"Seal" a video work by artist: Liew Teck Leong
"Dreary" a video work by artist: Wong Eng Leong
Paintings in "The We Project"
The Leader | Oil on canvas | 2' x 3' | 2010
Truly Malaysia | Oil on canvas | 2' x 3' | 2010
Urban Landscape 1 | Oil on canvas | 16 x 22cm | 2010
Urban Landscape 2 | Oil on canvas | 16 x 22cm | 2010
Urban Landscape 3 | Oil on canvas | 16 x 22cm | 2010
Urban Landscape 4 | Oil on canvas | 16 x 22cm | 2010
Opening night of "The We Project"
The We Project, video from FINDARS on Vimeo.
Essay
Reality: Recent Conceptual Adventures of
PHUAN THAI MENG
PHUAN THAI MENG
by Suraya Warden
Phuan
Thai Meng, on The WE Project, August 2010:
I think
I want communication. I bring up the problem, and then we can talk.
Richard
Lewis & Susan I. Lewis (1995) The Power of Art, p. 429:
Like
Minimalist pictures, Superrealist pictures are cool and calculated
performances.
Phuan Thai Meng reemerges on the art
scene with a quasi-experiment, and offering a unique viewing experience. A solo
show, The WE Project is also more than a typical art exhibition and more than a
sale of works, although it is of course both of those things. The work – it is
on one level intended as a singular work - pushes the boundaries of Phuan Thai
Meng’s art practice into new, fun and exciting territory, where his skills in
painting in a photorealist style are proven (one could say exposed) to be the
means by which he expresses messages, and the language which best tells his
stories, which should not be simplified as ‘…honing in on the ordinary…’1. Indeed, a
significant potential benefit to viewers or students of The WE Project, and one of its most exciting
aspects, is that they may learn more about the artist through this exhibition
than ever before and perhaps hear his message all the clearer. As much as the
standard incentives of viewing art also apply, learning of Thai Meng’s
‘Malaysian-ness’, his understanding of social relationships, his finding his way in
an environment of urban paradoxes, is the underlying joy of experiencing this
exhibition. Where else can we see Kuala Lumpur and Malaysia this way except
through Phuan Thai Meng?
The WE Project is an installation, and
it is an art exhibition. If viewed as an installation it also becomes a ‘fake’
show, and utilises the Chinese to English translation of the sound ‘we’ and the
character 伪 which is fake - a calculated move by the
artist while giving the exhibition its title. The title (in English) refers to
Thai Meng’s precious recurring themes
surrounding the functionality of societies, particularly Malaysian society, and
also refers to the use of other artists’ works within this one, which
transforms solo into collaboration. Among others, the Johor-born artist is
taking into account himself as a Malaysian. Of his choice to explore local themes
he has said,
“When I
was small, I didn’t know Malaysia. Most of the media was from Singapore, so all
the information, the culture, was from Singapore. Now when I go back to my
hometown I see most of my family is still like that. And I think it’s weird. I have
the same problems as artists outside, so my focus is here. Then if I go outside,
especially to Singapore, I bring something from here.”2
Through this work he is also addressing
every other inhabitant of Kuala Lumpur; ‘ordinary people’ at large globally;
artists and activists who want to discuss Malaysian society; and viewers of a
tiny experimental exhibition inside a commercial gallery in a shopping mall in
Bangsar. Nobody is excluded from the term ‘WE’ here.
The installation provides much
opportunity for reflection and interaction by a viewer. All over the walls is
Super Model, the floated decals of faceless officials. Their body language,
familiar from television and newspaper reporting, seems to be saying, “This
area cost… and achieved…”, “Note here if you will…”, “Soon this will be…!”, and everything
similar. They are patting their organisation, company or government department
on the back with each phrase and milking the opportunity for publicity with
each exaggerated pose. The result is hilarious and timely local-themed
“wallpaper”3, which, while
conveying the atmosphere of a rapidly developing nation, also loosely ties in
to another instantly noticeable part of this installation: House. This nine-foot-high
structure is there under notions of ‘dwelling’ and ‘inhabiting’. It is there to
be enjoyed, thought about and walked through. Elsewhere, two large colour
paintings by Thai Meng face a borrowed piece of video art about
free-speech4; the physical relationship
between these three items - more so than that of other items in the
installation - is deliberately organised by the artist. At the back of the
gallery in lower light another piece of borrowed video art is projected on the
wall. Lastly, a series of four small, painted, black & white
‘photographic’ images in typically domestic gold framing hang throughout the
gallery. There need be no further explanation or description of the basic
physical make-up of this piece here. As Dennis Sporre has suggested, “An enormous
amount of nonsense is generated by such questions as ‘Is it really art?’… A more proper
question would always be, ‘What can we get out of it at this moment?’.”5
The WE Project ties together in this
way: each individual piece of art is part of the one installation, just as each
person is part of (a) society. As the artist wishes to point out that every
common thing is “connected” to the bigger “social environment”, interpretation of
this work/show really can be that simple, or the viewer can go deeper.6 “It is a way of
thinking and analysing; getting more [by going at the same thing] from a
different angle,” Thai Meng says.7 The artist has concocted The WE Project to
push himself, and to generate conversation. “Overseas is more theory-based but
I try to be fun [being based in Malaysia].” The artist’s efforts are not in
vain as the piece brings two broad ends of a spectrum together by placing
concept-heavy art in a shopping center where materiality is king, to tickle his
own interests in society and exhibiting art. As a package the total outcome is
all Thai Meng. On one level he is putting skills, style and content aside and
playing with the space allowed in a small commercial gallery. On another level
he is sparking discourse along the general themes of his art, approached also
in previous works and solo exhibitions, which suggest that Malaysian society
could probably function differently. Even in its planning stages, the many
possible reactions to his combining these two levels of experience was undoubtedly
a delight to the artist.
A particular strength of The WE Project
is that the photorealist skills of the artist and the painted elements within
the installation make the heavily conceptual layers of it all much more
accessible. Later of course the same heights could be reached with Phuan Thai
Meng’s paintings alone, as has occurred in the artist’s past, should he do more
typical exhibitions in the future. Any paintingonly exhibitions he might create
have the potential to be no less ‘conceptual’ and hopefully will be ‘the next
step’, that is: provide expansion and progression, for the artist and
eventually for any viewers. But The WE Project serves (and is no doubt intended
to serve, on one of its several layers) as a fresh perspective in the somewhat
ridiculous ground-level arguments of whether it is possible to do something
special and meaningful with painting anymore. Of course, in Malaysia and
elsewhere, painting and sculpture serve an enormously valuable purpose by
providing the accessibility of art generally and also just the idea of other types
of art, to the intimidated or uninitiated. But for the sake of argument, it
should be noted that this experiment from Phuan Thai Meng evolved organically
and thereby propelled him further as an artist, into himself. Therefore any
attempts here to present possibilities in art are
also side effects of the artist simply exploring his own practice. This is
absolutely something to enjoy and take advantage of. It can be a beautiful,
wonderful thing when an art exhibition leaves a viewer excited by art or having
made an easy connection. In general, Phuan Thai Meng’s art contains a powerful
combination of form and content, rare amongst photorealists globally and in
history, to successfully make that a reality.
Painting in That Way
It also provides a chance to learn a
bit about Photorealism in mainstream art history, which can then also help
viewers to understand Thai Meng’s art, perhaps by assessing his similarities and
differences with members of the movement. We will get the ball rolling here.
Primarily, it should be considered that Phuan Thai Meng, in not only the production
but also the display of his art, if allowed, would leave absolutely nothing to
chance, luck, or limitations of someone else’s dictation. His installation here,
while meant to be fun and lighthearted and played with, is calculated down to
the last conceptual millimetre. The artist is meticulously controlling and
self-controlled, almost out of suspicion and mistrust of the commercial local
art scene (but this is another topic for exploration elsewhere) as much as out
of intense perfectionism and motivation, and so does everything by himself and
also nothing for himself at the same time. As Richard and Susan I. Lewis argue in The Power
of Art, Photorealism and Minimalism although so different in appearance were
actually similarly organised, controlled and calculated reactions against Abstract
Expressionism. But, more generally, where infamous Minimalist artist Donald
Judd worried “that art made it difficult to perceive reality”8, Photorealism (also
called Superrealism) in painting9 created
paintings that looked just like basic photography. This is the entry point
through which Phuan Thai Meng – and through him Malaysian contemporary art –
gets tangled up with an interesting time in art history.
Photorealism can encompass Photorealism/Superrealism
and also Hyperrealism10. Phuan Thai Meng’s
method can be considered very close to basic Photorealism (because his paintings
sometimes look like photographs and he sometimes paints from photographs)
although he is not really exploring painting techniques and is therefore not
part nor continuation of the original movement. Painting, rather, is his
mechanism for communication and photorealism is one of the languages he uses.
This has been the case for artists in history who are typically included among
the original Photorealists, who were expressing themselves “…in stark contrast to the
private, mysterious language of Abstract Expressionism” 11. Audrey Flack is one
such artist. But Phuan Thai Meng is not reacting to previous movements in painting
as well. In a broad sense, art in general is a more so a method of
communication today than ever before, and all the forms Thai Meng creates his art in are
his “visual language”12.
In a discussion of Richard Estes’ oil
on canvas Central Savings (1975), created at probably the height of the
Photorealism movement, Lewis & Lewis note:
In a
methodical way, he is imitating the way a camera records reality – utilising
the harsh contrasts and precise focus of mechanical vision… His subjects are
always drawn from the world he lives in… But he never imposes his personal viewpoint
or glorifies his cityscapes.13
Phuan Thai Meng is absolutely
methodical. He does not glorify his cityscapes or other subject matter, yet his
art often hits the viewer with a wave of emotion fuelled by familiarity and/or
imagery of decay and overuse. Thai Meng also offers no opinion, or social commentary.
The only fixed commentary involved in The WE Project that could be considered
intended is the suggestion that we are all a contributing part of a bigger
picture. The work was not created to suggest any right or wrong path, to teach
anything, to force anything, or to provide anything pre-conceived except fun in
experiencing art for the viewer/participant. And Thai Meng certainly draws from
the world he lives in. These are some of the reasons Phuan Thai Meng joins the
Photorealist community, albeit on the fringe.
Hobbs and Duncan point out that while
Photorealism was traditionally intended only as an exploration in painting
techniques, “it is difficult not to see the subject itself” due to the works
often containing scenes of the banal, everyday variety. Thus, they argue many
Photorealist paintings are “representative of an era”.14 Photorealism in
Malaysian contemporary art as presented by Phuan Thai Meng is also
representative of an era. In these modern times it is sometimes actually the
glare of the computer screen and the static surface of a mid-price-range
television set that Phuan Thai Meng emulates. In the colour paintings of The WE Project, the element of photography is
replaced but the degree of realism is still arresting in the art. The artist
has stated:
I have
ideas on whether I go for the realistic look or not. When I paint an image on
the television I am painting the image on screen, not just the image. If it is
from tv or video [for example], it might be fine but not sharp.15
And in his re-creation of those
effects, he is calling attention to the information age, and to the free-media
“way of seeing” 16
as the
traditional Photorealist also did in the past, “by meticulously copying
photographs, [calling] attention to the abstract effects of the camera’s
special way of seeing.” He is also manipulating the perspective of his art to
reinforce his notion that “Local issues become global” and “Issues that are
local are actually international problems”.17 His painting of technology, and development, from
a Malaysian perspective, confirms the place of this society as just one part of
a functioning world. And this does, unsurprisingly, parallel other aspects of
the installation.
So with this work Malaysian
contemporary art participates quite directly in the sharing of global art
history; at a theoretical place where everybody’s voice is valid if only they
would have one, and where some artists are happily producing an extension of previous
art that is entirely their own rather than always trying to be ‘completely
unique’. But this is somewhat unintentional, or to put it in the artist’s own
words:
I looked
into Photorealism of the 70s or what, when I first started [painting this way],
I read books on art theory and I’m not going for that. That was a style, a
movement. I use different techniques, I mix it, and this is my visual language.
But maybe next time [I won’t do] Photorealism.
He then adds with modesty, “I think if
you look at KL, yes Photorealism is exciting. But if you go elsewhere it’s
common…”18. The skill itself may
be common but the exciting element is that Phuan Thai Meng’s artistic voice – a
combination of his message, his practice, his execution and talent, his heavily
thought out concepts – is not. It takes Malaysian contemporary art to new arenas
of discourse because unlike the Photorealists, Thai Meng is using his skills to
make references to urban landscape, and issues of social framework and the
functioning of his beloved society. There is no opinion dictated, but within
The WE Project, in the black and white photograph-sized works the (Urban Landscape
series) for example, there is a great amount of affection in each image, as if
begging for an answer to explain away the despicable. It is such a tender
treatment that the subject becomes uncharacteristically beautiful. It also
seems such a true image of (one aspect
of) what life is like here in KL that – just for a moment - the viewer might
not want the real situation corrected or fixed or changed at all.
Elements Within The
WE Project
Further on the Urban Landscape series,
the images are extremely localised; extremely valid to locals or anyone who
might want ‘a piece’ of KL. As a result of both his techniques and personality,
the image of KL through the eyes of Phuan Thai Meng is the image of the city as
it is right now. This is not to say that in this exhibition he is pointing out the
ordinary. And of course, there are other ways to record what is going on around
KL, but it is the approach itself that is significant. Australian Peter Dallow
has argued this recently:
However
realistic, an image is always a work of imagination, a construction and/or
selection, ‘always from a particular point of view’ (original emphasis). An
image is a negation of the world. What is simulated is not reality, but the
situation of the artist-image maker: ‘a particular intention of consciousness’,
as Satre puts it. As such, it also, by extension serves as a momentary trace or
line across the discursive and psychological conditions,
the cultural formations, around the situation within which the artist operates.19
Another way of putting it is: The WE
Project presents something very personal. For this exhibition, Thai Meng takes
the perspective of everyday life as a citizen of this town, and the humility is
poignant. When asked if he is observing society here, the artist’s response is
immediate: “I’m not teaching.”20 Thus,
partly by way of knowing what he intended not to do with The WE Project, Thai Meng
created this installation. In a discussion of his four black and white
paintings the artist has elaborated on this:
[One is
a site] beside the Pudu station, but I’m not saying ‘you can recognise the
place’. It can be very general. And also with the stadium [Urban Landscape 2]
it can happen anywhere, so no need to be specific [about] that building. Even
if you cannot recognise the place it’s okay, [and] if you know the place ok, maybe
you have another story there.21
The entire installation is presented in
this way, although there are some deliberate connections made by the artist.
The black and white works are somewhat related to the house structure, as Thai Meng
describes:
The
house is skewed, one side is lower a bit, not looking very stable, I think to
reflect to the [black and white paintings]. A lot of our development policy is
very temporary; and it [can get] very creative to cover that up. I’m not trying
to illustrate the issue but just the bring up the issue, that’s why the
material is contractor netting… it also directs us to contracting, it has the message
inside the material itself, and then I try to use the very temporary technique
to build the house. Maybe someone will go ‘why you didn’t make it properly?’,
so I think the message is there.”22
The treatment is of utmost
consideration to viewers, confirming that Thai Meng intends his art to belong
to society, primarily for the purpose of provoking thought within individuals
that may in turn provoke discourse within the community.
We can consider the subjects of his
colour paintings, chosen for their ability to encompass many issues – many
initiators of thought – at once. Truly Malaysia contains elements of mystery, which
fight against the total realism of the painting technique. These elements
provide a ‘searchability’ that is both physical and intellectual, whichever the viewer
prefers if any at all. The work borrows a video by artist Vincent Leong,
although it does this indirectly. Phuan Thai Meng has pointed out that looking
for that video on YouTube will raise issues, and could also lead to viewing any
videos at all which then indeed would be connected in some way to this artwork
‘and everything else’ in society. In addition, on a surface level the artist is
having fun with the idea of internet usage and lack of control by the user. He
laughs, “Maybe it’s slow or just stuck there already! Maybe [there’s reasons
for that] we cannot see.” 23
The work
also represents avenues of information, and popular media. Related of course is
The Leader, painted along similar themes in the image of Prime Minister Najib
Razak giving a speech, in which he is saying “If you help me, I help you” 24. The news crawl or
‘ticker’ below, in Mandarin characters, provides three headlines. The first
refers to issues of bankruptcy and Mahathir’s Wawasan 2020, the second of
admission - with the excuse that money and politics cannot be separated - that
votes can be bought, and thirdly of how the Malaysian economy might look from
outside this nation. Although the second headline is most closely related to the imagery presented, the inclusion of
these three topics deliberately provides “conflict and contrast”25 to further open up the
painting’s possible meaning.
The video art that The Leader and Truly
Malaysia are placed in proximity with is borrowed from artist Liew Teck Leong.26 Within the
installation the artist intends that the video work’s original meaning is not
altered, but rather is seen in a new light because the message of the video art
(very generally: speaking freely) is also one of the messages of the show. “So
I bring it in and try to extend the issue…,” Thai Meng explains.27 The use of another
borrowed piece of video art, by Wong Eng Leong28, mirrors Thai Meng’s ongoing ttempts to address
communal issues from an individual viewpoint:
[In Eng Leong’s work] the artist tried
to look at the everyday things [and here in The WE Project] I have a mixture of
the same thing. For our show here it’s ‘from the big issues we need to extend
to our daily life.’ So like the [image in the video] we actually ignore it,
it’s just ok, it’s an LRT track…but from there we can xpand. It shares with my
previous paintings like the pipe, it’s from a small issue like the water’s cut
out, and from there we can look at our social
environment.29
To Thai Meng, the LRT track is a symbol
of development.30
Of course,
the artist is also exploring the physical use of another artist’s work within
his own, as a development in creating and exhibiting art. There are no
accidents in Phuan Thai Meng’s handling of his own ideas. The WE Project work
is firmly on the unique path of previous and future
creativity by the artist, and as such truly allows us to see the individual
that he is while at the same time gathering our own responses and experiences
from the work. For Malaysian contemporary art, the bonus is that the artist’s
themes and imagery are so specifically from this area and, it seems, will
continue to be. “I try to use the very common things,” the artist summarises,
“to say: maybe this is our culture la.”31 Asked what subjects he might tackle next in
his art practice, Thai Meng is straightforward yet cryptic: “My next step may
be the economy and how people live. It’s the same thing from a different angle.
Maybe they are happy.”32
1
Yee I-Lann on Phuan Thai Meng, quoted
in the Made in Malaysia (Phuan Thai Meng solo show, Kuala Lumpur, 09 - 26 Sept)
catalogue essay by Simon Soon, the full quote being: “His process is described
by artist Yee I-Lann in The Painting Show as ‘honing in on the ordinary as an
attentive observer to the awkward relationship between these spaces and its
inhabitants.’” 2 In
conversation with the artist, July 2010. 3
In conversation with the artist, August
2010. 4 Ibid.
5 Spore,
Dennis J. (1991) Reality Through the Arts. New Jersey: Prentice Hall., p.12. 6 In conversation with the artist, July
and August 2010. 7 In
conversation with the artist, July 2010. 8
Lewis, Richard and Lewis, Susan, I.
(1995) The Power of Art. Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace College., p. 427. 9 There is also Photorealism in
sculpture, often using casting. See works by Duane Hanson, such as Janitor
(1973) in the Milwaukee Art Museum collection, or Ron Mueck’s Pregnant Woman
(2002) in the National Gallery of Australia collection. 10 Hyperrealism: the painting of our
reality with an extreme perspective that produces the image of an altogether
new reality. Subjects are often political and social commentary sometimes rife –
or not – in Hyperrealism. Examples of this category of fine art include, as
pointed out in various places online, some paintings by currently practising
Malaysian contemporary artist Latif Maulan. 11
Lewis, Richard and Lewis, Susan, I.,
The Power of Art., p. 430. 12 In conversation with the artist, July 2010. 13 Lewis, Richard and Lewis, Susan, I.,
The Power of Art., p. 429. 14 Hobbs, Jack, A. and Duncan, Robert, L. (1992) Art, Ideas
& Civilisation. 2nd edition, New Jersey: Prentice Hall., p. 491. 15 In conversation with the artist, July 2010.
16 Hobbs & Duncan,
Art, Ideas & Civilisation (2nd Edition)., p. 491. 17 In conversation with
the artist, July 2010. 18
Ibid. 19 Dallow, Peter, ‘The
Virtually New: Art, Form And Consciousness’., p.80, in McLeod, Katy & Lin
Holdridge (Eds.) (2006) Thinking Through Art: Reflections on
Art as Research. pp. 73-86. London/New York: Routledge. 20 Op. cit. 21 In conversation with
the artist, August 2010. 22
23 24 25 Ibid.
26 Seal by Liew Teck
Leong can be viewed at http://liewteckleong-jitjitluluetling.blogspot.
com/ 27 In conversation with
the artist, July 2010. 28
Dreary by
Wong Eng Leong can be viewed at http://findars.blogspot.com/2009/08/xi_27.html 29 In conversation with
the artist, August 2010. 30
In
conversation with the artist, July and August 2010. 31 In conversation with
the artist, August 2010. 32
In
conversation with the artist, July 2010.
No comments:
Post a Comment