about us
Balinese Eclecticism - May 2009
Rudi Mukahar'S Balinese Eclecticism
by Chandra Johan
The first impression on seeing the works of Rudi Mukahar is that the point of departure of his artworks is the tradition of drawing. Mukahar's “drawing” tradition is actually the oldest and most basic element in the world of fine arts. But with the passing of time, it is no longer of much interest to painters, nearly “forgotten” or “abandoned” and even “marginalized”.
In the tradition of modern art, there is a difference between making a sketch and making a drawing. For a painter, the sketch is a brief “record”—usually swiftly executed. As a “record” a sketch may be the raw material for a painting, though it can also stand alone as a work. Whereas a drawing, broadly understood, can take any form—sketch, painting, photo, and so on—but is understood here to mean a “finished image” rendered through a rather basic medium.
In “drawing” it is typical for the artist to use a medium such as pencil, pastel, or poster paint. And an artist who is adept in the tradition of drawing is also usually adept at arranging the background (plane) of the picture to manifest a sense of three-dimensional space. This expertise, of course, is accompanied by a high level of technical skills to translate three-dimensional objects into two dimensions, flesh into paint pigment, from light to dark. It is at this level that the work of Rudi Mukahar is worthy of notice.
Beginning one's artistic career by carrying on the tradition of drawing is, to me, something special in the midst of the festival of contemporary arts these days. Mukahar is also deeply devoted to a genre, namely, the genre of romantic realism, which is really becoming rare among contemporary Indonesian painters. People compare the works of Mukahar to those of Rudolf Bonnet, the Dutch artist who lived in Bali in the 20th century, only because Mukahar, like Bonnet, creates works in pastel, and both take Balinese people as their subject matter.
Probably Mukahar really is influenced by Bonnet. But of course, if we look closely, we will find fundamental differences between Makahar's and Bonnet's works, especially in their stylization and simplification of their subject matter. The works of Bonnet are generally subject to fairly typical stylization, for example, the anatomical lengthening of the limbs of all his figures. Whereas the works of Mukahar are generally founded on a faithful rendering of anatomy. Bonnet's works are composed of lines and hatching that come closer to being rough sketches, while Mukahar's works are composed of fairly fine lines and hatching, detailed and soft. Bonnet's works usually use monochromatic browns, while Mukahar is more faithful to the actual colors of reality. Based on these differences, I see Mukahar's works as clearly having their own unique character.
Based on these simple observations, I would like to look at Mukahar's works in terms of their strongest, most typical tendencies. Out of the many works he has produced, one thing that is clear is that his work demonstrates a strong degree of consistency, whether between one painting and another, or in the handling of a given area of a painting as a unit within the formal structure. We can see this from the various solo shows he has held, whether “Rainbow in Paradise”, “Evoking the Human Spirit” or “People in Paradise”.
The progression of Mukahar's works from the early on up to now presents us with an evolution that shows changes, albeit changes that do not seem to be extreme. Mukahar's drawings dated up to 2008 are generally works on paper. In his imagery, all parts of the picture are filled by images that support or represent the primary objects being depicted, so the “painting” is full of action; no reality is left out; there is no effort to “filter” the image. Like Mukahar, who is very fond of detail, all aspects representing the imagery and story of his main object always receive equal attention; every detail is evenly worked.
In translating the forms of the objects he is depicting, Mukahar stresses interpretation as much as possible; he is more inclined to stick to image making that approaches the authenticity of the original form. Likewise, the objects he depicts—generally, the lives of the Balinese—express the convention of a culture that is close to “perfectly peaceful”, faithful to imminent traditional values, without evidence of cultural clashes or contamination.
Thus, we are proposed a sense of “tranquility” so romantic that Bali becomes “heaven” for her beholder. There, beauty is connected to stability, calmness and peace. At this level, the genre of realism that Mukahar follows is tied to romantic values: reality subjected to idealization. In this idealization, the artist “filters” reality, offering the “exemplary” side of the reality, discarding “anything disturbing”.
In his later evolution, that is, between 2007 and 2008, Mukahar shifted his attention. First, he tried replacing drawing paper with canvas, still continuing to use pastel pencils in his drafting techniques. He did this, among other reasons, so that his works would not have to be placed under glass, meaning that he was adapting himself to the demands of art lovers.
However, it turned out that this translation process was not easy, because the canvas material he was using could not be spontaneously used the way paper could. After a few months of searching and experimenting, he finally decided to prepare his own canvas, adapted to be comfortable for him to draw on.
Aside from the shift in medium, Mukahar's works also began to show changes. Here, Mukahar started creating artistic strategies and developing interpretations of the values influencing social life in Balinese society. Artistic strategies are the efforts artists make to create a visual concept that they feel is necessary to realize higher and more relevant aesthetic values. In this sense, Mukahar engaged in simplification, whether of his subject matter or background, or the elements encompassing the whole picture. In this way, Mukahar's more recent works, in my opinion, seem to be more “efficient” in bringing out their subjects and in delivering the messages he wants to convey.
There are some interesting tendencies worth noting here. The first is a change in aesthetic values that is optical. If we compare the works of Mukahar from 2008 to those from previous periods, the earlier works still bear fidelity to the image of nature as it is. The colors of the sky, sea, and clouds, for example, are in keeping with reality, as are the colors of skin, cloth, and so on. Here, the main objects and supporting elements have equal standing in the hands of the painter.
According to Mukahar himself, he would actually prefer to bring out the main object and leave the background empty, but does not have the courage to fully do this yet due to a number of considerations. However, since a year ago, Mukahar has begun to embolden himself to express things he has been thinking about for a long time.
In Mukahar's most recent drawings, we are offered simpler and more popular images of Bali. The human figures of Bali are presented in bright and energetic colors, as if they existed beyond the limits of time. Because time has been abolished, replaced by yellows, greens or reds in which time is born without limits. Here we can no longer witness the sky, the sand or cloudy blue skies, because Mukahar is giving observers an opportunity to enjoy construing these limits in their own minds.
For me, the empty backgrounds that Mukahar offers us in his latest paintings truly constitute a bridge to his past works, and the reverse is also true. Because change in art should really not be misunderstood as progress or decline. Aesthetics go through changes, but esthetic values are in place in each work.
Another interesting aspect to note about these changes is the issue of the cultural values that affect the lives of the Balinese themselves. This comes up along with the changes in aesthetic values made by Mukahar in each work. In Mukahar's current view, the Balinese are like all people of Indonesia, wherever they may be. Like it or not, they, the Balinese, are facing the influences of the values of modernity on their lives. The values of modernity may well be just “things”—like hand phones, bags, jeans, eyeglasses that are stuck right on the body, or things that serve as a means of communication among people.
In the friction of cultural elements of this kind—between traditional values and the modern values that are beginning to interfere with them—a friction of values occurs, leading to mixtures of cultural elements that are actually highly unique.
In rubbing together such values, Mukahar does not directly evaluate whether this is a good thing or a bad thing. He just proposes a reality that may well be fairly absurd. For example, in one of his works, “Blue Moon”, we are presented with an image of a Balinese youth who probably likes to telephone his friends all day. Scattered all around his bare-chested body are a number of cellular phone “chips”. As if each time he runs out of “pulsa” (telephone credit), he replaces the old chip with a new one, along with a new number. Friction between values of this sort gives rise to cultural absurdity. Is the Balinese youth who loves talking on the phone really mocking him self or is he mocking modern culture itself?
In Mukahar's images, the most easily perceptible and most penetrating symbols of modern culture today are the cellular phone handsets and their casings. The casing itself can be read as the "outer skin" of any element. It might even be that the Balinese women wearing traditional Balinese clothes are just using the “casing” of traditional Balinese dress. All of this cultural reality actually represents the social life of a transitional society living in dilemma.
This is happening not only in Bali. In the large cities of Indonesia, and more generally, in the post-traditional societies in Asia, whose peoples are still living in transition, modern elements and old elements, still deeply rooted in the community, often just blend together in their meeting, to produce eclecticism and give birth to rather interesting tensions.
Within that eclecticism, people accept everything in a positive way, both the old—the traditions they have carried from so long ago—as well as the new—the new values that make it easier to deal with modern life, which is forever moving forward. This is the point where the values that Mukahar wishes to convey through his works really lie. And it is also the point where I grasp the moral message implied in Mukahar's latest works.
Chandra Johan, curator and painter
