Art in Japan>Contemporary Art 1930-2004>Under Construction: New Dimensions in Asian Art (long version)

Original articles on art, artists, architecture, exhibitions, galleries, museums and cultural institutions around Tokyo, Japan.

Under Construction: New Dimensions in Asian Art (long version)

by John McGee

Subodh Gupta, Pure, video, 2000 (Image courtesy the artist)

In Douglas Adams’ future dystopia novel “The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy,” a giant computer finally determines the answer to the meaning of life: 42. The joke was that nobody knew the question. 

In April 2000, Yasuko Furuichi, exhibition coordinator at the Japan Foundation Asia Center, had her own big question: What is Asia? She posed it not to a computer but to a group of curators. Their answer: 43. 

The 43 artists in “Under Construction: New Dimensions in Asian Art,” up through Mar 2 were chosen by eight curators from seven Asian countries, were shown in seven group exhibitions throughout Asia, and are compiled here in Tokyo in one show at two venues: the Japan Foundation Forum in Akasaka and Tokyo Opera City Art Gallery in Hatsudai. The exhibition is a lot like your first day in Bangkok, sans guidebook—exciting, cramped, chaotic, confusing and tough to get around. 

The Asia Center, a semi-governmental organization, promotes intellectual exchange and cultural vitality in Asia. One of its missions is to introduce contemporary Asian art to Japan. Over the past decade, these efforts have included solo shows of Asian artists and various conferences.

Compared to recent projects however, "Under Construction" digs deeper, trying to get at the very root of Asian identity. Globalization, the internet, tourism, modernization and other factors have led to breakneck growth and development, causing socio-cultural transformations within many parts of Asia. As Furuichi writes in the exhibition catalog, these forces have led to greater connections throughout the region and also caused Asians everywhere to confront their national and trans-national identities.

During the 1990s, the art world began to include an increasing number of Asians in international biennials and other opinion-shaping showcases, intensifying the identity issue, at least for globe-trotting Asian art stars. Still, in what is sometimes characterized as an unwitting extension of colonialism, most of the curators doing the selecting were Western, not local. 

The Asia Center wanted an Asian view of Asian artists. One problem, Furuichi notes, was that Japan’s 20th-century imperialist march through the region didn’t endear it to its neighbors, and past attempts by Japanese organizations to sponsor projects within Asia were often denounced as cultural imperialism. So, rather than sending only Japanese curators, "Under Construction" aimed to capture the current Asian contemporary art zeitgeist through the collaboration of eight curators from seven Asian countries—Pi Li from China, Ranjit Hoskote from India, Asmudjo Jono Irianto from Indonesia, Yukie Kamiya and Atsuo Yamamoto from Japan, Sunjung Kim from Korea, Patrick D. Flores from the Philippines, and Gridthiya Gaweewong from Thailand. (According to one of the Japanese curators, these countries were chosen because they have Japan Foundation offices in them.)

In August, 2000, the curators met each other for the first time. All spoke English and were roughly the same age (born in the 1960s and ’70s) and most had some overseas curatorial experience or education. Following working seminars in Japan and research trips to various Asian countries the curators held seven “local exhibitions,” one each in Ashiya (Hyogo Prefecture), Manila, Beijing, Seoul, Bandung (Indonesia), Bangkok and Mumbai (Bombay). 

Each show was organized according to different principles with a different curator or curatorial team. In general, they brought together Asian artists working with similar ideas, regardless of nationality (this is not an art Olympics they stress). The somewhat reciprocal Manila and Ashiya shows, curated by Flores and Yamamoto respectively, shared some of the same Filipino and Japanese artists dealing with issues of craft and transcending borders. Kamiya, Kim and Li curated the nearly identical Beijing and Seoul exhibitions, both focusing on daily life and fantasies in the work of Chinese, Japanese, Korean and Thai artists. In Bandung, curator Irianto built a temporary barn-like gallery to show Indonesian artists. The Bangkok show, curated by Gaweewong, took place in three venues around the city and featured Thai, Indian and Chinese artists. The Mumbai show, under Hoskote’s direction, included Indian and Filipino artists dealing with post-colonial issues, media and the body. These shows, co-sponsored by the Japan Foundation and local groups, were meant to lay the groundwork for art infrastructure within and among the countries and encourage connections among the curators. 

Curators more often work alone than in groups. This veritable ASEAN summit of the arts must have required patience, determination and diplomacy. So how was it? “Good, bad, terrible, exciting, frustrating,” says Gaweewong. There were some language problems, sudden venue changes, email overload and the Chinese construction crew that had trouble differentiating “art” from “non-art.” 

Judging from each curator’s essay in the exhibition catalog, there were also serious differences in the critical framework, purpose, organization and implications of the show. Nonetheless, they found common ground. As Hoskote put it, “Each supposed difficulty was very stimulating.” 

Gimhongsok, The Boat, mixed media, 
2000-2002 (Photo: John McGee)

All of the curators agreed that one of the most interesting things they learned was that each had very different ideas about Asia, being Asian, art, and how to organize a show. “What you take for granted, others don’t,” says Hoskote. They credit their cooperative process with helping them understand different ways of perceiving art and Asia. “It widened my horizons,” says Irianto. “It was fantastic...eye-opening,” says Kamiya. “The most difficult thing,” says Li, “was that we had so many ideas but only one show.” 

One of the final debates was how to organize the Tokyo exhibition. “All of the local shows had different directions and we didn’t want to destroy their underlying meanings,” says Kamiya. But in the end, they decided not to re-present individual units but to commingle them to see what new juxtapositions would produce. Tokyo Opera City Art Gallery and its chief curator Mami Kataoka joined with the Asia Center in the final collaboration of financing and space. 

The group used the keywords for the local shows as the framework for the Tokyo exhibition, matching them to the characteristics of the two cross-town galleries. The Foundation Forum is a dark, mysterious theatrical space that fit the themes of Memory, Enigma, Fantasy and Dream. Opera City is bright and open, suiting Mobility, Daily Life, Habitation, Transforming, Hybrid and other ideas. 

So here we are, seven local shows, three working seminars, countless emails and nearly three years later, looking at this potluck of contemporary Asian art. We know the question (What is Asia?). We have the answer (43 artists). But, somehow the meaning of this sprawling adventure in identity exploration and curatorial panache eludes. The parts just don’t congeal. 

Maybe they’re not supposed to. “Under Construction” references the message you see on an unfinished website. Also, as Kim writes in her catalog essay, when the project started three years ago, “what Asia is was much clearer...however the question has grown more and more complicated and unclear.” As Hoskote says, “We didn’t hope to have the answers.” Moreover, Kamiya says, “You cannot articulate ‘Asia’ in one word but through different voices. We didn’t expect one result.” 

Is this big muddle a metaphor for Asia then—not easily defined, amorphous, ever-changing? If so, it does little to assuage the disorientation visitors are bound to feel. 

The curators’ free-flowing connections and divergences would have been easier to navigate if they had included a concise conceptual diagram (or copious materials in the galleries) of how the show came about, who was involved, and why the results appear as they do. Visitors shouldn’t have to read the entire catalog to get the gist. This is supposed to be a Sunday afternoon art stroll not a three-day seminar. 

But the show is rewarding in individual moments. Some examples: Boem Kim offers a simple, effective transformation of idea and form in his sculptural installation which is literally “An Iron in the form of a Radio, a Radio in the form of a Kettle and a Kettle in the form of an Iron." Sora Kim’s installation looks like a bank counter with long blue, red and green banners hanging overhead identifying it as “Capital Plus Credit Union.” Every deposit you make—of anything you like—is guaranteed 3% interest in either size, weight or quantity. Bharti Kher raises issues of national identity and representation in her pair of bulbous “trees” covered in marbled swirls of bindis standing over a fake tiger rug. 

Often the dialogue between the works suffers from the cramped exhibition layout, designed by Japanese architecture group Atelier Bow-Wow. Inside Mareeya Dumrongphol’s contemplative, clay-smeared room, you can hear people stomping up the ramp and platform (an installation by Lee Mikyung) that forms the ceiling to her small space. Is that dialogue or just interference? Likewise, Hiroshi Kitao’s metal flowers and trees spread through the galleries like kudzu, squeezing out their neighbors. 

In her catalog essay, Kim asks whether this show is any different for having Asian curators. It’s tough to answer. After the opening, however, Irianto said, “I’m worried that with this show we’ve only followed the fashion.”

Though not entirely successful as an exhibition, "Under Construction" succeeds in raising questions about the art world, Asia and post-colonialism. Through much of Asia, “curator” remains an unknown term. Addressing this issue in practical terms—establishing a viable network of contemporary art curators and infrastructure within Asia—is an important outcome of this project. Gaweewong says, “As Asian kids from the ’60s and ’70s, we always look toward America and Europe but this was a chance to look at our neighbors.” Other curators echoed this. “We created a network through which we can understand our positions as Asians,” says Kamiya. And in an apt metaphor for what the curators’ joint project means to the future of Asian contemporary art, Kamiya adds, “We are all the same level physically. We don’t have to look up like we do when we collaborate with Europeans or others.”

This exhibition was held Dec 2002-Mar 2003 at Tokyo Opera City Art Gallery in Hatsudai, Tokyo, Japan and Japan Foundation Forum in Akasaka, Tokyo, Japan.

©2006 John McGee

©2006-2008 John McGee. All Rights Reserved. No part of this site may be reproduced in any manner without prior written permission.