Filipino Artist MM Yu presents her first solo project in Indonesia entitled Miscellaneous at the Art Dept by VWFA. Known for her obsessive photographic observations of the urban everyday Yu reframes and categorises the banal, the overlooked and the abject to create hypnotic visual moments that are at once distant and intimate. For Miscellaneous she focuses on the neighbourhood sari sari convenience stores found all over the Philippines, to strike up a light hearted conversation with the Goods Dept, as a concept design store located in one of the most exclusive shopping malls in Jakarta.

Sari sari literally means ‘variety’ in Tagalog and are similar to the ubiquitous Indonesian warung. They form an important part of local communities selling a variety of products such as food, cigarettes and household goods to provide low cost convenience for their customers. In Miscellaneous, Yu photographed over two hundred different stores in and outside the capital city of Manila, which were then organised into a series of photographic grids. Creating a mosaic like glimpse into the similarity and differences of each, Yu surveys their visual appeal from the colourful exteriors to the repetitious display methods of the products on sale, which in this context becomes a subtle parody of the carefully articulated layout of the Goods Dept itself.

Adding to Yu’s extensive archive of objects, people and place this body of work communicates her ongoing curiosities and obsessions with looking and relooking at the world around her. Creating an inquisitive portrait of the Philippines and the constructs of consumption, her work allows for silent moments of rediscovery, of the things and places we often take for granted, the magic of the everyday.

ABOUT THE ARTIST:

As a photographer MM Yu compulsively documents the urban and everyday environment, creating a multifaceted archive of visually compelling, enchanting and disturbing images of and around Manila. By re-presenting and re-framing the forgotten, rejected and overlooked she reveals quiet moments of aversion and affection, beauty and banality.
MM Yu (b. 1978, the Philippines) obtained her Bachelors of Fine Art, majoring in painting, from the University of Philippines in 2001. She has had numerous solo shows, recently including Inventory, Galerie Zimmerman Kratochwill, Austria, 2011; If You Could Hear a Pin Drop, West Gallery, Manila, 2010; Waste Not, Want Not, Finale Art Gallery, Manila, 2010; Either/Or, Finale Art File, Manila, 2009; Subject Object, Mag:net, Katipunan, Manila, 2009 and Rescind, West Gallery, Manila, 2008. She has participated in group shows including, Serial Killers/Welcome to the Club, Taksu, Kuala Lumpur and Singapore, 2011; Salvation in a Nest of Vipers, Lost Projects y3k Gallery, Melbourne, Australia, 2011; Bastards of Misinterpretation- Doing Time on Filipino Time, Freies Museum, Berlin, 2010, The Inversion of the Ideal, Galerie Zimmermann Kratochwill, Graz, Austria, 2010; Beyond Frame, aUTS Gallery, Sydney Australia, 2008 and Manila Envelope, Honolulu, Hawaii, 2007. Yu was shortlisted for the Ateneo Art awards in 2011, she was a finalist in the Sovereign Art Prize in 2010, a recipient of the Cultural Center of the Philippines 13 Artists Award in 2009 and the Ateneo Art Gallery-Common Room Bandung Residency Grant in 2007. She currently lives and works in Manila.

Entang Wiharso

Entang Wiharso studied Painting at the Fine Art Department of the Indonesian Institute of Arts, Yogyakarta, Indonesia. In 2010, his solo show “Love Me or Die” took place at the Galeri National Indonesia as well as following group shows: “Rainbow Asia” at the Hangaram Art Museum, Seoul Arts Center, Seoul, Korea; “The Grass Looks Greener Where You Water It”at Art Paris Guest, Grand Palais-Champs Elysees, Paris, France; ”Contemporaneity-Indonesian Contemporary art” at the Museum of Contemporary Art, Shanghai, China and Bergamo, Italy; and at the Prague Biennale 4, Prague, Czech Republic.

Entang Wiharso divides his time between the United States and Indonesia. His paintings and installations combine personal, Western and Indonesian mythologies and cast a critical eye on international politics, environmental issue and cultural stereo types and prejudces.

He is indeed drawing on history and mythology from his home culture of Indonesia; he also reponds to Western culture and globalisation since making his second home in Rhode Island. Much has been written about the symbolism in Wiharso’s art as it relates to the history of Indonesia, his personal biography, and the global art market more generally. Yet, without any translation, one easily recognises figures, expressions and powerful scenarios that have an emphatic message.

Iswanto Hartono

Iswanto Hartono was born in Purworejo in 1972. He is now living and working in Jakarta. From 1991-1996 he studied at the Faculty of Architecture, Tarumanegara Universty, Jakarta, and from 1998-2000 studied at the Faculty of Fine Arts, Jakarta Institute of Arts. In 2000-2002 Hartono studied Architecture, majoring in Urban Development in New Delhi, India. In 2003-2004, he received a grant from freeman Asian Art Award from the Freeman Foundation, United States. In 2010, Hartono made a solo exhibition in Canna Gallery entitled “Museum of Innocence”. He has exhibited his works in Singapore, Tokyo, Europe and Seoul.

In recent times, Iswanto Hartono has been involved in many site-specific and installation project. With his architecture background, Hartono’s artworks engage with dimensions of space and question one’s perceptional relations between space and history, Guold/Gold is an illumination of his interest in using text as visual code and as a tool to investigate history from the perspective of common people

Wisnu Auri

Wisnu Auri was born 1981 in Yogyakarta where he studied at the Fine Arts Department of the Indonesian Institute of the Arts. He has been involved in many art project and group exhibitions before he held his solo show titled “The Other Side of Beauty” in Galeri Canna, 2010. He is one of the young promising Indonesia artist and has exhibited his work in Singapore galleries.

 As a conceptual arist, Wisnu expresses himself in both two-dimensional and three dimensional formats, and the clean lines of his installations stand in stark contrast to his drawings, which appear disorganised and chaotic. The artist’s seemingly perfect display of everday objects contains multiple layers of meanings in term of its word usage and aesthetics, which is an example of how Wisnu deftly combines ideas, language and visual elements in his art. There is a spirit of spontaneity throughout Wisnu’s art, Quite unusual in the Indonesian cotext nowadays.

Solo Exhibition by Aditya Novali

03 December 2011

at Galeri Canna, Jakarta Art District, Grand Indonesia.

Indoscape: A “Geo-History”

Code 1

Many still perceive that works displayed in art museums as sacred objects. This is despite the abundance of critical views and thoughts regarding the sacredness of museum pieces. Attempts at sanctification can be seen in various rules put in place by museums, in such a way as to distance these works from the public. For instance, it is now generally known that museum visitors are not allowed to touch these works. Although we must admit that such measures are necessary for safety purposes—to avoid damage, for instance—sometimes these attempts can go too far. The placement of barricades has alienated these museum pieces, making them inaccessible.

In 1970s, when critical opinions began questioning these ‘isolationist’ policies, there emerged art works that are created to actually invite/encourage public participation. Not limited to the invitation to touch, these works actually gain more meaning through public intervention, for example: pulling a lever to cause various elements of the art work to move. Works such as this are still being made even now, emerging within the development of contemporary art even though they are no longer made as responses to the sanctification of museum works. They have become a language of expression—an idiom.

Aditya Novali’s works—from the beginning of his career until this exhibition today—demonstrate this tendency. The basis of his works is not wholly influenced by this particular branch of contemporary art that opposed the sanctification of museum pieces. Aditya Novali’s works tend towards the concept of play. It seems that he has extended an invitation for the audience to play, to join in on a game of snakes and ladders, monopoly, checkers, or chess. This concept of Play influences the shaping of his idioms.

In the beginning, his works offer an intricate game/play concept. These early works come with a set of rules that are often placed next to his works. These works draw public attention, but not because of its inaccessibility. They are appealing because they are unusual, conveying a depth of thought. For his art works, Aditya Novali found himself nominated for the 1997 and 1999 Indonesia Art Award. In 2003, his works were selected for inclusion in the 1st CP Open Biennale at the Indonesian National Gallery.

The complexity of his games tend to portray Aditya Novali’s works as having a conceptual lean—even though they are not based on conceptual art conventions of the ‘70s contemporary art scene. His works are created based on certain thought concepts, and he places emphasis on ideas. This trait is quite the opposite to creative processes based on emotions, feelings, and the kind of idiom-building that often begins without ideas whatsoever.

The tendency to present conceptual works can be seen as a sign of development in Aditya Novali’s works. He began painting from an early age, and in the 1980s drew much attention in the children circuit as a child painter and as a puppeteer (dalang)—a skill which he learned from his mother, a graduate from Indonesian Art Institute, Yogyakarta. Despite studying architecture at Parahyangan University, Bandung—he graduated in 2002—Aditya Novali has never abandoned painting. His paintings, until mid-90s, are mainly expressive paintings, paying special attention to idiom-building, which gradually evolve into almost abstract images.

In time, the emphasis on ideas within his creative process shows a major change. He finally abandoned the exploration of idioms based on emotions and feelings. This exploration has been replaced by creation of visual forms (which are quite limitless), based on visual experiences—which contain artistic perceptiveness. As with design processes, these visual forms are more receptive to ideas, concepts, and thoughts.

Between 2006 and 2008, Aditya Novali pursued art education at the Design Academy Eindhoven, the Netherlands. This institute of higher education in art is known for placing an emphasis on non-conventional problem-solving and thought processes. Despite the word “design” in its name, this academy breaks the boundaries of art and design. Thus it seems fitting that Aditya Novali passed the entrance examination to this academy because his works [also] transcend the boundaries of art and design; regarded as an artist who applies thought onto the development of idioms. After a grueling learning process—as is the method of the academy—Aditya Novali graduated with a degree in conceptual design.

Upon his return from the Netherlands, Aditya Novali began developing game/play concepts in his works. He finally arrived at a concept called “rotatable paintings”—paintings that are ‘versatile’. The paintings are made out of pieces of wood, constructed into triangular tubes with three surfaces. These triangular tubes are placed parallel to one another (either horizontally or vertically). Each tube can be turned independently. By turning each triangular tubes, the audience can choose the images and combination of images painted on the sides. To cater the public’s choices, Aditya Novali must take into account every compositional combination, that they must all yield pleasing and meaningful results.

Code 2

On his participation in the 2nd CP Biennale (2005), held at Museum Bank Indonesia, Jakarta, Aditya Novali presented a large-scale steel construction as a representation of spatial arrangements. Despite its bareness, this construction strongly conveys the image of a group of apartments. In this construction, Aditya Novali has placed hundreds of small lights with several options. By pressing buttons, the public can explore various light possibilities. This exploration inspires a strong impression to the audience; this large-scale metal construction of apartments can expand into a city.

This particular piece demonstrates yet another tendency in Aditya Novali’s works of the 2000s. Here he shows his interests in urban issues. He especially paid attention to addressing spatial problems in urban living: the structure of living spaces and spaces in daily life, including public spaces.

Early 2000s, before embarking on his education in the Netherlands, Aditya Novali made a number of works about spaces, on transparent surfaces. Here, he did not create dwellings on a city-wide scale. Instead he created a representation of living space (an apartment) on a smaller scale. Even though it is not a realistic representation of an apartment, this work conveys the question of living spaces in an urban proportion, where people must adjust to dwindling living spaces, and the threat of privacy loss.

He did not stop at making three-dimensional forms. Aditya Novali also made photographs of these forms, assisted by various possibilities in lighting and shadow effects, resulting in some very interesting slides and photographs. At that time, he did have an idea to create video art, although it would end up unrealized.

Nowadays, the question of urban living in Aditya Novali’s works has become even clearer. He uses the concept of rotatable painting to convey a sense of spatial arrangement. In previous developments, his rotatable paintings often depict landscapes. However, most recently, he has used rotatable paintings to convey spatial dimensions in his flats and apartments. Here, urban inquiries can be conceived clearly. These are the types of works being presented by Aditya Novali in his solo exhibition at Galeri Canna, Jakarta Art District.

Aditya Novali’s work, Unrepresentable Freedom (2011) shows how this combination still needs public intervention to work. It depicts the façade of an eight-storey flat—each rotatable section represents one storey. The audience can choose from several options. However, each option conveys a dark and gloomy sense, because all the windows on every storey are metal-barred windows, such as those found in prisons or colonial military-type buildings.

Through this work, Aditya Novali offers a public dilemma. There is a particular discourse behind it. This work can be connected to a book by John Turner—first published in the early 1970s—Freedom to Build, which criticizes the construction of low-cost housing around the world. The concept of low-cost housing began in 1915. Then, in 1940, it was expanded into a global concept, especially applied to low-cost housing construction projects funded by World Bank. This concept is still being applied today. In Indonesia, the application of this concept can be seen in the construction of simple (RS) and very simple (RSS) housing.

In his research, John Turner discovered how this concept is ineffective in improving the quality of life and welfare of the lower classes. He argues that this concept does not allow spaces for involvement by its future tenants, only spaces calculated in terms of economical units. According to John Turner, this concept reflects middle-class housing in early 20th century America. It is also a concept that is inappropriate for people living in poor countries, both culturally and economically.

In John Turner’s view, the construction of low-cost housing can become more effective and even cheaper when developers take cultural aspects into account. This cultural approach invites the involvement of local population in planning and [self-]constructing low-cost housing. However, this attempt requires the will to draw up numerous budgets—especially on a World Bank-level—and avoid using a “one size fits all” budget. In Freedom to Build, John Turner lays down the basis of his ideas on low-cost housing. He reminds us that the word “housing”, though currently perceived as a noun (house), actually has its roots in the verb (to house). As such, it is more appropriate to look at housing as a verb, reflecting the activity of building/constructing a house for the purpose of fulfilling basic, personal needs that exist on every social scale.

Aditya Novali’s works in this exhibition, Metropolitan Landscape (2011),  Silent Scream (2011), and Metropolitan Monument (2011) underline John Turner’s view. In these works, Aditya Novali explores the question of space in urban housing. He expresses many forms of human struggles when faced with limitations of their living spaces. The symbols for death and destruction in his works show Aditya Novali’s vision on the variety of impossibilities in urban self-actualization. He emphasizes a commonly-understood theme of alienation in urban-metropolitan living.

The reality in Aditya Novali’s expressions, is an Indonesian urban reality that emerged at the end of the 19th century, during the colonial period. It began simultaneously with urban development at that time, followed by the emergence of civil society. A number of historians call this the “capitalist era”. The development of trade and private [crop] estates—once the monopoly of colonial government—has shifted more political power to civil society, which in turn forced the colonial government to provide public facilities.

At the same time, there was an increase in the number of indigenous administrative workers, entering the bureaucratic ranks of the colonial government. This group helped form the middle class, well-educated and earning a higher income than the rest of the indigenous population. They had the same level of awareness, conviction, and ability to think as Dutch middle-class citizens.

This condition prevailed until the early 1950s. Until then, Indonesian cities largely remained the same, with little change. At that time, many cities in Indonesia still played host to various residential areas with rows of houses that represented some sort of attempt at urban planning. There were “ordinary” houses for staff workers—not too large—built close to centers of public institutions, such as bureau offices, hospitals, and railway networks. There were also Art-Deco style housing estates in uptown locations, far from trade centers and government offices situated downtown. Residents of these houses were high-ranking government officials, judges, prosecutors and other professionals (doctors, jurisprudence scholars, architects, engineers, scientists, teachers, and accountants). They formed the middle-classes, who wielded enough power to dictate the direction of Indonesian political development. This was somewhat reflected in the 1955 General Election.

This condition changed when in 1957 the then president Ir. Soekarno began his socialist-style Guided Democracy. Subsequent governments began to systematically eliminate criticisms and oppositions; parliaments were silenced and this circumstance marked the ‘death’ of intellectual traditions. Social development outside the political sphere—in such aspects as welfare, education, residential planning, urban development—also fell victim to uncertainty. Urban infrastructure began showing signs of decay, following an economic crisis that drove population movement from villages to towns.

This aimless development did not alleviate even with the change of power in 1966. A new government emerged under President Soeharto, who centered his government’s program around economic issues. Economic developments were centralized in major cities. The flow of urbanization increased dramatically. The dilapidation of urban infrastructures occurred in both large and middle-sized cities. This, in turn, influenced people’s welfare, when assessed through their living conditions, distribution of clean water, and transportation routes—as the economic artery. What was left of urban planning, which was present at the beginning of this republic, disappeared completely.

This historical condition, which influenced urban problems and development of civil society, shows the importance of the president’s role and the establishment of public policies in determining the trajectory of civil development, as reflected in their living spaces. Aditya Novali expresses this dilemma through two of his art works: Invisible Space (2011) and Invisible Structure (2011).

The subject matter of these two works is Istana Merdeka (lit. Palace of Independence), in Jakarta, a colonial structure that has been the seat of government since colonial eras. Istana Merdeka is the front structure of the presidential palace complex that faces Monas (the National Monument park). The state flag, Merah Putih (lit. red and white) was raised here for the first time in December 1949, following the transfer of power (Indonesia represented by Sultan Hamengkubuwono IX) where the Netherlands formally recognized Indonesia’s sovereignty (through a recorded statement by the Dutch Queen Juliana). The rear part of this structure is known as Istana Negara (State Palace).

In his works, Aditya Novali presents Istana Merdeka in maquette-model-form. Invisible Space is a maquette made of transparent sheets; meanwhile, Invisible Structure is an outline of Istana Negara made out of metal rods. These maquettes are presented over an uplighted neon-box. This theatrical lighting strongly encourages the audience to question the leadership tradition in Indonesian politics.

Code 3

Aditya Novali has often stated that he tends to create a series of works. A House is not a Home Series is the name he has given to a set of works that represents urban problems through spatial construction. Also, works created around Istana Merdeka as subject matter—including a rotatable painting illuminated with LED, The End One Day (2011)—is called the Infinity Series.

A serial work is often used by artists for linguistic exploration. In contrast, Aditya Novali’s serial work reflects an exploration of the mind. In his serial works, the wealth of idioms—explored separately—are combined. In both his serial works, we can find various idioms—rotatable paintings, a concept of play, spatial arrangements, and illumination—which either together or separately can be used to convey a message.

Aditya Novali’s serial works reflect his attempts to avoid narrowing down the issues at hand (that one problem can only have one answer and vice versa, also, one solution, conclusion, or answer). His serial works demonstrate his belief that one problem can have multi-dimensional issues it must contend with. The inquiries in his series become complex because of their inter-connectedness. The A House is not a Home Series, which carries an urban inquiry, can immediately turn into a national Indonesian urban problem when connected to his Infinity Series.

Parallel to these, Aditya Novali has also created another serial work for this exhibition, Identifying Indonesia Series. Once again, we can draw a connection between this and “A House is not a Home Series” and “Infinity Series”. It has inspired the title of his solo exhibition at Galeri Canna, Jakarta Art District—Indoscape: A “Geo History”.

The four works in Identifying Indonesia series play with the Indonesian map—which in turn inspires the term “Indoscape”. The title of these four works suggests his thought process: the process, the chaos, the history, and the contemporary. The Process (2011), is an Indonesian map made out of metal rods, presented in an aquarium-like thin-glassed box. In the beginning, this map of Indonesia will not be visible as it is fully covered in packed wax. The wax will melt, gradually revealing the map, as those rods are heated using electricity. In the Chaos (2011), the Indonesian map is presented floating inside a glass box filled with water. The components of this map—the islands of Sumatera, Java, Borneo, etc—are upside down because of air pumped into the water.

The History (2011), which looks similar to the two works mentioned above, is static—there are no movements, there are no process at work. Inside the glass box are thousands of little skulls, packed closely together like peanuts in a jar. Using contrasting black-white color, and nuances of various shades of human skin, Aditya Novali arranged these colors to vaguely present the Indonesian map. Unlike the History, The Contemporary (2011) is far more static and requires public participation. The Indonesian map is made up of hundreds of LED points, which can be activated through a number of buttons placed in front of the glass box. When no button is  pressed, the LED stays dark. On the other hand, pushing (a) button(s) will reveal the image of either Sumatera, Bali, Java, or other islands. However, these buttons are left unlabeled. Not having a way of knowing, upon pressing a particular button, the audience must accept whatever image is presented to them. They cannot decide beforehand to search, for instance, “Where’s Sulawesi, my birthplace?”

The reality Aditya Novali wishes to question with this particular series is not limited to a socio-political reality. Through it, Aditya Novali tries to look back to Indonesia’s nation-building process. By tracing all the thought processes involved in creating works in this Identifying Indonesia series, we can see how he has lengthened space and time in the reality he faces. The Indonesian reality is not just today’s reality.

As such, Aditya Novali’s works cannot be said as merely providing social commentary. Although we cannot separate his works from social inquiries—including current socio-political issues—the question of reality in his works are human inquiries in relation to history.

The Indonesian maps in the Identifying Indonesia series, demonstrate a “geo-historical” approach. Placed in parallel with the term “geo-politic”, we can surmise that “geo-history” is an attempt to observe history through geography. Aditya Novali observes Indonesia not just as a Republic—a post-colonial nation that has adopted the same historical colonial areas. Aditya Novali questions Indonesia as the Nusantara archipelago (nusa-antara; the nation in-between), also historically known as Indos-nesos. In geography, Indos-nesos is used to identify the nations that occupy the islands between continental Asia and the Pacific Ocean (more than 350 ethnic groups in all), all of which do not necessarily share the same ancestry—with no certain identity and roots.

Through a historical point of view, we can discover accounts that describe various upheavals across the history of this archipelago. In the 1st century CE, The Srivijaya kingdom (from South Sumatra) successfully embarked on global expansion through maritime excellence, preceding European colonialism by many centuries. In the first year of the new century, Srivijaya managed to rule over a large portion of South-East Asia, with Natrang, Vietnam as the location of one of its furthest border. Historic upheavals are documented in various tomes, such as Pararaton, written in the 12th century; and Negarakertagama, written in the 14th century. Both texts record the founding, rise, and fall of the final Hindu-Buddhist kingdoms in Java: Singasari and Majapahit. Both of these texts, written in different eras, demonstrate similar visions when recording political tensions between the kings and nobles; colored by betrayal, murders, coup d’etat, and constantly changing political policies.

Connecting the inquiries behind the three series of works, we can see how Aditya Novali is questioning the “fate and destiny” of the people living in this archipelago, an inquiry spanning twenty-one decades. This inquiry is not looking for concrete or definite answers, and it demonstrates a thought process on a philosophical level. This trait is reflected in Warrior of Change (2011), one work within the Identifying Indonesia series.  This work represents a field covered in human bones, resembling a mass grave placed on top of the soil. Through this work, Aditya Novali wishes to express that there are no absolute deaths in history. Looking closely, we can see repetitive kinetic movements (jerky movements) on this pile of bones. This work strongly conveys Aditya Novali’s desire to describe human’s survival spirit within this particular geographical space, a spirit that persists to change human fate and conditions. One major occurrence in the geo-history of Nusa Antara is the conveyance of the name, Indonesia, and a clear statement of the people within this geography proclaiming themselves as one nation.

Code 4

In January 2012, Art Stage Singapore 2012 will take place at Marina Bay Sands, Singapore. This art event, inaugurated last year, is a contemporary art fair that claims to have been patterned upon the Asian Aesthetic, which must be differentiated from Western Aesthetics. It is the brainchild of Lorenzo Rudolf, the art fair organizer noted for breaking art fair traditions in the beginning of the 21st century by presenting a contemporary art fair in the middle of Basel Art Fair. Lorenzo Rudolf applies this concept on Art Stage Singapore. At the Art Stage Singapore 2012, Lorenzo Rudolf will present around 30 curated project presentations.

Aditya Novali has been chosen to participate in this contemporary art exhibition. He will present four works that are extensions of the A House is not a Home series, highlighting urban problems. These works are first presented here, at Galeri Canna, Jakarta Art district, for his solo exhibition, before their 2012 Singapore showing. All four works present an imaginary real estate project

The work proposed as the main object in the upcoming presentation is The Wall: Asian (Un)Real Estate Project (2011). It is presented in the form of a large-scale maquette. Similar to Unrepresentable Freedom, Metropolitan Landscape, Silent Scream, and Metropolitan Monument, this maquette is a series of triangular tubes constructed vertically. Each side of the tube depicts part of 160 miniature rooms, representing 160 apartment units.

Like his previous works, each triangular tube provides three options, one for each side. The first side depicts a stack of bricks. When all triangular tubes on The Wall: Asian (Un)Real Estate Project are set to this first side, then the finished result would show a thick brick wall. The second side shows prison doors. Similarly, when all tubes are set to this side, the maquette will convey a sense of “prison apartment”. The third side is the façade of an apartment with large picture windows, allowing the public to view inside.

Aditya Novali’s maquette for this imaginary real estate project is also furnished with a video presentation The End is the Beginning (2011), a stop-motion video Inhabitant (2011), and a photo presentation Postcard of Living (2011). All of these elements offer details into each room of the 160 apartment units in The Wall: Asian (Un)Real Estate Project. All of them offer a dark, gloomy look into lives within this three-sided narrow apartment. The video presentation, The End is the Beginning, provides a glimpse into three different scenes of destruction in these apartment units. The first scene shows the apartment being devoured by fire; a flood in the second; and the third shows the apartment engulfed by sand.

This presentation of imaginary real estate project is a parody. It is not meant to be a sales promotion tool, but instead it is intended to scare “prospective customers”. Through this work, Aditya Novali questions backgrounds of real estate projects with a social dimension (allegedly to improve social welfare). This idea has a global scope.

The term “real estate” appears in the English language lexicon in the 15th century. This is a legal term referring to land that has actual and objective existence (real), not just a land that should be, thought to be, or imagined to be there. At that time, it was not so easy to look at or visit lands, especially cultivated lands that could have certain prospects attached to it, since the journey would involve a large and costly logistical undertaking. Then, it became illegal to offer a prospective land for sale, when in actuality the land was unpopulated or difficult to cultivate.

At that time, the understanding of “real estate” did not have a social dimension at all. When real estates began to be developed into cultivated land, it led to some social problems. Despite having left the Dark Ages, and even though there were already some attempts to defend the lower classes in the 12th century, 15th century Europe was largely still patterned towards absolute power—concrete thoughts on democracy did not emerge until the 17th century.

This absolute power was reflected in the social structure that separated the upper-classes from the lower-classes. The royals and nobility controlled almost all aspects of life. They were well-educated, rich, and controlled almost all aspects of trade and economy, as well as controlling most cultivated land. Their alliance with religion (the church) within the sphere of dogmatic politics further cemented their absolute power. Within this sort of social structure, the majority of the population was made up of the lower classes, who were heavily exploited—marginalized in all aspects including in the development of real estate. They were an uneducated class with no real awareness of their rights. They suffered in terms of physical welfare, and their lives were haunted by the fear carefully cultivated by church-driven dogmatic politics.

Until today, the development of real estate is still seen as a highly profitable business. However, as stated by John Turner, since the 1940s, real estate development has begun to show its social dimension. The concept of low-cost housing development was first conceived as means to improve the welfare of the lower-classes.

Like John Turner, Aditya Novali questions how far business calculations behind real estate development can honestly be relegated to second place, to give priority for a new concept of social welfare. There are many complex problems that must be addressed in order to develop real estate in a social way, to avoid purely business calculations and corruption. Such problems include: the re-assignment of the great amount of low-interest borrowing from World Bank, drawing up suitable budgeting plans in poor/underprivileged countries for such projects, the involvement of architects and contractors, land acquisition, and other logistical problems to ensure the efficient running of these projects. John Turner saw the consequences in the 1970s. However, his critiques were ineffectual; World Bank programs, especially in Asia, remain unchanged (unchallenged).

The title, The Wall: Asian (Un)Real Estate Porject, notes that the thought processes behind Aditya Novali’s works do not stop at the contention surrounding low-cost housing. The paradoxical use of “(un)real” in the title shows that, fundamentally, the problem of low-cost housing is related to different perceptions given to the term “the real”. We note that historically, the term “real estate” appeared first, and would heavily influence people’s understanding of a subsequent term, “the real”.

It began with an occulocentric civilization, as introduced by ancient Greek philosopher, Plato. This type of civilization placed the eyes—the ocular—not just as another sensory organ, but as the primary way to understand “the real”: the eyes leading the way of  how human perceive reality. When 19th century philosophical understanding on “the real” appeared, the term “real estate” contributed significantly to this occulocentric understanding of “the real”.

“The Real’ is no longer something that can be seen, but also something that has material qualities. Its presence can be proven and not just imagined. This phenomenon also occurred outside the English Language. The understanding of “real” in Pre-19th century France followed Latin comprehension of the word. Here, “real” is closely related to “things”, that are not always objective—“seeing things” is an English idiom that can mean hallucination. However, since the 19th century, the French word for “real” adopted a similar understanding as that in English. Upon this logic then, the understanding of the term “unreal” is exactly opposite to that of “the real”, and can also be seen as things or conditions that “do not make sense”.

Based on this perception, it is easily understandable why the term “housing” has become a noun, and that its meaning contains a material association. Looking at the architectural side, the term “housing” contains the association to order, certain system and organization that can be designed. This perception view welfare in low-cost housing—a minimal living space, in relation to income, economic efficiency, privacy, and its connection to the community—as a calculable and measurable phenomena. Within this context, self-developed housing as found in many traditional communities—UNESCO once dubbed it as architecture without architect—is considered as vernacular housing, which does not adhere to architectural mores. This type of housing may seem unplanned and unorganized. When they appear in cities, they are called ‘slums’.

Asians do not necessarily subscribe to the same perception. Looking at the widespread application of Yin-Yang philosophy, it might be possible that the understanding of “the real” in Asia is not a wholly positive one. The presence of “the real” in this reality, has its balance in the “unreal” realm. In the Yin-Yang philosophy, this balance lies underneath the continuous change in reality—such as those found in theories about entropy, or chaos theory. As such, in this philosophy, the “unreal” must be properly understood, that people are invited to examine its complexities, believed as a metaphysical consciousness. Here, disorder and chaos in the real world can be accepted, because they have their balance in the unreal world. This is the spirit of survival that enables human to try and persist through bad circumstances.

Aditya Novali’s work The Wall: Asian (Un)Real Estate Project, and its three supporting works, demonstrate doubts on whether current style of housing also provides space for this spirit of survival. For people living in developed countries, where socio-political infrastructure can ensure welfare, this spirit of survival should not be a major issue. However, for people in developing countries, where unstable socio-political conditions cannot guarantee justice, where policy-makers tend to be corrupt, and where there isn’t any political will based on ethical consciousness to provide for the welfare of the lower-classes, this spirit of survival often becomes the life-and-death matter for the more unfortunate amongst us.
Jim Supangkat / Kurator

Galeri Canna 10th Anniversary Exhibition ” 9 Lives + ” ( 23 November – 10 December )