Under The Threat of Bursting Bubbles

C-Arts | July - August 2008

After the euphoria of the art boom, Indonesia’s contemporary art circle is presently overshadowed by concerns that the market bubble is about to burst. What actually is happening?

The contemporary art market in Indonesia had taken a turn towards revival beginning in the first half of 2007. This continued with strengthening interest and a flurry of buying and selling at the two international auction houses dealing in Southeast Asian contemporary art, Christie’s and Sotheby’s, as well as amongst local auction houses, Larasati, Masterpiece, and Borobudur, some of which have now gone international. Traditionally at auctions, lots from Indonesia have always been dominated by works of the modernists such as the Indo-Dutch early modern artists (Walter Spies, Le Mayeur, Rudolf Bonnet, Isaac Israel etc.) and the indigenous artists (S. Sudjojono, Hendra Gunawan, Affandi, Lee Man Fong, Dullah, Basuki Abdullah, Srihadi Soedarsono, Popo Iskandar, Sunaryo etc.). It should be noted that Indonesia only became familiar with art auctions since 1998. On average, the modernist lots outweighed those of contemporary paintings by 10:1; and have even reached 20:1.

Yet ever since that turning point, some unexpected things have taken place, including some price surprises (see table “Comparison of Number of Lots of Modern & Contemporary Works before and after 2007”). Initially, estimates for the values of works by contemporary artists like I Nyoman Masriadi, Rudi Mantofani, Handiwirman Saputra, Agus Suwage, Ugo Untoro, and Yunizar ranged between US$1,000 and US$3,000; and the highest prices fetched averaged around US$10,000. On the other hand, estimates for the works of the “old masters” or modernists were 20 times more - with many works valued at between US$100,000 and US$300,000. Now, however, a work by Masriadi can bring in as much as US$500,000, while the works of even the most commercially viable modernists like Srihadi Soedarsono and Sunaryo sell at around US$ 50,000 to over US$ 100,000 -– Srihadi’s Alam Meditasi went for USD$55,040 at the May 24, 2008 Christie’s auction in Hong Kong, the highest price realized for the three works of his offered, and Sunaryo’s Stagen Merah went for US$154,544 at a Sotheby’s auction sale in October 2005.

After a period of domination by their modernist seniors on the art market, the contemporary artists have begun to see the possibility that art market doors could swing open for them with the explosion of prices for the works of contemporary artists in China (Zhang Xiaogang, Wang Guangyi, Yue Minjun, etc.) at Christie’s and Sotheby’s auctions beginning the middle of 2006. For example, the works of Zhang Xiaogang, which previously sold for only US$500, suddenly saw a radical upswing with a piece suddenly gone for US$972,200 in March 2006 at Sotheby’s New York. A work by Wang Guangyi sold for as high as US$284,800 at the same time.

The contemporary art fever that started in China then swept into Indonesia, steadily making its presence felt from August 2006 through March 2007. Local galleries and auction houses began selling contemporary Chinese art from the first to the fourth tiers, from wellknown artists to artists whose names seemed to have emerged from nowhere. The demand was so high that the prices of contemporary art by Chinese artists, including those of newly emerging artists, even without the reputations of Zhang Xiaogang, Wang Guangyi or Yue Minjun, rose rapidly. These lesser known artists began churning out works as if they were laboring on a mass production line producing “job lots” in some factories. A popular term for this is autoplagiarism. Meanwhile the contemporary artists of Indonesia could do little more than stand staring with their jaws dropped in awe or jump on the bandwagon and try their hands at the Chinese contemporary art styles that were most popular and sold best.

However, the international auction house, Christie’s Hong Kong, had another vision. While art dealers in London and New York had their eyes trained on the sales of post- World War II and contemporary artists like Andy Warhol, Roy Lichtenstein and Jean-Michel Basquiat who had replaced Renoir, Manet, and Matisse amongst the top 10, Hong Kong’s international auction house was already grabbing the Asian contemporary art baton that included developments in contemporary Southeast Asian art.

In the catalog for its Modern and Contemporary Southeast Asia Art auction held on November 26, 2006, Christie’s provided a special introduction to contemporary Southeast Asian art, in addition to featuring commentaries on the works of several artists.

Among those featured in that Christie’s catalog were artists from Indonesia: Nyoman Masriadi, Rudi Mantofani, Handiwirman Saputra, Agus Suwage, Dadang Christanto, Putu Sutawijaya, Yunizar, Redy Rahadian, Budi Kustarto, Christine Ay Tjoe, Jumaldi Alfi, Bunga Jeruk, Erica Hestu Wahyuni and Dede Eri Supria.

From Thailand there were: Natee Utarit, Jakapan Vilasinekul, Decha Warashon, Ithipol Thangchalok, Thavorn Ko-Udamit. From the Philippines: Ramon Orlina, Gabriel Barredo, Neal Oshima, Geraldine Javier, Jose Santos III, and Marcel Antonio.

From Singapore: David Chan and Eric Chan. And from Malaysia: Jalani Abu Hassan.

This effort bore fruit. Collectors and art dealers were immediately aware that the prices put on works by Indonesian artists of comparable quality to that of works coming out of China were far too low. In the first half of 2007, the prices for contemporary Indonesian artworks also began to rise at both Christie’s and Sotheby’s. Works by Nyoman Masriadi, Handiwirman Saputra and Putu Sutawijaya sold for 10 times their price estimates. The prices for works by Agus Suwage, Rudi Mantofani, Yunizar, and Budi Kustarto also rose (see page 76 in C-ARTS Volume 00, and page 40, C-ARTS Volume 03). Indonesian contemporary art saw a major increase in prices, far outstripping the prices fetched by works from other Southeast Asian nations like Thailand, the Philippines, Malaysia and Singapore (see page 37, CARTS Volume 01).

The prices for works by Masriadi have been sky rocketing well beyond those of his peers since the beginning of 2006. The piece titled Dinner (2003) auctioned at Masterpiece on March 5, 2006 as Lot #41 with an estimated sales price of 40 -50 million Indonesian rupiahs eventually sold for Rp 32 million (US$ 3,437). One and a half years later, on September 23, 2007, the same work was auctioned again as Lot #199 and was expected to bring in between Rp 90-120 million but actually attained Rp 440,000,000 (US$ 47,261).

Another work, Sang Penakluk (Lot #073), estimated to be worth Rp 40- 60 million Indonesian rupiahs by the same auction house, reached Rp 18,000,000 (US$ 1,933) on October 15, 2006. When auctioned again (Lot #134) on August 5, 2007 with an estimate of Rp 60-80 million, it scaled the price ladder and reached Rp 210,000,000 (US$ 22,556). Still another example is Menunggu Bintang Jatuh, auctioned as Lot #133 in March 2007 at Masterpiece Auction House. The estimates for the work was Rp 50-70 million. It sold for Rp 38,000,000 (US$ 4,081). Then when auctioned again on March 2, 2008, with a value estimated between US$80,000-US$133,333, it eventually attained US$ 151,533.

At present, the highest priced Southeast Asian contemporary artwork is a Masriadi painting titled Sudah Biasa Ditelanjangi (Used to Being Stripped). It sold for US$519,194 at Christie’s in Hong Kong on May 24, 2008 (see the table List of Prices for the 30 Most Expensive Contemporary Southeast Asian Artists during the First Half of 2008).

The explosion of the value of works by Masriadi, Rudi Mantofani, Agus Suwage, Handiwirman, Yunizar, Putu Sutawijaya, and Budi Kustarto has since functioned as a powerful locomotive to pull along other artists riding on the Indonesian contemporary art train. This includes artists of the older generation – Dadang Christanto, FX Harsono, Haris Purnomo – and younger colleagues like Ugo Untoro, S. Teddy D., Jumaldi Alfi, Ay Tjoe Christine, Dipo Andy, Galam Zulkifli, Agapetus Kristiandana, Tommy Wondra, Gusmen Heriadi, Januri, Zulfa Hendra, M Irfan, I Wayan Sujana Suklu and Masriel.

Bubble Victim

As it turns out, however, the price euphoria for Indonesian contemporary art (see pages 74-80, C-ARTS Volume 00) has shown signs of abating, and rumors of the bursting of the bubble have even begun emerging in various art circles. This concern seems well founded.

Art is a luxury commodity, an experience good, and often seen as the ultimate in consumer goods. The prices emerging in the trade of art objects are symbolic. The relationship between actual monetary value and artistic quality is a tentative one. Hence, purchasing art is not just a matter of buying the object itself, but is rather the procuring of the value behind it - the purchase of the discourse that it triggers, the buying of the creative struggles of the artist, and the purchase of an artist’s reputation. That is perhaps why Iain Robertson, Head of Art Business Studies at Sotheby’s Institute of Art, explained the “progress of the artist from art school to stardom” in his book titled Understanding International Art Markets and Management. (see the chart “progress of the artist from art school to stardom”).

Now, let us look at the case of Masriadi.

Compared to the prices for works by Rudi Mantofani, Agus Suwage, and Handiwirman Saputra, the prices for art pieces by Masriadi seem to have soared without any fundamental support in terms of exhibition history and works being collected by reputable institutions. As has been discussed above, the explosion of art prices for works by contemporary Indonesian artists has more to do with the gap in price between their works and the works of the third or even fourth tier contemporary artists from China, even though the quality and actual value of the works may be similar or superior.

However, there has been such an onslaught of rising prices that it seems only reasonable that the market will reach a point when someone will start asking - Why is it that the prices for the work of one artist (Masriadi is a good example) are on par with those for works of , say, Z contemporary Chinese artists ? What is so special about Masriadi?

These Z artists have exhibited at Gamma Gallery, Beta Gallery, Alpha Gallery – and have even been touched on by XX (see the section “Schema” above). So, how did Masriadi’s reputation grow so suddenly to reach a comparable level?

With this happening, it seemingly follows that the prices for Masriadi’s works are little more than inflated balloons that could burst at any moment due to the lack of fundamental support (Up until now, Masriadi has yet to hold a solo exhibition). But will this actually happen with Masriadi? What is clear is that, after sponsoring the solo exhibition of Yunizar at NUS Museum, Singapore, from November 16 to December 9, 2007 (see pages 108-109, C-Arts Volume 01), Gajah Gallery, who represents the artist, will also sponsor Nyoman Masriadi’s solo exhibition at the Singapore Art Museum (SAM) later this year (see page 95, C-Arts Volume 03)

Reputation is an important aspect in considering the fundamental support of an artist. This aspect is best regarded in the case of Chinese artist, Zhang Xiaogang. The prices for works by the artist, as has been noted above, exploded in 2006. The highest price paid for the artist’s works in 2005 was US$161,250 but in 2006 a work by the same artist raked in as much as US$2,056,000. In 2007, his works were worth up to US$4,400,000. Beyond that, the prices for Zhang Xiaogang’s works, which now seem to tend toward auto plagiarism, are not likely to increase much further. His works on average are now selling below estimated prices, and some have even gone unsold at the major auction houses.

Just this year, Sotheby’s Hong Kong sold an early Zhang Xiaogang titled Bloodline: The Big Family No 3 (1995), the painting that raised his name to the forefront of the 1995 Venice Biennale. This work has emotional impact, a definite spirit, and perfectly expresses Zhang Xiogang’s desire to point out that the people of China (as opposed to those of the West) cannot leave behind family ties and blood relationships. “We live in an extended family” says Zhang, whose depictions of expressionless robot-like figures clad in cadre uniform refer to the way of life during the repressive Cultural Revolution period in China. “I want to show that they are like cloned people and they have the same thoughts. I wanted to make them to look as if they were daydreaming.”

This is the kind of work that is keeping the prices of Zhang Xiaogang’s works from slipping drastically. Estimated to be worth US$2,500,000- 3,500,000, this work sold for US$6,080,092 (see chart - Price Developments for Zhang Xiaogang). Imagine what would have happened to his prices if Zhang Xiaogang had not yet cemented an international reputation before he was rumored to have started selfplagiarizing.

A prime example of what can happen when prices soar for artists without a good foundation in reputation and experience is the case of Indonesian painter Putu Sutawijaya, whose prices soared and then crashed when he slid into autoplagiarism.

Quite apparently, the market has the power to establish or banish into oblivion an artist. Price explosions can make artists punch-drunk and tempt them into chasing after and reproducing the surface value or “skin” of what is trendy in their own works, so much so that they may forget who they are as artists. This is particularly dangerous in a creative world where self-identity and image is very important. Certainly, the contemporary art world doesn’t hold fast to the tenet of originality set out by modernism, but the image of the artist in other senses is still vital within contemporary art circles.

Just consider this. One artist depicts a stone, it sells well, and so other artists take on the same subject matter.

From Jumaldi Alfi to Julnaidi M.S. to Widoyo and Tommy Wondra to Anggar Prasetyo, Rieswandi, Darvis Rasjidin, Desrat Fianda, Oentong Nugroho, Januri, I Wayan Upadana, Isa Anshori, and onwards to Gusmen Heriadi.

Like blind mice leading one another, artists start producing “metoo products” and drop them into the art market with not a little opportunism. If during the modernist period, Men Sagan parroted the works of Affandi, Gung Man copied Arie Smit, Dadang M.A. echoed the horizons of Srihadi Soedarsono, and Rudolf G Usman borrowed heavily from Srihadi’s depictions of Borobudur, we are now seeing young artists lining up to paint landscapes like Rudi Mantofani, or to

exploit the styles of Agus Suwage or Nyoman Masriadi.

Others even feel that all they have to do to be called a contemporary artist is to paint apples, watermelons, Kentucky Fried Chicken legs, burgers or Coca-Cola packaging. Let alone if they depict popular figures (the list includes Gandhi, Marilyn Monroe, Elvis, The Beatles, Andy Warhol, Adolf Hitler, Jimmy Hendrix, John Lennon, Yoko Ono, Bob Marley, James Dean and David Beckham). The crazy thing is that painters of the calibre of Dede Eri Supria (one of the first exponents of contemporary art in Indonesia by his participation in the New Art Movement) are letting themselves be carried along in this current – it just cannot help but smell a whole lot like the sweet and profitable tendencies emerging when artists followed blindly the “Balinese beauties and barongs” trend set by Affandi, Sunaryo, and Srihadi Soedarsono.

One Indonesian auction house that rejected such “copycat” works made a lot of enemies because much less astute art dealers were insisting on promoting the paintings of artists without any reputation at all as top class works, when in actuality they were little more than craftsmen or artisans. In this way, they act seemingly like junk bond salesmen trying to foist their products off as credible above counter stocks. In the art circle, this kind of work is known as delta class. Even crazier, these dealers have even been trying to pass off forgeries of the most popular and best selling contemporary works by artist Rudi Mantofani and others.

C-ARTS is now investigating these dirty practices. In our opinion, price bubbles are a lot less threatening to the art market than a lack of fair play and business ethics.