Asian-Australian
artists: Recent Cultural Shifts in Australia
by Melissa Chiu
Ah Xian China
China Bust 7, 1998 Porcelain
Kate Beynon Li Ji: Warrior Girl , 2000 Digital photographic
print
Felicia Kan Different Skies (Ocean 1,2,3), 2000 Photographs
David Sequeira 31 Threads, 1996-2000 (detail) Goache
on paper
My
paper today will address the theme of this conference 'Inside
Out: Reassessing International Cultural Influence' by looking
at specific developments in Australian art. These developments
relate directly to my work as a curator and the establishment
of the Asia-Australia Arts Centre in Sydney, explaining in part
the context from which the organisation arose and it's focus on
Asian-Australian artists. Although Australia's engagement with
Asia could be said to be hundreds of years old, with indigenous
and Indonesian trade recorded in cave paintings found in the Northern
Territory, my focus will touch upon some of the more recent cultural
developments that have occurred over the last decade. By offering
some explanation of AustraliaÕs official interest in Asia I also
hope to contextualise the work of a number of Asian-Australian
artists, taking into consideration the ways and conditions that
their work was first excluded from debates about Asia and then
later incorporated into various exhibitions about AustraliaÕs
place within the Asia-Pacific region.
One of the most
significant cultural shifts in Australia over the last twenty
years has been a re-orientation of the axis of influence from
the historical colonial vestige of Britain and post-war America
towards the Asia-Pacific region. The impetus for this shift in
focus came largely from a perceived economic necessity, since
Australia was effectively shut out of European markets by the
formation of the European Union as well as the U.S markets because
of protectionism. The Asian Turn, as it has been called, was first
publicly promoted during the 'eighties and 'nineties by Prime
Ministers' Bob Hawke and then Paul Keating, but the emphasis quickly
evolved into ideas of the 'Asianisation' of Australia. Although
a popular catchcry in media and business sectors, the "Asianisation"
of Australia is problematic insofar as it conceives of Australia
and Asia as discrete, separate and rigid identities. Ien Ang and
Jon Stratton have discussed the way in which the "Asianisation"
of Australia re-affirms a binary and oppositional relationship
between the two. They state that "where 'Asia' was discursively
constructed as the Orient, that Other against which 'the West'
defined itself, 'Australia' was constructed as a settled outpost
of 'the West', an attempt to realize a society on the principles
of European modernity in a space outside Europe".1
While Ang and Stratton's
conception of binary relations appears to be a persistent and
recognisable model of engagement between Australia and Asia, it
is nevertheless dependent upon a mutual identification with the
broader terms of East and West. As Ang and Stratton are quick
to acknowledge, the conditions of Australia's engagement with
Asia are more complex than an East and West philosophical divide
because of Australia's peripheral location to the West (outside
of Europe). Yet the problem with a general theory based on such
binaries, is that it doesn't allow for a consideration of any
of the subtleties or contradictions inherent in the relationship.
One of the specific limitations of this binary logic is a lack
of acknowledgment of regional differences within Australia. The
Northern Territory is a case in point, where the long history
of Asian and in particular Chinese migration has had a significant
impact on the community. Although the Northern Territory was governed
by South Australia at the turn of the century, Eric Rolls has
written that it was "virtually a distant, separate Chinese settlement".2
This history, and the Territory's contemporary status now includes
diverse populations of Indonesians, Filipinos and Malaysians,
might well suggest a different model of relations between Australia
and Asia.
Another illustration
of the difficulty of applying binaries conceived through an East
and West model lies in the way that Australia perceived Asia,
which differed greatly from a European perspective. Alison Broinowski
describes Australia's ties to Britain in the 1800s as a significant
factor in the consideration of Asia as a geographical threat.3
The threat of Asia was never an issue for Europeans, who were
so far removed not only geographically but also culturally. Another
example of this difference is contained in an observation made
by Mary Eagle, who stated that Australia's proximity to Asia underscored
the Australian impressionists determination to be 'European'.4
This stands in stark contrast to the European approach towards
Asian cultures, which were often appropriated into an art canon
as European art forms, as in the case of chinoiserie and
japonisme. These differences further deconstruct the idea
that Australia has the same relationship as the West with Asia,
recognising the specificity of the Australian situation and, in
particular, the aspects that make Australia different from the
West, itself an homogenising and largely useless epithet.
An interesting
aspect of the current situation is the way Australia 'imagines'
itself within the region. By this I mean the way that Australia
chooses to project and promote representations of itself within
Asia. Nowhere can the results of this presentation be seen more
clearly than in the visual arts. One of the best examples of this
was in the first Asia-Pacific Triennial at the Queensland
Art Gallery in 1993. In spite of the fact that this expansive
event was an attempt to position Australia as a cultural centre
within the region, the Asia-Pacific Triennial illustrated
a number of contradictions in the way Australia seeks to present
itself to Asia. On the one hand, Australia expresses a desire
to be part of Asia yet defines itself culturally against Asia.
The national selection of Australian artists, for example, depicted
Australia as dominantly Anglo-European, notwithstanding the contribution
of indigenous artists. The artists featured were Judy Watson,
Gloria Petyarre, Kathleen Petyarre, Ada Bird Petyarre, Jon Cattapan,
Marian Drew, Bronwyn Oliver, Giuseppe Romeo and Gareth Sansom.
Although this selection acknowledged the impact of European post-war
migration on Australian culture the selection did not, significantly,
include any Asian-Australian artists, maintaining a conception
of Asia and Australia as somehow separate.
In 1994, Sneja
Gunew commented that Asian-Australian artists remain under-utilised
despite being "uniquely qualified to act as cultural mediators"
in Australia's struggle to define itself anew within the Asia-Pacific
region.5 In this way, one could also argue that Asian-Australian
artists present the greatest challenge to the binary distinctions
that maintain the construct of "Asia" as "other" and furthermore,
Australia as the "West". This challenge is embodied in the notion
of diaspora, which includes artists who were born in Asia and
currently reside in Australia as well as artists who possess an
Asian cultural background. Diaspora is often described as a condition
of dislocation between here (Australia) and there (original culture),
indeed this condition is its defining feature. The significance
of Asian-Australian artists lies in their knowledge and understanding
of an Asian culture, yet their location within an Australian context
provides an entirely unique denial of the fixed notions of Australia
and Asia. It is only in recent years, however, that Asian-Australian
artists have had any impact on Australian contemporary art. This
can be attributed to a number of factors, the most significant
being curatorial interests, which have now begun to include Asian-Australian
artists. For example, Here Not There at the Institute of
Modern Art in Brisbane in 1993 conceived as an alternative voice
to the Asia-Pacific Triennial because of its exclusive inclusion
of Asian-Australian artists and Above and Beyond which
toured nationally throughout 1996 and 1997.
While the inclusion
of Asian-Australian artists within exhibitions has most frequently
been interpreted through a localised multiculturalism, the national
debates about Australia's relationship with Asia has made the
reception of their work all the more complex. One of the most
persistent yet problematic interpretations of work by Asian-Australian
artists is the tendency to overplay their cultural or biographical
history. While some Asian-Australian artists do make work based
upon a re-discovery of their cultural heritage, such as Hyun Ju
Lee, Kate Beynon and Hanh Ngo, there are a number of artists whose
work is not relevant to such an interpretation, namely Felicia
Kan, Katherine Huang, Natsuho Takita and Bill Seeto. The process
of constantly relating art work to a personal or biographical
dimension also has the effect of locating it outside mainstream
contemporary art practice as a kind of testimonial art, limiting
its ability to interact within dominant discourses. A timely warning
against the application of such an interpretive model is given
by Ang, who states that when "the question of 'where you're from'
threatens to overwhelm the reality of 'where you're at', the idea
of diaspora becomes a dispowering one".6 The work of Asian-Australian
artists must be interpreted within an Australian idiom (where
they're at) rather than necessarily an Asian culture (where they're
from). Interestingly, when one examines these Asian-Australian
artists as a group, it becomes evident that they possess more
differences in terms of their cultural background and biographical
history than similarities. It should also be noted that 'Asian-Australian'
is itself a term that some artists refuse to identify with and
consider a limiting because of its racial component. While I would
agree with this to some extent for the purposes of this paper
I have called artists of Asian descent Asian-Australian to link
their work as a group in order to identify significant differences
in their strategies of both dealing with cultural difference as
well as aesthetic issues involved in art making.
The importance
of an Asian diaspora and the individuality of Asian-Australian
artists lie in their potential to disturb the perception of an
homogenous national culture. In an attempt to convey the diversity
of these practices, I will now discuss the work of a number of
Asian-Australian artists. The first generation and now most established
and prominent Asian-Australian artists are Lindy Lee, John Young
and William Yang. While the work of all three artists currently
investigates, in varying degrees, their Chinese cultural heritage,
this was not always the case. In fact the evolution of these artists
work to incorporate an acknowledgment of their cultural heritage
is a relatively recent aspect of their practice. In the 1980s,
when Lee and Young were establishing themselves as artists, their
work was decidedly post-modern. Lindy Lee's brooding photocopied
images of portraits by European Masters were theorised as an investigation
into the endgame of mechanical reproduction and simulacra. Yet
from 1995 onwards, a visible shift emerged in her practice through
an exploration of Zen. Lee has recently acknowledged Zen as a
way of negotiating a series of oppositions between abstraction
and figuration, self and other, not to mention diasporic Chinese
and Australian culture. Colour has also been an important element
in her paintings (with black dominating) playing an increasingly
symbolic role. Arranged from panels of orange, purple, red, blue
and celadon green, her paintings currently show a more expressionistic
use of paint, influenced in part by calligraphy studied by Lee
while on a residency at the Central Academy in Beijing.
The notion of diaspora
is further complicated by how far one is removed from an original
culture. For example, first generation Australian-born Chinese,
Lindy Lee and third generation, William Yang represent different
Chinese diasporas in Australia. The Chinese have been present
in Australia at least since the 1880s, when they migrated to Australia
(known to the Chinese as the 'golden mountain') where they were
able to mine, farm and trade. As a result of this traffic between
Australia and China, the perception of Asian cultures in Australia
has frequently been dominated by Chinese. Notwithstanding this
established diaspora, in the early 1990s a number of Chinese artists
migrated to Australia following the 1989 Tienanmen uprising such
as Shen Jiawei, Guan Wei, Li Bao Hua, Wang Zhi Yuan, Guo Jian
and Ah Xian. Their work draws upon their life experiences and
education in mainland China to make sense of a new culture. Self-taught
as an artist, Ah Xian's most recent porcelain busts are an interesting
convergence of Western and Chinese history. Using his Chinese
friends and family as models, he creates fine cream busts in their
likeness. He then paints various Chinese designs and motifs in
quintessential Qing dynasty blue glaze such as dragons, wave patterns
and plants onto their faces so that the design becomes inextricably
linked to the corporeal form like a tattoo. Interestingly, the
bust is a Western tradition of veneration rather than Chinese,
despite the fact that Mao later adopted it.
Over the last three
years, a younger generation of artists has emerged to provide
a fresh series of perspectives. Coming from diverse cultural backgrounds
and for the most part trained at art schools in Australia, these
artists have a very different relationship to their cultural background
from their predecessors. Unlike Lindy Lee and John Young, these
artists have begun their careers recognising different cultures
as a direct influence on their work. One of the most successful
artists from this generation is Kate Beynon. Her manipulation
of chenille sticks are youthful and popular renditions of Chinese
stories. She likens the gradations in fuzz to the sensitivity
of a calligraphic brush stroke. In Queen Li Ji (1996),
for instance, Beynon attempts to re-invent an old fable about
a young girl who slays a python. Beynon's renditions of traditional
stories and images are an appealing reference to Chinese culture
but they also reveal a disjuncture between her nostalgic view
of Chinese culture and the contemporary reality. More recent animation
works show this same warrior character, which bears a striking
resemblance to the artist, walking through the streets of Melbourne
confronting racist graffiti about the Chinese or Aboriginal population.
My Lee Thi's work has explored issues related to ideas of cultural
difference. Utilising physical signifiers of hair, skin and eye
colour, Thi attempts to deconstruct racial stereotypes. Her most
poignant work to date is Black, White, Red, Yellow (1997),
a series of identical small plaster faces made in the likeness
of Pauline Hanson. Each of the four faces were painted a different
skin colour in a humorous alteration of Hanson's cultural ethnicity.
At the height of One Nation's popularity, this work was an incisive
critique of the seemingly arbitrary nature of racial discrimination.
While these artists
draw upon their cultural heritage as a source of inspiration,
this is only one aspect of the practice of Asian-Australian artists.
A growing number of artists from different generations are working
within a conceptual tradition with little overt reference to their
cultural backgrounds. Significantly, these artists are rarely
included within the Asia/Australia debates as their work does
not slip easily into a biographical interpretation and has little
relationship to a proposed "culture of origins". Felicia Kan is
perhaps the best example. Her art practice offers a similar conceptual
investigation. Her paintings and photographs are minimal and discrete
observations of effect. Perhaps her best known works are photographs
of fields, skies and landscapes. Presented as large cibachromes
pinned to the top of the gallery wall, these images depict and
engage with an Australian landscape tradition. These works show
that few Asian-Australian artists have similar life experiences
or cultural backgrounds, let alone art practices in common.
The intention of
this essay was not to identify any unified cultural movement ,
but rather to acknowledge the diversity of art practices by a
number of Asian-Australian artists. The growing number of Australian
artists whose work explores Asian cultures is also part of this
cultural shift. With precursors such as Ian Fairweather, John
Olsen, Brett Whiteley and Fred Williams, other artists such as
Tim Johnson, Helga Groves, Joan Grounds, Diena Georgetti, Pat
Hoffie, Neil Emmerson, Tony Clark and Geoff Lowe have, to varying
degrees, been interested in and influenced by Asian art. This
consistent interest demonstrates a broader cultural shift that
is central to Australian contemporary art, but one that needs
to go a lot further than a crass promotion linked to economic
imperatives.
Footnotes:
1. Ien Ang & Jon Stratton, The Asian Turn, Art + Text 50 (Jan.
1995), p. 28.
2. Eric Rolls , Citizens, St Lucia QLD: University of Queensland
Press, 1996, p.2.
3. Alison Broinowski, The Yellow Lady : Australian impressions
of Asia, Melbourne: Oxford University Press, 1992, p.7.
4. Mary Eagle cited in Alison Carroll, Out of Asia, Bulleen, Vic.
: Heide Park and Art Gallery, 1990, p. 8.
-
©2001
Melissa Chiu
Melissa Chiu is
Curator of Contemporary Art at the Asia Society, New York. She
was Founding Director of the Asia-Australia Arts Centre in Sydney
and has written extensively on contemporary Asian art in journals
such as Art Asia Pacific Magazine and Third Text.
