Commentary on the Institution of Art and Its Conventions This seems to be the motive we see the most. Perhaps this motive could be the artists’ strategy to reveal to the public the commotions behind art creation through art creation. Within it is a criticism about how the art institution and its apparatus has the power to define and create conventions: what is art, what artists merit value, and so on. Barriers between art spaces and the public aside, artists have been taking on a role and strategizing (outside of economic motives) in distributing their work and ideas independently to reach a wider public. Such distribution patterns have been enabled by technological advances of the digital media that transcends the barriers of time and space. This contemporary reality increasingly underscores the nature of art in the market context that has turned into a commodity that requires the services of salespeople as marketing agents11. Certainly, still laboring in this context, art does intend to serve buyers/collectors of art who consider the utility and investment values of artwork. An illustration we often find in flea markets is interesting to note; after it serves its purpose as an art object, artwork can be dismantled and its meaning reconstituted in the form of ideas and its economic value. Works as a Reflection of Consumer Deception This last motive resembles a form of meditation about the contemporary situation: how participatory media has contributed in affording a space for fundamental human desire to express and to be heard. This type of meditation takes us to a cacophonous societal reality that is awash with information12. One can easily borrow and appropriate the abundant “signs”, either to be collected or reconstituted to create new meaning and to be looked at from a different perspective. Media technology has fully transformed public culture and shifted the limits of art itself that we see a fusion or blending between what is considered art and technology and everyday culture13. *** These are the motives of “celebration” that we would like to share with you, that linkages between art and technology have been happening for a while now, intertwining and influencing each other. In the introduction to this catalogue, Hafiz Rancajale – quoting Jim Supangkat – has said that, “Video has torn down almost every barrier of what has been considered reality”. And new media technology, with video as its subset, has also been doing the same for barriers of art. Media technology has become a part of daily public life – it is inseparable from urban visual public culture14. Perhaps the choice of “Deception” as theme is quite timely. Technology is increasingly advanced, easily accessible, easily operated and can be disseminated in a matter of seconds. It is a curve reaching its apex. OK Video this time is not only limited to a single-channel video art, it also includes installations, video sculpture, photography, and other mediums familiar to the public – a cause for excitement to us. Today is the moment that can kindle the public to continue thinking about the function and position of artists, definition of art, maturing medium exploration and questioning the barriers and conventions of art. The emphasis is not on the penultimate artistic achievement, nor on breakthroughs in the use of mediums, but on the social function of artists and their work. The balance of it all. And this is that celebration. *) Translated by Miki Salman 11. Look at the project by Young Poor Artist, Marketing 12. Look at the project by Christopher Baker, Hello World! Or How I Learned to Stop Listening and Love the Noise 13. Hendro Wiyanto in Influx curatorial, Strategi Seni Multimedia Indonesia, 2011 14. Hafiz Rancajale, “OK, Sekarang Mari Melebur”, Katalog MUSLIHAT OK. Video 2013
39