Creative Institutionalims in an Asiocentric World
farid rakun (ruangrupa), Jeroen de Kloet, Ming Tiampo.
Harvest by Daniel Aguilar and Diana Cantarey
Hosted by Nuraini Juliastuti
farid rakun’s thoughts on collectivism were posited with reference to his long-term engagement with ruangrupa. Collective works, rakun argued, were based on the complexity of maintenance practices. Like many other art and cultural initiatives which emerged in post-1998 Indonesia, ruangrupa came into being to reclaim post-authoritarian public spaces. Furthermore, the collective aimed to cater for interests that were not catered to. As such, it did not produce a collection of individual (art)works but rather spaces and infrastructures caring for people. Here then, the problem becomes the maintenance of such creative spaces for longer periods of time.
Ming Tiampo opened the panel with her research on the art of the Gutai group, illuminating forms of collectivism in post-fascist Japan between the 1950s and the 1970s. These artists reflected on the relationship between the individual and the collective, proposing non-hierarchical relations in a very hierarchical society. Art was for them, directly connected to revolutionary practice. But here, then, the individual does not disappear in the collective because she is a tool to resist fascism as a critical thinker and creator working in relation with others. As such, Gutai’s works were made up of interconnected individual performances. As elaborated by Tiampo, thus, temporary communities emerged through the work of Gutai as an articulation of individualism and collectivism shaped inside and outside art.