” Fantasi Tak Berujung” at Mondecor Gallery, Jakarta
A Narration of Giddiness
(About I Made Arya Palguna’s Artworks)
Artist can make up artworks based on several kinds of themes. These themes may be based on individual problems or the problems in the society. Whatever the theme is, and then what ever the method is, what language or shape that is used, mainly or supposedly has to go through the process of understanding and putting into meanings. The understanding and the meaning that is revealed in the arrangements of forms and shapes (that are made into paintings and other artworks) is then what I thought to be the meaning for the artist himself and for the life in general.
However the search of understandings and meanings for a painter (and other artists in general) is not an easy thing to be done, and also in the meanings that are offered in his works. Such problems might be caused by the painter’s effort in search of ideas and themes, artworks—in whole—with several metaphors that is used, and how the process of communication and mediation of the artist to the society in general, which is actually the his supporters. Therefore other issues that arise such as how to trace ideas that are about to be brought up by the artist in his works which uses lots of metaphors, which mostly looked so personal.
During this phase, viewers would likely be devided into those who ‘enjoys’ the work and on those who are trying to ‘trace meanings’. Those who are ‘enjoying’ the works will stop on their decission of appreciation or distaste. Meanwhile, those who are ‘tracing meanings’ might be stuck in a storm of signs (may also be a mystery), a row of metaphors, and a chain of contexts. Furthermore, the artist might often play around with some ‘games’ that are touchy, disturbing, tempting and even entertaining or just joking around.
This condition is then added with the artist’s constraint in articulating his ideas, whether in written or in oral forms, or even in the ‘inteligence’ in finding and synthesizing metaphors into an artistic form, an aesthetic from, a logical form, or maybe something that is both facinating and annoying. This may also mean that the efforts on processing ideas or just having fun may not have a clear distinction. The reason why is because there are some kinds of hold ups such as good ideas that are expressed into a bad artwork; or vice versa, good artwork but with a no-so-good idea.
Palguna and Reality
I Made Arya Palguna is a young painter who was born in Ubud Kelod, Bali on October 12th 1976. He entered the Indonesian Art Institute (ISI) Yogyakarta on the year 1996 and eversince he lived in Yogyakarta. Palguna’s artworks are based on his Balinese culture and the culture of the city of Yogyakarta which he is interventing him.
But in reality, Palguna is more interested in focusing on his personal problematics that is happening in his family or in his society. Oftenly he would focus on himself or on the phenomena that are happening to his generation as his exhibition themes. For example “Premature” (Taman Budaya. Denpasar, 2000), “Anjing” (Taman Budaya Yogyakarta, 2000), or “Monolog” (Padi Gallery Bandung, 1999). Now, in the year 2003, in his individual exhibition in Mon Decor Gallery, he is working with the theme on ‘helplessness, gidiness, hipocrisy, and uncertainty’, entitled An Endless Fantasy (Fantasi Tidak Berujung).
The theme on Palguna’s works although they talk more about the reality of life, but it looks more like it is a struggle of his (psychological) world that is very personal and abstract. Many of his problems seems untouchable, but can be sensed. This is not only Palguna’s reality, but also the reality that can come to other people. Unhelplessness can appear in many forms, such as doubt, giddiness, jokes, skepticism, sickness, denial, anger, or anarchism. Several methods may be used to respond these forms; it all depends on the character and the effectiveness of each person.
What is the real purpose when Palguna responds, or even changes, the problems mentioned previously? What meaning and value can we get when these untouched reality is expressed into a visual reality on the canvas? Can we still recognize and sense it, like when we are experiencing it? Or do we then have somekind of distance to it? Does Palguna conveys a creation as an expression of satisfactory and solutions in a personal matter, or is it more like offering ‘values’ or ‘enlightment’ to others?
The description to foolow may be useful to trace the answers to the questions mentioned previously.
Aesthetics and Olok-olok (Jokes)
What has Palguna worked on about his daily reality and his environment, because those things are quite be understood and be close to the problems. Even more, it is shown, whatever the problem, as far as it is potentially to be a disturbance (obsessive), so there is a great possibility to become a short story in a canvas.
Paying attention to the way and to the language expression, it is strongly impressed that Palguna does not intend to do any sophisticating (make it sounds sophisticated) idea, by choosing some difficult themes. The main idea of Palguna creations is, “hopeless expression, religious, hypocrisy and an everlasting uncertainty, without any reason and without knowing where it comes” (I directly quote from Palguna’s statement, Fantasi Tidak Berujung). Moreover, explicitly he explained that behind those painting titles, actually, only a daily problem and event. It might be important or nor important. “I have a problem in a family, where that problem is really complex and sound personal. Sex probably. Or jealousy”, Said Palguna. (Ibid)
Therefore, it is directly understood if Palguna intends to retell those problems in his creations. For example, about sex (in his creation of, Malam Pertama, Every Body go to the Moon, There Ell in My Head), about jealousy (in his creation of Human Time Bomb), about dispute (In his creation of Garden of Eden), about divorce (in his creation of The Family, Jaka Tarub: Please don’t go), or about hatred (in his creation of Monkey Donkey Collection, Ketua Suku Menghajar Kebo).
Those themes are flowing easily without any burden, once again, seems like without any tendencies. Even sometimes come as jokes. For example, sex problem, is how we manage lust seething, private place, something relaxing which are mixed with neighborhood crowed or children (There’s eel in my head). Or sex problems is a winding seething, just like sailing on an open sea or something utopia that tug at pleasure and beauty( Everybody go to the moon). Or a real dispute, which is like for a moment hurricane, not too serious or it sees as beautiful (Garden of Eden), since it is, suggested to a light, bright and fresh shape order.
Palguna’s themes cross many fields and the outskirt of city until the one, which is popular among city teenage. Those crossed field themes caused two effects. Firstly, he sees and understands that every problem is only a part of an event, which is very fluid. Therefore, Secondly, every problems seems to be in a contexts (and importance), which is horizontal. However, we know that some problems sometimes need to be discussed vertically, in order to develop the awareness of contemplation.
Of course, the way in seeing something that way will result in its way and its language expression. Almost all Palguna’s creation does not offer a challenge to be wistful. On the contrary, it offers crowded, which tends to be cheerful. Palguna, I think, chooses a practice- pragmatic solution. However, do not forget that attitude is also a way to stand and even a way to survive.
However, does everything should be taken up windingly, thorny and bleeding?
Does everything have to come- represent ourselves-seriously, wrinkled forehead, covered by transplantation theory, wrap by total comprehension ( that actually is shallow), covered by cynical and as if it is smart.
Does light and cheerful approach of palguna’s model become useless (even wrong)?
Palguna, in his creation process, stay together in a pleasure process. Because of that he fused and even impressed- inside, one of his sifter process (stillisasi). In this field he pours all his creation or give all his unserious spirit, just like Hilman who (Hilman always stay with Boim Lebon) influences Lupus reader (in every unique story), with funny, stupid, touchy, humanism story that is close to teenage life.
Spirit is kept in his creation as that. The reality which is punched fiction, vice versa, shown in a mixture in every canvas screen. Quoted popular jargon. The reality, which is covered behind the titles. The comedy, which is in a row with tragedy. The seriousness in a row with relaxation. The creation of Mangan Ora Mangan Kumpul (2002), the family belief, community or an inexact group of society, which keep tenses potential (in unstable gathering condition). It is shown in Palguna’s canvas, which becomes fluid, fresh and entertaining. Dispute in the reality drain the adrenalin, strained, performed in to a beautiful visual and rhythmic (in creation of Garden of Eden, 2002). The real jealousy which is burned is performed in a beautiful composition, like in his creation of Human Time Bomb (2002). The only metaphor, which describes the resentful jealousy, through a form of a woman with distended body, as if keeping a bomb that ready to be blown anytime.
However, Palguan is also able to express his dramatic feeling about divorcement. A man with a sad face, red lined costume, who is trying to reach a goddess with a transparent silk scarf with a short gold wings, while there is a child embracing the below part of the goddess’ body.
The back ground of the painting pictured as: an open field in a mountain range above the sky border with a dark blue sky and tree branch dangling on the field, a romantic creation.
That painting derives from a java legend that is about the meeting of a man, Jaka Tarub with a goddess, Dewi Sri through a naughtiness and casualty. Jaka Tarub peeks inside and steals the cloth of goddess called Dewi Sri, when she is bathing. Since her cloth is her flying instrument. She cannot go back to heaven. Therefore, Jaka Tarub married her. The story end, when after a long period they stay together and the leaving of his wife of him and his children. Palguna, quote the story and make it into a painting theme. For me, those creations are able to describe the sadness of a farewell drama to be beautiful and touchy, Jaka Tarub: please don’t go! that’s how he begs.
Two creations are a bit different in the way to express it that show Palguna’s attitude, which are relax and sometime cynical, that is in his creation Belajar Melihat (2002), and Belajar Terbang (2002). A single figure fills the picture field; firstly, that figure is walking with seven eyes lodged in his head. Secondly, a figure who is learning to fly but by using a small wings. Seeing (able to see a reality accurately) and flying (able to reach a dream) are two things which are important in a process of someone to be someone. However, usually things like seeing and flying can only be understood only in the outskirt. Only by using facilities (instruments: understanding, knowledge, experience that is minimal, a man determined to walk because he feels he’s able to see, even he determined to fly because he’s able to reach something easily. A decision that is too risky.
Although, the end is a happiness (or perfect) is usually only able to reach in a simple format; Satu Anjing Empat Burung Utah Cutup (2002), as what is reveled foolishly in that painting. Thirdly, that painting, I think, is such a Palguna’s self portrait.
It means, remembering a teenage story, Lupus, so Palguna’s creations are in a mixture of what is real and what fantasy, mixed into a visual reality, intimate, entertain and sometime disturbing.
The Distance of “Reality” with “reality”
At least, there are two reality which are able to persuade from Palguna’s creations that is, beside we are in a daily reality, we are also facing the visual reality (in a form of a painting creation). Why do both realities become far? It means, our experience that is involved in a daily reality, is not easily confirm with Palguna’s creation (even in unvarying; this thing is different with Lupus last result, which is close and familiar) in palguna’s creation the unfamiliarity, I think, still exists, pr4obably the intimate that becomes far. It happens because of the sifter charm (stillisasi), which is spread evenly and dominant. Furthermore, relaxation factor, without any burden in perceiving problem that born a perspective, everything is easily overcome.
Dizziness, according to Palguna, I think is not something that needs to be worried even threatening. He is even able to be his own motivation to create productive creations. Something that is irritating and disturbing becomes the motivator. He is even able to be someone to put the joke on. He can be constructed to be another reality. Brighten or not? Probably it is only a matter of the ‘antenna’ and ‘wave’, similar or not, and related or not. There is still a space called interpretation and the field is imagination (and fantasy) is flee freely. ‘Does fantasy have no end’? Palguna keeps playing the small brush and the paint, on his stage is canvas. Life is beautiful. Do not leave any part of it.
Is it?
Yogyakarta, February 2003
Suwarno Wisetrotomo
A fine arts critics