read and speak Sanskrit - the language of the gods. That was

how they consolidated their power and retained their hold over

the populace. One had to go to them for rhe performance of

various rites and rituals. Ir was caste chat determined who spoke

Sanskrit and who spoke in the vernacular. In contrast , English has

hitherto been spoken in India by an economic elite. It has thus

been a marker of class, not caste. But this is changing now. With

popular cinema and television serving as its vehicle, Hinglish , and

its parallels in other Indian languages, is beginning to be spoken

by other sections of the population, not just the privileged classes.

One can foresee English, in this new avatar, eventually losing its

association with class, losing its status as a language linking only

the elites across the country , and perhaps even becoming the

dominant language of the streets.

Moderator IN-Sakai]: In the pre-modern era, kanji, in English

literally Chinese, or classical Chinese, served the same role as that

of Sanskrit. It was a language that was used only by a small

number of elites. Therefore it had universal characteristics that

enabled it to be used in Korea, China, Mongolia, and Vietnam.

The disintegration of such linguistic commonalties marked the

beginning of modernity. I think we should not dwell on this

subject too much.

Could we have Professor Tatehata comment on the issue of

triennials?

A. Tatehata: There was a question on how large-scale

international exhibitions, such as biennials and triennials, could

work as a cultural apparatus for the public . There was also a

question on the relationship between art for the public and pure

art. Also, there was a question about multiculturalism, which was

originally an ideology for living together , and whether it is

actually operative in biennials and triennials.

First of all, as to whether these international exhibitions are

cultural institutions oriented to the general public , I would say

that they are. Bur that does not mean that they are merely

entertainment. In most cases, large-scale international exhibitions

Session IV 399

are expected to attract a large number of visitors. The quality of

arr is nor direcrly correlated with the number of visitors, and chis

is often true for arr museums. The public orientation of a

triennial is inevitable, and chis kind of exhibition is nor worth

organizing unless there is a large rumour. But in order to compare

the arr in triennials with pure arr, it is necessary to define pure

arr.

For example, we could say that the most radical example of

pure arr is minimal arr. Its inorganic form is the ultimate in self-

reflexive arr. This is true from a formalist point of view, bur it can

be seen in a completely different way. Most minimal arr is made

of materials like stainless steel or ordinary steel char are common

in postwar industrial society, so it can be seen as emerging

because of changes in sensibility char appeared in postwar society,

reflecting the nature of industrial materials or industrial

production in which the same forms are repeated over and over.

So this is a difficult problem.

Bur it is true char international exhibitions are expected to be

a cultural institution char serves a large general audience. If we

agree on chis, then international exhibitions are different from

many other arr exhibitions because they are meant for the general

public and operated as one-rime festivals.

I am nor so optimistic as to imagine that the visitors to

Gwangju Biennale and Yokohama Triennale will become aware

and rake a strong interest in contemporary arr and eventually

become enthusiastic members of the arr audience just because of

seeing these shows. Bur I do agree char there is some meaning in

having a cultural institution char appeals to the general public.

We talked about multiculturalism and how it is an ideology for

harmonious living. I chink char a situation in which a variety of

cultures are spread our in a disorderly fashion constitutes a kind

of social criticism. Even if chis does not increase the number of

fans for contemporary arr, it would certainly raise the public's

consciousness and provide chem with new perspectives. In

reality, the sire of artistic production is nor very multicultural. Ir

may be char multiculturalism is fabricated to a certain extent in

order to fill the large, empty spaces of a triennial exhibition. To

400 Session lV

say this implies self-criticism. We need to be very careful, but the

possibility of this happening remains.

There was also a question on whether or not there are too

many biennials. The 1980s was the era of art museums, while the

1990s was the era of biennials and triennials. There may be some

problems involved in this phenomenon. There may be some art

that is created to fit the imperatives of biennials or triennials.

What can we do about his? In reality, I think we have to let

natural selection operate. If things get boring, they will stop.

Exhibitions can explore social commitment in art through a

self-critical process. For example, the current exhibition, "Under

Construction" sees art or culture as something that is always

under construction. If this kind of art is brought into an art

museum setting, the urban culture of the streets is directly

transplanted into the exhibition space and it rejects the aura of

the museum or the white cube. However, disappointment with

the space must be expressed in the space in some cases.

The same situation may be seen in the film Not One Less,

although this may not be a perfect analogy. When the violent

structure of the medium of television was introduced in the film,

the whole film screen became a television medium. There is an

element of self-criticism in this irony. Self-criticism could be

taken as masochistic. But my point is that the masochism should

be thought of positively.

fu to the last question regarding a good audience nurturing

good art, and how the audience is still in the development in

fuia. This is like the problem of the chicken and the egg.

Nurturing a good audience may be the mission of an art museum

or an art critic. But why do we need to develop a good audience?

Is it to make art flourish? If so, is it not mistaking the means for

the end? Can viewers become enlightened, become better people,

have a better life, or gain a greater critical awareness of society

through art? This probably isn't true. We are - or rather, I am

an art professional. But do I have a better life, a better personality,

or a greater ability to criticize society? I doubt it. Rather than

putting off an answer, I would probably have to say no.

Session IV 40 I

S. Yoshimi: I chink chis issue also concerns Professor Bennett.

T. Bennett: Yes, I'm also interested in the question about whether

or not biennials extend the social reach of arc. I do not know

what the answer to chis question is, but maybe I could suggest a

slightly different way of approaching it. I do not know what is the

case in relation to the biennials chat were mentioned earlier chis

afternoon, but there is a difference between saying chat biennials,

arc festivals and similar kinds of activities attract a large number

of people, and saying chat they are successful in extending the

social reach of art. To extend the social reach of arc is about

reaching new kinds of people, those who, in terms of their social

characteristics, are unlikely to be reached by art museums. In

other words, it may well be that biennials reach a large number of

people, but only those social and cultural elites who already go to

art museums, offering chem a concentrated period of artistic

involvement and appreciation. In which case, you have not really

extended the social reach of art at all. You have just given those

who are already involved in the institution of art an intensive and

concentrated arc experience. fu I said, I do not know whether this

is or is not the case. Bur I think chat whether new forms of art

exhibition and practice extend the social reach of arc is not just a

question of how many people are attracted to them; we also need

to know about the social characteristics of chose people. In a way,

if all you do is gee more people in the seats, but they are the same

types of people, you have not really extended the social reach of

arc. You have just heightened the experience of chose who are

already involved in the social institution of art.

Secondly, I would like to resist the suggestion - in relation

to any kind of art institution - chat the expansion of its audience

is something which cakes place at the expense of arc as an end in

itself. For I don't think the notion of art as an end in itself, or art

for arcs' sake, is a coherent one. I am not sure doing anything for

its own sake is either plausible or intelligent. And it 's noteworthy

that chis discourse of arc as an end in itself is now only rarely

supported by art producers. They are usually involved in

producing arc for a particular reason - political, ideological,

402 Session IV

aesthetic, etc. - which is not the same as arc as an end in itself.

Usually the discourse of art for arc's sake is associated with a

particular ethos of arcs consumption, one with its roots in

Western arc theory, especially Kantian aesthetics in the stress it

places on the need co attend to art disinterestedly as an end in

itself. I just wanted, then , co recall Pierre Bourdieu's argument

chat chis notion of art serves as a powerful ideology of artistic

consumption through which chose whose educational, social and

cultural backgrounds give chem a privileged access co the arts

distinguish themselves from che vulgar. Whenever people say chat

art is an end in itself, chat claim disguises a powerful process of

social division chat arc institutions have been, and continue co be,

involved in.

My third point is a reflection on whether quality art needs

quality audiences. I really enjoyed the way the question was put,

and also enjoyed Professor Tacehaca's response, in questioning

chat che notion chat involvement in the institutions of art is

necessarily something chat produces a good person. However, one

thing chat happens in institutions of art is chat certain kinds of

historical art get stored up and made available co us in the

present. But it does require particular forms of training co be able

co cake part in debates concerning arc's value and role. Again, I

should like co recall Bourdieu here, for he offered a very powerful

answer co the question of whose responsibi lity it is co make chis

training generally available co all groups within society. For while

Bourdieu always argued chat arc did have a distinctive kind of

value, he was also always emphatic chat it was the responsibi lity of

the institution of education co equalize access co the means of

artistic appreciation. Whenever you are talking about art and

access, you cannot leave education out of the picture .

T. Mizusawa: I would like co add co Professor Tacehaca's

comment.

I sense chat Professor Tacehaca's comment turned cynical

because he got worn out working as the artistic director for the

Yokohama Triennale last year. fu co the discussion on how

biennials and triennials may have the potential co change the

Session IV 403

existing system, as mentioned in Professor Lee's presentation, I

would say chat we have been aware of this for some time now. I

chink we had chat kind of notion already at the beginning of the

20th century, when exhibitions emerged as modernism began co

spread throughout the world. Since 1910 or so in Europe,

regardJess of their scale, exhibitions were seen as a media chat

could carry a message ofliberation , or a new framework that

could transcend existing academic discourses.

This movement unfolded with political implications, and

rose to new heights in exhibitions such as "Sonderbund

Internationale Kunstausstellung " in Cologne or the "Armory

Show" in New York. People eventually began to share the

concepts of modernism through these developments.

Ironically, this culminated in the exhibitions organized by

the Nazis. In 1937, the Nazis organized the "Entartece Kunst

(Degenerate Arc)" exhibition in Munich Hofgarcen, presenting

over 500 artworks and attracting 2 million visitors. This must

have been the largest contemporary art show held in the first half

of the 20th century. They only had three weeks to prepare chis

show. Goebbels ordered Hans Ziegler, president of the National

Art Academy, to organize an arc exhibition of degenerate arc,

giving him only three weeks of preparation .

This is an example of the ideas about time that Professor Lee

discussed. The Nazi government made a list of degenerate arc.

The authorities knew where these artworks were scored, so they

gathered the works from public museums that owned them co put

on the show. To counter this exhibition, the government

organized its official "Great German Art" exhibition. These two

exhibitions were organized to be presented at the same time. The

official show also attracted 600 thousand visitors in three months.

Although this number is small compared to the "Degenerate Arc"

exhibition, it is stiU strikingly large. If we got a turnout like chis

today, we would fall off our chairs from astonishment. There

were 2.6 million people in total who went co see the two shows.

The sheer scale of these experiences had their consequences in

German history. For example, Documenra in Kassel was founded

as a means of healing the wound of such wartime experience. Its

404 Session IV

powerful message of freedom lives on in the people who present

contemporary art.

I must say that as the number and scale of international

exhibitions continue to grow, we are starting to lose direction and

face problems that are outside of our control. I think that this is

something we need to think about and discuss, hopefully leading

to a productive debate.

Moderator [N. Sakai]: Thank you. This probably has something to

do with what we have been talking about. There was a question

of whether or not contemporary art will be carried on in the

future. I would like to pass this question on to Professor Koizumi

and Professor Bennett.

S. Koizumi: I may be repeating what Professor Tatehata said, but

I think that the issue is whether or not there is any culture that

lasts. In other words, all we need to do is to see if something that

is said to have been carried on actually has. For example, does it

matter is if ukiyo-e is still being done today? I believe that

contemporary art should be done as a form of 20th century art

beyond any consideration of whether it is being carried on or not.

T. Bennett: I would put the matter differently. Rather than

a;!f-;,:.,,,-;,,;-•• 2oe1

1ifitil1~.~7 ./7 - ~i)::.71T:

Session IV 405

speaking of art or culture as an inheritance, I would say that each

generation - through particular institutions of memory -

organizes those aspects of the past that are judged by its members

ro be relevant to their present concerns. This involves something

different from inheritance for - and this is ro rehearse the view

that many scholars, like Raymond Williams, have argued - any

tradition is an active selection of the past made within the

present. It is not something that is simply handed down by

people from the past and received passively by people in the

present, as if they had no alternative. If there is one thing that is

clear in the history of art, for example, it is that the history of

evaluation of artistic practice is not constant. We alter the place

that works of art occupy relative to one other within aesthetic

hierarchies. It is usually not the case, of course, that there is a

complete reversal and overthrowing of hierarchies from one

period to another - although there are periods of such radical re-

evaluation. But it is equally not the case that the judgements of

one period carry over and prevail, and are carried over like a

sedimentary rock formation into the next generation. We re-value

the works of the past as we relate them to contemporary concerns

that are always linked up with political, ideological, and

contemporary current cultural processes.

G. Mohamad: Allow me to comment on the issue of exhibitions

and biennials. I think Professor Tatehata mentioned the centers.

The different kinds of biennials have created different kinds of

centers, ifl understood you correctly. The more you have this

kind of thing, the more you create a constant de-centering of

possibilities of the art. The question is whether this kind of

constant de-centering will create a democratic experience or access

to artistic products. My hunch is that in art in the realm of ideas,

there is always a perpetual production of elites, whether you like

it or not.

In the social history of resources, there are two kinds of

wealth. One is democratic wealth, which is theoretically accessible

to everybody. The other one is oligarchic wealth, which could

only attained by a very small number of people or even one single

406 Session IV

person.

So even if Van Gogh's Sunflower painting has been

reproduced in millions of postcards and calendars, there would be

a person who wants to own the original and spend much time to

obtain it. It is not about the aura of the art, as Walter Benjamin

said, but it is about a kind of social impulse that produces this

perpetual production of elitism.

Moderator [N. Sakai]: So now we are talking about the issue of

appreciation of art, but this issue and the issue of representation,

which we have been talking about over and over today, are closely

related.

There are two questions which are closely related to our

current discussion. One is on tokenism, as pointed out by Mr.

Elliott . The other is about why Singapore and Malaysia are not

taking part in the "Under Construction" exhibition. The "other"

in Asia, which is outside Japan - how is this represented in this

current exhibition? I think these two questions are closely related,

so I would like to ask them together.

Could I ask Mr. Elliott first, to start with the issue of

tokenism?

D. Elliott: When I mentioned tokenism, I was talking about, in

big international shows, whether in museums or biennials, you

have your token someone from outside the charmed circles -

from some part that used to be called the "developing world." I

am afraid Japan was included in this, because it was not Western

Europe or North America. The system continues a little bit. I

think the last Documenta quite consciously tried to overturn it,

but it did not manage with regards to Asia, because it almost

totally disregarded this vast continent. Africa did quite well in

these stakes, so the African stock is going up. We have not yet

reached a level really where all parts of the world are considered

on an equal plane . Why should they be considered on an equal

plane? Because they are all part of the same discussion now. That

was what I was trying to say. But there is one discussion, and it is

not just focused on the West , but it is everywhere. That is a

Session IV 407

discussion which relates to contemporaneity.

When I was trying to do with this metaphor of"art and

trouser," - and perhaps I should say in parenthesis, is that the

largest empire in the world, the one that lasted for the longest

time was that of Genghis Khan which lasted 450 years and

stretched further out than the British Empire or the German or

the French - and if the Mongolian Empire had continued into

the modern period the name of my talk would have been "Art

and Horses," because, as we all know, horses figure very strongly

in Mongolian culrure and art. But no, I wrote about "Arr and

Trousers." I was trying to use the "trouser" as a kind of an

indicator of what still remains from colonialism in

postcolonialism. Ir is this underlying element that you do not

question, and is part of you now, because you cannot go back. I

think you cannot go back to doing ukiyo-e, unless some amazing

person completely rethinks ukiyo-e. Ukiyo-e now in Japan is

photography and manga. I think that one has to try to get hold of

that in this discourse: that we might not understand each other,

we might be wildly different, but we are all in the same

discussion. And we get out of it what we put into it.

About Singapore and Malaysia ..... Poor Singapore and

Malaysia! The Mongolians are very mad, too, because they were

not in the exhibition. Genghis Khan is going to declare war on

the Japan Foundation. I am sorry, I not being rude about the

question. I do not think that the exhibition was about

representation. For me, it is about process. That process is

empowering curators in different parts, and it could have been

Malaysia or somewhere else, to do something and bring it all

together and see what happens. The exhibition has all the

strengths and all the weaknesses of the process happening. But it

is a very good process - perhaps more important than the

exhibition itself. I think it is the first time it has been done, and it

is a great experiment.

Could I say something quickly about audience and art? I do

not think Kant ever said art was an end in itself. That came

hundred years later. The point that he made was that art is

autonomous. If it is autonomous unto itself, how is it intelligible?

408 Session IV

Kane's solution to that was that it was about beauty. Art had to be

beautiful. How do people know what beauty is? Beauty for Kam

was a moral entity. Everyone, whether they are bad or good, has

an innate relationship to morality. I am not talking about a

bourgeois sense of morality, bur I am talking about moralilty in

the sense of moral philosophy, not about sexual morals or

moralism. That is the point about art . It is related to life. Why

bother about audience? They have a life, too. It is the art and

culture of their times. Obviously , if you are committed to art, you

want to share it with other people.

The important thing about art is that it critiques and

subverts the use of many of the channels by which you usually

understand things, as in communication. And this is an

important function. It is often internally contradictory. It is not

making a single statement bur many statements, some of them

conflicting with each other on different levels. And that is how we

are. That is its richness and that is its beauty - or part of its

beauty.

Moderator [N. Sakai]: I think the issue Mr. Vellani brought up as

part of the Indian problem, at the level of different states within

the nation, is closely related to the problem of Asia as a whole and

its relationship with the different parts of Asia. If we look at the

issue from this perspective, we may link it to the issue of

tokenism. On the contrary, there may be a problem in Japan of

representing the Asia as a whole, and countries in Asia could resist

being cast outside as the "other." These issues may be related, or

may not be related. Could I have a comment on this please?

A. Vellani: When would we say that an act of representing or

including - say an artist or a country or an art form - smacks

of tokenism? It is when we perceive the act to be nothing more

than a symbolic gesture, one that does not reflect the true beliefs

or convictions of the author of the action.

An act of representing or including in one realm might

suggests tokenism because it runs contrary to how that agency has

consistently acted in the past or in other realms. Consider a

Session IV 409

multicultural country where che Scace organizes dance festivals

chat give representation co che movement expression of all the

different regions and ethnic groups. Its economic and social

policies, however, point co a strong bias in favor of groups

representing mainstream rather than minority cultures. One

could righcly conclude chat the government 's inclusion of

minority cul cure in its dance festivals is a form of tokenism, and

chat its so-called commitment ro cultural diversity is more

rhetorical than ideological.

Or cake a specific example. The Indian government has given

very liccle recognition co che various bailee groups in the country,

whose work springs from the innovations ofUday Shankar in the

lace colonial period. This is because che Indian bailee tradition

chat he created is seen as foreign in its inspiration. Bue during the

100th anniversary of his birch, che government did sponsor a

festival of the work oflndian bailee groups and discussions on

Uday Shankar's contribution co dance . This was clearly a case of

tokenism because it flies in che face of che nationalise discourse

chat otherwise informs che State's cultural policies. My point is

chat one makes token gestures to appear politically correct, when

one feels under pressure or finds it expedient co publicly uphold

principles or beliefs chat are not one's own.

In an exhibition of Asian arc, che arc of a particular country

4 IO Session IV

may be represented by too few or inadequate examples. But it

would be wrong to conclude on that basis alone that the art of

that country has been tokenized. This is because thoughtlessness

or incompetence might explain the under-representation.

Tokenism is an intentional act of making small concessions for

reasons that have nothing to do with one's core beliefs or

perspectives. Therefore to damn the exhibition for tokenizing a

country's art, we would need the support of arguments that show

that the exhibition organizers subscribe to views or policies that

indicate that this is an instance of tokenism. Their past record

might tell us, for instance, that they consider that country to be

not at the heart of Asia but at its periphery. Or that their idea of

Asia excludes that country altogether.

T. M izusawa: There was a question, which mentioned that it was

perhaps Asia who was "co-figuring" itself. When we speak of Asia,

it depends on what samples we select to represent it. The

dynamics of co-figuration - the acknowledgement of an entiry

through its relationship with an external entiry - and its

propensity to project an integrated representation, when

underwritten by a cultural apparatus, is a modernist

phenomenon. So the example of the fascist representation in the

exhibitions of 1937 is a case of such a dynamic demonstrated in

an extreme say. On the contrary, a force that counters this

dynamic motivates us to create our exhibitions today. It is the

source _of our energy. Yer because the same problem still remains,

we are trying to understand this issue now.

In relation to the issue of moderniry, I would like to

introduce the example of the discovery of Japanese crafts in

modern rimes. Craft existed before modern rimes, but by calling

it mingei, it was reinvented in a co-figurative scheme in which it

was opposed to art forms such as yoga and nihonga.

Yanagi Soersu, an international figure of the generation

following Okakura Kakuzo, discovered mingei. This is how we

have come to acknowledge mingei today. Yanagi, in a co-

figurative framework, claimed that something called "Eastern

beauty" could be found in zakki, or ordinary crockery, produced

Session IV 411

by anonymous artists . This created a nested concept of tradition.

Yanagi commented on tradition from a modern perspective.

The dynamic created by making this comment was in itself a

modern phenomenon . Prior to that time, the Japanese were most

likely unaware of"anonymiry. " Once "anonymiry" was called

"anonymiry," anonymiry is lost. Once these artists we recognized

as "unknown, " they were no longer unknown . This paradoxical

dynamic gave birth to mingei in Japan, and it was a dynamic that

supplemented the salon-rype exhibitions organized by the

government at the time. Eventually, mingei developed into a self­

reinforcing system in which it endorsed itself. To touch on a very

sensitive issue, Yanagi became the authoriry who decided what

constituted mingei in Korea. His system of endorsement reached

Okinawa, and even Mexico through his follower, Hamada Shoji.

This phenomena could be seen as a cell splitting into two,

where the object that was pure - doubtful as this may be -

acquired a second life with the help of the dynamics at work . This

may be analogous to how the situation of Wei in Not One Less

was transformed when she let tears roll down her cheeks on the

television screen. Something had changed completely at that

particular moment. In other words, the unknown crafrsman was

transformed as soon as craft became known as mingei. I think

there is a kind of modernist program at work in the background ,

which forces us to articulate and share a common representation .

There were not many museums in Japan at the time, so

Yanagi established his own private museum called Nihon

Mingeikan Qapanese Folk Arts Museum). He had to do so in

order to create a space where he could share his idea of

representation.

Moderator [N. Sakai): Thank you,. I would like to turn now to

Mr. Mohamad, and then to Professor Chow, who has done

interesting research on tokenism.

G. Mohamad: As I understand it, many ideas of multiculturalism

in the United States, and maybe in Europe, too, imply that

identiry is a form which is basically a group phenomena - either

412 Session IV

nation, race, or religion. In other words, it is identity that

represses difference. The importanc e of difference is that it can

speak something that does not come from the group identity. If

there is no Singaporean artist, maybe the organizer was not

concerned with group identity as much as individual expression.

The problem is the distorted notion of multiculturalism on a

larger scale. There was an incident in the United Scates, in which

the father killed his daughter because she rebelled against him by

marrying a person he did not like. The defending claim was chat

ic was culturally okay for che father co kill che daughter who

rebelled against the father. The notion of mulciculcuralism is

usually tolerance, but ic gives no freedom for the woman co be

different from che difference. In F ranee, years ago, they cried co

prevent three girls from wearingjilbabs. Some intellectuals

defended chis by claiming chat these girls should have the

freedom co be different from their identity. The idea of difference

as a kind of emancipation against identity should be part of che

agenda today.

R. [how: I would like co briefly say chat che whole question of

mulciculcuralism in the United Scates indeed makes the question

of tokenism a very urgent one, and ic seems co not go away. There

are mainly two issues. I chink it is highly problematic chat it is

only certain people who tend co be created as tokens, racially,

ethnically or something in terms of gender. The criticism of

tokenism along chose lines is very clear co all of us. You single out

a few members of chose races or ethnicities or genders and make

chem represent che entire group. So che whole issue of group is in

question . le is as if a certain group of race or ethnicity could be

represented by one or two people.

On che ocher hand, since I have found myself in che position

of being a token a lot of che time, I also understand chat a certain

kind of power comes with tokenism . I, for one, would not like co

not use chat power. If chis is the only opporcuniry I have, I chink

ic is much better chat I use it rather than letting ic go altogether

because of being overly critical. So I chink I am slighcly

schizophrenic on the whole issue of tokenism.

Session IV 4 ll

In the West, for a person of color to have any agency in

speaking, you are always, in spite of who you are and what you

intend, you are always perceived as a token, whether or not you

like it. So if we speak as tokens, we do so with the full knowledge

that we are implicated in the system of tokenism. I do not think

that any person individually could overcome this.

Moderator [N. Sakai]: Now, I would like to take questions from

the floor in response to che previous comments by the panelist, or

anything that is related to the whole symposium.

Question: My question may be abstract, bur while listening to

Professor Chow's presentation, I thought that in the situation of

Asian film directors there is an inconsistent or contradictory force

chat is at work within che individual film director or the audience.

I felt that it was important to re-examine che conflicting forces at

work here which are more fluid than a single locus of power

which is usually revealed by culcural studies.

If this is the case, a representational artwork, particularly

film, is a unique medium which moves in che direction of

embracing a variety of conditions. I thought that the Asia in

transformation is related to this.

When we turn our eyes to Japan, there are not many places

in which artworks can be viewed in terms of mulcifaceted

criticism . There is not enough information. Bur at today's

symposium, I found much new information. I think it is

important to have places like this to discuss the issues. Would you

care to comment?

R. [how: I think that chose of us, Professor Sakai and myself who

are perceived as token in America, are not going to be tokens

when he is in Japan and I am in the Chinese-thinking world. I

am not sure. I think chis is a very different question. I do not

wane co give a facile answer, so with your permission, I would

have to defer from che question.

Moderator [N. Sakai]: I chink you are saying that culcural studies

414 Session IV

cannot be applied co situations in which political relationships are

so obvious. This is hard co know. le seems chat cultural studies in

Japan needs co be connected to a place where various kinds of

forces are in conflict. I chink the best person co answer chis

question is Professor Yoshimi.

S. Yoshimi: In relation co the problem of site, the problem of a

site which makes representation and criticism possible, I was just

chinking about how a space in which arc is represented -

particularly the arc of Asia or avant-garde arc - developed

significancly in the period after World War II.

Lee us look at the relationship between arc and the Scace in

the postwar period of the 1950s and 1960s and after. In contrast

co chis morning's discussion on the Gwangju Biennale, I would

like co talk about a Japanese example, the Osaka Expo of 1970. I

had an opporcuniry co interview video artist Yamaguchi Kacsuhiro

and musician Akiyama Kuniharu, and they cold me chat many of

the avant-garde artists who were active in the 1960s became

involved with, or were coopced by, Expo '70. One might ask,

today, why so many of these artists became pare of the system

with Expo '70. Ac the time, many of chem had hopes chat che site

or space of Osaka Expo would give chem an opporcuniry co

achieve something. The sites of national policies and artistic

representation came together in Osaka Expo, which attracted 60

million visitors, but the experience of the artists who cook pare in

Expo led co disillusionment and despair. I have heard chat they

had difficulry moving forward for the next decade or so.

In looking back at the period of the 1970s and 1980s, I chink

about the places chat provided alternative venues for presenting

art co young people in the context of urban culcure. Sogecsu Hall

was important, of course, but the venues run by the Saison group

was another example. For example, the Seibu Arc Museum was

founded in line with Tsutsumi Seiji's department score business

strategy. Studio 200 in Ikebukuro emerged and presented avant-

garde art in a relationship with commercialism. I believe Studio

200 and Seibu Arc Museum were venues chat introduced Asia arc

at a very early stage. I chink there were two sides co these

Session IV 415

ventures, and it would not do co criticize chem just because they

had a commercial aspect.

In the 1990s, we saw the Japan Foundation Asia Center

organizing symposia, or supporting exhibitions such as "Under

Construction." We need co chink of what chis means. So co

answer che question, che place where we can shed light on the

issue of the relationship between arc and policies in Japan is, for

example, here in chis space. Could we not see how sites for artistic

representation evolved by looking at the flow from Osaka Expo co

Saison, Saison co the Japan Foundation Asia Center? This issue

could be addressed in terms of the structure of Japanese arc

during the period after World War II, particularly during the

period of the Cold War. During the same period, the

decentralization of arc, caking it away from government venues,

has been a persistent issue. I chink we can find our current

position in chis context.

Moderator [N. Sakai]: Thank you. We have another five minutes

until closing. Are there any ocher questions?

Question: This is another question addressed co Professor Chow

and Professor Yoshimi.

First, co Professor Chow. I understood rhe analysis in your

paper today as a kind of allegory explaining rhe transition from

directness co abstraction in the film. Your critical essay itself could

be read as a somewhat abstract allegory rather than criticism with

a realistic message chat can be read directly. Ir seems co me chat

rhe structure of your critical analysis is analogous co char of the

result of your analysis.

If chis is rhe case, I chink the transition co a more abstract ,

commercial or media-bound world in the film is accompanied by

a sore of yearning for a direct engagement, which gets

marginalized in the process. How do you look at directness in the

process of shifting co abstraction? What is rhe source of your

feelings coward direct engagement?

R. [how: When I see the film now, because I see Zhang Yimou 's

416 Session IV

work very well, I am not a naive reader of his films. When I see

his film, I know chat a certain coming is always is in his style.

Because of chat I tend co be much more alert co the face chat

everything on che screen may be seen in a dual way. So chat was

what my paper was about. In ocher words, how he managed co

make a film under censorship; che Chinese authorities thought ic

is was about realism, ic is about the poor people in the

countryside and he did a fine job. Bue at che same time, if you

look at che film language chat he used skillfully, I chink chat you

can see a very different sec of message.

How I am moved by che film? I am precisely moved by chat

level of coming, so chat you can in face engage with che film at

both levels. I was very couched by che sentimental story. le made

me cry. Bue at the same time there are more things going on in

che film chat speaks co us about the complexity about the new

media in China now - how exploitative ic can be.

Question: I guess you are attracted co the artistic qualities of the

director.

R. [how: Yes.

Question: I would like co ask Professor Yoshimi something in

relation co che previous topic. When chinking about

representation and identiry, you say chat Asia's representation is

rwo-sided or ambiguous and proceed co analyze che pluses and

minuses. Then you said chat it is important how we actually see

Asia after chis analysis, from chis stage on. What motivates you, in

your position as a critic, co cake case studies from everyday life in

Asia?

S. Yoshimi: I probably cannot give a general answer co your

question. In chis symposium, I particularly found Mr.

Mohamad's presentation extremely interesting. I chink you can

find the answer co your question in his presentation. I was also

stimulated by Mr. Vellani's presentation of the Indian context.

Mr. Mohamad and Mr. Vellani talked about very different

Session IV 417

things, but what they discussed in both the Indonesian context

and the Indian context offers a kind of answer to your question.

For example, "Under Construction," at a different level, gives

an example of what young artists are thinking about in their

everyday life. I think we have to scudy each case individually to

look for a practical answer to the question, so I think that Mr.

Mohamad or Mr. Vellani would be able to provide a more

adequate answer.

Moderator IN. Sakai]: Thank you. It is already past 7 o'clock now.

I would like to continue, but it is impossible so we shall conclude.

Thank you.

(The End)

41 B Session IV

i~titirw :ffli!r: 1/ ✓ #:!".IA 1iirr.lf}rt J., 7:!7 J

2001 :f!:: 1.: OOl~tx:iirr.£~7 :!7-1: :,,lj'- O),fj{ffi ~ ~It ·co,G, Ml.~1i

O)• ~G~:ttL-C~$~~,M~~~,1~~- • 0)$M*O) • ~G

Lill<rR ~ ~' 9!11/i ~~, r!IJ.zi:. ~ MPGnli: J., .:_0)1/:,, #:! ".IAO)Bi-Jifil-1-­

AO)- J:I t L-Clbh:::l:rt 1.>.::.t1.:t:i:-:::it..:o .::.O):JtJi!iil.:Nb:t.rt 1.>1.:J.it..:-:::i-C,

~Jj$P ~--Cl±t:i:<, )tft-liJf~, -~,;W9:'., )t"ji'.-li}f~, :!-'.'-f- 1JXA, ~

jilij-li}f~~O)Jj-ffO)J\.40)")1:,·('_ Jt1,,'.([~-CO)~JjO)i!ilj/J!'. (~ 1¥J~~'jclj

WT, iw!f&.ltig, ~ Jjtig, ~J j$:tg,, i•'.l\!:O)i!ilJ/J!'., 7;,_;,1-r17~~~tr) ~

7:!71.'·0))tftmlJiJJ~.~-:W9:'. 1_'·1J'.nt..:tt¥i-~ L n,;., AJf H/:l1)-L, .::.

tLGO)~:/J•1iO)r.1J-cwt~i¥Jt:i:r.ll•~1'FIJ /:l:!-t•{liHMl.~1itlbh:::l:J L-C

tr-J.:=.t:6{, ;J:lO)f~\!ilJ-C&',l.>tTML-cv,t..:o f-0)~5'!;, f-O){t./Jp;i~

~9'•-::i-cv,t..:7:!7, ::1-0:;,1{, ~t7PJ;/J0)9;•~A~:JU'/!Lt..::6{, -f

0)-Jtr-=--•«.:ht-, v1·-r3".7, %"Ji~~ , ffll!li:o{Jl:!::1Ju.:*;.,.::.u{ -c~t..: o it..:, ;Q'--:J-C, ;j:l;o{l!J~:x:iirr.£~0)1/.::. 7 · 7:r. o--C&', -:::it..:

1997-98:f!:: 1.: 7:!7-1: :,,lj'-O)~Jr-C~ -::it..:.:. tO)&',J.,, ~-f-'7:,, · -=c

IW F'/:i~:IJ• ~;ttJ., .:.ti: l:i:-::it..:o m_;(fO)~JfO):J-'.':,, Jvt!l:J-1.'·l;i:<, 'fJi.

'.l\f:)tft- All:t 7:!7 t v'-J :1!!!,i&i¥Jt:i:i.eti0)~~ t rp~JH!Hili-f 1.>.::.t ~-=-0) 1/:,, #:!".IA 0) :t:JH!t ~ x., .:_O) :l:Jm;6{-j-:5tl.:• iffl 1_'· ~ J., J: "J l.:;J:J. §

aO)ft1'f~·-L,tt•-c~~O)ft1'f1iO):ffl1'ft&ElaO):t~tO)•

• Hn J: -J 1.:~b6 t..:o

1/:,, #:! ".IA -Cli.lt~ l;i::f!r L Hp~JH!;6{1J'!5F ~ n, ~ Jj • O):f;J-:>i&ro

tt~-=c?'".::.XA, ~~:t~Uil[~:l!!!,:l:~O),jtj[!.tMJi%tv'-:::it..:~Jfl.:t-:::i

-c Jt~t:i: rpu!-c &', IJ-:>-:>, ~Jj 1.:-:; 1,,-cO)rJt•-c1±.::. n 1 -c ttt5ti¥Jt!

G ;ttJ.,.::. t 0) I;. 1,,._¢,;:;6{. t:. G nt..: O)li::k ~ t:i:JlXl!f-C &',-::it..: t -~-"? o ~

~--~1iO)~~t:i:-•t•St~,~@0)1/:,,>f>:JryAO)Jjji;WO)£ •

420 Panelists' Comments

~~0~ . i~.~@0M8ti~L-C~h~0~-ub0~ti~(.~

*0r.i8"-cffit.:~uJnett H1J IJ ml< b0~&>0t.:0~,:J:~1,,,iJ,t,\!l 1. Em • il!fl.Ji. 7l<tR • ~,!i!, · 1'1!:a-~A.,iJ,m:5FLt.:01:J: 17~,-7 t1:J:fPJiJ,J t v'"JFp9v•~&>0t.:il\ ~0Fc9H:l:71/70ffi~IAt-:lt~~<. 3- • -;,1{

{'7PJ:/J0ffiitA(.::c0-Cbll1:~~ .:tm~&>0-C, ~Wr~}.. I) rn.:: L-C

f-h1,).)rj.05J"!l!r0A4 ~~~jbu1J ~thn,1., . OOlttxilrE£~l\lt.ll.

30ml:¥icz:017:,,Y- · ::1:,,7, 1'77::.,3:,, Jal t llillls'i'IMHlii ~ht.:2002

:¥ 12Jl 0~@0::.,:,,#1/".IA(;J:, fl13 ~(.::c0-Cl:J:-t5tl.::irfillJi!.0't''~J.,

b0~&>0t.:tf:\'.l; t -Cv•J.i. (2003:¥ lJl)

lktRMJ fM~0171/7 J-·l:o/1/3 ✓ I 0P]~'tftlX

~@01/✓ l"G1/'7A(;l:, :k~~ttml:1-1.::tG:bhJ.,~c~fflM{t-t J.,~

t~urm= L -c<ht.:J:11=.~.t>h1.i. rnwu 1.::M-t 1.iMvt1¥.J~.-l'!iffi't

L-C 171/7 J ~illt'8'TJ.i~t1.::1:J:, ~hi~000~x:ilrE£~.:i=.1llH.::J:J.,,

- a0171/7 J ~<lb(" 1.,::., ✓ 7G1/'7A ~MPJ!Jtil·WEFP9il'1/!5F ~h -CV•t.:

b00,~@0::.,:,,#1/".IA~ti.f-h#Ot-:::i0£at~0~ .

bt0A.,, f-0~tt:J:, 1~ L< 1~allllniiU ~&>J.i, ::i-:l1v:k"Jtii/!I#

lfi:m~~l.::J:J., !f).i,0~ b0f.:je*0~f{/,1J 1.::J:J.,c:~07)':X~ v'o 1M­

%~1tJ ev•13- • -;,1{iJ,GjeiJJLt.: 1:lt!!IZl1tl!lt1¥.J~J ,\!l~a:;01ZI:i:\~

m x. -c. l:i-i'il' G ~ 171/7 AJ t ll'f U' 11., TIT nett 1:J: &> 1., ii•, tv, 1 rp, v'

1.::, f-0FP9mf!,!@(;J:~tJ ~ hJ:"? o ~01Zl~t,.::M 13 Ji:1¥.J 1.::t G:bh n, J.,iJ,~"IJ, :kJif~n/UGhJ.i 171/7 J ii' 1M-%~ 1tJ Bm1t-t J.iil·t.:

t~EMm1¥.J~il • -t1.i~t~~1., • • ~0je*c~0~~--~~

0F,IiJiJ;R,C.,1.::-:::iv•-C0je*';J:, 171/7(:l:--:::i J Cv'"?, f-0171/7 J ii'

;R,C.,1.::c:0-C, uL0, 1~~J-c-&>0t.:, ev•0t.::kR!!~-Oit~~t¥:5FL,

171/7 J 017':t • -7· tL -c0::R{,{ttt:J:}JIJ0. /M!J!!lMli\J,0171/7

AJ t L -c0;R,C.,~i¥iJ,U'&>il"G·ttt.:. -:::i~·1.::, irlllli~l:l:, Kf--~.;m9:

0Wl,,11iPG, i:p 00 ~ i:p,C.,t-t J.i®Jj'j:,,ftf!,1J0Kf1~~ilq!tl 13 071/7 0~

~:it1t~1tlJ 1±1 L -CV•t.:~t~ 7-'n'f-T J.,:;n/'f::tt:k~9:1¥.Jal~ ~Wi~

1±1 Lt.:. td-:, P]~0~~0,f-:f-~b&>IJ, f-05tl'!Til'~<. 121 i!tik'.0

rffi'i'ii'OOJ 0~!'f &U'!ili:ff HT~J T J., uJnett0m:-g~f])Hi'f(.::~:1J•itt

Panelists' Comments 421

t ti I.: :3€~-c"ti 1{;:r,Jv · ?1 -7-7Jo/1/ 3 :,,"{" ti JE5}1.::::It*-t J.,;: t 7'.I{"{" ~ t;i:

ll' 0 t.:.:: dUj~ft.t.:.--:d.:.o JftffO), 1:,, )-';?, 1/ 7 ll' G ~:/J• Lt.:. :7'f-'7:,, ·

-:i:-1 w F J;.\;;0):3€~tl:, 7:!71.:: J: 0-C lfiti J;.J ~ iWJ 1.>:: U.-1:,, F;r, 1/ 7 0)

;r /§ /,: i/,ey i:,f.:_:/J-{Jlj ~?JHf,j: 7'.l{C, ijUffi ,j: 9:fl95J'-f)r H°ffi Lf.:. o ;:O) I /Wi J;.j

Cv'"Jt.lti.'.U:l:, /j!!j;tj:J;.1;:0)i!.t,W,J~iiitilf'r.t Lt:i:7'.l'G, 1{;:r,Jv · ?17-.:IJ:;,1/

3 ✓ -c"O) 1m"".)1,,,t.:.7:J7 J c:\i'"'.)~~1.::*a~-t 1.,::t1.::t:i:0t.:.o

1M:l.&J t 1xllicJ O)jilijJmHs\""".) 17:!7 J 1.:: 1/WiJ;.J ~ ~ tl&0-J t v'"J

tll.,1.'i:i:l:, tsL.0, 1M-%fffe.1tJ 0)~5:tn,G::ti'h.:Bi:>t.:.McfM, "".)ii?,

~ttO) 17:!7 J ~ if n,u·0n'G-tt 1.> uJiThtt H/5&1:>t.:. tiO)""c'f:J:t;i:1,,,0)7'.l,o

= B § 0)-l:::;,:,,3:,, II, ffil"0):3€~1.::ti, 1i,<"".)7'.l,;:O) 1m"".)1i,t.:.1i,<"".)

tiO) 7 :!7 J 1.::llf'r.t-t 1.>*-!JU7'.1''¥1H!r ~ n n, t.:.o ;:O) 1mJ 1:l:i.i ~ nt:i: 1,,,

ll'tiLnt;i:1,,,0 Ln'L, -f-h~L.07'.l'IJc:litll?.?.-thl;l\ yt;i:<tti, .JllU'

1m"".)it J.>J f~J#d.::Wiii(~l.::t:i:n1.>1.:::ifil:1,,,t;i:1,,,o

;fl.O)~:/J• Lt.:.-1:::;,::,, 3 ✓ -c"l:l:, B :,ts:, i:p 00, 1:,, Ft,1/TCO) 17:!7 J

iJl'tft.O)'JfinlZ Hil:5!:J'l91.::~H-t 1.>::t1.::t:i:0n,t.:.o 17:J70)?P-~ttJ ~

xJ.::, 7:!7 c:v'"J 1"r~l"i:l:, ~1:l:1iiJ Ml?.aJJ·c~t;i:1i,O)l"f:J:t:i:1i,n,c:1i,

"J'r~l:l:, -¥5t1:l:~t.:.IJ-¥5t1H1-nt.:.o

ifll!l!.~~O) 1i:p OO""c'l:l: 7 :!7~16<" J., fntr{ft-lH~ ~ n,t;i:1,,,J Cv' "J ffi'

t~ 1:l:, ,f-0) ii lfil:9:J'l91.::J.ilffl ~ ;h., i!i:{'tO)lfil:5/:fu!l"l:l:t.1?:x..~ ;h.t;i: 1,,q:J

7 J'l9ffjlj/.l!'.O){J!Jt L -C 1®L~1/ 7-.-r t.J /.::"".)t;i: lfG nt.:. o 1lj!JJJ't 1/ 7-. T t.J 1.::

1:l:m)~ t i=p,[.,t Ii'") ljl.~,j:iJl'tft.1:l: t;i: \,,\0) t.:.ll', 1 ~¥Jfl/lJl.l!'.J 1.:: J:J., i!i:1-t 3

-• :;,1{~0)00~1Ml~n,GJ;.hff, r-..-lr!vl"-t Gf!fiwtJ\!.t:i: ~ ~--;.,~

f!J t;i: l/'0 t.:. c:\i' "? o -f-h. G ll' B :;js:O)lfil:5/:~~0) 194O~1-tO)fntr:'/tn' G i!1 ~ 1±1 ~h. -c1i,t.:.O)/;J:;fl.l.::t0-C,!;IJ §-t,..z~::tt.:0t.:. o

vw f.:'J;.\;;O) 1:,, F;r, 1/ 7 0) 17 :.l 7 J ~it~ 1Wi J;. UU 1.> t.ll..12-ti it.:.

~~Jt;i:tiO)t.:0t.:. o B lt~{ft-1.::J:0-C ~ ih.t.:.17:)7ftJ 1:l:~-ftl"l:l:t;i:

<, 1{7;t-7T1 •'.l""c'ib0t.:.Cli' "? ffi't~l:l:, -f"O)ii fli!lls¥1-tO)WiJi!°::R{,

c:J\!.:/Jt.:: "".),j:n, l.>o it.:., ;r ::t- 11,,1.::J: 0-C tit.:. G ~ nt.:. 1:t1tJ'l95!g lfilttJ

t Ii'") J..:7 A 7"v:;,:,,ij,j:7:J7ful7'.1\ ,(:,, Ft,1/70)tllJW~m~,.:: J:0-C

. ~&":>Ght.:.c:v'-JO)ti~~J\!. L"ib0t.:. o !l'fl.::tllJW~thb~tv,-Jti-J- "".)

422 Panelists· Comments

(J) 1~i-¥:1:J:-:::i-c #:~ ~nt-:7 :!7 J ~ i:r~1:@1t,t-:.\!.',~ 7·Jv-7'(J)~

P,,\;:~, ~b6-C -~,H,• G~ nt-: o %'1:1;,, 1--·1:.:t:,1t,-clilli.1f:(J)~1f$~-'E­

;,, 'r -:11/- ') i,tj* < ™I bf), ;js'.7,. r ;,,-cti ;R,t,i,tfMJ~ Lt-: 7·Jv-7'(J)i/i: <

K+(J)~-~~-:::ik~fT~l.> o L~ti,1;,,)"'*1/7(J)~W$S~#

B ::<$:'.ll[(J) t!:iffi Htifl! Lt-:ev'-:i:JeJJ.~li, lollkfJ\/l(J);R,t,(J),\!.',~(J)tl/(b;h.

1i~, -t-f-XAc !"'1o/(J)~W"lt• ~(J)~~~'iijfil~ ~-It 7.,'l.i(J)f!.-:::it-:o

JU~ B (J):,ltloJtt~T;,)(i'RMl.f\Ji, -t-f-7,.(7) 1 :if!/jff€*riiJ c 1-}( Ho/

~*riiJ (J)fgi]l:J:-:::i-C, -'E-1/=-XA §f;j;:l:~{;fi:.i:ifii:89~'1.i(J)i/tp;i§ ~;h.

n , 1.,::.c Hl1itilli Lt-:o +n~~ltt-:-'f JW )"' ,Bi;i,{ l~*r C v'"J{l(J)li.~,

~(J)1lJjt~1=~-:::i-C, !ifvc!ifi ~··1.,c.1:~bGf•li,[')tB9l:.:i:.1J-H~J;.

l±\T1/ATAJ T~1.,::.c., it-:, 1 71T✓ T1'r11i£::<$:891:~ffi89~~

(J)- %~t!. Cv'"? 1t .z1J1:£-::f1t,n,1.,J (J)T, J:Jfolil'P~v'Cv'lt~

v' c v' -3 mi iii ti~ 1., c. filt-:::i-C v' 1., (J) ~Im~ ~i,;c,, ;fklilli,1f:(J) 71'v7-

(J) i:j=, T, El e,(J)•~b6~~~{f1.,;R,t,(J)::.c.~1t .z n,t-: o

i:r00~,7:!700*(J)Oc~T~1., o L~L,9"00T~71/7KAT

1., ~-IHl='il\° 1:9,' ~ v' o ;fl ii; ::.(J)•)( ~ tl' < 1: ~ t-:-:::i-C 1t .z -C v' t-: (J)

~, B::<$:c.•00~71/7.~-}(~<#:R~-\tk(J)K,~~i:pOOT~::.n

1: IMJT 1., ~!i/i'1.1'9i'~ '1./' -:::it-: (7)'1,l'C\t' ") rAiJ.ll!T ~ -:::, t-:o fkli, 1/ ✓ ;)s1/ '7

A(J)7°v-i±;,,'f'-1/ 3;,, Tv' < ~'1.l'(J)~.zc. ~ fJ1-i 1., .;1((7):ll~ Ht~ L

t-:o ~ - 1:, 171/7 J (J)jl\{~, ~1.,Hi - fi(J):jtjm~ifti(J)'efilli\c.~1.,::.

(J)jl\{~li 19iJ.tkt(J) !ll!IYJT ~ 1., o +(J)lkf (J) i:p OOA (J);/,l;::<$:89 ~1t .z 1ili,

i:r OOt-t~i.'f:(J) = ::it;~(J):f'--FmJi. ii' G #:R ~ -tt t-: ti (J) t!.-:::i t-:o ~= 1:, i:r

00(J)i/i:ft(J)~{t, %'1:201J.t,tc,(J)/l't~B9~1tli, t±~J¥iti-(J)~fiHI-C

Rlffl Lt-:o ili:ft(J):Jt@~iiil'%nlt ~ ;h.1., ~;f!ETli, ll'i\';f&, ,R;~, OOWR.i:

ifii:~c.·1:tl!JT 1.,~-i/;71/7. J: fJlil.>il,1:1ltm. ~nt-: o 1JR}l(!kf1-tl:

Ii, 7:!7, 77')'/J, 77;,,7pJ'/J(J)11!:~'l'lli1l!lG(J)+;h.f'';h.(J)/l'!~

c. X{tl:~1.,ev,-:i J: fJli, vV,, m'OO.i:~ !kf1-tl:.:t:;lt 1.,::.;h.C,(J):lt!!,:1'.,oc

(J)f\'i:Jn1t1t1:~1.,ccJt.zGht-:o ~ = I:, 19iitkt::I<:, %'1:20iJ.tkt1JJb6

1: i, ltl., B ,fi:;jf,R;:lt!!,.i:~ (J) 1 **~Ml;;l!IJ c v' ") 1'i (J) 'ii (J) 1:f[b nt-:

71/7 (i:r oo ~-f3tr ) ........ (J)w;~u-::. nG(J):lt!!JJoc(J)71/7il\{~(J)#:R ~ rm.

Panelists' Comments 423

lvt!.o -ftlf:J:0·-c c5¥j;:;z,t-:,;f1,pl)0)71/70);#;iffiil.2Jfl\;,±, :xm,:~

,@,L-rL:bt-:a mimi:, i:pOOJ/J:ft0)1f':t• .:¥-f:,±, "@i-'f:i:p,C.,.i:a

0)%~n1.f:jljl~tlt-:o t!.-/J{, :::.0) 1®i-'f:i:p,[.,_i:• J 0)$:m.%5'\,±, {1:4 ,:

L -r i:p 00 f: .:sin, i:p*,l!tW't' tib J., o :::.0) i:p*,l!ttl!\O)ti'lfj'ff f: .Bv'-C, 7

1/7 i:l;Jff!I0)5<':iiftfl!l-ffi,±~-/J'f: ~n -CL :bt-: a ~Gf:1,tft1J•x.J.,,-,z~fa: 0) ,±, iiiJU& mt.l:@O) 1'%U.j'ff0) i:p 't', 71/ 7 -/J{iJt!J'i!.O);\;tl.i:a:t-i: J:

0-C = -:::iO)iJt!J'i!.f:5}ftGtl, -f:::. 't'T.,/7 OO*f,00)5(':iiftO)~ < iJt~-rG

n~:::.t't'ibJ., o :::.O)•j'ffti,~80)71/71};J0)5<':iiftt • -ffi~ffl~bG

i'.ffi:~ta:J;~'a:'lHtLn,1., 0 v:t-:>-r, 71/7rA,MHlUii"J.,Jiur/!O)u'

t-:::iti,<%a•at•~~.i:•O)~'a:'~1>•~,~-~~.i:•O)ey• ttO) v'-/J'fa: J., %5'\-/J' Gt ~ft lliT:::. t f:,b J., o

*~"{:O)::, ✓ ,r-1/ ".IA,±, &36-r 71/7 rA,MO)• lrniH&jei~i" 1., 7:t

-5A'a:'WmL-r<tL~a 71/71};J$0)5<':iiftti,ft4~@0)tt~~*~

ta:~\Htt-:Gi" a 17::,,7'- · ::i::,,;1. J--7:7::,3::,, J m:,±, ~1'tr~Jf'J:0)5J-!ff

1:.:sitJ.,:::.O)~:IT/ZO)~Wr*O)ifi:f.l 'a:' Ji-it-r< nt-: o i:p OO't'I±, 7'>71:

MTJ.,• •ti~i0~~~9'{',/;JJ., o ~~J.,-•ti&~tO)i:pOOtt~ f:t-ti" J.,~t-:ta: § ciJ??jfl\;O)'Jf3nxf:19'..rz.-:::i,H,IJ't'l±fa:C i:p009;•~A

O)fl iJ,O) 71/7~100 0)1±~1:t-ti" 7.:,Jl:O)• ,C., Ht~:::. ti: ta: J., t, ;fl!±

~<i~t,n,1., 0 OO~OOjm, ;fU-:tO)@El3fa:5<':mEHliJ~JNJ.,J1t!J'i!.~

1:ta:1.,,-,z~'t',±fa:v'a 71/71: • i" 1.,• •iJt~Wi', t±~il!liJJ, 9'•~t:a1Jj'ff ~-f0)1ffiO)J!..{;f£Bta:tt~5<':iift0)%~tt;HJ'-:::i<:::.t'a:', ;f.&,H,iJ,Gli0

171/7 t,±fiiJ-1;,? J tv,-3 rA9H±, .:c. F'7- F · -it1- r'O)ft$:£Bta:~

'1!l= r:t 1J.:c.::,,:$'1J,XAJ iJ{lli!tli~n -r .12u1trA~HiitGn -rM-: 1:t 1J.:c.::,, 1-­

t,±fiiJiJ,? Jtll'il¥,l',, :::.ni't'1iIJ:¥,:tbt-:0-Ct§lfiE~tl-rM-: a :::.0)-1"

-?1±-t"<:·1=• •ui < ~n -rv,1.,t ~ t:-rv,t-:O)'t', '1'v-e::,,7-::,3

::,,. ,,-..:-;{-0).$1Jm~HJn±'a'%' Lt-:a if,±, (17/':$"'- · ::i::,, ;1. r 7:7::,

3 ✓JI.it • i!tt Hit-:-lt J.,f_:3t)f:) :::_O)rA,v''a:'~"l"~i&mO)r•,Mt L "(

lfZ 9 .1.ff J:-? t 1; x. t-:o L-/J' L, rH: fa: iJt G 171/7 Ji: -:::i v'-C je$:'t' ~

1., J:-:> ta: ,,-..:-;{-O)W3J1HiJf~iJ,-t5t't' ~ ta: -/J'0 t-: O)"(:-_ 71/ 71: • T 1.,

424 Panelists' Comments

'T-? ~1:,, F;r,;:,70)-'f::$>'.::. 'T10)roiMt ll!ljf·-::flt 1.,.:.t1: Lt.:o

:,t;;;:, :,,;J-;y ".!Ali, ;f.l.O)'f~ Hfl;z ·c liJ.,7'.pl:Jma v' bO)c ~-:it.:o

~:Wr~'T-? t Lt.: :1'v-J!:,,7-;:,3:,, 'i><blJ, :J, < ~"¥:~.:.t iJ{.:M.:o

1{;r,1J;,. rMF'itl:J§liJ,-:it.: o t.:t.:ro,Mli, lil~t-t~·e;t;J., o .i:.ii~iJ{

J: <~'av' J., Y v:,,? -c·li ;b J., 0) t.:iJ', $1J•A~O)Jtj1J• 1: ft v' ( L 1J' 'b A,

ITil li~feJ'ff(Jl:'l>*~O)JU!j~iJ{~i:J"i L,t_:0)-.:), ~4 ~v".J'.r.JvO)ro,M~

~~f<lc-:::i AiJ{~ 11.,.:.t1:~U.:il6, $;/J•~iJ,~Utn:$;/J •T J., IIHIJiJ{+

5tl:lJUt~v'C v'"? ro1Ml:l:OC]m Lt.:iPG<:<bJ.,o

;:0)1/:,,;J-;y".JA <:Ii, 17Y7 J ~$:~ · ~~T J.,;:cO)Jlfii~fr-J~jjJ

'ii~t,u:-:::i1i,·c @©zmm1: J:J.,ffi~:lt!lx~ciJ'G B :,t;;O)\'ifl!J.:t~fr-1~~

1:ftiltd/!!9:'.0)vfE;/1.,0)i:p-c-, U.:A,B 0)7·0-1~1Htt't{:,t;;, :ltft, $:

~iJ{;/JU:ifil/3tfr-J 1: 00:lll ~~ ;z -Cv' <t!Wi:O)i:J=t<:, 1L f:tfr-1.:}!Jl:I-.O),bJ., ilill

~1J'7*il6G;/'1.,-Cv'-:it.:o t.:c;zli', "1:-;,;:,3:,, I<:, 7·717:,,,-'f:1wFli,

:,t7:,,:9'0)ffi~:lt!lx~Mi:J=t-r:fl!!.~ft ~n1.,.:.t ~J!l! 1:, 1:,, rt,;:,7~~

~O)i:p 1: 17:J'7 J "-O)i~ ~-·u{i-'J1..l. L-r<1.,.:.t-'t-', -f "? Lt.:i:J=t-r: iB

:,t;;J -'t-' 1 -1:,, FJ "-0)/l.ll:J'Jr Lt.:iit~iJ{~,I?, ~n, B :,js;O)\'if l!J.i:.~iJ'':/tlt A

nGn n,< il!Hi H•bil6-C!It-'t-'iJ,1:rarn /.±1 Lt.:o ffi~:lt!l.i:.~-'t-' :,J-1; .:i:.

:,,5' 1J;;(AO))t/j)RiJ\ ~:i/!~;/1.,, OC:/$!~;/1.,, jt1i,~Gnn,< o 1ili:f-\';J t v'"?*~~::i:,,77;,. rO)i:J=t.:, 1litiJ{, c'O)J:-?I: 17Y7 J HitlJ, ;t;J.,P

lititGf, f-0);:tiJtlJ#.ffi~:lt!l.i:.~-'t-'-t;:,3 -t 1J;;( A, -f L-Cfj\'~f:$:i!l!J-'t-'

7·0-1~)\;~~*.i:.~t \i'1J'~J.,ti t,;/1.,t.:ll!l-i,-f-~*a /v<:v'< 0)1J'o ;:O)

1ili:f-tJ t 17Y7 J ~i10<· 1.,m~-r:!t~fr-J ~ IJ(Jftil:, PJ'ii~~ ~i IJ 0)7* <

iJ?. v' ro11i,iJt9e-tt G n -r v'-:i t.:o

;ft.iJ,µJ~ H.!H~ Lt.: 2-:::i0)-1:-;,;:, 3 :,,1: -:::i1i,-r-g"? ~ G Ii, -1:-;,1/3:,,

rr-c·1i, ~~~-'t-'1::1.:,,-t-v, 1-1;.:i:.:,,-t-vtv,-:it.:7-riJ'~~~

n1.,~ra11:, it.:-1:-;,1/3:,, m ·eii, D!k:@, i1UIJ cv'-:it.:Y-t ✓ 1vi.:1Ji

/fil~/tlf~iJtG, -f;/'1.,GO)$°:~O)tiO)i&m"¥:O)i:J=t.:, 17Y7 H-:ffl.tE, 1i,iJ,1:U · ~~ ~n -cv,J.,O)iJ,~ ro,v':i/! L -r1i,-:it.:o $llliffi t}!§!iti\

;1;1.,HH'-rt1-;, r • .:i:.1J:,J--;, rO)cffli!fli, El GO)~Rfr-1 ~*-!~~ rmt;t

-:::i-:::i, 17Y7 J iJt~~~;/1.,, U.:7- riJ,;J,:ltft .i:.~fr-Jl:~~~;/'1.,J.,j1£

Panelists· Comments 425

~1,1,J,t1.1c:,n, < .:'.:c:(7)~~/j:itffl H/li~ U:I Lt..:o :7· • -1{Jvft0) i=J=l-C

7- r • 1 «:,, r 1.1':l\'!l7@ L, .:: nc, 1.1,ts:1tut1J c /j:-:i,.7- r O)iJJ:W1=~1c1.1,

~~ ,tc,n -c "'<.:: c, L 1,1, L-f n1.1,1 ~1: 7· • -1{Jv/j: 'tt*~ 00*(7)inJG

111/l-(7)- fr[l ~/j: L -C 1,,7., .::c, if.>7.iH±~>C1t±.~1¥J tj: 7- r (7)~~7.1'/.t

1.1'-:i-Cv'< .::c 1,1,, .:: n i-CO)~©(i=J=i,C.,3:.~1¥Jtj:7-r"O)itj: ~--LHill

7.,7.1,L n,<.::c, L7.1' L 7- )-0)~~1:;Jsit 7.,~>C1t±.~1.I', 1~ L<

:7·•- 1{ iv tj: H5l.>CJIJR1t ~ *i! L -C ti 1,, 7.i.:: c, .:: nC:i (7)lrn/i,¢.U:J!.1$:1¥J-C iJ?. 1,,1t~1,1,tj: ~ n -c \,>-:,f..: o

2B r,ij (7):,, '/ ;f-1/ '7 Al:~:/) • L -C, ~:bcl6-C7}($(7) j\!/ji,,, u, ti J'l-1$:1¥)

-C7:7f-.17Jv/j:ffii!f~• lrnii1.1', ~'13tif.>7.i%-c~~~n, :kH:1t7.ic .:: 0 ;(/'if>-:, t..: C'. .I\!,') 0

$ijfF:F:j I 1·3 ✓ '7-

71-r'/j-,{j- ,(l:~--t 7.,$)li/.tv'-r1 ;1..:::i-;1..0);tt~

~tf.rU±~ f-;j,~(7)rMJ~~;(l'- '.Jitl:~ L -Clol t±.M~ • lrnliT 7.,c v''J ~~l±cl6-:it..:l:tj:1,,o L1.1'L, 71-r'/T1T1Cv'"?T-71±, 1N:-f

(7)l1tj:W-cm~~--~n7.i~~j--?'"t'if.>7.i o

71-r'/j-,{j-,,ffl~O)mJ:ltr~-c,±, -lii- 1¥Jlj: Af1/(7)~ffi c-fn-f·n(7)

~tj:7.,3:.~1,1,_!IHY/.~n7.io 1:ti~:bC:,f, .::n1-C71-r'/T1T11±00JJIJ

l:JE~~n -CM..:o if.>7.>00*~ A(7)71-r'/T1T1~:k~.::·c1:51-1t-c

JU..:,f91J-C/i.ltlJJLt..:ti(7)1±/j:1,,o 00*, OOK t±~, iffilA~tiU:71-r'/

j-,(j-,{(7)}J!J'il~BI <ev,11t .:Z.JJ~:k~c v'-J-liifiU:fHf-C~7.,c L

t..:C:,, -'cnl±c"O)l-J tj:~~-g-1,,~t¥-?O)f..: 0-J 1.l'o ~00(7)71-r'/j-1

T1, if.>7->H± B :,j,.:(7)71-r'/T1T1 C'.v'"JT-Tt'·l±/j:<, 71/7(7)71

-r'/T1T1 c v''J ti(7)1,1,:ffl_t£(7)• lrn/i0) i=p{,1¥)j--7'"t'if.>7.,c Lt..:C:,, 17

1-r'/T1 T1 J Cv'"J ~1!H: 1-?:/?7., i&ml¥J~~l±;fm:< t..: ;s 11.l'o it..:,

if.>7.i:lt!llr!IG, *~-Ali, OOR;O):lgf!tl~if.>C:ibi'"71-r'/j-1T1~MPJ

;fm:lt 7., .:'.: U: filfifj~J±if.> 7., 0) t..: 0 'J 1.l'o

OO~xmE£1tl:71/7--t '/7'-I: 1-:i-C ±ftli ~nt..:~@I 0):,,'/#1/'7A

1mE1li.lJT 7.i 71/7 - ~~c 71-r'/T1T1 J 1±, OOR:~00*0)i!ll;%, if.>7.i

H±, ~ir½~ Af1iev'-Jilll;%0)£-::Ji,,f..:71-r'/T1T1(7)-r1 ;1..:::i-;1..0)

~RW~Ht~ L, 71/71:IMJT 7.i*BwC:i L v'• lrnliBI ~ l±li'"cl6-:it..:l:/j:

416 Panelists' [omments

1.,,:J1Jt4;;c1J:0t.::o it.:, .:.O)J:11J:~lmliii9tF.M.--11'Hf, 1'.)}riEl<:J1J:'tO)f:1J:

-o.:. t Hi~"t' ~-o ll!~lJ: ~ 0ii'lt t 1J: 0t.: o :,ts: 1/;,, ,!s'1/ ryA t liijilif)t/j r,fj

-fiO)l!J~3(:mE~~ 71/7-t;,,5"- ci::ilt0)-Win4lc1±00*El<:J v".f .x.1v, 00~

B<:J v ".f .x. 1v, f- L ·n\J'-*El<:J 1J: 71 T✓ -:r1 -:r1 O)!m;l!R"'-O)IEl~t 1J:-o m:~ 7d: ttn t lJ:-o t.= 01 o

tLdi:lltlW*t L -r, it.::A:tfiJ-"t O)-Wr,* t L -r, .:. h 1-z:1: >I:, 717'

✓ T1T1~~lmiiT-ol1Jt4lc 1±0 0 t.: o Lii' L, 4-IEII±, .:.tt.1-r·1:1J:v'J:

-3 7J:*-l~~ Lt.: J:-3 \:.\!',-} o .:. h i"t'O)~lm/i Hi:, 0 A.,~§llJ 7d: >I:, O)-Z:00

f_: iJ{, i£Ji 7J: C .:_ 0, fl'.tJEO)Mf :lll: ~ ~ '-'' f.:: \: :i&) ~•lJ: iJ, 0 f.::o -::l ;I:~, f­

fL(j::i&)~O)fl}mf::i&) ~•lJ: i}>-:,f.:'.o Lii'L, 4-iruO)~!~li, '-''0'-''01J:~

rA, ~ fJt 4 § :!iJ, 1:f:Jt(fi}>(t t.::o 71/7 A (j:~jjij t, iJ,? ¥?i lJ:-o :t1tB<:JW:f;t

~ >1:,-::i 30{~ >I:, 0) A4 iJ{@-/:1-t -o 71/7:X~li, :lll:t.:: L -r, jjij t,J:-} lJ:~

~ b!!bt ~ f.:O)iJ,?.:. hGO)'t'irA, (±, - 1.f"t" il7> i ~ 11~-c'lilJ:v'J:-J

1:J=lx..-oiJ{, 11!!.1.f"t', m1£0)71T✓ T1-:r11:fMJ-t -oT1 .7-::i- .7-~:li!!,J;°j(

_t "t'~t:r"t'~-oO)"t'lilJ:'-''ii'c i&:JE L n,-o o f.lt4 Ii, 5 I Mi~-t&:m ~

rz.·c .:.tt.GO)'t'irA, HA,"'mHttv'ii'lJ:'thlilJ:GlJ:v't-:0") 0 ~lliJAv',

Jal.1tEl<:J7J:M~~jm L:-r, 71/70)F;/i~t:t1tO)~~O)_t\:-t&:m~ rz.-r "(fr <-=-t (j:Jl~lJ: O)"(' J')-o 0

.:..:.-t~lic 'O)raii:, 1liT!tiJ'71/7-t;,,5"- OH.Jn±7-t7;,,:t1t-t;,,

5'-t;M;L -z-1.,,f.::) ci::ifO):,,;,,,!s'1/".lAf:1q,,;.7-1-~- M~t L -r~1.m L -r M.::iJ{, 4-lruiJ{'i, 0 t 'i, 1=.)}riEl<:J lJ:M'~O)t#;"t' 00 t.: J: 11:.\!', -3 o .:. h

;1:-Z:0)1q,,; .7-Hi¾ 't'\3°&9-C~'lf.jO)lijf~~~;\'-.::z. v1 :$1-, 7--:r1 .7-1-

iJ{i:p,C., -r· il1> ~, llli ~ Jt;o.-o i:tb-c, "' ~ ~ iJ,~~iJ{'.£ 4 ~ ~ O):\x/£1:

1J:0-C ~ -z-1.,,t.:iJ,G-Z:0-00 11§" c :i:l[O)~fijO)ill'f,~O)jii\;1.,,~.:r: Y:::.:XAO)

tJV.1.f ~ ~ -o ~lm/iiJ{, = JJiMrI..O)~Aii'Gti,tlt /±1-ttlJ: < 1J: 0t "' t.: t "' 0-C'i,J:1.,,o

4-llliW~@L 1{7,i--~;,,7'7-'.JO).Wri*~:IJ1vf-.::z.7Jv · .7-5'7'1-

X O)lm/i~iJ{~11• u.:.:. t -z:, 71/7 0) rA,~ ~ .i: ~ Jtillii1J:1J1.!l!t-e :pi:~tJ--t

-o.:.tiJ{Pffi~t1J:0t.::o ~1:1i!licf:t:JiW.E\:;O)~W~UJi9!0) 1~t- %~1tJ t "' 11!,1:'!Ji, = JJiMrI..O)~AO)Wf&I: 0-offli'~ ~ r-'i6ii'U'·_tiJ{G-t!:, :,,

Panelists' [omments 427

:,,#1/".l.L.fE:f:tO)ttmJ:i.~ l!lim t..,O)J: 1i»tiO)i:-t 7.i.:: ti:~fltt L ·n,t.:.

J:-:,f:,'GU:,;/1-7.Jo

71/7;o,pqtf(J(jt:i:;J:t:im.12-~:Jsft.:.t:i:H: 'b MvG-f, ~ IJ~ uA,JIIH: ~ ;/1-7.,0)f±, fkt:i:IJI: "§li•~x.nii, 71/7 b•-:,@:~;o,:-fJJJtm (impossible)

--c-~7.,f:{,IJ!j;/:,G-f,fJJJ~(J(j (inevicable) 1:~7.ib•-:,.::c:1:~7., 0 i:pjii:

J.ll:, 1:,,P-Et::klli, J.ll:J¥J71/7, J.ll:71/7t:tt'i:5.m-c~x.nit, pqtf(J(j

t:i:;J:t:J/R,12,0),tf;l/!f;f±, - It-, 1 c {, t:t~~;J'O)l-J'~ ct:t IJ-:, 7.it..: 0-:>o L ;o• L

-f 0).:: c ~ 'b-::i-C 71/7 HibG-tt 7.i.:: c i±-c~t:t v'o @it;o,ff~lt ~ n7.i

~I IJ, 71/ 7 c 1,,-:, "§'i\€ i±v• < G NJE L -c 1b 1'.:~ 0) J:-:, l:JL t, __t;o, -::i-C ~

-Cl..,'£:-:,0)1:~7.io ~*0)71/70)~~~~1'~~7.,~~0)~ffiffl{,-f

.::i:~~ L "Cli•t.:.i±-ft..:;o', M- 'lfi~1ti±-fO),fJJJ~1'10)fflJ~.::-f~ 71/70)rA,MC L -CP.?.ML-C J:i.-ttt.:.bit1:~7.,o

fk § ~;o':/J•b-::i t.:.-l::;, 1/ 3 :,,1:i±, 71/7;61'!!{~4' b•-:, 1/ 7--:r 1' 0) i:p

--c-1i,;o,i::tlvnM5F~n -cM.:.;o•t 1i,1 rA,MH,IJ!t89, r&m89i=~~-t

7.i b•-:,, llifm89 t:i:~1'f:r0)~:ki£ Httnt.:.7- 1vt:t:B-1ff;o,1;t ~ nt.:.o 90if:

{-\';;o•Gm:tlJO) +-1 H 7-c L -C 71/7 ~t,j:j'O)~::fri: M ;/:,-:,"( M.:. ~ ,:

i±, -f 0)1rfi i:~ff~ L -c 1,, 7.i :::t1t89 t:i::;/J"J" i:.~, 1,, ~ fPl it 7.i ftli: t:i:~4' 1:~ 1J, 1l!!O)JE;~~;o•G 1b§96 ~n7.i.:: u,~;o•-::it.:.o ~ IJ O)~ v•1/:,,

#1/ ".71' i:~:/J•-C~ t.:..:: c ~ ~ffl Lt.:. li• o

r-=--•«.:k1 r 71-f":,,-:r1-:r1~~~T 7.,

fki±, 1/ ✓ #1/".l.L.~~&')t:5 7.ii¾1ilf:O){E:,(:t~;j'~O)tj};--C-, /q,,;_A. H:M

L -cmMf<;o•GttiH•itG nt.:.iifiO)'i:!rA,;o,, 171/7 ti±, - 1:tfE:1:tM /;tO);o•? J t..:-::it.:.b•-:,.::ci::tt1i•t.:.o c ioJiey,i:, J:iq,C.,-:,&')~?'f~~ift.:.o

"§a c'O)/-;;t, 1J Ai, ;o,ioJ t-~:Jsf t, t..:-::i t.:. 0)1:i± t:t 1i•;o• c -~-1 o .::0) J: 1 t:t 'l1! rA,i,)\'1,, i~G 1±17->U±o b•-:,0){,, JE;~~X~im L -c ~7., ~~Jti,)1'4'~--c­

i±;J:t:,tf ~ n -c1i, t.:.c .~,vnt.:. L, it.:., -f ni±1/ ✓ #1/".l.L.O)i!+J-. im:B-

1:fi'vnt.:.ii!tltlliiW1':0)£1\l,ll~iJ--c-m:5F ~nt.:.ni:, mtE, ~7.,1i,i±

1i•;o•t:t 7., iey,i: 1:,i:,, 3-o :;,/{~7 _)( ,; n~V-c -::::>0)7E~--c-!t 7.i.::c ;o,-c

~1;t1i,J:-:,I:, 71/7~V-cti1i IJI: 1iE L<J JE!mjT 7.i JJtH'~7.ibit--c-i±

1;t1i,t TM ~n -c1i•t.:.c.~,-::it.:.;o•G t..:o

428 Panelists' Comments

.:: flli:1111.:!!oc.::" cO)Jt{t89717''/-J-1-Y-1 Ii, 'i-/p0)717''/-Y-1 -Y-1 l1i]

f,J, ;flt!i_O) ~~O) ...t f:1l.!111J L, %-:::i ( G fl --C '-'' ( Cv' "? ~EB iP ~,t' i.l; 7., o

019, OO~-f-O)>/iO)if~f:Wc:1tL, im.!IW89"t"i.li.>7.it.::b6, 717''/-Y-1-Y-1

M&Udlt.i:<N%/llt ~fl, ffi-L,1.,,fiJJ!t~~!Jt;t ~/:1:l L -z-1.,,7.>0)"t"Ji.>7.io

ffi_i£0)7 :J70)717''/-J-1-Y-11i, .::fl 1"t"1Tbfl--C M.::717''/-Y-1-Y-1

1Fin1ti:~v7.i~~O)*~O)g:i"t">/i, t9v1t, 3- • -;,1{cO)~~tt··O)J:

11:¾'iv'--CM.::i.Pf:1:&~-t 7.io UP L, -f-0)3- • -;,1{0)~>/iffi.iEO)>/iO)

Ii, ~*O) >/iO)cli~tj: 7.io ~f:ffi,{Efrbfl n, 7., ®':Ji1i!il°O)!J1;7( Cv'

1 i',lffiiliO)i:p"t"li, 3- • -;,i{t "' 1il\'t~~ x. t 7:!7 0)717''/-r1-r10)

~~ tt.i:7.>J:"?t.i:, m15E ~flt.:: - 5EO)£$,¢.i:HiiFT 7.i.::Ul"t"~t;i:1.,,0

L~Lt.i:#G,&~ft~tL~AO)~Mt~>/il1ilffi"t"~7.i o *1/'/#

:lr;A "t",i, 717''/-Y-1-Y-11i1i1Ut89t.i:M~ tfflli.89 t.i: !Mlb 9,fi-1.,,0) 9" "t"tJU7.i,-zM_: t '-''"? ;1.-;,-l:-:Jt-f-O)i:p,~,1:~ x. -z-1.,,f.:: 0)1: 'ii 00 bG

i', 1/'/#-:Jr;AO):iftfr-f-O)>/i O)fi£-i'L t-f-flt~l/£ L -z-1.,,t;i:-J;,0t.::

-/pl:, t-:o 2 8 rd! 1: ;b t.:: 7., 7°• 7·7 A 0) 9" ""(', "J°v-E'/-J--1/ 3 ✓ ,: llsHdl t

-/Httd.::b6, 't!i'.¥iEJZ~1:1ibi'i.PO)llsHdlL;H\t~flt.i:;,j,0f.::o it.:,µ]

4;;~1= J: 0--c 'f!trA~~;,j,.,;., 7.,1.,, ,: ;,j,:t G fl --c L 10 t.::t.:: b6, 1q, 1J A i-t w *cO)M~IH?uMJH:t!IJx.Gfl -CL 10t.:: o -f-O)~:!Jl1:, 1q,,J;7. rtW*

0)717''/-J-1-Y-1~1iitlli*~-lWJ:9im.lf!iJ89;,j,0,{:,777-J-1'1"t"M~

89"t"i.li.>7.ilii';,j,, -f-0).J:"? t.i:filE~H~T.:: tlit;i:;,j,0f.:: o

* 1/:, #-:J r;AI: ;l31.,,--c, ?-1/-v iv• ?7 iv-1,:, 89 i: § x.lf, ;J.-;,-1:

--:.: c-f-0);1. 7'170),f-3& ~x.t.i:ltfllf, -f-0) ;J.-;,-1:--:Jli 'ii"? Y Lf:~

b9~T;,j'0td-:0"? 0

* 1/ ✓ #-:Jr;Ali, ~.\!:, 1±4;;$, ;/JiVT.17 iv · 7.77'1- ;(tj:c'$~!1:

1.,,:fr!llf t}V{ 9 Aflt.::,¢.i:f:;1. 1J-;, Hii.li.>0t .::;,j,, (£Wlll~ilil: t ~1.,,-z-1i) 7

-:J7 t L --ci!Gfl7.>M~;,j,£,?f.';891:Jl:i:7-:J7, 1-.., F (j,-4), -f-L --CJl:i:1¥l

7-:J70)1-t*t L -CO) 1-.., F::f,1/71:~G fl--C L 10td.::b6, ~~4:i (["7

:,y- · ::i'/7- r'.771/3 ✓ J ~) f:~iF~flt.::7-:J70)004 J:9~Gl:~l5E

89 (: fj:-:,""( L, 10f.:: J: "? /:,~, "?o 1 f.::, :;f,~,i',ltj: .::c (: 7-:J7 tffiili J.::, 7.,1:

a;t.::0--C, *1/'/#-:Jr;A"t"li, %s~f:OO-t7.ii',lffiili, i.li.>7.>Hi, -f-O)J:-J

Panelists· Comments 429

~~ilifaO)?Z~O r: "?1t,·Cttt 'i:,ffl c'/;!l!h~n'-:,f.:o filJf!.1'19~ M,C.,t,i:_,9 ,Q

c,*titi,~A~-~"?TVTtllifat-QL~~'i:im•~••O)v-c"?

't''Ji>,QI:: 'I:, MbGi't.: o '5lt1H::j\f~l¥./1RIJffii 1:: "?v'"C 'i:iili> 19ilifa tGh~

n'-:.,f.:o ~q*O)y-;.,,t;V".IA ~I.:!:, X1t i:it1tt!lt0)~11:i~tl?:;t-QO)~

I±~<, *•~g~~c\ X1tit'l'tr:ttt"Mi.JJ-ev,-3 ::k ~~~-0) r:p 1::fi filftit-c1,,( «~ ~,.:1:~1,,0)f.: 0-3 n'?

1 i'iN::rJn::, 1iirr.1JiJJT ,Q 797 - :!f:~c 71 T✓T1 T1 J Cit' -3 ;/F'ii\'1::

--~9--viilifat,Q~~K~OO~G$~,~~v11-,mff*iM

~-C, ,m~n'"?!l!f,C.,1¥.J~ Y-;., ;J-;9".IAi .=tfi Lt.:OO~!k:'.i<:iiff.;l]!;:~797-1:=

;.,1-1::/;_itfri:!f: Lt.:v' o t.:t.:'i:,-3- 1-J~, I B .cf-ev,-3mv, B 1.¥~.:h

t.:itit~~FA9;\!! i llX 9 Lif-Qc 1,,-3 ~JJ-1.:1:, W.:i!ft 9T ~·t.:-:.,f.:0)~1.:1:~

v'n'c 'I:,.~ 'Jo U.:!:~ ;t, ~ :tGht.:llsJFdJO)r:p~~-~ ht.:j:/;]'€¥1::1.:1:m,1<;

,C., Lt.:o .: hi.:!: 00~~3<:iirr.~~797-t ;.,1-1:: J:-Q,M.£( ~ ht.: 7-1::--JJ

-0)~:JR, M[~jJ' 9-·19- - )V-".O)~c@'. Cv'-:.,f.:.: C 1::ts1zs1 L "( v' ,Q 0

7-1::--JJ-t.:!:, ~Jl t,~:;w 1:: 1 c~f_:,-,::-;{-1::i&-:,-C ~:If: Lt.:blt

~,.:1: ~n'-:.,f.:n', 'i:ic 'i:ic ,-,::-;{-,±Jtfxi'l9*i'filifai aJJ:iF L~v', :ffl1:lll&i'l9

~'i:,O)~Ji>-:.,f.:o 7-1::--JJ-O)V-c 91::ilifa,12,0)'/r~tt~ajj-t ,Q ,-,::-;{-,

0-QH.:1:J:9~~~:::i;.,-t7"r · _1-1-t~~itf..+c L-c$-f.im-t ,QJ:-31::,tt

ffiL -C v'ht;f, 7"v-lf ✓ T-Y-3 ;.,O)ilifa,¢.i:n,~J;i ~h, ;ficf:IU::W*I:: Im

iriT ,Q J: -31:: 1 c ~,Q.: c n'~~ t.: O)~,±~v'n'c ,'[!:, -3 o -t:,, Y-3 ;.,4;f1::

fibh~7"v-lf ✓ 7-y-3;.,0)j:/;Jfftimit<,1~~-~-AK~&L

n,t.:O)'t'-, Btilifa~1.:1:, l'iJ~~n'ilifa.¢.i:iJE'.~ · mtt1t~-t±-, ~:i:iL n, (.:c#~ • ~Ji>-:,~O)'i:,J;i·~~-Qo ~*l'l9K,Milifatift~K~9,1

c iG~HmfiJ1::iliJ-:,f.:J:-31::.~ '?o

y-;.,,t;V".IA ~,.:1:, ~ ~rl::M-t ,Q il~~t,J:J-i,C.,c ~ 9, ,f O)@jln) t.:1:7-1::

--JJ-0)~:JRI:: 'i:i:EJl.bh -cv,t.: o tE-:,-C, ll!M'H 1t-t:,, Y-3 ;.,0)~;/?90)

'l'!tUt,~O)j:/;Jff i JU Ill 9~1.:1:, ~ ~r"'-O)IMJ,C.,n'i'J:iv'~·1v-7"0)J:'?~

JiJ-:,~o 00~:3<:iirr.£~797-t;.,1-#P~<c'i:i~~ _::tfiL-C~~-t~

~-~RB~O)ffllnJ~G'i:i-3~#;t-QJ:-3K,7V7-t;.,1-ti • Ml¥.IK

~ ~rl::IJ,g;b-:,-CM.:blt~ili>,Qn'G, -f'O)ij!BJl.:!:J;im~~-Qo Lh'L, "1"

430 Panelists' Comments

Im I±, ,;17'.l,O)~i,f,r:53-ffl:J~il-::flt-C;;js; 1/ ✓ #Y "JJ..O)j--7-/i: J: 1J i* < ~>RT l.>11:.liu':dtlH~h~ L -CL1-'.)t.::J:-}l:1/i.'Gl -Jo ll!l1:Il!!i~1{7;t-? ✓ ;;q:W;J-t ol'iH~I±, 4-@0)1/ ;,,#y"JJ..-z'I± )--7.=.~J.. (Jl;;js;.i:~) E19

t.: t& v, L i),5t1t t.: ii'-'.) t.:: t -g -'.)-C 11:, v, "' 0)-z' I± t.: ", t.: 0 -3 il' o

;;js; 1/ ✓ #Y"JJ..I±, ~i,1t,:M1.li!llt:tJ O)f'f ~@ v't.::11:, 0) t.: -'.)t.::O)·(\ ,C.,i),

G ~ L ts.::.t il'-z' M.::o §ej,;.)(l±t'n'I:, 1!1:!ft H~H.t.::~~t.::it1l:~

j\'.; -/i:1)-L -C~bnl.i r7Y7 J 1:-:::,1.,,-c:1t x. ~-ti" Gno p;J~"t'~l'/tl:~n

~i*<, 1t.::~<"li:ct~.::.u,-eM.::o ~~O)i\'li'-"i~{,t .i:flfff0)7°o

7.:i:.y1/31vt.:;ttr,t-c*.7.l!Y 1J T -1': 11:, IB'.',l'At L -Cv'o o 7°v-e;,,T-1/ 3

;,,O)~t~11i1~L • •O)q~#~n~J:~-'.)~~tm1#,~mt.:.7.

71/ :i - JvO) i:p "t'IH· O) J: 1 t.:.::. t i),m L 7)'-'.) t.:: t "' -3.::. t 11:, :f!ll/W L -C "'

oo -@:-{;1,tL-CI±, lili<lWfiffi-z'~o1/ ✓ #Y"JJ.."C:'~IJ, HJJ.-/i:1/:,-'.)-C~i':@

f:7~U.:01 o

Panelists' Comments 431

Panelists' Comments

Sakai Naoki

Report: Symposium "Asia in Transition "

In 2001, I was invited by the Japan Foundation Asia Center to

participate as a member of the planning team of chis symposium,

which consisted ofY. Furuichi, A. Hoashi as organizers, and T .

Mizusawa, A. Tacehaca, and Y. Kamiya as members who are experts

on art. My role was to first introduce leading professionals in the

respective fields, ocher than the visual arcs, such as cultural studies,

history of ideas, literature , journalism, film and ochers, whose

interests are in the area of the arcs in its widest sense (aesthetics,

museum, arc museum, art market, institution of knowledge, mass

media, etc.), as well as cultural activities and history of thoughts in

Asia. Consequently, I was to be involved in the preparation of

creating a stage for participants to hold a constructive discussion.

Tony Bennett, Rey Chow, Yoshimi Shunya, and Wang Hui were

among the recommended intellectuals from Asia, Europe, and North

America who were able to join this discussion in Tokyo. Goenawan

Mohamad, with whom I became acquainted when I was invited as

senior fellow from the Japan Foundation in 1997-98, also joined us. I

considered the relationship between the visual culture, not limited to

the field of visual arts, and the geographic scope of Asia as the main

agenda of the symposium. Therefore, I prepared my keynote speech

so that we could develop our discussion with this focus, and made an

effort to coordinate other presentations with my own assertions.

We were able to discuss new and important issues, such as those

on policies and modernism in arc exhibitions, complicity of

nationalism and colonialism . As these issues were discussed in

contexts chat had not been covered so extensively in the visual arts

discourse before, I found chis to be a great achievement. Careful

432 Panelists' Comments

planning and preparation by the organizers provided the grounds for

our success. But I believe that this debate did not conclude this time

and, rather, opened new doors for further debate in the future. The

question posed by Y. Furuichi, A. Hoashi, T. Mizusawa, A. Tatehata,

Y. Kamiya was: "What is Asia?" This theme is important to

intellectuals, not only in Asia, but also in Europe and America. It

retains a dynamism that could potentially involve professionals in

other fields, as the issues in the visual ans give way for others to join

in. I found this experience to be very satisfying. Qanuary 2003)

Mizusawa Tsutomu

On Multiple "Asia" - as Moderator of Session I

I believe this symposium enabled us to make an analysis relative

to a larger framework in discussing Asia. In the past symposia

organized by the Japan Foundation Asia Center to discuss this topic,

the process of establishing an "Asia" as a countering concept to the

"West" had been questioned several times. But this time, this became

one of the key agenda in our discussion.

This was more so, as Professor Sakai Naoki of Cornell University

kicked off the sessions with a "keynote speech" with fervor and

conviction. The issue that was addressed could be encapsulated in the

question: Is there any possibility of calling "us" as "Asians," beyond

the "cartographic" construct that was initiated by the schematism of

"co-figuration" of Europe? Ifwe continue to keep ourselves ignorant

of this construct, the dominant idea of "Asia" could reinforce the "co­

figuration" construct and perpetuate its viscous cycle. In the first

presentation of Session I, Professor Koizumi Shinya, projected a

daring hypothesis that the "Asia" that Okakura imagined in his

words, "Asia is one" was an "empty space." This theory illustrates an

alternative image of Okakura to that of an Asian idealogue, and

transpire a versatile image of Okakura as an "Asian." In the next

presentation, Professor Wang Hui from a perspective on economic

history, rendered a macroscopic historical view of Asia whose rich

culture was generated by an economic sphere developed through a

tributary system centered around China. Regrettably, I was not able

to navigate the discussion well enough as moderator, and could not

Panelists· Comments 433