Thai Art Criticism Seeker

2012-02-08T22:40:00.000-08:00

Manit Sriwanichpoom, ‘ Art Stage Singapore, 2012,’ in the Silpa Wattanatham column of SiamrathWeekly news magazine, 3 - 9 Feb.2012, Yr.59, Vol. 20.

I didn’t want to believe it. I had come to see my old friends, contemporary artists from Indonesia, the Philippines,and Singapore at the ArtStage, Singapore,2012 (12 – 15 Jan. 2012).Instead of meeting them at some international artcelebration like a biennial or triennial, which are very exclusive shows.

Today we are olderand greyer, no longer the ‘young blood,’ the ‘young artists’ of the artworld. We are people who have passed through artexhibitions and art festivals in many countries. This time, we met in a place we never expected- an ‘art market,’ an ‘art fair’.

Bringing goods, especially art, to sell in the market is nocrime. It’s not robbery or murder. It’s an honest way to earn a living. So artists shouldn’t in the least feel wrongor feel like sinners. Instead of makinga lot of denials, we should get to know these markets and make use ofthem. That is much better.

What is intriguing is that the art market has been able todevelop, adjust, and change itself by embracing works of contemporary art whichpeople once saw as ‘not art,’ or as impossible to sell. But today, it finds space on walls or acorner in which to show, not different from artworks or works of modern artfrom years past.

In Singaporethere is an old market, the Singapore Art Fair, which has been operating for along time – about 10 years. The old wayof handling an art fair was simply to invite various galleries from around theregion and the world to open a booth and bring finished works of art to sell. Looking out-dated and inadequate, theSingapore Art Fair is coming to an end. It may close down by next year to makeway for the new Art Stage event, something fresh which is getting full supportfrom the Singaporean government.

Lorenzo Rudolf, thefamous Swiss organizer of the world class Art Basel art fair, has signed a5-year contract for a large lump sum. The Singaporean government is investing seriously in hopes of becoming themarket for buying and selling art in the Southeast Asian region.

Politicians and bureaucrats who oversee art and culture andmay well realize that no matter how much they invest in local artists inSingapore, these artists will eventually hit the censorship ceiling, a ceilingon freedom of expression. The ceiling in Singapore, we know well, is lowerthan almost every other country in this region. There is hope that Singaporean artists can move forward onto theinternational world stage, but it’s not easy.

So they can change to something else: making money issomething Singaporeis good at. Trading art isn’t difficult, and artists won’t get hurt (by beingscolded by their fellow artists). Selling art which critiques political and social problems in neighboringcountries goes on rather freely; it is not seen as a Singaporean problem. Contemporaryworks of art with these characteristics are indeed seen on sale.

Lorenzo Rudolf, director and CEO of this event, is smart toplay ball with the government of Singapore. He knows how far he can go and how to doit. Lorenzo knows that an art fair is anoccasion to work with local, regional and international collectors who areinterested in Asian art. In this event,collectors are the heroes, not artists. Collectorsare introduced in interviews and become the stars of the show. This is a situation which the super-richthoroughly enjoy.

The internationally known Thai artist, Navin Lawalchaiyakul,made a large picture, 3m x 12m high. Thepainting’s giant canvas includes the faces of collectors, gallery owners andcurators and important leading artists under the title, ‘We are Asia.”

About this gigantic painting, the media in Singapore wrote in sarcastic terms that it wascreated in hopes of selling it to the Singapore Art Museum. Or some, insultingly, saw it as flatteryaimed at haughty collectors. Artistsshouldn’t accept this, nor should they do it. In this matter, anyone who has long followed the work of Navin knows howhe always likes to play with and make fun of society this way. So this kind of picture can be viewed asNavin’s critique of the ‘world of the famous.’

This is the second year for Art Stage. There were 50 events, 130 galleries from 18countries, and a number of special art programs set up especially.

After the event passed last year, Lorenzo saw the differencebetween the values of works of artists from this region compared with worksfrom Europe. This year, in order to bring galleries in the region to higher standardsin presenting works, those which planned to join theevent were asked to present the ideas, works and names of the artists first.This is an attractive new event which gives Lorenzo greater bargainingpower with gallery owners than other art fairs elsewhere. But some galleriesrejected his approach and refrained from taking part in the event.

In any case, it is clear that the old way of arranging anart fair in is no longer adequate. Theorganizers must think of new ways to bring collectors to the event and theymust find interesting works of art to sell. There must also be promotional activities to make it a lively event,such as talks by scholars, art critics, collectors and artists to create anatmosphere of knowledge.

This year there was only one Thai gallery, the Tang,presenting the work of Preeyachanok Kettsuwan (Kaotu) , Tawan Watuya,Chusak Srikwan and Kamin Lertchaiprasert. For Maitri Siriboon’s special booth, he ordered a bamboo roof from Thailand. He plays country music from Northeastern Thailand, letting visitors dance and experience Isarn-discoentertainment. His White Space Gallerydid not have the intention to sell the work, but rather to show Maitree’s ideasabout Isarn. There were questions fromreporters and listeners to panel discussions during the event, expressingconcerns. They asked, ‘Do artists think that art fairs [like this] will impactthe creativity of their works?’

I responded that, “It depends on each artist. Some may be shaken by market demands. Theygive in and create works repetitively. Others don’t feel the impact at all, because the market and the artists’creative processes are separate. Theymake the choice. In any case, in theend, works of art as a rule end up on the market. It only depends on whether it’s sooner orlater. Artists would do better to createtheir works according to their inspiration.”

As I was experiencing the Singapore Art Fair, I couldn’thelp thinking of our situation at home. Though there have been some attempts to organize events like this, bothprivately and by the public sector (the Ministry of Culture), we are yet to reallysucceed in making it happen. We arestill just crawling along.

The state still doesn’t see the economics of it, the money inbuying and selling art. They don’tactually know how to organize an ‘art market’. So it just isn’t happening in Thailand.

Thailand is simply a placewhere works of art are produced for the Singaporeans to sell in their market.

Paisan Tirapongwit, ‘Art When it Floods and After the Water Subsides’

2012-01-23T01:28:00.000-08:00

Paisan Tirapongwit, ‘Art When it Floods and After the WaterSubsides,’ in the Silpa Wattanatham column of Siam Rath Weekly magazine. 23 –29 December, 2011.

Year 59, Vol 14.

Until now, a great many people’s ‘Mr.Water’ or ‘Miss Water’has moved along until pretty well drying up, all of it, in every area. Some of the water was pushed out to sea by agreat variety of measures, some effective, some not. Afterwards, after the flood had passed,everybody who had fled the water as a refugee began coming back to return totheir homes and put their possessions in order. But they met with sights whichwould make your heart simply evaporate: they saw disastrous losses of homes andliving spaces materializing before their eyes.

After that, the task of each person was to get to workcleaning up their homes, tools, appliances, implements and all the variousthings that were still there after ‘Mr.Water’ or ‘Miss Water’ had thrown losses – heavy or light - their way. Everyone had their work to do until the jobwas finished. Every householder washappy to come back to sleep in their own house after having to abandon them toflee the water for a month or for many months.

People with savings, steady income, and secure jobs couldget to work repairing and tidying up the various losses and destruction oftheir houses, recovering and rebuilding, making them fit to live in again insome normal fashion. Friends andacquaintances in the local artworld who could be contacted mostly had experiencedflooding in their homes, some critically, some minimally. Their eyes were pained,their faces set. They were all occupiedwith cleaning up the mess to be thrown out. Some people had to clean and clean again so many times.

But what appeared to be the most serious problem after thewater went down and dried up was the mold, bacteria and fungus that grew up allover the walls of the houses. If youdidn’t get this really cleaned up, it could be a source of long-term problems. And they said there was some kind of moldthat was really quite dangerous to human health. Caution was necessary in cleaning up andgetting under control all the scum that covered so many houses, especiallyair-conditioned ones. Instead of gettingright back to the work of making art after the water receded, it has often beennecessary to take considerable time to consult a doctor about health issues.

In the past, I have written that there are no few people [inThai art circles] working in the field of art. In the midst of these greatfloods this time, there were many violent impacts. A number of people had to call a halt totheir plans for exhibitions which they had been working on for many years. They had to evacuate without any time to thinkabout where else they might have their show.

Not only the private exhibitions of many individual artistswere cancelled or put on hold, even large shows planned by the BangkokMetropolitan Authority to celebrate His Majesty, the 9^th King’s 84^thbirthday. Those plans were very grandfor the BMA Art and Culture Gallery. They mobilized the borrowing of many worksof art – paintings, sculptures, graphic art, photographs, mixed media andinstallations – to show the public – bringing them together to enjoy thedevelopment of the local artworld during the whole period from the beginning ofthe 9^th reign until the present. This would help reflect the flourishing of the currents of art in theera of the 9^th King.

And this big exhibition program planned by the BMA had to becancelled, so very unfortunately, because of the problems caused byflooding. That was very sad. One feelsso full of regret on behalf of Thai people who love art. There would be no chance now to see orexperience the well-known and excellent works, the skillful works of manyindividual creative artists from many generations. All those works would have been set uptogether to show in the BMA Art and Culture Gallery, or the BMA Gallery [forshort]. As a rule, so many of theseworks would be carefully hidden away in the homes of collectors. They cannotsimply be seen by anyone at any time, easily and comfortably.

Besides, there are still many people in many branches of theartworld that I know fairly well. Badluck for us all that their homes were flooded and that their tools and theworking equipment of many of these artists were submerged and damaged,sometimes seriously, sometimes only a bit. They were not always able to move things in time out of the way of theflood waters. They had to patientlyendure and fend for themselves.

I heard that the home of P’Suchart Suwatsri was floodedalmost to the ceiling of the second story of the house. This hit his collection of books hard.P’Suchart had collected and cared for them all his life, and he lost them all,disastrously, in one blow. For peoplewho are not interested in reading, how don’t love books with the reverence of abookworm, they could not understand the value and worth of books whichP’Suchart had collected as his ownpersonal heritage and treasure. They were so valuable and important tohim. Many people just looked at them aswater-soaked paper, easy to buy and replace.

But the real value of each of those books which were packedinto P’Suchart’s house and were all ruined – you could say they were completelybeyond price. Many of those books were quiterare. If you had sacks and barrels ofmoney, would you be able to gather such a collection back together again?

If you were flooded for a day or two, you might be able todo something for yourself. You mighthave hope or find some way to save the situation, to cut your losses, to savesome of those books damaged by the floodwater. But the flooding of Rangsit lasted a month, and the paper of each bookwas soaked, immersed under water for a long period of time, for a month ormore. What would be left to rescue?There was nothing remaining but to mourn and despair.

I don’t know how to give assistance this time or help in therecovery of losses in cases like P’Suchart Sawatsri. Should the state take someresponsibility? Should the Ministry ofCulture, or the Association of Thai Writers have measures and take steps tohelp him? Countless writers have, tosome extent, experienced disaster on account of the flood. What to do: this is the question, to doubt,that I don’t know how to answer. And I don’tsee any government agency taking any interest at all in helping P’Suchartaddress the losses to his home.

About a week ago or maybe longer, I read in the pages of adaily newspaper about a skilled photographer whose home was in the Don Muangarea. He was aomong those who also had to deal with disastrous floods for morethan a month. In addition to there be nohelp in sight from the government (which should have been there, as they haveat their disposal an utterly confusing array of agencies and units), there wasno one taking responsibility for efficiently tackling the problem of thefloods. No answers came from stateagencies which were supposed to manage and control the water. Would they helpget rid of the water in the community so the people could regain some sense ofnormality?

The photographer I am speaking of and his friends in thathousing area blew off some steam, venting their frustration and anger at thecomplete absence of any assistance from the state. He took his camera and waded out to recordfrom many perspectives the event and the fate of the people of Don Muang, theirvarious dangerous and destructive encounters with flood water left standing andstagnant for a very long time. Then, heenlarged the pictures and put them up on display in an exhibition publiclycondemning the utter incompetence of the government. The pictures were hung on the [exterior]walls of the flooded homes in the area to show passersby the suffering borne bylocal people and the uselessness of the relevant government agencies. Those ‘professional political gamesmen’ didnothing but give interviews, hand out charity, make a few meals for a fewgroups and grin for the media cameras taking their photograph.

The work that they should have attended to and completelyaccomplished, they didn’t do. In fact,they probably didn’t have the wit to make a good job of it. Truly wicked. And this is such a sad story, even sadderthan having their homes flooded, because the ability of our government lags sofar behind like this. Where will theyfind brains and the capability to tackle national problems? They just talk and complain. Nothing gets better. They say don’t get your hopes and expectationsup or ask for anything to benefit the nation and the lives of the common people.‘Professional political gamesmen’ without a doubt, an endless disappointment.

The atmosphere in the local artworld during the floods andafter the waters receded is probably still rather sad, quiet and worn out,lacking in energy and color, lacking any sparkle and liveliness. The many exhibitions I have gone to see haveall been indifferent and listless. I’veyet to see any works which are really energetic, stimulating and forcefullyarouse imaginative ideas, or which are challenging and call for exercising ofbrain muscles. I don’t mean that worksthat are moving along and put on show aren’t good quality. But they are not really satisfying andreplete with feeling. They don’t drawthe viewer in with imaginative thinking.

I hope that in the new year, under the same sky, with a newcalendar marked with 2555 (2012), the pulse and respiration of the Thai artworld will be moving along and will be somewhat more lively, fresh andinteresting than the months and the year that we have just passed through. Goodbye to the old year, and good luck,everyone, with life in the new year ahead.

2012-01-07T05:54:00.000-08:00

Manit Sriwanichpoom, ‘Thai People Don’t Abandon OneAnother,’ in Silpa Wattanatham column of Siamrath Weekly news magazine, 30 Dec.2011 – 5 Jan 2012

Chamlong Boonsong wasformerly a senior news photographer with the Nation Group. He was with them from the beginning of thatnewspaper. Today he is travel editor ofthe Post Today, which is part of the Bangkok Post group. He brought his own photographs to show in anexhibition titled ‘แพะรับน้ำ’. (roughly, paa rup narm) [This is a play on the Thai word for‘scapegoat’ (แพะรับบาป): but instead of the goat (แพะ)being the carrier of sins (บาป), The Goat must Carrythe (Flood)water (น้ำ)] The showwas on this past 2 – 6 Dec. 2011.

The exhibition venue was not far away, not in a gallery orthe lobby of some glamorous downtown hotel. It was at the entrance to a Teacher’s Cooperative Association Housing Estateon Sorngprapah Road,Don Muang, where the photographer lived.

The name of the exhibition is direct and tells the storyclearly: it’s about the flood. But thisflooding is due to the actions of some human beings who seem to think ofthemselves as gods. They made thedecisions for the people living in this housing estate, deciding that theseresidents were to be the scapegoats. They would be sacrificed by taking on theflood waters that would otherwise flow into central Bangkok. They had no choice [about having totake Bangkok’spunishment on themselves.]

Chamlong’s uses the art of photography to make an ironiccomment on the world. When one cannot respond and strike back or argue with thepower of the state, the power of the government of Yingluck Shinawatr and the Bangkok Municipality under M.R. SukhumphanBoriphat about having to receive massive floodwater – something no one wants –they had no choice.

On the day I drove my car there to look at the exhibition,the water had begun to recede. Sorngprapah Roadwas clearing in front of the Teacher’s Cooperative Association Housing Estate,though the water was still ankle deep. Iwas able to see Chamlong’s photos through the windows of my car. He had hung them along the exterior wall ofone of the buildings. I could see thepictures of people who had the terribly difficult battle of fighting withfloodwaters as high as 2 – 3 meters. AndI saw the real thing – conditions inside the housing estate where the residentshad begun to return for the cleanup. They were returning to their homes tolive. It was a very sad and depressingsight.

As I drove past the art exhibition and entered the estate, Isaw an elderly couple entering a house. A ripple of water weeds drifted into the house along with stinkingfloodwater as they entered. The oldcouple looked up and smiled a greeting, choking down the pain in their heartsas they saw the destruction of their home and the beloved possessions whichthey had worked hard all their lives to gather together. In their old age, at the end of theirphysical strength, their feelings would be beyond description.

Chamlong Boonsong put forward a point of challenge tosociety. Who decided where it would bedry and where it would flood? Theresults of water management by Mrs. Yingluck Shinawatr, the Prime Minister, andCompany were complete disaster. Are wegoing to have to leave the management of such things in the hands of her andher associates?

The mistakes surrounding this disaster cost 693 lives(according to the Center for Disaster Relief and Management..ศอส,Thai Rath newspaper, 12 Dec. 2011) Economic losses are in the range of hundredsof thousands of millions of baht. Thisis not counting losses in terms of morale, which is hard to assess. We should ask the Prime Minister to reflectupon [the statistics]: Yingluck: 693floating bodies; Aphisit: 91 bodies. In thiscomparison, Yingluck’s numbers are out of sight.

We should be seeing the Democratic Party launching ano-confidence debate to consider [the work of] ผล. ต.อ. PrachaPromnok, Minister of Justice, and director of the ศปภ( Center for Support /Relief of Victims of Disaster). We know and see the country. We see the PuerThai government and leadership of the red shirts for what they are. Not only are they ineffective in watermanagement; they are dishonest. Theystole donations and put on them the names of their clueless, shamelessleaders. For this work, no one is goingto take responsibility. From the head ofthe line, ‘taking,’ such as Mrs. Yingluck, พล. ต.อ. Pracha, รมวKaset, the head of the Irrigation Department, all the way to the end ofthe line. And the government hurries toadopt a fighting stance to ‘revive’ or rebuild the country, even while thereare still some places under water. Those local people closed the roads inprotest, calling for the government to hurry and begin pumping the stinkingwater out of their communities.

To be in tune with the state, to unwind and to get into thegovernment’s ‘revival’ mode, a photography exhibition from 9 – 30 December hasbeen launched by the Ministry of Culture, the Photography Association ofThailand, the BMA and the Tourist Organization of Thailand: ‘Water andEmpathy.’ The show tells the audiencethat the worst of it was a ‘bad dream’ for the country, and that nightmare isnow a thing of the past. And we pulledthrough because ‘Thai People Don’t Abandon Each Other.’

The Thai title of the exhibition, น้ำ+ ใจ [literally, water + heart ] a play on the Thaiword for good will, น้ำใจ, was all that was needed for the imaginationof professional and amateur photographers, both foreign and Thai. It ensured what kind of pictures they wouldsent to the selection committee. So wesaw the photos – all taking a positive point of view of Thai society in the midstof a disaster : people helping each other, along with state agencies, soldiers,police and private social welfare agencies such as the KratanyuFoundation. Small acts of kindness byindividuals. Seeing these pictures issure to bring a tear to the eye and make one feel lucky to be Thai because weare such a kind-hearted society, especially when there is a crisis.

It is undeniable that these hundred photos show the historyof a natural disaster that has to be recorded. As you look at the exhibition, your ears may by chance hear the song,‘Thai people don’t abandon each other,” by Ad Carabao striking up. These images go well with the propagandamusic video that was playing on TV every 5 or 10 minutes, especially during theperiod of the heaviest flooding.

The MV pictures for this presentation in some parts showedimages of the president and managing director of a large animal feed companyhelping toss emergency rations down from a helicopter to victims of the floodbelow whose homes were flooded. Thepictures were edited to show clearly the logo of the company to theaccompaniment of Ad Carabao singing.

‘However much it floods, the kindness and good will of Thaipeople is more than that. We Thai peoplenever abandoned each other. We face the crisis of these floods together…’

The Ministry of Culture is always clever and able to searchout ‘Thai-ness’ to use as a selling point in a crisis. This time they use น้ำใจ [good will / water + heart] as a celebrationand self-congratulation, without which Thai society might just fall apart. Because if the question of selfishness wasconsidered too deeply; the anxieties over holding onto power; the need toprotect ones own clique (until some houses had to put up a red flag on theirroof for fear they might not receive aid); the corruption and cheating andtheft of donated money and goods by government politicians and theirunderlings: the perception and mind of Thai people are controlled. [Otherwise]the sickness of sadness and depression might turn into rioting and murder ifThai people were to actually see it. ‘Goodness,’ the things we hold to and depend on cannot be dependedon. Whichever way you turn, you findonly ‘flooding and criminality.’

If you look at it this way, celebrating a little goodness andbeauty, looking for a bit of fun, for entertainment, to blow off steam, such asa photo of a transvestite dressed as a ‘Mermaid Fleeing the Water,’ bySutathinan Panhorm. It gives rise to afew smiles and laughs. Or if you see thepicture of a movie star like Bin Banleurit carrying a newborn child and an oldperson, one does regain some hope.

In any crisis there is a chance - in the midst of theflooding we see the intelligence of the Thai people when they have to live withthe water. The picture of ‘Tuk Tuk and Flood’ by Trevor Paul Grant was funnyand compassionate.

Maybe it’s a bit strange that no one took pictures for theexhibition of the ‘Big Bag,’ the giant bag hero of the ศปภ. This monster was an innovation born duringthe flooding this time. Someone shouldspeak up and take out a patent on it. There’s nothing like ‘the Big Bag’ for successfully stopping flood wateruntil people on the two sides of the flood wall are at eachothers' throats, with one side trying to tear it down right before the eyes ofpolice and local officials. But therewere no pictures of Big Bag in the show.

(It seemed that the organizers had forgotten the mostdangerous animal of another kind, i.e. government MPs. This type of animal is totally voracious,‘eating’ [euphemism for corrupt dealing] floating toilets and fiberglass boats.Just a warning about such animals in case you happen to meet up with one ofthem.)

As historical pictures of this major calamity, the 2011 น้ำใจ[‘narm-jii’] exhibition is extremely flat and limited in scope. .. Those born in latergenerations who were not around when this happened are going tomisunderstand. They will think the floodwas fun – like when we see black and white news photos of the big flood of1942. You see people paddling boats atthe Royal Plazaat the equestrian statue of the 5^th King near the Ananta Samakom Palace.

There was some attempt to analyze this great flood we havehad, that it was ‘holy’ water, actually a good thing, because it made us seehow the real core of Thai society has rotted and fallen into disorder. We see the greed, the selfishness, thedesperation, from the level of government to the level of individuals incommunities.

Especially the images in ‘Thai People Don’t Abandon OneAnother,’ the roots of which are in the idea of a welfare society. People are always waiting obsequiously for ahandout, waiting for the state, for the powerful, the MPs, or Mafia overlords tocome to the rescue, rather than depending on themselves.

Thai politics is like a populist welfare state. It is not strange that we see pictures of PMYingluck going around, handing out packages of items to alleviate suffering andmonk’s alms bowls filled with EM balls(a locally concocted product said toreduce water pollution). She did this in preference to sitting somewhere doingadministrative tasks to manage the flood crisis herself. She seems to understand that [wandering abouthanding out charity] is the role and function of Thailand’s prime minister.

Paisarn Tirapongwit, ‘The Still Silent Movement of Those Who Grant Prizes for Art in Thailand,’

2012-01-05T22:11:00.000-08:00

Paisarn Tirapongwit, ‘The Still Silent Movement of Those WhoGrant Prizes for Art in Thailand,’in the Silpa Wattanatham column of Siamrath Weekly news magazine.

Yr. 58, Vol. 49. 26Aug – 1 Sept. 2011

These days we often become aware of news about activitiesarranged to distribute prizes in various professions. Prizes are handed out in response to theoutstanding ability and potential of individuals in the field. Some prizes celebrate and honor or encouragepeople to work and to devote themselves, their ideas, and their creativeabilities and works in their chosen field, and to develop and move ahead sothat they will grow, flourish and continue.

The result of creative development of individuals whoreceive these awards, whether great or small, may by models, examples orinspiration in one way or another to people in the field. They may encouragepeople to improve and develop their work to be more efficient, more complete,more self assured. People may become morecompetitive in many directions, with many forms to follow.

But because the society in which we live today mostly oralmost completely moves or is driven by economic mechanisms of consumerism andbase materialism in this era of globalization. It is an era when big capital controls everything completely in only onedirection.

Nowadays we find that the society we live in recordsactivities in which prizes are awarded. In some circles, careers or fields there are many competitions and manyprizes handed out. Sometimes there is afeeling of doubt about these prizes, many of them, that they may beexcessive. And the quantity or number ofprizes – of which there are so many – that they do seem to be excessive. And they seem to lack dignity. They seem to be unimportant and [therefore donot] invite much admiration when they are received.

At the same time, prizes in some circles of some fieldsprovoke feelings of incredulity. Theyare ‘cover’ awards without any particular meaning. They don’t inspire any profound satisfactionin receiving them. And the agency ordivision which originates and distributes the award is not recognized verywidely for the most part – revolving and moving in professional circles, eachin their own branch or circle.

Many times one finds that there is something to besuspicious about, to protest, to oppose, and a refusal to accept the results ofthe deliberations. The evaluations whichhand out prizes in some circles, some professional branches, sometimes becomescandalous news. The news issensational, notorious, especially in working circles in which the public takesan interest or where business and commerce are also involved.

But in fact, the handing out of all these varied awards,whatever the characteristics of the platform, in whatever field of career orprofession, mostly they cannot avoid confronting censure and doubt in almostevery case about transparency or the suitability of the winners of the awardsfor the prizes they have been given.

It is not clear to what extent the organizers handing outawards tried to find ways of doing so in just and transparent fashion, and ifthey acted accordingly. Because there isno one and no method which answers 100% of the requirements of everyone insociety, or of creating direct, perfect and complete satisfaction, according towhat people think and expect.

As for contemporary art circles, or Thai modern art circles,in recent years, there has been news of movement in activities involving thepresentation of awards of many kinds and many characteristics. They appear and get some exposure from timeto time. But mostly, the awards whichhave appeared and have been handed out in our local circles have been of littleinterest in the eyes of the public. Wider circles of interest have not been captured.

This is no different from the state of things or theatmosphere in art exhibitions organized in the visual arts for the mostpart. If you follow the exhibitionspaces for the works of art of our country, they are most characterized bysparseness, by the absence of people. They are deserted. There are few Thai people nowadays, ascattered handful, a pitiful few who are interested enough to spare some timeto go to these rooms and take a look, to have a brief taste and appreciate theworks of art which have been set up in exhibitions in galleries or ‘art areas’– all those various spaces set aside for art.

For quite a long time, and up to today, Thailand’s artcircles have been influenced by many diverse ideas in many forms. There have been many schools and many movementsfrom the West to study and build upon, to grow and branch out from, adapting,taking short cuts, imitating, following, and eventually developing enough tofollow ones own path, appropriate to ones own place and time. We [the modern Thai artworld] are more than80 years old now. But…the status ofcontemporary art in a Western idiom is still strange, separate, alien,involving things which most people generally – half the country – have neverknown or experienced, and have no sense of familiarity or closeness with atall.

Not just ordinary common folk generally in Thai society wholack interest in seeing or collecting art, or in studying and understandingworks of art. Not even governmentagencies in our country know or take an interest in art. And including all those ‘tigers-lions-bulls-rhinos’who put on the spirit of ‘professional politicians,’ who snatch from each otherand compete against each other, shifting places to get into parliament. Theyall sit in the chairs of cabinet ministers. They are groups of individuals who, in addition to having no taste inart and no useful vision for the Thai artworld กะผีกริ้น . So, the life and breath of our country’s artdoes not appear to receive the support of policy on the part of the government.

So there is nothing puzzling, perplexing or strangehere. There is denial in response fromthe people who walk in the street generally in Bangkok and other places in other regions ofthe country. When we throw a question:Do they know anything about prizes for art in the visual arts – the ‘Silpathorn’? It has been supported and distributed by theOffice of Contemporary Art and Culture in the Ministry of Culture. People are extremely puzzled with prizes forart which are handed out at regular intervals of about three years – like theManat Siensingh Daeng prize.

The Manat Siensingh prize – which is called ‘Daeng’ (red) –is a prize for visual arts from the Pridi Panomyong Institute. It was created as a memorial to ManatSiensingh, whose nickname was ‘Daeng’. The prize, intended for works in the field of visual arts, wasestablished in 2001. There are standardsfor the honor given for visual artists, for example, those who create worksconsonant with peace, democracy and justice – or simply speaking – the life ofthe artist is considered. The artist’swork must reflect such problems in order to inform the public over a period ofdecades. The mode of presentation is not limited.

All of the aforesaid is information from the document handedout at the second award ceremony for the Manat Siensingh Daeng prizes in2006. There is a gap in time till August2011 when the awarding of the 3^rd Manat Siensingh Daeng prize wasannounced very quietly. It came to theattention of particularly interested persons; it wasn’t news widely announcedin society for the enjoyment of all. There didn’t seem to be any media taking much interest in reporting theevent to the general public. Thepresentation of the 3^rd Manat Siensingh Daeng awards, therefore,passed quite quietly without any fanfare.

As for the ‘Silpathorn’ prizes, which should be announcedand handed out in a ceremony sponsored by the Office of Contemporary Art andCulture sometime this month or next month. There were announcements to many members of the press and many branchesof the media. However, visual artsactivities and events are of little interest to most of the generalpublic. The common people have nevershown much interest in the realm of this kind of visual art because such worksare still very exotic in the lives of the vast majority of people, and thathasn’t changed at all for more than 70 or 80 years.

It will be a very long time, many decades, before all theseworks of contemporary or modern art can become a part of the lives of the greatmajority of Thai people. Thailand is a countrywith a long history, passed down over thousands of years, but without museumsto preserve, display, and exhibit works of art by individuals of manygenerations in this country for the enjoyment and even sale to futuregenerations and people from other countries who come to visit or make aholiday.

As for the hosts of buildings which shamelessly refer tothemselves as ‘museums’ with ‘national’ tagged on, as well, including the‘National Gallery of Art,’ with such perfection, which among them is anythingmore than a warehouse for the nation’s old stuff?

Properly functioning ‘art museums’ and ‘art galleries’ for acity– impressive, spacious and grand – may rightly be tagged ‘national’. But the Thai bureaucracy serving whatever [specialinterest] group or party, which ever prime minister’s team, they all lack thewit and the ability to support or successfully build up a single place. Themost they can do is to create a vague picture of a castle in the sky. Before [the real thing] can be revealed, [thesupposed sponsors] disappear, leaving their office without accomplishing anythingof substance, anything we could be proud. Then there is nothing but blaming and cheating, sluggish and gaping. Thenthere is no trace of anything, no evidence: even though the evil occurs,unfurled for all to see. No one can findthe perpetrators – not a one. Ridiculous!

Before closing off here, I would like to let readers knowthe announced names of the recipients of the 3^rd Manat SiensinghDaeng awards for 2011. There are twowinners: Surapol Banyawachira and Kanya Charoensupakul. Both are artists who have endured for a verylong time, making works of art. Ifreaders are interested, you can get more information about the Manat SiensinghDaeng awards at the Pridi Panomyong Institute in Soi Thonglor (Sukhumwit 55).

As for the Silpathorn awards from the Office of ContemporaryArt and Culture, Ministry of Culture this year. I still haven’t heard the news about how this is turning out. So I don’t know what kind of art or who hasreceived the award. Also, there is some talk about making some changes in theawards ceremony for the Silpathorn. ButI don’t know what will be changed. Idon’t even know if the award is still going to be handed out at all. Did they cancel? That would be unfortunate and verydisappointing. We will have to keep anear out for the latest news from the Ministry of Culture. What is the direction being taken by theSilpathorn Prize? What will it be tomorrow?

2011-12-17T00:51:00.000-08:00

Manit Sriwanichpoom, ‘M.L. Toi Chumsai’

In the Silpa Wattanatham column of Siamrath Weekly News

Yr. 59, Vol. 11, 2 – 8 Dec. 2011

I had heardof the reputation of M.L.Toi Chumsai (1906 – 1961) for a long time in hiscapacity as Thailand’sfirst photographer of nudes - although there is still no [absolute] evidencethat proves he was in fact the first. But nude guru Niwat Kongpien has dared to say M.L. really was thefirst (in Niwat’s view at any rate), because [M.L.Toi’s] works emphasize the artistic aspect. They weren’t like the vulgar images of nakedwomen appearing in shady porn magazines. And he was the first to create a system for photographer’s nude womenmodels in our country.

In anycase, when it came right down to it, I wasn’t able to find any examples of theworks of M.L.Toi to see anywhere – not even in the collection of nude picturesof nude guru Niwat. He didn’t have any! By good luck, M.L.Toi’s nephew, Sihabutr Chumsai na Ayudthya, has a companywhich makes movie advertising. The place is locatedjust opposite the house of Aphisit Vechachiwa on Sukhumwit Soi 31. So I justparked my car there and went inside to make inquiries.

Though Ihad never met K. Sihabutr face to face, this famous director for filmadvertising was really very helpful. Hegraciously allowed me a leisurely look though eight large photo albums of hisgrandfather’s works.

Thoseyellowed old albums, sealed with great care, held black and white, 8” x 10”photos of female nudes. With the passageof 50 to 60 years, the glue that held the photos in place had lost its holdingstrength. As each page was turned, thepictures slipped off the paper. They were ‘nude images of the past’ longpreserved in silence since their owner left this world in August of 1961.

There were112 old photos of nudes. The images were yellowed and tea colored. In some of them, the silver salt ( เกลือเงิน)had come forward, glittering. These were the last pictures, the only remainingset. The original film negatives werebeyond hoping for: they would be long gone. Even it they still existed, they would be peeling and running,disintegrating in the constant heat and humidity.

According to Singh Sanamluang and Niwat Kongpien, M.L.Toi Chumsai was born on 28 January, 1906. He studied at Dhepsirin school in the same class as Kularb Sai-Pradit(Sriburapa), Sodt Kuramalohidt and closeto Chote Praepan , whose pen name was Yakob (Jacob). In the end, M.L.Toi graduated from anadvanced agricultural school in Bang Sapan district of Prachuab Kirikun. He used the pseudonyms Khun Aree and NoiApirum.

M.L. Toientered politics as a two term representative from Prachuab Kirikun, from1938 –1942. After the coup by Field Marshall PlaekPibulsongkram, he began working as a building contractor and doing business inthe North and South.

In terms ofart, besides being a very accomplished writer, he also designed book covers,created illustrations, and did interior decoration and architecturaldesign. He studied photography on hisown – especially taking photos of nudes – which he began to work at seriouslyafter the Second World War. (From an interview with M.L.Toi’s son, SisakChumsai na Ayudthya.)

M.L.Toi even built his ‘Rock Cottage’ on land he owned at Bang Lamung (Pattaya) touse exclusively as a photography studio. The roof was designed to be open enough to let in plenty of light forthe photographer’s work.

He investeda great deal of time and energy to create works of art which were sometimeswell received and sometimes badly criticized. His nude photos stood right onthe borderline of society’s delicate moral code. Either he must have been very brave to do this,or plain crazy. Just think back to thatperiod when Thai society was being re-engineered, when the country came underthe dictatorial direction of Field Marshall Pibulsongkram. According to the policies of that time, men,women, children and community leaders were all comport themselves in a mannerbefitting ‘civilized’ people. For example, people were supposed to wear hatswhen they left their houses. And the men were to kiss their wives beforeheading off to work.

Because hehad the title ‘M.L.’ (Mom Luang) before his name, the criticism he enduredabout impropriety was far more vociferous than for a commoner with no courtlyconnections. But M.L. Toi didn’t backdown. Rather, he was determined and confident in his ideas. He retorted to his critics with the immortalwords [very roughly translated]: ‘Hey! These are not pictures of naked women.They’re photos of nudes! There’s a difference!’

If youseparate M.L.Toi’s 112 photos of nude models roughly into groups by content,you get the following:

Nudesin Traditional Thai Life

M.L.Toisometimes had his models dress as country people – like farmers or gardeners ofthe Central Plain or Isarn. Thephotographer was very polite. He simplyasked the model to unbutton her blouse all the way. He chose designs of ladies’blouses which would reveal their breasts, white as peeled eggs. [Looking atthese pictures] was like sneaking a peak at the breasts of a young villagegirl.

The mostbeautiful in this series is a picture of a model who pulls up her sarong tocover her right breast, even as she lays bare her left breast to the brightnoonday sun. The young woman, heranxious eyes darkly expressive, leans against a coconut tree in the middle of afield.

Nudesin Modern Thai Life

Sisukdi,the photographer’s son, said in an interview that his father’s models were‘well-educated persons, and very nice. Some of them knew each other. They lived near to each other and talked together. Dad invited them to come and be photographedthis way.’

So, it’snot strange that in many of the photos, the models are pretty. Their skin is white and clean-looking, notthe dark skin of country women who work in the fields. The young women [in M.L.Toi’s photos] dressattractively, in the fashions of the era. They simply wear their clothing more ‘transparently’ or open it a bit toallow us to peep through, and making the viewer’s heart beat faster.

Theoutstanding image in this series is without peer. The model lies listlessly in a large drainpipe on a sandy beach. I don’t know whatM.L.Toi was thinking, so I asked the model from the series with women in shortsand nude from the waist up. The modelhad climbed in to lie in one of the abandoned water mains which would becomepart of a road being constructed. In thepicture, the model’s hand reaches up and gently takes hold of the curvingrim. Her two legs extend out of themain. The photo is taken from a low angle, making it appear that the pipe hasthe woman within its grasp. The background is an empty white sky which mergeswith the vacant expression on the model’s face. The picture looks silent and strangely lonely.

And wecannot fail to take note of the picture of the nude young woman in short tornjeans who stands, holding onto the railing of a porch. The low camera angle lifts the woman’s barebreasts like a great cliff. With hertense and serious expression, she looks incredibly vigorous and robust, full ofpower. This is an aspect of grace andbeauty in a woman’s body that M.L.Toi Chumsai wants to celebrate.

Nudesin the context of Nature

M.L.Toiliked very much to photograph his women models in nature – sometimes on thebeach being splashed by the waves or on rocky hillocks in untamed forests. Hisapproach to posing his models was classic, placing emphasis on the whole lengthof the model’s body. Nothing would beput into the picture which obscured that central form, seen reclining sadly ona rocky slope or at play in the sea.

Abstractphotos of Nudes

I have noinformation for certain about how or even if M.L. Toi was influenced by photosof nudes made by whites. I only know that he read photography texts by whiteauthors, and such books would certainly have examples and illustrations. In any case, there are pictures which arestudies of light and shadow on the unclothed body. The pictures by the modernAmerican photographer, Edward Weston (1888 – 1958) put the camera angle at aclose range. Sometimes he cropped the face of the model from the image in orderto emphasize the physical body and the beauty of the figure, the abstractloveliness of line and volume.

Nudesof the Surreal and Dreams

One imageshows a nude model with a great rope wound around her body as if she were amermaid pulled up from the sea, lying unconscious on the beach. This is M.L.Toi’s beautifully craftedfantasy. Any way you look at it, thispicture is absolutely stellar – timeless - unlike most of the other pictures inthis series. When times change, people’stastes change. People become bored with some things, for example, like nude modelsphotographed in studios with white backdrops; or models awkwardly posed withitems on a set: a model pretending to be someone gathering firewood or a venderof sweets in coconut milk. Or a model presented as a worker on a buildingsite. Such pictures are either innocuousor funny.

It’sinteresting that when M.L. Toi Chumsai was still living and fully devoted toproducing images of nudes, his works were seldom disseminated throughreprinting in the media. I tried lookingthrough old issues of the magazine ‘Chao Krung’(ชาวกรุง) from1952 – 1960 when M.R Kukrit Pramote was the owner. Wilat Maniwat and Nopporn Boonyarit were botheditors, respectively. And it turns outthat the nude photos by M.L. Toi under the pseudonym Noi Apiroom were printedonly three times…only three pictures. Those pictures were only slightly revealing. So! What can you do withthat?

“…As far aswe know, this will be work for the Red Cross

and father will open a stall in thatarea. People will be asked

to buytickets which will be the price they must pay if they want

to take alook. And there will be photographybooks passed out.

Sometimes a model will be brought out for theaudiences to sketch.

All theincome my father gets he will donate to the Red Cross.”

SisakChumsai na Ayudthya in an interview by Thevirat for the

magazine Executive,1980.

In any case, afterwards the nude photographs which were thework of M.L.Toi Chumsai became prototypes and influenced the works of laterprofessional or pictorial Thai photographers. But this influence has been longforgotten by now.

Manit Sriwanichpoom, ‘Form (Dissolves) Content

2011-12-04T06:42:00.001-08:00

Manit Sriwanichpoom, ‘Form (Dissolves) Content, in the SilpaWattanatham column of Siamrath Weekly News, Yr.59, Vol. 2, 30 Sept. – 6 Oct.2011.

At thebeginning of this September there was news of the outstanding work of the newMinister of Culture (with red plates) Sukumon Khunpleum, the daughter-in-law ofa Chonburi Mafioso, Khamnan Poh, Somchai Khunpleum, concerning the registrationof 30 cases of ‘intangible cultural heritage’ for 2011, for example, the taleof Pla Bhuthong, the legend of Mere Nak Prakanong, Tichap, Yaa Longrue, Tom YumKung and Pad Thai, in order to protect Thai cultural wisdom from beingexploited, adapted or damaged.

Afterreading it, one feels sad that Thailand’sMinistry of Culture is so backward, so weirdly nationalistic. They don’t change. This business of registering ‘intangiblecultural heritage’ is so meaningless, crazy and clueless and reflects a lack ofmaturity, of being adults. A great lackof confidence in ones own culture to follow after the UN’s educational, scientificand cultural organization (UNESCO). Whydo we have to chase after the tails of the whites or internationallike this? They call it ‘a colonialslave mentality.’ One is not free inoneself at all.

The moreone cites the reason that this heritage might be exploited by others, taken andadapted and thereby damaged, the more it is appropriate that we should bebetter off shutting down this ministry altogether.

Unfortunatelyfor the people’s tax money. The culturethat arises each day as ‘new heritage’ is born from the living headwhich is made of nothing but words like edit, adapt, embellish, increase – allold things. The old heritage is thefertile ground for the new heritage. That is how the world evolves.

If we lookwith a bit of understanding, what the Ministry of Culture has done is theposture of someone who is afraid of globalization. Who fears changeinstead of having an open policy, creating understanding of the change which ishappening in Thai society now. Instead,they have chosen the path of preservation and conservation, holding on to theold, being afraid of the new.

This makesone think of a story not long ago. A friend who is an art teacher asked me, ‘Doyou know [the popular song] ‘Khun Who’ (‘Itching Ear’) or not?’

‘What now?’I asked, confused and puzzled.

My friendimmediately pulled out his iphone and opened You-tube (your TV) and showed methe clip of the song Khun Who (‘itching ear’) by the pop groupTURBO. The clip had already registeredeight million hits in three months. (Counting every clip with this particularsong, the count would be ten million hits.) That would make it the top piece ofThai art.

The reasonthis clip was so enormously popular was the very suggestive dance gestures ofthe lead female singer who arouses her audiences, especially the young men, butolder guys as well. As she sings thewords ‘ itching ears,’ her hand massages her cunt, which she, wearing her veryrevealing, close cut costume, presents to her audience. They were very short-short jeans, almost likeunderwear. So the hoards of males ‘inheat’ in the audience crowded up to the stage during concerts, all surgingforward and reaching up their hands in hopes of lending a hand to the young woman,to help her scratch that itch.

‘Itching,itching, itching ear! I don’t know what it is? No matter how much I scratch,it’s always itching!

For thoseof you who have never seen the clip, you should take a look. You’ll see a young woman vocalist dressedvery provocatively, singing this refrain in a very sexy voice while she dances,thrusting her hips forward, clutching her cunt in the most startling fashion,challenging the morals of the delighted audience.

If onesimply listens to the music without the pictures, it is an entertaining song bya woman country singer. But when onesees the very riveting pictures of the arousing massage, it’s difficult toerase the image from ones brain - like the dancing of Michael Jackson, the wayhe would take hold of his balls. Soevery time one hears the words ‘itching ear,’ one must have a mental image ofthat swollen vulva. The thing plays intwo ways, three pronged. We are familiarwith songs which feature two singers in a musical conversation, like อีแซ่ว,or professional singers from Isarn. But the style of dancing is greatlyexaggerated. The censors of the Ministry of Culture must be avoided verycleverly. So there you have it: theintangible Thai cultural heritage that should actually be registered.

All of theabove is preface to the ‘Form (Dissolves) Content’ show which is on from 28July to 28 August, 2011 at the HOF Art Gallery,Silom Galleria. It is the work ofWarawudt Toh-Uruangs, a young painter of 27 from Silpakorn University. His central concept is to stimulate‘thought’, investigate, test, and explore content, both in reasons of paintingand reasons of society together.’ (from the catalog)

Theartist’s method and approach is to create a situation for the characters in hispaintings. There is apt to be strangebehavior or unusual acts which deviate from the reason and understanding ofpeople generally to the point of ‘madness’.

Forexample, a large acrylic painting (180 x 190 cm), ‘กายกำลังออก ทางกำลังเดิน’ (roughly translated,‘doing many things while traveling), is a picture of a young man – I think itis the artist himself – wearing a long-sleeved, striped, blue and brown shirtand pale orange, cloth fisherman’s pants. He has an orange towel looped over his neck. He sits on an exercise machine on a ferryboat crossing the Chao Phraya river. The young man is single-minded in attempting to usethe TV remote control to order the big tube of red paint which he has beforehim, gripped in the toes of his right foot. The red paint spurts out from the tube while the artist grips thepaintbrush in his mouth.

Thedetermined attempt to squeeze a tube of paint by using a TV remote controllooks like the irrational act, the act of a person whose mind is ‘not allthere.’ It is more like the act of amadman than the act of a normal person.

‘บ้านริมถัง เป่าริมคลอง’ (roughly translated,‘house at the edge of the bucket; blowing on the edge of the canal’) is a largepiece (200 x 200 cm). It reminds one ofthe lives of the homeless who hang about Sanam Luang and along Klong Lordcanal. There are places the artist usedto scratch around when he attended Silpakorn University. Warawudt offers a picture of two middleaged men. One is quite fat and wearsonly a pair of shorts. His belly isbare. He wears a plastic shower cap and swim goggles. The other person is thinand wears a raincoat. The top of hishead is covered by a knitted cap as if he were living in a very coldcountry. The two men are cooking with awok, frying the trash they have collected – things like floor scrub brushes,plastic bottles, tin cans, other random plastic and artist’s paintbrushes.

While the fat man is adjusting the fire to a hottertemperature, his friend blows the flame to make it stronger. But this stove is a gas burner, not an oldcharcoal burning cooker which needs to be fanned. Although we can see that these are thebehaviors of mad, insane people, the charm of these two homeless souls isclear, their friendship, their sharing of joy and sorrow.

The by-products of these ‘inappropriate and unsuitable’ situationswhich occur in ‘the wrong place, the wrong way’ are stories aboutrelationships and friendships. In theartist’s painted neighborhood, the characters have a heart. (Perhaps the artist was not intending toemphasize this aspect but it arises naturally.) The same is true in his work, titled ‘ชักผมบนสนามหญ้า กนมามาในกะละมัง’ (roughly translated,‘washing* hair in the yard; eating instant noodles in the bathtub.’ (195x 300 cm)

[*This particular Thai wordfor ‘washing’ is properly used for washing clothes, not hair.]

This is a picture ofthe relations among three people. Thecenter of the story is the plastic tub. One woman is washing her girlfriend’s hair in this tub, while her friendlies having her hair washed as she uses a TV remote to read a book. And in this plastic tub, a young man (theartist) is trying to use a pair of pliers to carry cooked instant noodles tohis mouth.

These works I havespoken of are attempts or experiments by the artist to ‘dissolve familiarmeanings’ and arrange new ‘symbolic forms’ which give rise to newforms with new significance.

When all is said anddone, this approach is not new. It wasseen regularly in comic shows on daytime TV (‘ก่อนบาย คลาย เครียด,’ roughly ‘relax before afternoon’), a way of creating witty littlejokes. In these paintings, which aresincere and serious, such jokes are presented in a new way. The audience isn’t brought to outbursts oflaughter. Instead, some interpretation is required; some reading of what theartist has hidden in the work.

The works in the‘Form (Dissolves) Content’ show by Warawudt Toh-Uruangse look more likereflections of the artist’s states of emotion than attempt to ‘seek newmeanings in works of painting,’ whichwas what the artist was hoping for.

‘ข้างสังตาม’ (roughly, ‘what has already passed’) 2010,a large painting (260 -280 cm) is another piece for which he makes a similarclaim. I think the work reflects verymuch the emotion of the artist about Thai society today. The picture presents a situation occurring infront of a street-side restaurant. Ayoung man (the artist) in the picture has cleaned his plates … by overturningthem. He now holds in each hand a left-overchicken bone, which he does not toss to the two black dogs who are growling viciouslybeside his table. The young man turnsand looks behind him with a bad-tempered expression. What is he waiting for? Is he looking for someone to tell him what todo? The two stray dogs are going to getonly chicken bones. They snarl fiercely.

‘Emerging Patterns,’ by Manit Sriwanichpoom

2011-12-02T02:24:00.001-08:00

‘Emerging Patterns,’by Manit Sriwanichpoom

In the Silpa Wattanatham column of Siamrath Weekly, Yr. 58, Vol. 50, 2 – 8 Sept. 2011

If you havenever taken a holiday to get yourself a taste of the three Southern borderprovinces, you should take a look at ‘Emerging Patterns,’ a show ofcontemporary art from Songkhla, Pattani, Yala and Narathiwat at the Bangkok Artand Culture Gallery from 4 Aug. to Oct. 16. The show may impress visitors with bright fresh pictures of that part ofThailand– the way of life of local Muslim people, happy and peaceful, with simple livesreflecting a sufficiency economy. They are people of faith, deeply committed totheir religious beliefs.

This isquite opposite to what we find in our morning newspapers – images of vehiclesblown to smithereens, the elderly, children, monks, and soldiers shot dead andlying wretchedly on the side of the road. This kind of evil news almost looks like a lie [in comparison], a setupintended to mislead the world, something for readers to consume with breakfastbefore going off to work.

A theorywhich long has been given credence, that ‘art is a mirror of the world,’ maynot be applicable at all in this exhibition. The theory that ought to be directly relevant and to the point shouldbe, instead, ‘art is the refuge of the artist.’ Why and how can it not belike that?

In Bangkok, the offices ofculture, sport and tourism have the good intention of having a contemporary artexhibition about the area of the three Southern border provinces. The aim is to better inform city people andto help them better get to know the local people by means of works of art. Thus, the request came to the BangkokMetropolitan Gallery Art and Culture. Chatwichai Promtatweti was the curator and manager for the show. He contacted Pichate Piaklin, who teaches atthe Faculty of Art at Prince of Songkhla University (Pattani campus) to invitehim to be co-curator in selecting works for the show.

And 28young men and women artists from this area were selected. The works were brought to show the city folkto let them know the feelings and ideas, way of life, culture, and beliefs ofthese Southern people.

It is quitestrange why these young artists did not use this opportunity to present contentabout the things they face every day – problems of trouble and violence stirredup by the skill of cultivators of unrest and by state officials. Why didn’t these artists need to touch at allupon the life and death situations they face? For what reason did they not need to speak at all of those things? Especially, to speak to friends abroad whosympathize with their sufferings. Whydidn’t they feel any need to present these things in their works?

If we lookat the organizing agencies and promoters, they are the Bangkok municipality and state agencies. It’s possible that these artists chose topresent safe artistic content, ‘generalized’ and neatly masked, addressing the‘identity of the local people’. They didnot criticize anyone, but they may hold other opinions. This is the first obstacle: a lack oftrust. So self-censorship arises. Artists don’t dare to exercise their preciousright to express opinions frankly in their works of art.

Somethingelse associated with state agencies. Though the BMA Art and Culture Gallery wasborn out of [lobbying and demonstrating] pressure by the local artworld, whatcan be done to prevent it from being regarded as an arm of the state? It is aprivate agency [and should have] the freedom, dignity and courage to show art presentingnegative as well as positive views of the state, a gallery which authenticallyand democratically respects the rights of artists and artistic expression.

I believe that among the community of artistswho came together to fight for this municipal art gallery, no one needed thisplace to end as a mere agency for official art like the Office of ContemporaryArt, whose function is to serve the agenda of certain politicians andgovernment officials.

Therefore,the point must be made about respecting the rights and freedoms of artisticexpression as the central pillar of this institution. There should be no compromise with anyoneabout upholding these principles for the future. If that is not the case, the art exhibitionsat this gallery will be no more than decorative shows, appeasements, insincereand useless.

If we areto believe the curator about the artworks presented in this show, there havebeen no preconditions about doing decorative abstract patterns, pictures of thelives of fishermen, of the faces of Muslim elders, fields and paddies, rubberplantations or fleets of boats: the artists selected the topics and presentedthe pictures themselves. It seems theymust be bored with making and sending images of evil, the violence in that partof the South which they face endlessly. Perhaps they thought images of beauty would be preferred, creating hoperather than sadness.

I don’tknow how true this is, or if this is what the participants were thinking.Burying their head in the sand or choosing not to speak of the violence,fleeing into worlds of artistic imagination rather than presenting the realityof people being killed daily, this will not help eliminate the problems fromsociety.

If you area young artist, man or woman, who wants to avoid facing a problem head on, youcould use your artistic skill and talent as a tool for communicating withpeople outside about what is happening to the place where you live. I don’tknow who could help you. There might notbe many opportunities to take part in an art project like ‘Emerging Patterns’providing a budget and a place to show in the city center. It is unfortunate that you decided to takethe visitors ‘in retreat,’ moving away from reality. No one knows really how our fellow citizenson the country’s southern border can live their lives, or what they needbesides ready-made peace plans parroted like talking mynas whose words havenothing to do with truth.

EspeciallyPu’s [Yingluck Shinawatr] government, with their policy about ‘specialadministrative districts’ for the three border provinces of the South: how willthe men and women artists of the young generation, the good thinkers, respondto this? Will they accept it ornot? Will problems be solved directly orwill they multiply? Those of us outsidethat part of the country want to know what the local people there think aboutthis. Points of disagreement areimportant. The forms of art arenecessary. They are an extension of the place, lifting up the voices of thepeople to be more widely heard. [Artprevents those voices from] being bottled up by the opinions of academics,theologians, politicians, government security officers, soldiers andpolice. When the country is in crisis,the role of the artist in making expressive, revealing works of art is of nosmall importance. Artists are not herejust to produce pretty things, to decorate offices or create works of fantasyand imagination in order to escape from the evil world.

In anycase, in the midst of dazzling decorative patterns, among the scary images ofdreams, there are works by two artists which attempt to interject content aboutcontemporary events into their work in an interesting way.

Imron Unu(there is no biographical data in the exhibition catalog about this artist,which is strange) presents a work of mixed media with a picture of a Muslimgrandmother and grandfather on a traditional reed mat. Speaking of identity and the ways of life ofcountry people, they are presented in black and white images – seventeen littlepictures of black tanks, guns, hand grenades and explosions. The bottom-most picture plane is coveredentirely in white Arabic script. In themiddle [of that white plane] is a portrait of a young Muslim man. His face is dark grey. He wears a black kabiya [Muslim headcovering for men]. His head turns toregard the viewer with his blood-red eyes. The image is forceful andoutstanding. It makes the viewer feeluneasy, because the eyes of the young man in the picture (perhaps the referenceis too the artist himself) look back at his audience with eyes full of fiery,vengeful anger. There is no friendshiphere. (The work is untitled and isaccompanied by no explanatory details.)

The work ofChusak Srikwan takes the form of a traditional Southern shadow-puppetplay. The work is titled ‘Happiness,Thrift and Moderation in Living.’ Chusakbrings things happening in the three Southern border provinces to use increating a traditional shadow play. Hischaracters tend to be funny, as is typical of these Southern shadow-puppetshows. For example, one character isdressed as a soldier with a chest full of medals and decorations, but he wearsan elaborate headdress commonly seen in traditional musical melodramas.

Or, we seea very fat monk seated in a khaki-green tank, talking on his red cell-phone. The man in the front driving the armoredvehicle is a soldier with his hand on a machine gun. On the vehicle are written the words ‘armoredcar for the personal use of the abbot.’ This mocks the troubled situation in the area. (It is strange, too, thatChusak Srikwan’s personal history is not given in the exhibition catalog.)

The use ofthe name ‘Emerging Patterns’ by the organizers’ toys with Islam’s ban on thecreation of images of people (because the Lord is the creator of man). Only patterns are permitted. So what can the younger generation do to makethe old patterns look new, look fun and exciting? Are youth going astray? Or is this a way out and the hope of theyounger generation?

This is thesame as bringing a native Southern fishing boat up to display in front of theBMA Gallery – as if a new culture has been discovered. The Thai state likes to do this when itpromotes love for local culture and tourism.

‘Lieng Eiu’ by Manit Sriwanichpoom

2011-11-29T22:20:00.001-08:00

‘Lieng Eiu’ by ManitSriwanichpoom, 5 – 11 Aug, 2011

in Siamrath Weekly News (yr.58, vol.46)

If I ask Phuket residents if they know a photographer by thename of Ari Korcharoen, the answer will be ‘no’.

And if I ask the same question, using the Chinese name, KorEng Li, only the elders and senior people (not so very many) will say they knowhim.

But if one asks again if they know Lieng Eiu’sphotographer’s shop, just about everyone on the island will point to Rachada Rd., at thetraffic circle in the center of the city. They guarantee you’ll find it.

Therefore, for convenience sake, and for ease ofremembering, I’d like to refer to Ari Korcharoen as Lieng Eiu (the nametranslates as ‘most excellent friend’). That was the name of his photographyshop which operated from 1933 to 1987. His children [finally] asked him to stop taking photos and take a rest.In 1992 he passed away peacefully in his sleep at the age of 81 (1911– 1992).

Manote Korcharoen, one of his sons and one among eightchildren, said that his father was a Hokkien Chinese born in Thailand. He was born on Phuket Island. But he studied on Penang Islandtill he was able to speak and read three languages – Thai, Chinese and English.

He learned on his own how to do photography. He bought a foreign textbook to read. As for the film, chemicals and darkroomequipment, he ordered them from Bangkok. He opened what was only the secondphotographer’s shop on the island, eventually becoming the premier shop in thecity, the only enduring one. The firstshop, ‘Nai Sawang,’ lasted only a short time before it went out of business.

I had a chance to see some of the works of Lieng Eiu in Bangkok. Bik-Min Darkroom brought them out toshow. Mostly, they were photos ofchildren from a few months to a few years old. The pictures were taken with film on glass plate. These works weredonated by the Korcharoen family.

I was only able to see a few pieces, but I knew immediatelythat this photographer was out of the ordinary. Even taking photos of children, without technique or method of shooting,it is very difficult to manage very little children who are still little morethan infants. Getting a good photo,charming and striking, presents great difficulty. The film could be used up very quickly. But Lieng Eiu was able to get each shot usinga single plate.

So I wanted to see his work, the work of this skilled andmasterful photographer, who did more than make pictures of children. A few months later, Kietipon Rijranuwatr, anoteworthy young man from Phuket who was taken with photography and developingand enlarging pictures using film and a darkroom as they did in the olddays, came to meet me by introductionfrom a mutual friend.

Kietipon was in charge of much of the estate, taking care ofvery many of Lieng Eiu’s images on glass plates. There were more than 20,000 pieces which aformer foreign consul had bought from relatives of the photographer. That foreigner appeared to have been verywell disposed and kind, because he bought the works but did not carry them awaywhen he left Thailand. Instead, he presented all the film toKietipon to take care of and to disseminate as cultural heritage. These works were a gift to the people ofPhuket and interested tourists.

Kietipon arranged for me to meet Manote (about age 59) atthe Lieng Eiu Photo Gallery and Color Lab. The place had been modernized from the B&W film era. At that time,it was called the Lieng Eiu Gallery and Pictures. It was a unit in a group of old, two-story,cement and wood row houses, quite run down after 50 or more years.

Manote admired the dark-room where the color and B&Wfilm was processed. It was quite decayedbecause it had been closed up for many years. The second floor was a studio for picture-taking. It was a large studio, very wide, lit bylamps rather than modern flash bulbs. The chairs from Englandwere still there where Lieng Eiu had the children and adults sit. They had not been lost. The painted backdrops with arches andclimbing vines were rolled up and kept in the back of the dressing room. In one corner was a place for touching upfilm. Shelves for the glass film platesstretch from floor to ceiling. The twotables where the pictures were touched up had completely fallen apart. The room was filled with dust.

What we saw before us was the past, once bright andflourishing. Today, however, Lieng Eiucolor lab has almost no trade at all. Itis a scene that makes one feel sad. The father who was so skilled is gone, andthe changing world of photo technology has moved into the digital age wherephotography is at everyone’s fingertips. Because of this, photo shops round the world, not just in Phuket or Thailand, hadto completely change their business strategy. The world leaves behind those who do not adapt quickly enough.

In any case, the works created by Lieng Eiu were appropriatefor the world he was working from 1932 to 1978. The works have become a priceless social, artistic and culturalheritage. That period was one in which themines were booming and growing at a fantastic pace and declined along with thepassing of that master photographer. Phuket’s mining operations closed down around 1992 -93 and businessmoved in the direction of tourism.

Nowadays, the works of Lieng Eiu which have been surveyedand discussed most of all are his glass plate images, a method he used from theearly days when he first opened the shop in 1933 until 1969. After that, acetate film was being produced.In this later period, photos were produced both in color and in B&W. These works have not been investigated atall.

Kietipon and friend have scanned some of the glass plateimages they have in hand, separating the plates into groups. Almost all the pictures in the studio were ofindividuals. Some were taken outside thestudio – groups of students or marriage parties.

The pictures of persons in the studio include infants,toddlers, primary school children, teenagers, old people, monks, merchants, andcivil servants. If one is interested inthe way of life of society and politics, a variety of races, ethnicities andbeliefs are expressed in these photos.

If the men in the pictures wear Chinese attire, Muslim hats,or Sikh turbans, it seems uncertain that they are residents of Phuket. But the island had a lot of mining interestfor hundreds of years, and fortune hunters didn’t include only local Thaicountry folk. People from many countriesand of many races came to this island and mingled harmoniously with the locals. The culture became mixed. So, if one asks which of these pictured individualsare residents of Phuket, the answer will be – all of them.

But if one is interested in fashion and how people dress,there are pictures of charming, chic young women from the boom years of themining industry, like starlets in early Thai movies. They wear blouses with short sleeves and‘flower-basket’ rounded necklines. Theirhair is cut short, above the shoulders with curls on the top or back of thehead. They toss their heads or lean this way or that, with bright, fresh smiles.

We can see the seam in the culture where old people arestill attired in traditional fashion, Baba women or Peranakan*, people inChinese dress from China, or wearing the ‘jong krabane’ tucked-up sarong fromthe era of the 5^th king.

[*Note: Baba women' and 'Peranakan' are ethnic terms referringto members of a mixed Chinese (mostly Hokkien) and Malay racialpopulation. They're sort of a creolized people within theirown culture which is distinct from both Chinese and Malay culture.They don't assimilate, either, a very strange and interesting situation, whichdoes not seem to happen much in central Thailand. You only find them in the South in Thailand, but they are widely spread across Malaysia, Singapore,and Indonesia.]

The group of pictures of weddings is another beautifulset. They reflect not a little an eraand the taste of the people of Phuket. The groom looks very smart and in fashion wearing a tuxedo instead of asuit and necktie. The bride’s long whiteskirt has lace which also ornaments her head in angelic fashion. Some couples choose to wear traditional dressin Thai style, Indian, or as Baba women and Peranakan

The works I have mentioned are only a tiny fraction, butvery marvelous, of the works by Lieng Eiu. He made it his role and function to record the essential life andculture of Phuket people in portrait photos during the latter years of Phuket’smining boom era.

Unfortunately, his negatives are beginning to bescattered. Some are sold; others aregiven away. One thing I would like tosuggest to the family, to the city of Phuketand to private and public tourism organizations is that they turn the oldstudio into a Lieng Eiu photography museum – but it should be a livingmuseum.
They should fix up the building,returning it to proper condition and atmosphere. Selections should be made fromamong the old negatives for recording and developing for display. Some of the works can be enlarged and soldinexpensively to tourists. Theenterprise should remain in the hands of the photographer’s family. Public relations should turn the site into atourism attraction in that province.

This is one way of preserving artistic and cultural heritageupcountry in a place like Phuket. It isa way of learning about the way of life in the past on this island.

The Politics of Hate, Manit Sriwanichpoom

2011-11-29T18:53:00.001-08:00

From the Silpa Wattanatham column of Siamrath Weekly (8 - 14 July)

Whatever the people are like, their leader will be like that, too.

Someone or others immortal phrase came up in my head after the news came out about the results of the election - definite, clear and in favor of Puer Thai and Taksin Shinawatr.

Many people in the minority (like me) who didn't vote for Puer Thai were in a state of disappointment, very sad, dejected and down-hearted because of the mistaken belief that most Thai people are capable of sorting out right from wrong, good from evil, in times when the country is in crisis.

But not so!
Despite the witnesses and the evidence and so very many facts that show that Thaksin and his followers are so corrupt. He massively sought his own advantage while he held political office until the courts convicted him and sentenced him to two years (the Rachada Land case). The court confiscated 46,000 million baht (from the case involving the sale of Shin Corp.).

And the abuses of human rights such as the [many extrajudicial] killings in the campaign against drug dealers, and the mass deaths at Tak Bai and Kreuseh. But the people were not interested.
They just stepped up and elected Taksin again.

With more than half the votes plus the support of some small parties, we are likely to experience a parliamentary dictatorship such as we had under Taksin when he first came to power. Changing the constitution to wash away any of Taksin's crimes will be easy to do.
Citing their clear and total victory in the election polls, a vote of confident to wash away the blemished past of the former prime minister. Then he can come back to lead the country instead of his younger sister, Yingluck, his 'spare' part.

The leaders of the Red Shirts merited a shift in status from peasant (prai) to lord (ammaht) as they have so long desired. They will have political positions, cabinet posts. They will get officially decorated and festooned with ribbons. Then maybe they will give up their accusations of everybody and their brother.

And this is the 'era of yearning for an elected dictator,' a dark and frightening era has returned to deceive and bewilder Thai society once more.

Two or three days before the election of 3 July, I went round to take a close look at the campaign posters along the roads on Rama 4, Kong Teuy, Bonkai, Lumpini Park, and the Rachaprasong, Patumwan and Samyan intersections as far as Suriwongse Rd. I saw that a great many of these posters had been violently destroyed in various ways.

In some cases, a sharp blad had slashed the faces of the candidates and nothing remained but a hole. In some cases, only the two eyes were cut out. This happened mostly to the candidates of the two big political parties, both Puer Thai and the Democrats.

Yingluck Shinawatr and Aphisit Vechachiwa were the primary targets. The next most attacked were candidates from those parties. The faces of leaders of medium and small-sized parties were also slashed. Sharp blades were used to slash the plastic so that it curled up, for example, the face of เสธ หนัน, Suwit Koonkiti, Chavarat Chanvirakul and Somsak Kosyasuk of the New Politics group. Even the 'vote no' party with the monkey face for the Alliance for Democracy was badly cut up.

Pens of various colored inks wrote crude scolding and vulgar messages or accusations voiced by rival parties against the candidate pictured. For example, 'Burned our home, our country,' on the face of Yingluck. Black paint was sprayed over the eyes to make her look like a ghost. Or the words, 'Only good at talking [expletive]' along with symbols of male sex organ on the face of Aphisit and the words '91 corpses' as well.

The violent and angry destruction of these campaign posters for candidates is something not often seen in Thai elections. Politics which divide and separate, choosing colors, choosing sides, creating division and breaking the country clearly into two political poles. The country is full of anger and hate, mutual disgust. Lying, slandering, color labels overruling the minds of all. No one seeks truth. People are drowning in falsehoods, wrong information and prejudice, closing eyes and ears. They listen to what they want to hear in order to confirm their preferences, holding tightly to 'me and mine.' The 'Right' - it is I!

Taksin and the Puer Thai Politicians, the red campaigners, the devilish red experts, creating conditions in society to create angry disorders and hateful upheaval in order to hasten hatred. They begin by opposing the coup - getting people to hate the coup, but not to despise the 'elected dictator' - creating rhetoric about 'double standards' and 'peasant-lord' in order to create polar differences among classes in society - making it a longstanding and chronic problem in Thai society.
Then they cruelly call up some of their own Red Shirt corpses in order to set new conditions that 'the Aphisit government murdered the people.' When people are overcome by all this, it is easy to lead them along to do what is wanted, what is needed, including getting votes for themselves in the election.

Using hatred as a weapon to drive the populace is not done just by the Taksin faction, the core members of the Red Shirts and red scholars. The opposition, like Aphisit and the Democratic Party, including the People's Alliance for Democracy, uses the same sorts of things with Taksin Shinawatr and his corruption as the primary targets of their hatred.

So there now. The democratic election has finished. Taksin for Thai and the Red Shirts have won. If there is something you are going to do, be quick about it. If you want your big boss Taksin back, hurry and get it done! The red country folk are waiting.

Though another new face in the history of Thai politics begins again. But what still waits to emerge from the past? How can it take place? The anger and hate that has built up in society over many years - will it be washed away or not?

'Harmony' or 'unanimity' is memorized, parroted, spoken as by Myna birds during the election campaign by voters on the side of those who will form the government. What are we to do to get the country divided into two colors: blue for democracy and red for Thailand.

Accepting amnesty for Taksin Shinawatr silently and without resistance?

And the case of Taksin Shinawatr - that remains on hold. Will many obstructions be tested in court?

The case of two PAD people from 7 Oct. Where is that going?

The 91 Red Shirt bodies...will they get justice?

How will we handle the death of the soldiers at the Kokwua intersection on 10 Apr.2010?

The case of the PAD at the airport - Where will it end?

And the Taksin terrorists and the Red Shirt core group - Will they drop the suit or not?

Actually, we already know the answers. People who practice lying as part of their lifestyle are not likely to lead society toward truth and justice. ฉันใดก์ฉันนั้น Thai society may still be stuck with anger and raging hatred with each other. Because this is the only thing which makes people false: the villains are able to hold on to their power.

The question thus comes back to common folks like us - How much longer will be have to put up with this?

How long can fish swim in polluted water before they bloat and turn belly up?

My dear foreign friends who worry even more about the fate of Thailand sent me this brief, complaining message to my cellphone: Goodbye King?
Please take care of yourself. Be safe and well.

Manit Sriwanichpoom,“ ‘Being a Woman’ and Taksin.”

2011-06-24T08:45:00.000-07:00

Manit Sriwanichpoom,“ ‘Being a Woman’ and Taksin,” in the Silpa Wattanatham column of Siamrath Weekly News, Yr. 58, Vol. 38, 10 – 16 June, 2011.

There may never have been an election in which ‘being a woman’ was such a political selling point as it is in the election of 2011.

Indeed, yes, I’m speaking of Yingluck Shinawatr, the new political chewing gum of Taksin Shinawatr, her older brother.

Who could be a better ‘nominee’, a better ‘clone,’ than his own little sister? Better still, there is no suggestion of possibilities of betrayal or any cheating about the size of the payment coming afterwards.

As the slogan announces in the campaign slogan, ‘Taksin does the thinking; Yingluck carries it out.’

Nothing could be clearer than that! Thai politics has again arrived at a dead end. ‘To take Taksin or not to take Taksin.’ The hosts of red shirts and red academics who boasted that things had gotten past Taksin are all tight-lipped now.

Anyway, this election battle should be called ‘in which Taksin recalls his female resources.’

Thai politics are better than the Ramakien! Who would have imagined that a character like ‘Yingluck’ would emerge from the shadows, acting out the possibility that Thailand could have its first woman prime minister.

Taksin must have done the math well enough: bringing in another male ‘nominee’ like Samak Suntaravej would turn things back into the old track, as in the election of 2007. Having a showdown between male opponents could turn violent. So he decided instead to change his nominee to a pretty female clone, fresh and unblemished. He figures that his male rivals wouldn’t dare to attack her too cruelly, since she is just a woman, one of the weaker sex.

So we see Ahpisit Vechashiwa and Suthep Teuksuban in a situation where they have to pull their punches. They have to mind their language for fear of being accused of abusing a woman and a young newcomer.

Try to imagine, if you can, venerable old Big Jiew Chavalit Yongchaiyudt or Mingkwan Saengsuwan as the head of the Puea Thai party and vying for the prime minister’s seat. The atmosphere of the campaign would be hot and mean, certainly much more brutal.

Marketing ‘being a woman’ is real business and not something that is cooked up lightly. The news about this [campaign] has been carefully controlled from the start. Campaign posters all over the country introduced Yingluck Shinawatr among the first ranks of Puea Thai, running for election to the party list.

In the past, photos of female candidates for ส.ส. and ส.ว. would have full face images, perhaps the face turning just a bit. They would wear their hair short or tied smartly back in order to look firm and no-nonsense. (The exception is the ‘Big-hair’ favored by upper class women. Their hairspray creates hairstyles like helmets for them.) In this way, voters are helped to overlook the candidates’ being a woman, a fact that can be seen as an obstacle in working with the male politicians who dominate the political landscape.

But Yingluck’s photos go in quite the opposite direction. She turns a three-quarters view of her face to the camera, smiling to show her white teeth. Her hair is loosed and let down long. Parted on the left, it falls over her full, round right cheek, making her appear more slim.
Her long hair is twisted into a thin spiral that comes down across her shoulder and ไหปลาร้า Wearing a soft black suit, she appears before a rather scary, dark grey background which helps make her face look brighter, more white and sexy – more so than the campaign posters of other women candidates. And this poster uses the same principles as shampoo and cosmetic advertising. The emphasis is more about ‘being a woman,’ and ‘sex appeal’ than about selling a politician or being an administrator – which is the only qualification she actually brings to her bid for political office. Such is the first information [about Yingluck] which Taksin communicated to the people.

Letting all that hair fall loosely like that in her campaign posters wasn’t a random action. Even when campaigning herself, Yingluck wears her hair loose, as in the posters. In spite of hot weather or blasting sun, she doesn’t pull her hair back for comfort or convenience. The relaxed way in which she manages her long ‘hair’ is a way of maintaining and driving in the point that she is a woman: the voters won’t be allowed to forget that.

When she actually goes out to woo voters, we usually get news of Yingluck’s ‘woman’s tears’ from the campaign platforms of Chiengmai and many other places. These tears elicit no little pity among voters for the cruel fate of her dear older brother.

Thai society has long had a taste for tear-jerking soap dramas. If lies are repeated often enough, they are liable to become real one day. Stories of the life of Taksin, if told skillfully, become tales which enthrall the world, inviting the fascination and tears of the households of the nation.

In the election campaign, Taksin doesn’t leave his sister to manage on her own. He created a team of handlers he refers to as his ‘Brains Trust”, comprised of former executives in the Thai Rak Thai party who had been side-lined from political activity. They assess and advise [Yingluck] about the way to address audiences on various occasions.

There is a news report by the Bangkok Post newspaper from 28 Feb.2011 which states that after Yingluck tried to make a forceful address in the manner of professional politicians like Chalerm Yubamroong. The result of that was that she didn’t look good, wasn’t convincing. The team therefore changed their approach. They had her speak more briefly; just talk about her own feelings, about her old brother, Taksin, the pitiable leader who has not received justice. Regarding policy, others would speak instead. Yingluck has activities which win the hearts of the people in humble, homely ways, for example, walking through fields and gardens, doing some cooking, and trying to use Isarn dialect in her speeches.

On 29 May, Taksin gave an interesting interview with newspaper reporters in Singapore for the Straits Times. The interview reflects why he chose his younger sister to be prime minister.
‘The soldiers become extremely agitated because of the news that I will change Thailand to be a republic and make myself president. But really, that’s not at all the case. When one is a leader, one must be strong. Otherwise, you can’t change things which are chronic problems. As soon as one is firm and strong, zap! People say I want to be president! That’s nonsense! That’s why I want the prime minister to be a woman. They won’t think that a woman could do such a thing.’

Taksin must think that changing the country must be the task of men like him. Women like Yingluck, his younger sister, don’t have the wit to achieve such a thing, so the soldiers should not be so edgy.

It’s interesting why he believes that.

In fact, Thai women have never had the image of revolutionaries. Those who are celebrated are women who were defending the country from invasion by enemies, for example, in the stories of Suriyothai, of Yah Mo or Thao Thep Kasatri, and Thao Srisoonthorn, as we memorize in primary school.

We have nothing like ‘Liberty Leading the People’ (1830), the large oil painting by Eugene Delacroix, of a French woman carrying forward the flag of the revolution to overthrow the French monarchy.

This time, for Yingluck, her only task is to defend the interests of her beloved older brother.

To conclude, ‘being a woman,’ in Taksin’s view is just being another instrument to move his game forward as he searchers for a way to get back his kingdom again. When one sees that being a man is an obstacle, he is reading to use being a woman, or to put it more directly, to use ‘the illusion of a woman’ in his sister for his own ends. It is dazzling and brutal use of his beloved sister. As for Yingluck – the woman’s side – no need to pity her. She is 44 years old.

When ‘being a woman’ is blemished and doesn’t sell, or when the strength of the spell has worn off in Thai society, Taksin will have to think up a new marketing strategy to use against his sluggish political enemies and against the rest of the country.

When it’s like this, it’s not strange that there begins to be some sound of women’s rights groups and some women academics from universities who are expressing disappointment because they know well that the first Thai woman prime minister would really be ‘Taksin transformed into a woman.’

Paisarn Tirapongwit, Thai Flag Flies in Art Exhibition Abroad – the 54th Venice Biennale

2011-06-18T19:56:00.000-07:00

Paisarn Tirapongwit, “Thai Flag Flies in Art Exhibition Abroad – the 54th Venice Biennale,” in the Silpa Wattanatham column of Siamrath Weekly News, Yr. 58, Vol.37, 3 – 9 June, 2011.

If the summer or winter sports Olympics were the principle competitions which all young athletes round the world aspire to, if having the opportunity to be chosen to represent ones home country, and to participate, would give such great satisfaction and joy - - then what a historic honor in the life of a young athlete, to be a winner in an Olympic match and to win an Olympic medal!

Taking part in a major competitive event like the ‘International Art Exhibition of the Venice Biennale’ in Italy must be one of the principle goals among creative artists everywhere. They hope they will have a chance to take their work to show on an international stage with others in the Venice show, which is staged every 2 years. This biennale, first established in 1895, has been going on continuously up to the present day, for 116 years.

And although Thailand has been aware of this large and venerable exhibition since the time of the 5th King, who visited and viewed the 2nd Venice Biennale on His Majesty’s 1897 European tour, we had to wait till 2003 before Thai artists were invited to represent the nation by taking their works to show officially. The Biennale had already been carrying on for 100 years!

The 50th Venice International Biennale of 2003 was the first time that the works of a group of people in Thailand working in the creative arts had a chance to select works to show together in one of the oldest and most venerable art exhibitions in the world. It was a beginning, planting the flag, so to speak; a way of using works of art to announce the person, the very self, of Thai society. Those works would speak to the people of many nations who would be traveling and touring through Venice.

This show in Italy introduces and makes the Thai character famous in other perspectives than the suffering identity by which Thailand is known all over the world (and which Thai people do not like), for example, as a land of sexual pleasures and drugs, a favorite destination for sex tourism, etc.

Thailand can now participate in the Venice Biennale with contemporary works of art which tell about us, our attitudes and ideas, many things which suggest what it is to be ‘Thai’ nowadays. But taking part doesn’t mean simply bringing up the corpse or the ghost of the ancestors in traditional artworks like Thai dance, folk dance, the kohn, Thai boxing, or fighting with sword or staff which are utterly commonplace by now.

Thailand has for 10 years been invited to join the Venice Biennale’s stage for the art of many countries. Many countries have willingly invested tens and hundreds of millions in order to bring artworks from their own country to show and impress the admiring eyes of people of the world who join the event as spectators. They show clearly that they have an identity, a self to be seen from other points of view. They show their progress, their intellect and ideas, their culture and civilization. They show the world and express themselves through their works in large impressive pavilions. Each country boasts of its achievements. This is what is seen on the premises of the Venice Biennale each year.

But the team of individuals who hauled the art works from Thailand to Venice to show them off to international audiences were relatively penniless, operating on a shoestring. They were funded by the government through the Office of Contemporary Art and Culture in the Ministry of Culture. Support was limited - not many millions of baht, not the many millions needed to cover the costs of such a venture. The individual and group presenters have had to struggle, search, and beg for whatever support the private sector was able or willing to provide. By pressing on this way, they have been able to take their artwork from Thailand to show it off along with the other presenters at the event.

It’s quite sad when you think about it, the attitude and mindset of our government officials. They still regard as unacceptable any investment in disseminating the fame, face and identity of Thailand in ways which depart from the typical government model. They are reluctant if contemporary art is involved instead of traditional Thai dance or Thai boxing, which are familiar and popular symbols of Thailand among government officials. But ‘Thai-ness’ moves on continually into the future. It’s altogether meaningless, extraneous and unnecessary to try to promote, support or help [culture] along.

While the governments and communities of our fellow Asians in Singapore, Hong Kong and Taiwan have only little islands, and are much smaller [geographically] than Thailand, they are pouring investment in the tens of millions to rent space in buildings for their pavilions and for their artists and workers in art who represent them. They are able to install their artworks with ease and convenience. They don’t experience the squeeze and the crowding difficulties like the group representing Thailand. The Thai contingent had to be thrifty and tight-fisted, counting every penny because some parts of the budget had to be sliced off for the use of state officials as well.

Many people who are not interested and don’t see the value or importance of works of art may look at art in the same light as the state. They think that spending millions to display works of art in a single show is extravagant, meaningless, and unnecessary. Looking at the matter on a very superficial level, one might possibly accept such a view as reasonable.

But if you look at it from the point of view of superpowers like the US, France, Germany, Japan, Korea, or China, the governments of these countries pour many hundreds of millions into these exhibitions in order to open their pavilions and show the work of the artists of their countries. They regularly join in mounting the Venice Biennale.

These countries don’t consider participation in this art exhibition simply as an ordinary art show and tourist attraction. The governments which finance these pavilions hope that the artworks will be instruments which announce the distinctive identity of their nation. Whether a country is great or small, having a pavilion at the Biennale puts their art where people can see it as they circulate through the vast exhibition. These displays announce clearly at a certain level the potential and freedom of ideas and expression of their society for the people of the world to see.

Take Taiwan for example. The Taiwanese use their art pavilion in this biennale to show off the dignity of their ‘nation’s’ art just like other countries. They are not just an appendage or some compromised portion of China, which is always trying to block them and force them to return to the fold. At the same time, Hong Kong, which has already returned to its mother country, stills maintains its status under the ‘one nation, two systems’ policy. Hong Kong is ‘different,’ and it tries to preserve and pass on its identity. They do not surrender; they resist being swallowed down.

For which reason, Hong Kong has its own pavilion which operates independently in its own distinct place, apart from the pavilion of the People’s Republic of China. This is a political matter which reflects distinctive cultures and identities. The exhibition in the pavilion of each country must be counted as an instrument which disseminates the distinctive contemporary character of each country in itself.

Most especially, the city of Venice is famous, a place widely known by people from many countries round the world. In the period of the year in which the biennale is held, there will, without doubt, be many tourists coming in ranks to see the event. This great exhibition is on the tour schedule of tourist groups who plan ahead to make it part of their travel program.

So the various countries rent buildings to use for their pavilions in which to install and show their artworks all together, each in their own space. The area set aside for the Venice Biennale International Art Exhibition covers a very large area indeed. The pavilions which are seen and known will automatically get the serious attention of tourists who look forward to seeing them, especially if that country’s pavilion features artworks which are striking and outstanding. Depending on how works are presented, they attract visitors and tourists who have come to admire and enjoy them.

As for the works at the 54th Venice Biennale in 2011, the Office of Contemporary Art and Culture in the Ministry of Culture still supports the selection of persons working in art from Thailand to enable them to bring their work to join the show, like the four previous times. This year there is a conceptual work, PARADISO DI NAVIN & A MISSION TO ESTABLISH NAVINLAND, by Navin Lawalchaiyakul, a Thai artist of Indian descent. He is well known and well accepted on the international art scene. He has been selected by two curators, i.e. Bandit Jantarojanakit and Steven Pettifore.

I have not yet seen the original works installed at the Thai pavilion this time. Nor will I be up to the challenge of the making the journey to the distant city of Venice to actually experience and enjoy the originals. But the information I received in handouts from the Office of Contemporary Art and Culture helps expand a basic understanding about Navin’s two works which have been taken to show.

“The artist will reflect and show the political atmosphere of the world in the context of Thai society. He challenges our understanding of identity, the essential character of the country, and the borders of unbounded countries and communities.

“The artist also connects with his earlier works. He established the political party, Navin 0, bringing together, as one, people named Navin from every corner of the world. In the creation of Navinland we see an attempt to build an identity, a new self, which is not thinking in terms only of nationality, language, or the old parameters of nation-building in the contemporary world.”

Putting it simply, I still can’ figure out how much those two works of art can effectively tell any story or create a clear and complete understanding for audiences according to the artist’s (i.e. Navin’s) objectives for the works because I haven’t seen the originals with my own eyes. So I have to leave it to those who have a chance to travel to the Biennale to see what they have to say about it. Eventually, the works will find their way back to be exhibited for audiences in Thailand. Then we will know how well they answer the artist’s objectives.

If any readers are interested in going to see the work of Navin Lawanchaikul in the Thai pavilion in Venice, you can see them from 4 June to 24 November in the area of the Paradiso Art Place near the seaside area of the Giardini park.

Manit Sriwanichpoom, “Two Women – Different Angles, Points of View.”

2011-05-16T21:05:00.000-07:00

Manit Sriwanichpoom, “Two Women – Different Angles, Points of View,” in the Silpa Wattanatham column of Siamrath Weekly News magazine, Yr.58, Vol. 34, 13 – 19 May, 2011.

There are two women artists of the new generation who have some interesting work. Both of them present works with content about women. But the points of view of these two are entirely different. One person goes by way of the West and the other of the East: one wants to break rules; the other jealously embraces them.

One is Priyachanok Katesuwan, who graduated from Silpakorn University with a master’s degree. She is 26 years old and poses a question about the situation of women (‘เพศสถาพ’ ) in Thai culture. Her focus is on women of Lanna, Chieng Mai, where her matrilineal heritage lies.

Priyachanok studies the characteristic image of women which emerges in local fairy tales, in ritual tales such as the ‘saisayong’ ritual in which a woman shows her intense faith in Buddhist religion by pulling out her own hair to make a silken cover for the Tripidaka Scriptures.

And there are works of Lanna literature such as Chaochan Phom Hom by Mala Kamchan. This story presents the long, scented hair of Chaochan, the heroine, as the tool with which to gamble for her final fate, i.e. doing her duty as a good daughter of her parents and marrying a rich man to who was owed a great debt, and the choice to return to seek out the man her heart truly desired. However, the strand of her fragrant hair was not able to find its way under an enormous sacred boulder, which meant that Chaochan had to accept her fate. She calmly married the rich man, whom she did not love.

Priyachanok chooses ‘hair’ as an important symbol in her solo exhibition,
(ครอบงำ / ล่วงล้ำ) Possessed / Poached at Tang Gallery, 24 Mar.-30 Apr.,2011. Most of the works are large photos and works of video art.

Five large black and white photo portraits show the face of the artist, her mother, her two aunts, and her aunt’s daughter. All five of them have wrapped and covered their heads and had put large silver bowls on their heads. The bowls contain fruit and flowers and things to sacrifice to the spirits. The women are still and inactive, and comprise only a third of the whole picture space. Most of the space is filled by the silver bowls. In addition, the artist uses a ballpoint pen to draw in the lines of reddish-brown hair, almost covering the silver bowls entirely. This creates a mysterious and scary, hair-raising feeling, intensified by the use of picture frames with a special Louis design, cast in clear resin and encasing strands of human hair.

There are three more pictures of these five women doing activities together. They work in the kitchen together. They plant rice in paddies. They sit relaxing on the steps in front of their house. These three pictures also hold long strands of hair. Great giant crowds of rain clouds loom frighteningly overhead. The pictures are framed and enclosed in the transparent Louis pattern which encases strands of hair.

As for the video art, one piece is a picture of women of different ages (probably the artist herself and her mother). They look at each other. Their hair has become twisted in a strand that is joined and floats, suspended, above their heads. The strand looks like the root of a climbing vine. It reminds one of the nareepol, a species of plant you see in old Thai art.

The artist has specifically chosen to play with video images in order to be able to rewind or reverse and to move forward in slow motion. This distorts to unintelligibility the sounds of voices in conversation. We can’t tell what the two are conversing about, or what they are reciting.

Another work in a room separated by a lacy white curtain is a piece of video art projected vertically. It is a picture of a woman dressed in Lanna fashion who walks with a silver bowl containing ritual items on her head. She passes back and forth on the many dikes which separate individual paddies. (She never seems to actually get anywhere – she never arrives at a temple.)

In any case, Priyachanok has not presented anything new about gender issues concerning women in Thailand. She simply rubs it in, making us see that the situation of Thai women still hasn’t changed much, as far as she can see. Women still bear the burden of values and tradition. The hopes of society like heavily upon women, like the gigantic silver bowl which balances on their heads. The dark shadow of the strands of hair, the shadow of tradition, continues to haunt them with every breath, so that it becomes difficult to flee anywhere.

In order to shake off and flee the gloomy shadows, and to go beyond as far as she is able to go, Priyachanok shaves her head. (Not having a woman’s long hair dissolves and blurs the distinction between male and female. Male and female monks must shave their head.)

Since she has shaved her head, she should take the chance to criticize the traditional beliefs about ordination, which excludes women, not allowing them to ordain in order to reciprocate the blessings they have received from their parents. Why are women unable to take hold of the yellow cloth and help their parents go up to heaven? Priyachanok mocks the ritual shaving of the male postulant’s head by having her mother shave her (the artist’s) head at the opening of her exhibition.

This is Priyachanok Ketsuwan’s courageous striking back, her refusal to accept the fate decreed for her by tradition.

Ampanee Satau is another woman artist who moves in precisely the opposite direction from Priyachanok. Ampanee is 28 years old. She comes from the area of the three most distant border provinces of southern Thailand. She won the Young Thai Artist Award in photography in 2007 for her series of black and white photos entitled Muslim Women (Hijab). These photos assert the feminine identity of Muslim women, which she wants people generally to respect. She wants them to accept these different beliefs and not to see them as weird and threatening, simply because the women cover themselves in a way that differs from the beliefs of most people.

Her new series is entitled ‘ Stolen freedom / Burqa, 2010,’ and was created while she was studying in Paris in 2009. It is a gesture of protest, a reaction against the new law by the French government which forbids Muslim women from all kinds of clothing which covers their faces in public. The law applies to all, whether French citizens or aliens.

Regarding this matter, the French Minister of Justice, Michel Aliet-Marie, has said, “This law is a success for the values of freedom, equality, fraternity, and the secular French Republic.”

Ampanee expresses her dissatisfaction by having her model put on some very shiny Burqa of red, white or blue – the colors of the French national flag. The models stand in the wind before the Eiffel Tower, the Arc de Triomphe on the Champs Elysees, and on the sea’s rocky shore. In other scenes, she also wears a purple Burqa, and a yellow and black one, and stands before several other symbolic places.

In terms of photography, Ampanee is able to create strong images which strike the eye with no little force. The Burqas look beautiful, fluttering luxuriantly in the breeze. At the same time, they look mysterious, frightening and threatening.

In terms of content, Ampanee creates several points of protest, arguing with the French government’s law forbidding the wearing of the veil. Is it a violation of human rights, the freedom of religion, or not? Even in Muslim communities, there are differences. Some Muslim supporters are progressives who note that there is no law in the Qur’an which requires women to be veiled. These women wear the Burqa or the Niqab because they have taken on the culture of dress of the ancient Persians and Byzantines: their costume predates Islam. Hence, citing the veil and the covering up of the body as a religious identity doesn’t appear to be strictly correct.

But opponents cite some sacred passages of the Qur’an which state:
Qur'an 24:30-31
Say to the believing men that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty:
That will make for greater purity for them:
And Allah is well acquainted with all that they do.

And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty;
That they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (must ordinarily) appear thereof;
That they should draw their veils over their bosoms and not display their beauty….

Others say that Muslim women cover things that give rise to sexual
feeling (hair and some parts of the body, for example). This makes them feel safer from eyes which do not wish them well or which hide sexual desires. [Such precautions] make men behave much more respectfully.

But if we look at Muslim countries which forbid their own people to cover their faces in public – in Tunisia, in schools in Syria, in Parliament in Turkey – what the French government has done [by comparison] is nothing new. It depends on what point of view you take here, and whose interests you are considering.

In any case, my understanding of Islam is very limited, even though I studied in a primary school where the owner and almost all the students were Muslim. Thai society 40 years ago was very comfortable with Muslims, Chinese, Indians, Thai - all mingled together without asking what religion one practiced.

I never thought that covering ones head but showing ones face – which they call hijab – would be an issue over which people would draw blood. Among teachers and professors who graduated and were influenced by strict religion from the Middle East, Islamic revivalism in the decade of the 1980’s has spread influence in more strongly expressing ‘being Muslim.’ Tensions have increased accordingly.

Images of Thai Muslim women who cover the head with the hijab now are very common. Women are putting on the Burqa which they wear in the Middle East (some wholeheartedly, some under duress), and we see it more frequently around Bangkok and Greater Bangkok. There is no need to go to the deep South to find such things.

It’s interesting that Ampanee, who is an artist of the young generation, should choose to wear traditional dress from the Middle East while many women in those countries and in many places round the world are trying to escape wearing the Burqa, which is seen as a symbol of oppression by men. They don’t want to be ‘walking tents’ in the modern world.

In Buddhism, this is referred to as ‘everyone having their own ideas.’

Manit Sriwanichpoom, “Insects in the Backyard”

2011-04-22T21:59:00.000-07:00

Manit Sriwanichpoom, “Insects in the Backyard,” in the Silpa Wattanatham Column of Siamrath Weekly News Magazine, Yr.58, Vol.30, 15 – 21 April, 2011.

The accusations of a ‘double standard,’ or a ‘lack of any standard’ against the National Film and Video Board – of which the prime minister is the chairman – in the Department of Cultural Promotion of the Ministry of Culture, seems to carry much more weight lately after the The Legend of Somdej Naresuan Maharaj:Part 3, the Naval Battle, a well-connected historical film, received a subsidy of almost 400 million baht of the taxpayer’s money.

The film received a rating of ‘sor’, or ‘Promote’, which means that it is a film which all Thai people, whether children or adults, should be encouraged to see, despite the fact that the film contains scenes of bloody violence overflowing on the screen, images of opium smoking and visits to brothels, and content which is nationalist-monarchist propaganda going far beyond any confirmed historical fact. This film’s grand opening took place on 25 March, 2011 at the Sala Chalermkrung Theatre.

Three days later, at another pole of society entirely, the Administrative Court on Chaeng Wattana road heard a suit brought by the makers of a little film created on a private budget of 400,000 baht, “Insects in the Backyard,” by Tanyawarin Sukapisit (the director and writer who also played the leading role of a transgendered father).

Tanyawarin was in court with representatives of the Network of Film Audiences and volunteer lawyers. They found it necessary to make the journey to this court in search of justice because their film had been banned and forbidden from screening in Thailand for reasons given as follows:

“The National Film and Video Board has judged this film to have content generally expressing characteristics concerning sexual relations between males and males, females and females and males and females; as well as smoking cigarettes; youths in school uniforms drinking alcohol in many scenes; and the sale of sexual favors by uniformed schoolboys. The film is dominated by the expression of improprieties such as images of young girls and boys making a living by selling themselves in prostitution. They are not shown to seek other ways of solving their problems. There are scenes in which young boys in their school uniforms offer sexual services.

Children are seen being taught how to smoke, drink and engage in ‘petting’ or vulgar conversation. And there are scenes presented of the father being killed. Even in a dream sequence, such a scene is inappropriate. The board is of the opinion that the main content of this film concerns expressions of sexual relations which are inappropriate in Thai society. They also could lead audiences and society, even people who are 20 years of age or older, into misunderstandings. People might, for example, imitate this behavior, sell sexual services, or do other inappropriate behaviors offensive to the good morals of Thai people. The National Film and Video Board does not permit the film, Insects in the Backyard to be screened publicly because it offends the good morals of the people. The appeal to the court [by the plaintiffs] is therefore rejected.”

I was very pleased that Khun Tanyawarin (the first plaintiff) and the Network of Film Audiences (the second plaintiff) put up a fight and were unwilling to give up their rights and freedoms, as guaranteed in the constitution, in the face of the censorship board’s incredibly nebulous, vague, narrow-minded and prejudicial objections.

I had a chance to read the suit which was brought against the National Film and Video Board – of which the prime minister is chairman – and the Board of Censors. I read it and was impressed by the well-reasoned and firm exposition, backed by the principles of law to which we should hold firmly. This is an example to future Thai film directors if they likewise do not obtain justice from the authorities.

I’d like to quote for you from page 44 of the suit, which shows the good intentions and determination of the film’s director:
“4.2.1 The party against whom the suit is filed has stated that the film has content which generally expresses character and content about sexual relations between males and males, females and females, and males and females as well. The plaintiff (1) wishes to explain that actually, the content of this film is about relationships in families. The story is told through the experience of one family, i.e. a father (Tanya), a mother (Sarah), the daughter (Jenny) and the son (Johnny). But the mother dies while giving birth to the boy. So the father is left to take on the role of looking after the two children by himself. But the father in this story is different from fathers in other families. That is, his body is characteristically male, but his sexuality is feminine. He likes to dress as a woman, and imagines having sex with a man. And he has other characteristics which society deems appropriate in women, i.e. he is compassionate. He loves and takes good care of the children.

Even though he is kind and very caring, and works at his family duties wholeheartedly, his two children do not accept their father under such conditions. They tell other people that he is their older sister, Tanya. The two children’s inability to understand their situation pushes them to leave home and to try to live in their own world. The daughter leaves and goes with a male friend who sells sex services to other men. Looking for ways to earn money, she begins willingly to sell sex services as well. Though she doesn’t really understand what she is doing, because she cares for her lover, and wants to help carry the burden of earning their living, and also by desire to find the meaning of such actions, she chooses this path. The son, who is just becoming a teenager, is at a turning point in his life. His mind and heart are in a state of confusion regarding his father. He decides to follow his sister and begins selling sex services to men.
In the end, there is an important change which makes the daughter know that, whatever ones sexuality is, the love and intimacy which human beings feel for one another is what is important. As for the son, the film communicates that actually, he is just a child who needs warmth and affection. He begins to better understand his father and the state of sexual preferences in society as he sells sex to various men, of whom there are many types.

The above summary shows that the film’s characteristics reasonably connect the various scenes together into a story which develops with reason and logic. It is not to be understood as disconnected images taken in isolation of each other. It is clear that the content altogether tries to communicate the problem of a lack of acceptance of the diversity of sexuality which actually exists in society. It is this lack of acceptance which creates problems for this broken family.

About the number of scenes which actually concern sexual relations, there are only 5, and each one is on-screen for only a few seconds. These scenes simply show the meaning of the story: they are not grossly erotic or pornographic images in the least. In fact, the film has far fewer of these kinds of scenes than in other films which have received permission to be screened in Thailand. Hence the plaintiff (1) claims that the overall content of Insects in the Backyard does not center on the sexual expressions of homosexuals, whether male or female, or heterosexuals, contrary to the claims of the party against whom this suit was brought.

4.2.2 The judgment of the first party against whom this suit has been brought specifies that there is a scene in which the father is killed, and that whether it was a dream or not, there should be no such scene. Regarding this, the plaintiff (1) wishes to state that the image of a son so hating his father that he could actually kill him is recorded in the Greek legend of Oedipus, which Sigmund Freud, an Austrian psychologist used as a basis in his analysis of the human psyche. His ideas were developed into Freud’s theory of the Oedipus complex which states that these feelings are only just that – i.e. one of the normal feelings which happen as part of the development of growing children. It is a complex which fades away with maturity and is not a long term issue. Furthermore, the scene of killing a parent occurs in Thai literature in many stories, for example, Torapi – Torapa: the packet of rice was too small so he killed his mother. And such scenes have occurred in many Thai and foreign films.

As for this film, the scene in which the son kills his father is only one of the scenes in the dream, regarding which the plaintiff (1) tries to communicate and show that the son is extremely constrained and that he greatly misunderstands his father simply because his father is a person whose sexuality does not fit the model set by society. The boy did not actually intend to really kill his father. Plaintiff (1) tries to show that these problems arise in society because of varieties of sexualityand tries to explain by this scene. After he ‘kills’ his father in the dream, the boy actually goes to his [real] father and embraces him. This shows that in his heart, the boy still loves and feels attached to his father. After he awakens from his dream, the boy feels good.

The actor who plays the boy expresses emotions of both guilt and satisfaction together very well. He seeks comfort and consolation from someone near to him by embracing him. This film provides a way to deal with this issue. It doesn’t suggest that actually killing ones father is good, but rather that to do so would not be good. Those against whom this suit has been brought point out that killing ones father goes against good morals, but stories of fathers being killed occur repeatedly in the literature of all ages. When one considers the source and the result of the deed, and the state of mind of the character in the film, the scene of the killing of the father (as characterized in the foregoing) isn’t something that will lead the morals of people down or corrupt relations between fathers and their children. The plaintiffs therefore do not agree with the reasons of those against whom this suit has been raised.

4.2.4 The order by those against whom this suit has been brought forward states that the primary expressive content of the film moves in a wrong direction. For example, the boy and girl enter into prostitution rather than attempting to solve their problems through other means and remedies. The plaintiff urged the court that if one considers the reason and factors which pushed the children to choose prostitution, one will find that it happens because the characters do not accept their father who has the tastes of a woman and who dresses as one. It makes them choose to go out in search of love and care from others. Jenny soon meets a man who proposes to her. She agrees to be a prostitute in exchange for staying with that man.

Johnny leaves home to stay in a game shop, as young boys of that age might do nowadays, until by chance he meets another boy who persuades him to sell his body for sexual services. They have no families to give them stability. Johnny, therefore, ends up prostituting himself. The path chosen by the two boys reflects the importance of families and of accepting in society today the third sex, which does in fact exist.

The two children ran away from home because they could not accept the unorthodox sexuality of their father. Then they experienced the reality of sex in the wider world. In fact, they both preferred members of the opposite sex as objects of their own desires. The story illustrates how people might learn to better accept someone’s identity, whatever his or her sexual orientation may be. The characters who prostitute themselves in this story show by the expressions on their faces and by their words, many times, that they are not happy with what they are doing. The story does not promote prostitution in any way as a desirable choice when seeking a way out of personal troubles.

It’s very sad for someone who makes Thai films, like Tanyawarin Sukaphisit, who wishes society well but lacks big connections. Not only is the filmmaker not congratulated or promoted, but quite the opposite. He is ‘shot down,’ in a manner of speaking, spitefully used and defamed, in short, dismissed as a nuisance, as if he were an insect in the backyard.

Manit Sriwanichpoom on ‘S.H.Lim’

2011-03-28T06:07:00.000-07:00

Manit Sriwanichpoom on ‘S.H.Lim,’ in the Silpa Wattanatham column of Siamrath Weekly News magazine, Yr. 58, Vol. 26, 18 – 24 March, 2011.

Midday sun, blasting heat, and the crowding of salaried people shopping in Soi Lalaisap (Soi 5 Silom). It is a road least made for walking, for those who hate shopping. I pulled out the name-card and read it again awkwardly in the middle of the packed, pushing, shoving crowd around me.

On the very plain square of paper, the words said, Siam Colour Slide Club, Vivat Pitayaviriyakul, S.H.Lim – this name in Chinese characters – Honorary Advisor, Thai Artist in Photography Award, 2005. And on the last line, 403/16. This was the number of the rowhouse I was looking for.

Racks of cheap clothing obscured the house numbers. It was necessary to ask the vendors at each stall in order to find the house I was seeking.

“Is this the house of Khun Vivat? I have an appointment with him [‘elder uncle’].”

The lady vendor, who had smiled, thinking I was going to bargain for a better price for some clothing, showed her disappointment. She indicated with a scowl the room on the other side of the tea-colored glass windows.

“Wait. He’s not back yet,” a middle-aged woman inside told me in an indifferent voice. Before long, elder uncle returned from having lunch with friends.

“How shall I properly address elder uncle, sir? Vivat or S.H. Lim?” I asked straightaway, because his name-card had both names.

“S.H. Lim is better,” came the reply. “No one knows me by the name Vivat.”

Neither the Thai nor the Chinese name would have any meaning at all for me if I hadn’t had a chance to see elder uncle’s work in the 50th year Anniversary Show of the Thai Photography Association in 2010. In that exhibition, elder uncle presented four color photos of the beauty queen, Apantri Prayudseni, wearing a red Thai costume standing conspicuously before a black Khmer sculpture of Phra Narai. These pictures reflect the skill of the photographer very well – from lighting, setting the pose of the model and choosing the camera angle. I wanted to get to know elder uncle because I was surprised how a senior photographer as masterful as this had escaped my awareness.

Many boxes of photos, enlarged to 20” x 24”, were stacked under the stairway, filling and over-flowing the space, spilling out into the parlor. I brushed the dust off and carefully picked up each photo to examine and select for a show at the Katmandu Photo Gallery. As I looked, I asked him about the history of his career as a photographer.

S.H.Lim was an ethnic Hailum-Chinese born in Bangkok in 1930. His father worked for Shell Oil Co. When the Second World War broke out, the family moved to Singapore for about 8 years, before coming back to Thailand for good. While in Singapore, when he was about 18 years old, he began to take an interest in photography. He used his father’s camera, an Alfa 6 x 9, which used a medium film size of about 120. It could be said that S.H.Lim studied photography on his own – that he was self-taught - learning by trial and error and depending on advice from the photo shops he knew.

In 1960, S.H. Lim began to work as a photographer in earnest by taking pictures of pretty girls and beauty queens to sell to leading magazines of the time such as Bangkok Weekly, Sakunthai and Ploenchit. The pictures were printed on the covers of the magazines. He was paid 150 baht per cover in an era when a bowl of noodles cost two baht. Hence the payment can be considered good enough.

In any case, a photographer had to have his own equipment (big cameras – 4x5, and medium size ones – 6x6, which were expensive). And he had to find his own models. The publishing houses had nothing to do with this end of things. After he had sold cover photos to Bangkok Weekly magazine for quite a while, the publishers hired him as permanent staff. They divided the photo credits between S.H.Lim and Smart Photo, which was Lim’s photo shop next to Wat Kaeck, on Silom road.

S.H. Lim agreed immediately that he liked to photograph people most of all, and especially beautiful women. Not surprisingly, most of the photos were of women seen as ‘beautiful’ in Thai society. At that time, some of the great beauties were Appasara Hongsakul, Petchara Chaowarat, Pitsamai Wilaisak, Aranya Namwongse, Orasu Isarangkul na Ayuthya, Pusadee Anakmontri and Saengdeurn Manwongse, and the sex symbols from bygone days - Pariya Roongreung, Prim Prapaporn, Sirikwan Nantasiri and Christine Leung.

Although life outside that row-house was swarming and confusing, time was standing still for the dusty photographs in this room. Time had not moved, had not disappeared or gone anywhere. It was just waiting for someone to come and meet it again. Even though the photos of S.H.Lim were not news-photos, his pictures of fashions and starlets still reflect that era very well and the changes which took place in Thai society between 1959 and 1977.

We see the letting go, the expression of sexual freedom in the black and white photo, Bikini Top, by Preeya Roongreuang na Kohlan, Pattaya 1967. Instead of setting things on fire by presenting the whole rack as the whites like to do, Preeya took the bra and asked the young photographer S.H.Lim to hang it up before the camera. Preeya sits with her naked back straight, tiny waisted and pertly confident. There is no suggestion of bashfulness. Rather, she turns her face slightly towards the left so we can see the side of her face, her cheek, her eyelashes. On her head is the photographer’s own smart black hat, which invites the viewers to use their imagination as freely as they choose.

(An art news reporter made an observation about the bra-less Preeya, noting that the photo looked quite modern and ahead of its time. This also seems to suggest that Thai government censors in those days were much more open-minded. The official censorship practiced nowadays looks extremely out of step with the modern world.)

Another work which I would call ‘extraordinarily liberated’ is a black and white photo in which Orasah Isarankul na Ayuthya wears a bikini and leaps high, floating between palm branches at Pattaya. She smiles broadly, thrust aloft in a charming pose, mid-air. The image communicates very well the pleasure of the model. Khun Orasa had only recently graduated from her modern dance studies, which in those days was an extremely progressive path to take, pushing tradition aside.

Pusadee Anakamontree (Wongkhamhaeng) in a black and white photo strikes a colorful pose wearing a swimsuit and holding a gun like a femme fatale in the James Bond movies which were only just then, in 1967, beginning to appear in Thailand. I

In another picture, she wears a one-piece swimsuit and sits boldly alone at the end of a swimming-pool diving board, allowing a hoard of young male photographers from the Photographer’s Association to take her picture. They crowd around in swarms, shutters clicking happily. S.H. Lim’s photo shows the crowd of photographers all dressed in suits, contrasting the scantily clad model. The picture is both amusing and thought-provoking.

It’s difficult to deny, even as it was unintended, that S.H. Lim’s photos of fashion stars evoke no little atmosphere of nostalgia. What is the past in these pictures except clothing, faces, hairstyles, the expressions on the faces of the models? All are characteristic of their era. Note that the faces are typically fresh and smiling brightly, innocent and guileless. They make no attempt to put on a ‘sexy’ face with pouting lips as we see in models nowadays.

The naiveté of these fashion models of our mother or grandmother’s day reflect the market before it became so bloodthirsty and insanely competitive, and which eventually replaced the pictures of S.H.Lim. He always pleases and puts a smile on the faces of his audience. I say this not to disparage sexy looks or even the sale of sex on magazine covers. But applying he brakes or stopping to think these things over from time to time is also good. One sees that it is not necessary always to look at women that way [i.e. as sex objects] all the time.

There were eleven 8x10 personal pictures which S.H.Lim took together with some of these famous starlets – women like Petchara Chaowarat, Pawana Chanajitr, and many others. These photos reflect and show the good relationships between the photographer and the model. Perhaps because S.H. Lim is a rather small man, very slim, handsome, and clean cut - not at all threatening. He looks trustworthy, which was probably something that helped him as a photographer working with women models. It was helpful and made things go more smoothly, more easily and comfortably.

His personal habits as well were appropriate to the work. He was a man of few words, modest and self-effacing, always characterizing himself as a poor, penniless photographer who could not hope to turn the head of any starlet or young beauty queen. So these [photographer-subject] relationships always remained platonic.

Today, that little photographer is 81 years old. He was asked by an art news reporter who wanted to know what elder uncle Lim was doing with himself nowadays.

“Nowadays, photography is just a hobby for me.” S.H.Lim replies, smiling like a kid ready to show off as he reaches for his digital Ricoh camera. As they say, when you have reached the heights, you find yourself back at normality.

Paisan Tirapongwit, Notes on Thai Society in the Notes 05/2553 Photo Exhibition

2011-03-22T02:42:00.000-07:00

Paisan Tirapongwit, ‘Notes on Thai Society in the Notes 05/2553 Photo Exhibition,’ in the Silpa Wattanatham column of Siamrath Weekly News magazine, Yr. 58, Vol. 12, 10 – 16 Dec. 2010.

The photo exhibition by five artist-photographers, ‘Notes on 05/2553’ [the Thai title], or ‘Rupture’, is open to interested members of the public who might like to drop by the Bangkok Municipal Art and Culture Gallery, 9th floor, from today until Sunday, 9 January, 2011.

In Notes 05/2553, the organizers have built on a theme presenting photographic works recording memories of these five artist-photographers. The pictures show their experiences, ideas and feelings about the violent conflict which occurred not long ago in the heart of Bangkok, the capital city, during May, 2010.

In February 1991, the ror-sor-chor (‘national peacekeepers’) called out troops from many sectors in a coup which overpowered the government of Prime Minister General Chatchai Choonhavan. By May of the following year, a so-called ‘cell-phone mob had assembled aiming to drive away a dictatorial new government which was awkwardly associated with the ror-sor-chor. The widening tensions ended in fighting which bloodied historic Rachadamnoen avenue. The injuries and deaths of many people in that 1992 event are remembered as ‘Black May.’

These events quieted, settled and eventually wound down, and their recollection was set aside. But the significant loss of lives and property, the wounds, pain and suffering, were not erased from the broken and slashed memories of those who witnessed them.

Perhaps the stories faded and weakened in people’s feelings, but certainly they were not gone from thoughts and memories. Comforting themselves and keeping their hopes up, people held on to the hope that Thai society would no more in future have such revolutions and revolts. Never again would soldiers from this or that military graduating class use their martial ministrations to usurp power, tear up the constitution, overthrow it, take the country’s future, and drag it backward.

But actions and deeds throughout the era of Taksin Shinawatr, Thailand’s 23rd Prime Minister, along with many other factors, led to a military coup in 2006. It was a revolt which turned the face of Thai history and politics, making it shake and tremble once more.

Strangely enough, however, this coup by the kor-mor-shor (Council for National Security) met with virtually no resistance from Bangkokians – quite the opposite. A great many people in the capital were pleased, even delighted, as evidenced by pictures of Bangkokians presenting flowers to the tank crews who enforced the military coup of 2006.

The people of Bangkok were in fact happy and pleased that the soldiers had come out to help rout the ‘government of the capitalist dictator.’ The coup was led by a former prime minister, a ‘great puppet master,’ who made possible the country’s escape from the cycle of political and governmental powerlessness which was transforming Thailand into a ‘Public Company Ltd.’

As a result of the military coup of 2006, the political mechanisms of Thailand were turned backward. There was a loss of the continuity of freedom and stability, and all because of the overweening ambition and thirst for power of a few individuals. Mechanisms of conflict set in motion in Thai society, creating divisions among the masses and their communities and spreading like a poisonous disease.

The state of disorder and unrest reflects the divisive conflict of ideas as well as the insatiable lust and craving for power of many in our country. Such disarray gives rise to numerous costly and diverse impacts throughout society, both materially (in terms of property and money) and in the loss of normality in human life, especially when people take sides and are divided, choosing opposing colors. Divisions and conflict become biting and devouring. The atmosphere of ill will and strife make for situations that are confusing and unpredictable. Where will the story end, and what will the state of things finally be?

Regarding the photographs, black and white or in color, or moving pictures on the monitor screen, all are brought together in the Notes on 05/2553 exhibition on the 9th floor of the BMA Art and Culture Gallery. The show includes the creative works of Oliver Pin-Fat (English), Wolfgang Bellwinkel (German), Agnes Dherbeys (French), Piyatat Hemmatat (Thai) and Manit Sriwanichpoom (Thai).

The photos are like records of memories and feelings concerning the violent events which occurred, about the violence resulting from division and conflict of political ideas about government – ideas which were planted, formed, incited, disseminated and mobilized, step-by-step and systematically.

Most of the works selected for show in Notes on 05/2553 record violent events and their aftermath. These events erupted out of a divisive conflict which had been fanned up and which burned and smoldered in society for months and years. Conflicting ideas pushed people to choose sides and take a stand, whether mindfully or not –including those who were opposing the power of the state and the government (at that time).

The photos selected could hardly cover every angle of these events, their causes and results, because what happened was very problematic, widespread and complex. Many details crowd and overlap as various factors come under consideration. The number of photos selected to show in Notes on 05/ 2553 cannot possibly reflect and cover with detailed certainty the complete story of all that took place.
Nonetheless, the organizers tried to choose the works best able to show many angles to reflect and express to viewers that really, the violent events that occurred did not simply concern and involve just two or three opposing groups. There were at least four or five elements involved, perhaps more, which took part in this crippling shakeup.

A great many of the works are simply records of the event in which the photographers just tried to capture the phenomenon as directly as possible. Some works have a subtly critical point of view which audiences may feel. Other works present the varied points of view of the experiences of people on different sides in the events. Unfortunately, some works were banned altogether, censored by the administrators of the BMA Art and Culture Gallery who would not allow them to be exhibited. As a result, some real information about certain aspects of these events was simply pulled out of the picture. Unfortunately, therefore, they are lost from the record of the Notes on 05/2553, or Rupture show.

The ideas and feelings of individual photographers about the conflict, the violence, disaster and loss, which had considerable and widespread impact on Thai society, generally, can be felt and seen a little bit in the critical angles of these images. However, most of the photos on show have the character of a record. They are narratives of the events showing some of the losses and the remains. But this is only a very little fragment of the whole story.

Of course, these photographs in the exhibition cannot enable us see really clearly the back story. They cannot show the basic causes which led to this outbreak of increasingly intensifying violence, or who was pulling strings behind the scenes.

Whether much or little, the dozens of photos in the show let the viewers know and see to some extent what the losses were and how they happened in our society – which used to be peaceful, a country in which people cared for each other in harmony. How did it come about that everything changed? Who were the innocent? How many were hit directly or indirectly this time by the conflict and division among Thai people?

The divisive conflicts between different parties, the senseless partisanship, turned the capital into a ghost town. Silenced was the clamoring, boisterous noise of streets bustling with traffic. The streets were emptied of cars, moving or parked. The losses were disastrous, damnable and very disheartening to the lives of people who had no inkling of the causes. [What had they done to deserve this?] They had been dragged into the fray unwillingly and had to carry part of the losses with no opportunity to refuse.

As for the photos banned by the administrators of the BMA (the real owners of the site), the pictures were forbidden to be put on exhibition. However, interested persons can still seek the censored information and details in the catalog which was printed up to accompany this photographic exhibition.

If the reader can spare some time from a busy daily life, the Notes on 05/2553 show is open daily, except Mondays, to the public, free of charge. The exhibition is on the 9th floor of the BMA Art and Culture Gallery.

Till now, it can be said that this is the first show presenting content about those violent events resulting from political machinations in our democratic nation in 2010, a time when Thai society was battered and wounded with division and conflict which bit more deeply and violently into society than ever before in the past. The conflict and division resulted from the greed of just one person – that’s crystal clear.

Manit Sriwanichpoom, ‘A Cultural Constitution for Reform,’ 11-17 Feb. 2010.

2011-03-14T04:21:00.000-07:00

Manit Sriwanichpoom, ‘A Cultural Constitution for Reform,’ in the Silpa Wattanatham column of Siamrath Weekly News magazine, Yr.58, Vol.21, 11-17 Feb. 2010.

Monday, 24 January just past, I was invited to join a meeting of the Assembly of Artists for Reform (in the Central Plain) on the topic of ‘What part will artists have in creating Thai society?’ This time, it was a meeting of just a small group in the visual arts. The first meeting, on 16 – 17 December, last year at Cholpreuk Resort in Nakorn Nayok brought together artists from every field.

The primary target was announced beforehand in the letter of invitation to subcommittee members in the network of artists for reform and the chairman of the Thailand Association of Writers, Ms. Chamaiporn Saengkrajarng, stated as follows:

“ …In order to give everyone a chance to get together as stakeholders and hosts to carry forward the work of reforming the country; to create awareness of people in society and support artists in creating works of art which emphasize justice and the reducing of inequality in society by communicating and giving rise to new imagination, including summarizing the major points to present which drive toward national reform, using art to reach the stage of the National Assembly for Reform in March, 2511.”

Before the meeting started, there were video presentations - “ Why Does Thailand Need Reform?” by Acharn Sakesan Prasertkul, and ‘Direction of Reform for Thailand,’ by Dr. Prawate Wasi.

After the video presentation I began to understand what Dr.Prawate thought about art and why he had invited P’ Nao, Naowarat Pongpaiboon, to steer the Assembly of the Artist’s Network. He saw the necessity of using artists as tools of communication to create currents and to drive this reform to spread to wider circles. Simply speaking, using them as instruments of propaganda, for example, like the leaders in every political system do. To say this is not to say it’s wrong, or that it means trying to manipulate artists, because after listening to him explain at length how there was a need for structural reform, such as the structure of the centers of governing power, law and justice, the economy and education for example. But he didn’t raise the issue of ‘the structure of art and culture,’ even though it had an important part in bringing Thailand to the crisis today of burning up the nation.

If all they wanted was propaganda, a mouthpiece for reform, they could hire some clever advertising firm. They might get faster results, wouldn’t waste their time, and would save their budget.

The center of the pyramid of art and culture is in the capital- just like the structure of power, government and the economy. Everything begins in Bangkok and functions like the notes on a ranad (traditional Thai xylophone) – what we call ‘the official edition of art and culture,’ how it is used to overtake and destroy provincial art and culture. Today, it’s like that. Furthermore, things have been improved and upgraded – what we call, ‘the state’s tourist edition of art and culture.’ It’s even worse, and makes things even worse than before.

Monopoly of the definition of ‘nation,’ of ‘Thai,’ - it’s still in the hands of the powers at the center. The little people, the minorities, have no rights, no voice. That’s just the way it is. It doesn’t change. As in the example of the ease of the rejection by the authorities of the request that the Yawi language be a second official government language in the Southern region. The very narrow reason given for the denial was that Thailand must only use Thai language for official business.

So it seemed to me that the topic of the meeting should be taken to a higher level, not sticking with a superficial and decorative one. And there should be some intelligent debate making wider use of our brains than seems to be happening. Because quite a lot of things are implicated – many important issues – in the constitution: control of power, the duty of the state to manage art and culture, the rights of communities, and the freedom of individuals as regard these things.

In the meeting a draft was presented from the first meeting to improve, make corrections and additions. But when I read the set of proposals for every branch of the arts, and for the visual arts, I found that the talk was about minor issues at the tail end of things [rather than addressing the basic problems]. For example, there was a proposal to set up people’s art and culture liaison centers in every region; to set up history centers for ‘knowledge of the land and the nation.’
If it’s like this, how is there going to be any reform? The constitution remains untouched, and the real root cause of the problems are located right there.

I agree with the point of view of the reform slogan of Acharn Sakesan Prasertkul, which calls for a reduction of the power of the state and an increase in the power of the people. This is a continuation of the attempt to disseminate power in the 1997 constitution.

In fact, when they were drafting the constitution in the year 2000, I and my friends in the Artist’s Network went into the parliament to make proposals about art and culture, to get some things put into that constitution. It was another occasion during which we tried to raise the structure of the problem to a national level. We called our proposals a ‘culture constitution.’ Unfortunately, we have not yet succeeded.

So, now I’d like to dust off those proposals and consider just a few articles which ought to be put into the constitution.

Section on Rights and Freedoms of Thai People

Article 1. Individuals have the duty to care for, protect, and pass on and develop and study the nation’s art, culture and local wisdom.
(Rationale: Because art and culture are the essential structure of society, just like the economic and political structure. Individuals thus have the duty to protect it, watch over it, and develop it to flourish and be beautiful.)

Article 2. Individuals are free to express their ideas - to speak, write and communicate meaning by means of art and culture.

Carrying out the preceding paragraph must be subject to the law and the limitations on rights and freedom that apply, except by the power of particular acts of law which control rights and freedoms as regards honor, reputation, rights in families, or the personal lives of other individuals.

(Rationale: In the past, government functionaries would cite the need to ‘preserve the peace and order or good morals of the people, or the need to protect or halt the mental decline or declining health of the people’ as specified in every constitution as a reason to limit the rights and freedom of expression of the creativity of the people – A vague citation without principal like this is simply a means of the state to control the opinions of the people. Hence, these words should be removed in order to lift the power of the state from the people. What will remain would be just the governing of other individuals who might receive the brunt.)

Article 3. People living together in provincial communities of longstanding have the right to designate their local heritage of art and culture which they should care for and which they have the right to protect, pass on, and make use of. This heritage may be made use of for public benefit and be managed as the law requires.

(Rationale: In the past, officers were the ones to establish what is ‘the art and culture heritage,’ and their judgments sometimes differ from what the general people say. This article helps people have more of a part in preservation.)

Article 4. Individuals have rights and freedom in setting up networks and art and culture funds to take care of their own local artistic and cultural heritage and innovations.
In order to implement the above, the state must provide supporting budget and legal apparatus in accordance with the specifications of these acts.

Article 5. The state has the duty to give equal support to promoting, supporting, and arranging budgets for managing the work of seeking, studying, researching, and disseminating in terms of various academic knowledge about art as well as the creation of works of art and culture in every branch, whether the work is done by an individual, a group of persons, a government agency and the local private sector, or on a national level. And a cultural and artistic exchange is a must at the international level.

Article 6. The state has the duty to promote and arrange for art and culture in society’s path by setting up basic structures as a foundation for art and culture in terms of resources, education, law; promoting support from the private sector and stipulating that the people have a part in setting art and culture policy.

(Rationale: Art and culture are the nation’s heritage; they must be protected and nourished, supported and put in their appropriate place, as scholars see it, so that people can study it, learn about, as the root and source of wisdom. For example, building contemporary art museums; grassroots museums which show the daily lives of the people. There should be provisions made to direct tax support to these purposes, stimulating the private sector to take part in supporting the creation of art or museums.)

Article 7. The state must acknowledge the variety of local cultures and art and culture groups and should promote their preservation and continuation. Their development, creativity, support and disseminate art and culture with fairness and equality at the grassroots and the national levels, and should keep in mind the value of art and culture as a way of life which includes economics, society and politics.

I’d like to leave these proposals with the Artist’s Assembly for Reform to consider – hope they will be of some use.

Manit Sriwanichpoom. Art After Red May (5) 14 – 20 Jan. 2011.

2011-03-12T06:25:00.000-08:00

Manit Sriwanichpoom. Art After Red May (5), in the Silpa Wattanatham column of Siamrath Weekly News magazine, Yr. 58, Vol. 17, 14 – 20 Jan. 2011.

After talking about contemporary works of art with content associated with the violent events of this past May, 2010, the works of senior artists, the older artists of international standing, let’s turn to the younger generation, which has also taken strong interest in what is happening in their own country, in their own politics.

‘Within These Walls,’ is an exhibition by five artists – three of them Thai, two foreign – i.e. Rerngsak Anuwatwimol, Chalitaporn Yamoon, and Charintorn Rachurach, and Rupert Jones (UK) and Jeff Gompritz (US) in the glass rooms on the second floor of the BMA Art and Culture Gallery, 11 Dec. 2010 to 6 Jan. 2011. The show presents the initiativ, ideas and selection of artists by a new face – a woman curator, Bo Wasinont, who announced her intentions for this show in a news release, as follows:

“…After the conflicting events of last May, have we created material walls, and walls in our own thinking in order to cover up the damage? Our new walls have been varnished over with hope and encouragement. We vow seriously to move forward, but have we understood what we must leave behind us or not? And have we learned? Do we acknowledge the wrongs and mistakes or not?”

These five artists investigate and recall the losses from the violent political events which came to pass in May of last year. Their works are brought together within a structure of ideas which investigate the meaning of citizenship, of the propaganda created to control the feelings and thoughts of most of the people, and the uneasy confusion which arises from conflict and division among people…”

In line with the exhibition’s theme, ‘Inside the Walls,’ the curator brought mucky and faded stickers to close off the glass rooms of the second floor of the gallery. Areas are created which become ‘inside – outside.’ So there is a feeling of secrecy and concealment, stimulating immediate curiosity. It’s a very clever way of solving the problem of glassed in rooms which were divided for business purposes, areas which were never intended to be used as galleries.

One room shows works ‘ Within the framework of ideas seeking the meaning of citizenship.’ There is an installation by Reuangsak Anuwatwimol with Thai content under the ‘white’ name, ‘ Everything Might be OK, All About Thai.’ The artist has invited his friends and acquaintances and general audiences to join in and show ideas and opinions about the meaning of the words, ‘Thai citizen.’

People are asked to bring in whatever objects are able to represent the meanings and feelings which they feel are appropriate, and place them in the exhibition room. These things are painted red, white and blue, like the Thai flag. And we find that the variety of objects brought in include fresh apples, a cake, the 1997 constitution, T-shirts and plastic handguns, for example. The artist himself brought three things and put them in place first: a pair of dinosaurs the colors of the Thai flag, tri-colored plastic bags, and the skeleton of a dog carrying in its jaws an old map of Thailand.

Is it possible or not that the violent incidents of Red May in which people were killed and injured have shaken to their foundation, to their very roots our ideas and beliefs in rank, status and privilege? And our definition of the meaning of ‘Thai citizen,’ and what we used to recite by heart, ‘Thai people love peace.’

If we consider the symbolic objects which they deposited here, there is irony, contempt, anger, hatred and spite expressed toward the wicked baseness of Thai society because of said events. The state of emotion isn’t just among artists only. No few Thai people have become depressed and hopeless since these turbulent events have occurred.

In any case, for the audience, the various symbols brought together in this definition make quite a mix. Most are unrelated or scarcely related to the violent events which have passed, perhaps because it has been many months now. The feelings and ideas have cooled and changed, for Thai people forget very easily. For example, there is a wedding cake with a white groom and a Thai bride. And also, the apples.

In the next room as well, ‘Propaganda created to control feelings and thoughts of most of the people,’ by Charintorn Rachurat in the white piece labeled, ‘Trust Me.’ It is a work of art which assembles together eight inkjet, poster size prints, with an orange neon sign which says ‘Trust Me’ in the middle of the exhibition room.

Though the artists were determined to critique the use of mass media during those events and the attempt to direct and control the ideas of the people, only two works really address this issue. The rest are simply mocking and ironic regarding the different colored rallies. For example, in ‘The Duties of Students,’ Charintorn makes a collage using line drawings and primary school study models from the Pibulsongkram era. There is a picture of two pairs of men and women facing the Democracy Monument, along with photos of trucks carrying people off to political rallies. There is a text which says: ‘Renoo goes to the morning assembly; Banya goes to the morning assembly; brothers and sisters all, we meet together in the morning.’

In another work, ‘Announcement,’ is a blue poster mocking nationalist announcements in the era of Pibulsongkram. The colors people wear express their political preferences.

These two works reflect the fact that the artists have never joined any such meeting or movement to fight for anything. If they had, these gestures would never have materialized. They wouldn’t have contempt for or make ironic comments about rallies of opposing colors who have different ideas.

On the other hand, one image of drawings going back to the Pibulsongkram era, ‘Gaily Colored Family,’ satirizes and critiques political rallies very creatively. And they look much better, and are very direct in presenting their point of view and in raising awareness. In the picture you see two ideal families. Both fathers are boasting to their wives and children as they show them bombs, but outside the house the town is burning wildly. At the top of the image, the text says, ‘We go to rallies. We choose sides with solidarity.’ This poster is like a horror movie in the middle of a delightfully fine day.

In a state of war at whatever level, propaganda is a weapon against an enemy, whether it is the Aphisit government or Taksin and the Red Shirts. This is nothing new. But what is different, and which Charintorn observed, was the use of new communication technology, different from May 1992 when they talked about the ‘mobile phone mob.’ Nowadays, we have an online network society called Facebook. In Charintorn’s ‘Network,’ she touches on this too, but only lightly, not deeply enough. She just takes a picture of a laptop computer monitor displaying the word Facebook and the word [in Thai] No. And there are scolding, argumentative texts about the rallies.
In order to communicate that all this is propaganda, the artist uses poster drawings from the era of the Chinese communist revolution. The picture of those intent and stalwart armed Chinese youths, both men and women, recalls very well the dress and attitudes of that era of communist dictatorship. ( The poster could be used in China.)
I did hear news that during the [Red May]violence, the hot ‘war’ on online networks was no less intense than the fighting on the street. Vile – raw – lawless. There were no class distinctions, no gentry, no peasants. Everyone was brought down to the same low level.

As for the works of art in the other rooms concerning ‘definition of confusion and hesitation that occurs when people are conflicted and divided,’ there is the work, Pointless, an installation by Chalitaporn Yamoon which presents violence via a variety of plastic guns emerging from a mirror attached to the wall. These guns are painted pink and reflect light. At the end of the barrels are lasers. The other end of the gun is the mirror on the wall. Opposite is a mirror on the other wall. The result is that the laser lights [from the gun barrels] go back and forth unceasingly. To the audience it says that the result of killing others falls on the killer’s own head, i.e. we reap what we sow. Assessing this artwork, one concludes that Chalitaporn’s offering is the weakest one in the group.

In the last two rooms which are worth noting, there are installations by a pair of whites, Rupert Jones and Jeff Gombritch. I have no information about how long either of them has been in Thailand. But that is not as important as what they try to reflect of the haunting and frightening results of the violent events of the past Red May. These two artists do not create anything new. They simply collected some of the debris left over from the fire at the Siam Theatre complex. And they have used it very cleverly. They use the crippled objects to reflect the story: the objects are the story-tellers.

Kring-kring! The sound of the telephone loudly arises outside the exhibition room. When the audience follows the sound, they find a congealed green public telephone which appears extremely moldy and repugnant to the touch. It is attached to a black wall in a black room. There is a single spotlight fixed on that phone. The atmosphere is dark, scary and isolated in the room. The phone just keeps on ringing. If you lift the receiver to listen, there is no voice on the line, but the phone continues to ring. Rupert and Jeff have entitled this work, ‘No Answer.’

In the adjoining room a[n old-fashioned vinyl] recording of the Thai national anthem made by the Fine Arts Department can be played. The record has been warped by the fires which were the work of the Red Shirts. The record’s distorted sound of the music and singing is the result of the violence.

Unfortunately, the other side of the record is the royal anthem. If not for the censors and the proprietor’s fear of being charged with lèse majesté, how powerful this work would be. At this point, the nation’s highest institution is also being challenged, dragged into the contest for power and advantage. The sound of the royal anthem, incoherent and stuttering, would completely dismay Thai people who love and revere this institution, filling them with apprehension.

Manit Sriwanichpoom, Art After Red May, 4

2011-01-27T05:04:00.000-08:00

Manit Sriwanichpoom, ‘Art After Red May, 4’ in the Silpa Wattanatham column of Siamrath Weekly News magazine, Yr. 58, Vol. 13. 17 Nov. – 23 Dec. 2010.

‘Manorah and the True Friend of the Cobra’
When the political exhibition, ‘Who’s Afraid of Red, Yellow and Green,’ by Rerkrit Tirawanich, ended, many drawings were erased from the walls of the 100 Tonson Gallery. Sakharin Kreu-on, a contemporary artist, young and famous, immediately followedwith his new show of ironic political commentary by unfurling a theatrical backdrop with images of palaces, forests, mountains and waterfalls in nature. These become panoramic settings for a new video work, ‘Manorah and the True Friend of the Cobra,’ 9 Sept. – 24 Oct. 2010.

Sakharin has taken something old to retell – a work of literature from the Ayudhya period: the story of Phra Suthon and Manorah. He has adapted the story to fit with contemporary events in our country today. Even so, Sakharin has barely preserved the old structure [of the story] at all.

I’d like to summarize the original story to refresh our memories a bit. Ahthitwong, king of the city of Banchalonkorn, had a consort named Chantrathevi. In time, this consort bore him a son. This child brought treasure with him. The king gave the young prince, his new son, the name Suthon, which means ‘having perfect treasure, having great treasure.’ The city flourished and prospered. Prince Suthon studied and became skilled with the bow and arrow.

One day, the hunter, Boontrik, using a snare and a rope, was able to capture Manorah, a kinnaree, who had alighted in the Anodat Pool to play in the water. The hunter brought the kinnaree as a present to Prince Suthon, who was very pleased. King Ahthitwong and his consort, Chatarathevi, arranged a wedding ceremony for Prince Suthon and Manorah.

Later, the frontiers of the kingdom were attacked by enemies. Prince Suthon had to lead the army to quell these invaders. While he was away, one of the king’s advisors, a Brahmin who had a grudge against the Prince because he had refused to marry the Brahmin’s daughter, made the provocative move of asking the king if Manorah might not have brought bad fortune with her. If she was such a woman, she should be sacrificed for the good of the kingdom.

King Ahthitwong was loath to consider this because he knew that Manorah was greatly loved by Prince Suthon, but he could not disagree with the suggestion of this powerful and ranking courtier, so he ordered that the sacrificial ceremony be readied. When Manorah learned about this, she did not resist the order that she be killed. However, she asked for her wings and tail to wear in the ceremony’s ritual dance. Queen Chantarathevi returned the wings and tail, which had been left in her keeping by Prince Suthon, to Manorah. When she had put them on for the ritual dance, Manorah flew away, returning to the Krailasathin Mountain, which had been her home.

When Prince Suthon returned to the city and learned that Manorah had flown away, he was extremely upset. He hurried to beg his father and mother for permission to follow Manorah. Prince Suthon went on his journey and met the noble Hermit, Kassop, from whom Prince Suthon learned about some tricks and some magic that Manorah had left behind to help him escape safely from danger. Prince Suthon was encouraged on his journey and carefully followed all Manorah’s instructions. He traveled on like this for seven years, seven months and seven days. On that final day, he arrived at the Krailat Mountain and found Manorah at last.

Manorah’s father, the noble King Toomrath received Prince Suthon in audience. The prince demonstrated his skill with bow and arrow which greatly pleased the king. But there was still another test. The king’s seven daughters all dressed themselves alike and came to sit together before their father. At that point, Prince Suthon had to point out which one among them was Manorah. All the daughters looked very much alike, and it was very difficult to identify Manorah among them. Prince Suthon therefore made prayer: if he had in former lives never had another wife, and if he had a heart only for one woman – then may he recognize her. The Lord Indra, therefore, changed into a golden fly and flew round and round the head of Manorah.

In the end, Prince Suthon was able to correctly identify her. King Toomrath was pleased and arranged a great wedding celebration for Prince Suthon and Manorah. The royal couple remained firmly in love and went on to rule the city of Banchalonkorn after King Toomrath.

So you could say that the story of Prince Suthon and Manorah is about a test of ‘true love’ between a human – Prince Suthon - and a demigod. Humans are seen to be full of desires and burning jealousy, driving the divine away from humanity till human beings have to their own sincerity to the test. Humans are then able to return once again to unity with the divine and find happiness in the end.

In the short film by Sakharin, ‘Manorah and the True Friend of the Cobra,’ which is filmed in imitation of the old silent movies, the story is given new meaning. Though the actors dress in the theatrical garb of olden days and dance with sweet delicacy, growth and development comes to the city of the ‘true friend of the cobra’ which is ruled by Phra Suthon, a human and a commoner, by a lady with hi-tech knowledge of a very exotic nature. This knowledge, called ‘innovation,’ spreads among the citizens to use in making their living. The lady – Freedom - has the wings of a kinnaree which allows anyone to freely fly. In sort, Manorah becomes a symbol of civilization and freedom.

As for Phra Suthon in this new story, he is more violent than before; he breaks the wings of Manorah to prevent her from flying away. And Suthon also has a friend, a tricky, persuasive cobra who persuades Manorah to teach the Prince how to fly with her wings. Manorah is naïve and gullible, agreeing to everything. Soon PhraSuthon can fly. When the jealous citizenry see him in flight, they come protesting and calling for the chance to fly too. They also want wings. In the end, Phra Suthon, under pressure, hands the wings over to them: the picture, in this case actually shows the wings of the kinnaree lying upon a dais which looks like the ceremonial tray upon which the Constitution sits in the Democracy Monument on Rachadamnoen Avenue.

Because there is only one pair of wings, when a male of equal stature wants to control them for himself alone, not sharing with anyone. In the end, there is quarreling and contesting for the wings of freedom. The kingdom is no longer at peace. There is lying and trickery by the creation of false ‘wings of freedom’ to persuade people that when they use the wings to fly they will fall to their deaths, and their land will suffer terribly.

Phra Suthon sees events intensifying increasingly and decides to take the wings back by force, returning them to Manorah, ‘because she was divine.’ Though she has her wings again, she decides to remain with Phra Suthon out of love. As for Phra Suthon, he ‘ruled over the country as a father rules his children,’ and the land became peaceful once more.

We see Sakharin’s attempt to adapt a story from ancient literature to serve the country today in a situation which is very hot and full of dislocation and conflict and political division with the hope that a short film will be an example for Thai people to think of their own weakness and fragility, so easy to be ensnared, to be exploited by one side over another. This is a good intention and deserves support.

Even so, the question arises about the plot of Phra Suthon – Manorah – is it suitable to adapt or not. I wonder if Sakkharin chose this story more because the ‘bird’s wings’ of Manorah could be used as symbols of ‘freedom’ in a democratic sense. But perhaps he forgot to develop the structure of society and politics – a monarchy - in this story, i.e. ruled by a king. He should have brought this all up to date with a democratic system with a king as figurehead, as in Thailand today.

Then, bang! Comes Sakharin’s shocking conclusion. He solves the problem of the townspeople who are fighting over the ‘wings of freedom’ by having Phra Suthon, the symbol of the old monarchy, cut through the problem by taking the wings of freedom away from the people. In other words, freedom was the source of the problem! At the end of the story, the tricky cobra warns Phra Suthon to remember the prophesy of a wise old priest:

“…To solve the problem, changing bad to good, as before, you must offer a sacrifice. You must bring the cause of the uproar (the woman, Manorah) and burn her on a pyre till she is turned to ashes. After that we will all have peace.”

Strange. Why doesn’t Sakharin think that freedom isn’t something that comes with human beings from birth? As the saying goes, ‘Man is born free.’ And why doesn’t he see that the citizens who are fighting among themselves are doing so because democracy / freedom is at work. Phra Suthon could have ‘solved this problem’ easily by having the citizens set rules and responsibilities about each person’s ability to master the wings - for how long, making it just for all the people of the city – instead of taking an approach which resembles ‘might makes right.’

Looking at it this way, is there a proposal in this short film, ‘Manorah and the True Friend of the Cobra,’ by Sakharin Kreu-on about how to solve the problems which are causing the uproar in Thai society today? Is it the wrong era, the wrong time, a citizenry not emerged from ‘childhood,’ who remain dependent on ‘grownups, the big people,’ the highest institution, to solve their problems, including political ones.

Or is it possible that I misunderstand? Sakharin himself who comes above the clouds: is he mocking the situation in the country in a crafty way, the period past, the coup d’etat of 19 Sept. 2006, was taking power and burning the wings of freedom of the people.

In addition to these important points is the issue of the writing which tells the story which uses titles [instead of voice over] because it is a silent film without speaking or narration. The pictures and storytelling titles are interspersed. Sakharin chooses to tell the story entirely in English. There are no Thai titles at all. Both the length and size of the English titles are unsuitable for on-screen reading, and are a great obstacle to following the story when the artist wants to communicate with Thai viewers, and they are the primary audience….right? Why isn’t the story told with Thai titles, with translations for white viewers? Unless this film was made for white audiences. And that would be MOST ANNOYING!

In any case, the strong point of this short film lies in the images. They are beautifully photographed. And the special effects are very well done. For example, the blooming roses of many colors piled up in the scenes of love between Phra Suthon and Manorah in black and white.

Manit Sriwanichpoom, ‘ Art After Red May (2)’

2011-01-19T22:03:00.000-08:00

Manit Sriwanichpoom, ‘ Art After Red May (2)’ in the Silpa Wattanatham column of Siamrath Weekly News magazine, Yr. 58, Vol. 5, 22 – 28 October, 2010.

‘Yellow = Red = Red = Yellow’.
There was one work in the ‘Dream of Peace’ show entitled, ‘This Shirt is Yellow, This Shirt is Red,’ by Tavorn Ko-Udomwit, a senior artist and lecturer in art and an influential art manager. It is a close-up from bust to groin of two young women. The girl on the left wears a red T-shirt bearing the message in yellow letters: THIS SHIRT IS YELLOW. The woman on the right wears a yellow T-shirt painted with the words, THIS SHIRT IS RED. Both lift the T-shirts to show their skin, their navels, their mid-sections as flat as any fashion model. At the same time, hands reach into the picture from outside its frame to check these two waists with red and yellow measuring tapes.

Many viewers, including myself, wondered what the sexy mid-sections of these models had to do with the problem of conflict between the two groups of red and yellow shirts. One couldn’t make out what the ideal midriffs of those beautiful people communicated in terms of calls for peace. Were these advertisements for T-shirts printed with clever words to remedy some ill omen, or were they making fun of the stickers seen on the backs of cars and taxis saying ‘This vehicle is yellow,’ or ‘This vehicle is red.’

Two weeks after the opening of the ‘Dream of Peace’ show, I followed up to see the answer from Tavorn Ko-Udomwit in the opening of the exhibition ‘Yellow = Red = Red = Yellow’ (Utilitarianism) at the Ardel Contemporary Art Gallery ( 15 July – 15 August, 2010). It is regarded as the first really ‘political’ show by this award winning artist, who has taken [many] prizes inside and outside the country. For more than 30 years, Tavorn has made artworks concerning Dhamma and Nature, using forms of presentation which hold to a very simple style of ‘little, but much,’ like the art of Zen. Using a branch, golden leaves, colored string, he brings real materials together on handmade sar paper, or makes pictures with graphic art to communicate feelings which are still and peaceful and meditative. The art has a rather decorative character which is comforting to look at. One needn’t think much because these images don’t critique the ideas or beliefs of any particular person or institution.

You could say that ‘Yellow = Red = Red = Yellow’ is a turning point, an about face. It looks like the artist has great confidence not only in his own ideas and point of view regarding the state of affairs in Thailand today. But he also invests a lot in each work he makes, and he puts himself in a prominent position: he is one part of the works himself.

For example, ‘Portrait of the Artist, 1,’ a color portrait photo of the artist wearing the special kind of glasses normally used for vision examinations. They have red glass lens on one side with yellow lens on the other side. And he has a bowler hat like those worn by whites like the Mafia or Al Capone in the 1930s. The T-shirt and backdrop are black, emphasizing the face of this senior artist, age 54, with his rather straggly grey mustache and beard. In terms of presentation, ‘Portrait of the Artist, 2,’ shows just the lower part of the artist’s face because he is standing behind frosted glass. It looks like an advertising photo of the hero in a science fiction horror film rather than a work of art with political content.
After following at length the political situation of conflict between yellow and red, Tavorn concluded his opinion in one part of the catalog for his show, as follows:

“…The laws of nature – the real truths – three of them, concern impermanence, change and no-self. These help take us more easily to our goal, which is the end of suffering if we just choose to look at things that happen simply as phenomena. Something appears, stands, and is extinguished according to reason and the necessities of life. This is normal. We only remain and wait for the time of change. The context of happiness changes to one of suffering and awaiting happiness [to come back]. This chain of changes, coming in and going out is reality, and more real than the reality of any particular individual or group.”

It seems that all the problems of conflict between yellow and red stem from the fact that both sides are totally stuck and sold on themselves. But if they would only step back and ‘let go,’ allowing these ‘phenomena’ of conflict take their course, it would all calm down by itself – just like impermanent suffering and happiness which come and go in turn. Hence, one should not worry: that’s just the way it is. The important thing is for us to know how to ‘look’ at things that happen.

When one thinks like this in the large photograph entitled ‘Blind Spectacles,’ Tavorn makes plastic spectacles which are opaquely yellow and red as his [artistic] expression and as political media. Glasses like this were handed out to friends, seniors, juniors and acquaintances in the artworld to wear and to have their pictures taken in order to say that when you wear these glasses with a red-yellow view, you will not see things, which is not unlike blind people.

Playing with the idea of ‘seeing’ or ‘looking’ with ‘glasses’ is the vehicle of expression, and is the heart of this work: there is nothing wrong with that. Political movements nowadays all use ‘color’ (which can only be comprehended by the eye) in creating ‘a political identity’ for their political body, whether yellow, red, green or blue.

Actually, Tavorn begins well by looking at ‘phenomena’ (conflict). However, rather than really going into study it, to creating understanding of the roots of the conflict and violence that arises in society, he turns back and chooses to use Buddhist teachings, which he reveres, to explain rather awkwardly why he doesn’t get mixed up in it, and why one shouldn’t choose sides, either one color or the other. The language he uses and his way of explaining is like someone in the temple who tends to speak more about problems of personal emotion and deep feeling than about ‘burning down the city and the country.’

He talks as if ‘phenomena’ (conflicts) are not as important as ‘the one who sees phenomena’ – in this case, the artist. Both portraits of the artist that I mentioned already attest to this.

There is another large photo of the artist which drives in the point of showing his importance. The artist, camera in hand, has taken the trouble of attiring himself in body armor and a combat helmet upon which is printed the word, ‘ARTIST.’ The background is the Democracy Monument, dressed in red cloth. The relief sculpture decorating the monument has been splashed with paint by the red shirts and marked with words of protest. Anyone who sees this picture must conclude that this artist is in the forefront of those who ‘saw’ and went out ‘to record;’ who saw with his own eyes and charged right in, endangering his life just like a war correspondent.

But it is strange. Why are there no photos of the protest event, or of the violence, all the losses, for viewers to see. Except for the picture of the artist standing conspicuously in the middle of the picture of the Democracy Monument, for readers who are outsiders rather than insiders like you and me, it would be impossible to get politics into this exhibition.

When you see ‘phenomena’ as unimportant, the confusing, complex conflicts of Thai politics appear almost like a competitive game, as suggested in the big photographic work, ‘Twin Boxers,’ in which the artist dresses a pair of youths in red and yellow shorts and boxing gloves. Printed on the red trunks are the words ‘Dad’s son, disciple of the yellow camp,’ and ‘Red son, disciple of Taksin’ on the yellow trunks. They form a twin pastry, like patango, a bitter tonic, pickled red and yellow, or instruments of destruction such as red or yellow acid.

To so simply sum up the life and death problems of the nation without any principles or reasons to support and back up this personal analysis is not unlike a crude and shallow summary, like those conducted in the foreign press talking about the problems of Thai society today. But the rearguard here, with another kind of readymade view, sees the problem as trifling.

This is one ‘illusion’ of artists who have a ‘Dhamma’ point of view. When they take a high vantage point, it could make them lose their way, believing they understand everything about the problem. They bring and apply the teaching and principles of Buddhism to use in a slanted interpretation in order to fit with the behavior of the one making the interpretation. Sometimes they look no different from the behavior of politicians and campaigners who simply climb up on stage and call for democracy and justice.

Thai Buddhism is interpreted as asking people to surrender, endure and accept their fate ‘with awareness’ rather than interpreting in a dynamic way, to bring about change to solve problems – deep structural problems – which are at the source of injustice and corruption and special interests in order to bring real peace to Thai society.

In this case, the ‘Yellow = Red = Red = Yellow’ show makes the process of fighting and being injured and dying on both sides to be a kind of irony or satire. Meaningless. Just a backdrop for a big image of the artist.

Paisan Tirapongwit, ‘The Future of the Body of the Artworld in Thailand: Do they Really Have Any Future?’

2011-01-13T22:50:00.000-08:00

Paisan Tirapongwit, ‘The Future of the Body of the Artworld in Thailand: Do they Really Have Any Future?’ in the Silpa Wattanatham Column of Siamrath Weekly News Magazine, Yr. 58, Vol. 16, 7 – 13 January, 2011.

The year 2010 has passed now from the calendar’s pages and we have already moved one week into the new calendar year of 2011. People in many circles have expressed extravagant hope and expectation that in this new year, there will be no devastating evil happenings in politics. They hope that armed camps will not arise to slash at one another in fights for power and control of government, scooping up and amassing advantage and privilege out of the coins in the national budget via the many mega projects of those professional ‘political gamesmen.’ They are a breed of tigers, lions, wild bulls and rhinos scouring the earth with their fangs and horns. During the past two years Thai society has been badly bruised, but there is a good chance to change things for the better.

But as for art circles in Bangkok and the rest of the country, if you ask me, I’m not at all confident. This year the various parts of the Thai artworld can find a bright future with some good dreams and hopes within their grasp, waiting there before them – if only things would not get worse than they have been in the year just past. That would be a triple bonus in itself. It is the story of art in a country whose administrative government has never taken the slightest interest in furthering the arts, has lacked any vision of the arts, without even the most minimal understanding of the nature of art in the contemporary world.

In 2002, some people from the artworld and from the political sector got together to successfully ram through the project to build a Bangkok municipal contemporary art and culture center. It is one of the departments in the new Ministry of Culture created under Prime Minister Taksin Shinawatr.

The inception of a ministry of culture and a new department - the Office of Contemporary Art and Culture - helped people in the Thai art world to feel hope that the activities of the artworld would receive more systematic and concrete support and promotion. The future looked good, looked hopeful. There would be no more neglect and abandonment by the government – as had been the case in times past – even though it was not really a heavy investment of patronage as in the time of the absolute monarchy when the Chakri kings of the Thai and their governments in turn undertook such patronage.

So you could say that after the institution of the city’s contemporary art and culture center, becoming an organ of the state government, a great many Thai artworld activities received some rather good support from the government, especially in the early years when the director of the Office of Contemporary Art and Culture was Dr. Apinan Posyanond.

I mention this because I noticed that after Dr. Apinan finished his term and was followed by 2 or 3 successors, the Office of Contemporary Art and Culture has lacked any really formidable vitality. Instead, the office has leaned heavily in the direction of activities which almost exclusively emphasize themes of duty. So much of what was done before has ceased almost entirely, and there has been no expansion to open new areas.

This problem in part results from meager budgets and scarce cash flow, as usual. It is difficult to push for the birth of new, creative and interesting activities. Another aspect is the lack of knowledgeable and understanding personnel or groups who are closely related to art activities. So one understands the problem of scarcity and the dwindling away that has begun in art circles working with the Office of Contemporary Art and Culture. It is hard to know how to think about promoting or building more into existing activities.

The Venice Biennale exposition is a big undertaking once every two years, an event in which Thai art society has been invited to participate. The Office of Contemporary Art and Culture provided not so many million baht for the transport of the artworks and personnel needed to set up the show in Venice. And you can’t compare what was done with the pavilions supported by the governments of Hong Kong or Singapore. They generously poured in many tens of millions in order to announce their power and to disseminate works of art from their countries – this despite the fact that these nations are just little islands – so much smaller than the Golden Ax which is Thailand. But those governments have potential and demonstrate a far-seeing vision for art.

They know very well that investing in and promoting art takes a rather long time to fruition. But the harvests that come are enduring and strong, as for example in America, England, Japan, China or South Korea. They all make good use of the branches of their various arts and culture, of their young men and women who are seen everywhere, with skill and efficiency which colors their ideas and points of view. But our Thai government is so stupid and muddled, so blind and short-sighted, consistently clueless, inept and senseless.

Counting from 2011, one isn’t certain that the Office of Contemporary Art and Culture of the Ministry of Culture will support or push forward activities which are creative, energetic and vigorous. Or will they just continue to hand out Silpatorn prizes with purses of 100,000 baht? Will they continue to be preoccupied with their regular yearly duties and accept the necessity of this state of affairs?

In addition to hopes for the Office of Contemporary Art and Culture in the new year, I still hope for the future and fate of another agency which is firmly in government hands - the Bangkok Municipal Art and Culture Gallery. A new director is expected to oversee and take full responsibility for managing the work of the gallery this year to replace the ‘acting’ directors who have for so long been standing in the position.

Not only do we hope for a new director of the Gallery who can really do the job in the position; I hope that the BMA – to which it is officially attached – will be willing to spend a bit more on the city’s official art gallery in order to really get it moving. And more activities are needed which bring art to the public in a well planned and systematic fashion, well-funded and well-staffed, rather than in a state of dribbling and trickling, hindered and impeded, pulled and curbed till it is unable to move at all or engage in any activities which are truly vigorous and challenging. In the end, there is a state of paralysis such as happened during the past two years.

Arranging for good art activities or exhibitions which inform and cultivate the public requires money from the municipal budget. The city needs to support and seriously promote the gallery. In addition, the BMA Gallery Foundation must be fully empowered with administrative positions, instead of being forced to wriggle and shift as they have had to do – it’s so annoying. I don’t know why [the BMA] needs to cling on to these [positions and controls] or to what end. What reason could they have for carrying on this way?

In my honest opinion, if an organization like the BMA Art and Culture Gallery remains under the care and administrative control and management of the state [i.e. the municipality], then this art organization is certainly hopeless and without a foreseeable future, as things stand. A precedent clearly exists in the lifeless art institution of the Museum of the National Gallery of Art. It is appropriately labeled a ‘museum,’ truly dead already.

The Office of Contemporary Art in the Ministry of Culture is no exception. If this department-level state agency has no ‘art people’ functioning as staff or line, doing documentation, information, academics, or whatever, in its various units; if the agency simply swallows personnel with knowledge, expertise and experience with art’s various unexpected connections; it will be very difficult to push ahead in a forward, challenging, effective way which encourages the creative arts to produce interesting things in the Thai artworld and for Thai society generally.

There is another factor which I regard as a weak point or gap which impacts the management of the Office of Contemporary Art and Culture, the Museum of the National Gallery of Art and perhaps, it appears, the BMA Art and Culture Gallery as well. In each case, the director of these agencies holds his or her position for only 2 or 3 years. The chief officer leads for only a short time before being replaced. This doesn’t bode well, because these directors don’t have enough time to carry out any of their projects. There is no continuity. Besides their dependence on funding, creative projects must also be wrestled with, cleaned and polished, edited and improved, in order to function well.

While expecting very little from art agencies controlled and monitored by the Thai government, I hope new magazines about art will be created, published and put out on the stands for sale. They could help quicken the pulse and breath of life of our artworld, making it stronger, more interesting and more intense, and arousing it from listless depression.

Some people reply that we have magazines like FINE ART already. Isn’t that enough, they ask, for a society in which more than half the people in the country are not interested in art? Perhaps it would be enough, if we only read magazines offering news about art exhibitions in Thailand and abroad. But what I wish for is a magazine or some other medium that will help shake up the art world and make it vibrate – make it tremble with life and save it from listless quietude. It would be a magazine which not only gave the latest news in the artworld, but which also stimulated creative ideas, with expressions of opinion and criticism of artworks, or stories backed by clear thinking to stir up new ideas which crack and strike the myriad of events and happenings using reason and principles.

People in our art community might be stimulated and aroused to compete in creating things strange and new. They might not be satisfied to cling to their old successes. They would not linger with their old ideas about what is comfortable and familiar, the fleeting illusions of fame. They would then perhaps not be afraid to go beyond what they had already achieved, seeking new frontiers of imagination. We might help each other search for new ways to approach the capitalists who continue marching in place with art by pouring money into exhibitions in which artworks compete for prizes and purses.

All I have written here only points to my faint hope that the new calendar plans for 2011 might change. As to the results, we will see by December. Happy New Year, everyone! May you find the happiness you desire!

Manit Sriwanichpoom, ‘ Beautiful Life,’

2010-12-09T23:57:00.000-08:00

Manit Sriwanichpoom, ‘ Beautiful Life,’ in the Silpa Wattanatham column of Siamrath Weekly News Magazine, July 18 – 24, 2008, Yr.55, Vol. 43.

‘More to Love – The Art of Living Together’ is a show of contemporary art organized in the hope of building understanding and dislodging prejudices toward people with HIV-AIDS. The exhibition has four venues: the Wityanitat Gallery at Chulalongkorn University; the Gallery of the Faculty of Painting, Sculpture and Graphic Art at Silpakorn University; the Tadu Gallery, and TK Learning Park, from 24 July through 15 August, 2008. More than 20 Thai and foreign artists are participating. The curator is Chatiya Nittyponprasert who selected the works.

The driving force behind this show is Han Nefkens, a Dutch writer and kindly rich man. He owns the H+F Collection of many contemporary works of art. The life and history of this man is interesting and worth sharing. He himself has lived with an HIV infection for more than 20 years. Now, by age 50, Han has been moving in Thai contemporary art circles for about 5 years, supporting magazines and art activities concerned with an HIV-AIDS campaign.

Besides supporting art projects, he gives money for research projects and for the development of medicines to fight the AIDS virus. The HIV-NAT Center coordinates between Thailand, Australia and the Netherlands, and works with the Thai Red Cross as well.

Han speaks frequently – at every opportunity. The reason he has survived so long, longer than so many others infected with AIDS, is because – luckily for him – he’s rich. He can afford to buy the expensive medications he needs. But his fellow humans are not so lucky –so many of them – and they die tragically. Therefore, he felt impelled to provide funds to support the development of medicines, making them cheaper and more effective in the body of the sick person. Especially regarding children, drug companies don’t want to invest in medication for them, because they have no earning power to invest. Many infected children have to take medicine which is too strong for them, which was designed for adults.

Han is keenly observant. He thinks about the problems of those infected with HIV – the problems they face in their lives. He sees that when Thai society gives only medicine to fight the virus, it’s not enough. Those who have to deal with the infection face a stigma as well. They are victims of prejudice, excluded from society, even though doctors have clearly stated that it is not easy to be randomly infected by the virus in daily life and that those who are infected can live in ordinary society like other people. In many agencies, in companies, even in schools, when people learn that an employee or someone they know - a child, perhaps - has HIV, the head of the agency, company, or school, will ask or even force the person to leave. When people lose their jobs, when children have no school to go to, they do indeed become a burden to society. But these things don’t really have to happen.

Unfortunately the stigma, the prejudice, the discrimination, is not easy to correct. It’s not as easy as simply taking medicine. Even though many people, including doctors, know for a fact that AIDS is not easy to transmit in daily life, many of them still refuse to adjust their beliefs or behavior. The stigma, the prejudice, lives on in their perception.

Hoping to use art as a tool to correct and change perception, to change attitudes through the visual arts, and to communicate through images, Hans created the project, ‘More to Love.’ These simple art exhibitions develop into something more than typical contemporary art shows. Through them, Hans hopes to push Thai society to think about and see the problems of those infected with HIV – the challenges they face.

At the beginning of the white decade of the 80’s and the HIV-AIDS epidemic, the Thai medical establishment was unable to control or deal with the virus. Doctors, public and private health workers, and the media had first to create a primary image. They made the disease look really scary. That was the first step. Victims were pictured, emaciated, dehydrated, bedridden and awaiting death. This was the image taken to heart round the world.

From the beginning, the infected were presented with faces hidden. In newspapers, faces are blurred or blocked by a black bar. On TV, they blur the focus, or have the person turn their back, or make an unintelligible ‘mosaic’ of the person’s face, or put on a cap which obscures their identity. These methods are used with all the infected, whatever their age or status. Whoever it is, adult or child, the result is that sufferers look like lawbreakers in society. (The fact that HIV-AIDS can be passed through sexual intercourse or sharing needles tends especially to give more fuel to the condemning speeches of moralizing preachers.)

We have to follow up and correct this central scary image which was created to deceive and frighten people. This was a challenge to artists who joined the project. How can such a change be accomplished?

Speaking for myself, how can we change the frightening, depressing, hopeless pictures of those who have been infected by HIV and those suffering from AIDS if we don’t replace them with refreshing images, full of hope, with a future? The old ideas must be replaced. I’m not saying anything new here: many countries round the world have done this already. And they have succeeded, especially in Western countries where Han has traveled. He has seen that art can help bring this change about.

In order that participating artists would receive information and feel the stigma attached to infected people, Chatiya and doctors at the HIV-NAT Center introduced them to people infected with HIV and their family caregivers. The artists heard about the impact on the lives of the affected persons and their families. Adults had lost their jobs and had no money for treatment. They were shunned by the surrounding community. As for children, the teachers who should have protected these innocents instead attacked them. For children, infection meant being driven from school in the middle of the school year.

It seems as if we shouldn’t condemn anyone in this case, but rather cooperate in changing attitudes.

I wanted to present photos which were bright and full of hope in order to erase the dark and dreary image of HIV infected persons. (Some people were surprised that I could get these very fresh and lively photos, since they had only ever seen frightening and depressing pictures.) I thought that images of those charming, happy, laughing children would touch the hearts of adults with compassion. Without prejudice, they would care more for these children and feel more sympathy for their fellow men.
I captioned the black and white photo, ‘Life is Beautiful,’ as follows:

The smiles and shining eyes of these four children express the purity
of tens of thousands of similar boys and girls throughout Thailand
who were born and have been growing up with HIV inherited from their
parents. Society as a whole brands or stigmatizes these children, excluding
them from life in the normal world. And these boys and girls must
struggle even harder with another vicious plague, the ‘virus of prejudice.’

If you don’t believe the camera, ask the doctors you know. Why must we resist and hide, covering the faces of these innocent children, excluding them from ordinary society? The media and the press make them out to be dangerous criminals when in fact all they need is to preserve their own lives day by day. That is the heroism of these children.

Stop being prejudiced, stop branding, stop stigmatizing the sick and the HIV infected children and adults! It is possible for us to live together in harmony.

Unfortunately, the set of photos which I hoped to show in the exhibition, ‘Their Hearts, Our Hearts,’ was rejected by an NGO working on behalf of children. This NGO objected, saying that the pictures violated the children’s rights by showing their lovely faces. But I had reasons and principles which were quite opposite to those of the protesting agency. I felt that this set of works fights on behalf of children who have been deprived of their rights, and whose human dignity has been violated by adults. These pictures are a way to ‘use a thorn to reveal the thorn that is causing pain.’ But the NGO disagreed.

So I withdrew in order that this celebration of contemporary art, the ‘Their Hearts, Our Hearts’ exhibition, could move smoothly forward. Then, I brought the pictures, ‘Life is Beautiful,’ to show at the Kathmandu Photo Gallery from 31 July to 31 August, 2008. (www.kathmandu-bkk.com)

Seeing the radiant smiles of these children, how do you feel?

Manit Sriwanichpoom, ‘Face to Faces: From Generals, Artists, Gays, Rambo, to Street People, (part 1)’

2010-12-05T20:56:00.000-08:00

Manit Sriwanichpoom, ‘Face to Faces: From Generals, Artists, Gays, Rambo, to Street People, (part 1)’ in the Silpa Wattanatham column of Siam Rath Weekly News magazine, 13 – 19 June, 2008, Yr.55, Vol.38.

The exhibition is “Month of Photography, Year 4,” (part of the French Cultural Festival). The hosting embassy invited me to help select works by Thai artists and photographers. They join together to exhibit with works of photography from France, pictures under the title, ‘ Face to Faces – [Self] Portraits.’ Simply speaking, it’s a matter of photographs of individuals.

It looks to me like a good opportunity to survey photos of individuals or portraits in our country and how they become tools for communication and expression. I look around in the world beyond the circle of art and artist. I look to people on the street. Why do they take pictures? I look beyond the nationality of the person who creates the artwork. I don’t look down on photographers, Thai or not Thai. I’m interested in the content of the picture – is it based on Thai society?

Because the number of catalogs is limited, I take this occasion to present the article I wrote for the Face to Faces: Part II show.

I think that Thai people became familiar with pictures of individual persons or portraits, before they knew other kinds of photographs such as views, landscapes or still-lifes. I assume this because the 4th King (1804 – 1868) had his portrait photo taken many times in many styles. He had many pictures taken in his honor. He was not intimidated by cameras, by the new technology of the whites or fear that it would suck away his soul into the box, as the country people feared. But the 4th King was aware of its power, the power of photographs which had the power to impact kings, emperors, and leaders generally of the Western nations which were looking to spread their influence in Asia. The king presented the dignity of the monarch of Siam with its ancient – not barbaric – culture. Reality seems present and concrete in a photograph of a person in formal, political communication when these things first entered Siam.

Now, however, Siam has become Thailand and follows a democratic system of government. Thai society still worships power, people who have power, and those who are happy to use power rather than reason or justice. Portrait photos of the influential - or those who appear to have influence–are still important in Thailand. They are tools that help communicate to others the extent to which one has or is associated with power. (Certainly, important elements for such displays in photos are uniforms and signs of rank like medals and ribbons.)

The Chaiya Jitrakorn Photography Studio is one important old Bangkok portrait studio which caters to powerful people in Thai society. The establishment has been carrying on for 72 years. Established by Yim Huntrakul, his son Artorn Huntrakul carries on the philosophy and methods of his father. The philosophy of Chaiya Jitrakorn which remains unchanged is that the picture must be idealized, i.e. look better than the sitter [himself]. The torso and face, quite upright, are turned directly to the camera, looking neither to the left nor to the right. The eyes are clear and shining. (The background is blue like the sky because blue goes nicely with the color of every uniform, whether soldier, police or government officer in dress whites.) Any traces of wrinkles or spots are erased from the skin. Eyebrows and hair are darkened. All this makes the subject more beautiful, because leaders should be flawless.

Michael Shaowanasai, who likes to dress as a second kind of woman, picks up the expressive ways of local people in daily life to use in his own work. In his series, ‘The Life of One Girl,’ (2005) Michael reflects dreams which are ‘normal’ for him, for example, the portraits we find in parlors everywhere. He imagines himself as a girl in her high school uniform, winning the Miss B’Heaven Contest, finishing her studies and holding her diploma, getting married, posing with her darling son, and toward the end of her life, dressed all in white as a nun, a peaceful life in the coolness of Dharma.

Michael summarizes his own dreams (the dreams of no few young women) in just six photos which must make one smile or laugh at the artist’s foolishly impossible dream in the real world. Michael is a pretty stocky guy, but in the photo he is delicate and sweet, full of earnestness, happy, with a perfect life.

‘Pure Happiness’ (2008) is a new set of black and white photos by Isarete Sutisiri which came about when he finished his BA studies at the Fine Arts Faculty of Bangkok University. He came to his upcountry home and was called upon to take photos of the celebration opening a new pavilion at a local temple. This group photo was the result, developed along with his own graduation photos when his family and relatives traveled to Bangkok for the event.

This picture of innocent happiness may look rather banal with no special technique of photography. But the charm of the picture is in the earnestness of the local people. The group picture is taken in a hierarchy where everyone knows their place (in society). The monks are always in front. The elders are honored to sit according to ancient seniority, which still functions in Isarete’s photo. (He stands, observing, behind the camera.) The seniority system has its way, with everyone sitting and standing in orderly fashion. The people dress quite similarly, showing their solidarity and unity. They have their picture taken in a very straight-forward way. All these aspects make the work look like an old photograph – 40 or 50 years old – though it was snapped only yesterday.

While the people in the group photo by Isarete have their individuality swallowed up, Alain Soldeville, a French photographer, is able to make some distinctions among local groups of white-collar workers, office staff, salary men in shirts with neckties. They all come out at the lunch hour in the middle of Bangkok’s Silom business district.

Alain uses speed in taking his photos. Capturing just a fraction of a second, he is able to catch images of the floating state of the subconscious world of personal thought, where we forget to notice the world and the surrounding environment. In the moments when they are not sitting in an office, but are out looking for lunch, these are the Thai people of a new era whom Alain notices in his images. He calls them ‘Busy People’ 2004 and 2008. The people don’t smile as in advertising posters for TAT. Their faces are not very happy, but full of worry, deep in thought. These are the portraits that Thai people are afraid of. They recall images of Japanese workers in Tokyo’s business district hell.

Thanapol Kaewpring, a photographer for Wallpaper magazine (Thai language), also asks about the meaning of life for us today in his work, ‘Nameless’ (2008). Thanapol reflects the lack of a core, the meaninglessness of the lives of people who only ‘eat – shit – copulate – sleep.’ He uses a slaughterhouse (pigs) as his studio. There is an executioner and there are pigs. The result is a picture in which there must be a killer and one killed. No need to doubt what the artist thinks is the state of things and what he wants to show society. But who do the viewers think is the artist in these pictures? (to be continued)

Manit Sriwanichpoom, ‘ Surat Ostanukrau and the Art of Photography'

2010-12-05T00:20:00.000-08:00

Manit Sriwanichpoom, ‘ Surat Ostanukrau and the Art of Photography,’ in the Silpa Wattanatham Column of Siam Rath Weekly News magazine Yr. 55, V. 35, May 23 – 29, 2008.

I would like to join in a sad farewell on the occasion of the unexpected demise of Khun Surat Ostanukrau (1930 – 2008). He was the former head of many ministries and a billionaire businessman. He greatly expanded his family’s business. He was a scholar and the founder of Bangkok University. Toward the end of his life he devoted himself wholeheartedly to creative work, works of art in the form of photography.

I first met Khun Surat in the work, ‘Vanishing Bangkok,’ a photograph exhibition collected in his first book. The show took place at the National Gallery on Chaofah Road at the beginning of January, 2002, six years ago. He took part not in the capacity of a politician or a member of the elite, but as an artist-photographer who had created some interesting work. (I would like to refer to Khun Surat as an artist because he created the works from his own imagination, not as a hired photographer for an employer.)

When I think back, even now I’m still taken with that Bangkok series, mostly for the reason that he started doing these works after the age of 70. People at this age usually ‘take pictures’ which look like exhibition works – the stuff seen and done for associations or clubs. But Khun Surat’s work is not at all like that. He worked very freely, not constrained by rules of composition. He preferred decisiveness, clicking the shutter at the decisive moment, according to the style of Henri Cartier-Bresson who influenced him so much: he emphasized content over form, which is totally different from exhibition photography.

Speaking of photos taken for exhibitions, Khun Surat used to explain that they were ‘readymades,’ dreamed up in the past by members of the Photography Club of England under royal patronage for a group of friends who enjoyed playing with cameras. (Some research is needed to confirm this.) Such readymade formulae were passed on to the members of photographers’ associations both within and without the British Commonwealth.

I guess that ‘exhibition photos’ are formula aesthetics, both in terms of content and composition. For example: ‘A photograph of the sea should not have the horizon in the middle of the frame because doing so divides the picture squarely in two, which is boring and uninteresting. The line should be high or low.’ Such rules make photographers look at landscapes and see a beauty they already know. But they fail to see the beauty that actually lies before them.

We find that no matter how many decades of exhibitions we have, the winning works from competitions since the beginning of the association up to the most recent times are pretty much the same, despite the development of technology from film to digital.

A more important point is that exhibition photos cannot reflect the always changing world and society. This makes the works of members of photography associations (almost every association and almost everywhere in the world) uninteresting, dated, out of touch with social change. For this reason, the pictures they make are almost always judged as ‘mediocre.’

When Khun Surat was welcomed so warmly in his work, ‘Vanishing Bangkok,’ and was invited many times to show, both at home and abroad, he gained confidence in the approach he was taking. His rapid success led to his becoming president of the Thai Photography Association under royal patronage. The association had fallen into a sad state and lacked the funding needed to carry on their activities. Khun Surat told me that he took the position as an opportunity to develop the photography scene in Thailand; he was confident that things could be better.

I was against the idea and told him straight out: Why don’t you start your own institute of contemporary photography? It would be easier [than rebuilding the old organization]. I didn’t believe it was possible to change the existing association because most of the members themselves didn’t see any need for change. They were satisfied with what they had, with their own ways. Most of them saw photography as a hobby rather than a profession. Photography was for their own pleasure, a way of relaxing, without passion or determination. They didn’t expect to learn anything new about the art of photography except in terms of cameras and shooting techniques. That’s why the taste for ‘exhibition style’ photography lingers on among the members, despite it being such an indifferent approach.

When Khun Surat first began working in the Thai Photography Association, he was faced with the prejudices of those who preceded him. They whispered behind his back in the jealous Thai style that he wanted to use the association for his own glorification. Khun Surat was not disturbed by this, however. He just held to his objectives, ignoring the raucous chorus.

Khun Surat invested quite a few years in working with that association. Although he brought them fame and fortune, he eventually came to feel that he was wasting his energy. He was unable to change the attitudes or understanding of the committee or the members about the art of photography. Despite the fact that they were younger than him, they didn’t understand what he was trying to do. It was discouraging.. Still, he didn’t give up altogether. Leaving the Thai Photography Association, he set up the Photography Foundation of Thailand, an alternative to push forward with activities for Thai photography. (It may be too late for that now, however.)

Of course, Khun Surat collected a large fortune before entering the artworld. He had investments in properties and he made political investments (connections with politicians, public officials, businessmen and merchants) and social investments (in fame and respectability). Personally, he was a very open-minded person and far-seeing. He was friends with people in many circles with many varied political ideals and beliefs, both for and against the titled elite, some for capitalism, some for communism. Khun Surat accepted diversity and didn’t see it as an obstacle to developing the world of Thai photographic art. He wanted to bring it to a par with international circles. In order to develop, he said, ‘we must cooperate and push together.”

For this reason, Khun Surat quickly became the center of Thai photography circles when a big project like the ‘9 Days in the Kingdom’ book came up. It was to include 55 photographers contributing as part of the celebrations for His Majesty the King’s 80th birthday. For this project, 45 well-known photographers were invited from around the world, and 10 were selected from Thailand. Khun Surat was invited to chair the advisory committee of editors. This was acceptable to the famous Thai and foreign participants who agreed to take part.

The book included photographs which were surprising, even stunning – like the costumed backup chorus of country singers in the photo, ‘Uraiporn, Little Bird.’ In this picture, Khun Surat was able to capture an incredibly embellished atmosphere of sparkling and flashing costumes. We can almost hear the ecstatic shout of the young male fan who grasps a female singer’s hand. The images of the smooth, sexy legs of the chorus girls tear ones heart. The dancers wear tight-fitting costumes - their legs are not naked. But the camera angle, the light on the dancers, and the rhythm of movement – Khun Surat pressed the shutter so decisively – anyone who sees the picture will feel a chill in their heart.

We will miss Khun Surat Ostanukrau and he won’t be forgotten.

Manit Sriwanichpoom, ‘Sorcerer’s Lies,’ in the Silpa Wattanatham in Siam Rath Weekly News Magazine, 29 Feb – 6 Mar. 2008, Yr. 55, Vol. 43.

2010-12-04T07:14:00.000-08:00

Manit Sriwanichpoom, ‘Sorcerer’s Lies,’ in the Silpa Wattanatham in Siam Rath Weekly News Magazine, 29 Feb – 6 Mar. 2008, Yr. 55, Vol. 43.

The exhibition of contemporary art is ‘Paradise Engineering,’ at the Wityanitat Gallery at Chula (8 Feb – 1 Mar 08). There is a large oil painting entitled ‘Land of Kwai, 2007,’ by Ing Kanchanawanich. It is a painting which uses very few colors, but is powerful, pulling, and greatly stimulating one to think. The artist reflects a picture of the country today with some vivid images of groups of demons and their contemporary disciples.

‘Demons,’ black and white, on two sides, are rolled and twisted together like evil demons from hell in ancient white fairy tales. The bodies are black, wrapped in blood-red suits. And there are little snakes, crawling, teeming, and increasing the disgusting character. The master demon surveys the scene, facing his disciples, with his back to the viewer. In his right hand he holds up a round white light, brilliant and blazing, for the eyes of all the hundreds and thousands of disciples who stand or sit, naked, and making obeisance to the leader demon. Many have heads of buffalos; many have human heads, male or female, all seeming to be in a daze. Altogether, the event looks like hell. Flames can be seen leaping up in the background. But this hell isn’t just any place: it is our Thai hell. Many disciples wave Thai flags. On the top of the painting are the hand-written words :
‘When the lord demon tells them all that it is the power of the people, the masses throw themselves down in obeisance and worship the god.

Ing responded to Chatriya Nitypolprasert with a very interesting answer to the question about the source of this work. (Chatriya selected the works for this show.)

Ing: “…I saw that most people chose Samak Suntornvej – Thai Rak Thai in a new bottle – (after the Dec.23 election) - I really felt very sad and very tense. The feeling in Bangkok at that time –where people didn’t choose him- was very dark. How stunning it was that, when the evidence of corruption was so clear, the issue of the war on drugs – the killings – the people who chose Samak didn’t care.

Especially recalling the 6 Oct. incident, it is especially tragic. My earlier work (‘Land of Smiles’) didn’t express adequately what I felt, so I wanted to do this piece.

I am not showing contempt for those who voted, but in my feeling, we need a mirror which lets us see reality. People were willing to be tricked. They believe the promises, the dreams created by demons, the tricksters, the politicians who check things out and then cheat and commit fraud. They reflect reality only in our feelings. Perhaps it’s prejudice, but it’s a prejudice felt by many who look at country folk as buffalos. However one puts it, we really do let them deceive us. That is what is so sad.”

Chatriya: “The question, upon seeing this work, must be with the image communicated and the information which appears. Does the master appear to prophesy?”

Ing: “I wanted the image to look like a huge newspaper political cartoon and I intended to use words as in scripture, about fights between justice and injustice; righteousness, unrighteousness, in the world, as more or less black and white.
I wanted the words to sound scriptural, but what I wrote, I created myself. I wanted the style to be sonorous, resonant.

Even though this picture is made with a gesture which refers to the recent election, the use of the words, ‘people-power’ isn’t intended to point to any particular person. I was referring to anyone who uses democracy to trick the masses, who makes the people think that they will be given a voice, power, strength, ‘people’s power.’
The deception tells the people what they want to hear: creating the dreams they want to dream, i.e. ‘Paradise Engineering,’ i.e. propaganda.”

Chatriya: “Are you worried about how people will interpret the picture?”

Ing: “It’s up to them. My task is to only to make the picture. If a work is controversial, an argument resting on reason, analysis is good. Democracy is born from this. We have the right to express ideas and opinions – even if we show our ideas as prejudiced – we can speak directly. People generally have the right to perceive directly what we think of them. It is better than sitting and denying reality that we do have such feelings. Now I’m fed up with denying reality. I’m fed up with all this ‘unanimity’; it’s fake. Society cannot be cured if we don’t rid it of injustice.”

That last sentence is very interesting, i.e. that Ing spoke frankly:
“I’m fed up with the word ‘unanimous’ because it is fake. Society cannot be cured if we don’t rid it of injustice.”
In not too many days after the show opened, Prime Minister Samak Soontornvej responded to newspaper reporters from CNN with confidence about the 6 October, 1976 incident that, “As for me, I didn’t see anyone die except one unlucky fellow who was immolated at Sanam Luang.”

This is the most painful thing that one can say about those who were ‘victims,’ both innocent students and citizens, who were killed so cruelly, and to the relatives of heroes who never received justice out of this event. The words of Samak, which came so easily and irresponsibility, were very cruel to the hearts of these people. He spoke without concern for what people round the world (on CNN) will think of the lies of these sorcerers. He distorted the truth of history because he well knew that in Thai society, ‘Those with power are those who hold the truth.’

As to what Samak tells the people of the world about the October 6 event, there is nothing strange in this. Samak is like this: he never changes. Especially, there is Dr.Chalerm Yubamroong, who tries to pretty things up and help Mr.Samak out of the snare. So he adds some information that a policeman fired his gun and the story came out that a group had been killed, making these tales all the more interesting.

I’m not asking about ‘the October people’ in the People’s Power Party and the old Thai Rak Thai – where they stand on this, or how they are going to defend this. These politicians use the memory of the October history ‘as greatness,’ all of it ‘fresh and good.’ … There are no good deeds which need recalling or repaying. So, there is no use in trying to correct what we hear. What I am interested in is the listeners, especially listeners who voted for Samak as governor of Bangkok and as Prime Minister. I’d like to know what they thought.

It’s a shame that Thai mass media doesn’t work much. They just poke a microphone at Prime Minister Samak, but they don’t inquire into the feelings of the heroes – how do they feel? Not a week after the interview, CNN tried to get together the relatives of the dead heroes to give their opinions about this case. It did not appear in many newspapers – and not on a single TV channel – so you can see that those in power control the media. The pictures of 40 persons killed from the secret files of the public prosecutor and the tale of the sufferings of their families and those connected with the 6 October 1976 incident – none of this went out to the listeners who voted for Samak and the People’s Power Party.

Then in order to get this issue of Oct. 6 from the prime minister, a poll was quoted that looked into this matter, only to find that the people didn’t want to hear about Oct.6. but wanted the government to solve the problem of the economy first – that was primary. If you don’t call this the cleverness of demons, I don’t know what to call it.

In any case, I may be naïve for thinking that the ‘country folk’ (especially in Isarn and the North) didn't get the news fully and completely (like some academics who look at the world optimistically.) Otherwise, they wouldn’t have chosen Taksin and Samak as prime minister (so nastily).

The former leftists student leaders, those accused of the 6 October massacre in the People’s Power Party, and the former Thai Rak Thaicould cooperate politically with extreme rightists like Mr.Samak without hesitation. Some of them even came out making alibis for Samak, saying it’s just his way of talking that’s the problem.

That’s why all those country folk kowtow to the great satanic figures who claim they are the ‘force of the people.’

Paisarn Terapongwit, ‘Art and Politics – Politics and Corruption.’

2010-12-02T00:35:00.000-08:00

Paisarn Terapongwit, ‘Art and Politics – Politics and Corruption,’ in Silpa Wattanatham column of Siam Rath Weekly News magazine, 28 Dec. 2007 – 3 Jan 2008, Yr.55, Vol. 14.

Before this year end issue of Siam Rath Weekly reaches the hands of readers, voting for new members of Parliament in another important election for Thailand will have finished. As for when the Election Commission will have things in order, it will be many months till we know the results.

What is certain is that what comes next will be a lot of dust raised. There will be a rush among political parties which have enough voices to push their party heads forward as cabinet ministers and try to form a government. Will they come together into the marble halls to do their duty, managing and cutting up the cake so that every group and every side gets a satisfactory answer?

The honorable Thai people who are bowed and bent as they bear the burden of life will have to content themselves and be patient for a good long time before the company those honorables [in parliament] have enough free time to turn back and take an interest in ‘moms and dads, brothers and sisters,’ and set to work untangling our people’s problems. And it looks like they will continue to play an important part, if nothing changes, especially until those honorables ‘see the heads’ willing to bow and scrape in the period before entering the polling booth. [translator's note: this paragraph may have some problems]

In this period, the art circle in Bangkok, Thailand has two exhibitions presenting stories about ‘political’ points, exchanging and sharing points of view, opinions, or political experiences for the interested public.

The first show opened on Tuesday, 11 Dec. 2007, ‘the Art of Corruption,’ in which I took part as curator. The second show, ‘Political Demons,’ of paintings by Somsak Raksuwan opened on Monday 17 Dec. 2007 at the Jamchuri Gallery of Chulalongkorn University.

I am going to focus here on the exhibition in which I took part closely as curator. That was the ‘Art of Corruption’show. As to pictures in the show, ‘Political Demons,’ I was still looking for time to travel to visit it. So, I’m not able to take up an angle on the content of that exhibition of the latest work of Somsak Raksuwan to talk about or critique it.

Talking about the ‘Art of Corruption,’ some readers might wonder why the show had that title. The words don’t mean that the exhibition and the artworks celebrate ‘corruption.’

Those concerned with setting up the exhibition have similar ideas, in the same vein, which is ‘Corruption.’ It has happened in Thai society from the past to the present, and even in the future, tomorrow, which doesn’t have a way to get rid of it. The mechanisms or processes are complex, detailed and tricky. They use science and considerable knowledge in many fields and branches to use in corrupt practices in every shape and form.

Eventually, the law is not able to condemn or catch them. You could say that the ‘root’ and ‘seed’ of ‘corruption,’ which continues to flourish, to worm and gnaw its way in, to insinuate itself destructively into Thai society every day, is the product of the wisdom, skill, and ability of people who have knowledge, ‘brains’, with doctoral degrees, with all kinds of letters trailing after their names. This is not the work of the common people.

‘The Art of Corruption’ is like an ironic word which ridicules the real behavior that occurs in Thai society nowadays. It is an era in which many people yield and accept ‘corruption,’ as if it were a vital part of the body of life. There are processes and mechanisms of ‘corruption’ which people like you and I, all very common, can perceive and hear in ‘politics,’ in ‘voting’ and in arranging things generally.

But it doesn’t mean that escaping political circles will solve the problem of ‘corruption’ because the seeds of corruption seem to sprout in every atom of society, even in what appears to be the undistorted truth. But ‘corruption’ outside ‘political circles’ may have less negative or more limited impact on society than what happens in politics.

Along with the exhibition, ‘the Art of Corruption,’ there is a traditional-style shadow-puppet play, ‘City of Lies: Episode of the Art of Cheating/ Fraud,’ by Wasan Sittiket. An installation, the work of Kamol Paosawat, puts forward a trophy to be presented to ‘the individual with works of outstanding nationwide corruption.’ The photographs of Manit Sriwanichpoom pick up on problems of provincial ‘corruption’and its impact on the lives of children. And the people of a Rayong village make a presentation via illustrations with light and sound.

The work entitled ‘Wallpaper’ by Sutee Kunawichayanont offers a pattern of the words ‘cheat’ and ‘clever’ spread over a whole room, dominating the eye of the beholder. And when the lights go on softly, some reflected images appear - the head of a dog on an oily surface which smells of motor oil. It reeks within a partially-closed, square room, which has been painted a very flat black, by Sakharin Kreua-on. Another work consists of four big pieces of cake by Porntaweesak Rimsakul. The cake is rushed, grabbed, cut, and divided, till nothing is left, before disappearing into anyone elses stomach. Many faces and many eyes are left to look at the remains of things which were hidden inside each piece of cake.

The paintings of Ing Kanchanawanich tell the story of the supposed roots of
‘corruption’ which are passed on through Thai society. And four other paintings by Pansar Bhuttharaksa reflect a picture of control, cheating, stealing, taking-over by the powerful, with symbols of all kinds of animals of strange and weird form and appearance, twisted and surreal. In the large, inkjet works by Wit Kanchanapongse, questions are posed in a doubtful mode, i.e. if there were no ‘corruption’ in our country’s political machinery, wouldn’t the lives of the people of Bangkok be less difficult? For example, might they meet fewer problems like the traffic jams which they now face daily?

In terms media, there are cartoons by Kwansawong Atipothi, a professor in the Department of Urban Planning, Faculty of Architecture, CU, who arranged the exhibition. These images may enhance understanding, or knowledge of the impact of ‘corruption’ and how it damages society. The artist offers his point of view very simply, but enjoyably, throught brief feature cartoons and animation.

There are eight other types of poster design works which campaign and protest against corruption through the skills and ideas of eight youthful designers, i.e. Konkanut Silpawisawakul, Wichien Toh, Siva Sirisatichai, Santi Laurasawi, Samret Jaruamornjit, Anutin Wongsakkorn, Ekalak Pienpannawech and the ‘Be Our Friend’ studio, which also joined the exhibition.

If the reader is interested in experiencing these works, ‘the Art of Corruption,’ the show will be on from Sunday, 20 Jan. 2008, open daily from 10.30 – 20.00 hrs (except Mondays), free of charge, at the gallery of the Contemporary Art Center (GCAC) on the ground floor, TPI, at the corner of Nathiwat-Rachanakharin street, which intersects with Janton street near the Macro shopping mall. Or you can make inquiries for more details by phoning 02-678-6666.

Manit Sriwanichpoom, ‘Art After Red May (3) – Who’s Afraid of Red Yellow and Green.’

2010-11-29T01:45:00.000-08:00

Manit Sriwanichpoom, ‘Art After Red May (3) – Who’s Afraid of Red Yellow and Green,’ in the Silpa Wattanatham column of Siam Rath Weekly News magazine, Yr.58, Vol. 9, 19 – 25 Nov. 2010.

Famous artists on the international scene at the age of 49 are the real thing, not empty boasters. Rirkrit Tiravanij is one of them, and he is having an exhibition addressing politics after the burning of the city and the other violent events on and around 19 May, 2010. The show at 100 Tonson Gallery is entitled ‘Rirkrit Tiravanij (Who’s Afraid of Red, Yellow and Green). It is Rirkrit’s first solo show since his return to Thailand in 1998.

Rirkrit Tiravanij’s ‘Who’s Afraid of Red, Yellow and Green?’ is his coming out announcement in a sarcastic mode, a mocking the stance toward politics by this international Thai artist who isn’t linking up with anyone or any color, period.

Rirkrit’s title for the exhibition was taken from the name of the abstract series, ‘Who’s afraid of Red, Yellow and Blue,’ by the New York artist, Barnett Newman (1905 – 1970), whose paintings in this series mocked the expansion of power of the communist party during the cold war.
[Here Manit is citing comments in Rathsaran Sireekan’s article, ‘Rirkrit Tiravanija's debut solo art show focuses on Thailand's current and firmly established socio-political divide,’ in the Outlook section of the Bangkok Post newspaper, 19 Aug.,2010.]

As for me, Rirkrit’s manifesto didn’t surprise me at all, because if we look back at the works that made him famous, they all challenge authority and the meaning of ‘art areas’ like museums and galleries by changing them into creative areas. He made ‘pad Thai’ to eat instead of coming to appreciate paintings and sculptures, according to established tradition. And he posed questions about the meaning of the word ‘art’ – what it really is. If artists like him invite artist friends to have a football team to compete, is that activity art too?

In the postmodern world, in which the meanings of things are unstable, always changing, ‘art’ is also like that. But no one is bold enough to ask about whether the results make things better or worse. The murky uncertainty puts scholars, art critics and audiences into a state of confusion and uncertainty. They don’t know how to ‘take’ these new things.

We shouldn’t deny the influence of Rirkrit’s ‘pad Thai’ art on the artworld whether you like it, hate it, or feel disgusted that nowadays anyone can be an artist without even working up a sweat. The ‘artist’ in this meaning no longer needs to dirty his hands or blacken his fingernails. He need only know how to manage!

If you can’t imagine it, think of how people arrange parties or events – event organizers. They depend on their ability to cooperate with people in many fields, for example, draftsmen, designers, set designers, lighting and sound, musicians, food and beverages (caterers) in order to impress and excite crowds or create new experiences for audiences.

From one point of view, art seems more democratic; anyone can do it. Do it yourself. No need for an institution or for any systematic education; it’s easier to achieve than before. The holiness and power of art and artists which were once monopolized by some groups and by the ranks of the old guard have become less important. There are new art powers arising like the Rirkrit school with their new ‘Ver’ Gallery as the meeting ground.

I’d like to return to the artwork of Rirkrit on the opening day of his show. Gas stoves had been set up with cooking pots, plates, bowls, and dinnerware half filling the gallery, a neat square room whose 4 white walls were beginning to show patches of charcoal drawings.

Students from PSG/SU were providing labor to make the drawings using copies of news photos which Rirkrit had provided. These images showed events calling for democracy since 14 October, 1973; 6 October, 1976; Divisive May, 1992; and the latest demonstrations by both yellow and red parties since the coup of 19 September, 2006.

Today, Rirkrit invites audiences to come to party, to eat curry – red, yellow and green – in the midst of an atmosphere calling for democracy. While waiting for Rirkrit’s cook to steam the rice and heat the curry, the heat from the stoves made the gallery, very warm indeed, too hot to discuss politics. And really, no one felt like talking politics either. Maybe because we had just passed the violence of 19 May such a short time ago. Everyone preferred to party instead.

On the last day of the exhibition, the gallery had a talk by knowledgeable persons and artists to close the event. On that day the 4 white walls were so completely covered with charcoal drawing that everything seemed darkened from ceiling to floor. In the month that passed, the scenes of events and protests with different fates and agendas (hidden) had been drawn over by the young artists till the images had mutually absorbed each other to become a single story, becoming a picture of great power.

The artists responded to questions by saying that he chose these events because they took place in a period when he was growing up and he had heard about them in the news. He believed that the people’s fight for democracy would continue.

Unfortunately, at the discussions closing that show, neither Rirkrit nor any of his famous guests had anything to say about the present political situation – not a single word. The artist himself avoided talking or giving his thoughts about what is happening in Thailand now. He let the audience figure it out for themselves. He did, however, express his opposition to the former US president, the obnoxious George W. Bush.

When the country is in a state of unrest and brokenness, publicizing ones own political stand is something we should do with caution, since one never knows if dear friends share the same ideals or not. This is especially true for Rirkrit, who lives in Chiang Mai – that is his home. Whatever he says can come back to torment him. Nowadays one hears that young men and women artists, great and small, are in conflict among themselves over the state of the country and the central, principle institution.

It would be too much to expect that while the artist is still in a state of fear, we could discover clearly where he stands, or how deeply or shallowly he understands Thai politics. We do know for sure that he does not support ‘violence’ or ‘soldiers.’

The day after the 100 Tonson show, the artist opened a new show entitled ‘erasing 22’09” (unfinished), 24.05.2010’ at Ver Gallery (from 29 Aug. – 16 Oct. 2010) which has a new location at the Kokwua intersection, the site of a clash between Red Shirts and soldiers. That was the first time [i.e. during the recent violence] that the ‘men in black’ were seen, which showed the red-shirted people not to be – as they had claimed - a non-violent movement for democracy.

Rirkrit sent a pencil sketch (drawn by one of his anonymous assistants) to his white artist friend, Nico Dokx. The sketch was a copy of a newspaper photo from the NewYork Times. That photo, taken at a fairly close distance, showed a line of soldiers shooting as they advanced. Nico then used an eraser to wipe away the sketch of the photo while recording the sound of the erasure as it took place. Those sounds are replayed for listeners in the gallery at the exhibition.

In the middle of the very bright and roomy exhibition room, a record player has been set up. The listener can sit and listen to a recording of the ‘erasing of the image.’ The sounds resemble something scraping on metal.

At some points sounds of the blowing and heavy breathing of Nico can be heard, along with the ceaseless noises of passing traffic outside. We must put our ear near to the speaker while listening and try to imagine the slowly disappearing image of the pencil sketch of the soldiers firing their guns at the demonstrators. To testify to what was done, the artist has brought to show as well, in one corner of the room, a picture of the soldiers. It is about the size of a piece of typing paper, and more than half of this record has been erased, though we can still make out the forms of the soldiers holding guns.

The choice of this picture to create this work must surely raise some questions. We well know that the original photograph presented only a fragment of the facts – not the whole event. Those who see the picture could easily misunderstand what happened, or get an inaccurate or distorted view of the reality.

Using this news photo without any explanation from the news report, the audience will not know if the soldiers were using real bullets or rubber bullets to put down the riot. They cannot know whether the protestors, who are not seen in the picture, were armed and were fighting the soldiers. At the Kokwua intersection, the black-suited figures appeared with serious firepower to shoot back at soldiers, wounding, even killing them.

The question arises, then, as to why these two artists chose to focus only on violence from the government side. Why are there no pictures of those black-suited killers on the side of the Red Shirts? We cannot deny the negative image of soldiers from the past as regards calls for democracy. But the demands of the Red Shirt group were questionable and doubtful: were they really calls for democracy? If they were genuine, why were there ‘men in black’ with dangerous weapons at work, too?

Presenting a one-sided image of soldiers is a simplistic and ready-made view of the problems of Thai politics, one which has been put forward by no few white news services (including the New York Times, from which Rirkrit took his photo). It is a very slanted presentation which is indifferent to the fact that the protesting Red Shirts also used violence via their black-suited men. That fact has been intentionally overlooked.

This is one of the problems of looking at Thai politics and of artists’ pictures of the violence.

In any case, if you consider the creative process of the work of Rirkrit and his friends in both shows, their method illustrates ‘[historical] revisionism’ very clearly. Using a piece of charcoal to sketch the picture in, ‘Who is afraid of red, yellow and green’ builds onto what is there, making ‘additions.’ The opposite takes place in ‘Erasing 22’09’ (unfinished), 24.05.2010,’ in which pictures are wiped out, demonstrating the preference for ‘subtracting.’

The artist makes us recall that history should not try to flee from the facts which it tends to obscure in euphemisms or swallow altogether in order to make the story fit with the hidden agenda of those who write it.

Paisarn Tirapongwit, The Results of the 31st Bua Luang Art Competition

2010-11-23T01:33:00.000-08:00

Paisarn Tirapongwit, ‘ The Results of the 31st Bua Luang Art Competition,’ in the Silpa Wattanatham column of Siam Rath Weekly News magazine, 16 – 22 Oct. 2010, Yr.57, Vol. 4.

Organized art competitions in Thailand appear to have begun during the reign of the 6th king. Although, they did have some competitions in the period of the 5th king, they were more contests of skill or craft rather than art shows in the Western sense. According to the documentary records in the archives of the National Library at Tawasukri pier, in the time of the 6th king there were three art competitions organized addressing many branches of the arts in the period from 1917 to 1920.

Even so, these competitions and contests of artistic skill, then and for quite some time to come were not seriously planned official occasions. They were competitions which were staged irregularly, and were not scheduled annually, launched from time to time as it suited the situation or special conditions, for example, as part of the celebrations for the first constitution of Siam after the change in the nation’s form of government.

Things changed with the arrival of Professor Corrado Feroci, a young Italian sculptor who, for political reasons, changed his name and his nationality to Thai during the Second World War. He became Prof. Silpa Bhirasri. Having entered the civil service in Siam under the 6th king, he joined with members of the court of Siam to write a curriculum for studying and teaching art along the lines of a Western European art academy. The institution which eventually opened for study was the School of Fine Arts (1934).

Later, when Field Marshall Plaeck Pibulsongkram was the prime minister, this school was upgraded to the level of a university, and was given the new name of Silpakorn (1943). When it first opened, there were only two departments – painting and sculpture and just sculpture.

In 1949, Prof. Silpa began to arrange art competitions as a showplace for the creative works of the young men and women graduates in painting and sculpture. Interested persons from outside the university who were interested in making works of art, who had skill, and who were ready to compete with work of their own to show the public were also invited to participate. The competition was a mechanism to stimulate the development of artistic skill and expertise. At the same time, it was an invitation to the people to meet and acquaint themselves with kinds of artworks which were still a novelty and very unusual for Thai society in those bygone days.

As to the competitive stages that grew out of the early efforts and lobbying of Prof.Silpa Bhirasri (who was very well known in later times), his work was carried on continuously with activities, competitions and contests in the various branches of the visual arts up till the present. The well known competition which he started during his tenure at Silpakorn University, is the National Art Exhibition, of which the 55th showing was just recently completed this September, 2009.

The Bua Luang Painting Competition/Exhibition is another important ongoing arena to test skills in the visual arts. It is the second oldest show after the National. Although Silpkorn University plays a vital role as an organizer, the primary supporting agency which stages the Bua Luang show is the Bangkok Bank Foundation.

Between the National Exhibition and the Bua Luang, there are some distinctive points of difference. First of all, the forum for the National Exhibition is open to all branches of art, all techniques, and all materials, whether in painting, sculpture, or mixed media. Each kind of art is classified and judged in its own class, all being divided and judged in distinct groups.

By contrast, the Bua Luang is a competitive stage for paintings only. This show selects and awards prizes in only one field. Hence, artworks in the fields of sculpture, graphic art, and installation cannot compete for any of the cash awards in this arena.

Although they accept only paintings, the rules of the Bua Luang competition also divide paintings on the basis of characteristics of form/ style into 2 or 3 types, according to conditions of the show and the judging from year to year.

Early on, when the competition first started, the panel of judges divided works into two categories, i.e. traditional Thai painting and contemporary painting. Nowadays, however, the competition recognizes 3 groups when awarding prizes i.e. in traditional Thai painting, contemporary Thai painting, and contemporary painting.

By contemporary painting is meant works in a contemporary style which clearly show influence from the West. These paintings have many characteristics that are seen generally nowadays. Then there are the other two groups, i.e. ‘Paintings with traditional Thai form’ and ‘Paintings with a traditional Thai approach.’ These last two classifications might make anyone feel perplexed, confused and surprised. What’s the difference, one may ask, between ‘form’ and ‘approach’?

‘Thai painting in traditional style’ means paintings which follow the style and line of traditional Thai painting. They are works which clearly carry on what is handed down from ancient Thai painting as the important element. Some details may be developed and changed from the work and teachings of ancient Thai master painters of the past. This category of works generally [and distinctively] recall their ancient Thai heritage.

The content of works in this category express and as a rule revolve around the history of the Buddha, stories from the Triphumi and the Ramakien, or imaginative images of heavenly cities. Quoting and interpreting Buddhist teachings, these paintings tend to symbolic reflections with characteristics in a more restricted range, differing among themselves in skill, taste and the personality and organization of the structure of color, atmosphere, etc.

As to ‘Thai painting with a traditional approach’, these are works which use traditional Thai art forms, but which mingle and mix elements which have a modern character like Western art. These paintings may use a myriad of materials to communicate their creative expression. As to the content presented, there is much more diversity than in traditional Thai art. Besides Buddhist stories from history and philosophy, religion, the Triphumi, the Ramakien, hell and heaven, the content of these paintings ranges from past stories to present day events.

Another important and special characteristic of the Bua Luang competition is that it is the only forum in Thailand that is open to traditional Thai art in a myriad of forms and styles. The competition is unique in its support for this kind of development.

About the 31st Bua Luang in 2009, which opened on 7 August and ran until 23 November, if you ask about my feelings and opinions generally about the works, judging and selection, I found hardly anything of interest in the 58 works selected to show or in the prizes awarded.

Whether in terms of form/style, technique, method or content presented in the works which I considered and surveyed briefly, they were largely indifferent, an indistinguishable blur. As I wandered past, virtually none were able to make any impact or bring my leisurely stroll to a halt.

Compared with the last Bua Luang, the 30th, in 2008, I think that the works from that show still leave an interesting after-image which call up more emotion and thought, have more color and life than we find in this 31st show.

This is not to say that there are no interesting works at all in the 31st Bua Luang. However, what I found by and large was very familiar… things I had seen before. And as to my own feelings, and the desire for something new, from this exhibition of the works of young men and women, there was Tanakorn Buaplod’s rendering of monitor lizards biting and tearing chickens to pieces. One has seldom seen such a cold-blooded and implacable depiction of horrific violence.

Another picture in which skill in painting is very clear is Pacharapong Meesin’s depiction of a smashed, smiling face dripping with sticky, cloudy, thick, messy pus. It is a presentation full of feeling, a presentation luminous with bruises, both in concept and content.

Another is a painting by Tanawat Suriyathongtham of rowdy, mocking crowds jeering from inside a large red mouth. Karuna Panumet presents a face overlaid with shadows, the complex of lines and tracery soften and radiate power with new ideas which shake emotions, feelings and imagination – an experience of the heart for people like me who want more than just pretty pictures created skillfully by experts. Art-makers comment on or argue about or relate to something. They have exchanges with the many eyes and faces of the audiences, with everyone who pushes themselves to make the journey to see all these works.

Though there are few from the many, I still hope to see more new works from Tanakorn, Tanawat, Pacharapong and Karuna, and from all those young people whose works express the changes and differences, the ceaseless movement of the process of ideas which are reflected in the outstanding works which they bring to show. They develop things that are new, different and varied. Their’s are not works which revolve in place, going nowhere, round and round with the same technique, form and style, unable to struggle and search for a way out.

We will have to continue and follow up on the works of this new generation of young men and women as they send their work out to society and the public in the days ahead. Tomorrow, will we see changes, or will we see the same pictures as before, brought out again and again, the same picture with some minimal change in perspective and a feeble scattering of new details? Until tomorrow then: please follow step by step. We’ll see what comes next.