Positioning Contemporary Asian Art

The words "Asia," "the Orient," and "the East" are loaded terms conceived by the West. Through prefabricated constructs of the imagination, Asia has become one of the West's deepest and most recurring images of the Other. As a result, the geographical boundaries and regional divisions of Asia and the curatorial considerations in the visual arts that arise from them often comply with binary schemas such as East/West, yellow/white, and Asian values/Euro-American centricities.

In the Asia-Pacific region, some zones are privileged over others. For example, the Pacific Rim discourse divides the region into Northeast Asia, South Asia, Southeast Asia, Australia, and the Pacific Island nations. But in the U.S. context, Asia is often perceived as Japan, China, and the Pour Tigers or Little Dragons--Hong Kong, Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan--and the up-and-coming Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, and Thailand.

The rise of these tigers and dragons during the past decade of economic miracle has shifted the balance of power in world politics and trade, as evidenced by the growth of such organizations as Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation (APEC) and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). Consequently, certain key political and economic, as well as social and cultural, structures have changed. For instance, the position of Japan and the People's Republic of China as political and economic leaders in Asia has immense impact on art and culture in other nation-states, such as Indonesia, Korea, Singapore, Taiwan, and Vietnam. This is evident in art and cultural exchanges designed to promote international relationships through traveling art exhibitions, concerts, acrobatic shows, food festivals, and language programs.

Yet, the New World Order, free trade, and electronic media networks claiming to bring the world together as one happy global village have caused new tensions and cultural confinements. The dynamics of global trade and borderless communications have resulted in a demand among some groups for the restoration of indigenous identities. As a result, the trend among Asian elites toward "indigenization" and "de-Westernization" has gone against the tide of infatuation with Western cultures and habits among the masses. The elites tend to prefer cultural revivalism and indigenous values in reaction to globalization. At the same time, they accuse the masses of blindly accepting "poisonous" values such as consumer culture, fast food, and alternative music.

The desire for difference and identity has led to the following question: Is there an Asian identity? Such a generalized question makes it easy to ignore the flesh-and-blood reality by collapsing multiple Asian identities into a single construct. The complexities behind the regional characteristics of various Asian identities are constantly shifting according to time and place; and in the region, the conflict of cultures is highly evident through the spiritual divides in Buddhism, Confucianism, Islam, Hinduism, and Christianity. For example, the most recent episodes of religious and ethnic violence in Java and East Timor reveal that Chinese and East Timorians have been under vicious attacks by Muslim Indonesians. Such traumatic events have enormous consequences on ways of life, as well as artists' work. For instance, Dadang Christanto, Heri Dono, Tisna Sanjaya, Moelyono, and Arahmaiani have recently created a series of works directly related to riots, looting, and burning in Indonesia.

Some critics have suggested that we are presently experiencing the age of international curators. The emergence of curators with the power to persuade, control, and dictate taste within the art infrastructure has been phenomenal in the past few years. However, in relation to contemporary Asian art, it is necessary to rethink and relook at the authority of curatorial arbitrage in relation to curators' activities.

The history of representation of contemporary Asian art is relatively new, both within and outside Asia. Here, the role of cultural arbiters, art promoters, and curators must be considered in relation to both local and international art scenes. That is to say, one must take into account the interpretation of contemporary Asian art as it is seen regionally in Asia, as well as how it is represented outside the region. In particular, it is essential to consider the relationship between museums, artists, and the public in Asia in order to understand both traditional practices and new ideas and ways of working.

When it comes to contemporary art, the curatorial considerations that arise in Asia are frequently dictated by the hierarchies of politics, economics, trade, and religion; and regional identities vary accordingly. For example, the ASEAN painting and photograph exhibitions that circulated among ASEAN countries during the 1980s aimed to create harmony, consensus, and friendship among the members (Brunei Darussalam, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, and Thailand; Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, and Vietnam joined in the 1990s). The mottos "unity in diversity" and "friendship and fraternity" were used as thematic subjects for artists to follow. This meant that to comply with nonintervention policy, curators were encouraged not to include works with racist, overtly political, or antireligious subjects. For biennials and art exhibitions outside Asia, the selection of artists and their works has been less restricted. Although curators and artists are still seen as representing their nation-states, the choice of subjects and contents is more varied and thought-provoking.