SCULTPURE EXPANDED: group exhibition
JANUARY 13 - JANUARY 31, 2005
CP ARTSPACE, JAKARTA

Sculpture Expanded : Re-asserting The Definition Of The Medium
By Anusapati

The definition of sculpture as a three-dimensional medium of art has recently expanded. Despite the fact that theoretical studies of sculpture in Indonesia remain few as yet, such development keeps going, in practice particularly, so that the actuality of contemporary sculpture is increasingly varied. The evolving discourse on contemporary art in general in the latest decade has its own role in the shifting and expanded definition of the medium of sculpture.

The tendency of blurred borders between mediums of art has generated works physically hard to classify and identify. Among some artists, creative zest has led to novel works that cross such borders as known previously. Some artists who used to work exclusively with the two-dimensional medium have currently begun exploring the three-dimensional realm, exploring space and featuring objects.

Now we have three-dimensional works that do not easily categorize themselves as sculptures; that is why new "categories" theoretically more justifiable such as "installation" and" object", which is somewhat more neutral, are introduced. Despite the precariousness in distinguishing "sculptures" from "non-sculptures" in their physical terms, individual artists' attitudes and approaches to the mediums they work with may often be indicative in this regard. In this case, an artist's background is most relevant.

Consciously or otherwise, in their creative process some artists start from the recognition of the physical nature of the medium, with its spatial exploration, elaboration of forms, manipulation of scales, et cetera. Briefly, the entire physical potency of the medium they choose is to be optimally used. Others may, for instance, see the medium as just an extension of their artistic ideas, as signs representing meanings, which can be manifested either as images on two-dimensional fields or as three-dimensional concrete objects.

Sculpture As A Discipline of Medium

In a monograph on Rodin the sculptor, R.M. Rilke, a German poet, observes: "Sculpture was a separate thing, as was the easel picture, but it did not require a wall like picture. It did not even need a roof. It was an object that could exist for itself alone, and it was well to give it entirely the character of a complete thing about which one could walk, and which one could look at from all sides."¹

Rilke's description clearly asserts the characteristic quality of sculpture as a three-dimensional medium that is physically different from painting, which is two dimensional. The statement, written in early twentieth century, expresses how sculpture - after being thoroughly 'liberated' from its architectural function - has become an independent medium in itself. While sticking to an anthropocentric framework, Rodin's sculptures already break free from the one and only task of being full representations. Some works of his, including those featuring parts of the human body (instead of its entirety) can be individually taken as wholeness, as objects in their own.

While Rodin then actualized the technique of modeling as one among the ways to break free from classical sculpture (chiseled marble), Constantin Brancusi - a sculptor of the next generation - explored the techniques of stone and wood chiseling and carving to revitalize traditional spirit in his works. Brancusi makes a lot of innovations in the history of modern sculpture, especially regarding forms as a visual phenomenon. Yet his treatment of the medium even reinforces sculpture as a conventional medium where the factor of "craftsmanship" in the real sense of the word becomes central.

A quite radical leap takes place in the methods of making sculptures, resulting from the development in cubism introduced by Picasso and Braque, and, later, Gonzales in sculpture. As three-dimensional realization of object compositions in cubism painting, various kinds of material, such as boards, ropes and cords, are used by Picasso to assemble and "devise" (not just "to form" any longer) his sculptures. In turn, such working method effects very significantly on not just the process of making sculptures but the subject matters for sculpture as well. Figuration that was previously the main concern in sculpture is replaced by concerns over forms and materials.

Anyhow, this change implies some continuity that is highly reasonable. In his "Material as Sculptural Metaphor", Donald Kuspit discusses to some significant extent the aspect of tactility that is among the essential qualities inherent to material.² Tactility is the manifestation of conceptions and sensory perceptions of the body, and this actually refers to the drive to fulfill the emotional need that is the most primitive in human beings. It follows that in any sculpture, even for the most abstract as well, bodiliness remains an inherent part that is articulated by the presence of material.

Sculpture In Contemporary Art

In contemporary art discourses in postmodern era, borders between mediums are no longer at issue. Indeed, the tendency to get rid of such borders is included in the "agenda" of contemporary art; the concoction of different mediums has become common in the contemporary art practice. To some artists, those working with two-dimensional medium particularly, the adoption of the three-dimensional medium does not only represent attempts to break free from the limitation of the two dimensional. It can also be seen as manifesting resistance to the principles of modernism. In line with the spirit of pluralism flourishing in the 1990s, exploring mediums represents one way to escape from "Euro-Americentrism" in the contemporary art practice. "Square canvas" being regarded identical with the art practice of "the West", works of installation and various three-dimensional objects emerge, especially those adopting indigenous materials thus implying refutation against the narrative of historical development of Western art predominating art practices outside the West. Consciously or not, the drive among artists to explore the three-dimensional medium - while pivots on certain artistic premises - also rests on the political consideration of actualizing contemporary spirits.

Sculpture Expanded

The current exhibition features trends among individual artists in adopting the three-dimensional medium to actualize their ideas and manifest their perceptions of space and the presentation of concrete objects. Some of the works presented here may well exemplify the classical qualities of sculpture as a medium. Yet, others - even if they are three dimensional in nature - may not easily and necessarily categorize as sculptural works. Despite their genealogical differences vis á vis sculptures, the kind of works often termed as "objects" have similarities with sculptures, at least in their physical aspect.

The concrete presence of such works - so that they are not only for seeing but also sensing and even touching - can also be interpreted as an antithesis to the tendency in the development of contemporary art that gives primacy to the aspect of idea while eliminating the material aspect, for instance in conceptual works, multimedia, newmedia art, and cyber art.

The title "SCULPTURE EXPANDED" is meant to emphasize the expansion of the three-dimensional medium so that it now no longer exclusively belongs to sculptures but also manifests as objects of various kinds and natures. The title of an essay, "Sculpture in the Expanded Field" by Rosalind Kraus has more or less inspired the titling of this exhibition. In her essay Kraus points out that the category of "sculpture" in contemporary artistic practice is currently so fluid and flexible that it includes almost any works involving space and objects.³ This exhibition, however, tries to see things from a different viewpoint: in addition to the ongoing development in the natures and uses of mediums in the general contemporary art practices, there have also been changes and dynamic movements in the sculpture-making domain itself, and this holds true even when we stick to the more conventional definition of "sculpture".

This exhibition presents the works of eight artists working with the three-dimensional medium. Some of them are known as "sculptors" in terms of both their field of academic study and their actual works. The others have academic backgrounds different than sculpture and they work mainly with a different medium, painting in particular, so that they are more known as painters. Yet, the latter artists then also intensely develop the use of the three-dimensional medium in their works.

ICHWAN NOOR is among those that might be classified as "true sculptors". Invariably using artist-made idioms, both figurative and abstract, his works are remarkable in terms of craftsmanship. This is because Noor always focuses on skill in his creative process. The making of most of his works involves quite sophisticated techniques as well as advanced knowledge and technical skills. His sensibility features obviously in the working on his made forms and the way he treats his materials.

HEDI HARIYANTO is a sculptor who makes a lot of exploration concerning the mediums he works with. In addition to sculptures, he makes installations and he collaborates with performers. One of his works in the performance format is when he fried tempe (soybean 'cakes') at an art exhibition. Yet what he afterward offered to the audience were his sculptural works: the tempe he made himself to represent the forms of various objects like cars and hand phones. Though his works are provocative, they do not question borders between mediums. While his exploration often feels wild, his working methods that capitalize on techniques, and his empathy for individual materials he works with, strongly implies his "loyalty" to sculpture, the discipline he sets from.

As a sculptor of a younger generation, RUDI MANTOFANI experiments much with various materials as well as the use of readymades. Sometimes he will adopt two-dimensional elements in his works, for instance by making paintings on the even fields of his sculptures or adopting painting panels as the main elements of his sculptures. By so doing, he seems to always question categorization regarding two-dimensional and three-dimensional works as well as illusions and concrete objects. This is observable, for example, in one of his sculptures that involves a piece of plastic sheet hanging amid a space. This work provocatively offers ambiguity in terms of its spatial dimension. Yet, whatever forms the work takes, and however meager the thickness dimension of the material used, it is an independent object all the same, so the work undoubtedly categorizes as sculpture.

The beauty of forms - but not in the formalistic sense of the modern art - can become the strength of a given work as in the case of YULI PRAYITNO's. Yuli Prayitno offers a new esthetics within the realm of sculpture. Concocting found objects and artist-made elements to make a harmonious unity, but often feels bizarre, Prayitno's works are poetic while breathing out surrealistic impressions. His individua works are not monolithic; instead, they usually comprise a number of components so that they are far from giving the impression of being allegorical or monumental as sculptures generally do. His works give the impression of playfulness, yet with some meticulous execution, so that they immediately seem closer to the domain of craft. His exploration apparently brings him to the borderline of art and craft, an actual issue in the discourse on contemporary art, namely the deconstruction of modernist thinking by questioning the dichotomous delineation of (fine) art and craft; high-art and low-art.

BUNGA JERUK'S objects provide the three-dimensional representations of her thoughts. As does her paintings, her works here use - in very sublime ways - highly personal idioms to articulate such actual issues as feminism and identity. The visualization is simple, even often naïve. The technical execution tends to be "cold", leaving no trace of the process, so that the works are hardly distinguishable from mass-product goods sold at stores. It follows that when viewing her works people will not stop just at the visual sensations but they'll go further - through their own mental and intellectual perception - to the artist's thoughts far beyond the physicality of the works.

S. TEDDY D. stands as one among highly productive Indonesian contemporary artists. In terms of his exploration of ideas, his works feel wild; as a result, the two-dimensional medium is not sufficient to accommodate his ever adventurous ideas. His choices of idioms are always most unique, and with forceful visualization. He adopts various kinds of materials very liberally, relying solely on his intuition. This very attitude is hardly conceivable among artists with austere awareness of the natures of materials (as sculptors are) that sets limits to their exploration of materials for their works. An artist like Teddy is lucky in that he is free from such limitation.

UGO UNTORO'S three-dimensional works in the forms of artist-made objects provide the metaphorical manifestations of various problems in life, human beings’ relationships especially. The works are attractive due to the simplicity of _expression that is often mingled with humor while implying profound significations. His made objects take inspirations from prosaic, daily objects that he elaborates in surprising, unexpected ways. As is the case with Bunga Jeruk's, the strength of Untoro's works does not lie on the visual sensibility but, rather, on the idioms that metaphorically express the artist's ideas and responses of and to the surrounding world.

What we find in HANDIWIRMAN's works refers to nihilism. Once we try to find in them a clue that will lead us to any meaning, not to say a narrative, we'll be in vain. His artist-made objects seem absurd in that they do not refer to any pragmatic or esthetic objective and function. Even the titles given to the works can never help to identify them. The artist uses various materials, also in a highly idiosyncratic attitude. He can adopt wood, plastic, paper, thread, electric bulbs, and anything to be materials for his works. He treats those objects as some kind of fetishes, disrupting them from their original contexts then manipulates them, with high-leveled manual skills, to create certain visual sensations.

The eight artists whose works are presented here intensely work with the three-dimensional medium, yet with different notions and perceptions concerning the potency of the medium that they individually choose. They choose the medium on the consideration that an object of that kind does not only offer visual experience and sensation but appeals to total sensory perception in the enjoyment and appreciation.

Through their works we may see how differences and categories operate on the practical level of creating works, and how individual artists' backgrounds effect on the choice of media as well as the artistic expressions. It is also observable here how, on one hand, the boundaries among disciplines are increasingly blurred by ever pluralistic art practices while, on the other hand, artists still have free space for exploration even if it is only within the limitation of the media they themselves set for themselves.

¹ William Tucker, The Language of Sculpture, Thames and Hudson, London,1974.
² Donald Kuspit, Material as Sculptural Metaphor, Individuals; a Selected History of Contemporary Art. Abbeville Press, New York, 1986
³ Rosalind Kraus, Sculpture in the Expanded Field, The Originality of the Avant-Garde and other Modernist Myths. The MIT Press, Massachusetts, 1997

back to top ^