LOCK AND LOADED: YOUNG GUNS 2017 (2017)
Published by HOM Art Trans​
​
“It takes a very long time to become young.”
Pablo Picasso (1881-1973)
​
The YOUNG GUNS Award and travelling exhibition, founded and organized by HOM Art Trans, returns for its second instalment this year with a fresh batch of young and upcoming visual artists namely Ajim Juxta, Anniketyni Madian, Ed Roger Rosili, Faizal Suhif, Fawwaz Shukri, Gan Tee Sheng, Hisyamuddin Abdullah, Jamil Zakaria, Khairuddin Zainuddin, Sabihis Md Pandi, Yim Yen Sum, Shafiq Nordin, Hafiz Shahimi, Meor Saifullah Lulaed, Khairul Izham and Syahbandi Samat. A triennial event that began in 2013, it is according to founder and director of HOM Art Trans Bayu Utomo Radjkin, a form of recognition given to selected Malaysian artists from the ages 33 and below with the intention of helping them ‘increase the value of their works and also to enable them to be on par with the more successful seniors’ in the art scene.
​
How is this to be achieved? And more importantly, why?
Bayu believes that by challenging the artists to step out of their ‘comfort zone’ and push themselves in terms of techniques and ideas, they would be able to elevate themselves to the next level in their artistic career. For the participants or recipients of the Young Guns Award, they are given the task to expand or encouraged to come up with something different from their usual offerings. These 18 young guns, selected by Bayu based on their track record of producing quality works, visibility on the local art radar as well as from recommendations by respected sources, are to produce one major artwork within the dimensions of approximately 2x2 or 2x3 metre. The reward are the sales and exposure gained from the travelling exhibition to three major locations in the country. The exhibition will begin its course at MAP@Publika, Kuala Lumpur, making its way down south to Medini Mall in Johor Bharu for its second showing and ending its run up north at The Whiteaways Arcade in Penang.
​
As a senior with decades of experiencing the highs and lows as a full-time art practitioner, perhaps the motivation behind this event came about from Bayu’s observation on the increasing lack of variety and predictability in terms of the outputs of many young artists today. Many may unconsciously or calculatedly as feared, be following the footsteps of some mid-career and veteran artists who, once established a certain style, approach or recognized for their choice of subject matter, prefers to continue to tread the beaten path they have grown familiar and comfortable. Of course, one may ask:
​
‘What’s wrong with that?’​
​
SHOOT FIRST, ASK QUESTIONS LATER
​
Consistency is important as some artists may not have exhausted their interest in a subject matter or the potential of materials/ tools used have not been pushed to its limits. Furthermore, it doesn’t help that some gallery owners and clients themselves are less than enthusiastic when presented with something different from the usual fare by their ‘favourite’ image makers (like ordering any meal on the menu at the local fast-food joint and unexpectedly getting something else instead). The failure to heed the demands or entertain the requests of one’s supporters/clients/patrons* could spell the end of one’s fledging career. Undeniably, there are those who treat artists as mere craftsmen or image makers that unthinkingly churn out the same works year in year out just to cater to market demands. Some may argue that the changes and variations should be very, very subtle, reflecting a refined artistic sensibility as opposed to the fickle minded who favour abrupt stylistic shifts, jumping from one to the other without mastering the technical fundamentals or fully comprehending the subject matter. Following that train of thinking, would it not seem odd then that a 50-60 year’s old veteran artist continues to produce the same type of works, embodying the same outlook they did back when they were still 20-30 year’s old novices? Imagine a survey or retrospective exhibition given to a modern or contemporary artist whose works produced from the last 20-40 years all looked similar in terms of themes, styles or approaches and concept…
​
Of course, it takes two to joget. Young artists must be willing to push the boundaries within and outside themselves.
​
But why should they?
​
‘Not much, we have more artists now I think, more exhibitions per month. A few more private galleries. The older artists still do the same painting, the young new blood do the same new painting. Everybody is either repeating himself or repeating someone else’s efforts in art, with the exception of a handful, whom I think are very committed and involved artists."
Long Thien Shih
​
The above is an excerpt from an interview given in 1984 by Long Thien Shih where he was asked how much has changed in the local art scene then. Two decades earlier, he had earned the ire of some senior artists that necessitated a response in the local press for another interview given to a foreign press where he told them forthrightly that Malaysian art was 50 years behind! This was his observation as someone living in the European art capital (Paris) for almost ten years when seeing how Malaysian artists were congratulating themselves, smugly thinking that Malaysian art had finally arrived at the international scene because they were exhibiting in many major exhibitions overseas such as the 4th International Art Exhibition (1962), Commonwealth Art Today, London(1962-3), South-East-Asian Cultural Festival, Singapore (1963), Waratah Spring Festival, Sydney (1965) ‘Malaysian Art Travelling Exhibition’ to Hamburg, Rome, St Etienne, Paris (1965-6), First Triennale Malaysian Art Exhibition, Australia/New Zealand (1969), 10th Sao Paulo Biennale (1969) and Asian Countries in Contemporary Art, Tokyo (1969) just to name a few.
According to two online dictionaries, the term ‘Young Gun’ refers to-
​
1) a young man perceived as assertive and aggressively self-confident.
​
2) a young person who is good enough to be able to compete with older more experienced people.
​
Our abang Long, a Tokoh Cetakan whose name is still found in the latest edition of the Kamus Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka under the Malay word ‘inovatif’ certainly qualified as a ‘Young Gun’.
*’It is true that we still have few patrons who carry on the bygone system, they are neither numerous enough nor influential enough to affect the general body of art. It is significant too, that they confine themselves to the arts of painting and music, whose product can be used for their personal profit, for the decoration of their houses or the amusement of their friends’. Excerpt from the ‘Symptoms of Decadence’ in ‘To Hell with Culture’
Herbert Read (1893-1968)
​
He was even given the French label enfant terrible for his critical opinions and his creatively titillating series of erotic artworks. His prints were among the earliest to highlight issue-based themes (ecology) before it became common staple in the repertoire of many a young artist.
​
The last ten years or so saw a greater focus on the younger generation of visual art practitioners with more exposure in private galleries. The words ‘young’, ‘new’ and ‘emerging’ were brandied about as though each exhibition featuring fresh grad juveniles promises to unveil the ‘next big thing’, offering something visually arresting and intellectually exciting. In comparison, the situation was different back in the 50s and 60s when some ‘young guns’, chiefly among them, Syed Ahmad Jamal (1929-2011), Abdul Latiff Mohidin, Yeoh Jin Leng, Ibrahim Hussein (1936-2009) Jolly Koh and Cheong Laitong (this group also included the late sculptor Anthony Lau) championed non-figurative art (read abstraction) as a way to counter decades of schematic approaches in paintings of landscapes, portraits and kampung sceneries. They were roundly denounced for promoting ‘an alien (read Western) and corrupting’ form of art by those** who make a handsome living from reproducing images (from photos) that peddled trite sentimentalities for imaginary pasts that never were while engaging in a localized form of Orientalism. It is strangely befuddling that it did not occur to these mostly figurative painters that art could be about self-expression*** and individuality (a dirty word in fascistic and totalitarian societies) and not a skilful way for copying images from photographs, magazine covers and today, from the internet.
​
Then in the 70s, two ‘young guns’ came up with a brilliant idea of presenting an exhibition of found objects (mostly rubbish) as documents of mystical experiences in a response to the prevalence of schematic figurative art AND the emotionally charged (but opaque) works of abstract expressionism. The former were seen as the result of a scientific way of perceiving the world constructed through the illusion of perspectives, measurements and proportions to arrive at ‘picturesque’ views of people and places brought on by colonial education that were totally alien to the cultural and spiritual world view of this side of the region while the latter it was claimed, a cynical cold war propaganda hatched by the C.I.A to present abstract art as the art of the free world to counter the popularity of socialist realist figurative art propagated by the Communist blocs. In the Exhibition ‘Towards a Mystical Reality: A document of jointly held experiences by Redza Piyadasa & Suleiman Esa’ in 1974, the two presented their readings and observations as an alternative for Malaysian artists with the hopes that it will spark the interest of local art practitioners to look into and subscribe to ‘an artistic ideology based on cultural and philosophy traditions of Asia’. Redza Piyadasa (1939-2007) and Sulaiman Esa aimed ‘to sow the seeds for a thinking process which might someday liberate Malaysian artists from their dependence on western influences’. In the manifesto that was published in conjunction with the exhibition, one of the points raised were about the dilemmas of non-western artists in general and Malaysian artists in particular.
​
**This late, celebrated figurative painter whose submission to the National Art Gallery’s First National Loan Exhibition in 1958 was a painting, skilfully reproduced in oil, an iconic image of two silat exponents locked in close combat taken from the cover of the magazine Straits Times Pictures (1948) published by the Straits Times Singapore a decade before. He did not even bother to credit the photographer or the source of that image.
​
*** Syed Ahmad Jamal and Ibrahim Hussein even responded to the communal violence of May 13 1969 with their works ‘One Fine Day’ and ‘May 13 1969’ with the latter being called to parliament to defend himself. Syed Amad Jamal have always been critical of government attempts to impose control on artistic freedom especially after 1971’s National Cultural Congress committee voted in favour of pushing an ‘Art for Society’ agenda instead of leaving art workers to their own devices.
​
They warned that ‘…as we do not attempt to requestion the philosophical basis upon which we are functioning, we will go on producing works which for all their technical brilliance can only remain derivative and at worst, imitative!’ It is pertinent that they raised the issue about the lack of critical rigour in thinking among the artists back then and their penchant to copy and imitate the styles and approaches from the west without any forethought had resulted in no serious contributions or impact from non-western artists to modern art on the global stage. The reason they deduced were ‘…. the general tendency amongst local artists to have ignored the relevance of Art History and the history of ideas must surely account for the weakness of so many artists when it comes to a reconsideration of the rationale behind their work.’ (emphasis added) And the results were ‘Too many of our best artists have become exhausted of ideas within a few years and ceased to become committed to Art because of this.’ Of course, the exhibition was panned left and right. It elicited the reactions and responses it deserved though not the kind the two artists sought! However, the issues raised and the possibilities it opened for the coming younger practitioners must be appreciated. Redza Piyadasa, Sulaiman Esa’s and the early works of Lee Kian Seng and Nirmala Dutt Shanmughalingam (1941-2016) were a handful of noteworthy initial efforts at contemporary art making in this country.
​
The 70’s too saw the emergence of image making that was unlike anything seen before, a truly alternative approach to figurative and landscape against the academic or expressive that were the norm. Through the art collective known as Anak Alam, (it had Latiff Mohidin as one of its founders and guiding light in the early years) a number of self-taught artists distinguished themselves with distinctive approaches in their works, namely Mustapha Ibrahim, Ali Mabuha, Mariam Abdullah just to name a few. Two from this non-hierarchical and informal grouping of like minded individuals even won the coveted Bakat Muda Sezaman Award (the first) in 1974 (Zulkilfi Mohd Dahalan) and 1984 (Thangarajoo M Kanniah). Zulkifli Mohd Dahalan who died at the age of 27 is forever immortalized by his two large paintings ‘Shops’ (1973) and ‘Separate Reality’ (1975) in the national collection of the country.
​
With the rapid industrialization of Malaysia beginning in the 1980s we begin to see more symbolist/ surrealist and art with heavy references to popular culture becoming common. Two artists from this period who have not been given the proper accolades they deserved are S. Amin Shahab and Anuar Rashid. Others worth mentioning are Fauzan Omar, Choong Kam Kow, Ismail Mohd Zain (1930-1991) Mastura Abdul Rahman, Sharifah Fatimah Syed Zubir, Yusof Ghani etc. The number of artists returning after completing their studies abroad too were among the factors in the growing diversity of artistic practices. They produced works, taught in schools, colleges and universities around the country as well as wrote about the new ideas and developments in the visual arts taking place internationally which inspired, encouraged and emboldened the next generation of art practitioners to push boundaries in local art making. Hasnul Jamal Saidon who was influenced intellectually by the writings and critical insights of the late Ismail Zain championed electronic arts and multidisciplinary approaches, is both a practitioner and an educator. Social commentary and critique through the visual arts, especially drawings, prints, political cartoons and other forms of proletarian art that were common before and after the second World War became more sophisticated and wide spread during the politically tumultuous 1990s and continued into the new millennia in contemporary forms that included installations, performance art, video and other non-traditional art forms. The politically conscious Wong Hoy Cheong creatively employed every means at his disposal to launch intelligent attacks on the foibles and injustices perpetuated by the powers that be on a number of fronts covering issues of institutionalized racism, systemic denial of social justice as well as debunking/challenging official narratives. Joining him are multidisciplinary artists Liew Kungyu and the American Ray Langenbach with a host of others from outside of visual arts world especially theatre practitioners and writers. Words like ‘alternative’, ‘independent’ and ‘new media’ were apt terms to describe the growing use of nontraditional media in art making that reflected the increasing criticality towards ideas, materials, issues and events adopted by a younger generation of art practitioners.
​
The late 1990s and early 2000 saw a whole generation of locally trained visual artists emerged as strong representative of contemporary practices in Malaysia. A cursory glance at that period will also reveal more than a handful of names of those who have made significant marks in the local contemporary art scene and beyond. They are Zulkifli Yusoff, Tan Chin Kuan, Eng Hwee Chu, Chuah Chong Yong (from the artist collective Rumah Air Panas@ RAP) Noor Azizan Rahman Paiman, Nur Hanim Khairuddin, Shia Yih Ying, Bibi Chew, and of course, members of MATAHATI namely Bayu Utomo Radjkin, Ahmad Shukri, Hamir Shoib, Ahmad Fuad Osman and Masnoor Ramly. From 2000 up till now, a few more names pop up prominently, with some of them regularly invited to participate in international events. They are Chan Kok Hui, Phuan Thai Meng, Azliza Ayob, Chang Yoong Chia, Umi Baizurah with Yee ILann, Shooshie Sulaiman and Norlisham Ismail @ ISE currently making strong waves abroad. Of note too are a handful of practitioners based abroad who’ve made good for themselves in the contemporary art circles of their adopted country and beyond. They include Peter HH Lim (Italy), Aida Redza (Germany), Nadiah Bamadhaj (Indonesia) and Tan Jui Chien (Japan).
These are the (though not exhaustive) list of illustrious seniors that our ‘young guns’ would have to be able to stand shoulder to shoulder to compete and to even bested them in the coming future. Surely, it will not be easy.
​
POP SHOTS OR SHOOTING BLANKS?
‘All Art is quite Useless’
Oscar Wilde (1854-1900)
Veteran art writer and curator Ooi Kok Chuen wrote in the 2004 Young Contemporaries Award catalogue that ‘The obvious flaw, if at all, is to look for the Artist as an Anarchist. An Artist who dares, who can break through conventional thought and practices. An artist who is able to define the people, the cultural ethos and issues of the time. New ideas, new approaches, new forms, but with our diverse Asian backgrounds, from a platform of tradition and heritage, from old ways where things were done. All tall order which one never expects from the more established and veteran artists. Why? Because the young are often seen as a harbinger of renewal…’
​
Of course, again, it takes two to joget. Young artists must be willing to push the boundaries within and outside themselves.
​
But how could they?
​
It is hard to be genuinely excited about contemporary art works nowadays either by the young or the old who still feel young at heart for that matter. It is not for the lack of talent or ideas but the signs and representations of the ‘spirit of the epoch’. In an age of prequels, sequels and reboots, any creative output will automatically be judged as a variation or another version of someone else’s efforts which on some level, is true. With instant connectivity and information at our finger tips, we have never been so connected to the rest of the world before resulting in us becoming more homogenized in our taste, influences and outlook. Is it still possible then for us to see something or anything ‘new’ that no one else have thought of before, not just in the visual arts, but also in music, fashion and film? Arthur Danto (1924-2013) wrote in ‘After the End of Art: Contemporary Art and The Pale of History (1997) that contemporary art ‘…has no brief against the art of the past, no sense even that it is all different as art from modern art in general. It is part of what defines contemporary art that art of the past is available for such a use as the artists care to give it. What is not available to them is the spirit in which it was made’ (emphasis added) while in ‘The Conspiracy of Art’ (2005), Jean Baudrillard (1929-2007) observes that ‘The adventure of modern art is over. Contemporary art is only contemporary to itself. It no longer transcends itself into the past or the future. Its only reality is its operation in real time and its confusion with this reality. Nothing differentiates it from technical, advertising, media and digital operations. There is no more transcendence, no more divergence, nothing from another scene: it is a reflective game with the contemporary world as it happens. This is why contemporary art is null and void: it and the world form a zero-sum equation’.
​
Without provenance, justification or a destination, Malaysian contemporary art too has remained stuck at being ‘contemporary’, meaning ‘current’ or ‘just now’ for quite a while now. Furthermore, a number of factors have contributed to the stagnation. Herbert Read proved most insightful when he wrote that ‘the symptoms of decadence as they reveal themselves in the art of a country are indifference, vanity and servitude. Indifference is the absence of appreciation. It is the general attitude towards the arts in an industrial age.’**** Astutely pointed out by Michael Foley in ‘Isn’t this Fun? Investigating the Serious Business of Enjoying Ourselves’ (2016) ‘Sight is the most detached sense and therefore the sense most prized in the detached modern age’. Indeed, in our age of information overload, we tend to look without seeing, without differentiating, without understanding. Image becomes everything. And self-image (vanity) however, is the one that we’re most addicted to. The artwork becomes an extension of the artist’s vanity. Like the pointless acts of taking selfies, the artwork ends up becoming pure image sans content or context. It can be bartered even to the lowest bidder. Servitude, however, is when the artist lacks spirit. They are those who can be made to do the bidding of politicians, money launderers, speculators and other status seeking carpetbaggers going around sniffing holes for profitable deals at the expense of ‘Art’. What that great British wit, Oscar Wilde meant when he said that all art is ‘useless’ is that ‘Art never expresses anything but itself’ (the Decay of Lying) because ‘Art is the most intense mode of individualism the world has ever known’ (The Soul of Man under Socialism). He continues with ‘The moment that an artist takes notice of what other people want, and tries to supply the demand, he ceases to be an artist, and becomes a dull or an amusing craftsman, an honest or dishonest tradesman’. (emphasis added)
**** He continues on pg 88 ‘Vanity in the patron of art leads to servitude in the artist. A servile mind is a mind that has committed moral suicide. Art is independence- independence of vision, directness of expression, spiritual detachment. Further on pg 90, he wrote that ‘Art, in its full and free subjective action, is the one essentially revolutionary force with which man is endowed. Art is revolution, and art can best serve revolution by remaining true to itself. In ‘The Freedom of Artist’ Read wrote that, ‘It is, still more certainly, upon personal happiness that the future of art depends…Happiness in the field of art, means work: the capacity and ability to create something near the heart’s desire. The happiness is not in the possession of the thing created, but in the act of creating it’ (pg121)
​
KEEP CALM, RELOAD, AIM AND SHOOT AGAIN
‘Art need no longer be an account of past sensations. It can become the direct organization of more highly evolved sensations. It is a question of producing ourselves, not things that enslave us.’
Guy Debord (1931-1994)
​
​​It is admittedly pointless to argue against the so-called commercialization of art. Artists, who were actually craftsmen serving the agendas of their paymasters be it the monarchy, mercantile or religious classes since the beginning of civilization thousands of years back only came to the idea of using art to express themselves in slightly more than 200 years ago. The idea of ‘individuality’, a marked quality or outstanding trait in a person that distinguishes one from others is uncommon (though artists and lesser others are quick to claim it in abundance). However, it is that ordinary individual who decides against capitulation in the face of seemingly insurmountable odds or faith shaking temptations, does something extra-ordinary that makes the difference. In ‘Reclaiming Art in the Age of Artifice: A Treatise, Critique and Call to Action’ J F Martel wrote that ‘wherever an act of creation is shared with others, then there is -individuation- not just for the author of the work but for the audience too. The singularity of art awakens us to our singularity, and through it to the singularity in the Other’. It is interesting that J F Martel used the word ‘Individuation’, a term used in Analytical Psychology to mean the process of someone becoming distinct, whole and complete. As opposed to the intention of making works with a patron or the market in mind which already reduces the work to that of a commodity even before it is completed, when the act of creation is made from a place of hope, love and truth, its uniqueness not only awakens something optimistic, courageous and righteous in the artist, it also has the power to inspire in the viewers that they too are autonomous, unique individuals capable of making a difference in the face of seemingly insurmountable odds or faith shaking temptations.
​
Any platform (with a challenge thrown in) to encourage confident and ambitious young practitioners to expose their works will only be positive in the long run for all involve in the local art ecosystem. Bayu deserves credit for coming up with the idea and organizing this event called ‘Young Guns’. As a senior, Bayu is gracious enough to share and broad minded enough to encourage younger art practitioners to push themselves against the seniors and veterans. However, the recipients of the award themselves must also realize that to be on par or even better requires more than killing a few braincells or burning layers of fat and calories for their art. It needs something extra… and with heart. In ‘The Aesthetic Dimension: Towards a Critique of Marxist Aesthetics’ Herbert Marcuse (1898-1979) wrote that ’Against all fetishism of the productive forces, against the continued enslavement of the individuals by the objective conditions (which remain those of domination), art represents the ultimate goal of all revolutions: the freedom and happiness of the individual’ (emphasis added)
​
With this event, the stage is set. Will our ‘young guns’ choose the path of ‘guns for hire’ or will they choose to become ‘top guns’ of the ‘revolution’?
​
We shall have to wait and see lah!
​
​
​