| EN |

neoneo Part1 [boys]: neoneo boys are "soshokukei - herbivorous artists"?
Reviews
Written by Satoshi KOGANEZAWA   
Published: August 27 2009

     The other day, I wrote about the “neoneo Part1 [boys]: neoneo boys are ‘soshokukei - herbivorous artists’?”, which is now being held at the Takahashi Collection Hibiya, as follows:

“Needless to say, collecting art works is a political activity, and has always been so historically. We can also see an extremely political and violent attempt, in the embarrassing naming of “neoneo boys” as well as "Neoteny Japan", to establish a certain fixed concept of the age, the artist, or the work using this influential language as a tool. This exhibition shows not only the collected works, but also the strong desire of the sponsors to locate those collections historically and socially. The artists seem to be victims through being categorized by the trivial naming.”*1

fig. 1

fig. 2

 

     Now, to avoid misunderstanding, I would like to emphasize that the above text was not written about the Takahashi Collection itself. As I used the phrase, “the strong desire of the sponsors” in the above writing, the people whom I intend to criticize here are the “organizers” of this exhibition. Nonetheless, it might have been easier to understand my meaning if I had used the word, the “planner”. Because of this, I should apologize to the readers, but anyway, the above text is not about the Collection itself. Anyhow, as I wrote in the news release, “Director : Ryutaro Takahashi”, the focus of my criticism includes, of course, Takahashi himself, but it also targets Mayumi Uchida and Yayoi Kojima, who are the curators of this exhibition. In addition, I suppose Noriko Miyamura (editor, LaiRai), who wrote the contributed article entitled “Soshokukei - the narcissism”, in which she simply gave an appreciation of the current Takahashi Collection, has a similar way of thinking to that of the above-mentioned three people.

     In the article, Miyamura mentioned admiringly how great the Takahashi Collection was and how interesting the theme of this exhibition was. The following phrases reflect her idolatry clearly: “In this exhibition, which is held with the aim of intensively introducing Japanese art works, and which is a focus of international attention, we can enjoy only a small proportion of the Takahashi collections, which are, in fact, composed of more than a thousand art works.” There is no explanation of why the phrase, “a focus of international attention” was used. I would never agree with casually using a term which means a “worldwide approbation”, even if some “Japanese art works” fetch high prices and therefore attract the attention of art experts. Indeed, generally, it is not unusual that an article that is contributed by an outsider to an exhibition contains a glorification of the show, but even if this is real, I am overwhelmed by her writing because it lacks any objectivity. In addition, I am just amazed to find that she has no hesitation in describing the young artists who follow the “Neoteny Artists” as the “Neo-Neoteny Generation”. This is an arbitrary name created by using coined terms. It seems that this cannot be helped, but furthermore, she also uses the name, the “Neo-Neoteny Generation”, as an axiom in the following line: “With the aim of introducing a number of the Neo-Neo Generation.” Here also, she does not explain why she uses this name in the article. Has Miyamura ever met the artists of the “Neo-Neoteny Generation”? If so, who are they? Or, if not, why can she write, “a number of the Neo-Neo Generation”?

     Considering my lack of knowledge about what kind of roles the two curators play in this exhibition, allow me to aim my attack only at Miyamura without referring to the acts of the curators. In addition, the writers’ names are not specified but instead other phrases are used, including “The ‘neoneo’ is held with the aim of showing the works which were created by the most remarkable young artists, dividing them into men’s and women’s groups,” and “This exhibition shows you the truth of the times through the creations made by the younger brothers of the Neoteny Japan Generation”. I cannot understand why they did not think twice about using words such as “the truth of the times”. I consider that the role of curators is to increase the value of artists and their works by creating new words or concepts. Although it is essential for curators to select words and explain carefully to achieve such an aim, the curators who wrote the above phrases seem to have waived such a requirement. This is probably because they place more emphasis on market value and less on art-historical value.

     Here again, I do not intend to criticize the Takahashi Collection itself or the artists and their creations, which and who belong to the Collection. Needless to say, I do not have the right to make comments on private collections, and if I wish to criticize a certain artist or his/her work, I can present my comments on the artist or his/her creation through essays about them. The reason I am writing this review is that I would like to point out the strangeness of the idolatrous descriptions, such as those revering the Takahashi Collection, and of the people who do not question the situation in which they glorify the Collection naturally. I also wish to say that I consider that “neoneo Part1 [boys]: neoneo boys are ‘soshokukei - herbivorous artists’?” embodies such a “strange” situation. After releasing the text first reprinted above, I have often been told that I did not need to write such comments since the exhibits are appealing. Nonetheless, I would never agree with such an opinion. Indeed, usually, I do not care about what is said about a certain collection, but this is applicable only when such comments concern insiders. We should definitely disagree with trends such as deciding the ideal situation for Japanese modern art. If you are a person of knowledge, you may understand how “strange” that would be.
(Translated by Nozomi Nakayama)

Notes
*1
Written by Satoshi Koganezawa, “neoneo Part1 [boys]: neoneo boys are ‘soshokukei - herbivorous artists’?”, Exhibitions, KALONSNET, 2009
http://www.kalons.net/j/news/articles_948.html
Last Updated on May 10 2016
 

Editor's Note by Satoshi Koganezawa


Needless to say, the collection of art works is a political activity, and has always been so historically. We can also see an extremely political and violent attempt, in the embarrassing naming of “neoneo boys” as well as "Neoteny Japan", to establish a certain fixed concept of the age, the artist, or the work using this influential language as a tool. This exhibition shows not only the collection works, but also the strong desire of the sponsors to locate those collections historically and socially. The artists seem victims for being categorized by the trivial naming.


| EN |