Addressing Issues That Limit Artistic Expression In Everyday Places

ADJOURNMENT MOTION

The Leader of the House (Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That Parliament do now adjourn."

Question proposed.

ADDRESSING ISSUES THAT LIMIT ARTISTIC EXPRESSION IN EVERYDAY PLACES

6.22 pm

Mr Kok Heng Leun (Nominated Member): Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. Before I speak, I would like to say this on behalf of all my NMP colleagues. We were talking about it. We would also like to express our thanks to the House, to the Government and to all our fellow parliamentarians for your patience, for your generosity. Through all these debates, we have actually felt that it was a very, very enriching experience. Thank you very much. [Applause]

Now, I can give my speech.

Mr Deputy Speaker: Thirty seconds have gone and have been lost.

Mr Kok Heng Leun: Art is art. We are familiar with art when it is "art". We understand them sometimes as something material, like a painting, a sculpture, or an installation, or an event over a specific time, like a performance or movie screening. We are familiar with these arts being produced and presented in conventional spaces, such as theatre, gallery spaces, cinemas, screening rooms, studios and so on. Of course, there are occasions when these works are presented in alternative spaces. But there are also defined spaces, like in a church, in a quarry or in a cemetery.

Purpose-built art spaces are crucial – like Esplanade, National Gallery Singapore, Singapore Arts Museum, The Substation, Centre 42, amongst others. These are privately-managed public spaces, providing focused spaces for developing and appreciating artistic expression. They congregate audiences and supporters of the arts, therefore creating also a sense of community. They have become iconic sites and attractions in their own right, not only for locals, but also for visitors from the region and abroad who are interested in finding out what our artistic community is doing.

But art is not just what occurs in these spaces. Human capacity for expression is not limited to just these spaces. Art is not just artifice – which it also can be – it is also about life.

When artists take art beyond conventional spaces, they seek to engage with the expressions of the everyday and in sites of the everyday. Here, the gestures and relationships of our everyday spaces and activities become the material of art.

Art as life help us to understand ourselves, allow us to reinvent ourselves. When art happens in everyday places, the space and the gesture, the expression, all become a curios. This distancing, what we call an aesthetic distancing, stimulates queries, investigation, reflections and in many occasions, even actions to realise the reinvention.

Such art practice interrogates our everyday being. It comes with some inconvenience, but necessary to stimulate our creative and imaginative being. As I have said before, creativity comes from ruptures, from interventions, from challenging norms, perceived notions and habits. And when such art practices happen in everyday spaces, it becomes all the more immediate, because everyday places are public space that allows people to interact and be in communal with one another.

As a small nation city, we have quite a substantial population, we have a lot of built-up areas – flats, huge shopping centres, office buildings – and with so much focus on economic and consumeristic activities and successes, public spaces for everyday interaction and communal engagement are important. As Peter G Rowe, a Professor at Harvard University’s Graduate School of Design said, “[A sense of community] makes me feel as though I’m part of a human race, not the rat race!”

When familiar everyday space is filled with excitement and surprises, one becomes rejuvenated and excited. One becomes attentive to things around us, not taking them for granted. Hence arts as life, in everyday places, is one important way to re-connect to our spontaneity, to re-discover our curiosity, to repair our relationships with space, things and people.

And now, I will talk about permits and permission related to the using of this space. But first, let me recall, my early years when I was working at The Substation, founded by Mr Kuo Pao Kun. By the way, today is the 16th death anniversary of Mr Kuo. The Substation is also called "The Home for the Arts". And indeed it is a home for many artists and many different arts practices.

There was this sense of free-spirit where conversations flows, things happen. It is a place that celebrates spontaneity, respect artists and their work. It also respects audience by honouring them as individuals who are generous even when they may have different tastes in and preferences on art. I would like to focus on the Substation Garden which is an outdoor space of The Substation where public would come, artists would gather. Hence, it is a public space.

On a busy night, there would be a set-up in the garden to prep for a performance or a hard rock gig with very noisy sound tests. There will be people after watching a piece of theater in the Black Box, they will be gathering in the Garden, discussing what they saw, debating what they liked or disliked, expressing their frustration over some impenetrable work.

In the same Garden, artists like Zai Kuning, Tang Da Wu, Amanda Heng, or academics like Lai Ah Eng would be at the Garden, probably talking to each other after a conference, while some people may be practising on their guitars, or basker Roy Payamal would be practising his juggling skill in the Garden.

Street performing artist Roy did not need to ask permission to practise at the Garden. Roy made sure that when ever his juggling ball flew out of his hand, crossing the path of anyone there, he would pick it up, and in his very gentle manner, would smile apologetically.

Why did I take such pain to describe The Substation Garden? Because it was here, that I learnt about what makes a space, a place and what makes a good public space. Here I learnt to debate, to listen, to know that there are so many art forms, so many possible artistic practices, so many different opinions that it is important not to judge, but to know that we are all different – we have different opinions and we can co-exist.

The Garden was a place that need no permissions. In fact, many years later, I realised that the people who used the Garden, whether the artist or the audience, gave permission to each other to try things, to be different, to disagree, to agree, and most importantly, to gather. That is why it became such an amazing public space for artists and audience. And I do not remember me, being an arts administrator there managing the Garden, having to do any policing.

Now, on the point of permits and permission, within conventional spaces, certain conditions of the space and use may already determine how art is developed or presented. I have to say that it is to the credit of some of these arts public institutions, like Esplanade, National Gallery, who have gone the extra mile, to reach out to audience, to place-make these public spaces.

However, would these huge public institutions, where artists gather, where artists would meet and talk about ideas, allow people to be spontaneous? What if when dancers, while discussing their future work at the foyer, start to move to demonstrate ideas, then followed by some improvisations that come along in response to the movements? Would this be allowed in such institutions?

I have checked with some of the artists and there are stories where they told me that they would be stopped by the security guards. And the reasons cited would be such activities or behaviour would create disturbances to other visitors.

Have we become over-zealous in our effort to make sure that these public spaces are well kept, thereby taking away the spirit of spontaneity of an artistic space? That is an irony indeed.

So, how can these privately owned public institutions allow such spontaneity?

What about the use of everyday spaces for the arts? There are permits and laws that prohibit certain kinds of activities or expressions, such as the Public Order Act, Public Disturbance, Obscenity Act, and so on.

These laws do articulate, to an extent and to a measure of certainty and interpretation, the scope of what is legal, or permitted by the authorities.

But let us consider a hypothetical situation. On a weekday night, a musician outside Toa Payoh Library – you know there is big square there – practising his guitar. His skill was so good that he attracted people gathering around him. He responded because it was fun and he asked them to start to move and dance. So, people gathered. Is this permissible?

People may say that this is a hypothetical situation and Singaporeans are not so spontaneous. I disagree and agree. I disagree because after many years of artistic practices in public space, I find that Singaporeans want to tell their stories. They want to express and connect with artists. That desire is innate, deeply human, to be with each other, to do things spontaneously. In the early years of our forum theatre performances, we have to beg people to come up to make interventions or to expect our friends to come up to make interventions. But now, people, audiences, come up voluntarily. When we set up tables for conversations on end-of-life issues, people would sit and share and will not stop until we tell them that we have to end by 10.00 pm, because that is stipulated in our performance licence.

Yet, I also would agree that Singaporeans are not so spontaneous because I think we have been culturally and politically conditioned to be cautious. The many laws, like Public Order Act, that caution people from gathering, from getting together for a cause, permits and permissions needed to express, to perform, all these narratives of Singapore need to be orderly has conditioned our mindset, inhibiting us. Making us fearful of being spontaneous: what if I break the law, what if people get offended, what if people complain? And many, many "what ifs".

Deputy Speaker, there are a lot of instances where art works well in public and everyday spaces. Forum theatre in heartlands dealing with difficult issues, like end-of-life concerns, discriminations of migrant workers, domestic violence, all these have happened in public spaces without incidents. In one of our recent works, THE LESSON, which talked about how one makes difficult choices on land issues and what is a democratic process, people stayed to participate, debate and are respectful of each other.

Crowd events such as Night Fest and so on, where there certainly is not a high ratio of security for the crowd it attracts, would go on peacefully. I would say that the populace knows how to experience and understand art in these places.

Can art happen beyond the 30 places prescribed by the Government? Only when art can happen in ordinary and every day places, then can we claim, as in the ACSR report, that art is everywhere.

Then there is still the question of what kind of work is permitted and who can decide them.

In the case of artistic expression, is it aesthetic, which can be subjective; moral, which has a level of subjectivity too, and which has certain aspects covered under legal terms; or political, which should be distinguished from legal? What are all these considerations that help decide if that work can be done in public or in everyday spaces? What if there was a case where an artistic expression does not flout the law? Should or then can it be permissible by default? Or if a permission were sought for such an artistic expression that does not flout the law, would it be granted?

If a group had applied for a licence to blindfold themselves and sit in the train silently, holding the book "This Is What Inequality Looks Like" would that be permitted? Would it also be allowed if it is done without applying for permit and licence? It is a quiet piece; it does not create any disturbances; it is performance art in the public.

What if there are some complaints from certain members of the public to the work? Does it then mean that it should be taken down, or the performance being stopped?

Can an individual or a group who disagrees with a particular artistic work or message, then advocate for it to be removed in the name of it being in the public space? So, who is this public? What is this public space for? For which public?

The right to a city, this is an idea proposed by French sociologist who talks about if a city, which also include the public space, is meant for public, it should be safe and permissible for everyone to be there, to interact, to exchange information and ideas, as long as the exchange does not incinerate and create disorder. That is a right to the city, a right for everyone.

So, what should we do if there are complaints about artistic work being placed in public space? Let me quote from ACSR, page 18:

“There is a scope to let the community take greater ownership of our arts and culture activities, facilities and development, in order to harness Singapore's creative capacity. Unfortunately, much of our cultural development is currently perceived as being directed 'top-down'. Our people need more space and support to initiate artistic and cultural activities from the ground-up, with the Government playing a more catalytic role in facilitating connections and allowing emergent subcultures and creative communities to thrive.”

I support the Government in this vision but we know that while we are at the infancy of this development. There have been disputes and disagreement. The Golden Staircase, Mr Oh’s installation at the void deck in Chong Pang, amongst others. So, here I would humbly like to propose that the Government should form an independent body, almost like an ombudsman, to look at such disagreement. The independent body should include legal experts, artistic personnel and various stakeholders to address these disagreement, to investigate complaints, but importantly to set up dialogues and conversations between complainants and the artists. This is how public space should be managed. It is about dialogues, sometimes with disagreement, but the intention is to include, not to exclude.

I would like to end my speech on this issue of trust. I hope that this Government would trust that artists in Singapore are very responsible people. A lot of time when they make work, they do works that are personal with a lot of committed beliefs.

When we talk about earning trust, it is not just about sitting there and say, "Hey, show me you can be trusted". It means one needs to reach out to connect in order to express trust. The public space, being a space where strangers meet strangers, means we have to be able to trust by connecting and not by segregating or being territorial or tribal.

Any honest and truthful artist work on trust. Why? Because without which they would not put their artworks in the public, to be critiqued, to be judged. An artwork is a personal and deep expression of self and to show it to public, one must trust the audience. It is this gesture of faith in our capacity as artists, as human beings, that we want to reach out to people, and to hear and get their response.

Artists have great faith in audiences. Likewise, I hope the audience, the public, the Government, everyone, would have the same faith in the artists. Art practices in everyday spaces, is an expression of this trust and this connection.

Mr Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Mr Kok. I am glad I did not have to guillotine you. Minister for Culture, Community and Youth, Ms Grace Fu.

6.40 pm

The Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank Mr Kok for his observations and suggestions to increase artistic expression and engagement in Singapore.

Mr Kok referred to the many opportunities for art in public spaces beyond the conventional gallery, theatre or studio. In fact, he has mentioned several examples of how forum theatre has been able to engage the public in multiple locations in Singapore, having good engagement on topics that can be difficult, can be emotional and sensitive at times. That is, in fact, the best testament of how art has been able to be carried out in public with trust, with good conversations and with mutual understanding. So, I am glad that he is indeed affirming that this has taken place in Singapore.

He also noted that the Singapore Night Festival organised by the National Heritage Board has done well to balance accessibility and security. I agree with Mr Kok that Singapore’s arts and culture scene, including art in our public spaces, is indeed vibrant and thriving. Aside from the Night Festival, there are many, many other opportunities for Singaporeans to enjoy art in everyday spaces in the city centre, as well as in our heartlands. These include NHB’s Singapore Heritage Festival, National Gallery Singapore’s Light to Night, the National Arts Council’s (NAC’s) Arts in Your Neighbourhood, and People Association (PA)’s PAssionArts. I am sure PAssionArts is quite familiar to many of the Members sitting around the House, because it is taking place in every constituency in Singapore - in everyday spaces, in hawker centres, in void decks, in community centres, in parks. These offerings are part of the over 100 arts and cultural events available each day, and which 74% of Singaporeans agreed that they were proud of in the 2015 Population Survey on the Arts.

Mr Kok also spoke about the spaces that are currently available for public art. The Government has embarked on a variety of efforts to increase public art over the last 30 years. These include the Urban Redevelopment Authority’s Public Sculpture Masterplan and Art Incentive Scheme, the Land Transport Authority’s Art in Transit Programme, NHB’s Public Art Tax Incentive Scheme, and the NAC’s establishment of the Public Art Trust (PAT) in 2014 with a $10 million seed fund from the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth (MCCY). Under NAC’s Busking Scheme, over 250 buskers have been endorsed since 2017. They include the father and son duo, Mr Mashruddin Saharuddin and Nizaruddin, who were featured at this year’s National Day Parade, and whose performances have enlivened city life and energised urban spaces.

I am pleased to update that NAC has secured over 50 sites around Singapore for public art, from a shophouse wall in Boat Quay to an open area near an HDB block in Tampines. NAC will continue to identify more of such spaces, and work with site owners to make them available for artists to showcase their work. Together with spaces for street art at Goodman Arts Centre, Aliwal Arts Centre, and *SCAPE, these sites will help augment our arts and cultural offerings, and add vibrancy to our city.

MCCY remains committed to making the arts and culture accessible to everyone, and to working closely in partnership with arts practitioners as well as enthusiasts, hobbyists and volunteers. We want to create an environment where more Singaporeans, and not only trained artists, can appreciate and participate in the arts, so that the arts are an integral part of all our lives.

In 2017, PAssionArts involved some 50,000 art participants and volunteers, about 30 arts groups and 300 organisations, including schools, voluntary welfare organisations, religious groups, community groups, and hospitals in more than 65 heartland locations. At this year's PAssionArts Festival in July and August, a memorable experience was the Animal Art workshop where three-generational families and neighbours came together to create and paint on wooden planks. And this is an example of how art in everyday spaces, in everyday places, and in everyday lives, can help build the connections which Mr Kok referred to, and which my Ministry also seeks to develop between Singaporeans.

We are also stepping up efforts to engage our youths who are the future generation of artists, patrons and supporters of the arts. To do this, we provide opportunities for talented youths to showcase their work. At the recent Night Festival, I had the pleasure of interacting with two groups involving students from the Singapore University of Technology and Design and their work – Hyperbands by Kopi/O and Orbit by LiteWerkz. Their enthusiasm demonstrated how we must continue to support our youth in pursuing their passions, including by expressing themselves and showcasing a part of our Singaporean identity through the arts.

The Government supports art in everyday spaces because we are aware of its ability to shape common experiences and to spark shared interests. And if done well, this can help Singaporeans develop stronger bonds, and bring us together as a people.

At the same time, however, we are mindful that our public spaces serve a wide range of needs of Singaporeans. We need to be sensitive and respectful of the different perspectives, values, and way of life in our multi-cultural and multi-generational society. It is MCCY's role to ensure that we promote the arts and raise arts excellence in a way that gains strong public support for arts and culture across the board. Therefore, in promoting public art, we must strike a careful balance between the artists, and the stakeholders who own and use the premises.

For example, park users may appreciate the occasional band performance, but prefer to keep the park quiet and serene at other times. Therein lies the need to consult different stakeholders as a matter of respect and basic courtesy – those who own and use the space should also have a say. I am sure that Mr Kok can see the merits of this approach, as he has often advocated for acknowledging diversity in views, in this case from different users of public spaces, including non-arts practitioners. He too has noted the importance of how public art should not flout the law or create public disorder.

Mr Deputy Speaker, I will elaborate on how the Government supports art in our common spaces that add to the enjoyment and experience of Singaporeans and enhance our physical landscape, while taking in the considerations that I have outlined earlier.

First, the Government, through NAC, commissions key public art works. The first three commissions under the Public Art Trust (PAT) were conceived to commemorate Singapore's Golden Jubilee. Another two new public artworks will be commissioned in community spaces to commemorate Singapore's Bicentennial next year. And NAC plans to commission one additional public artwork each year thereafter. In other words, we are actively supporting, financing, and cultivating artists to bring public artworks, sculptures and installation art to public spaces.

NAC has made efforts to involve the arts community in good public art projects through its grants. For example, OH! Open House, a recipient of NAC's Major Company Scheme funding, curates art walks that bring art into unexpected, everyday spaces such as HDB flats.

Second, the success of the arts in Singapore is the result of a strong and mutually-beneficial partnership between the Government, the corporates and individuals. NAC not only encourages private donations for new public art, but also engages key partners for their support, such as in securing new sites for this art. For example, the PAT advises both site owners and artists on best practices in commissioning, installing, maintaining and decommissioning public artworks.

Third, to present public art that is relevant to Singaporeans from all communities and walks of life, we must continue to bring art closer to the community through thoughtful programming and outreach. The initiatives of our arts groups, like the national orchestras and Mr Kok's own Drama Box in the heartlands are good examples.

The PAT commissioned a Stop and Smell the Ang Mo Dan! exhibition with NAC's Arts In Your Neighbourhood initiative in March this year. The site-specific works by four Singaporean artists included talks, live painting sessions and hands-on craft activities for residents and non-residents of Ang Mo Kio to learn about the rich history and hidden characteristics of this neighbourhood. These activities reached over 190,000 people, and demonstrated how public art can engage and bring communities together when it is carefully curated.

Deputy Speaker: Minister, you have two more minutes.

Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Thank you very much, Deputy Speaker. As a result of the combined efforts of the Government, private, public and people sectors, today, a wide range and diversity of visual and performing arts have enlivened our public spaces. The Government will continue to develop our policies so that Singapore is home to diverse and distinctive arts that are accessible to, and inspire our people, and connect our communities. Thank you, Deputy Speaker, for your indulgence.

Question put, and agreed to.

Resolved, "That Parliament do now adjourn."

Adjourned accordingly at 6.52 pm.