CAA Conference 2013: Art in Indonesia: Continuities and Change

Farah Wardani
Indonesian Visual Art Archive

THE JAPAN FACTOR: Great Asianism & The Birth of Indonesian Modern
Art (1942-1945)
Through the comparative studies between Japanese wartime art and
Indonesian social realism in its early modern art, I am trying to analyze the
way the ideas of modernism (as adapted from Western context) was fused
with the notion of ‘Greater Asian’ identity, in particularly through arts in the
Japan Occupation period (1942-1945).1
This paper will try to further elaborate on art historian Claire Holt’s thesis on
Indonesian modern art in that era, with some new perspectives on the
Indonesian art’s Social Realism movement as endorsed by the Japanese that
offers the ideology of being free but also be a part of the global current of
modernism as brought dominantly by the (colonial) West.
I will try to examine how the brief but significant era influences the
constructions of modern art and the modern Indonesian Identity that
developed from past to present, during the era of the emergence of local
intellectuals, with arts, culture and media as means of identity construction
and to break free from the Dutch-given identity as the Netherlands East
Indies.

I. Holt’s Indonesian Modern Art

‘Art in Indonesia: Continuities and Change’ (Cornell University Press, 1967)
by Claire Holt is one of the most canonical books about Indonesian art – from
traditional to modern, if not to be mentioned as the first. Until present, it is still
highly referred by international and local academicians, curators and
researchers when analyzing Indonesian art history.


























































1
 After the Russo-Japanese War and along with the 2nd Sino-Japanese War in China, The Japanese
Empire occupied South East Asia including Indonesia, known then as the Dutch East Indies, during
World War II from March 1942 until after the end of War in 1945.

Under siege by Germany, the Netherlands had little ability to keep its colony from the Japanese hands,
so the East Indies was handed over to Japan. Unlike the Dutch, the Japanese facilitated the
politicization of Indonesians down to the village level. Mainly operating in Java, the Japanese educated,
trained and armed many young Indonesians and gave ways to their nationalist leaders to attain political
positions – a condition that was proven beneficial for the locals to set up their independence afterwards.



A result of her intensive research that started in 1952 in Cornell and
developed in a series of trips around Indonesia (1955-1957), with this book
Holt gives a thorough and comprehensive study on Indonesian visual arts
from the prehistoric to the modern, an attempt that had never been done
before by other researchers/writers. The part that I will focus on is Part III:
Modern Art (pp. 189-254), which contains Holt’s description and analysis of
the genealogy of modern Indonesian art, from Raden Saleh (the first
Indonesian artist to master Western modern art techniques in the 19th
century), the emergence of Dutch painters residing in Java and Bali who
trained local artists, to the independence era in mid-20th century with the birth
of local art movements.
A great part of the analysis were taken from authentic research materials that
she compiled by meeting the artists in person – most of them already passed
away now. This part of the modern era is considered as the best part of her
book in the field of Indonesian art history in local academies, as authentic
references on this subject was – and still is – very rare.
However, with all my greatest respect to Holt’s seminal work, I notice a very
significant part is lacking in this chapter, i.e the prominence of the Japan
Occupation era before the independence and its effects on Indonesian
modern art. There is relatively little mention on this in Holt’s chapter,
comprising only 2 pages (pp. 198-199), describing the involvements of
emerging East Indies artists such as the then canons S. Sudjojono and
Affandi at the Keimin Bunka Sidosho, the Japanese-initiated cultural center for
local artists, and emphasizes more on the Japanese influence in terms of
artistic styles and techniques – which she regards as almost nonexistent.
As Holt firmly describes:
The lack of greater Japanese influence can perhaps be explained by the
probability that the Japanese painters who accompanied the occupation
forces to supervise its pictorial propaganda program had already been
affected by Western ideas at that time. They did not carry the traditional
Japanese art styles to Indonesia. Moreover, the Indonesian artists may have
been reluctant to follow Japanese models of whatever style when their initial
enthusiasm for the Japanese regime dampened. Above all, the duration of
the Japanese occupation, about three and a half years, was not long enough
to leave a lasting imprint. (p.199)

Nevertheless, she does acknowledge that the Japan Occupation era

somehow gave an impact on the collective spirit of the Indonesian artists such
as the Persagi (Indonesian Painters Association, founded 1937) and Pelukis
Rakjat (People’s Painters Group), to accelerate their initiatives and
movements, which accumulated during the revolution in 1945. Yet, she does
not elaborate very much in this matter and treat the Japan period merely as a
brief transitional period before the Indonesian independence in August 1945 –
along with the end of World War II. 2


























































2
Holt, Claire, ‘Art in Indonesia: Continuities and Change’ (Cornell University Press, 1967) p. 200

She then again highlights the in her conclusion chapter on how the birth of
Indonesian Modern art was solely influenced by the West/Dutch, with a
discontinuity from its traditional arts or local identity. As she describes:
In Java there was no living legacy in painting and sculpture for the artists to
perpetuate, alter or repudiate, except the wayang world. The Javanese
modern artists had nothing to lean on but examples of Western art. They
could only rebel against the naturalistic landscape painting, the first Western-
inspired art which some of the older Indonesian artists had mastered. In the
absence of museums where original masterpieces of Western art could be
studied, their models, if any, were mainly reproductions; before World War II,
the most accessible of these were works of Dutch masters.

When I asked painters in Java to name their favorite European artist, Van
Gogh was mentioned most frequently. Other names mentioned often were
Gauguin and Matisse. Rousseau had made a deep impression on Kartono;
the surrealists appealed to Sudibio; a young artist in Jogjakarta, Sukarno
Hadian, was enchanted by Klee, but he was an exception. The People’s
Painters preferred Ben Shahn and Grant Wood. Picasso had no appeal;
Mondrian was never mentioned. (p. 259)

While acknowledging the high value of this authentic information, I still regard
that it is necessary to elaborate on the incomplete part of the Japan
Occupation era in Holt’s book. During my 2 months research in Japan in
2010, I gathered some archival materials and references taken from a number
of resources, resulting in some discoveries which I view as crucial elements
that can fill in the missing link of Holt’s thesis – that I will describe in this next
chapter.

II. Japan Occupation Era: Great Asianism, Keimin Bunka Shidosho and
Indonesian Social Realism
I mainly take references from the book of Ken’ichi Goto, ‘Return to Asia:
Japan-Indonesia Relations 1930s-1942’ (1997), which describes in great
details about Japanese policies, strategies and propaganda operations in the
Dutch East Indies at that time. One crucial factor that is explored in Goto’s
analysis is the ‘Great Asianism’ (Dai-Ajia) ideology that the Japanese
propagated during their occupation in Asia.
As Goto describes:
The ideology held by the Dai-Ajia Kyokai may be illustrated in the following
notion: Asia was one, but it was actually being devoured by the Western
powers; therefore, it was necessary to restore Asia to its original state of
being. This was the mission accorded to the Japanese Empire, and
Manchukuo was the embodiment of the mission accomplished. The unity of
“Japan and Manchukuo being one” was a model that had to be expanded to
the rest of Asia. .(pp. 134-135)

Japan’s ‘Great Asianism/Dai-Ajia’ ideoleogy can be said as something

between Japanese notion of modern imperialism and a regional concept of
Asian solidarity against Western colonialism. The impacts were different in
each of the occupied countries. As Goto analyzes, the (brief) success of
Japan Occupation in East Indies was also due to the role of one Japanese
‘Indonesianist’, Takei Tenkai, a journalist turned advocate who resided in the
East Indies from 1906 to 1928 (a very significant era of local intellectual
awakening and birth of Nationalist movement), and did intensive research of
the politics and social lives of the locals.



Takei
 Tenkai
 (center)
 with
 Soemenang
 Soerjowinoto,
 chief

editor
of
Pemandangan
newspaper,
Jakarta,
circa
1940s






Takei
Tenkai,
circa
1930s


Tenkai’s writings and findings became the main materials for the military
government to develop propaganda strategies in the archipelago, and much
of his recommendations display strong affections to the native people in the
region. He was very supportive with the local intellectual movements, and
became one of the first foreign people to use the name ‘Indonesia’, instead of
Netherlands East Indies, in his writings. Tenkai’s initiated the League for the
Liberation of Southeast Asian Peoples, which was inaugurated on January 24,
1941, for the purpose of “liberating oppressed peoples in Southeast Asia so
that they may be able to live their own lives, thus making solid the foundation
of the great cause of Asian development.”3
From 1933 onward, Japan’s foreign policy underwent a major shift,
symbolized by Japan’s withdrawal from the League of Nations. This
development could not but have a powerful impact on the Indonesian
nationalists’ views of Japan, as a proof to break free from the Anglo-American
world order. 4 It is a great opportunity for Japan to penetrate the region with
the campaign of Great Asianism ideology, taking into account Tenkai’s


























































3
Goto, Ken’ichi, ‘Return to Asia : Japan-Indonesia Relations 1930s-1942’, Ryukei Syosha, Tokyo,
1997), p. 178

4
ibid, p. 304
knowledge and perspectives towards the Indonesian people into a series of
cultural operations, mainly operated by Gunseikanbu, the military government.
Sendenbu, or the Propaganda Department, was set up within Gunseikanbu in
August 1942, comprising division of Media (Jawa Shinbunkai, Jawa Hoso
Kanrikyoku), Film companies (Nihon Eigasha, Jawa Eiga Kosha) and a
Cultural center, the aforementioned Keimin Bunka Sidosho. As noted by Aiko
Kurasawa, many talented Japanese worked as Sendenbu officials. They can
be divided into two categories: first, those who were, like Shimizu,
propaganda experts and who were mostly engaged in planning the programs.
Second were the specialists in a particular field of arts, such as writers,
essayists, musicians, painters, caricaturists and designers who were generally
called bunka-jin (culture men) in Japanese society. These were mostly
engaged in composing propaganda materials and carrying out the actual
propaganda operations, together with their Indonesian counterparts.5
Besides the officers there were also Indonesian writers and artists working for
Sendenbu, including Raden Mas Soeroso (painter) and Iton Lesmaa
(designer in charge of advertisements). Many other well known writers,
musicians and painters worked for Keimin Bunka Sidosho, among them
Sanusi Pane (writer), Armijn Pane (writer), Utojo (musician), Cornelis
Simanjuntak (musician), Raden Koesbini (musician), Agoes Djaja (painter,
and Djauhar Arifin Soetomo (essayist and painter). 6 Agoes Djaja himself was
the chief of the local artists group in Keimin, which includes Soedjojono (later
entitled as the father of Indonesian modern art), Basuki Abdullah, Kartono
Yudhokusumo, and Emiria Soenassa (first prominent Indonesian female
artist).













The
 inauguration
 of

Keimin
 Bunka
 Shidosho,

Jakarta,
 1943.
 (From

Djawa
Baroe
#5)





























































5
Kurasawa, Aiko, ‘Propaganda Media on Java Under the Japanese, 1942-1945. Cornell University,
1987


6
ibid

The inauguration of Keimin Bunka Shidosho was published in the Japanese-
Indonesian local Magazine published by Sendenbu, Djawa Baroe, in the 5th
edition, 1943. It includes the statement of T. Kono, the head of the Painting
and Sculpture (Bagian Loekisan & Oekiran) division:
Reviewing the condition of the painting and sculpture arts in Indonesia today,
there are many shortcomings, which can also be seen as a result of the
colonialist politics of the Dutch previously. But it can also be caused by the
lack of understanding around Indonesian art experts upon what it means to
be a society that is aware of the importance of art in life. This cannot be
denied.

The willingness to build the art of the nation does not have a solid ground, so
we cannot find in paintings and sculptures the elements of gamelan and
serimpi. […] This is one field in culture that hasn't been developed under the
Dutch regime in directing the arts of painting and sculpture. Now, we will give
a concrete direction upon this field.7



Djawa
Baroe
Magazine,
1943‐1945




























































7
Djawa Baroe Magazine, Edition No. 5. 1943, p.9-10 (my translation):

“Djika menilik keadaan kesenian loekisan dan oekiran di Indonesia masa ini maka terdapatlah banjak
kekoerangan, jang boleh djoega dipandang sebagai akibat politik pendjadjah daripada Pemerintah
Belanda dahoeloe. Tetapi djoega disebabkan oleh paham ahli2 kesenian Indonesia sendiri terhadap
masjarakat jang berdasar pada kesenian dan paham tentang kehidoepan. Tidaklah hal ini boleh
disangkal.

Kemaoean membangoenkan kesenian bangsa tidak mempoenjai dasar jang kokoh, sehingga didalam
lapangan loekisan dan oekiran tidak terdapat gamelan dan serimpi. […] satoe lapangan dalam doenia
keboedajaan jang beloem dikerdjakan dalam masa Belanda memimpin keboedajaan kesenian loekisan
dan oekiran. Sekaranglah kita akan memberikan pimpinan jang sesoenggoehnya dalam lapangan ini.”



Even though being authoritatively controlled by the Sendenbu (with a lot of
protocols and censorship for anti-Japan sentiments), the endorsements and
training life at Keimin seem to breathe a new independent spirit for the artists
to find their ways in expressing nationalism and sense of identity through
modern art. In a way, it serves as a kind of a turning point for the local artists
to collectively educate themselves, build network among each others in
interdisciplinary ways, and institutionalize the nationalistic zeitgeist as a
common ground.


 

S.
Sudjojono
in
Djawa
Baroe,
1943
 Emiria
Soenassa



From the Djawa Baroe articles it can be seen how the local creators enjoyed
this new ‘freedom’ of creating something that can be truly about them and in
their own language – in the modern medium such as literary writings, fine arts
and cinema. As pioneer filmmaker Usmar Ismail said about being trained at
Keimin: “The truly new climate, both in terms of content and process of film
making, came at the time of the Japanese Occupation. At that time we first
came to be aware of the function of film as a means of social communication.
One more thing to be mentioned is protection of language and as its result… it
came to be clear that films began to grow and come closer to the national
consciousness.”8

III. Hypothesis of Japanese Influences in Indonesian Modern Art

In the field of visual arts, the artists’ newfound national consciousness as
stated by Usmar Ismail above, gave ways to the Manifesto of Indonesian
Social Realism, with S. Sudjojono as the vanguard. Here I would like to
respond to Holt’s descriptions of the artistic influences of the local artists, as
mentioned and quoted above. It is no doubt that the artists were definitely
taking influences from the West as noted. However, we can see that most of
the Western artists named by Holt were impressionists, surrealists and
abstract expressionists – which some of the elements can be obviously seen

























































8
Kurasawa, Aiko, ‘Propaganda Media on Java Under the Japanese, 1942-1945. Cornell University,
1987

in the works of the artists. The question is: how did it all lead to the
construction of Social Realism?
One interesting fact is that Sudjojono was trained by a Japanese realist
painter, Chiyoji Yazaki, a visiting Japanese painter in East Indies 9, in 1935
before he joined Keimin Bunka Shidosho. It is also important to note the
significance of Saseo Ono, the painting teacher at Keimin, who originally was
a prominent painter and manga artist in Japan before he was posted in
Indonesia in 1942 – whose works often depict satire and social commentaries
of wartime life in a modern, progressive manner (that also explains the
abundance of comic strips and caricatures in Djawa Baroe).
Saseo Ono was remembered as being the favorite teacher at Keimin Bunka
Shidosho, and engaged closely with his students to organize Japanese-
Indonesian art exhibitions during those times. As Adachi Gen, a curator of
Saseo Ono’s works explains, “We should reconsider him, as an artist, who
aimed to make art for people, under the pretense of cooperating with
authority. […] With another mode that shows the expression of sarcasm.” 10 It
is very likely this manner of expression was adopted by S. Sudjojono and his
collective to formulate their own version of Social Realism.
I also observe another factor that I think is highly influential in Indonesian
Social Realism, that is the Japanese Wartime Art itself. Apart from the
influence of the Japanese art teachers at Keimin Bunka who often exhibited
their works at the center, I notice there are other evidences of Japanese
Wartime Art influences, especially with the works by the master-painters as
collected in the Museum of Modern Art Tokyo. Some of the historical paintings
exhibit striking similarities with Indonesian modern art in these times, mainly
through the works of Tsuguharu Fujita, Miyamoto Saburo and Toshi Shimizu.
Yet, how did the local artists get access to see these Japanese works? As
many of the artists have passed away and Keimin Bunka Shidosho items in
Indonesia were mostly burned by the Allied Forces in the post-1945 revolution
war, documents about this are very scarce. However, I encountered another
fact during my research in Japan, when visiting the Kyoto Institute of
Technology Museum, which is safekeeping the wartime propaganda posters,
including the ones distributed in Java during the occupation.
As we can see from the illustrations, painters Fujita and Saburo were among
the painters of the propaganda film posters, most of them distributed in Java
within the period of 1942 to 1945, such as ‘Soldiers of The Sky’ (1942) , as
enlisted by Aiko Kurasawa in the appendix of her paper. Kurasawa also noted
the range of the distribution of the films throughout Java with the number of
117 theaters operated as ordinary commercial theaters in 1943, as screening
venues of these films.

























































9
Siregar,
Aminudin
T.H,
‘Sang
ahli
gambar:
sketsa,
gambar
&
pemikiran
S.
Sudjojono’.
S.

Sudjojono
Center
&
Galeri
Canna,
2010


10
Gen,
Adachi,
‘Material
Girls
in
Wartime
Japan:
A
Re‐Examination
of
Ono
Saseo’s
Manga’,
paper

presentation,
2007

From a 2011 interview with the late Misbach Yusa Biran11, a film critic and
former member of the Keimin Bunka Shidosho, it is acknowledged that these
films and the posters were commonly seen by the local artists, filmmakers and
creators around those times. It is very likely that they also enriched the artists’
references on modern art, along with the others that altogether inspired the
Social Realism Manifesto that helped giving birth to the truly local Indonesian
Modern Art.

IV. Conclusion
As I mentioned before, the description above as a whole, is not to negate
Holt’s thesis but more to fill in the missing link about the Japan Occupation
part of the Modern Art chapter. Neither it is meant to glorify Japan’s
achievements in their brief period in Indonesia in supporting Indonesian art,
as there are many aspects of the era has its own shares of flaws. It is fair to
mention that The Gunseikabu was constantly under heavy criticism by the
local intellectuals for their fascistic approach and aggressive military practice
in the region. I expect this study to give another point of view upon the birth of
Modern Art in Indonesia, which so far has more predominantly seen through
Western perspectives.
Last but not least, it is more to offer a deeper understanding upon how
modern art, as well as the idea of modernism itself, are constructed in
Indonesia during the nation’s formative years. It is obvious that art practice
played a great role in this as a medium to express the new consciousness as
being a Modern Nation. I believe that to analyze this period is crucial not only
for the development of art history, but also to understand the contemporary
Indonesian people today – a hybrid society shaped by endless fuse of
ideologies, traditions, postcolonial identities as an outcome of negotiations
between East and West.


























































11
Interview
by
Hasnul
Rahmat
with
Misbach
Yusa
Biran,
Jakarta,
August
2011,
my
transcript