ARTJOG is an art event that brings together new ideas in art and creativity. It acts as a venue for exchanging knowledge, enjoying aesthetic experiences, and keeping up with the latest trends in the art scene.
Hosted by Yayasan Hita Pranajiwa Mandaya, ARTJOG stands out as a festival dedicated to fostering innovative artistic practices and creative expression. This dedication is showcased through visual art exhibitions and a range of art and educational initiatives aimed at providing continuous fresh and inspiring experiences.
ARTJOG 2025
MOTIF: DEED
Can the practice of artists and their artworks be seen as a deed? Is the deed of art limited to the art world, or does it touch our broader collective lives? In the Indonesian Dictionary (KBBI), the word amal is defined, among others, as “a good deed that brings reward” and “done to do good to society or fellow humans”.
The term ‘beautiful’ is often used to describe works of art, rather than good. The term ‘beautiful’ is associated with the aesthetic value of a creation, whereas ‘good’ refers to the moral realm, i.e. the goodness or badness of a human action according to its goodness as a human being. Is it possible for aesthetic value to result in goodness? In what sense can artistic practice be defined as action?
Rarely do we hear of artists working to earn or ‘bringing in merit’. An artist who is wholly dedicated to their art is what we term ‘devoted’. Another term is ‘sacrificing’ oneself. ‘Devotion’ or ‘sacrifice’ of artists is not commonly referred to for the purpose of “benefitting society or fellow human beings”, as the dictionary defines it. In the public eye, artistic behavior is often seen as outside the social norm – eccentric – rather than as a role model for society.
Rainer Maria Rilke once wrote to a young poet in a letter: “[…] To be an artist is not to add up and count, but to blossom like a tree that does not force its sap, and to stand confidently in spring storms, not fearing that summer will come afterwards. For summer will come …” Rilke believed that the most valuable aspect of a work of art is its “poetic power … which is not always immediately visible in full, and without pose.” Thus, if we follow Rilke’s view, “a creator must always remain unconscious, unmindful of their best virtues…” It would appear that the most valuable quality for an artist is what Rilke refers to as ‘poetic power’. Poetic virtue or power may only be understood or captured in a limited way by the art world. Does the realm of everyday life require ‘poetic power’?
However, it was Sudjojono who used to say that the function of art, “is not a bucket “la fine fleur de la nation” (symbol of the nation’s flower bundle), but “for the betterment of people in society”. Sudjojono believed that in art there is “virtue and truth”, and the two are one. In fact, he said art shows “truth without intending to seek only ‘good’, but seeks truth as truth, (and therefore) certainly remains good.” In Sudjojono’s dictionary, the term “true” is synonymous with “automatically good”. It was Sudjojon’s view that the advancement of people’s lives could only be achieved through the unification of the good and the truth in art. This was Sudjojono’s optimistic outlook.
Sudjojono combined the two with the Javanese word ‘bares’ (direct). This word is addressed to artists, which means that they must be honest with themselves. The words ‘good’ and ‘true’ as used by Sudjojono are undoubtedly associated with the ‘beautiful’ and ‘good’ above. Someone who chooses the path of life as an artist, he said again, must say something about the world they see. In short, “He has to say something even if his society squeezes him to death”. Art thinker Sanento Yuliman stated that Sudjojono did not separate the aesthetic from the ethical, between beauty and moral honesty. Thus, Sanento dubbed Sudjojono’s aesthetics as the “aesthetics of the great soul”.
Historian Aminuddin TH Siregar dubbed Sudjojono as a “parrhesiastes” due to his straightforwardness of speech about greatness, beauty, and truth. Parrhesia is a Greek word that means “to say everything”. People who speak plainly about anything or practice parrhesia are parrhesiastes. Parrhesia is different from rhetoric. While parrhesia emphasizes straightforwardness, rhetoric uses speech techniques to influence or persuade the mind of the listener. A parrhesiastes is someone who speaks their mind frankly and openly about their beliefs. Stating the truth is an obligation. A parrhesiastes chooses clarity over metaphor and speaks directly rather than persuasively. Even a parreshiastes is willing to risk their own life to speak the truth. Therefore, Sudjojono’s utterances cannot be judged as merely rhetorical, they have moral value with his obligation to tell the truth.
Going back to Rilke, even the artist does not need to recall their “best virtues”, therefore there is no sense of loss when an artist makes sacrifices or dedicates their entire life for their work. The artist gives a duty to themselves to contribute something to the society, not the other way around, “asking” for something from their environment. Contemporary artist Mella Jaarsma once stated those sharp words.
Artworks are generally seen as unique entities. Because of its uniqueness, art is often referred to as autonomous or possessing its own norms (auto and nomos). This autonomy results in artworks having a certain degree of separation from their surrounding context. In an imagined ‘perfect’ autonomy, writes Bourdieu, a distinctive activity (such as art) is often defined by its “ability to reject external determinants and adhere solely to the specific logic of its arena’. The economy of this practice is instead based on the overturning of economic principles themselves, as in a game of ‘loser wins’. Once a work of art enters an ‘autonomous’ art arena, selflessness, for example, becomes ‘symbolic profit’, and an aesthetic moment turns into an object of commodification. Talking about the function of artworks as a form of ‘deed” is thus not easy.
The autonomy of art includes three aspects, namely the autonomy of the artist, the autonomy of the art world, and the autonomy of the work of art. However, when considering the function of works of art, the view of the three autonomies of the art world become relative. When a work of art is appreciated, the appreciation of it will depend on the (group of) society that appreciates it. Systems outside the autonomy of the art world will influence the appreciation of it. Beyond the autonomy of the art world lies the world of life with multitude of norms. Such a world is called heteronomy.
In a heteronomous world, judgment of artworks or aesthetic judgment is certainly not the only one. The heteronomous world also dissolves the boundaries of autonomous art. In a crowd of heteronomous worlds, regarding the function of artworks, which function can be realized in the real world through artistic experience? The artistic experience evoked by a work of art – in whatever form – must initially derive from the structure of the art world itself. We now recognize a variety of forms and representations of artworks, including those that are anonymous, individual creations, collective, interactive, participatory, mutual aid, and so on. The heteronomous world is increasingly attracting the attention of artists and society in the development of art, particularly in light of rapid technological advancements or artificial intelligence. Who is the artist in the creation of highly intelligent artworks that are only possible through artificial intelligence? In this development, the intrinsic value of aesthetic experience is being increasingly challenged by extrinsic experiences such as research results, data sets, information, and seemingly limitless knowledge.
Aesthetic experiences that in the past were often referred to as disinterested are no longer merely aesthetically intrinsic. Such experiences increasingly include the interests of the person experiencing them:
“What attracts us in artworks we experience aesthetically, is, on the contrary, the hope that we‘ll be able to relate them to our lives. And to relate them to our lives means to relate them to very specific interests which depend of course on the person and the moment.” (Schaeffer/Maanen 1998; 2009: 177).
This view sees aesthetic experience through something more instrumental. The element of knowledge (cognition), which in aesthetic experience is linked to imagination, is considered to have presupposed its relationship with reality. Thus, aesthetic experience through art encourages us to apply this to real-life activities.
Works of art that function as works of art and works of art through which a particular interest can be realized are a never-ending tug-of-war being discussed in the art world. Deed as motif in the art world can be recognized through both autonomy and heteronomy. Both autonomy and heteronomy are not a perfect, circular arena. In an art world that adheres to intrinsic aesthetic values, this motif is often not taken into account by artists. On the other hand, in a heteronomous reality where the function of art is at stake and questioned, the structure of the artwork tends to become an act.
The meaning of deed in this case is not bound to dictionary definitions that emphasize merit. Amalan (deed) is a discourse within the art world formed by aspects of aesthetic-art language (intrinsic) and outside language (extrinsic), if we are still willing to separate between the two. The practice of deed in this case must be seen as a cultural practice that encourages the realization of the “common good” (Bonum Commune) in society, a very ancient ideal that is always challenging to be approached like a horizon. The “common good” is not an institution and cannot be institutionalized, but rather a social practice that is organic and creative. In the art world or creation, a deed of an agent called an artist does not first of all reckon their work in a system of exchange value or “does not add up and count” (Rilke). They still do their duty to echo parrhesia, “even though the society is constricting him to death” (S. Sudjojono).
Deed in the theme of ARTJOG this time means artistic practice, art/aesthetic deliberation that does not intend to regain something that is practised as the purpose of action, as happens in the symmetrical relations of the exchange economy. Deed does not have “rational” reasons, because the “rationality” of deed is the totality of the act itself as a gift or generosity from the artist and their work to the idea and practice of realizing the common good. Deed is thus a “gift” from the art world, beyond the often unquantifiable calculations of profit and loss for society. +++
ARTJOG 2025 Curatorial Team