification is in order: in today’s market-oriented art practice, determining the quality of an artwork doesn’t only take place once a work becomes public. It already begins when the work is still in process at the artist’s studio and is carried out by the artist (the doer) and “stimulating agents”. Different parties tend to play decisive roles in determining quality in the public realm and at artists’ studios.
In dealing with the question above I will give priority to talk about work to be processed at studios by “creative stimulators” that might include artists, galleries, curators and authoritative museums*1 (unfortunately we don’t have them in Indonesia yet) with their respective roles. It is very important for each of these stimulators or motivators to keep from making the claim that they are the most influential in determining the quality of work to be made by an artist. In fact each of them may offer ideas, language and different kinds of interpretations. The nature of the process, and questions on proportion, are points where constructive relationships among artists, curators, galleries and museums become significant in developing artists’ concepts and putting them into practice. As we know an artwork rests on three pillars that are form, technique and idea. Naturally, it is the artist establishes the three pillars in two- or three-dimensional, or any other creations. In these creations artists objectify value or anti-value, beautiful or not-beautiful (yet artistic), authenticity or copy, innovation or old-fashionedness, mere technical skills or perfected with profundity of ideas.
So one may see right away that it is artists (backed up by artisans and other assistants), galleries, art curators and authoritative museums play a significant role in shaping the quality of an artwork before going to an exhibition (i.e., in the initial creative process at artists’ studios).
An art collector is not necessarily the sole determiner of quality
Then what party plays the decisive role regarding the determination and judgment of the quality of an artwork in the public realm? Until today some have maintained that collectors are the most appropriate determiner of the quality of artworks. The reason is that collectors are end users; they spend money on artworks with the risk of spending it on wrong artworks.
We often hear and read that today it is collectors determine and dictate the direction and quality of contemporary art. This doesn’t only apply for Western countries; in developed and developing countries collectors have played an important role in the production and consumption of contemporary art.
Odd as the statement above might sound it is hard for us to ignore it, particularly in the consideration of recent reality prevailing in the world of art.
It is true that in the past, prior to the current contemporary era, there was the great collector by the name of Medici who became the patron for art in support of the developing Renaissance art. In the contemporary era we know Charles Saatchi, a gallery owner cum famous art market player in Europe and the US. By the touch of his golden hand Damien Hirst’s reputations, for instance, soar high. Hirst’s installation in the form of a preserved tiger shark in a glass container, called The Physical Impossibility of Death in the Mind of Someone Living, is regarded “high quality” after it sold twelve million US dollars in 2004 thanks to Saatchi.
Yet what about Basquiat and his work? A graffiti artist in New York, Basquiat sees his name raise without, one may say, any collector’s help. Historically Basquiat’s fame springs from the prominent critic Rene Richard who “discovers” Basquiat as “the Radiant Child” as the critic puts it in his writing in the world’s most prestigious art magazine, Artforum, in its December 1981 issue. Later Basquiat reputations and his works become more widely known and discussed in the circles of collectors and market players*2 after Andy Warhol “baptizes” him.
As a result, the case of Basquiat and his works proves that the institutions of prominent critic, legendary artist and reliable media (art magazine in this regard) can also work together and provide power that enables the “baptism” of artists and their works as highly qualified. Here collectors merely follow them.
With the above examples I hope it is clear that the role to determine the quality of an artwork, more than that: to orientate the journey of contemporary art, is not fully in the hands of collectors; other institutions and stakeholders of art*3 also have their power. In fact determining the quality of a work is often a collaborative matter involving persons from different fields of expertise in the realm of art.
In the context of Indonesian art, artists whose personal qualities*4 and works get recognition from and through such collaborative experts (not just from one single preeminent collector) include, for example, Jumaldi Alfi, Entang Wiharso, Agus Suwage, Chusin Setiadikara, Heri Dono, Mangu Putra and Ay Tjoe Christine. With their individual backgrounds their works already get national and international recognition. The market as well as the world of discourse on art welcomes them.
Field Research
I’d like to inform here that what I have offered in this writing all comes from excerpts of field research I independently did during the period from the end of last year through the beginning of this year. I visited art communities in different parts of Java and Bali. I started with Denpasar. There I organized discussions in four consecutive evenings with the participation of top-rank artists, senior art collectors, prominent publishers and well-known authorities on culture. The prevailing answer, to the question put in the title of this writing, is: the art collector is not necessarily the sole authority in determining the quality of artwork; instead, it is determined by the community of experts in art*5 as well as the test of time.
I then went to Jakarta and Surabaya. This time my research made use of a sort of concatenated techniques: by means of the SMS (short message service), electronic mail, facebook, telephone conversation, but also face-to-face discussion with collectors, market players, journalists, and owners of influential magazines. In addition, I had some big art dealers and certain market players enthusiastically and actively giving remarks. By and large, their answers are similar to or even identical with those occurring in Denpasar. Frankly such result surprised me greatly, and delighted me at once; it was a long dream of mine to have a contemporary-art community getting smart together, and now the dream comes true.
Of course the overall smartness of an art-expert community and an artworld needs regular updating. This is in order to build up the soundness of our art while keeping some people from being too conceited to think that they have been playing the most important role in determining the quality of artwork and the orientation of Indonesian contemporary art development. You do agree, don’t you ?.
Notes:
*1 Authoritative museum = (a). Run by an administrator, professionally managed – as marked by the existence of a board of directors comprising reliable curators, critics, and historians. (b). In active connection with the Moma, Guggenheim Museum in New York and museums in Germany, Spain, France, England, China, Japan, South Korea, Australia and other such places. (c). Having the backup of funding supporters or patrons contributing IDR 500,000,000,000 annually for obtaining artworks and covering administration and operational costs.
*2 Market players = art dealers, art investors, art traders and art shops.
*3 Stakeholders of art or artworld = artists, art galleries, art curators, critics, art collectors, market players, the media, museums, art lovers and academicians.
*4 Artist’s personal quality = credibility, integrity and historical roles.
*5 Art expert community = art galleries, art collectors, market players, critics, curators, and authoritative museums.
PULL-QUOTES
“THE QUALITY OF ARTWORK, AND, MOROVER, THE ORIENTATION OF CONTEMPORARY ART, IS NOT ENTIRELY DETERMINED BY ART COLLECTORS BECAUSE OTHER STAKEHOLDERS OF ART ALSO HAVE THEIR OWN POWER.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Catatan :
Berkeinginan yg berlebihan itu adalah semangat besar atau ambisi dan kalau ini dilakukan untuk Cinta pada Keluarga , untuk Kasih pada Umat sesamanya , untuk Memperbaiki kualitas hidup manusia di dunia dan untuk mengAyomi Kelestarian Alam , maka keinginan berlebihan itu diwujubkan dgn kontrol berEtika , sesungguhnya dia sangat Mulia ! keAbadian hanya ada pada GERAKAN : dorongan mengembang, tarikan mengkerut atau sirklus berputar , Wahai teman , kematian itu ada dan indah sejatinya , akan merubah yg tua dan memberi ruang bagi yg muda , ini adalah filsafat , selamat memaknainya.
hendrotan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SIAPA PENENTU MUTU KARYA SENI RUPA?
oleh hendrotan , pemilik Emmitan Contemporary Art Galeri
Tertulis tanggal, 02 Februari 2012
Artikel ini telah terbit di Majalah Visual Art pada Maret - April 2012 (hal. 56 -59)
* Tulisan ini bisa di baca juga di web Visual Arts.
www.visualartsmagazine.info
HASIL RISET TERBARU TELAH MEMBANTAH PENDAPAT SELAMA INI, BAHWA KOLEKTOR TIDAK LAGI MUTLAK SEBAGAI PENENTU MUTU DAN ARAH SENIRUPA KONTEMPORER.
Judul tulisan yang saya ajukan -- bernada pertanyaan -- ini, jelas dapat dipertanyakan kembali, apakah yang dipersoalkan itu : mutu karya senirupa yang sudah jadi dan dipamerkan di ranah publik, atau yang baru dalam tahap proses di studio/ bengkel kerja perupa.
Sebelum menjawab, kiranya dapat dijelaskan terlebih dahulu, bahwa dalam perilaku praktik senirupa berorientasi pasar dewasa ini, yang namanya mutu karya tidak hanya ditentukan pada saat karya itu sudah beredar di tengah masyarakat, namun sudah dimulai sejak tahap proses di studio oleh pelaku dan “penggerak”. Adapun pihak yang berperan menentukan mutu di ranah publik dan dalam studio cenderung berbeda.
Dalam menggali jawaban atas pertanyaan di atas, saya mendahulukan pembahasan karya yang bakal diproses di studio oleh “ para penggerak cipta”. Adapun penggerak cipta itu adalah perupa, galeri, kurator dan museum berwibawa*1 (sayang di Indonesia belum ada) dengan perannya masing-masing. Unsur-unsur penggerak ini sangat perlu menghindarkan diri dari klaim kebenaran sebagai pihak yang paling berperan menentukan mutu karya seni rupa yang akan diciptakan oleh si perupa. Sebab setiap unsur penggerak tersebut dapat mengajukan gagasan, bahasa, dan semua jenis tafsir yang saling berbeda. Seperti apa prosesnya, dan bagaimana proporsinya, di situlah hubungan konstruktif antara perupa, kurator, galeri dan museum berwibawa, sekaligus menjadi faktor penting dalam menggerakan konsep penciptaan si perupa sebagai aktor utama. Sebagaimana kita ketahui, suatu karyaseni rupa terdiri dari tiga pilar utama—yaitu bentuk, teknik, dan ide. Tentu saja, perupalah yang mendirikan pilar tersebut dalam bangunan dua dimensi atau tiga dimensi atau lainnya. Dalam bangunan itu perupa mengobyektivasikan nilai atau antinilai, indah atau tidak indah ( namun artistik ), otentisitas atau peniruan, pembaruan atau lama keuzuran dan kepandaian teknis semata atau lengkap dengan kedalaman gagasan.
Karena itu sudah dapat disimpulkan jawabanan atas pertanyaan siapa yang berperan menentukan mutu karya seni rupa yang belum dipamerkan ( awal proses penciptaan di studio) adalah perupa (lengkap dengan artisan dan tenaga pembantu yang lain), galeri, kurator dan museum berwibawa.
Kolektor tidak Mutlak Jadi Penentu
Lalu siapa pihak yang berperan menentukan mutu karya senirupa yang ada di ranah publik? Hingga saat ini masih ada yang mengukuhkan pendapatnya sendiri bahwa kolektorlah yang paling pantas sebagai penentu mutu karya. Dalihnya, kolektor lah yang mengeluarkan uang (end user ), dengan risiko jika salah beli kolektor jualah yang menanggung bebannya.
Bahkan, sering kita dengar dan baca bahwa pada saat ini kolektorlah yang menentukan arah dan kwalitas seni rupa kontemporer. Tak hanya di Barat, negara – negara maju dan negara berkembang pun, kolektor telah memainkan peran penting dalam praktik produksi dan konsumsi seni rupa kontemporer.
Sekalipun hal tersebut terkesan janggal -- kalau bukan aneh -- sulit rasanya untuk mengabaikan pernyataan ini, terutama jika kita mengingat realitas belakangan yang terjadi di dunia seni rupa.
Memang harus diakui, dulu, sebelum era kontemporer telah tercatat jasa seorang kolektor besar bernama Medici, yang menjadi patron seni dalam menyokong perkembangan seni Renesans. Atau di era kontemporer kita kenal Charles Saatchi, pemilik galeri merangkap pemain pasar senirupa ternama di Eropa dan Amerika Serikat. Lewat sentuhan tangan dingin Saatchi, misalnya, reputasi Damien Hirst melambung tinggi. Karya instalasi Hirst berupa seekor hiu macan yang di awetkan di tabung kaca, yang berjudul The Physical Impossibility of Death in the Mind of Someone Living, dianggap “bermutu” setelah terjual seharga 12 juta dolar AS pada 2004 melalui jasa Saatchi.
Tapi bagaimana dengan Basquiat dan karyanya? Seorang pelukis grafiti jalanan New York, yang menjulang namanya ini bisa dibilang bukan karena kolektor. Sejarah mencatat, nama Basquiat menjulang setelah “ditemukan” oleh Rene Richard, seorang kritikus seni rupa ternama, yang menulis sosok kreatif Basquiat sebagai “The Radiant Child” (Bocah yang Bersinar) di majalah seni rupa paling bergengsi di dunia, Artforum, pada Desember 1981. Reputasi Basquiat dan karya-karyanya kemudian makin dikenal dan dibicarakan khususnya di kalangan kolektor dan pemain pasar*2, setelah “dibaptis” oleh perupa Andy Warhol.
Walhasil “kasus” Basquiat dan karyanya ini, dapat menjadi bukti bahwa institusi kritikus terkemuka, perupa legendaris, dan media massa (majalah senirupa) yang terpercaya, juga bisa berkolaborasi menciptakan kekuatan “membaptis” perupa dan karyanya, sebagai yang bermutu. Kemudian posisi kolektor dalam kaitan ini, tinggal “mengamini” saja.
Dari contoh-contoh di atas jelas sudah, bahwa peran yang menentukan mutu karya senirupa, apalagi arah senirupa kontemporer tidak berada secara mutlak di tangan kolektor, sebab institusi maupun para pemangku kepentingan senirupa*3 yang lain juga punya kekuatan. Bahkan dalam menentukan mutu karya senirupa, tidak jarang dilakukan secara kolaboratif, oleh para pakar senirupa di bidangnya masing-masing.
Dalam konteks senirupa Indonesia, para perupa yang mendapat pengakuan secara kolaboratif (tidak semata-mata atas peran mutlak kolektor) atas mutu diri*4 dan karyanya antara lain adalah Jumaldi Alfi, Entang Wiharso, Agus Suwage, Chusin Setiadikara, Heri Dono, Mangu Putra dan Ay Tjoe Christine. Dengan latar belakang masing-masing, karya mereka diakui ditingkat nasional maupun internasional. Mereka diterima pasar, juga diterima di dunia wacana.
Riset Lapangan
Sekedar tahu, semua jawaban dalam tulisan ini, saya sarikan dari hasil riset lapangan dalam rentang waktu akhir tahun lalu hingga awal tahun ini, yang saya lakukan secara indepen. Saya berkeliling ke komunitas-komunitas seni rupa seantero Jawa-Bali. Bermula dari Denpasar. Di sana saya menggelar diskusi maraton selama empat malam, dengan peserta beberapa perupa papan atas dan beberapa kolektor senior berikut publisher yang ternama, hingga budayawan kondang. Jawaban yang mengemuka : yang berperan menentukan mutu senirupa bukan mutlak kolektor, namun komunitas pakar senirupa*5, dan uji waktu (sebagai pembuktiannya).
Kemudian saya lanjutkan di Jakarta dan Surabaya. Kali ini saya melakukan riset dengan teknik campuran: lewat sms, email, facebook, telpon langsung , juga beberapa kali saya berdiskusi face to face dengan kolektor, pemain pasar, jurnalis, dan owner beberapa majalah berpengaruh. Selain itu, ada beberapa art dealer besar ternama dan beberapa pemain pasar yang sangat antusias aktif mengomentari. Pada umumnya jawaban mereka hampir mirip kalau tidak boleh dikatakan sama dengan yang di Denpasar. Jujur saja, melihat hasil ini saya sungguh terkejut, sekaligus gembira, bahwa sudah lama saya bercita – cita agar komunitas seni rupa kontemporer bisa cerdas bareng-bareng -- berhasil menjadi kenyataan.
Tentu saja, kecerdasan komunitas para pakar dan artworld senirupa pada umumnya harus terus di up-date. Selain supaya senirupa kita makin sehat, jangan sampai ada pihak yang ge-er (gedhe rumangsa) berkepanjangan, karena “didapuk” oleh mitranya, dan merasa paling berperan sebagai penentu mutu karya dan arah perkembangan senirupa kontemporer Indonesia. Anda setuju kan ?.
Catatan kaki :
*1 Museum berwibawa = (a). Yang dikelola oleh administrator dan
bermanajerial profesional–antara lain board director berisi
kurator, kritikus dan sejarawan yang handal. (b). Berjejaring
aktif dengan Moma, Guggenheim museum New York dan museum –
museum di Jerman, Spanyol, Perancis, Inggris, China, Jepang, Korsel,
Australia, dll. (c). Memiliki Penyokong dana / Patron yang setiap
tahunnya sebanyak Rp.500 milyar untuk pembelian karya seni rupa,
biaya administrasi dan operasional.
*2 Pemain pasar = Art dealer, Art investor, Art trader dan Art shop.
*3 Pemangku kepentingan Seni Rupa = Perupa, Galeri, Kurator,
Kritikus, Kolektor, Pemain Pasar, Media, Museum, Balai
lelang, Pencinta Seni Rupa dan Akademisi.
*4 Mutu diri perupa = Kredibilitas, Integritas dan Eksistensi peran sejarah.
*5 Komunitas Pakar Seni Rupa = Galeri, Kolektor, Pemain Pasar, Kritikus, Kurator
dan Museum yang berwibawa.
PULQUOTES
“ YANG MENENTUKAN MUTU KARYA SENIRUPA, APALAGI ARAH SENIRUPA KONTEMPORER, TIDAK MUTLAK DI TANGAN KOLEKTOR, SEBAB PARA PEMANGKU KEPENTINGAN SENIRUPA JUGA PUNYA KEKUATAN.”
