Thoughts on GEISAI and its twelve year history - July 5, 2014, Miyoshi Studio, Japan For the past several weeks, we have been holding exhibitions for the artists who were awarded prizes at this past GEISAI. geisai.net/g20/ geisai.net/g20/news/info/info_0703_2.php As some of you may know, GEISAI began in 2002 as an incubation event for Japanese contemporary artists. At the time, it was well acknowledged that problems existed in both the Japanese art market and in the infrastructure for education and development of aspiring artists here. The theme and challenge, from the beginning, was to take that existing framework and see if we could twist it to the artists advantage. geisai.net/g20/history/ In doing so, however, I have continually been confronted with artists who stand out for their passivity and irresponsibility. Whether this is some personality trait of the particular type of artists attracted to GEISAI or whether it is a sign of the times, I do not know, but even with attempts to educate them on the ways of the art world, I often found myself despairing at the attitude of the participants and their refusal to take charge of their own careers. It is worth noting here that GEISAI began as an online art debate forum called Geijutsu Dojo. 61.196.224.12/~kaikai/dojo/index06.html Geijutsu Dojo was created as a sort of Karate dojo for aspiring artists. They were given the chance to discuss and engage in serious debate on several themes with professionals like myself, as well as Noi Sawaragi and Hiroki Azuma, who were still emerging at that time. Just like a real karate dojo has belts, we later asked students to submit thesis papers on assigned topics, all of which were reviewed personally by me, and the other mentors involved, and assigned a grade of pass or fail. After meeting success with this format, several of the participants asked if we could extend the discussion off-line by holding an event, complete with an exhibition of artworks by members. Building on this idea, I was reminded of the art festivals held at Japanese universities and decided to call the event by the abbreviated nickname often given to those festivals: GEISAI. The root of my impulse to do all this lay in the time I had spent as a teacher at an art preparatory school and the enjoyment I gained from interacting with the students. Even after beginning my own career, I continued working with young people and tried to gear my teachings toward a practical achievement of goals, in this case their development into working contemporary artists. Thus, GEISAI represented a large scale expansion of these efforts. However, in what turned out to be key point, I quickly realized that a. the context of contemporary art itself is based in western history and artwork only functions as contemporary art when it has built a connection with that lineage and b. most Japanese admirers of art either completely lacked understanding of this point or had a strong allergic reaction to it. Because of this, the artwork at GEISAI never reached a level where it was able to address or evaluate the structure of that relationship, nor did the artists understand the need to approach it as a motif. And while I had been prepared, after giving my thoughts on the nature of contemporary art, for artists to respond with derision and challenge me with their own equally radical expressions, in the end, this never happened. Ive certainly met my fair share of derision but the gap between such scorn and the small-scale, passionless nature of the work itself, the weakness of the artists desire to achieve their function as producers of art, has stood out more than anything else. If someone were to explain to me that this is the way of the new generation and the general direction the world is moving in, I would probably agree and also admit that as an aged man (now 52), I have failed to read the new generation and find myself a bit of an anachronism. However, that is not the only reason for the situation. Looking back, the trivialization of Japanese artwork is something that goes back to the post-Meiji era and has always been confronting us. In other words, weve moved back to the starting line at which we stood before beginning GEISAI itself. In Japan, spatial art, art as subculture, art seen through print or other mediums that differed from their point of origin, as well as artwork that can be incorporated into daily life were consistently valued. We had always desired art with a use and our markets moved accordingly. However, after changes in the Japanese lifestyle led to changes in the decorative taste of tea and tatami rooms, there was no longer a need for artworks which could be easily appreciated in those sorts of spaces, and our outlook shifted to something closer to what is taught in the west. Artists too created works to ride this new format but the society was not yet ready and social tension developed between the artists and their audience. In the end, we were left with the lack of a real market and a simplified artistic education that taught that true art is only that which can be felt and understood without explanation. This led to more confusion among the audience and the downward spiral gained speed, leaving in its wake a simultaneous strong longing for and animus toward western art. In response to this, I attempted to put aside the dogma that guides the Japanese art world and create a new market, while also laying the prospects for a practical education ground. However, in doing so, I was all too ignorant of the need for large social movements in the formation of new markets. It was not enough to educate only the artists. We also had to educate buyers and create the social preparation that would lead people to see value in buying. For example, right now in Taiwan, where the contemporary art market is booming, there are large exemptions in the inheritance tax on artworks but in Japan, the system remains unchanged and there is in fact a strong peer pressure which teaches that if you collect, you will tagged be as a fat cat, and thus evil, leaving no incentive to collect and no growth in the market. So again, we tried to put such problems aside and made GO WEST (in other words, enter the real contemporary art market) a slogan of the event, but the reaction was overwhelmingly negative: Whats the point? Why do I, as a Japanese, have to lower myself in such a way? Sounds like too much work. It was with regret at this reaction that I decided to open a gallery space inside the otaku mecca of Nakano Broadway and invite clients from abroad, in other words people who already had the custom of buying art, and am now trying to build a new market from there. We do plan on introducing some of the well received artists from GEISAI in these spaces, but such movement still feels a bit unnatural, and is unlike to become a major force. Is the problem that we as GEISAI organizers fail to understand our structural problems and lack the energy to address them, or that the artists lack the energy to challenge the problems they face with equally powerful expressions? Weve tried changing our focus and holding different versions of GEISAI in differing formats. Theres the independent format, which we organized by focusing on domestic artists only and allowing anyone who paid the registration fee to participate. Then there were times where we placed an age limit on the participants or reviewed works before accepting. Weve had events with and without jury reviews. Weve tried almost everything. Lastly, there have been the times when we have held GEISAI outside of Japan. Thinking that if we held the event in a place which has an established market then a greater significance would grow, we organized two consecutive events in America at Miami art fairs and three events in the Taiwanese capital of Taipei. All of these iterations were incredibly well received, especially when compared to Japan. The cost, however, was a burden - enough to cause a lurch in Kaikai Kikis operations. And yet, I also had no intention of seeking out sponsorship in America. We went way into the red. In Taiwan, the organizers were not Kaikai Kiki but a real estate company interested in urban development, and we received (without any sort of profit for myself) funds for the events operations. However, we have now cut our relations with this group and have been unable to resume the event. With all that said, I still find myself asking why was there such a difference between the events held in Japan and those abroad? The answer can only lie in the lack of change to the overall social structure. Cool Japan, the governments efforts to promote Japanese culture abroad in order to energize domestic cultural industries, was perhaps an attempt to build that needed social infrastructure, but in the end, all it ended up doing was throwing money at Japanese advertising agencies. I am left with the conclusion that the only way to move forward is to continue holding GEISAI in Japan, while hoping for social change, and also hold events abroad, while enduring the difficult economic circumstances it creates, and recycle the positive effects of these events back home. So while I set out to change the nature of the Japanese market, I have now invested more than ten years and nearly 2 billion yen which I well never get back in order to reach the following point: from next year, GEISAI will change its operations to a fair that places equal emphasis on events held in Japan and those held abroad. To our fans in Japan, please allow us some time. For all of you that weve met at previous GEISAI in America and Taiwan - see you soon.
Posted on: Tue, 08 Jul 2014 19:57:18 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015