Nghệ thuáºtBà n tròn "MÄ© thuáºt đương đại Việt Nam Ä‘ang ở đâu"16.1.2003
Natalia Kraevskaia
Talawas round table "Contemporary Vietnamese art in the international context"
Yes, Nora, you are right, to be apolitical
doesn’t mean to be non-political. I would say, that in the socialist’s
countries it always had been even opposite: to be apolitical was a sign of
being political, a sign of non-acceptance of the mainstream government
politics. And there had been dozens of such “apolitical” artists before “Doi
moi” in Vietnam. May be this idea of apolitism is still in the heads of Vietnamese
artists.
I agree as well that we can’t say that now
artists in Vietnam are totally not political. To make political art is not
simply to incorporate countless faces of Mao in the body of the work (the case
of Chinese art) or hundreds times to paint an ironical image of a pioneer with
a bugle (a pesky Russian comment on Stalin's words about happy childhood). I
have a feeling that this easy-read posters-looking political “art” is mainly
made to suit the expectations of the western public (same as our notorious
buffaloes and girls in ao dai). Like literature differs from journalism,
political art can’t be reduced only to caricature style criticism. I agree with
the previous writing of Bradford that there are not many references to the
current social situation in Vietnam in contemporary art, but at the same time
we can find hidden symbolic and hint in some works. Can we say that Nguyen Minh
Thanh’s installation at Berlin’s Gap Vietnam exhibition about stagnant,
non-changing life of the Vietnamese peasant women is not political? Or Dinh Gia
Le’s awareness of Dolly-zation of the world (Hanoi Goethe Institute, November,
2002)? Or Nguyen Duy Quang’s comment on the division of the inner being of the
modern person into parts in his mannequin installation (French Embassy,
December, 2002)?
And is political act only about criticizing
your own government? Why not other governments or politicians (like critics on
Bush’s post-11th September politics by Le Quang Ha)? And Nguyen Van Cuong started his “Cultural
pollution” critical series exactly at the same time when government began the
fighting campaign against the social evils checking all video shops, closing
karaoke-cafes and crashing all the signboards with the foreign names. In this
sense he can be judged as very pro-government, but his work was not understood
by the official institutions and once his exhibition had been cancelled a day
before the opening. Instead of seeing him as comrade-in-arms the governmental
institutions honored him with halo of apostate.
And why should now Vietnamese artists criticize
the government? They have gotten so many things in this post-doi moi time: the
access for any information, the possibility to exhibit and to sell their works,
ample opportunity to travel abroad and to participate in the international
shows. The rare cases of censorship and intervention in their work are often
made not really by the government but by the other artists groups who have more
power and who are jealous to success of their more famous colleagues.
I have also another very personal explanation
of absence of interest of the artists in the political themes. As the person
always living in the “social” society (USSR and then Vietnam), I contend that
people from the social countries are fed up by the political topics. Westerners
admire and adore political posters. Locals don’t look at them. How can I like
posters if I had been oblige to look at this propaganda from the very moment I
had been born: in maternity hospital, in kindergarten, in class room, at the
bus stop, on the public toilet wall, in the university, at the airport and so
on and so on? People from the social
society are tired of the politics, they now just wait for the different, even
very slow – it’s o’key for them – improvement. Those who by their real will
would explore the direct political critical issues in art are rare, the others
are liars trying to build up their career pleasing definite western interests
(many Chinese artists as well).
Mai Chi asks why the artists don’t touch other
– moral or sexual – taboos. For me, to speak about any issue you first have to
experience it – through studies, through practice, through observation. I look
to the artists and feel that they just began to experience the freedom crossing
many taboos themselves in their everyday life. We have Truong Tan, Chau Giang,
Le Quang Ha and some others. Wait for a year or two – they will bring their
life experience into art. Today a young artist brought to me wonderful drawings
to see: something between sex session and contemporary dance. But he says these
are people who want to fly.
(16.01.03)
© 2003 talawas