Raiji Kuroda, 'Practice of Exhibitions in Global Society for Asians, by Asians, and Some Associated Problems'
In: Global Visions: Towards a New Internationalism in the Visual Arts. Edited by Jean Fisher. London: Kala Press in association with the Institute of international Visual Arts, 1994, pp. 140-151.
Expectations for International Exhibitions and the Popularisation of Contemporary Art in Japan
Since the early 1990s, Japan has often discussed the possibility of hosting international exhibitions. [1] One reason for this is that the Japanese public, curators and journalists have become familiar with international exhibitions, held with increasing frequency in western countries, while appreciating that Japan is not doing enough in the field of promoting culture to match its economic power in global society. [2] Japan has started to realise that not only Asian artists but also European curators now expect Japan to have a leadership role in promoting international art exhibitions.
[...]
The reasons for this sudden interest in Asian contemporary art are, firstly, the experience of international exhibitions which included âThird World Art’, but were yet again held in the West, âMagiciens de la terre â, Documenta 9, and the Venice Biennale in 1993 being prime examples. Secondly, Japan can no longer locate its sense of value through an adoration of the West, the concept of modernism and/or the framework of established international politics. The weakening of progressive western art, plus the popularity of the concept of postmodernity in Japan and, of course, the end of the Cold War, are the factors I assume one has to place alongside the economic growth of the potential and competitive power of some Asian countries. However, this attitude of turning away from the West toward Asia has occurred in the past whenever Japan has felt distant, disgusted and disappointed in the West.
[...]
Since its establishment, The Fukuoka Art Museum, where I am working, has organised the âAsian Art Show’. [4] It is the most appropriate event worth considering in relation to the main theme of this symposium on âNew Internationalism’. It is likely that Japanese curators, will have more inclination to promote temporary exhibitions and events concerning the contemporary art of Asia and/or the non-western world in the future. But I believe that the ideal exhibition will be that in which art from the West, Asia and Japan is shown together and the âAsian artist’ is treated as an individual without privilege, romanticism or sense of guilt However, for the present, it is absolutely impossible for us to organise such exhibitions; and it would be most unrealistic to contemplate the possibility of an international exhibition which includes African and Latin America because both these regions do not have a close relationship with Japan.
[...]
The tendency to stereotype Asian artists, without any malice, because of cultural and historical intimacy, exacerbates the problem. We may generalise national attributes in the work of individual artists. Thus works are labelled as âIndian style’ or âPhilippine style’ while ignoring the individual background of each work. Until the 1989 show, this was coupled with a method of curating which classified works by country. The reason for national classification was that participation in the Asian Art Show was organised on the basis of ânation’, with the exception of the âAsia Artist Today â Fukuoka Annual’ and âNew Art from Southeast Asia’ (which I will address later). This has made us identify work within the limitations of national borders, derived form a relatively recent political balance of power, rather than by cultural classifications formed over an enormous length of time.
[...]
There is no consensus definition of contemporary art amongst the countries in Asia. In Japan, for example, there is no clear distinction between concepts of the amateur and professional, imitation and creation, decoration and philosophy, cultural centre and educational centre. [8] In the western system of curator and museum, on the other hand, contemporary art is a concept of the avant-garde, the experimental and the individual as distinct from the group. Japanese curators take risks when selecting, for example, works that use objects from daily life, installations, photographs, video and so on, which have the appearance of contemporary art as it is understood in the West. Certainly, the âNew Art from Southeast Asia’ show held in 1992 was possibly the most successful art show of Asia held in Japan with regard to the quality of the work, the vastness of scale and timely introduction of the installation, the use of everyday materials, the reinterpretation of traditional culture and social participation of the artist, which ignited a new trend for Southeast Asia. The exhibition itself had no special theme but the idea of contemporary art. However, I wonder if it created its own contemporary art idea without depending on the established definition of contemporary art in Japan.
[...]
In order to renovate the concept of âcontemporary art’ in Asia, it is important to understand the art movements of each country, in their own socio-historical contexts and backgrounds, not by comparison with the mainstream of Japanese or western history. [9] Secondly, we must define contemporary art by the degree it reflects the present situation, and not through individuality, originality or how avant-gardist it may appear. If a work reflects a contemporary human activity, we should recognise its contemporaneity. For example, we should positively evaluate seemingly commercial, decorative or conventional artworks as contemporary art, such as Balinese art, Chinese new year paintings, Bangladesh rickshaw paintings, Indian billboards for movies and Indian Tantric folk paintings- to the extent that they are media through which the âpresent era’ of location and community are reflected.
[...]
[1] For instance, the Art Summit Tokyo Symposium âArt in the Future’ which was held in February 1991, organised by the Japan Foundation, invited influential European and American curators. Responding to the 44th Venice Biennale, August 1990, Bijutsu Techo, the leading Japanese modern art magazine, ran an article about concepts of internationalism and debates surrounding the âsetting-up of international exhibitions, how to hold an international art exhibition in Japanâ.
[2] People are asking for more effective methods of entry to existing international exhibitions outside Japan. Focusing on the recent Venice Biennale, the necessity for new strategies towards European and American society has been recognised. The fact that the âGutai’ (Concretism) was the only movement admitted as valuable art in post-war Japan by the Italians, gave Japan the impetus to search for a new strategy. The Indian Triennial and the Bangladeshi Asian Art Biennale and an accompanying media strategy now objectify Japan’s desire to look East.
[4] For the reason why the Asian art show is held in Fukuoka, see Kuroda, âA difficult Journey of Contemporary ASEAN Art’, in Narrative Visions in Contemporary ASEAN Art, Masahiro Ushiroshoji (ed), the Japan Foundation ASEAN Culture Centre, Tokyo, 1990, p. 8.
[8] Many local museums in Japan include welfare facilities for artists living locally who are at the Kobo-dantai level!
[9] For instance, the âGutai’ group of the late 60s quickly gained status in the west as pioneers in the postwar art of Japan because of its surprisingly experimental nature. I don’t have any intention of denying the value of its achievement and the fact that only non-political art from abroad can be more easily understood. However, if we evaluate using local Japanese standards, âNeo-Dada’ and âGroup Kyushu-Ha’, which are contemporary with the âGutai’ group, reflected far more clearly the turning point of postwar Japan when it shifted from US military occupation to its period of economic growth. âEcole the Seoul’ was a label given to a group of pictures created in Korea in the 1970s. It was a form of western minimalism synthesised with a traditional sense of beauty, and as such was recognised as typical Korean contemporary art and was comprehensible to the Japanese gakugei-in.