Gudskul maps Indonesian art collectives
Original text by Ajeng Nurul Aini, Ayos Purwoaji, Berto Tukan, Gesyada Siregar
Translated to English by Ninus Andarnuswari

This is an excerpt from the preface of the book FIXER 2021 launched in July 2021.

FIXER is a research initiative to collect and archive the knowledge about operating models and sustainability strategies of art collectives in Indonesia. This initiative started in 2010, when North Art Space, Jakarta, launched the research and exhibition called ‘Alternative Space & Art Groups in Indonesia’, later known as FIXER, curated by Ade Darmawan and Rifky Effendi. This research in 2010 involved 21 art groups and alternative spaces that flourished in several cities in Indonesia between 2000 and 2010.

Gudskul: Contemporary Art Collective and Ecosystem Studies is now continuing it as an endeavour to map and re-examine the development of art collectives over the last ten years, especially in the context of sustainability strategy, and artistic ideas and practices of art collectives from multiple generations and regions. Building upon the previous research, the FIXER survey this time covers 58 art collectives spread across various locations in Indonesia. This research was carried out for approximately 16 months, throughout 2019-2021, by a research team consisting of Ajeng Nurul Aini, Ayos Purwoaji, Berto Tukan, Gesyada Siregar, Dwita Diah Astari, and Gusti Hendra Pratama. This research will be presented as a book in two languages, Bahasa Indonesia and English, which gathers thoughts from the research team along with guest writers who are artists, activists and curators.

FIXER 2021 team research meeting. Photo by Jin Panji. Image courtesy of FIXER.

It is the phenomenon of growth that is behind the aspiration to record the dynamics of art collectives in Indonesia. This has been increasingly significant in the development of the Indonesian art ecosystem for the last eleven years, and is marked by the emergence of a multitude of collectives with various artistic practices— some of which have received recognition from international art communities. The growth of art collectives in many regions in Indonesia has led to the birth of numerous artistic events and initiatives without facilitation by the state. To cite Ade Darmawan in the 2010 FIXER catalogue: the emergence of these art collectives or groups needs to be seen as “an effort to respond to changes in the society, for the sake of the development of ideas of art practices that are more relevant and immediately involved with the reality in the society.”

FIXER 2010 exhibition poster. Image courtesy of FIXER.

The Significance of Art Collectives in Indonesia

The history of the development of modern art in Indonesia in fact has never been apart from the spirit of collectivism. It can be dated back to the formation of Seniman Indonesia Muda (SIM, Young Indonesian Artists) in 1946; Lembaga Seniman Indonesia Tionghoa (Yin Hua Meishu Xiehui, Chinese Indonesian Artists Association) in 1949; Lembaga Kebudayaan Rakyat (Lekra, People’s Cultural Institute) in 1950; Lembaga Seniman dan Budayawan Muslim (Lesbumi, Indonesian Muslim Artists and Culture Activists Association) in 1954; Gerakan Seni Rupa Baru Indonesa (GSRBI, Indonesian New Art Movement) in 1974; Decenta in 1975; Kelompok Kepribadian Apa (PIPA) in 1977; Jaringan Kerja Kebudayaan (JAKER, Cultural Networks) in 1989; up to the emergence of artist groups in the 90s, including Kelompok Seni Rupa Jendela (Jendela Art Group) (1993), Apotik Komik (1997), Taring Padi (1998), KUNCI Study Forum & Collective (1999), HONF (1999), and Tanahindie (1999). Apart from those mentioned, there have also been studios that accommodate artists’ need for space to gather, have a process, and create. Some of these are Sanggar Jiwa Mukti (1948), Sanggar Seniman Kartono Yudhokusumo (1952), Sanggar Bambu (1959), Sanggar Bumi Tarung (1961), Akademi Seni Rupa Surabaya (AKSERA, Surabaya Fine Arts Academy) (1967), and Sanggar Dewata (1970).

This fact can actually serve as a premise for the contribution of artist groups, collectives, or studios and their long history in the development of modern art in Indonesia. And the tendency to gather has continued to the 2000s, and till today. In fact, recently it has emerged strongly in various regions. In his article in this book, Hendro Wiyanto, quoting Ugeng T. Moetidjo, notes that the emergence of numerous artist groups in the last twenty years has marked a shift in artistic practice from activism to collectivism. A consequence is the positional shift of the public in an artistic work. If artist-activists in the 1980s “presented the individual voice of the artist” and saw the exhibition hall as “a terminal for an activist’s adventures and explorations,” then an art collective of the 2000s “echoes the struggle of identification regarding issues of citizenship” and uses the public space as its “arena, target, engagement, victory, and defeat.” An attempt to identify this shift in artistic practice is very likely to be developed in the future, given the wide variety of the practices in Indonesia today that dissolve into everyday life, making them difficult to measure in conventional terms.

The fusion of collective artistic practice with social practice also becomes a crucial starting point for this survey: Is there a rigorous definition of “art collective”? How do we differentiate between an art collective practice and a local neighborhood youth group? How do we measure an art collective’s artistic practice whose members are not artists? Gesyada Siregar, in her essay in this book, tries to pursue the intertwining insights to be used in detecting art collectives’ practices that are often amphibious and take the form of institutional experimentation.

FIXER 2021 meeting notes on whiteboard. Image courtesy of FIXER.

When comparing our study subjects to those in the FIXER 2010 survey, we found that several art collectives or groups still exist; some have evolved and changed their names, while some have disbanded. However, disbanding here does not mean a dead end because in many cases members of art collectives that have disbanded form other collectives. For them, an art collective is not only a medium for channeling artistic expressions, but also a social forum or even a mode of survival. This characteristic answers a classic question: How can a collective’s artwork enter and be accepted by the art market? First, most art collectives do not have an idea about market mechanisms and are not dependent on them. Second, most art collectives position their artistic practice as a method for achieving the social goals they aspire to achieve. Their artworks cannot be framed as commodities, but can include various forms of interdisciplinary work. Ayos Purwoaji, in his essay in this book, describes it as such: “Their process of art creation—and the artworks produced—can only be seen from a certain vantage point because it requires a long timespan and involves the participation of many parties.”

How do these collectives survive? Through various interviews, we discovered that there is a diversity of resources that sustain today’s art collectives’ practices. In the 1990s or even in the 2000s, some art collectives received support through foreign funding or resorted to dues, as described in Berto Tukan’s article on factors for the emergence of art collectives. In it, he argues that in the last ten years there has been a diversification of resources, ranging from cooperation with the private sector, establishment of business cooperatives, securement of access to government budgets, to building independent economic strategies and developing community-based businesses. The definition of capital for art collectives in Indonesia does not stop at finances. Above all, various forms of social capital turn out to support their survival in more robust ways as an art collective.

FIXER 2021 team research trip to Sinau Art, an art collective based in Cirebon. Image courtesy of FIXER.

One interesting illustration appears in one of the interview sessions with an art collective that is more than ten years old and has not yet received external funding. Their works are not for sale, but they are active in various activities involving dozens of other art collectives in their region. Through interviews guided by Ajeng Nurul Aini, also published in this book, representatives of these collectives share stories of their survival strategies. How do they survive as an art collective? Some members we interview remark that one thing that keeps them going is a common sense of humor. They fulfill their personal daily needs by working odd jobs, while the art collectives become their social forum and channels of expression. Since they never depend on the global art market, their existence is not influenced by fluctuations in market capitulation and value. Independence in this case must be understood as a form of resilience and sovereignty to support the social dimension in their artistic practices.

A Multitude of Perspectives

Not only presenting the research team’s articles, this time FIXER has also invited guest writers to enrich our study of the development of art collectives in Indonesia in the last ten years. They are Dwihandono Ahmad, Hendro Wiyanto, Nuraini Juliastuti, and Renal Rinoza. In addition, FIXER has also invited writers from art collectives of different contexts and practices, namely Jatiwangi art Factory, Hysteria, Komunitas Pasirputih, Ladang Rupa, Rakarsa, Taring Padi, and Tikar Pandan.

More information at fixer.id.

This article was originally published in Check-In.