李健省       LEE Kian Seng                                    Asia Contemporary Art  亚洲当代艺术

 

                                    强奸艺术 (Raping Art)    作者：李健省 

 

  请参照相关文件：

 

 

 

 

 (1)  Factual Inaccuracies and Unjust acts in the publications of Malaysian Art
         被马来西亚国家画廊扭曲的史实，如何投诉 ? 

 
(2) LEE Kian Seng's letters to the National Art Gallery Malaysia
      李健省致马来西亚国家画廊信件  



 


艺术家是艺术馆的重要资源。国营艺术馆是公共资产。

 马来西亚国家艺术馆日前庆55周年(星洲2013-09-10p.16)时“表扬”各族高龄艺术家方略，有许多人询问我，怀疑那是官场做给人看看的。

见仁见智， 反正大部分华社领导对“当代艺术”视若无睹，有能力关怀艺术工作者权益的华社领袖也寥寥无几，至少目前的权宜之计也可安慰一下民间里的不满情绪。

有时族群政治里的公务员最拿手的就是把你当成猴子耍。

 回顾过去55年，像Frank Sullivan，林碧颜（ P.G.Lim）， Ismail Zain ， Syed Ahmad Jamal,等等有艺术良知，有胆识超越族群政治商业利益，为马来西亚当代艺术辩护的策展人逐渐消失。

随后国家画廊出版的书籍也出现不少错误。在客观环境下，许多国内外艺术史家对此课题都有心照不宣的默契。


 我希望马来西亚国家艺术馆在 “表扬”高龄艺术家时不忘改正以下书籍里的错误，以免传为国际笑柄。

2008年的“Timelines-Malaysian Art with 50 years (1958-2008)”；
2007年的“45@45”；
2002年的 “Masterpieces from the National Art Gallery of Malaysia”；
1994年的“Vision and Idea: Relooking Modern Malaysian Art”等等。

艺术不仅是教育里重要的一环，也是生活的本质，艺术家穷一生追求的是生命本质的实相。

在多元种族社会里，国营艺术馆务必强化正确艺术历史观和透明化收藏规格，才能促进社会的和谐与进步。

那些明目张胆篡改艺术史实不改正和华社里有些籍“表扬”捞宣传来抬高自己的行为，等同“强奸艺术”。

表扬也要实事求是。如果连艺术家作品的原创性和制作年份都不尊重的话，那“表扬”艺术家贡献的实质意义又何在？

 罔顾史实查证的撰著，在意识里与“强奸艺术”一脉相通。

注： 有关篡改史实详情请游览 ： http://www.leekianseng.com/lee_FactualInaccuracy.pdf

 李健省  20130917

 (1979/金属板上版画)


( 随记)

 


 

 

 1979

 

 

  1. 1979年，李健省参加一项国级艺术展比赛的文件在判决途中被人窜改。当时李健省参展作品共3件。包挂《铁钉铁锤》系列（Hammer and Nail series），一件大型自画像《Manusia Tabung Uji》和一组3副以金属板作媒介的版画。

    李健省自此被迫开始沉潜去避过那压抑，很多人必须提心掉胆地生活的“向东学习（1981-2003 ）”时代。

    当你朝向艺术高峰的同时，你无法避免命运暗黑的侵击。它会利用你的盲点或无知捉住你，将你困在浅水滩上，再揑住你的脖子。

  2. 过去25年李健省白纸黑字投诉国家画廊偏颇5次以上包挂 “Masterpieces from the National Art Gallery of Malaysia ”一书里的窜改与误导。只有2008年12月31日的信件第一次得到回覆，但等了5年，马来西亚国家画廊至今还没兑现承诺改正错误。公务员务必以诚信和文明方式处理文化与史实课题。官僚的怠慢与行政偏差，有损国家的道德形象。
  3. 2008年12月31日以信件投诉有关国家画廊英语版书籍“Timelines-Malaysian Art with 50 years (1958-2008)” (历史时间线--马来西亚艺术1958－2008 展) 窜改李健省作品事件。根据该展画册第232页，国家画廊为李健省1977年作品《Of ‘Image, Object, Illusion’ – Off Series Mechanism》（形象, 物体, 假象）制作的图片记录不正确，作品被严重修改。（注：该画册也有马来文版，但没刊登此作品)  。更多详情请游览 ：
    http://www.leekianseng.com/lee_FactualInaccuracy.pdf
    Errata:     The inaccuracies in the description / depiction of the work    《Of ‘Image, Object, Illusion’ – Off Series Mechanism》at page 232 of the book  “Timelines” published by the National Art Gallery Malaysia in 2008 。More details to
    http://www.leekianseng.com/lee_FactualInaccuracy.pdf
  4. 1983年马来西亚国家语文出版局 (Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka Malaysia) 出版“Modern Artists of Malaysia”（马来西亚现代艺术家）开始不见李健省的作品。（见 Sunday Star “Thought provoking but bare”/ December 11, 1983）。由  T.K.Sabapathy 和  Redza Piyadasa 合著,该书以特别的意识形态论述马来西亚艺术，同时遗漏了许多优秀华裔艺术家包挂李健省70年代的坐标作品。 Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka Malaysia published the joint works of T. K. Sabapathy and Mohamed Redza Piyadasa entitled “Modern Artists of Malaysia in 1983”. The book approached Malaysian art with an odd ideology by excluding a good number of outstanding artists including works by Lee Kian Seng. （“Thought provoking but bare”- A review by Chu-Li on the book “Modern Artists of Malaysia”,in Sunday Star Malaysia, December 11,1983）

  5. 1983年 日本策划马来西亚参加日本福冈美术馆第二届亚洲现代艺术展 (1985年11月) 的画家青一色由玛拉工艺学院（现在的U.I.T.M）的艺术讲师们代表。李健省曾向马来西亚国家画廊表示这种决策不合理国情。详情请游览：亚洲艺术界的无常/李健省/星洲日报观点/2013-04-09 。At the 2nd Asian Contemporary Art Exhibition held at the Fukuoka Art Museum in November 1985, the Fukuoka Art Museum had decided to have Malaysia represented purely by art lecturers from UITM, much to the chagrin of other Malaysian artists.
  6. 1991年在菲律宾马尼拉出版的“The Asean Sculpture － a photographic folio”（亚西安雕塑照片集/1991）画册里有人滥用机制操纵著述发放不正确资讯矮化李健省的形象和扭曲他的作品。画册里第42页有关李健省的生平介绍与作品的内容都不正确。文本内容是由东协各成员国官方委员会 C O C I 提供, 但事先没有得到李健省的阅读审核。（见 1996-03-20李健省致马来西亚国家画廊信件）。有关此课题请游览：http://www.leekianseng.com/lee_FactualInaccuracy.pdf

    Errata    : The catalogue “ The ASEAN Sculpture － A Photographic Folio”  printed in Malina in 1991 used materials, write-ups, slides and photographs provided by the National COCIs of the ASEAN respective member countries. Unfortunately it carries a number of factual inaccuracies.More details to http://www.leekianseng.com/lee_FactualInaccuracy.pdf

 

  1. 1991:  The Japanese newspaper published in Singapore by Asahi Shimbun International Pte Ltd., in its August 2, 1991 issue, page 12 (16) “Crown Town Information,” had misreported facts about Lee Kian Seng and Shoko Lee (The letter of Lee addressed to Asahi Shimbun International Pte Ltd dated 29 August 1991 is referred). 
  2. 1991/1992年的马来西亚沙龙展/比赛发生意外促使李健省不能参展 。之前1974年马来西亚国家画廊也曾不让李健省参加第一屆“當代青年”展。(见1991年12月12日李健省致马来西亚国家画廊信件) 。

 

  1. 1992年Redza Piyadasa与 Hideki Nakamura合作策展撰著在日本的《马来西亚现代艺术》時，破例删除李健省。 (注：见在日本举行Japan Foundation 主办的Contemporary Malaysian Art organised by the Japan Foundation @ the ASEAN Culture Center Gallery in Japan from 18 March-5 April 1992  )。其间也有外交官向马来西亚国家画廊官员献议不要展示李健省的作品。90年代初期， Kuala Lumpur 的某日资百货公司也曾尝试过主办马来西亚装置艺术展，同样企图篡改史实把李健省排挤在外。 70年代也有一批人 ，在马来西亚国家画廊设法剥夺李健省参展的权利 (见 Young Contemporary Review 1974-2000 published by National Art Gallery Malaysia ）。 At the Contemporary Malaysian Art Exhibition in 1992, Japan the host nation had broken international precedent by excluding Lee Kian Seng’s works. Not surprisingly, the exhibition was co-curated by Mohamed Redza Piyadasa and Hideki Nakamura of Japan. (NB: The Contemporary Malaysian Art Exhibition was organized by the Japan Foundation and held at the ASEAN Culture Centre Gallery in Japan from 18 March to 5 April 1992.) 。 

 

  1. 1994马来西亚国家画廊出版《Vision and   Idea:  Relooking Modern Malaysian Art》的画册在第162页篡改李健省的作品《形象, 物体, 假象》 ( Of ‘Image,Object,Illusion’off series Mechanism)。http://www.leekianseng.com/lee_FactualInaccuracy.pdf
     Facutal inaccuracies in the description/depiction of the work < Of' Image,Object'- Off series Mechanism) at page 162 in the book "Vision and Idea-Relooking Modern Malaysian Art“（1994） more details to  http://www.leekianseng.com/lee_FactualInaccuracy.pdf
  1. 1997:  The Malaysian national type secondary school Art text book Perintis Pendidikan Seni KBSM Tingkatan 4 & 5, published by Pustaka Delta Pelajaran Sdn Bhd, the name of the artist is inaccurate  on page 30. 
  2. 2000年国家画廊出版《Young Contemporary review １９７４－１９９７》是一本可参考的资料，作者Puan Zanita Anuar当时是国家画廊负责开发与研究部的主管。
  3. 2000年9月27日马来西亚国家画廊新馆开幕展之际，李健省的1972作品《人类》（Mankind） 被策展人错置改装。更多详情请游览http://www.leekianseng.com/3d_Manhttp://www.leekianseng.com/3d_Mankind.pdf
    Eratta: At the “Rupa Malaysia— Meninjau Seni Lukis moden Malaysia” (The Face of Malaysia: A Survey of Malaysia’s Modern Art, 15 September 2000 - 30 September 2001) exhibition held in conjunction with the opening of its new building, Lee Kian Seng’s work《 Mankind》 (1972) had been unethically modified。More details to   http://www.leekianseng.com/3d_Mankind.pdf

 

  1. 2001年1月31日，林碧颜在国家画廊所主办的国家艺术新秀奖颁奖典礼上《 Young Contemporary Malaysia 2000 》发表了一篇史实改正官方的“艺术史剧本”。她的演词大力震荡掌权谋私者所主宰的机制与话语权。公开指正李健省为马来西亚装置艺术之父 。遗憾国家画廊并没有珍惜这德高望重前辈的愿望把2001年1月30日林碧颜的讲稿翻译成马来文出版。（林碧颜的录影/录音可见证）。2001:    At a speech delivered on the occasion of the Young Contemporary Malaysian Art Award 2000 organized by the National Art Gallery on 30 January 2001, Dato’ (Ms) P. G. Lim told of the development of installation art in Malaysia as she witnessed it, and openly hailed Lee Kian Seng as the Progenitor of  Installation Art in Malaysia.. Her remarks were so powerful that they shook the very foundation of the official mechanism and narrative version controlled by the corridors of power.   

  2. 2002年马来西亚国家画廊出版的书籍“Masterpieces from the National Art Gallery of Malaysia” 著者Redza Piyadasa在第186和187页里篡改李健省 1972年作品《Mankind》(人类) 。更多详情请游览 http://www.leekianseng.com/3d_Mankind.pdf

     2002 · Errata :The inaccuracies in the description /depiction of the work of 《Mankind 》 at page 186 -187 in the book “ Masterpieces from the National Art Gallery of Malaysia”。 More details to http://www.leekianseng.com/3d_Mankind.pdf

  3.  2002年3月18日马来西亚创价学会文化中心主办莫哈末皮雅达沙（Mohamed Redza Piyadasa）讲座 "建设文化特征---现代马来西亚艺术课题 "。他 从1920年至现代，按年代先后顺序介绍马来西亚艺术。(由张文德主持) 。被邀请出席该讲座会者包括马来作家协会与马来西亚国家画廊代表，艺术界人士与创价学会会员等。(见南洋商报2002年3月24日）。On 18 March 2002, the Soka Gakkai Malaysia(SGM) organized a talk by Mohamed Redza Piyadasa titled“ Building Cultural Characteristics: Issues of Contemporary Malaysian art “ which was chaired by Teoh Boon Teck in the culture hall of SGM. Piyadasa briefed the audience on the history of Malaysian art in a chronological order beginning with 1920 up until the present. Invited guests to the talk included representatives from the Malay Writers’ Association and the National Art Gallery Malaysia, academia , art circle and members of Soka Gakkai Malaysia among others (for details refer Nanyang Siang pau, 24 March 2002 edition). 
  4. 2003年马来西亚国家艺术馆配合建馆45周年庆典主办45@45画展时，仗义执言秉持实事求是的林碧颜( Tan Sri Ms’ P .G.Lim) 不停梳理马来西亚艺术领域里的真相。她挑选了李健省1977年的装置作品《 Of ' Image,Object,Illusion ' -Off Series Mechanism》（形象、物体、假象），并将之诠释。
    但是 2003年“45@45”展的画册4年后于2007年才印出来；该国家画廊出版的画册第 92-95页也把林碧颜的文献弄得支离破粹，错误百出。
    有关篡改马来西亚艺术史实详情请游览：    http://www.leekianseng.com/3d_Image.pdf

    Errata    : The inaccuracies in the description /depiction of the work 《Of ‘Image, Object, and Illusion’-Off series Mechanism》at page 92-95 of the book 45@45 published in 2007 by the National Art Gallery Malaysia 。More details to http://www.leekianseng.com/3d_Image.pdf
  5. 2003年：在马来西亚版艺术走廊 (Art Corridor) 2003年第11期第10页的封面故事作者Eddin Khoo根据马来西亚国家画廊的资料而犯错。2003:  In the Art Corridor (Malaysia) Issue 11, 2003 cover story by Eddin Khoo on page 10, the author committed errors on LEE Kian Seng’s《Of ‘Image, Object, Illusion’ – Off Series Mechanism》due to the misinformation provided by the National Art Gallery Malaysia.
  6.  2005年 国家画廊在网络所发放的资料错误很多。李健省提供原著记录资料后国家画廊继续犯错。（见2005年11月17日信件） 

  7. 2007:  自70年代开始，有关马来西亚艺术, 大部份由毕雅达沙Mohamed Redza Piyadasa ，沙巴帕提T.K. Sabapathy和 Syed Ahmad Jamal (Datuk)论述。2007年马来亚大学，Valentine Willie Fine Art，马来西亚理科大学 与Penjana Bebas Malaysia合作出版画册<Between Generations---50 years across Modern Art in Malaysia >。该画册的序言,以及目前本区域许多学术与艺术文化界人士开始质疑官方撰述的可信程度。Since the beginning of the 1970’s, the story of Malaysian art had been largely narrated by Mohamed Redza Piyadasa in collaboration with T. K. Sabapathy. In 2007, the art book Between Generations—50 years across Modern Art in Malaysia was jointly published by Universiti Malaya, Valentine Willie Fine Art, Universiti Sains Malaysia and Penjana Bebas Malaysia. It is noted that the book’s preface, as well as many current academia, art and cultural circles in this region, had begun to question the credibility of the official version narrated by the mainstream in Malaysia.
  8. August 2007 : "...We would like, finally, to suggest that there are many intertwining, inter-connected and inter-locking 'faces' of  modern art in Malaysia, and that these different faces (or interfaces) may put forward contradictory pictures, which eventually have to be acknowledged, and even celebrated and respected (or debated and contested in a civilized way)."--- Excerpted from the book < Between Generations---50 years across Modern Art in Malaysia > published in conjunction with the exhibition curated by Beverly Yong and Hasnul J.Saidon in August 2007. The exhibition was organised by University Malaya, Unversity Sains Malaysia, Valentine Willie Fine Art (Malaysia) and Penjana Bebas Malaysia。
  9. January  2008:   “…In my meetings with artists and others in the art scene thus far, I have become directed to artists whose works and contributions have been missed out in the existing mainstream narratives of Malaysian art history. Your name ( Lee KIan Seng), in particular, has come out many times as one of the artists in the earlier generations whose work has been missed out and under-recognized.” , a  regional academician observed。

  10. 2008: 李健省于2008年 1月11日在马来西亚理科大学（University Sains Malaysia），4月12日在马来西亚国家艺术馆主讲《见证马来西亚艺术》。这两场讲座分别由理科大学副教授Hasnul J.Saidon 与 国家画廊研究开发部主任 Puan Zanita Anuar 主持。李健省根据原始记录开始纠正马来西亚艺术史里的偏见与错误。 LEE Kian Seng set out on a mission to rectify the factual inaccuracies of Malaysian art history found in the official historical documents which have been perpetrated by a racist and hegemonic regime.  Based on original visual documentation, Lee Kian Seng talks about 18 pieces of his 3-D works (installations) dating from 1968 －1990, with special highlight on the evolutionary process of 5 works between 1968 -1973 @University   Sains Malaysia on 11th January 2008 and on 12 th April 2008@ National Art Gallery Malaysia respectively.

  11. 马来西亚国家画廊1958年成立。林碧颜律师 ( P.G.Lim )曾经是马来西亚国家画廊第一届信托委员会副主席兼画展委员会主席及 第一届"Salon Malaysia 1968" 画展会召集人 (Convener)。她曾任驻联合国第一位常任代表，驻南斯拉夫、比利时、奥地利大使，联合国主会与经济委员会主席，国家咨询理事成员，律师公会秘书，职工会律师、国际区域仲裁中心主席，策略及国际研究院（ISIS）成员。她于2013年在澳洲过世。The National Art Gallery Malaysia was established in 1958. Dato' (Ms) P.G. Lim was then the first deputy chairperson of the Board of Trustees as well as the chairperson of the Exhibitions Committee. Apart from being the convener of the first Salon Malaysia art exhibition, she had been the first permanent representative of Malaysia to the United Nations, and a Malaysian ambassador to Yugoslavia, Belgium and Austria respectively. She had also been a former chairperson of the UN General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council, a member of the National Advisory Council, the secretary of the Malaysian Bar Council, an attorney for the Malaysian Trade Union Congress, and the former director of the Kuala Lumpur Regional Arbitration Center, Malaysia and was a member of the Institute of Strategic and International Studies (ISIS) Malaysia.She passed away in 2013 in Australia.
  12. 最近（2013年）也有黑手在某拍卖行的拍卖预告里以赝品滥用李健省名字。

  13. 归纳过去30年记事，只有一小撮人在官方平台滥权，在各种撰述里篡改李健省70年代同一批作品的造型元素，构图与创作年代。这些人一石二鸟，最终目的无非是要篡改史实谋私利和同时移花接木去建立有利当权的解析体系。遗憾地方上华社里也有心怀叵测的“艺术中心院长/世袭的”艺术协会会长/主席”，以讹传讹去献媚官老爷和蒙蔽华社子弟。

  14. 马来西亚国家画廊马不停蹄地篡改史实，2010年又出版了另一轮移花接木著述去巩固当权的解析体系。处心积虑只字不提李健省1975年前的装置艺术作品。莫非是要借尸还魂，替某些人的滥权与欺诈再作辩护？ http://faizalsidik.blogspot.com/2011/02/revolution-in-malaysia-art.html

  

< A review by Chu-Li on  book  Modern Artists of Malaysia by T.K. Sabapathy and (Mohamed) Redza Piyadasa published by Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka Malaysia (1983)”, The Sunday Star, Malaysia December 11, 1983 >    

The major concern of the authors of Modern Artists of Malaysia is to make us aware that the special problem the art critic faces today is the need to locate a tradition of criticism within which to operate, for a criticism is basically a Western habit.

Even in the West, such a need is relatively recent. In Malaysia, there does not exist a history of art that can truly be considered a tradition from which modern art direction can emerge.

Both authors, T.K. Sabapathy and (Mohamed)Redza Piyadasa, believe modern art in Malaysia has its own self-defining history directly related to an international tradition rather than a specifically historical and national one.

That which exists as an indigenous art tradition does not have sufficient conditions to qualify as a parent tradition for modern art. Both claim that in Malaysia, modern art therefore is an independent activity observing its own structural requirements and satisfying its own contexts.

Both authors are art critics themselves and have served as members of the Board of Trustees of the National Art Gallery (Malaysia). Being also an art historian, Sabapathy is currently lecturing at the National University of Singapore. Piyadasa is a artist and was lecturing modern Malaysian art and modern Asian art at the University Sains Malaysia.

But this is not the first published on contemporary Malaysian art and artists. Dolores Wharton’s Contemporary Artists of Malaysia was published for the Asia Society in 1971. To date, both books have attempted to offer a glimpse into contemporary Malaysia art scene and a superficial survey of our modern artists.

“Modern Artists of Malaysia” offer a thought provoking but brief investigation of the history of Modern Malaysian art, starting from the Nanyang group of artists of World War 2 up to Conceptual Art.

In the short introduction, Sabapathy tells the story of its “subdued beginning.” By the late 50’s two schools of art could be discerned.

The representational school, which upheld the notion of art for a social purpose, led by Hoessein Enas, has its devotees among the portrait artists from the Malay educated.

The other was a school of early expressionists consisting of artists who had studied abroad.

These were largely influenced by the German Expressionists and the New York School . Initially, they were some of the artists associated with the early Wednesday Art Group of KL (Malaysia) among whom Syed Ahmad Jamal,Cheong Laitong and Latiff Mohiddin (Anak Alam Group) gradually rose as major artists.

By late 60’s to early 70’s, a new aesthetic, which was stirred on by the New Scene artists, cried out for a non-symbolic art. The most vocal among whom were Suleiamn Esa and Piyadasa.

The first part of this book is interesting. But you would have to read Syed Ahmad Jamal’s account, 25 Years of Malaysian Art, in the silver anniversary publication of the National Art Gallery, to get a broader and deeper perspective into contemporary Malaysian art.

The second part of Modern Artists of Malaysia consists of the biographies of 26 “modern artist.”

These are revised versions of their profiles, which have appeared in the Dewan Budaya (Malaysia) magazines from January 1979 to February 1981.

In their selection, the authors claim they’ve been guided by “ our perception of the significant of individual accomplishment in relation to current notions of the major trends of modern art in this country”

One is tempted then to ask that  why some of the artists who have been briefly mentioned in the introduction have not been also given a profile in the second half of the book: Choong Kam kow, Tang Tuck Kang, Tan Teong Eng, Khalil Ibrahim, Chung Chen Sun, Joseph Tan and Annuar Rashid.

We are further tempted to ask why the following artists who have contributed significantly to modern Malaysian art have not been mentioned at all—Ahmad Khalid Yusof, Lee Kian Seng, Sharifah Fatimah Zubir, Long Thien Shih, Chew Teng Beng, Lim Eng Hooi, Lee Chek Wen, Mustapah Haji Ibrahim and a few others.

Nirmala Shanmughalingam and Ruzaika Omar Basree and their works make good reading. But Latif Mohidin’s works have been covered up to Langkawi series of 1978. No mention is made of his Mindscape series.

Some of the significant paintings and the Palestine images of Ibrahim Hussein are not featured.

There is tendency to fix artists in particular periods. For instance, Sulaiman Esa is described as a colourist and an articulate conceptual artist, although he has now begun to explore possibilities in Sufi geometry. As a result the book has become a personal and subjective account.

Nevertheless, conceptual art and its exponents, has been covered well. The biographies of Sulaiman Esa and Piyadasa are interesting and comprehensive. It is stated that the manifesto “Towards a Mystical Reality”, 1974’ written by Sulaiman Esa and Piyadasa, critically analysed the weaknesses of Malaysian art and offered solutions.

It and its accompanying exhibition generated considerable controversy. Unfortunately, this is the only document in which an aesthetic position has been declared and defended. But one cannot help and but feel that  “ Modern Artists of Malaysia “ is another attempt to resurrect and vindicate an understanding of conceptual art among its readers. 

Fortunately, by the 80’s, modern art in Malaysia moved to Joseph Tan and his Trenganu series, and Ingatan Dungun; Sarifah Zubir’s Light series and Nursiyah series; Eric Peris’s Through Thai Window and Anicca; Latif Mohiddin’s Mindscape; Sulaiman Esa’s Jentayu Campuran--- all interpreting some aspect of Tao, Zen, Islamic, Buddhist, Hindu, Sufi philosophy.

Ismail Zain’s Dot-detribalisation of Tam; Syed Ahmad Jamal’s recent landscape of symbolic abstract forms; Yeoh Jin Ling’s Ecology series; Asa Osman’s Naza;Ahmad Khalid Yusof’s “Khat” spiritual content, Annuar Rashid’s Wind, Water, Fire---are all traces of the new trend of modern Malaysian art as well.

Among the younger artists Zakaria Awang’s Al Rahman sculputural construction and the works of Ponirin Amin and others would make the book “ Modern Artists of Malaysia “ seem urgently in need of an updated edition, for it has only offered a veneer of modern artists of Malaysia. 

If the authors had worked at it for another two years, perhaps all these works might have been mentioned. It would have been a much more interesting book if, the concepts and themes of modern Malaysian art have been consistently traced through and seen in relation to their corresponding development and changes in literature, music, drama, and philosophy rather than through the individual biography of the artists. But such an approach may not be possible at present. Even in doing a book on such a massive discipline like modern art, we cannot deny its insurmountable problems.

 But like the two authors say “… to adopt an apologetic stance would be self defecting,” as it also has its thrills and privileges in writing about what is happening here and now!

 As it stands, this book is not altogether about the here and now, or at least not enough of it. It can only stand as a thought-provoking introduction of Modern Malaysian art and our “modern” artists.   

 Chu-Li  , The Sunday Star, Malaysia December 11, 1983