Chuck Close, one of American’s most prominent contemporary artists who had made the most number of self portrait had once said that, in the end of the sixties, painting is “dead” and sculpture—in the sense of sculpture in the expanded field—took control. According to him, painting had become a meaningless activity and although to be a painter you better paint an abstract, because at the time it was considered foolish to make representational images, the activity that was most irrational was to make portraits. Nowadays, when painting has regained its status, it is of course hard to imagine this situation. This also goes for portrait, which includes self-portraits. The same situation can be seen in Indonesia, where some artists is indeed known and considered important exactly because their intensity in creating self-portraits. Mostly these self-portraits deals with the face of the artist.

Face. Since the beginning of time, face has always plays an important role in one’s identity. Nowadays it remains the most important piece in settling the construction of identity. The difference may lies in how the meaning is constructed. Just like William A. Ewing said, “The face of human individuality is a more troublesome concept now.”ⁱ Of course, speaking abot self portrait in art is not merely speaking about face, however, it can also be said that face is the center of our attention. The fact is, nowadays face hold an important role in the construction of identity. This can be seen in the works of Barbara Kruger entitled your body is a battleground, with the main display focusing on a face of a woman with an embolded text, screaming the title. In other words, nowadays the phrase that was said by William A. Ewing, “(your-) face is battlegroud—for science, technology, industry, commerce and art—ⁱⁱ somehow fits. We recognise somebody mainly from his face. That is why the identity gadgets, such as identity card, passport, and other identity signs use facial portrait as the marker for one’s identity.

The Face Value exhibition shows the self-portrait works of four Indonesian artists that can be said had shown the most intensity in working in this field. They are Agus Suwage, Astari, Budi Kustarto, and FX Harsono. Through their works, they can show that self-portrait is still an up-to-date works. It goes without saying that the theme and issue that was represented in their self-portraits had become the common staple of discussions. That is why I’m not so keen in talking about the content of representation and meaning in these four artists artworks. I believe the audience had caught a sufficient understanding regarding the theme and issue brought forth by these four artists. That is why I decided to talk about their place as an entrance to see the possibilities of paintings and self-portraits in the contexts of contemporary art. Why is this still possible? Contemporary art does open a possibility for the whole range of art. It is therefore quite ligitimated to any contemporary artist to produce art in its many possibilities, even with medium, theme, and subject matter that is not entirely new. However, we do wonder, what is the reason behind self-portrait’s—the main stapple of European painters many centuries ago—rejuvenation?

In times when portraits are again considered important, the self-portraits instantly become an important focus. They basically compliment each other. Basically, the comparation—or to be more precise the act of relating—self-portrait works to the portrait (of others) is similar to the act of talking about “me/you and them”. In portraits, although the profile shown is not of the artist, but the presence was stated and controlled by the artist. That is why; there is always a connection between the artist and the other someone that he paints. Is it not true that the presence and individuality of someone is measured according to his relation with other people? Is it not true that all our days are filled with our “relation” to other human beings? Is it not the main concept of community, society and social mechanism? Even a grudge is basically an I/them thing. That is why, basically, in every portrait works, an intention of a self, in this case the artist’s, is always present.

Commonly, portrait can be placed as part of the problem related to the artist’s self—the anxienty, desire, dream, obsession and so on. In other words, the figure in the painting can play a protagonist or antagonist to the artist. If in the portrait works the artist painted somebody else, and borrowed them to “play” and represent the intended problem, in the self-portrait, the artist uses his own figure. In other words, in the context of contemporary art, the self-portrait is the method of an artist to sneak his self into the vortex of problem that he wants to mention. If in the portraits (of somebody else) the artist becomes a narrator, in the self-portrait he took the main role. The many roles available can be chosen by the artist to play.

It is said that the self-portrait is an ever-lasting subject matter that goes since the renaissance. Therefore, it cannot be otherwise that the contemporary self-portrait must have a different reasoning than its predecessor. In the renaissance, self-portrait emerged as the utopic reflection of humanism. “The Renaissance is associated with a rise in human self confidence. For portraiture it was a new beginning.ⁱⁱⁱ While in the relation to the popularity of portraits in the contemporary art Norbert Lynton had once said, “how could portraits flourish when we had such radical doubts about ourselves.”^iv Therefore, in the contemporary art, the missing confidence to humanism become the main popular reason to the depiction of self, which in this case, the self of the artists amidst the chaos of society and contemporary culture.

The artist who had chosen to show self-portrait is legitimated—as a prominent artist—when first he can instill his self into the mainstream issue in the contemporary art. The personal history of the artist become relevant when related to the problem in the dominant discourse. It cannot be denied that contemporary art is a region where interests collide. One of the interests that are considered important is the capacity of contemporary art in representing the thought or discoure of the politic, social and culture of today. In other words, the contemporary art is important because it represents the problems and provides channel on how the aforementioned problems are being talked, theoritized, and discoursed.  The importance of theory were explained by Zoya Kocur and Simon Leung,

“In the area of contemporary art and art history, learning to think from such perspectives felt urgent, necessary, and existing. In our encounters with culture, politics, and art, we found ourselves dividing our thinking into before and after our introduction to theoretical writings that seemed to illuminate them in ways that seemed both timely and essential.”^v

The fact is that the works of self-portraits from Agus Suwage, Astari, Budi Kustarto and FX Harsono are elaborated related to the identity politic theories. Their works are not only important related to the aesthetic quality, but also to the theory and discourse that are represented through their self-portrait. The self-portraits of FX Harsono are intense with the problem of ethnicity. It cannot be denied that the Indonesian, as a plural and multi-ethnic nation, obviously have many social and political problems. The historical journey of Indonesian shows how the plural situation had caused many frictions in the grassroot layers. However, the problem that worries Harsono seems to be the existence of the mighty hands—the kind of power that usually can only be emerged from the ruler’s environment—that trigger and reaping benefits from the chaos accompanying the friction. One of this ethnic chaos, which still leaves trauma, is the chaos known as May tragedy (1998). Whoever has any conscience—especially the victims—of course still feels the trauma and anxiety, because until today there is still no clarity upon the event. The intelectual actor behind the chaos is still shrouded in mistery.

Of course for Harsono, as an artist and a citizen with Chinese ethnic background, what he felt, experienced, and saw is an important thing. As an artist with high interest in the social political issue, putting his self in his works is the most effective method. He wants to states that he feels and experience these matters in the first hand. The presence of the artist also stated that the represented problems are the problem that “should” be represented in an artwork. He might have hopes that there will be a higher awareness and understanding that will become a start for the tolerance and justice in a plural society.

Just like Harsono, the works of Astari also brought forth an important and latent theme in the contemporary art, the gender bias problem. It seems the politic identity is intense with the tendency for the return of the repressed. The modern society is a society formed by the patriarchal construction. That is why, when the modern construction of society is put under question, the gende bias strikes to the surface. For Astari, an artist with broad knowledge and relation, with a cosmopolite and metropolist lifestyle, gender equality is “a must”. Alas, the reality shows a different face. That is why; it is inevitable that her works are laden with the feminist’s nuances. Astari also uses the tendency of appropriation to join the conversation and entering the realm of international artists. The recent works of Astari also felt more mature. In the Guilt Trip Series Biring Berry no 1 and no 2, the title shows how these two works are the reflection of Astari’s journey. The many icons (Formula 1 cars, Tomb Rider, woman bags, Black Berry) presence along with the old picture of the people of North Sumatera obviously are the symbols in the Astari’s life. The choice to use the traditional costume of North Sumatera obviously also held some importance.

Meanwhile, in Agus Suwage’s works, there is nothing that we can point as a clear hint on the problem of political identity. When we observe further, the narration in his works show some kind of interest in many things, be it social, contemporary art, pop culture, self-existence, even the profane. Agus Suwage is also known as one of the Indonesian artists who master the appropriation method. With his virtuosity on drawing and painting, Agus Suwage can represent the political figure, celebrity, and artists in his works with different aura, an Agus Suwage’s aura. This also goes to the self-portraits. In them he can show his self in myriads of problems. His criticism is clearly shown in his recent self-portraits, as in this exhibition. The work Manusia dan Angka-angka, depicting his deformed face, might very well be his depiction on the modern people insanity over the capital. It is as if he wants to say that we can never be free from the matter of loss and profit calculation. That might be the reason of his highly deformed faces, just like an extreme form of carricature. But, Thierry de Duve once said about carricature, “But a caricature is all the more truthful in that it is exaggerated…”^vi

Meanwhile, Budi Kustarto, the youngest in this exhibition seems to focus more on him. He started to be known with his self-portraits showing him struggling with the canvas. It can be said that what Budi talked about is about himself—or to be more precise, his existence—in the artworld. No wonder Budi likes to appropriate the world-class artworks to appear alongside him. What Budi like to say is of the position, existence, and of course the domination. We must admit that the global contemporary artworld is still dominated by the Western art. This is the result of the Western historical construction and art discourse that was spread across the world. In the works Satu Tegangan Budi’s figure is shown still struggling with the problem of the canvas. In this works he is seen hanging on the canvas in a way that is surreal. Meanwhile, in his works entitled Dialog dengan…, he seems to show his interaction with the contemporary art world, which can also reflect Budi’s own personal problem. The figure that he converse with is a figure in the work of a Chinese artist, Xiang Jing, entitled Peacock. The work Peacock talks about the presence of a strange, dark, unhappy woman. In the work Dialog dengan… Budi seems to want to show his empaty to what she experienced. Does Budi feel the same?

Apart from the problem of political identity representation, what really matters is the question of why—in the development of highly sophisticated image production—these self-portraits “must” be executed by painting them. The word “must” is somehow inappropriate in this matter, because in reality, the artists in this exhibition are also known to have worked with other medium. Harsono is well known for his installation. Recently, he often works with digital print and video. Astari and Budi Kustarto also work with sculpture, and three dimensionals. Agus Suwage usually use other media, such as found objects, objects, sculpture, photo, and digital print. The execution of self-portrait using painting is a matter of choice for these artists. But the question remains, what is the power and specialness of self-portrait works that were done by painting?

The title of this exhibition, Face Value, is also a statement on the existence of artists in the context of Indonesian contemporary art. For me, painting is still the most important part in the Indonesian contemporary art world, as its vessel of representation, reading, appreciation, and public acknowledgement. Painting is also appreciated because the identity of its maker. And to me, self portrait—apart from the problem that it carries—is also a further statement on the identity of the artist. The face of the artist on the canvas is a signature par excellent from the artist. We cannot deny the fact that the mainstream practice in the Indonesian contemporary art world is still painting, and the main players are still those painters whom paintings are considered important by the market.

Other matter that we can pursue is that, in this exhibition, we can see the importance of photography in the painting of self-portraits. We can say that the self-portraits of contemporary artists are really depending on the photography. On this we can even say that the first layer that these self-portraits represents are the photos of the artists. The use of photography and the final touches using painting practices is an attitude and choice of artistry which reflects what James Gaywood said as “egalitarian aesthetic.”^vii Although this might not be appropriate—because Gaywood used this term to criticize the Young British Artists, the term “egalitarian aesthetic” or “egalitarian art” to me fits perfectly with the application of painting as a practice in building images. By using painting, the self-portraits—of well-known artist—do not experience any resistance on its identity as an important artwork. Thus, the “problem” that he wants to talk about can directly be put in the frame of theory and discourse. That is why; in the context of contemporary art the reading of an artwork is also a “signifying practice”.

In the practice of meaning making, the role of the artist becomes more important. Which is why; the more well-know an artist is, the appreciation and meaning potential on his works goes higher; or we can say, that he gains better bargaining position. The more well-known an artist is, the higher it is his “value” in the eyes of its reader (namely, curator, critics, art dealer, collector, and art lovers). It does not matter how he manage, build strategy and directs himself to the important and well-known position. There is no one true and tried method to be famous, but one thing stands true, that in order to make the “values” in the presented works considered important, the “value” (the importance of the artist) in the art world has to be undeniable. Simply stated, this concerned his ability to show the aesthetic potential, often referred as aesthetically correct (which fortunately never has never been well-defined). The flexibility of the aesthetically correct definition in contemporary art era is needed to guard the principle of pluralism, even though there is always a mainstream tendency in certain place, and certain time. What is also important is the politically correct aspect, that can be simplified as the attitude of the artist in reading and representing the social political problem in contemporary culture. I believe these four artists in this exhibition have proven that they are able to construct such values, and had gained apprecation over it. These have shown how their self-portraits are face value par excellence.

Asmudjo Jono Irianto

Exhibition Curator

_____________________
End Notes:

i William A. Ewing, Face The New Photographic Portrait, London: Thames and Hudson, 2006, p. 13.

ii Ibid.

iii Norbert Lynton, “Portraits from a Pluralist Century” in Painting The Century, 101 Portrait Masterpieces 1900-2000, by Robin Gibson, New York: Watson-Guptill Publication, 2001, p. 8.

iv Ibid, p. 7

v Zoya Kocur and Simon Leung, editor, Theory in Contemporary Art since 1985. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2005, p. 1

vi Thieey de Duve, “When Form has Brcome Attitude—and Beyond” in Theory in Contemporary Art since 1985, editor Zoya Kocur and Simon Leung, Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2005, pp. 21-22

vii See James Gaywood, “’yBa’ as Critique” in ibid, p. 89.