WHAT OTHERS SAY

Teja and Artayasa's Existensial Void
Jean Couteau

A painter never paints alone his creativity doesn't simply appear out of the blue. He or she is part of a milieu into which interferes the heritage from his or her own society and influences from the outer world. It is in the way he or she reacts to these factors and reflects them, as well as reflects upon them, that ultimately belies his or her standing in the art world. Reciprocally, the art of painting, as a collective endeavor is one of the fields that best mirrors the economic, sociological and ethical changes to which any society is subjected.
It is in light of this relation with their Balinese environment - if only because of it's apparent lack of role - that the work of Teja Astawa and Artayasa, exhibited at galeri sembilan, ought to be examined. They are, within the range of their own individual talent, among the best representatives of a new artistic paradigm to which galeri sembilan is the principal exponent on the island - an artistic paradigm resolutely international, mostly bereft of Balinese cultural references, strongly individualized, and with a social or even political message.

Until the very present, past Balinese painting has been subjected to two opposite tendencies, themselves the result of contradictions inherent to Bali's position within the globalized economy. On the one side it has become increasingly "modern," as the society has urbanized and opened itself to a flow of ideas and images from the outside world abstraction and modern figurations were in this context accepted "as given," borrowed in their outer "form" and without their cultural underpinnings. On the other side the "commoditization" of Bali within the international market as "Tropical Paradise," "Morning of the World" and other lofty names has led its painting to preserve at all costs the signs of its "Balinese-ness" and therefore to accept modernity only reluctantly. As a result Balinese painting has since the beginning of the 20th century evolved between two the matic extremes: exotic alienation on the one hand, and strong affirmation of identity on the other, with a formal language evolving first toward realism and then toward modern figuration and abstraction.
Before the recent paradigmatic shift, the main trend - with exponents like Nyoman Erawan, Wayan Sika and a young group of "Abstract Expressionist" artists - was a painting "abstract" in form and composition, but using a number of semi-figurative elements (checkered cloth, mountain symbol, opposition of colors) that enabled a symbolic, usually Hindu reading of the work. It looked abstract and modern, but was heavily Balinese, presenting the core symbols of the island's culture.

It is against this trend that Teja, Artayasa and other artists from the same generation are "protesting." They are moving beyond the identity problem. As Teja put it: "What does it mean to be Balinese? Nothing." This move of the painting discourse beyond "Bali" bespeaks a deep change at the level of the mind set of the Balinese: the young artists now talk of "their feelings," of violence, politics: themes that were unheard of in the works of the previous generations - with perhaps the exception of the very "psychological" Jirna. The discourse of Balinese painting is thus becoming much more open and varied; at the same time it is losing the outer signs of its Balinese origin.
What is, in this new movement, the place of Teja and Artayasa? Their works have lost, as noted above, the signs of their "Balinese-ness." They show at the same time, traces of international, albeit indirect, influences such as that of American graffiti art (Teja) or Informal painting (Artayasa). This bears witness to the fact that, at the beginning of the 21st century, no one can afford to ignore the research in form or content made at the other end of the world. The problem is not so much to acknowledge the reality of influences, but rather to gauge whether the artist has integrated these influences in a way that is relevant both relevant for himself, as revealing his personality, and relevant for his society of reference, as it reflects the changes in values that are taking place.

The appeal of Teja's painting is its negation of the very idea of appeal itself. His colors are washed and sullen, his composition devoid of focus and his figurative themes painstakingly selected to look casual, accidental and most importantly, meaningless. His works are made to look like dirty city walls where children and youth happen to draw immature drawings, numbers and comments. Such treatment is far from the affirmation of ethnic identity the Balinese are so fond of in their modern art, with easy-to-read symbols, bright colors and an appealing composition. Teja talks instead of the lack of meaning, the death of traditional symbols and the sullenness of life; and this message transpires in the very banality of the thematic signs he uses: numbers thrown on the canvas without apparent logic, drawings of cars, tanks and consumer items such as bottles, spattered without purpose on his wall-like paintings. Such atmosphere is new in Bali. Other painters such Erawan have already dealt with the theme of the death of their culture, but they have done so by using a Hindu symbolism and always ended up reaffirming their identity. As for this genre, which has also appeared recently, it has never had the tone of existential "angst" so peculiar to Teja. If for this reason only, it should be interesting to further follow his evolution in the coming years.

Artayasa's work is, like Teja's, an expression of refusal, but with different themes and treatment. Almost all his paintings consist of distorted, ill-defined and unexpressive figures set in the middle of the canvas and occupying most of its surface. No obvious references are made to Balinese symbols and religion. Artayasa's works owe more to European Informal Art and American Expressionism than to anything really Balinese. The general atmosphere is pessimistic, in yellowish, brownish and grayish tones, now and then enlivened by small splotches of bright red. One has the impression that, while the artist is talking about Man, he is depicting him as crushed and even negated - to the point of sometimes hesitating on the verge of pure abstraction. Artayasa says that his pessimism is politically motivated, and he then goes on rambling about the "crisis of nationhood," "anarchy," "separatism," and similar societal problems haunting the country. His work, however, is not political in the proper sense of the word: there is no political message, but rather a sense of helplessness perhaps partially caused by politics, but probably more so by a state of mind. Like Teja, Artayasa belongs to a generation that is questioning the old paradigms of Balinese art because Balinese society itself is undergoing deep changes.

However, when pondering for a while the "spirit of form" underlying Teja's and Artayasa's work, one wonders what is the part played by the two artists' perception of the deep societal changes under way in Bali, and that played by the ubiquitous presence of the outer world within their culture. The future should tell us and further expose their real artistic personality as they face the unending dialog of Bali with the outer world and the unfurling of yet deeper societal change. Art, after all, is but a mirror.

Other Articles:

- Magical Nuance on the Combination of the Past and Present
- Examining Teja and Artayasa's existential painting
- Teja and Artayasa's Existensial Void
- Social and Development Instability
- Bagaimanakah Wajah Senirupa Kita Kini?
- Dari Ubud, Lihat Wajah Inndonesia

Copyright Artayasa 2008. All rights reserved. Designed and maintained by Balibagus.com