Beyond the Future: Papers from the Third Asia Pacific Triennial of Contemporary Art

colleagues; and from the mid-nineties on, our exhibitions have been jointly planned by curators from other Asian countries as well as from Japan . Recently, some observers have noted that broad regional surveys with titles like 'Indian Contemporary Art' or 'Asian Contemporary Art' put too much emphasis on common features of the region where the artists happen to l ive and that they might actually h inder the viewer's understanding of the objects on display as works of art. That is, art should be more than a tool for understanding the region where it is made. This view reflects a legitimate concern that works of art should be appreciated and judged according to standards that transcend the aud ience's simple curiosity or preconceptions about the region . The time has come for exhibitions of Asian art in Japan to move into a new phase in wh ich the art is appreciated for itself rather than as an aid to understanding the region it comes from . At the end of August, the Asia Center hosted an international symposium entitled 'Asian Art: Prospects for the Future'. During this symposium, the Indonesian art critic Jim Supangkat called attention to the role played by regional art forums during the last decade, d iscussed their impact on Indonesia, and called for the creation of a process of 'discourse' in the world of Asian art. David Elliott, the director of Moderna Museet, Stockholm , stated that Asian art was still a 'black hole' as far as Europe was concerned and pointed out the existence of recycled exoticism, whether deliberate or not, in the exhibitions of Asian art organised in Europe. It is only natural that critical views and the level of interest in the art of Asian regions depend on which countries or regions are targeted in exhibitions, the character of the organising institution, the purposes beh ind the exh ibition , the curator, and previous experience. As I have stated , the methods used in Japan have been chosen for their su itabil ity to Japan, and the same thing has been done in Australia and Europe. Art professionals dealing with Asian art sometimes forget how much it is based on particular historical and cu ltural circumstances . However, the differences in the way a rt is presented are not necessarily simple reflections of d ifferences in political and economic power. The problem is not that simple. Finally, I would like to consider the question of whether something called 'Asian art' or 'Asia­ Pacific art' actually exists. In the 1 997 symposium 'Asian Contemporary Art Reconsidered' organ ised by the Asia Center, Japanese art critic Yusuke Nakahara said, 'Of course, there are works of art made by artists in the countries belonging to the region known as Asia, but there is no such thing as a viable concept of 'Asian art'. I basically agree with Nakahara's statement. The concept of the geographical region of Asia is itself ambiguous and can be approached in many different ways, and I do not believe that it is possible to meaningfully fit all the works of art made in this region, from West to East Asia, into one category of 'Asian art'. The concept of 'Asian art' or 'Asia-Pacific art' is an artificial construct created by people involved with art in the Asia-Pacific region , including Japan , in opposition to 'western art', a concept of which we are always aware. Although an art network now exists in the region, and the use of phrases l ike 'Asian art' or 'Asia-Pacific art' has strategic val ue for promoting Asian artists, I do not think that these are meaningful concepts in a strict sense. Also, I am doubtful whether creating such concepts will contribute to the advancement of the art of the Asian region in the future. With the advance of global isation and the growing number of international exh ibitions being held throughout the world, there are more opportunities for showing and seeing art from all parts of the world, not just Asia, outside of its home region . Since the d ifferences between different forms of art are relative, it is imperative for artists to ach ieve both greater particularity and universality. The twenty-first century is likely to be a time of stimulating challenge for the artists of the Asia-Pacific region . They are now moving beyond the regional network of Asia and the Pacific, including Japan and Australia, and are about to emerge on the world stage where the true value of their work can be examined . 1 1 1