“I have to seek a different kind of freedom now. Everyone who was too afraid before is suddenly making political art now and it doesn’t mean anything anymore. I don’t want to be a man in uniform - at least, not in the way I think and make art.” - Isa Perkasa (1999)
Isa Perkasa’s solo exhibition is a continuation of the previous exhibition with the title “Ingatan yang Diseragamkan” (Bale Tonggoh, Bandung, 2009). The use of reversed title for this exhibition is intentional considering the materials in the exhibition are similar in a way, from the theme and media that Isa used in his previous artwork.
Besides the above reasoning, both titles represent another meaning targeted by Isa that is ‘sejarah’ (the history). Therefore, the term ‘ingatan’ (memories) used for both exhibitions has the meaning ‘sejarah’ (the history). Meanwhile, ‘seragam’ (uniform) itself has a very deep symbolic meaning. As we all know, Isa’s reputation in the society of Indonesian fne art as a critical artist has brought up the both terms ‘Ingatan Yang Diseragamkan’ (Uniformed Memories) and ‘Seragam Yang Diingatkan’ (Uniformsbeing Reminded) that will help us contemplate to understand how the authoritarian practice is implemented in Indonesia.Memories
History in conventional understanding means a series of events which were constructed based on memories of the past. It makes history a group of memories presented a form of knowledge ready to be memorized or rehearsed. By using the method of remembering, people will not easily forget about it. However, why people need to remember and is it wrong if people forget about the history?
In this context, being unconcerned about history is obviously not useful. That is because later on, people who ‘really master history’ will be in charge and control today. In a bigger scale, if that happens, it will be very threatening.
History is often written based on ‘someone’s creation based on what he remembers’ or politically written by someone who ‘master’ most people’s memories. This particular person will be in charge of ‘judging’ who is ‘in’ and who is ‘out’, deciding who should be reduced, minimised, and which part should be exposed.
The New Order (Orde Baru) fully understands how to force the importance of controlling memories – the history, as a frm requirement to support the ideology and to legitimate its hegemonic power. It does not end there; The New Order has successfully institutionalise this nation’s collective memories to justify its political behaviour by pushing forward the role of a specifc group in uniforms (i.e. the military).
These collective memories are then, through several strategic schemes, legitimated and offered as the ‘offcial memories’ to its community. By the New Order, people’s imagination is dulled to be ‘uniformed’ at the same time. Their knowledge on history is then dominated and controlled. The people are fnally made estranged so that they became unfamiliar with the ‘history of themselves’. People are seemed to be intentionally left without any memories at all. This condition makes them as: ‘the foated people’. Uniform
Uniform in this exhibition could mean ‘regime’ or ‘militarism‘. It is very important by the supreme power of ‘uniformed’ that it is considered crucial to be implemented in all other sectors in the system. Viewed from this perspective, Indonesia looks like the only country in the world that is obsessed with uniforms – knowingly like to use attributes that resemble so- called uniformed: uniform of ojek (hired motorbike) drivers, parking-men uniforms, school uniforms, and safari uniforms of legislative staff (DPR).
Uniforms seem to symbolize a meaning of togetherness, discipline, tranquility, order, and communalism. If uniform resembles ‘a control mechanism’ of ‘the big boss’ or ‘the headquarters’, it can also mean ‘stability’. As we know, the New Order regime emphasizes on political stability with a strategy of security approach.
The power of this uniform then forced others that seem like instable ‘civilians’, a good object, as a group which was different: as a group which needs to be taken over, controlled, ordered, disciplined. The high commission of the New Order insisted on creating the national stability. The effects on people are, by wearing any kinds of uniforms they are entitled the power and the ‘illusion’ of having the power.
Through his work in this exhibition, Isa invites us to think again about: why ‘uniform’ has become so important in understanding the reality of being part of the nation and the country, and vice versa, why is the estrangement of people without uniforms (civilians or ‘regular’ people) or the more commonly used term as a political commodity, ‘rakyat’ (grass root). The context of ‘history’ is also related with how later on the nation’s ‘historiography’ is (only) the supremacy history of them who are wearing uniforms (the military).
Therefore, when the meaning is generalised, both exhibitions ‘Ingatan Yang Diseragamkan’ (Uniformed Memories) and ‘Seragam Yang Diingatkan’ (Uniforms being Reminded) are basically focusing on one thing: the fact that ‘people with uniforms are not in synergy with what have been constructed by the history on their roles and contributions’. There are any proofs: problems this republic is facing (corruption, collusion, nepotism – just to name a few) are in fact inseparable from the actions and behaviour of the people in uniforms.
It can be well understood that the main point of Isa’s criticism in both exhibitions are complaints to the power and the injustice ‘people in uniforms’ brought to this country, about their control to the history, repression in ruling the governmental system. Moreover, it is clear that both exhibitions refect Isa’s consistency and commitment in art. Reformation: The Turning Point of Freedom of Art?
Isa’s Commitment and consistency in viewing issues on social politics, coring on the issues of human rights, democracy, and social injustice, can be analysed from 2 (two) phases: The New Order Era and Post-Reformation 1998.
In general, there are 3 (three) categories which are well-represented the practice of fne art in Indonesia: art obsessed with aesthetic (art for art); art as entertainment satisfaction, presentation, and ownership (art to accommodate trends in the art market); and art that allies with the current conditions and social changes (art for the community). Of this three distinguished categories (even though in reality all categories are not always opposite, but they even merge); Isa is in the last category.
Some artists and critics viewed the New Order is more supportive in the practice of art for art, and on the other hand, it ‘condemned’ other forms of art that criticise. It is no surprise that formalism has become a dominant aesthetic form with abstract art as the main domain. This type of art is considered as a paradigm insisting on eliminating the narrative aspects – including other contents associated with the sociality in creating art. They who have this belief understand that values of art are not didactively determined by other importance besides the artist’s own self. This kind of art is not art, but pamphlets. ‘With the consent of The New Order’, formalism has possessed the art pedagogy and has smoothly run its role as the regime of truth.
While studying at the Fine Art and Design Faculty at ITB, Isa was lucky to gain a strong formalism education. However, he was also lucky to choose graphic art as his major, because the ‘artistic freedom’ in this studio has a spacious room to grow. His earlier etches made during his university years clearly showed some signs on how interested he was in the social issues. Isa also participated in many performance art and installation art. The type of art in 1980s that was manifested as a tool to fght over the artistic stability (formalism pedagogic methods in paintings and sculpture at that time) and was also believed to be the type of art that could bridge the disconnectedness between artists and the social reality within the community has a major infuence on forming Isa’s creative ideas and artistic products later on.
In the catalogue ‘Ingatan Yang Diseragamkan’ (Uniformed Memories), I stated that, different from artist Mulyono who suggested credo of awakening fne art (seni rupa penyadaran); Semsar Siahaan with my art is the art of freedom (seniku seni pembebasan) or Tisna Sanjaya with art that takes side (seni yang berpihak), the appearance of Isa Perkasa in the world of Indonesian contemporary art Indonesia tends to offer a non-blazing credo. Isa tends to choose to walk freely in between those credos.
It seems that he inhabits another pole. Even if there is a possibly created credo, maybe it is Isa’s ‘statement’ that occurred in several of his artwork: ‘burden of art’– proven by the picture of a character (Isa himself) carrying a big box. The person in the picture appears with a body gesture that is struggling with carrying the box and with mouth which seems to protest. On the right side of the big box where the word ‘burden of art’ was written.
The interesting part is why would Isa feel that the burden of art needs to be carried? Does he represent other artists?
It can be simply said that Isa’s art ideas was derived from his thoughts that art is not something that is afoat losing its ground from the social reality (Isa lets himself got carried away by the situation). The artwork is diffcult to separate from the context that closely relates to time and space in forming himself. Is this a sign that Isa wants to break free from the ties also known as the art that is believed to have universal values? More or less: yes. So does FX. Harsono, Mulyono, Semsar Siahaan, Tisna Sanjaya others who explore their inspirations from social problems, Isa highlighted his position in this side: the angry young men – who persistently come up with the question Art for Whose Sake? This side realizes that there is no consistent or even one precise answer. On the other hand, each individual from this side has always been capable of transforming the spirit to a unique character in creating his/ her artwork (for your information, our art history is rich in terms of different characters as such).
Isa’s statement quoted at the beginning of this writing reflects changes in the practice of art post-reformation 1998 and at the same time explains the crucial transitional phase. Similar to what other artists feel, Isa also realized that Reformation 1998 at that time was in fact succeeded in making the social positions of artists unstable. And he also had to accept the new reality that reformation made many artists suddenly became political: something that was not the main orientation of their art ‘ideology’.
In a broader perspective, the efforts made by artists to use art as a social instrument; to persuade the community to always be critical about the authoritarian power; to report any social injustice and instability; to criticize corruptive behavior and others, are no longer the burden for these angry young men to carry. Because the obstacles that prevent people to freely express themselves have been taken away, now everyone can be critical and have the courage to shout out the injustice. While the justifcation by artistsare less needed, at the same time, artists fnd themselves are no longer the main source of social criticism in the community. This is a reality they have to accept even if it hurts.
One decade has passed post-reformation, several critical artists are still feeling the unstable situation. In the middle of the situation that has gone through many changes, they still feel the need to keep the ‘purity’ of the commitment and consistency of the criticism that has been built ever since the beginning of the New Order.
Epilog: Isa’s Artwork
In 2006, Isa used uniforms for the very frst time that he bought in meters as a
substitute of canvas. That idea was inspired by the suspected corruption by a governmental offcial in West Java who then became the head of culture and tourism department. At that time, from Isa’s point of view, the mutation between government offcials was done (maybe) to cover up the corruptive behavior.
In that early work of his, Isa pictured someone who is changing his ‘uniform’ and it seems that he was ‘hiding behind the uniform’. Isa’s spontaneity in using the uniform material showed his maturity in manifesting ‘found stuff’. In his every creative process, Isa almost never has any diffculties in fnding the right medium. He is always profcient in picking up anything that can be transformed into pieces of artwork, and also when he builds the symbolization of his art. What is unique in that process is how Isa then became very familiar to and sensitive about local dictions. To me personally, this is the most outstanding strength in Isa’s artwork throughout his career in the world of fne art.
In the previous ‘Ingatan Yang Diseragamkan’ (Uniformed Memories), Isa was broadening the use of the uniform material. In other words, Isa has also broadened his targeted objects of criticism. After the use of uniform material of local government offcials, other uniforms worn by other offcials: Prosecutors, Judges, Police, Forestry, Indonesian Army, SatPol-PP (municipal police), Prison uniforms, are all his canvases. Whereas in this ‘Seragam Yang Diingatkan’ (Uniforms being Reminded) exhibition, his main focus is aimed at ‘prosecutors’, ‘judges’, and ‘police’: as ‘triumvirates’ in cases of corruption in our country (considering many of the cases are done by people from that feld of work).
Through his artwork, Isa is successful in giving resonance on what an artist can do about many problems that this country is facing, without being trapped in the narrow national sentiment, nor agree with the nihilists’ passive behaviour that has thickened along with the economic growth of some social groups, the creation of a new lifestyle,the
extravagant celebration of pop culture, the strengthening of conformity culture, etc.
The corruptive and collusion attitudes and the practice of nepotism: three main points of focus of Reformation 1998 – have become the three major problems which solutions have not been found. Other than that, the supremacy of ‘uniformed people’ seems to get stronger in this nation.
When the reformation demanded the militarism to end like what the New Order showed, however, it is very different from the reality. By SBY being chosen as the president for 2 (two) consecutive elections clearly represent that the majority of Indonesians still have the perceptions that the military is still the best leader for this nation.
This nation, this country, seems struggling to break free from the representation of the ‘uniform people’ who have controlled ‘memories’.
