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-

“IBU SRI” THE INDONESIAN ART INFRASTRUCTURE, IDIOTS AND THE STATUS QUO / IBU SRI, ANAK IDIOT DAN STATUS QUO

“IBU SRI” THE INDONESIAN ART INFRASTRUCTURE, IDIOTS AND THE STATUS QUO

hendrotan

This article has been published in the magazine of Visual Arts May - June, 2012

IN MY OPINION INFRASTRUCTURE IS THE MOTHER OF INDONESIAN ART (Note: “Ibu” is an Indonesian word for “mother”, and Indonesian Art is “Seni Rupa Indonesia”, or “SRI” for short, in Indonesian language.) AS A MOTHER HER FATE HASN’T BEEN VERY GOOD SO FAR. SHE EVEN HAS TO ACCEPT THE FACT THAT HER THREE CHILDREN ARE “IDIOTS” AND ONE MORE OF THEM GETS PERVERTED TO BECOME A PAINTING MAGICIAN. THIS ESSAY WAS WRITTEN AS REFLECTION, SELF-CRITICISM AND SHARED LEARNING IN ORDER FOR THE MOTHER TO BREAK FREE FROM THE DEADLY GRIP OF THE STATUS QUO. 

As the story goes, it has been quite a long time since art community members wished to see the life of Mother SRI (SRI stands for Seni Rupa Indonesia, which is Indonesian Art and ‘Mother SRI’ refers to Indonesian art infrastructure) improve to be on a level with her counterparts in the USA, Germany and England. However such a wish is against the fact that not many people really care about improving art infrastructure; some even try to maintain its status quo of disorder. Consequently the disorder has generated three “idiotic” children. 

The three “idiotic” children are contemporary artist, art gallery, and curator. Another child, which is “bright enough”, named collector, tends to be perverted into being a “painting magician”. Such situation further complicates the current condition of Indonesian art. 

The question is what party should be held responsible for being the “father” of those poor children? I tend to put my finger on the higher learning institution for arts throughout the country that serves as the center for training prospective intellectuals in arts with sophisticated theories imported from around the globe. But why does the father let the three children become “idiotic” and the other one fall into being a “painting magician”? I will return to this topic after examining the fates of the three children based on facts and field observation. 

The first “idiotic” child: artist. A contemporary artist is someone with ideas and ambitions for making artworks to display in some prestigious museum of art. As I see it, the artist is a central figure. He/she is the first person with authority to state that something is “art”. Having such authority, an artist carves his/her name and reinforces the authority through collaboration with another party that is art gallery. But the sad thing is that some Indonesian artists are not quite mature yet in terms of personal, not to say professional, attitudes. Not few of them tend to easily break their promises and deny spoken commitments and even written contracts. They do such things because of general ignorance, or ignorance in legal matters, ineptitude in distinguishing between good and bad relationships with other parties concerning their creative work, and, often, their idiosyncratic behaviors. Some of them are wanting in morality so that they are not ashamed to get involved in spurious pricing of their works at auctions. What’s more ridiculous, some will even offer their works for sale to one or two customers on whom the artists’ lives depend.

The second “idiotic” child: art gallery. Indonesia never, so far, has any professional or well-founded gallery with some sufficient capital. Here ‘sufficient capital’ excludes assets, premises, and the gallery owner’s private collections. Let us compare the situation to that found in the USA. There, a third-class gallery has at least 5 million US dollar as its capital. A second-class has it at US $20 million, and a first-class one over US $100 million (Business Week, October 2006). What’s the situation here? Forget the amount of US $5 million; you barely need all your fingers to count Indonesian galleries with capitals amounting to even just US $ 1 million.

Today, galleries in Indonesia generally still keep the mass-minded mentality and behavior, which resemble those of art shops. It is true that a few galleries were previously proper art galleries; but now, because of changes taking place in 2011, they turn into common artshops or galashops. They don’t managerially operate as art galleries. This is because of the incapacity of the owners to shift their paradigm from that of regular shop keeping to that of conducting an elegant and prestigious business. Aside from that, there is also the issue of undesirable attitude: paying lip service to super wealthy collectors but showing arrogance to young collectors and art-collecting beginners, for instance. In fact they are supposed to be willing to pay attention and appreciation to young collectors and beginners whose number is much bigger. Moreover, galleries should be able to develop enclaves of young collectors in all Indonesian cities and to consistently run discussions on the essence of art as well as matters concerning market, and provide information about latest significant events in the international art world (this will, in time, set the roles of such galleries on a par with those of the hitherto predominant auction houses of the Sotheby’s and Christie’s). Indonesian galleries must not only concern about inviting ‘hot’ artists to exhibit, or organizing collective exhibitions potential to generate successful sales, while shying away from signing exclusive contracts with young artists. Such conduct reflects shop-keeping mentality of safeguarding one’s own interests or unwillingness to help young artists in dealing with their “difficulties”.  

Actually a gallery ought to be the main shield in protecting the dignity of artists, particularly those under the gallery’s management. That is what Charles Saatchi did when Damien Hirst was regarded by many (famous) art critics as being bereft of inspiration in 2008. Saatchi said, “He (Damien Hirst) is deeply an artist, a genius among us, but he’s had a bad run of shows over the past few years. All great artists have an off patch, and he’s having his. Usually when that happens, artists try too hard and the results look effortful and overblown. But I’m sure his next show will be a winner” (see My Name is Charles Saatchi and I am An Artoholic, 2009, p.70).

Such statement shows the integrity of a gallery owner cum dealer regarding an artist in his custody. Saatchi the gallery owner asserted the credibility of Hirst his artist although he was experiencing a hard time in creativity. Genuine galleries have the natural drive, passion and enthusiasm to make long-term investment that artshops do not seem to neither either have or need. 

The third “idiotic” child: curator. The roles and tasks of art curators cover several issues; among them are selecting artworks for being museum pieces, researching works of young/new artists, and curating exhibitions at public as well as private art galleries. Besides, they will write about art, artworks, also artists, and present it through various means of information/communication, such as catalogs, brochures, newspapers, and magazines, to the public.

As far as I know there are two models or patterns of curatorial operation, namely the top-down curatorial and the bottom-up curatorial. Both are often used as the main reference everywhere, including Indonesia. However malperformance marks some Indonesian curators in carrying out their tasks. For example, in the curacy of solo exhibitions they do not intensely monitor the artists’ creative processes at studios. Anyway, and curiously, they are able to write very smoothly in exhibition catalogs based only on few brief visits. 

How can it happen? Here are, I think, two among the reasons:

1. The curators are not knowledgeable enough about curacy and in fact the title of ‘curator’ is not really suitable for them. To improve curatorial capacity and professionalism it is now time to have a curator association in Indonesia.

2. Curators working for art galleries in Indonesia usually get paid around IDR 10 through 30 million per exhibition. Given the relatively meager fee, naturally they soon face problems in trying to perform their tasks professionally, to improve their dynamic knowledge about art, and to buy books and magazines on art published in the country and abroad. Traveling on their own resources to visit and take part in prestigious biennales, triennials and international seminars abroad is easily out of the question. 

Magician and Patron   

Another child of ‘Mother SRI’, which is “sharp enough”, is called collector. Unfortunately this kid often demonstrates over self-confidence in behaving, presuming that a good collector is one that can always afford for expensive artworks to collect. 

It is all right to think that way, but there are still questions about the deepness of the collector’s insight into the value of artworks and the willingness to share it with others. Upper-level collectors should also philosophically understand art in that the beauty of the garden of art doesn’t lie on the emergence of one or two favored roses but on the sweet scents of the various flowers in the entire garden. This metaphor implies that collectors – particularly those of them wishing to be called “patrons” – are not “gardeners” that are able to tend just one or two roses inside their golden cages; they are also supposed to be “architects” that work conscientiously in the realms of beauty and thinking, and to formulate and implement the garden’s design as well. If only collectors have the willingness to contribute to the development of Indonesian art in its wholeness, and have the ability to actualize the philosophy into some sound infrastructure of art education and art business, so that works of Indonesian artists can have their standard values/prices in international market, they will be esteemed as real patrons.

Therefore it is only proper for collectors to avoid being “painting magicians”. “Painting magicians”, what are they? They are collectors who are actually art dealers by profession but are always in disguise as collectors when carrying out their business lest their identities get uncovered.

With the situation described above in mind, we can say that currently it seems improbable for Indonesian art to have any collector that is a (real) patron. In my opinion Indonesia has only collectors of the types described below. 

(1). Collectors who develop collections based only on fondness of some specific kinds of painting. For instance, a collector will collect just Affandi’s paintings or drawings only. Collectors belonging to this type are pure collectors, you can call them genuine idealists if you like, because throughout their lives they only build collections without ever selling them again. This type, the “vertical-collector type”, has profound faith in art. 

(2). Collectors who collect artworks of various media and genres – traditional, modern and contemporary – with some high idealism. They will not become art dealers; even if they sometimes sell paintings, they do it just to get enough money to buy pieces of some better quality than those they decide to let go. What’s more, they always do the buying at gallery exhibitions. They belong to the type of “horizontal collectors” that believe in values of works. 

(3). Collectors who collect works of some specific genres, for instance Indonesian contemporary artworks, exclusively. Collectors of this type usually come from among young collectors that are highly critical and active in monitoring developments in Indonesian as well as international art while enthusiastically improving themselves by reading art theory books. That is why they will not hesitate to sell works that are “not on the line” (inconsistent with their concept of collection), or because of inconsistence in the artists’ attitudes. They then decide to replace the works in question with more proper and qualified pieces. They will say that they don’t sell paintings for the profit but because of their critical awareness. They represent the “young and smart type” of collectors.

(4). Collectors who collect artworks of various media and genres through cheap buys up. The purchased works will then be kept for some time to be later sold at some highest possible prices. To prevent people (particularly artists) from recognizing their being dealers, this kind of collectors make others do the actual selling and buying for them. They belong to the “painting-magician type” of collectors.

(5). Here I don’t discuss investors or art dealers as well as other art-market players, but I pay respect to those having clearly defined attitudes and who have helped Indonesian art market a lot by daringly buying paintings at high prices in auctions and supporting art activities by buying works at exhibitions by galleries. 

Actually the issue of buying and selling artworks represents a crucial one that defines a collector’s genuineness. According to Sarah Thornton (2009: 30), there are traditionally only three reasons for a collector to dispose of a collection item. Thornton, the famous observer of art, formulates the reasons as “three D’s” that stand for death, debt, and divorce. I think we can add one more “d” to include “donation”.

The Need for Order versus the Status Quo

Most Indonesian art collectors still need to improve their philosophical knowledge. At this point we may find one major reason for the lack of collectors with ascetic character and willingness to struggle for developing Indonesian art while disregarding loss-and-gain matters. Some of them even “get perverted” so that they develop the attitude of being against Indonesian art infrastructure and trade order. They choose freeness without any regulation. This attitude may spring from:

One, sound infrastructure and trade order will increase the reputation of artists and the price of artworks, and this may just disturb the status quo in which a number of art collectors have hitherto been comfortable (they can have their will in picking artworks at lower prices directly from artists’ studios) and secure (being given blind privileges from artists) in the chaotic situation currently. 

Two, sound art infrastructure and art trade order will help unmask the real interest of some collectors behind their inviting art practitioners from other countries to Indonesia. It will be uncovered that what they do is not for the sake of Indonesian artists and art but for their personal interest of showing-off with the next intention of – who knows? We know that “white” intellectuals and actors of international art market will not pay attention and appreciation to contemporary artworks produced by artists of a country that doesn’t have any proper art infrastructure. For example, even works by Affandi the maestro, S. Sudjojono, and Widayat, after years being in the collections of an ex-Brazilian ambassador for Indonesia, were sold at relatively low prices and sent back to Indonesia. The point is those works do not have any standard value/price at the international market (Tempo magazine, 16 April 2012, p. 68). The same thing will not happen to works by, say, Andy Warhol (1928-1987), Joseph Beuys (1921-1986), Francis Bacon (1909-1992) and whoever else among artists from countries that have sound and solid art infrastructure. 

Emphasis that should be given here include 1) a collector is not necessarily and automatically a patron of Indonesian art for the mere sake of his/her being wealthy. The attribution of the title of “patron” should be through examination, recognition and establishment by experts among Indonesian art community that includes academicians and even institutional elements of Indonesian artworld such as art foundations. 2) With sound Indonesian art infrastructure and art trade order, it will not be for Indonesian artists to strive towards “going-international”; reversely, the international community will come to you bros!

The Expected Role of Higher Learning Institution for Arts 

Early in this writing I have mentioned that the father of the three “idiotic” children and the “perverted”-collector-turning-a-painting-magician is the higher learning institution for arts. If there were never any learning institution for the arts, or art, all artists would have been known as “drawing artisans” or “autodidactic painters”. We can imagine that those autodidacts would be selling paintings at their home-cum-studios, or displaying paintings by the roadside as well as modern markets, and at other somewhat more prestigious spots in the public space like shopping malls and hotels. In other words, sophisticated infrastructure wouldn’t have been necessary. When painter A painted the dragon or the koi carp and it sold well, then painters B through Z would be painting the dragon or the koi carp too, expecting similar good sales.

But facts have their say. Following the nation’s independence higher learning institutions for art emerge, which include ISI (Indonesian Institute of the Arts), Faculty of Art and Design of the Bandung Institute of Technology [ITB (FSRD)], and Jakarta Art Institute (IKJ). These institutions annually produce Stratum-1 graduates (bachelors in art), while some of the institutions produce also Stratum-2 (graduate program) and Stratum-3 (post-graduate program) graduates. These alumni become the backbone of our current “art producers” that include artists, curators and observers/critics. Not few of them now operate within different elements of art infrastructure and they play some roles in the realms of discourse as well as market. 

That’s why I am sure that the improvement of “Ibu SRI” (meaning, again: the entire Indonesian art infrastructure) has to be through collective and simultaneous endeavors, which involve higher learning institutions for arts. In turn, such enterprise may reinforce collective awareness of the proper, dignified discourse and market orders of Indonesian art. 

The collective and simultaneous improvements will have positive implications for the existence of Indonesian art in the eyes of actors and observers in the country and abroad. Furthermore, sound and orderly infrastructure will also stir young (new) collectors, new market players, and, especially, it will invite international market players in finance (stock exchange and money market). Such a situation is expected to generate new galleries with significant capital strength and professionalism and to invite art galleries in New York, Berlin and London, for example, to open their Jakarta branches (and to make Indonesian artists “go international” in the true sense of the words). Finally, Indonesian artwork will have its standard value/price at international market.

If it can really be, the Indonesian artworld will gain respect and recognition from the international artworld. For Indonesian higher learning institution for art, which has fathered the existing idiocies in Indonesian art, its now time to take measures, together with art practitioners and the government, to think about, formulate, and define the course to take for the better future of Indonesian art; it should begin with the codification of each of the elemental parts of our art infrastructure. Not less importance and less wished is the incorporation of the subjects of art infrastructure and art trade system in the regular syllabi of higher learning institutes for arts. That will make “Ibu SRI” – the Indonesian art infrastructure – healthy, released from the deadly grip of chaos and the status quo. Let’s hope so. [V]

Pull quotes

The collective and simultaneous improvements will have positive implications for the existence of Indonesian art in the eyes of actors and observers in the country and abroad.

-MAY, 07, 2012, 10.10- 

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

IBU SRI, ANAK IDIOT DAN STATUS QUO 

hendrotan

Artikel ini telah terbit di Majalah Visual Art edisi Mei - Juni 2012

DALAM PANDANGAN SAYA, INFRASTRUKTUR ADALAH IBU SENIRUPA INDONESIA (SAYA SINGKAT IBU SRI). SEBAGAI IBU SRI, NASIBNYA TAK KUNJUNG MEMBAIK, BAHKAN ANAK-ANAKNYA “IDIOT”, DAN ADA YANG JADI DUKUN LUKISAN. 

ESAI INI SAYA TULIS DENGAN MAKSUD SEBAGAI REFLEKSI, AUTOKRITIK DAN PEMBELAJARAN BERSAMA, AGAR IBU SRI TERLEPAS DARI STATUS QUO. 

Alkisah, sudah lama warga senirupa menginginkan kehidupan Ibu SRI membaik dan sehat, seperti di Amerika Serikat, Jerman dan Inggris. Akan tetapi, keinginan itu bertentangan dengan fakta, bahwa tidak banyak orang mau peduli pada perbaikan infrastruktur senirupa, bahkan ada pula yang berusaha menjadikan status quo dalam kecarut-marutan. Akibatnya, kecarut-marutan ini telah melahirkan -- sekaligus menjadi biang—tiga anak “idiot”. 

Ketiga anak “idiot” itu, adalah perupa kontemporer, galeri, dan kurator. Sementara anak lainnya, yang “cukup cerdas”, bernama kolektor malah ada yang terjebak menjadi “dukun lukisan”. Suasana demikian semakin menambah keruwetan baru bagi senirupa Indonesia hari ini.

Persoalannya, siapakah pihak yang patut dituding dan betanggungjawab sebagai “bapak” bagi anak-anak yang bernasib malang itu? Si bapak, menurut hemat saya,  adalah dunia perguruan tinggi seni, yang tersebar di berbagai tempat di republik ini, yang menjadi kawah candra dimuka para cerdik pandai dalam mempersiapkan dan menggembleng putra-putri seni dengan menggunakan teori-teori canggih dari berbagai penjuru mata angin. Tapi mengapa si bapak membiarkan ketiga putranya “idiot”, dan ada yang terjebak jadi “dukun lukisan” ? Nanti masalah ini akan saya kupas setelah menyimak nasib ketiga anak itu, berdasarkan fakta dan pengalaman lapangan.

Anak “idiot” kesatu : perupa. Perupa kontemporer adalah seorang yang bergagasan dan bercita – cita membuat karya yang akan dipajang di sebuah museum berwibawa. Bagi saya, perupa adalah sosok penting dan orang pertama yang memiliki otoritas untuk mendapuk sesuatu sebagai “seni”. Dengan otoritas itu, perupa menorehkan nama dan mengukuhkan wibawa lewat kerjasama dengan pihak lain, yaitu galeri. Disayangkan beberapa perupa  Indonesia masih kesulitan bersikap dewasa dan matang, apalagi professional. Tidak sedikit dari mereka  menggampangkan pelanggaran bahkan pengingkaran baik yang sudah terikat kontrak hitam putih maupun akad janji (ucapan). Hal ini selain karena keterbatasan pengetahuan umum dan hukum, juga tingkat kecerdasan memilah baik buruknya hubungan kerja kreatifnya dengan pihak lain, dan tidak jarang bergejala idiosyncrasy. Ada pula yang miskin moral, sehingga tidak malu melibatkan diri dalam goreng-menggoreng di pelelangan. Belum lagi kenyataan -- sungguh tidak bernalar -- bila perupa menjadi penjaja yang tergantung pada langganan satu-dua kolektor yang dimitoskan sebagai sumber kehidupan mereka.

Anak “idiot” kedua : galeri. Di Indonesia belum pernah muncul galeri yang professional atau bonafid, serta bermodal usaha cukup. Maksud modal usaha cukup adalah setoran kapital yang diperuntukkan modal perputaran, tidak termasuk aset, tanah dan bangunan, serta koleksi pribadi pemilik galeri. Mari kita bandingkan dengan di Amerika Serikat. Di sana, galeri kelas tiga saja, modal usahanya paling kurang 5 juta dolar. Sedangkan galeri kelas dua 20 juta dollar, dan galeri kelas satu di atas 100 juta dollar ( Business Week , October 2006 ). Bagaimana di sini? Jangankan bermodal usaha 5 juta dollar AS,  galeri yang bermodal usaha satu juta dollar saja bisa dihitung dengan jari penderita kusta.

Sekarang ini, galeri di tanah air umumnya masih bermental dan berperilaku masif layaknya artshop. Bahkan beberapa galeri yang sebelumnya telah berperingkat galeries, dengan dinamika tahun 2011, balik menjadi artshop atau galashop. Pendek kata belum dapat dikatakan sudah bermanajemen kegalerian. Hal itu disebabkan oleh ketidakmampuan para pemiliknya mengubah paradigma dagang (toko) dijadikan bisnis secara elegan dan berwibawa. Selain itu juga soal sikap, misalnya inggah-inggih (selalu ya) pada kolektor super kaya, namun dihadapan kolektor muda dan pemula mereka bergaya arogan. Seharusnya mereka mau memperhatikan, dan menghargai yang muda dan pemula, yang jumlahnya jauh lebih banyak. Bahkan galeri harus mampu menciptakan kantong - kantong komunitas kolektor muda di seluruh kota besar, dengan konsistensinya mendiskusikan esensi kesenian berikut wacana pasar dan mewartakan kejadian penting terakhir medan sosial senirupa internasional ( metode ini nantinya yang akan membuat seimbang posisi-perannya galeri dengan dominasi Balai Lelang Sotheby’s dan Christie’s selama ini ). Jangan bisanya cuma mengundang pameran perupa yang lagi hot atau pameran beramai – ramai agar kans terjualnya besar, namun enggan membuat kontrak eksklusif dengan perupa muda. Hal itu merupakan gambaran dagang—toko “ cari selamat ” atau tidak mau berkorban membantu “ kesulitan “ perupa muda.

Seharusnyan galeri menjadi tameng utama bagi harkat dan martabat perupa, khususnya perupa yang berada di bawah manajemennya. Itulah yang dilakukan Charles Saatchi ketika Damien Hirst, yang menurut pandangan banyak kritikus senirupa ( kondang ), sedang kehilangan inspirasinya pada 2008. Kata Saatchi, “He (Damien Hirst) is deeply artist, a genius among us, but he’s had a bad run of shows over the past few years. All great artists have an off patch, and he’s having his. Usually when that happens, artists try too hard and the results look effortful and overblown. But I’m sure his next show will be a winner” (lihat My Name is Charles Saatchi and I am An Artoholic, 2009, hlm. 70).

Pernyataan tersebut, memperlihatkan integritas pemilik galeri dan seorang dealer terhadap kredibilitas seorang perupa ampuannya—betapa pun sang perupa tengah berada di masa – masa sulit dalam proses kreatifnya. Galeri tulen, memiliki karakter, passion dan semangat investasi jangka panjang, yang  artshop tidak memerlukannya.

Anak “idiot” ketiga : kurator. Peran dan tugas kurator senirupa meliputi sejumlah hal, antara lain menyeleksi karya seni untuk museum, meneliti karya perupa muda/baru, dan mengampu pameran di galeri-galeri senirupa negeri atau swasta. Selain itu menulis perihal senirupa, karya senirupa, atau pun perupa, di berbagai sarana informasi/komunikasi  dengan masyarakat, misalnya katalog, brosur, surat kabar, majalah, dan lainnya.

Sepanjang pengetahuan saya, sejauh ini dikenal dua model kerja kurator senirupa, yaitu top-down curatorial dan bottom-up curatorial. Dua model inilah yang sering menjadi rujukan di mana – mana, tak terkecuali di Indonesia. Namun ada beberapa kurator Indonesia dalam melakukan tugas kuratorialnya tidak selaras dengan peran yang harus di embannya. Misalnya, untuk mengkurasi pameran tunggal, sang kurator tidak mengikuti secara intens proses kreatif perupa di studio.  Anehnya, dengan sekadar menjenguk saja, sang kurator sudah begitu lancar menulis di buku katalog. 

Mengapa bisa terjadi seperti ini? Menurut hemat saya, disebabkan :

1. Pengetahuan ilmu kurasinya belum pantas menyandang titel kurator. Untuk meningkatkan kapasitas dan profesionalitas mereka, maka sudah saatnya perlu ada asosiasi kurator di Indonesia.

2. Fee atau bayaran kurator di galeri dalam negeri pada umumnya Rp. 10 juta sampai Rp. 30  juta/ pameran. Dengan bayaran relatif minim itu, tentu saja mereka mengalami hambatan untuk melakukan tugasnya secara professional, memperdalam pengetahuan senirupa yang dinamis, terkendala membeli buku-buku dan majalah senirupa terbitan dalam maupun luar negeri. Kalau untuk kebutuhan itu saja sudah kesulitan, bagaimana harus membiayai diri-sendiri datang ke biennale, triennale, seminar internasional yang bergengsi di luar negeri? 

Dukun dan Patron   

Anak Ibu SRI lainnya,  “cukup cerdas” bernama kolektor. Sayangnya kerap berperilaku over confidence, dengan anggapan, bahwa kolektor yang baik adalah yang selalu bisa membeli dan mengumpulkan karya mahal. 

Pendapat tersebut tidak salah, namun masih dibutuhkan pengetahuan seberapa dalam kolektor menghayati dan membagi  keindahan nilai – nilai kepada orang lain. Dan kolektor kelas atas sebaiknya senantiasa mengerti filosofi seni rupa, bahwa keindahan taman senirupa tidak terletak pada munculnya satu-dua tangkai mawar unggulan, tapi pada semerbak ragam bunga seluruh taman. Kiasan ini, artinya seorang kolektor—apalagi yang ingin disebut “patron”—bukanlah seorang “tukang kebun” yang hanya bisa menyiangi satu-dua tangkai mawar di sangkar emasnya, melainkan seorang “arsitek” yang berjuang di wilayah keindahan, pemikiran, perumusan dan pelaksanaan desain taman itu. Bila saja kolektor mau andil  dalam pembangunan senirupa Indonesia seutuhnya, dan mampu mewujudkan filosofi tersebut dalam infrastruktur pendidikan dan tatanan perniagaan senirupa yang  rapi dan sehat, sehingga karya perupa anak bangsa memiliki standar nilai / harga di pasar internasional, maka ia akan dimuliakan sebagai patron sejati.

Oleh karena itu, sudah tepat jika seorang kolektor, bukan seorang “dukun lukisan”. Apa itu dukun lukisan? Dukun lukisan adalah kolektor yang berprofesi sebagai pedagang lukisan, namun selalu menggunakan topeng sewaktu berjualan, karena takut diketahui identitas sesungguhnya.  

Dengan pemahaman seperti itu, maka untuk senirupa Indonesia sekarang ini, rasanya masih sulit menemukan kolektor dengan sosok patron (sejati). Menurut hemat saya, yang ada baru sebatas kolektor senirupa dengan kecenderungan tipe sebagai berikut. 

(1). Mengoleksi berdasarkan rasa suka semata terhadap  karya seni rupa dengan spesifikasi tertentu. Misalnya, mengoleksi lukisan-lukisan Affandi semata, atau mengoleksi karya drawing saja. Kolektor jenis ini adalah kolektor murni atau boleh dibilang idealis sejati, karena sepanjang hayat mereka hanya mengoleksi tanpa menjualnya kembali. Mereka ini tipe kolektor ber “iman seni” yang kokoh, atau tipe kolektor vertikal. 

(2). Mengoleksi karya seni rupa berbagai medium dan genre -- tradisional, modern dan kontemporer – dengan idealismenya tinggi. Mereka tidak akan berdagang lukisan, kalau pun menjual, itu untuk membeli lagi karya yang lebih bermutu. Pembeliannya pun selalu dalam pameran galeri. Mereka ini tipe kolektor horizontal yang memiliki kepercayaan kepada nilai - nilai karya.

(3). Mengoleksi karya senirupa bergenre khusus. Misalnya, mengoleksi karya senirupa kontemporer Indonesia semata. Kolektor jenis ini rata-rata kolektor muda yang sangat kritis, aktif mengikuti perkembangan senirupa Indonesia maupun internasional, memacu dirinya dengan bacaan buku – buku art theory. Itu sebabnya, mereka tak akan ragu menjual kembali karya yang “tidak segaris” (di luar konsep pengkoleksian si kolektor), atau karena sikap perupanya yang tidak konsisten (berubah kacau), maka diganti dengan karya yang segaris dan bermutu. Alibinya, mereka menjual bukan karena memburu laba, melainkan lebih karena kesadaran kritis. Mereka ini tipe kolektor mudas (muda dan cerdas).

(4). Mengoleksi karya seni rupa berbagai medium dan genre, dengan cara beli mengijon persis seperti tengkulak buah mangga; yang murni berdasarkan prinsip dagang : beli semurahnya, simpan dulu, lalu jual semahalnya. Supaya mata publik ( khususnya para perupa) tidak tahu bahwa dia jualan, maka si kolektor,  meminjam tangan atau mengatasnamakan hulubalangnya (modus operandinya seperti pedagang mobil bodong). Mereka inilah tipe kolektor dukun lukisan.

(5). Di sini saya tidak membahas investor atau art dealer dan pemain pasar karya senirupa lainnya, namun saya menaruh hormat pada mereka yang memiliki kejelasan sikap dan telah banyak membantu pasar Senirupa Indonesia dengan gaya letupan berani beli mahal dari pelelangan dan selalu mendukung kegiatan ( membeli karya ) di pameran galeri.

   

Sesungguhnya persoalan jual-menjual karya senirupa merupakan persoalan krusial yang menentukan kesejatian seorang kolektor. Sebab, menurut Sarah Thornton (2009: 30), hanya ada tiga alasan tradisional kolektor melepaskan karyanya. Dalam bahasa Inggris, pengamat seni rupa terkenal itu mengistilahkannya dengan “Three D’s”— death (wafat), debt (utang), divorce (cerai), dan menurut saya dapat ditambah donation (derma).

Perlu Tatanan Versus Status Quo

Pada umumnya, kolektor di Indonesia belum memiliki pengetahuan filosofis yang memadai. Di sini titik sebabnya mengapa kita sulit menemukan sosok kolektor yang berjiwa asketis ( asketisme ) dan rela berjuang untuk mengembangkan senirupa Indonesia tanpa pertimbangan untung-rugi. Bahkan ada kolektor yang “tersesat” sehingga bersikap anti infrastruktur, anti-tatanan perniagaan  senirupa Indonesia, dan memilih bebas tanpa aturan. Sikap ini bisa saja disebabkan oleh :

Pertama, dengan adanya tatanan infrastruktur dan perniagaan senirupa yang sehat akan meningkatkan  reputasi perupa dan peringkat harga karya, justru akan mengganggu status quo sejumlah kolektor seni rupa yang selama ini merasa nyaman (bisa pilih-pilih karya seenaknya dengan harga lebih murah di studio  perupa), dan aman ( mendapat keistimewaan secara blindly privilege dari perupa ) dalam situasi carut-marut saat ini. 

Kedua, dengan adanya tatanan infrastruktur dan perniagaan senirupa yang sehat, akan membuka kedok kepentingan sejumlah kolektor yang mengundang pelaku seni rupa luar negeri ke Indonesia. Ternyata, itu dilakukan bukan untuk kepentingan perupa dan senirupa Indonesia, melainkan untuk kepentingan pribadi mereka dalam ber-narsis ria  memamerkan egonya, dengan maksud—tujuan selanjutnya, who know ? Sebagaimana diketahui bule intelektual dan pelaku pasar internasional  tidak akan memberi penilaian dan penghargaan karya senirupa kontemporer yang dihasilkan oleh perupa sebuah negara tanpa infrastruktur yang benar. Sebagai contoh karya maestro Affandi, S. Sudjojono dan Widayat pun setelah sekian tahun di koleksi oleh bule mantan Dubes Brasil, toh akhirnya semua dijual kembali ke Indonesia dengan harga relatif murah. Ini disebabkan karya – karya tersebut tidak memiliki standar nilai / harga di pasar internasional ( majalah Tempo, tanggal 16 April 2012, hlm. 68 ). Sebaliknya, hal serupa tidak akan terjadi pada karya seniman Andy Warhol (1928-1987), Joseph Beuys (1921-1986), Francis Bacon (1909-1992), asal negara yang infrastruktur senirupanya baik dan mantap.

Yang perlu ditekankan di sini bahwa 1) Seorang kolektor tidak serta merta menjadi patron senirupa Indonesia karena kekayaan hartanya. Penobatan patron seyogyanya melewati pengujian, pengakuan dan pengukuhan dari pakar komunitas senirupa Indonesia dan akademisinya, bahkan melibatkan beberapa unsur medan sosial senirupa (artworld ) yang berbentuk kelembagaan, yayasan dan sebagainya. 2) Dengan infrastruktur dan tatanan perniagaan senirupa Indonesia yang baik, bukan perupa yang harus bingung dengan go-internasional, sebaliknya internasional community will come to you bro !

Peran Perguruan Tinggi Seni Ditunggu 

Di awal tulisan, sudah saya sebutkan bahwa ayah ketiga anak “idiot” dan kolektor yang “tersesat” jadi dukun lukisan, itu adalah lembaga perguruan tinggi seni(rupa). Dan seandainya di Indonesia tidak pernah ada lembaga pendidikan kesenian atau senirupa, maka semua perupa akan dipanggil dengan nama tukang gambar atau pelukis otodidak. Bisa dibayangkan, para seniman otodidak itu akan menjual  lukisan di rumah yang merangkap studio, atau menggelar lukisan di trotoar jalan atau di pinggiran pasar modern, hingga yang lebih gagah di ruang publik, seperti mall atau hotel. Alias tidak memerlukan infrastruktur yang canggih. Bila pelukis A menggambar naga atau ikan koi laku terjual, maka pelukis B sampai Z ikut menggambar  naga dan koi, mengharap laris.

Namun kenyataan menentukan lain. Setelah Indonesia merdeka, berdiri lembaga pendidikan tinggi senirupa antara lain ISI, ITB (FSRD), dan IKJ. Lembaga pendidikan tersebut setiap tahun meluluskan para sarjana seni S1, dan beberapa perguruan tinggi seni juga meluluskan Sarjana Seni Strata 2 dan Strata 3. Para alumni itulah pada kenyataannya menjadi tulang punggung “produsen senirupa kita” dewasa ini, yakni para perupa, kurator dan pengamat. Dan tidak sedikit dari mereka yang bergerak di berbagai unsur infrastruktur senirupa, dan turut berperan serta bermain di ranah wacana maupun pasar.

Itu sebabnya mengapa saya yakin bahwa pembenahan Ibu SRI (baca infrastruktur senirupa pada umumnya) perlu dilakukan secara bersama dan simultan, termasuk didalamnya melibatkan perguruan tinggi seni. Hal tersebut  dapat memperkuat kesadaran kolektif  atas tata wacana dan tata niaga senirupa Indonesia yang baik dan bermartabat.

Pembenahan kolektif dan simultan seperti itu, pada gilirannya akan berimplikasi positif pada eksistensi seni rupa Indonesia, di mata pelaku dan pemerhati senirupa, di dalam negeri hingga internasional. Lebih dari itu, infrastruktur yang tertata baik dan sehat, juga akan menarik minat kolektor muda (baru), pemain pasar pemula (baru), terutama kedatangan pelaku (pemain) pasar internasional dari bidang financial (perdagangan saham dan mata uang). Situasi demikian diharapkan akan menumbuhkan galeri-galeri baru bermodal kuat dan professional, dan berdatangannya galeri dari New York, Berlin, London, misalnya, untuk membuka cabang di Jakarta (dan akan membawa perupa Indonesia go-internasional dalam arti sesungguhnya). Pada akhirnya karya senirupa Indonesia akan mendapatkan standar nilai / harga di pasar internasional.

Bila hal itu yang terjadi, maka manfaat yang akan diraih oleh medan sosial senirupa Indonesia adalah rasa hormat dan pengakuan dunia senirupa internasional. Dan lembaga pendidikan tinggi seni(rupa) sebagai sang ayah dari berbagai “keidiotan” senirupa yang ada, sudah waktunya turun tangan bersama para praktisi senirupa di lapangan – juga pemerintah -- untuk memikirkan, merumuskan dan menentukan arah masa depan senirupa kita, dimulai dari penataan bagian per bagian infrastruktur senirupa kita. Dan yang tak kalah penting dan menjadi harapan kita bersama, yaitu bagaimana perguruan tinggi seni bisa membawa pengetahuan infra struktur dan tata niaga senirupa Indonesia ini ke ranah kurikulum atau mata kuliah reguler. Sehingga Ibu SRI sehat, dan terbebas dari cengekraman carut-marut dan status quo. Semoga. [V]

Pullquotes

Pembenahan kolektif dan simultan seperti itu, pada gilirannya akan berimplikasi positif pada eksistensi seni rupa Indonesia, di mata pelaku dan pemerhati senirupa, di dalam negeri hingga internasional.

-07 MEI 2012, 10.10-