Bright, colorful, mystical and universe-like, that’s the first impression upon first viewing. However, personally bright theme art never captivates me, dark abstract art does. Bright art is perceived as flat and shallow, and not good enough for further interpretation.

But everything changes after talking with the artist, Rekha.

Throughout my short stint in writing, I always have the tendency to write from an outsider perspective and keeping emotions at the lowest level as possible and adopt an objective approach. This writing tendency is based on how I treated my own life; suppressing feelings to ensure the triumph of logical and objective thinking.

Again, everything changes after talking with its creator, Rekha.

The Emotion

The meetup with Rekha makes me realize that the perception of bright art as shallow, flat and no further interpretation value came from my excessive ignorance of feelings. The dark aesthetics appeals to my personal taste because it lets me think rather than to feel, which appeals to my preference. When an art theme such as Rekha’s works that focuses on the complete opposite of what I always believe in, it forms a new experience that pulls me out from my comfort zone.

It brings me to a zone which I do not excel at; a zone that doesn’t encourage my traditional way of interpretation, and most importantly; a zone that I always try to escape from.

For people that have the same experience, Rekha’s works force you to confront the feeling that you’ve always suppressed. It forces you to dig that feelings which you had been avoiding all this time; because only by releasing these feelings her artworks could be comprehended.

• 

• 

For example, the work ‘Release’ showcases the battle of inner emotions expressed through the water drip and the springy lines that shows how both belong to the same picture yet such polarized border differences still exist.

Whereas ‘Floating Within’ explores the suppressed emotions of the artist, or should I say, for every person viewing it; its blue fragmented spots and the layers indicates that any person will have emotions or feelings that they want to cover with several layers, as thick as possible, with hopes it’ll never be exposed and be vulnerable again.

All these interpretations only came when one decides to accept his/her inner feelings; only with the acceptance of it, her works could be enjoyed and appreciated, aesthetically and narratively. But how do we know? How do we know this is the way to comprehend? How do we know this is where the value lies within the artwork? Where to get these answers?

It all lies on the search for the ‘entry point’.

Discovery of the entry point

Before meeting Rekha in person, as said at the start, my perception of her works are flat and don’t see artistic value in it. But after the conversation, her explanation of her artworks acts as the entry point for me. Upon gaining the entry point, as an audience I gain access to its raison d’etre, for all intents and purposes, the meaning of the artwork exists.

With just a single entry point, it unleashes the full background, artistic style, and traits of an artist to the audience; it then fosters comprehension and interpretation and finally with the final outlook of Rekha’s works; a direct acceptance of our inner feelings. Once the audiences discovered the entry point to an artwork, the interest to artist new works will increase and also eliminates negative perception similar to mine.

This brings me to the next chapter: Mystic.

Mystic

Cultural values and ethnic shapes a person and her artworks play as the entry point that brings us into these values and influences she lives by. The best example will be her ‘Floating Within; it was not pre-meditated but produced organically, said Rekha; yet I could still find some resemblance with the candles used during Deepavali.

• 

• 

This shows how her culture influences affect her expression method subconsciously. Born into a traditional religious family that practices Hinduism, Hinduism is a religion that contributes many mystical elements to the world such as Chakras, Yoga, Karma, Moksha, Hindu cosmology, etc. Growing up in a culture like this, it shapes how the artist perceives the world not just by isolating aspects of reality, but also her notice of the collections of events and processes, which we called it the mystic energy (2). Not to mention that Hinduism emphasizes hugely on the balance between reality and mystical energy, as shown in the Chakra concept.

All these ultimately compiles into her work, ‘Highest Good.’

She uses orbs as a depiction of the importance of our Chakras, energy portals in our body, our very own personal tools to tap into a source or the cosmos, to help balance our body, mind, and spirit and attract energies that serve our own highest good.

It is this curiosity of her own culture and ethnic that generated such work. It was her own deep understanding of her roots that expressed her observation in such mystical way; by focusing on processes and not just events, by focusing on the mystical side and not just aspects of reality.

The Shadow and The Mask

To start, we will need to first look into the Jungian Archetypes. The Jungian Archetypes were a concept introduced by the Swiss psychiatrist Carl Jung, who believed that archetypes were models of people, behaviors, or personalities. Archetypes, he suggested, were inborn tendencies that play a role in influencing human behavior.

Archetypes, he suggested, were inborn tendencies that play a role in influencing human behavior. There are four major Jungian Archetypes which are The Anima/Animus, The Self, The Shadow , and The Persona. The artist is especially fascinated by the ‘shadow’ archetype; where the shadow forms out of our attempts to adapt to cultural norms and expectations which her works are partly inspired by them.

These facial figures are depicted as a person, which is explained by Rekha:“ Are these masks an extension of ourselves or are we wearing them to seek validation or is it a form of escapism to ensure nobody sees the other facets of our true image that may not be as pleasant as the all-knowing, confident and never lacking in verve or security self?

Women seem to endure it more than men due to societies preconceptions and presuppositions to be the perfect daughter, wife, mother, friend, colleague, nurturer, worker and lover. (In my opinion, it is quite unfair to perceive men as enduring less by societies preconceptions, men do face the same issues as well.)

When the layers of these masks are peeled, we see fear, anxiety, depression, low self-esteem, grief and other negative facets of our true self emerge. Is it wrong to embody all of who we are? The good, the bad and the ugly.

To sum it up, Rekha brings us to explore the inner feelings in everyone’s hearts, opens up the mystic energy based from her cultural and ethnic roots and lastly, showcases the reality of how an individual like you and me choose to mask ourselves with the fear of being vulnerable.

Note: All images belong to Rekha which originated from her social media. Sentences that are in italic form represent the question and answer conversation between the writer and the artist

References
1) THE PAINTING IN THE AGE OF POST-DIGITAL REPRODUCTION, Wong Hoy Cheong
2)Mystical Reality, Redza Piyadasa and Suleiman Esa

The exhibition, to say the least, is personal. It is not an external world observation, nor a societal observation; but it‘s a deep dive into his inside world. It is indeed a bold move for an individual to be willing to open up his inner self for the world to criticize and analyze.

One of the artworks that deserve a deeper interpretation will be the Mood I. Mood I is not just for Instagram, it is not just for aesthetical pleasing, it’s a documentation of the artist journey in life, or should I say, a documentation of everyone at some point of life. Mood I mirrors the moments that everyone experiences once in their life; some happen consistently, some rarely, but still, it happens. To use the term ‘Sadness’ as a description of his artwork does not give the work justice. Because for an individual to resort to a position similar to Mood I, it is a combination of several emotional burdens that pulls the victim down and not just by one single emotion-sadness. The gradual compiling of these emotional burdens will eventually bring someone down to Mood I, not by choice, but a consequence.

Furthermore, for an artist, or any creator, and basically every human being; one of the biggest fears is the lack of purpose. Why am I doing this? What am I here for? What for? The scariest thing for a human is that these questions that came out in their head, many might not get an answer for a very, very long time. You thought by resting, the question will be answered. You thought by quitting, the question will be answered. You thought this, you thought that, you thought there, but the answer never came. The uncertainty and the inability to get an answer to your questions slowly leads to the formulation of your inner demon. It consumes you physically and mentally. And after all that, it finally leads to the image of Mood I.

This is just one of a few examples of Joshua’s artworks. All of his works drags you into his world inwardly, but eventually it hits back to your inner world. Joshua’s works allows the audience to take a rest from the world full of materialism and consumerism and takes a dive into an inner world where people are putting less and less attention to. An inner world where people are afraid to enter and reluctant to accept what exist within them; but the artist had forced us, the audience, to reflect ourselves through the artist personal emotional journey, playing as the mirror for us.

Emotions a weakness; Emotions a strength

Emotions a weakness. The exhibition exposes his vulnerability and problems through his artworks. The lack of direction, confused, despair, sadness and so much more, all pour into his 11 artworks. If we choose to interpret each artwork individually, it is indeed an expression of his vulnerability; a vulnerability that causes emotions to be a weakness. It then became a work that made people to think of the artist as a ‘sad boi’, a work that resonates with the audiences emotional weaknesses, a work that every writer portrays it as an expression of loneliness etc.

But on the opposite spectrum, if we choose to not just focus at the artworks individually, but adopts a more macro view; which the artworks are just puzzles to the bigger picture, this exhibition is actually a sign of strength. It embodies the emotional strength that people are capable of overcoming an emotional burden despite their initial assumption of being impossible. This exhibition is not a mere collections of pessimistic emotional messages; but it is the artist journey of conquering his inner demon, if not the exhibition won’t even be in existence. By adopting a bird eye view of Joshua’s exhibition, the act of vulnerability doesn’t seem like a weakness anymore, but an act of a true emotional strength; a strength where his past is not neglected but remembered; remembered but not damaging. It is Joshua’s triumph over his inner conflict that gets him to keep moving forward and finally brings the audience the ultimate product, These Thing We Do.

Emotions, a strength.

Is Malaysia always a Peripheral Country?

To start off, the World-systems theory must be introduced. The World-systems theory is a multidisciplinary, macro-scale approach to world history and social change which emphasizes the world-system as the primary unit of social analysis. In the theory, it categorizes countries into three; core, semi peripheral and peripheral. Core countries are countries that have achieved a developed status such as USA, Japan, Canada; you know the drill. On the opposite spectrum, peripheral is the low developed country and exert low influences in their own regional issues and global as well. However in this essay I won’t go deep into that but focus purely on the visual art aspect.

So how does an international relations theory come into the picture for a personal observation in an art exhibition opening?

In the World systems theory, Malaysia mainly revolves between the semi peripheral and peripheral line. Therefore, this positioning means that Malaysia’s influence within their own geographical region is considered average or mediocre. When a country is unable to exert its influence, it’ll usually be forced to comply with other cultures and its own identity faded gradually. It is fortunate at the same time as well because although Malaysia is not the clear leader in the ASEAN and there are signs of fading in its cultural identity, its foundation still remains, just that it’s not strong enough to the extent of carving it’s own niche.

When a country itself is unable to carve a niche for its own culture, there will be no reason for foreigners to visit them. I have realized this trend of Malaysia being an en route destination and being a second or third destination for foreigners. It is important to be noted that the term “foreigner”does not just targeted at tourists from the Western hemisphere, but it involves everyone as long they are are not Malaysians. This realization of the trend is concluded after the visit of the Superfold opening. Before the exhibition, the artist exhibited most of his important works at Singapore Art Science Museum, titled ” Minimalism: Space.Light.Object” last year November and it will end on April 14, 2019.

The works in Superfold, however,as stated in the exhibition guide, “Puntusawasdi will be displaying a body of preliminary works that were the basis for his site-specific commission at the 2018 Bangkok Biennale, and for this exhibition, Minimalism: Space. Light.Object….”

The word preliminary as defined in a dictionary is, “an action or event that is done in preparation before a more important action or event. “ Just from the words , a World System Theory can already be crystallized. Malaysia as the peripheral, Singapore as the core. The more important action or event is for Singapore; an action that is done in preparation before a more important event is for Malaysia. Now why do I deem this important? Because this does not just happen in Superfold, there were already many cases where foreigners deem Malaysia as just a secondary country. A country where it is best for foreigners to exhibit or showcase secondary and non premium works, products and events. Even the artist said it himself during the opening that the last time he visited Malaysia, it was 20 years ago!

It is indeed saddening to know when your own country is never the important player in the region, not to mention on the global level. Never underestimate the consequence and assume that it does not affect normal citizens like you and me. How a country performs on the regional/international level in terms of diplomacy, economy and politics dictates the foreigners assumptions of its people regardless of good or bad. All these efforts will eventually be transpired to its citizens daily life. In terms of visual arts, the core countries with its highly developed economy, high diplomatic presence and strong political structure around the region had already formed the foundation for its people to extrapolate from there. Thus, these core countries which are highly aware of its strong foundation ,attracts top artists not just relying on personal network ; it extrapolates from its foundation and build an excellent physical and digital infrastructure that supports these individuals and its activeness in the international scene etc… All these plays a huge role in formulating a foreign talent’s ultimate decision to depart to these countries.

Sooo… is there even a solution for Malaysia??

Fortunately, there is. From my point of view, it is only achievable when individuals take matter into their own hands. A Plus Works of Art is one of the best examples, although in my argument above I stated that Tawatchai Puntusawasdi only exhibits his preliminary works, but in the end an artwork is after all an artwork. For him to choose Malaysia as his destination to exhibit them, A Plus deserves all the credit. During the opening, renowned art critic Lee Weng Choy had praised the gallery as a good place of thinking of an idea and also the discourse of the idea inside the space.

A Plus did attract a few foreign artist in selecting Malaysia as their number one spot for their exhibition, as seen in their exhibition “Break, Bind and Rebuild” from Cambodian artists and “Enmeshed” from Thai artists respectively. Not to mention that the curator of “Break, Bind and Rebuild” , Ben Valentine had also chosen Malaysia as the first spot in launching his book which discusses the Cambodia artist which he engages with for significant amount of time. So what makes him to choose Malaysia? Like I said above, there are factors beyond just personal network, personal network usually just acts as a conversation opener, an enabler basically. I asked Ben about his decision; where he answered that because of the good logistics provided by A Plus in terms of the technical side in designing, editing and publishing the book; to launch it in Malaysia first is already inevitable. Now this is a what makes a core country a core country, not merely relying on personal networks, but puts focus even more on its infrastructure. From the observation of A Plus, they are indeed going in that direction, just that these core countries are already doing in a macro scale, whereas us are still in an individual/company scale.

The personal network with the A Plus colleagues had opened up the curator’s access to the Malaysia scene, however it is the infrastructure which is logistics in this case that ultimately sealed his decision to choose Malaysia as the number one country to start off his project. This, is what I believed to be the solution for Malaysia to escape from the trap of being a peripheral country; by accepting its current regional role it has to play and to extrapolate from there and focus on building its physical and digital infrastructures. Only with that, I see hope in us.

Andddd, it’s done!

I am proud to say, Personal Observation-Superfold has finally ended after 4 long sections. It is indeed a satisfying experience for myself to complete a self initiated project and I hope you can gain the same satisfaction in reading this. In the end, I wish you all the best and please do look forward for my future writings!

Sincerely, Artookie.

The Power of Art, The Power of Words

Since both the artist and curator are both foreigners, there are a few issues which I felt the need to raise. Both artist were from Thailand and it is not known for their English fluency compare to countries like Malaysia and Singapore. Therefore, there will be a communication gap between them and their foreign audiences. Of course, language on some occasion are not the most crucial factor in expressing, some artist can explain their works without needed to explain orally when his/her works already goes beyond the oral aspect.

However, scenarios like these are specially rare. In Superfold, the artist’s work emphasizes a lot on geometry had stimulated many curiosity from the audience and many questions at the same time. This is where the curatorial talk came in. The artist as a creator, the curator as the storyteller. The curator explains the meaning of his artwork; however this is where the problem came in, there were many occasions where the curator starts his explanation and gradually allow the artist to complete the narrative. But, English was never his main medium, therefore there were many narratives that were not articulated well and some are even difficult to have a full grasp which reduces the impact of his explanation. Furthermore, the nervousness from the artist can be felt when he articulated his views softly which I believe not a lot of people can hear properly.

So reading from all this above, are we correct to summarize the artist as a bad communicator? Or to label the curator as a mediocre storyteller when he is unable to explain the artist views clearly?

These questions will play as a pondering mechanism. Both are not a bad communicator literally, because there are two forms of language in art. Number one, the work as the main expression, it plays as the main language in the space the audiences are situated. It sets the mood of the space and how the audience perceive the work. This is the language that stimulates audience’s emotions and also the language which told their brain, “Hey, time to switch on your aesthetic side of yours.”

Secondly, the words and sentences. The words and sentences, be it written or verbal, are a tool to crystallize that artwork’s language, or should I say, universalize it into one language which everybody could understand. This form can either recapture the audience desire to return and appreciate in a new way; or to attract the audience to visit it for their first time. It provides something for the audience to recall. It’s like telling the brain, “Hey, you got to view it again, remember how the speaker delivers his speech? You’re gonna see something new this time”, or “Hey, you should visit it, the messages it delivers relates to your current situation, you should definitely check it out.”

A powerful artwork requires a synthesize from both forms of language; if an exhibition only relies on the work to express its language without the support of the written and verbal forms which acts a crystallization and universalization tool for the work, its true power of the artwork will face a difficult phase to portray its full potential; it is unfortunate that this was experienced from the Superfold curatorial work.

In the curatorial talk, because of the artist non-fluency in English (the main crystallize tool in that event), which resulted in his work (the main language in the space) delivering a lesser impact to the audience.

When an artwork failed to crystallize its art language, it fails to stimulates the recalling memory and the curiosity to know more from the audiences. In Superfold, because of the mediocre verbal expression, it autonomously cuts out the curiosity and the memory to recall.

Curator and artist are an extremely important partnership in order for an exhibition to be able to articulate its theme and narrative effectively. It is never just about the expression of the artwork itself; it only can be the most effective with the support of the written and verbal language. If we argued that it is always about the work and the interpretation are all from the work and nothing else; then there should be no sign of existence of curatorial talks, forums and sharing sessions. Why need that if we disregard any forms of words and speeches when one is only allowed to understand one’s work based on what’s hung or installed?

Ultimately, the Superfold curatorial talk and the exhibition itself created a curiosity gap. A gap where although audience can approach the artist without any obstacle, the curiosity to know and understand are still hindered due to the difficulties to express wholeheartedly by the artist when he is using a language which is not his mother tongue. Therefore, despite with the opportunities to have an interpersonal communication it still failed for the audience to achieve a holistic comprehension and intellectual satisfaction of the exhibition.

And finally Part 3 of my Personal Observation is finished. In Part 4, the final section, it’ll be my own observation about whether Malaysia is a peripheral country in the ASEAN region. Thank you for your time and I appreciate your reading.

Part 2:Levels of discussion within different profession

Before I start to write more on Part 2; there’s a slight edit regarding my views on Part 1, which is the close proximity of art circle. The close proximity of art circle on which I discussed is targeted specifically on the English medium based art groups. Now, let’s move on to Part 2.

Firstly, why does the level of discussion arose from my observation on Superfold opening? This happens where I overheard the conversation between three different individuals from three different professions; curator, gallerist and collector. Although belong to one industry, yet the subject matter and content is so different between these three and it’s quite captivating for me therefore this part 2 was born.

The conversation happens after the end of curatorial talk; while the crowd are ushered to enjoy the refreshments, these three talk about their views on the art ecosystem. The gallerist is the owner of the exhibiting gallery; while the curator is the one that curated this Superfold; unfortunately the collector is still unknown to me.

They raise the issue of where does the validation of an artwork comes from. Who justify its value? Who is the one that says it’s good? Is it from the highly reputed curator? It’s interesting that the question did not state one word of an art critic when they are one of the main contributor and the answer to their questions. This shows that the presence of an art critic in Malaysia is poorly low and underappreciated. With his question regarding of the curator; I interpreted as the underrepresentation of critic which forces many individuals to resort to a curator and even artist themselves to determine the value of the art. Value does not mean just in terms of money terms, but also includes how the subject matter, content, narrative is well delivered or not.

It’s unexpected as well for me to hear them discussing about how our 1970 National Cultural Policy affect the art scene in Malaysia. They raises how a high amount of art are produced and focused in the Islamic sense which in turn creates a gap for the other forms of art to follow. It hits true in some way as a few writers around the 70-80s period which I read from the book Narratives in Malaysian At; wrote their views on the NCC; some in heavy support as Malaysia will finally have one single identity to show to the world whereas some disagree on the basis of other forms of culture are ignored when these should also be part of the Malaysian identity. The conversation had led me to participate in a think tank discussion involving the Chinese community one day before this writing. Before moving on, it is very important to point out the difference of the Chinese community that uses different mediums to communicate. There’s the Chinese that uses mainly Mandarin as their main medium and their perception and social networks are very different from the opposite side, which are the Chinese that uses English as their main medium. Even their education exposre and the content they consumed are very different; one are mainly influenced by Taiwanese while the latter are more on the Western side.

The think tank that I participated are preparing their draft where they are amending some sections of the National Cultural Policy, and to be submitted to the government for debate in the upcoming parliamentary session on September. Similar to what these three raises, they are also concerned about the over Islamization issue and debating about the Malaysia’s identity. This shows that despite the different mediums, different education exposure, different influences between these two groups, yet still so similar in what they observed and concerned.

However, there’s one thing which bugs me a lot. From the conversation that I overhear from Superfold opening, how does the NCP affect the curator, gallerist and collector? In what way it affects them? This is one question which I can’t obtain answer yet. But I can understand more about the concern from the think tank as most of them are creator themselves, which rely a lot on government resources in terms of grants, sponsor and subsidies. And if the NCP focuses on Islamic identity, it is inevitable that the difficulties for them to obtain these resources increases.

Returning back to the Superfold conversation, it is unfortunate that I can’t hear much when they are discussing about the Biennale issues. But in summary, from what I observed, collectors, curators and gallerist are more interested in the macro aspects of the industry. They look beyond the technical aspect of how an artwork is produced, instead they focus more about the industry in a global and regional sense. It is indeed an eye-opening experience to know the difference of perspectives among different professions. Exist on the same playing field; different in what they see.

This essay is my observation and my promise to write about what I see from Superfold by Thai artist Tawatchai Puntusawasdi, curated by Vipash Purchihanont. To provide a framework before you proceed to read more, my observation mainly focus around:

1. Close proximity of art circle
2. Levels of discussion within different profession
3. Communication/interaction issue
4. Malaysia as a peripheral country?

Now what’s different for this essay compare with the previous one I wrote; this will be more personal as I write what I see and think. In this essay I specifically target the readers which are art individuals as I want to know what’s their views compared with mine and let’s discuss the difference that you saw as an insider compare to me, the outsider. Without delaying, let’s start.

Oh yeah, I just realized that section 1 is a little bit heavy, so I deliberately keep section 1 to stand as a solo essay first.

1. Close Proximity in the Art Circle

Even as an outsider, if you put a significant effort into it, you’ll realized how close the art circle is in KL; everyone seems like someone you saw a day before at another opening. Even for myself, when I engage with some artist, they’ll mostly even ask “I kinda saw you before somewhere.”, shows how small this circle is. However this is not intended to be portrayed as a con literally but to be analyzed in a more balanced way.

Close proximity typically means the social network seems so small where everyone already knows each other. Best example will be, even if A doesn’t know B, but C know B and is friends with A, so C introduces B to A.

In the visual art scene, it definitely belongs to the Strong Network. Such strong network usually means that communication within this type of circle has a very fast grapevine or snowballing thus a message is spread quickly , not to mention that art revolves around people; without the people, it loses it core. This is where the problem arises, due to the industry nature in being so people-based, from what I observed, is also one of the reason why you rarely see tech solutions specifically targeted in this industry. Does this mean artist doesn’t use technology? I would call myself an idiot if I answer yes. The point here is that most technology artist and other art individuals uses are usually the spilled effect of a great tech solution that focuses at another demographic.

For example, the core function of Instagram which is to share photos had lead to a rise of emerging and aspiring artist to share their works through there. However for some users that aspires to become the “conventional artist”, as said previously, they will need to fit into that insanely close and Strong Network in order to get that validation and finally become a “true artist”. Now this is the problem that I want to raise; it’s that despite many great apps that are the current mainstream trend and its high download rate, it cannot solve everyone’s problem, and it’s not their fault because it never was their intent to serve artists on this platform! Artist are just enjoying these platforms spilled value, but never the core value. The arts industry is not just about painting/creating something but it’s way more than that. To become that “true artist”, he or she must have value for other profession in this ecosystem as well. A value that allow writers to write about them, a value that allow curators to tell a good story from their work, a value that allow collectors to invest , a value that allow critics to have content to analyze about and so much more. And right now are there any platforms that sends out this slight chance for these value to be taken action? I’ll talk like an artist for now; you interpret it yourself.

Also, one more thing to note that there are indeed many artists that have a significant amount of followers on their respective accounts and some are getting a high amount of exposure. However, before these apps exist, it is important to be aware that they already belong to that Strong Network I’ve been talking about. The reason of their high exposure is not merely because of their artworks, but also because they are already part of that network, once a work is uploaded, that Strong Network will be activated . Writers, critics, collectors approaches. The app is just extrapolating these artist’s existing resources.

So does apps like Instagram helps artist? Definitely. But can it help in boosting aspiring artist that doesn’t take the conventional route? Can it help in letting the emerging artist in climbing up the ladder? Where he/she does not belong with the art circle and does not get involved with their conversation but focus purely on works. Generally, I highly doubt it. Therefore my take is that the platform that artist are using now are still insufficient to send out messages to these art circles out there that, “I have a way to for both of us to gain value from my works, and yes, despite our network gap, there’s a solution that can eliminate that gap.”

The artwork is in a dark tone and this have already sets up the mood for the audience walking by. From the narrative side, it seems that the artist suffer some childhood trauma, which is expressed by the constant shouting from individuals drawn.

At the top right, I was thinking about whether the artist was thinking of suicide? On the other hand, the artist illustrates the cane whipping from an adult to a child, which I assume the child is himself and he suffers a lot of injuries from the caning.

It is also interesting that an Ultraman is drawn here, from my interpretation; I feel that Ultraman is someone he looks up to as a child, in which he hope that he had a father figure similar to him or the Ultraman plays as a hope figure for his rough childhood.

In the end, his mother leaves his abusive husband and brings the artist to other places. So in a rough summary, the artwork is a story about his abusive father and how it causes injuries and suicidal thoughts to him. Thus the dark theme surrounding the artwork.

However it does not hit me in the feels personally. I feel like the artist did not illustrate the horrors he faced clear enough. It merely illustrates the problems he experience, but did not express enough what’s happening in his head. I’m saying this because this art is similar to Chang Yoong Chia’s Self Portrait as a Landscape. Chang Yoong Chia uses a lot of different environments and it explains more about what his thinking was like.

I also think that the different representations figure spreading around the work is too distant and it does not pieced together to ultimately integrate it together into one single core narrative. However, this could also be possible that it is my mistake if I compare his works with Chang Yoong Chia’s without looking at the artist’s title and his intention. Everything makes more sense after rereading the title as the artwork distant’s figures are not meant to build up one narrative, but it’s just a collection of the artist’s childhood memory.

On a final note, if the artwork expresses more on the behind the scenes such as what he thinks, the fears that go through his head, it may deliver a more powerful image. Something that’ll makes me feel the fear and trauma more profoundly.

If you are reading this, welcome back. Part 2 addresses Jack Yong’s second artwork, which is expressed through a book. The decision to split it into two parts is because based on my personal interpretation, although both artworks belong into one universe; which is the MH17 case, but the aspects he is addressing is very different between these two. In his book, it also is divided between two parts; Watching You and Watching Us. Both seems to touch on similar topic but still different in a detailed sense.

So prepare your mind; and welcome to my take on Jack’s view of the world.

Watching you

It’s personal.

While in Part 1 I addressed his artworks as more of Russia and Ukraine backroom politics at play, but from our conversation, it is actually more personal. I interpret,but Jack feels. The pain of the family members; the waiting, the hopelessness, the uncertainty, the indescribable emotions upon watching the news. All this formulates what the audience see in Part 1. However, the personal emotions gets even stronger in the book.

” How Would You Choose To Die? What Would Happen To My Body If I Was Buried? & Would I Not Feel Anything Because Our Souls Go Back To God? “, were the questions asked by a victim involved in the crash. Referring back to the book, it says: “these questions awakens nostalgia and suppressed emotions-rekindling the artist’s internal conflict with his perplexed interpretation of mortality and the susceptibility of our precious life.” Just one question, it has sets up the whole theme of Watching You and where it is leading us.

Loss.

The artist has enter into the minds of the victim’s closed one, thinking fully from their perspective. Jack did not just deal with the direct aftermath of the crash; but also what they think after a longer period after the crash as well. “I have all and then most of you, some and now none of you.” The process of having them by their side, to them departed, hearing the news, waiting and finally the ultimate outcome ; death. These words had visualized a scenario automatically in my mind when I was reading it. It made me imagine where after a few years, a mother coming down to the living room, needed to accept the fact that their child is forever gone.

From the day she was holding her newborn, I have all, to the day she looks at her child walking towards the departure gate, and then most of you, then watching the news and realized the airplane number is the exact plane her child is boarding, some, until accepting the fact, now none of you….

Watching Us

Curiosity of what’s beyond.

When you flip to the other side of the book, it tells you a very different story. Watching You tells you how the artist feels the victims personally. Watching Us deals with artist himself, personally. One is for the others, one is for himself. This side of the story discover more on the abstract side of matters; time, reality, space, process, beauty, aspirations and dreams.

“Are we in control of our own reality, or is reality in control of us?”

The question that’ll make audiences ponder for a moment. It shows that the artist has a tendency to establish a theme by asking questions that does not have an absolute answer, but to make you think.

A question where the answer is so subjective in nature had lead to different types of interpretation from different individuals. Some gives their answer based on their religious stand, where they believe everything is already decided by the “Higher being” somewhere in the universe. Some are influenced by their family traditional values, not questioning, but just passing the answer down generation by generation. Some are more idealistic in nature, where fate is in their own hands; and that guy is me. There are so many questions that do not have an absolute answer in this world, however sometimes it’s also makes this world more meaningful when there are some sort of ambiguity. This question perfectly play the role; with the question’s vague nature, it generates much discourses among the audiences not just in interpersonal conversation, but also inside their head. This could be the artist’s intention, not to get an answer, but to use that vagueness to extend the conversation from himself to us.

The artwork also shows the artist’s immense curiosity of what’s beyond our perceivable visibility, the universe.

“The artist points his lens into infinity like a curious astronomer

searching for life beyond the stratosphere of perceivable visibility.

The notion for life across the illuminating dark skies conjures a

myriad of optical ambiguity, surrendering the artist’s thought of stars

as an object of beauty but in reality connotes to the silent mirroring of our

life’s manifestation.”

This is why in the intro of Watching Us, it is stated that this part of the book is more about the artist compared to the former. His curiosity towards the universe can already be witnessed in his previous works where it usually involves the universe and his recent project for National Space Agency of Malaysia, named Space Project 2088 is still ongoing and targeted to develop intellectual individuals in Malaysia space industry.

Coincidentally, with his investigation into the MH17 tragedy, the subject matter naturally returns back to his passion for space. In Watching us, as you flip the page further, you will realize that the topic is moving from the stories from the sky into the topics of time and space.

It seems like his expression of the artwork has come into fruition; although the initial efforts are focused on the airplane tragedy, it eventually still come back down to himself. Whenever there is a sky above him, there will be something interesting for him to explore and discover.

In the end, it as an artwork that started out in uncovering the details of the MH17 tragedy but eventually it returns to the artist’s self discovery and ultimately, his passion.

Special thanks to Jack Yong, for willing to talk with an art rookie and share so much insights to me. It is your messages that inspire me to attempt to write about your art. I’ll keep doing on what I love, you keep doing on what you love. We’ll meet again soon.

Self portrait as a landscape- Chang Yoong Chia

During my first view on this portrait, I felt utterly disturbed. What is the most disturbing of this art is the stare, with a dimming white light in the middle of his eyeball that makes the stare even more focused and determined.

This is an artwork that must be viewed from many angles and perspectives. Based on my own view, I see the artist is trying to recall his past life and put it into this work.

First of all, the artwork stares at you first. But when you look more deeply, there are two humans looking back at the landscape. I do not know what role these people play in the artist life but I reckon to be a very important one.

With the center of the art piece, the nose is actually a kid leaning on something which I see it as two fingers combining together. I analyzed it as the artist childhood, living in self-hatred, despair and confusion in his life. At the side of the artwork, we see one boy fishing alone; which strengthens my view that he is a confused kid and have a tough childhood. This may be the reason of why his artworks is mainly in a dark theme in his exhibition.

He is also expressing his view on his own country. If you look closely, there’s a mosque at the left side of the artwork. From my view, he had fully acknowledged Malaysia as an Islamic country and therefore is not a guy that strongly opposes to it.

To summarize, this artwork for me can be considered an artwork that illustrates the artist’s childhood, the important people in his life and also his perspective of his own country. This artwork had shown the artist wide knowledge not only on himself, but the environment surrounding him.