Unmasking the city hall facade a study of its visuality in images 24

2.3 Billboard 2.3.1 The Façade as Image Against the enveloping darkness, the City Hall façade stood silently, unlit (Figure 1). Two symmetric columns of illuminated words floated on the façade of the building, moving in tandem with each other. Tracing a slow trajectory over the façade, the texts slowly made its way up vertically, from the plinth to the frieze. Bold and uniform in its typeface, the texts declared: DECENCY IS MUCH WAS DECIDED A RELATIVE THING BEFORE YOU WERE BORN DEPENDENCE CAN BE A MEAL TICKET DESCRIPTION IS MORE VALUABLE THAN METAPHOR MURDER HAS ITS SEXUAL SIDE MYTHS CAN MAKE REALITY MORE INTELLIGIBLE1 Titled For Singapore, a series of illuminated texts was projected onto the City Hall façade over the duration of three hours at night. Conceived by American contemporary artist Jenny Holzer, the artwork was a collection of statements that revolved around the themes of war, peace, sex and death. Commissioned by the National Arts Council, the governmental body responsible for spearheading arts development in Singapore, For Singapore inaugurated the opening of the first Singapore Biennale in 2006, a ten-week showcase of local and international contemporary art.2 Significantly, for seven years before the projection of For Singapore, the production of official images of the façade came to a halt, in a departure from its constant 1 The statements of For Singapore are drawn from an unreleased video documentation of the event, provided by Jenny Holzer Studio. Subsequent statements quoted in the study are referenced from the same source. 2 Ben Slater (ed.). Belief: Singapore Biennale 2006, 4th September to 12th November 2006 (Singapore: Singapore Biennale Secretariat, 2007), p.1. 143 imaging in the years after independence. The $10000 monetary note circulated between 1989 and 1999 was the last official image propagated of the façade before the commissioning of For Singapore (Figures 5&19). Crucially, two years before the ‘ship’ series monetary note was issued in 1989, the administrative function of City Hall was abolished.3 While the City Hall façade continued to serve as the stageset for the national day parades, its interiors underwent a refurbishment.4 The building was subsequently annexed by the adjacent Supreme Court to accommodate the Academy of Law.5 Despite the change in the function of the building’s interiors, its façade remained the same. The image of the City Hall façade with its classical architectural forms thus exhibits a pliability that can be easily transferred. However, in 2005, the Academy of Law announced that it would vacate the building.6 This was followed by the announcement that City Hall would be refurbished into an art museum tentatively titled the National Art Gallery, which was to be completed in 2014 (Figure 3).7 Since then, the building fell into a transitory state, with no real functional usage. Seen in light of multiple functional changes, the lapse in the production of official image of the façade might be attributed to the uncertainty of a permanent role for the building. For once it was decided that the building was to be transformed into the National Art Gallery, the imaging of the façade was resumed immediately a year later during the Singapore Biennale with For Singapore. 3 Pugalenthi Sr. Singapore Landmarks: Monuments, Memorials, Statues & Historic Sites (Singapore: VJ Times, 1999), p.32. 4 ibid. 5 ibid. 6 Supreme Court Singapore. “History.” Available from: http://app.supremecourt.gov.sg/default.aspx?pgID=39, accessed on 20 November 2011. 7 Ministry of Information, Communications and the Arts. “Transcript of Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s Speech at National Day Rally 2005 on 21 August 2005 at NUS University Cultural Centre”. Available from: http://stars.nhb.gov.sg/stars/public/viewHTML.jsp?pdfno=2005082102-2, accessed on 20 May 2011; “About the Gallery”. Available from: http://nationalartgallery.sg/about-the-gallery/, accessed on 20 May 2011. 144 For Singapore’s projection of a series of text utilised the City Hall façade as a flat, two-dimensional surface. Bold and uniform in its typeface, the formal composition of the illuminated texts exuded a commercial aesthetic that transformed the image of the façade. Neutral in tone, the short and effective one-liners projected onto the façade were designed to impart condensed, bite-sized information. Disseminating messages that could be absorbed in an instant, For Singapore was tailored to catch the attention of the passerby. Combined together, the illuminated aesthetic of the façade and the laconic writing style signalled an appropriation of advertising practices through its juxtaposition of image and text. Illuminating the façade with short, everchanging texts, For Singapore strived to deliver a striking message in the shortest amount of time. In doing so, the façade acquired a life of its own, communicating messages like a large, oversized billboard. Inaugurating the opening of the Singapore Biennale, this projection was a highly visible event. It was held in conjunction with the International Monetary Fund and World Bank Meetings (Meetings), which saw the convergence of 16,000 foreign delegates and 1,600 international print and broadcast media in the country.8 Through the distribution of free passes, the foreign delegates and media were encouraged to attend the Biennale.9 The projection of For Singapore on the City Hall façade was thus given an international audience. Circulated as an image in the international press and media, the City Hall façade did not only appropriate the aesthetic of a billboard. It functioned like one. Significantly, Beatriz Colomina has described architecture’s engagement with media such as television, publications and photographs as such: 8 9 Stephanie Yeow. “Totting up the numbers,” in The Straits Times, 21 September 2006, p.11. Chew Seng Kim. “Culture on the Agenda,” in The Straits Times, 5 September 2006, p.3. 145 It is a space that is not made of walls but of images. Images as walls… This is the space of media, of publicity.10 Colomina’s remark, made in reference to Le Corbusier’s use of media to promote his architectural ideas and projects, posits a distinction between architecture in real space and the space of media. For Colomina, the space of media transforms architecture into an image to be circulated around the world. And in doing so, media flattens architectural space into a two-dimensional entity. In the space of media, an architecture of image dominates, or, “images as walls.” She notes that Le Corbusier was particularly adept at adapting architecture for the media, or the production of an architecture of images.11 The image took precedence over space in the photographs of his houses, which were doctored to enhance the project’s formal qualities, and sometimes at the cost of their spatial properties.12 This was because Le Corbusier saw the propagation of architectural images in media as a way of disseminating his ideas and concepts. In the space of media, communication dominates architecture over space. However, there exists a difference in the conception of the façade as image in Le Corbusier’s projects and that of City Hall’s. As mentioned in Chapter 1, the City Hall façade was conceived as an image that made visible the identity of Singapore as a British colony. As an image, the façade communicates its message through allusion, or by means of references to the established symbolism of neo-classical architectural forms. On the other hand, in Le Corbusier’s conception of the façade as image, meaning was conveyed through the inherent, formal properties of the building, or the 10 Beatriz Colomina. Privacy and Publicity: Mass Media as Modern Architecture (Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 1994), pp.6-7. Italics are mine. 11 ibid, p.8 12 ibid, 114. 146 abstract architectural forms that were determined by programmw and structure. The projection of For Singapore on the City Hall façade, however, yields yet another kind of image. By superimposing texts onto the City Hall façade, what results is not just an image, but an “imagetext.” Coined by W.J.T. Mitchell, the term is used to designate composite artworks that combine image and text.13 A nexus of vision and language, the intersection of image and text simultaneously maintains and collapses the boundary between the pictorial and the literal. The text of For Singapore functions both iconically and textually. It has a shape, scale, and form of its own that endows it with a pictorial quality, one that transforms the City Hall façade, while at the same time communicating a message through its text. It was, however, not the first instance that text had intruded onto the imaging of the City Hall façade. Before the projection of For Singapore, texts had been illustrated on the façade on the back design of the $10000 ‘ship’ series monetary note titled “National Day 1987” (Figure 5). In the illustration, a banner featuring the words “Together Excellence for Singapore” was stretched across its parapet. Read against the illustrated scene of the national day parade, the text served to strengthen and reinforce the nationalistic message of unity conveyed through the image. However, in For Singapore, the texts refuse to explicate the image of the façade. Broaching diverse subjects that range from faithfulness and love, to truth and death, there is no explicit relationship between the text and façade. In his study of text-image relations, Michel Foucault has posited that in some instances, words “play an ambiguous role: supporting pegs and yet termites that gnaw and weaken [the 13 W.J.T. Mitchell. Picture Theory: Essays on Verbal and Visual Representation (Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1994) p.89. 147 image]”.14 His proposition is best explicated by Roland Barthes, who has forwarded two functions of text in relation to images: that of anchorage and relay.15 For Barthes, text do not just function as the “supporting pegs” of an image through anchorage, or the stabilization of the pictorial space through the imposition of a fixed set of references. Texts can also function as “termites that gnaw and weaken” an image through relay, or the allusive potential of words. Connotative in nature, such texts operate to contest and subvert the existing meaning of an image. Seen in this light, the texts of For Singapore, which do not offer any anchorage of meaning, serve not to denote, but to connote the image of the façade. Because of the amalgamation of the visual and textual, the imagetext of For Singapore poses a challenge to the iconological method. Conceived by Erwin Panofsky to study artworks produced during the Renaissance, iconology posits a strict divide between the pictorial and the literal, which do not merge or intersect.16 This is primarily due to the nature of artworks produced during the Renaissance, which were often commissioned to depict theological themes. In Panofsky’s conception, there is a one-to-one iconographic correspondence between biblical texts and images. Images exist as purely visual entities. Words are relegated outside of the picture frame. In the analysis of For Singapore, the iconological method is utilizsd, albeit with some refinements. Instead of theological texts, the image is read against social, cultural, and historical discourse, as well as the statements projected onto the façade. In doing so, a 14 Michel Foucault. This is Not a Pipe (Berkeley: University of California Press, c1983), p.38. Roland Barthes. Image Music Text (London: Fontana Press, 1977), p.38. Subsequent write-up on the function of texts as anchorage for and relay of the image are drawn from this source. 16 Erwin Panofsky. Meaning in the Visual Arts (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1982), pp.26-54. The following write-up on the relationship between image and text in iconology is referenced from this source unless footnoted otherwise. For further elaboration on the use of the iconological method in this study, please refer to Chapter 1.3. 15 148 one-to-one correspondence between image and text, or painting and theological literary forms, as Panofsky has advocated, is no longer assumed. Moreover, while the iconological method reads images against texts, it does not provide for an examination of the latter. In this instance, Mikhail Bakhtin’s concept of the “utterance,” which studies language as a product of its social context, is utilised in the analysis of the projected statements.17 Like iconology, which studies formal properties as symptoms of the ideological landscape that produced it, Bakhtin studies the style, intonation, and content of texts as reflections of social and cultural conditions. While the motives behind the artist’s conception and patron’s commission of For Singapore are taken into account, the objective is not to recover their intentions, but to examine the messages that the façade as billboard conveys. Significantly, For Singapore constituted part of Holzer’s Truisms series, which had been projected on various buildings around the world.18 First conceived in 1977, Truisms first manifested itself as a series of street posters.19 In 1982, the statements were shown for the first time on a LED (light-emitting diode) board at Times Square, New York.20 Subsequently, electronic signs became the dominant mode of dissemination for Truisms, until it was supplemented by Xenon lamp projectors in 1996.21 Utilized in the projection of For Singapore onto the City Hall façade, the Xenon lamp projectors produced a commercial aesthetic similar to electronic signs, while allowing texts to be projected onto building surfaces. 17 Mikhail Bakhtin and V.N. Voloshinov. Marxism and the Philosophy of Language (New York, Seminar Press, 1973), pp.86-90. The following write-up on the concept of the utterance is referenced from this source unless footnoted otherwise. 18 For examples, see “Projections: City Index,” available from: http://www.jennyholzer.com/list.php. Accessed on 25 October 2011. 19 David Joselit, Joan Simon and Renata Salecl (eds.). Jenny Holzer (London: Phaidon Press, 1998), p.23 20 Anne Ring Paterson. “Jenny Holzer and Barbara Kruger at Times Square,” in Peter Madsen and Richard Plunz (eds.), The Urban Lifeworld (New York: Routledge, 2001), p.366. 21 Barbaralee Diamonstein. Inside the Art World: Conversations with Barbaralee Diamonstein (New York: Rizzoli, 1994), p.111. 149 Till today, the presentation of Truisms at Times Square in 1982 remains one of the most prominent instances in the history of its projections.22 Situated within the sea of billboards that populate Times Square, the artwork appropriated advertising language and practices through its visual aesthetic and writing style. The nonsensical and parodic nature of its text subverted advertising conventions to offer a critique of the consumerist culture that had manifested itself in the overwhelming landscape of billboards that has come to define Times Square. In contrast, the context that surrounded the projection of For Singapore on the City Hall façade could not be more different. The City Hall building, located at the center of the colonial district, marks a landscape that is completely free of billboards and advertisements. Guidelines set up by the Urban Redevelopment Authority only allow outdoor signage along designated areas, in order to safeguard Singapore’s streetscape from visual clutter.23 As part of the preservation areas in Singapore, the colonial district does not lie within the designated areas. What, then, does the superimposition of illuminated texts onto the City Hall façade seek to appropriate? And as a gigantic billboard, what was the message that For Singapore was striving to convey? 22 Anne Ring Paterson. “Jenny Holzer and Barbara Kruger at Times Square,” pp.366-383. The following write-up on Holzer’s work at Times Square is inferred from this article. 23 Urban Redevelopment Authority. “Circular Package to Professional Institutes on Guidelines for Outdoor Signs,” available from: http://www.ura.gov.sg/circulars/text/GuidelinesForOutdoorSigns.htm, accessed on 3 November 2011. 150 2.3.2 An Ambivalent Mask Projected onto the City Hall façade, For Singapore attracted an audience that went beyond the foreign delegates and media that had converged in Singapore for the International Monetary Fund and World Bank Meetings. A free outdoor party open to the public was held at the Padang on the inaugural night of the Biennale.24 Attended by 2000 people, it took place simultaneously with the projection of For Singapore on the City Hall façade, thus increasing the visibility of the artwork.25 By bringing For Singapore out of the institutional boundary of the museum, it was able to garner the attention of a wider audience. Besides the regular visitors to the museum and the local arts community, it was also targeted at the ordinary man on the street. The projection of For Singapore during the Singapore Biennale was in line with the NAC’s strategy to establish Singapore as a cultural centre. It was an endeavor that began in 1989 with the Report of the Advisory Council on Culture and the Arts, which advocated the establishment of institutions and infrastructures for the arts.26 In 2000, with the institutions and infrastructures in place, NAC began to focus on the development of arts programs and events to establish Singapore as a “global arts city”, or a cultural centre in the globalised world.27 This culminated in the Renaissance City 2.0 report published three years later, which outlined a series of concrete strategies that would propel Singapore into the global arts scene.28 And it was in this report that the Singapore Biennale was first conceived. Specifically, the Renaissance City 2.0 report recommended that visual arts development could be enhanced through the organization of a biennale dedicated to 24 Mugilan Rajasegeran. “Glowing start to Biennale,” in The Straits Times, 2 September 2006, p.1. ibid. 26 Singapore Ministry of Information and the Arts. Renaissance City Report: Culture and the Arts in Renaissance Singapore (Singapore: Ministry of Information and the Arts, 2000), p.4. 27 ibid. 28 Singapore Ministry of Information and the Arts. Renaissance City Report, p.1. 25 152 contemporary artworks.29 Thus, in 2006, NAC invested in the Singapore Biennale, a multi-million dollar inaugural event. Besides stimulating local arts development, the Biennale was also conceived as a tool to project a favorable national image through its visual arts program. In the same report, it was suggested that “culture [can be used] as a means of image-branding” to shape foreign perception of the country.30 It proposed that “…arts and culture have the potential to help us project Singapore’s “soft power” in the global marketplace”, and that “a country’s national image…[is] important…a high reputation in one area can….[give] a nation a perception advantage”.31 According to NAC, one of the primary objectives of the Singapore Biennale was: …to position Singapore prominently as an international centre and regional thought leader in the field of visual art… complement[ing] the achievements of other areas of the arts and cultural scene, collectively enhancing Singapore’s international image...32 And the commissioning of For Singapore was one of the ways that the goal of “enhancing Singapore’s international image” was achieved. Having exhibited in major cultural capitals of the world with numerous awards under her belt, Holzer is well known for her repertoire of original and cutting-edge woks.33 Her reputation as one of the most important contemporary artists working today helped to position Singapore as a leader in the visual arts scene. Significantly, Singapore was also the first Asian city to host the Truisms series. The commissioning of For Singapore thus showcased the nation’s ability to compete regionally on cultural terms. Hence, besides 29 ibid. Singapore Ministry of Information and the Arts. Renaissance City Report, p.35. 31 ibid. 32 National Arts Council. “Singapore Biennale.” Source: http://www.nac.gov.sg/eve/eve03.asp, accessed 20th October 2010. 33 Holzer has exhibited in the major cultural capitals of New York, London and Paris, as well as the Venice Biennale 1990, for which she won the Leone d’Oro grand prize for the United States pavilion. For a detailed description of her works, please see Chiem & Read. “Jenny Holzer: Biography” Source: http://www.cheimread.com/artists/jenny-holzer/?view=bio, accessed 21st October 2010. 30 153 promoting arts development in Singapore, For Singapore also served the objective of enhancing foreign perception of Singapore as a cultural centre. The objective of “enhancing Singapore’s international image” was also achieved by holding the Biennale in concurrence with the Meetings. The foreign delegates, and international print and broadcast media that had arrived in Singapore for the Meetings gave the Biennale a global audience. The Biennale catered not just to the local arts community and art-going public, but also to the 16,000 foreign delegates from 184 countries and 1,600 international print and broadcast media that had converged in the country.34 Significantly, the co-organizer of the Biennale, Peter Ang, was also the organizer of the Meetings.35 In an interview, Ang affirmed the integration of both events as “an excellent opportunity to showcase Singapore”.36 During the events, the City Hall building functioned both as the delegates’ registration centre, and the site of the Biennale.37 In a bid to draw the foreign delegates and media to the Biennale, they were given free entry to the exhibitions.38 The Biennale thus represented a great opportunity for NAC to enhance the country’s image through the event’s visual arts program. Besides capitalizing on Holzer’s reputation, the statements of For Singapore are an exercise in image branding when studied against the City Hall façade. Informal and colloquial, the statements are voiced by a multiplicity of personae, ranging from an anarchist, an evangelist, to a stand-up comic. The statements are “utterances,” or 34 Stephanie Yeow. “Totting up the numbers,” in The Straits Times, 21 September 2006, p.11. Natalie Chen. “Singapore to host biggest IMF/World Bank meet.” Source: http://www.travelweeklyweb.com/article/singapore_to_host_biggest_imf_world_bank_meet.html, accessed 20th October 2010. 36 ibid. 37 Hong Xinyi. “Culture on the agenda”, in The Straits Times, 5 September 2006, p.3. 38 ibid. 35 154 verbal communication between individuals that arise out of the immediate social situation, and the broader cultural milieu.39 For Bakhtin, language can never be severed from social practices, as it is determined by the cultural landscape in which it is produced. Thus, he coined the concept of “utterance,” which studies language as a product of its social and cultural conditions. Conceived by Bakhtin, the structure of an utterance is constituted by two components – meaning and theme. The “meaning” of an utterance derives from its technicalities, such as word meaning and grammatical coordination, while “theme” refers to its style and intonation. Set in vertical motion, the texts of For Singapore are projected in two separate columns on the City Hall façade (Figure 1). Carefully aligned, the sentences can be read in relation to one another, or independently: DECENCY IS A RELATIVE THING DEPENDENCE CAN BE A MEAL TICKET DESCRIPTION IS MORE VALUABLE THAN METAPHOR MUCH WAS DECIDED BEFORE YOU WERE BORN MURDER HAS ITS SEXUAL SIDE MYTHS CAN MAKE REALITY MORE INTELLIGIBLE Read individually, each statement of For Singapore stakes out a position on a subject, which ranges from perspectives on politics and freedom, to sex and death. While each of the statements is specific to the issue it broaches, it is ambiguous in its meaning. Due to the lack of a contextual frame of reference, the significance of the statement is in a state of continuous flux, unstable and open to interpretation. This ambiguity remains even when the statements are read in relation to each other. The paired 39 Mikhail Bakhtin and V.N. Voloshinov. Marxism and the Philosophy of Language, pp.86-90. The following write-up on the concept of the utterance is referenced from this source unless footnoted otherwise. 155 statements have absolutely no correlation despite the mode of presentation which encourages the reading of one sentence against another by aligning them in two corresponding columns. Instead, what the statements offer are a multiplicity of ideological positions and convictions, or worldviews. This is reinforced by the ambiguous nature of the text, which allows for multiple interpretations that may yield several meanings from a single sentence. However, while the meanings of the statements are marked by incongruity when read against one another at the instance of projection, they acquire a dialogic quality when studied as a body of work over the entire length of presentation: PURSUING PLEASURE FOR THE SAKE OF PLEASURE WILL RUIN YOU DECADENCE CAN BE AN END IN ITSELF GOVERNMENT IS A BURDEN TO PEOPLE MOST PEOPLE ARE NOT FIT TO RULE THEMSELVES TRUE FREEDOM IS FRIGHTFUL ABSOLUTE SUBMISSION CAN BE A FORM OF FREEDOM IT CAN BE HELPFUL TO KEEP GOING NO MATTER WHAT IN SOME INSTANCES IT’S BETTER TO DIE THAN TO CONTINUE USING FORCE TO STOP FORCE IS ABSURD VIOLENCE IS PERMISSIBLE EVEN DESIRABLE OCCASIONALLY An interplay of ideological positions is set up in the juxtaposition of different worldviews. While one voice may proclaim that “pursuing pleasure for the sake of pleasure” will be ruinous, another voice counters that “decadence can be an end in 156 itself”. The various proclamations challenge and contest each other through a conglomerate of disparate worldviews and incompatible principles, exemplifying a heterogeneity of meaning and positions. At other times, the voices affirm each other ideologically: POLITICS IS USED FOR PERSONAL GAIN ABUSE OF POWER COMES AS NO SURPRISE DON’T PLACE TOO MUCH TRUST IN EXPERTS MOST ELITES ARE CRACKPOTS FAITHFULNESS IS A SOCIAL NOT A BIOLOGICAL LAW MEN ARE NOT MONOGAMOUS BY NATURE However, even when the various subject positions concur with one another, there is no replication of meaning. Each declaration is autonomous and carries an equal amount of authority as another. With no single ideological position dominating the discourse, the text of For Singapore is an assemblage of worldviews that is plural and heterogenic in nature. What the singular forms of the verbal structure exemplify through the disparate, independent and autonomous worldviews is the concept of polyphony. Coined by Bakhtin, polyphony refers to the use of a variety simultaneous combination of voices in a novel to present a dialogic world, one that embodies the ideological positions and conflicts at work in that society.40 Developed from the notion of utterances, Bakhtin posits that language, which is a socially specific entity, expresses within its meaning 40 Mikhail Bakhtin. C. Emerson (trans. and ed.). Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1984), p.65. 157 the ‘worldview’, or the ideological positioning of a subject.41 The concept of polyphony is used to describe a world crammed full of individual voices, sharing, affirming, competing and conflicting with each other.42 There is no authoritative voice controlling or guiding the multiplicity of individual voices in the polyphonic world. The author, for Bakhtin, still exists behind the work, but does not act as the omnipotent narrator, or dominate the discourse with a particular worldview: “…[polyphony] fights against any view of the world which would valorise one ‘official’ point-of-view, one ideological position, and thus one discourse, above all others.”43 In the vast array of voices and worldviews, the concept of polyphony presents a world in which no individual discourse stands above any other. This parallels the multivoiced world set up in the text of For Singapore, where there is no valorisation of any one official ideological position. The various voices, imbued with a dialogic quality, are characterised by contradiction and discord, heterogeneous and disparate in their subject positions. Commenting on the disparate subject matters broached in the text, Holzer posits that “Sometimes I think something is more effective if you make it seem official, but then use a different content.”44 By official, Holzer refers to the presentation of texts from the Truisms series on building surfaces and electronic signs: …the big signs make things seem official. The sign is either for commercial things, which seem very real in the United States, or for genuine public announcements…It 41 Mikhail Bakhtin. Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics, p.39. Mikhail Bakhtin. Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics, pp.17-21. The following write-up on polyphony is referenced from this source unless footnoted otherwise. 43 Mikhail Bakhtin. Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics, p.184. 44 Jenny Holzer, quoted from an interview with Paul Taylor. “Jenny Holzer: I wanted to do a Portrait of Society,” in Flash Art, 151 (March/April 1990) p.119. 42 158 was like having the voice of authority say something different from what it would normally say...45 While the “big signs” or scale of projections contribute to “make things seem official,” it is the image of the City Hall façade that imbues the project with the “voice of authority.” For the City Hall façade, through its historical associations and classical architectural forms, is the image of authority. The texts, authoritative and impartial in tone, draws on the history of the façade as the stageset from which important political announcements have been made.46 However, the statements on the façade, which broached the subjects of war, peace, sex and death, offered “a different content” from the official announcements that have been made on the site of City Hall. What the statements projected onto the façade sought to appropriate was thus the voice of the state, or in Holzer’s words, the “voice of authority.” Significantly, foreign perception of the “voice of authority,” or the Singapore government, is mired in its reputation as a paternalistic, or ‘nanny state’. Coined by the international press, the term ‘nanny state’ is used to describe a heavy-handed, interventionist state that is excessive in its desire to govern and control every aspect of its citizens’ lives.47 Common examples cited by foreign journalists to support this perspective includes the country’s ban on chewing gum and Playboy magazine; the imposition of caning penalty for graffiti vandalism; and the death penalty for possession of more than 15 grams of heroin for anyone above the age of 18.48 This is 45 ibid. The City Hall façade was where the self-governance of Singapore was declared in 1959, and the site of the Malaysian proclamation in 1963. The declaration of independence was also announced, from the prime minister’s office within City Hall in 1965. 47 As recent as 2010, Singapore was still labeled a ‘nanny state’ in foreign press. See article by Reuters Singapore Bureau Chief Raju Gopalkrishnan, in the article “Singapore Swing: Nanny State Loosens Up to Attract Wealth” Source: http://blogs.reuters.com/the-deep-end/2010/10/01/singapore-swing-nanny-state-loosens-up-to-attractwealth/, accessed 21st October 2010. 48 Examples of such articles include: Raju Gopalkrishnan. “Singapore Swing: Nanny State Loosens Up to Attract Wealth,” available from: http://blogs.reuters.com/the-deep-end/2010/10/01/singapore-swing-nanny-state-loosens46 159 compounded by the implementation of various social engineering exercises in the form of behavior modification programs such as the Courtesy and Keep Singapore Clean campaigns, or the Baby Bonus to increase the nation’s birthrate.49 The considerable number of regulations and restrictions imposed on the citizenry which leaves little ground for individual freedom, has culminated in the foreign perception of the Singapore government as a paternalistic state. Similarly, a long-standing issue between the citizenry and the governing PAP party is its paternalistic attitude and high-handed approach in its policy implementation that is more exclusive than inclusive. The issue first surfaced in the 1984 elections, when a 12.4 percent vote swing against the PAP led to a study of voter sentiments.50 Back then, voters charged that the PAP was arrogant and out-of-touch with sentiments on the ground by implementing unpopular policies. Despite objections, the views of the citizenry were not taken into account in policy decisions. Similarly during the elections of 2006, the vote share of the PAP fell from a high of 75.3 percent to 66.6 percent.51 In a poll conducted in the aftermath of the election, opposition voters cited the distant and domineering attitude of the PAP as the reason behind their political up-to-attract-wealth/, accessed 21st October 2010; David Lamb. “Singapore Swing”, in Smithsonian Magazine, (September 2007), available from: http://www.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=Sin…2Fsingapore.html%3Fc%3Dy%26page%3D4 &partnerID=253177&cid=10025091, accessed 21st October 2010; Wayne Arnold. “The Nanny State Places a Bet”, in The New York Times. 23 May 2006. 49 The National Courtesy Campaign was replaced by the Singapore Kindness Movement in 1997. It aims to cultivate kindness and graciousness in Singapore society. Singapore Kindness Movement. “About,” available from: http://kindness.sg/2011/about, accessed 20 November 2011. The Keep Singapore Clean Campaign was initiated in 1968 to make Singapore the cleanest and greenest city in the region by addressing the problem of inconsiderate littering. In 1990, it merged with the Garden City Campaign to form the Clean and Green Week. Joshua Chia Yeong Jia “Keep Singapore Clean Campaign,” available from: http://infopedia.nl.sg/articles/SIP_1160_2008-12-05.html, accessed 20 November 2011. The Baby Bonus was initiated in 2001 with the objective of improving the country’s fertility rate by providing cash incentives. Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports. “Home,” available from: http://www.babybonus.gov.sg/bbss/html/index.html, accessed on 20 November 2011. 50 “A change of style, not the substance,” in The Straits Times, 13 May 2006, p.9. Further write-up on the 1998 elections is referenced from this source unless footnoted otherwise. 51 Elections Department Singapore. “Parliamentary Elections Results,” available from: http://www.elections.gov.sg/elections_past_parliamentary.html, accessed 20 November 2011. 160 stance.52 While the study does not posit a direct correlation between the fall in vote share and the commissioning of For Singapore, it is raised to highlight the conception of the PAP as a paternalistic state. The heterogeneous, contradictory voices of For Singapore thus diverged from the singular voice of the PAP. The mutually exclusive concepts and judgments forwarded by the polyphonic voices do not allow for any unitary or authoritarian conception of life. Read against the City Hall façade, or the exclusive stageset of the PAP, the voices serve to overturn its reputation as a paternalistic state. The image of For Singapore, circulated internationally through the foreign press and media, depict the PAP as an inclusive administration that allows for the coexistence of a diversity of worldviews, accommodative to differing ideological positions. On the other hand, while the meaning of the statements projected in For Singapore presents a heterogeneity of worldviews, an examination of its theme, or style and intonation, yields a radically different signification: ENJOY YOURSELF BECAUSE YOU CAN’T CHANGE PEOPLE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR WHAT THEY DO ANYTHING ANYWAY UNLESS THEY ARE INSANE ENSURE YOUR LIFE PEOPLE WHO DON’T WORK WITH STAYS IN FLUX THEIR HANDS ARE PARASITES EVEN YOUR FAMILY PEOPLE WHO GO CRAZY CAN BETRAY YOU ARE TOO SENSITIVE The intonation, rhythm and style of each of the statements are uniform throughout the entire work. Even though the most varied and incompatible of worldviews are 52 ibid. 161 juxtaposed in the text of For Singapore, this heterogeneity is subordinated to the unity of a single personal style and tone. The singular theme that permeates the voices reveals the unity of a single world and consciousness. While the voices do not serve as a vehicle for the propagation of Holzer’s own ideological position, the homogeneity of style and intonation emanates a strong and singular authorial presence, indicating a world that is singular and monologic in nature. This distinction between theme and meaning has been applied to the concept of polyphony.53 The multivoiced world conceived by Bakhtin is not only autonomous in terms of its ideological positions, but also independent in its consciousness. Each voice exists in its own world, with a distinct style and intonation. This ensures that several fields of vision, each of which is the viewpoint of an independent individual, is represented, as opposed to a single worldview. On the other hand, the consequence of a singular theme has been highlighted: …such a monologic world fatally disintegrates into its component parts, dissimilar and alien to one another; there would spread out before us motionlessly, helplessly, absurdly, a page from the Bible alongside a note from a travel diary, a lackey’s ditty alongside Schiller’s dithyramb of joy.54 Bakhtin’s description sounds eerily similar to Holzer’s methodology in the conception of Truisms. Holzer has credited the conceptual gestation of Truisms to her penchant for reproducing the captions of diagrams from books.55 The first texts were written in response to a reading list that comprised of the works of major thinkers of the century while she was attending the Whitney Independent Study Program: ‘I was intimidated 53 Mikhail Bakhtin. C. Emerson (trans. and ed.). Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics, pp.17-27. The following writeup on polyphony is referenced from this source unless otherwise footnoted. 54 Mikhail Bakhtin. C. Emerson (trans. and ed.). Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics, p.16. 55 Joan Simon. “Joan Simon in Conversation with Jenny Holzer”, in David Joselit, Joan Simon and Renata Salecl (eds.), Jenny Holzer. (London: Phaidon Press, 1998), p.22. The conceptual gestation of the Truisms series is referenced from this source. 162 by the list but wanted to address the subjects. I did the best I could with a number of one-liners.”56 In encapsulating the gist of the subjects broached by the books in singular statements that were eventually strung together, the creative process behind the conception of Truisms is rather like “a page from the Bible alongside a note from a travel diary, a lackey’s ditty alongside Schiller’s dithyramb of joy.” Despite this, the outcome of Holzer’s approach is not the production of a work which is entirely ‘dissimilar and alien [in its component parts]…absurd.’ As demonstrated in the analysis of the statements’ meaning, they acquire a dialogic quality in certain instances. However, this is eclipsed by its consistently singular theme that obliterates the polyphonic nature of the voices to reveal an underlying world that is inherently monologic in character. The text of For Singapore thus projects a deceptive pluralism that does not quite conceal a singular authorial origin lurking beneath. The paternalistic nature of the Singapore government is revealed in a political dispute with the International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank (WB) and civil society organizations (CSOs) during the Meetings. At the heart of the matter was the state’s ban on all outdoor protests, as well as the decision to deny entry to 27 activists who had been accredited by the IMF and WB to attend the Meetings.57 In the first instance, the state established that accredited CSOs would only be permitted to express their views inside the convention venue, as demonstrations were banned under Singapore’s laws. In addition, the CSOs were prohibited from expressing any opinions that might offend religious, racial, or ethnic sensitivities, in adherence to Singapore laws. To this, Peter 56 ibid. Tanya Fong. “No outdoor demos for World Bank, IMF meets, say police,” in The Straits Times, 29 July 2006, p.1; “14 civil society groups call for event boycott,” in The Straits Times, 13 September 2006, p.6. Further writeup on the dispute is drawn from these two sources, unless otherwise footnoted. 57 163 Stephens, the World Bank’s Singapore representative, urged that outdoor protests by accredited groups be allowed, as “Effective inclusion of the voices of civil society is key to ensuring that the Annual Meetings are a success.”58 However, the government’s firm stance on banning of all outdoor protests led to more than 2000 activists to hold their rallies on the Indonesian island of Batam instead.59 Of a greater significance was the government’s decision to ban the entry of 27 activists into the country. This was despite their accreditation by IMF and WB to attend the Meetings. The official reason given was that these people could “create security and law and order problems”.60 In the release of a joint statement, the CSOs criticised the state for having “draconian security measures”, and called its actions “repressive”.61 The WB forwarded that the ban was “a breach of the formal agreement we had with the Government of Singapore, in the Sept 23, 2003 Memorandum of Understanding”.62 WB president Paul Wolfowitz went on to describe the Singapore government’s actions as “unacceptable” and “authoritarian,” accusing the government of inflicting an “enormous damage” to the organization’s reputation through the implementation of the ban, and remarked that the WB had always worked “with these representatives of civil societies, and we value their role – even when we disagree with what they say”.63 Wolfowitz was backed by the European Union, who supported WB’s stance that the accredited activists had the right to participate in the Meetings.64 58 Peter Stephens, quoted in Tanya Fong. “No outdoor demos for World Bank, IMF meets, say police” in The Straits Times, 29 July 2006, p.1 59 “Activists plan IMF, World Bank protests on Batam” in The Straits Times, 25 August 2005, p.3 60 “World Bank accuses S’pore of breaching formal agreement” in The Straits Times, 14 September 2006, p.4. 61 Ken Kwek. “14 civil society groups call for event boycott” in The Straits Times, 13 September 2006, p.6. 62 “World Bank accuses S’pore of breaching formal agreement” in The Straits Times, 14 September 2006, p.4. 63 ibid. 64 ibid. 164 Under tremendous international pressure, 22 of the 27 blacklisted activists were finally admitted into the country.65 The state’s ban on the 27 activists from entry into Singapore indicated its paranoia of differing ideological positions and worldviews that might be potentially subversive to its agendas. Revealed through the implementation of a ban was an authoritarian state that did not hesitate to exploit its legislative powers as a means of political control. The delineation of official spaces for the expression of opinions and the strict monitoring of views forwarded for politically sensitive content severely reduced the latitude for freedom of speech. All these practices demonstrated a hegemonic state that employed interventionist practices to maintain strict control of civil society at the expense of individual freedom. In an interview, Holzer put forth that one of the concerns of the Truisms series was that of “how personal freedom can be preserved along with the government”.66 In this instance, the government’s attempt to project a politically liberal style of governance that was inclusive and tolerant through For Singapore broke down to reveal its hegemonic nature and authoritarian practices. The polyphonic world of For Singapore falls fatally apart, disclosing instead a monologic world operating with a singular consciousness. 65 66 ibid. David Joselit, Joan Simon and Renata Salecl (eds.). Jenny Holzer, p.110. 165 On the other hand, For Singapore can also be interpreted as an exercise in image branding directed towards the local arts community. The commissioning of For Singapore conveyed a open and liberal attitude, especially towards the creation of political art. In Singapore, the use of art as social and political criticism did not come into significant state and public consciousness until the mid-1990s.67 Writing in 1994, local art critic T. Sasitharan posits that: Outside of these approved forums [Parliament, feedback sessions, ministerial walkabouts; mass media; opposition party forums], there is almost no significant public discussion of political issues here… art, which is also, arguably, a legitimate forum for political views, has never been considered so here.68 One of the primary causes behind dearth of political art in Singapore is due to the censorship and funding mechanism set up by the Media Development Authority (MDA) and the NAC. The MDA requires all art exhibition and performances to be vetted and licensed before they are publicly shown.69 The primary areas of censorship include content that critique public policies or promote political causes, showcase excessive violence, or advocate alternative lifestyles and sexualities. Funding is cut whenever a work of art broaches censored issues. The use of censorship and funding by the state to exert influence over artistic content and expression has, over the years, been the main cause of antagonism between the state and the arts community.70 67 Political art did not register significantly the radar of the state or the public until the Josef Ng incident in 1994. Ng, a performance artist, cut his public hair in a public place in protest of the arrest of 12 men for allegedly committing homosexual solicitations. Following press coverage of the event, Ng was charged with committing an obscene act in public. The incident prompted the NAC to freeze all funding on performance art in Singapore for nearly 10 years. For more information on the incident, please refer to Lee Weng Choy “Chronology of a Controversy,” available from: http://www.biotechnics.org/Chronology%20of%20a%20controversy.htm, accessed 16 May 2011. 68 ibid. 69 Media Development Authority. “Policies and Content Guidelines”. Available from: http://www.mda.gov.sg/Policies/PoliciesandContentGuidelines/Pages/default.aspx, accessed on 16 May 2011. Subsequent information on censorship and funding is obtained from this source. 70 On the relationship between the state and the arts community, please refer to Ruth Bereson (ed.). Artistic Integrity and Social Responsibility: You can’t please everyone! Singapore: Ethos Books, 2001; Space, spaces and spacing: The Substation Conference 1995 (Singapore: The Substation, 1996); Lee Weng Choy (ed.). Art vs Art: Conflict and Convergence (Singapore: Substation, c1995); “section TWO: focas on Censorship” in Focas: Forum on Contemporary Art and Society no.4 (Singapore: The Necessary Stage, 2002), pp.320-345. While it is recognized that art cannot avoid being a commentary on social and political conditions in society, NAC condemns the use of art as a form of political activity, or, the use of “the umbrella of art to shield a political statement.”71 Thus, in addition to censorship, a set of “out-of-bound” (OB) markers that seek to denote the boundaries of acceptable political discourse was established.72 However, the definition of OB markers has remained famously ambiguous. In an interview conducted in 1999, then minister for information and the arts George Yeo, forwarded that “OB markers cannot be defined in advance”, and that a topic that was previously permissible may be subsequently banned in light of changes in the country’s political climate.73 Due to the ambiguity of permissible content, the treading of art into the political realm usually takes on a subtle and covert form. Thus, NAC’s commissioning of For Singapore, which offers an overt political and social commentary on topics that range from governance to violence, is an anomaly. In addition, the content of the texts treaded into censored territories, by making political statements such as: ““Government is a/burden to the people”; promoted alternative lifestyles: “Random mating/is good for/debunking sex myths”; and advocated the use of violence: “Violence is permissible/even desirable/occasionally”. Thus, NAC’s commissioning of For Singapore during the highly visible event of the Biennale seemed to signify the loosening of reins over artistic content and expression, and a more liberal stance towards artworks that broached political viewpoints that differed from its own. 71 Koh Buck Song. “Liberalising the arts takes time”, in The Straits Times, 8 February 1994, p.4. “Minister Yeo on OB markers and Internet”, in The Straits Times, 26 May 1999, p.6. 73 ibid. 72 167 On the other hand, by transforming the façade of City Hall into a giant billboard, the commercial aesthetic of For Singapore can also be interpreted to be a critique of the economic function of the National Art Gallery, or the museum as a capitalist institution. Significantly, the National Art Gallery will host the first ever National Art Collection, which consolidates the works of important Singapore artists over history. Being offered a place in the National Art Collection is thus recognition of an artist’s contribution to the nation’s art history, thus elevating his/her status. In doing so, the museum inadvertently becomes an active participant in influencing the economics of art business. In addition, even though the National Art Gallery is a non-profit institution that is partially funded by NHB, it is subject to seeking private sponsorship and donations. In this, Paul Werner has pointed out the use of capital in influencing programming and curatorial directions, in which museums tailor shows to the needs of particular corporate sponsor.74 Notably, the singular projection of Holzer’s text on the City Hall façade yields multiple interpretations. While this can be partially attributed to the ambivalence that characterizes the meaning of the statements in For Singapore, it is also due to the transitory state of the building. With no real function at the time of the projection, the City Hall was in a state of flux, and this allowed the image of its façade to be easily appropriated by any party. 74 Paul Werner. The Red Museum: Art Economics and the End of Capital (New York: The Orange Press, 2010), p.4. 168 2.3.3 The Mask of Openness 169 Of the numerous locations that hosted the Singapore Biennale in 2006, the City Hall garnered much attention. For it was the first time in history that its doors were opened to the public. As the municipal headquarters of the British, access to the building’s interior was restricted to a select few. This included the governor, commissioners, and administrative staff. Its institutional function meant that the majority of the native and immigrant population had never stepped foot into the building before. In postcolonial times, the institutional function of City Hall was retained. Similarly as in colonial times, besides ministers, government officials, and working staff, the vast majority of the citizenry had little or no cause to enter the building.75 For them, the sole function of the building resided in the visuality of the façade as a stageset to the national day parades. As journalist Yeow Kai Chai commented after he stepped into the City Hall for the first time during the Singapore Biennale: “Tall, grey Corinthian colonnades and imposing steps greet you as you walk towards the entrance of the building. You feel like you are entering a different world, this Singapore institution you think you know about but realise you know very little about.”76 For most, the interior of City Hall was a visual mystery until it hosted the Singapore Biennale. The use of City Hall as one of the sites of the Singapore Biennale came a year after the announcement in 2005 that the building, together with the adjacent Supreme Court, would be transformed into a museum that has been tentatively titled the National Art Gallery by 2014.77 As mentioned in Chapter 2, the Supreme Court is a neoclassical building completed in 1939 by the British as part of Mugliston’s proposal 75 The City Hall housed governmental departments. The people who had the priviledge to enter its doors included ministers, working personnels, and people on governmental matters. 76 Yeow Kai Chai. “Seeking a spiritual home”, in The Straits Times, 19 October 2006, p.8. 77 Ministry of Information, Communications and the Arts. “Transcript of Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s Speech at National Day Rally 2005 on 21 August 2005 at NUS University Cultural Centre”. Available from: http://stars.nhb.gov.sg/stars/public/viewHTML.jsp?pdfno=2005082102-2, accessed on 20 May 2011; “About the Gallery”. Available from: http://nationalartgallery.sg/about-the-gallery/, accessed on 20 May 2011. 170 for the re-construction of the civic centre.78 In the design of the Supreme Court, much care was taken such that its front elevation was in conformity with the classical visuality of the City Hall façade.79 Its façade thus continues the Corinthian columns that line the front elevation of City Hall, which culminates in a magnificent dome at its symmetrical centre. Until 2005, when plans were announced for the building to be transformed into the National Art Gallery, it had functioned as the courthouse of the Supreme Court of Singapore.80 For the National Heritage Board (NHB), the government body that oversees the management of museums in Singapore, the transformation of City Hall and Supreme Court into the National Arts Gallery called for a refurbishment of the two buildings.81 The refurbishment was both functional and symbolic. In order to accommodate the change in function, the interior spaces of the buildings had to be re-configured. But the refurbishment also involved the exterior envelopes of the buildings, in order to visually communicate the transformation of the buildings into the National Arts Gallery. In 2007, an architectural design competition, open to both local and international participants, was announced.82 In a media release, then senior minister-of-state Balaji Sadasivan, who was also the chair of the steering committee for the National Art Gallery, forwarded that the objective of the competition was a “…first step, towards 78 “A Civic Centre”, in The Straits Times, 30 October 1920, p.8 “New Supreme Court to be ready by end of 1939”, in The Straits Times, 1 April 1937, p.13. 80 Supreme Court Singapore. “History.” Available from: http://app.supremecourt.gov.sg/default.aspx?pgID=39, accessed on 20 November 2011. 81 Ministry of Information, Communications and the Arts. “Singapore Launches Architectural Design Competition for a New National Art Gallery” Available from: http://nationalartgallery.sg/wpcontent/uploads/11_Press_Release.pdf, accessed on 22 June 2011. 82 ibid. 79 171 building a national institution that will be owned and valued by the community…”83 In a reversal from the private and exclusive nature of the building as a state institution that had seen few people step beyond its doors, the change of its function into a national art gallery sought to reconnect the space with the community. Specifically, besides being a “creative space” that houses works of art, it was also conceived as “civic space”.84 Seen in this light, the opening of the doors of City Hall to the public for the first time during the Singapore Biennale was a strategic decision made to facilitate its transition into the National Arts Gallery, or from a state to public institution. Dedicated to the display, promotion, research and study of Southeast Asian and Singapore art, the National Art Gallery is envisioned as a regional and international hub for the visual arts to “steer Singapore to the forefront of global cities and define our presence as a visual arts hub.”85 As a “regional and international hub,” its conception is in line with the Renaissance City Report’s objective of establishing Singapore into a global arts city. The permanent collection of Southeast Asian and Singapore art serves to present “the region’s arts to the world”, whilst international art exhibitions hosted will “present the arts of the world to the region”.86 Upon the National Art Gallery’s completion in 2014, it will assume the Singapore Art Museum’s current collection of Southeast Asian and Singapore art.87 Like the 83 ibid. ibid. 85 Balaji Sadasivan, quoted in Ministry of Information, Communications and the Arts. “Singapore Launches Architectural Design Competition for a New National Art Gallery” Available from: http://nationalartgallery.sg/wpcontent/uploads/11_Press_Release.pdf, accessed on 22 June 2011. 86 National Art Gallery. “FY 2010 Annual Report (Part 1),” available from: http://nationalartgallery.sg/about-thegallery/annual-report/, accessed on 24 November 2011. 87 National Art Gallery. “About the Gallery: Current Exhibition Venue,” available from: http://nationalartgallery.sg/about-the-gallery/current-exhibition-venue/, accessed 18 November 2011. 84 172 National Art Gallery, the Singapore Art Museum, which opened its doors in 1996, is also a refurbished historical building.88 Formerly known as the Saint Joseph’s Institution, the Singapore Art Museum was a Catholic boy’s school completed in 1867.89 Designed by French priest Benedict Nain, the central building boasts a classical façade crowned by a dome. In 1988, the school moved out of the building into a new compound at Malcolm Road.90 Gazetted as a national monument like the City Hall and Supreme Court, a bout of restoration was conducted before it assumed its new function as a museum.91 Differing from the transformation of the Supreme Court and City Hall into the National Art Gallery, there was no alteration in the exterior envelop of Saint Joseph Institution in its refurbishment into the Singapore Art Museum. The façade of Saint Joseph’s Institution was preserved in its entirety despite the refurbishment of its interior. Perhaps this can be attributed to the recognisability of the Supreme Court and City Hall facades, and the symbolism which they have acquired over the years, as opposed to the Saint Joseph Institution, a magnificent colonial building in its own right, but not particularly prominent visually or symbolically. In this, Robbie B.H. Goh has proposed that the image of the Singapore Art Museum’s neo neoclassical façade, with its crucifixes, cupola, and arches, functioned as a billboard to advertise the museum as a “grand” and “impressive” structure as a means of promoting cultural tourism (Figure 31). For Goh, 88 Singapore Art Museum. “SAM Architecture – A National Monument,” available from: http://www.singaporeartmuseum.sg/museum/the_building.php, accessed 20 November 2011. 89 Saint Joseph Institution. “The SJI Milestones,” available from: http://www.sji.edu.sg/subpage.php?id=266, accessed 17 November 2011. 90 ibid. 91 ibid. 173 Figure 31 The Singapore Art Museum. 174 …a project like the Singapore Art Museum naturalises the imperial-ecclesiastical import of such architecture by accommodating it within the nation’s commercial-tourist enterprise, and by emphasizing a countering culture of the local and regional. What Goh sought to highlight was the economic objectives also underlie the conservation of historical buildings in Singapore. Although the two decades after independence saw large-scale demolishment and rebuilding as the state embarked on its modernization scheme, conservation was given a renewed emphasis in the following years.92 As an attempt to recover the past, conservation helped to concretise the imagining of the nation’s history following the rapid urban development of the island.93 The economic interests of the state, however, also played a huge role. In the 1980s, with a slowdown in its manufacturing sector, the state actively sought new strategies to diversify the economy.94 In 1984, the Tourism Task Force posited that the loss of “Oriental mystique and charm best symbolised in old buildings, traditional activities and bustling road activities…” was one of the obstacle hindering Singapore’s development as a tourist destination. A year later, a conservation report released forwarded that: For our city to be truly great, we cannot rely only on modern architecture, which is restrained by the economics of efficient construction, the use of new technology, and the pervasive international architectural style of the 20th Century. It is inevitable that our new developments suffer the fate of looking like the new buildings in other cities of the world. The only way that gives our city a distinct personality in our historic past is through the selective conservation of old districts and buildings.95 92 Brenda Yeoh and Lily Kong. The Politics of Landscape in Singapore, p.132. Brenda Yeoh and Lily Kong. The Politics of Landscape in Singapore, p.8. 94 Singapore Economic Development Board. “The 1980s,” available from: http://www.sedb.com/edb/sg/en_uk/index/about_edb/our_history/the_1980s.html, accessed on 21 September 2011. 95 Urban Redevelopment Authority. Conservation Within the Central Area with the Plan for Chinatown 1985 (Singapore: Urban Redevelopment Authority, 1985), p.1. 93 175 Besides the revival of an “oriental mystique and charm” that would attract tourist dollars to the island, architecture conservation was also undertaken to create a distinct identity for Singapore, such that it would not “suffer the fate of looking like the new buildings in other cities of the world.” The conservation of “old districts and buildings” would endow the city with “a distinct personality,” portraying Singapore as a nation that has retained its historical roots in the face of modernity. In juxtaposing modern, high-rise architecture with heritage buildings, the urban landscape depicts a city that is connected to the global economy, and yet rooted in vernacular traditions. Notably, particular emphasis is placed on the preservation of building facades in the implementation of architectural conservation in Singapore.96 This is in line with the conservation report above, which is chiefly concerned with the “look” and “style” of historical buildings, as opposed to the preservation of their interiors. The use of architectural elevations at as a projection of identity by the state is thus not unlike British commissioner’s Mugliston’s proposal in 1920 for the erection of a continuous, monumental façade facing Singapore’s seafront. Both sought to image the nation, or colony, through the use of architectural facades. Projected to the self, the facades are used to promote a common understanding of the nation’s, or colony’s identity. Projected to others, the facades function as billboards that market an enticing image of the nation’s enterprise to the outside world. In both the conservation of the Singapore Art Museum and National Art Gallery, there was no perceived need for differentiation – a smooth elision occurs in the presentation of the nation to the self and other. 96 Urban Redevelopment Authority. “Conservation Information: Principle and Approaches,” available from: http://www.ura.gov.sg/conservation/mod3.htm, accessed on 28 November 2011. 176 Due to their similarities in function and objectives, the Singapore Art Museum can be seen as the predecessor of the National Art Gallery. However, while the Public Works Department quietly undertook the refurbishment of the Singapore Art Museum, the transformation of the Supreme Court and City Hall into the National Arts Gallery proceeded with much fanfare. Much publicity was given to the call for submissions for the design competition, which solicited entries from both local and international architects. Carried out in three stages by the Ministry of Information, Communications and the Arts (MICA), the evaluation and results of the competition were made public through news releases. A seven-member jury panel, headed by the chairman of the National Heritage Board, Tommy Koh, evaluated the competition entries.97 The first stage reviewed the design concept and vision forwarded by the participants, while the second stage examined the workability of the design solutions, as well as its feasibility in terms of costs and budget.98 Three teams were recommended by the jury panel at the second stage. In order of merit, they were Studio Milou from France, Ho + Hou Architects from Taiwan, and Chan Sau Yan Associates, a local architectural firm.99 French firm Studio Milou emerged as the winner in the third and final stage of the competition, which involved an evaluation of implementation details, and a review of 97 Ministry of Information, Communications and the Arts. “Five Design Teams Shortlisted,” available from: http://nationalartgallery.sg/wp-content/uploads/10_Press_Release_Shortlist_Stage_II.pdf 98 National Art Gallery. “Competition Information” Available from: http://www.nationalartgallery.sg/competitioninfo.html#1, accessed on 22 June 2011. 99 Ministry of Information, Communications and the Arts. “Announcement of Top Three Winning Design Teams for the National Art Gallery of Singapore” Available from: http://nationalartgallery.sg/wpcontent/uploads/9_MEDIA%20RELEASE_Top%203%20announcements.pdf, accessed on 22 June 2011. 177 the technical and financial viability of the proposed scheme by MICA.100 With extensive experience in designing museums and galleries, the firm was able to meet MICA’s cost and technical requirements for the project.101 More importantly, its credential as a foreign architect with an established and distinguished practice ensured that the National Art Gallery would be a world-class institution, or in their own words, “an institution that is unique in the world for the quality of its facilities and for its unique ensemble of temporary exhibition galleries, opening Singapore to leading forms of contemporary art…”102 The appointment of Studio Milou, and the implementation of its design ensured that the National Art Gallery would be competitive internationally in cultural terms, due to its expertise in the conception and construction of museum buildings.103 In tandem with the commercial-tourist rhetoric of the state that accompanies its investment in the arts, Studio Milou posited that its conception of the National Art Gallery would render it a “…cultural destination of a new type for all residents of Singapore and for art lovers from across the world.”104 In the treatment of the City Hal façade, Studio Milou adopted a light and minimal approach (Figure 3). While the City Hall façade is preserved in its entirety, a new roof promenade, a glass and steel structure stretches across the entirety of City Hall at its topmost level, is added. The glass and steel structure sweeps down in the space between the City Hall and the Supreme Court, to create a new entrance that links the 100 Ministry of Information, Communications and the Arts. “Appointment of Architect for Singapore’s National Art Gallery,” available from: http://nationalartgallery.sg/wpcontent/uploads/8_Media_Release_28_May_2008.pdf, accessed 22 June 2011. 101 Ministry of Information, Communications and the Arts. “Announcement of Top Three Winning Design Teams for the National Art Gallery of Singapore” Available from: http://nationalartgallery.sg/wpcontent/uploads/9_MEDIA%20RELEASE_Top%203%20announcements.pdf, accessed on 22 June 2011. 102 studioMilou architecture. “Singapore National Art Gallery: The Architectural Heritage revealed beneath a Wave of Light”, available from www.studiomilou.fr. Accessed 18 October 2011. 103 studioMilou is well know for their work on heritage buildings, having been engaged by UNESCO on architectural consultancy missions. The firm has set up a separate department, studioMilou Museum, which deals exclusively with museum works. Amongst their completed projects are the Mulhouse Automobile Museum and the Bougon Burial Mounds Museum in France. 104 studioMilou architecture. “Singapore National Art Gallery: The Architectural Heritage revealed beneath a Wave of Light”, available from www.studiomilou.fr. Accessed 18 October 2011. 178 two buildings together. Transparent and light, the glass and steel structure is a stark contrast to the massive and closed character of the City Hall and Supreme Court buildings, in displaying the activities taking place within. Studio Milou has posited that the glass roof structure functions as “the public sign of the new National Art Gallery”.105 By positing it as a “public sign”, the transparent glass roof structure embodies within its visuality the identity of the National Arts Gallery. The glass roof structure, by showcasing the activities of the public, reinforces the return of the building to the citizenry, in tandem with the street concept. The transparency of the glass roof structure is thus an expression of the values of openness and accessibility that the National Art Gallery strives to realize as a public institution. As a visual whole, the facade of the National Art Gallery is a juxtaposition of the modern with the classical. The light and airy glass and steel structure provides a distinct visual contrast against the massive, faux stone-cladded façade of City Hall as a symbol of the nation’s colonial past. The National Art Gallery façade thus condenses within a singular visual gestalt the projection of Singapore as a fusion of the modern and historical, an uniquely postcolonial nation in which the colonial past is valued and celebrated as crucial in engendering its present. Transcends the signification of the building as a public institution, the National Art Gallery façade also functions as a projection of the city’s identity. Crucially, news releases of the competition results were circulated in the international press media, through television broadcast and the web.106 The organisation of a design competition open to all, and 105 studioMilou Architecture. “Singapore National Art Gallery, 2013”. Available from: http://www.studiomilou.fr/page.php?lang=en&idProjet=singapore, accessed on: 20 June 2011. 106 News releases of the various stages of the design competition were circulated in the international press media, such as Taiwan’s CTV news, and various online art and architectural media. Example includes: “Announcement of top three winning design teams for National Art Gallery,” available from: http://www.worldarchitecturenews.com/index.php?fuseaction=wanappln.projectview&upload_id=1878, accessed on 11 November 2011; “National Gallery of Singapore, Singapore”, available from: 179 the shortlisting of firms from several continents such as Europe and the Asia-Pacific was an exercise in publicity. The National Art Gallery was endowed with a global visibility even before its completion. And circulated through the press releases was the image of the National Art Gallery façade, an amalgamation of the old and new that projected to an international audience a city that was simultaneously historical and modern. In doing so, the National Art Gallery façade functions as a billboard, one used to represent and promote the identity of Singapore, both to the self and other. Significantly, the transformation of City Hall into the National Art Gallery through the utilisation of artistic and architectural interventions bears much similarities with the refurbishment of the Reichstag in Berlin, Germany. A neoclassical building completed in 1894, the Reichstag was refurbished into the parliamentary building of the new German state after the country’s reunification in 1989.107 Crucially, before the building’s refurbishment, American contemporary artists Christo and JeanneClaude were engaged to turn the Reichstag into an art object through an artistic intervention titled the Wrapped Reichstag.108 Following that, an international architecture competition was held to solicit entries for the building’s refurbishment.109 As in the case of the National Art Gallery, both the art and architectural interventions were undertaken to project ideal visions that transcended the change in function of the historical building, to encompass that of the entire nation. http://www.architekturezt.com/national-art-gallery-of-singapore-singapore/, accessed 11 November 2011; “Smart Design for Singapore National Art Gallery,” available from: http://www.indesignlive.com/articles/projects/projectnews/smart-design-for-singapore-national-art-gallery#axzz1e2zOawha; accessed 11 November 2011. 107 Jacob Baal-Teshuva (ed.). Christo: The Reichstag and Urban Projects (New York: te Neus Pub. Co., c1993), p.20. 108 David Bourdon and Michael S. Cullen. Christo and Jeanne-Claude Wrapped Reichstag Berlin 1971-95: a documentation exhibition (Koln, Germany: Taschen, 2001), p.3. 109 Norman Foster. Rebuilding the Reichstag (London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 2000), p.2. 180 Commissioned in 1894 to function as an imperial parliament, the Reichstag was where the birth of the democratic Weimar Republic was proclaimed when monarchy was abolished in 1918.110 Functioning as the parliament of the Weimar Republic, the building became a symbol of democracy.111 In 1933, the same year that Adolf Hitler seized power, a fire destroyed the Reichstag’s plenary chamber.112 From then on, the building assumed a myriad of functions, most notably for the display of anti-Jewish and anti-Bolshevik propaganda exhibitions. On 2 May 1945, two Soviet sergeants erected a Red Flag on the roof of the Reichstag to celebrate their victory over the Nazis in the Battle of Berlin.113 For the Soviets, the Reichstag was a symbol of martyrdom. They perceived the Reichstag fire in 1933, which led to the arrest and imprisonment of Communist deputies and supporters, as the main setback that prevented the Red revolution in Germany.114 The display of the Red Flag on the Reichstag was thus a symbolic act of victory over Fascism. In the aftermath of the war, the country was divided into East and West Germany, and the Reichstag was situated right at the edge of the border.115 In the years between 1949-89, the East Germans insisted that no political activities should take place in and around the Reichstag. Throughout this period, the historical significance of the Reichstag a symbol of democracy during the Weimar republic was suppressed. In a bid to diminish its presence, the Reichstag was used to house a nondescript exhibition on the history of Germany. 110 Jacob Baal-Teshuva (ed.). Christo, p.23 ibid. 112 Norman Foster. Rebuilding the Reichstag, p.46. The following information on the use of the Reichstag during the Third Reich is referenced from this source. 113 David Bourdon and Michael S. Cullen. Christo and Jeanne-Claude Wrapped Reichstag Berlin 1971-95, p.17. 114 Norman Foster. Rebuilding the Reichstag, p.116. 115 David Bourdon and Michael S. Cullen. Christo and Jeanne-Claude Wrapped Reichstag Berlin 1971-95, p.17. Information in the paragraph are referenced from this source. 111 181 With the unification of the country after the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, the Reichstag was appointed as the seat of the new government.116 It was immediately suggested then that American artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude proceed with the wrapping of the Reichstag, or the Wrapped Reichstag, an artwork first proposed in 1976.117 The realization of the Wrapped Reichstag nineteen years after the presentation of the proposal was due to the Bundestag’s decision to move the parliament back to the Reichstag. According to Forster, public sentiments towards the building in 1991 were ambivalent: When we embarked on the competition, few Germans had any love for the Reichstag. It was a building with very mixed historical and emotional associations. For many it was a sinister presence, an isolated monument… For Germans, the Reichstag building has held a varying significance in different period of its existence. In the nineteenth century it was a symbol of hard-won German unity. For the Nazis, the building was regarded contemptuously as a talking shop for democrats, something to be replaced by dictatorial will in a totalitarian state. After the division of Berlin and the construction of the Wall, the Reichstag also became – like the Brandenburg Gate – symbolic of the division of Germany, because of its location hard against the border with the East.118 For Germans, memories of the Nazis and the division of Germany remained fresh in their minds, eclipsing the original significance of the building as a symbol of democracy during the Weimar Republic and the German empire. Due to the calamitous political events that had occurred at the Reichstag, its architecture became 116 ibid. The Bundestag is the term for the parliament of Germany. It was located in Bonn during the period when Germany was divided. 117 The wrapping of the Reichstag did not materialize as it entailed obtaining several permits from different authorities due to the site, which was governed by both Allied and Soviet forces. This was, however, part of the intention underlying Christo and Jeanne-Claude’s proposal, which sought to make visible the division of the German nation by engaging the different power governing the Reichstag. For more information, please refer to Jacob Baal-Teshuva (ed.). Christo, pp.23-39. 118 Norman Foster. Rebuilding the Reichstag, p.124. 182 the concrete manifestation of the country’s traumatic history. Commentators from German architect Ludwig Hilberseimer to art historian Tilman Buddensieg have posited the Reichstag as a “horrid” building due to its combination of styles from antiquity, Renaissance, and Baroque (Figure 32).119 The Reichstag’s awkward and fragmented architectural form became a metaphor for the country’s dire past, gradually becoming synonymous with it. In a speech delivered during a parliamentary debate on the Wrapped Reichstag, member-of-parliament Peter Conradi forwarded that the artistic intervention was necessary in order to reverse the negative perception of the Reichstag: The wrapping…will be a wonderful cultural symbol of our new beginning in Berlin. Like a prized gift, the Reichstag will become more valuable…after it is beautifully wrapped. With this act, we want to give a positive sign, a beautiful, illuminating signal that fosters hope, courage, and self-confidence.120 As Conradi had anticipated, the wrapping of the Reichstag by Christo and JeanneClaude created “a wonderful cultural symbol” that marked a new phase in the nation’s history. Shrouded in a resplendent silver fabric which shimmered and wavered in response to its environment, the Reichstag became a visual spectacle in the historic center of Berlin (Figure 33). Depending on the time of the day, the brightness of the sky, and the presence of clouds, the tone of the fabric ranged from gleaming silver to solemn gray.121 In a departure from the solemn and often calamitous political events that took place at the Reichstag, people picnicked, played music, danced and hung out peacefully.122 By wrapping the Reichstag in resplendent fabric, Christo transformed 119 Jcob Baal-Teshuva (ed.). Christo, p. 17. Jacob Baal-Teshuva (ed.). Christo, p. 85. Emphasis is mine. 121 Christo, and Jeanne-Claude. Wrapped Reichstag, Berlin, 1971-1995 (Koln: Benedikt Taschen Verlag GmbH, 1996), p. 486. 122 Christo, and Jeanne-Claude. Wrapped Reichstag, Berlin, 1971-1995, p. 453. 120 183 Figure 32 The Reichstag, before refurbishment. 184 Figure 33 Christo and Jeanne-Claude, Wrapped Reichstag, Berlin, Germany, 1976-95. 185 the formerly abhorred form of the building into a sculpture with a simple and elegant shape. Under the fabric, the Reichstag became a beautiful aesthetic encounter, leaving behind its association with the political blemishes in German history. Crucially, the Wrapped Reichstag’s transformation of the Reichstag’s visuality, from an awkward and horrid structure into a beautiful art object, also effected a change in its symbolism. In the aftermath of the Wrapped Reichstag, the transformation of the building into a “positive sign” was much commented upon. Architecture historian Daniel Willis described the artistic intervention as a “purification rite” not just for the building, but for the city of Berlin, and the whole of Germany.123 To Willis, the magnificent stretch of fabric that kept the Reichstag under wraps functioned as a purified slate that gave free rein to the spectator’s imagination of a positive future.124 The Wrapped Reichstag was cathartic in releasing the building from its traumatic and onerous past. While the artistic intervention could not dissociate the Reichstag from its past, it helped to lighten its historical burden and prepare the building for the return of its role as the democratic parliament of a united Germany. Significantly, during the two weeks that the Reichstag was wrapped, an estimated five million Berliners and tourists visited the site.125 Due to the political significance of the project, the scale of the artistic intervention, and the reputation of Christo and JeanneClaude as one of the most important artists working in the twentieth century, intense media scrutiny surrounded the project.126 The image of Wrapped Reichstag was thus 123 Daniel Willis. The Emerald City and Other Essays on the Architectural Imagination (New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 1999), p.101. 124 ibid. 125 ibid. 126 Christo and Jeanne-Claude have garnered numerous awards for their work. For details, please refer to http://www.christojeanneclaude.net/, accessed 20 November 2011. 186 widely circulated in the international press and media as a symbol of a new, reunited Germany. In view of this, both For Singapore and the Wrapped Reichstag were utilised to ease the transitory buildings into their new functions, a now common technique used in refurbishment and regeneration – send in the artists. By commissioning artists of international repute such as Holzer, Christo, and Jeanne-Claude, the projects commanded a global audience through the circulation of the artworks’ images in the international press and media. While the Wrapped Reichstag prepared the Reichstag for its transformation into the new German parliamentary building, the use of the City Hall façade as an artistic canvas for the projection of For Singapore served as a prelude to its refurbishment into a museum. Like the National Art Gallery, an international architecture competition was held to refurbish the building as part of its transformation into the parliament of the Bundestag right after Christo and Jeanne-Claude’s artistic intervention.127 The design brief stated that the building had to “meet the functional, spatial and design needs of a modern working Parliament…[while] exhibit[ing] transparency, expressing accessibility to the public and a sense of pleasure in communication, discussion and openness.”128 Forster’s design submission, which proposed the reconstruction of a steel-and-glass dome and the insertion of a new parliamentary chamber, emerged as the eventual winner (Figure 34). In a parallel to the publicity given to the Reichstag through the Wrapped Reichstag, the organization of an international architecture competition, and Forster’s appointment endowed visibility to the refurbishment of the 127 128 Norman Foster. Rebuilding the Reichstag, p.30. ibid. 187 Figure 34 The Reichstag, after refurbishment. 188 building. With a profile that surpassed that of Studio Milou’s, Foster’s stature as a star architect endowed the project with a heightened visibility. For Foster, the construction of the glass and steel cupola was a “marker on the Berlin skyline, communicating the themes of lightness, transparency, permeability and public access that underscore the project.”129 Glass, with its associations of transparency and openness, was a metaphor for the return of democracy to the nation. The glass cupola functioned as a symbol of the transformation of the Reichstag into a democratic parliament, housing the new Bundestag of a united Germany. In the refurbishment of the Reichstag and City Hall, one common objective governed their architectural transformations. Both designs sought to make the buildings more accessible to the public. In this, the expression of openness through the architecture of the buildings emerged as the main concern. Consequently, the architectural design interventions mirrored each other in certain aspects. Both schemes employed an extensive use of glass to literally convey a sense of openness through the transparency of the material. While the use of glass in the National Art Gallery marked its transition from state to public institution, its use in the Reichstag reflected the open parliamentary processes that took place within as democracy was restored to a united Germany. Significantly, Foster’s cupola effected not just a change in the visual perception of the façade, but also a transformation in the use and experience of the building itself. While the original dome was purely symbolic and decorative in nature, Forster’s 129 Norman Foster. Rebuilding the Reichstag, p.87. 189 reconstruction of the cupola and insertion of a new parliamentary chamber set up a series of new spatial relationships. Specifically, the plenary chamber was opened up to the glass cupola, while the rooftop of the Reichstag was converted into a terrace opened to public access.130 The glass cupola provided visual transparency between the public and the members of parliament in the plenary chamber.131 Symbolically, the visual transparency signified the inclusion of the public in the political process, and acted as a reminder to the members of parliament of their accountability to the former. Similarly, Studio Milou sought to effect a transformation in the use and experience of the National Arts Gallery as the building transited from a state to public institution through the implementation of a “street concept” (Figure 35). Executed at basement level two, a new storey was constructed to link the Supreme Court and City Hall buildings together.132 The two buildings were also connected on the roof level by a new glass and steel structure held up by tree-like supports, forming a continuous promenade for public activities. As the most public realm of a city, streets are accessible to each and every individual. It is a potent concept when applied to the creation of civic spaces in a bid to return the City Hall and Supreme Court to the community. In its application to the design scheme, however, the street concept is only symbolic, and its success is contingent on the activities hosted, and the programmatic functions that surround them. Without public engagement, the lively civic spaces envisioned in the proposal may end up as phantom streets, rendering the National Art Gallery an institution no different from its previous function as a political headquarters. 130 Norman Foster. Rebuilding the Reichstag, p.12. ibid. 132 studioMilou architecture. “Singapore National Art Gallery: The Architectural Heritage revealed beneath a Wave of Light”, available from www.studiomilou.fr. Accessed 18 October 2011. 131 190 Figure 35 A rendering of the National Art Gallery showcasing the street concept. 191 More notably, the rooftops of both the Reichstag and the City Hall were converted into terraces that emphasized public interaction and activities. As the most open and visible space of a building, the conspicuous display of people interacting and gathering at the roof was used to showcase the accessibility of the building to the public. The increased accessibility of the buildings was not just suggested visually, but also through concrete and functional design decisions. Previously enclosed entrances were made accessible. For the Reichstag, access from its main door had been denied since the 1950s, after the Cold War began.133 In Forster’s design scheme, the main entrance was not only opened up, but also made accessible to both politicians and the public. Symbolically, the opening up of the main entrance to each and every person signified the values of openness and democracy that defined the reunited nation. In a similar trajectory, Studio Milou’s design also removed the hierarchy of entry into City Hall. In the design scheme forwarded by the municipal architect A. Gordon, several entrances were constructed, each for a different group of users. The three heavy bronze doors that defined the main entrance were used only during ceremonial functions, such as the King’s Birthday celebrations or Coronation Day.134 Employees of the municipality entered the building from an entrance beneath the main flight of steps, where two lifts and a staircase provided access to the upper floors. In addition, the public was designated a separate entrance at the rear of the building. From there, a flight of stairs led to the main treasury office where taxes were paid. 133 Norman Foster. Rebuilding the Reichstag, p.86. Subsequent information on the main entrance of the Reichstag is drawn from this source. 134 “New Municipal Building”, in The Straits Times, 30 April 1929, p.10. Subsequent information on the entrances of the City Hall building are drawn from this source. 192 In postcolonial times, the use of the City Hall to accommodate political offices, and subsequently the Academy of Law, also excluded the majority of the citizenry from its interiors.135 In Studio Milou’s scheme, entry into the National Art Gallery was consolidated into one main access point situated between the City Hall and Supreme Court.136 This removed the hierarchy of entry that marked the City Hall, making it accessible to everyone. However, the construction of a new entry meant that the building’s original entrance was no longer functional. It now existed solely to maintain the original visuality of the façade. As such, Studio Milou’s design decision lacked the impact of the Reichstag’s scheme in conveying the concepts of openness and accessibility. By opening up the main entrance of the Reichstag to the public, Foster’s decision subverted its original function as a device of exclusion that privileged the political elites. Symbolically, the move returned the values of openness and accessibility to the Reichstag. Seen in this light, the scheme of the National Art Gallery paled in comparison. On the other hand, significant differences exist in the processes behind the artistic and architectural transformations of the Reichstag and the City Hall. In the artistic transformation of the Reichstag, a parliamentary vote was held in 1994 to decide if Christo and Jeanne-Claude’s proposal to wrap the building was to be executed.137 In the run-up before the vote, Christo and Jeanne-Claude sent out letters to the public, urging them to write to their “Member of German Parliament” to express their support for the project.138 The public was also activated through the utilization of the 135 The City Hall housed governmental departments. The people who had the priviledge to enter its doors included ministers, working personnels, and people on governmental matters. 136 studioMilou architecture. “Singapore National Art Gallery: The Architectural Heritage revealed beneath a Wave of Light”, available from www.studiomilou.fr. Accessed 18 October 2011. 137 Bourdon, David and Michael S. Cullen. Christo and Jeanne-Claude Wrapped Reichstag Berlin 1971-95, p.49. 138 ibid, p.50. 193 television and news media to give publicity to the Wrapped Reichstag.139 By bringing the approval of the project to a parliamentary vote, the citizenry was given a stake in the transformation of the Reichstag through their inclusion in the decision making process. Through the parliamentary vote, the Reichstag was truly returned to the people, marking the return of democracy to the country. And it is through this process that the building regained its significance as a symbol of democracy. Similarly, the public was consulted for their views on the architectural transformation of the Reichstag.140 On 14 February 1992, the first in a series of public consultations was held. Attended by almost 300 people, the session broached issues with regards to the building’s transition. Differing from the consultation of the citizenry in the Wrapped Reichstag, the session only included experts from select fields, such as politicians, historians, philosophers and architects. While it was not as democratic as the approach behind the Wrapped Reichstag, it was still more consultative than the decision making process behind the transformation of City Hall into the National Art Gallery. The artistic and architectural interventions involving City Hall were initiatives undertaken by the NAC and MICA respectively. Organized by the NAC as part of the Singapore Biennale, For Singapore was executed without the consultation of the public, despite the symbolic significance of the building in the nation’s imagination. Similarly, no public dialogues or forums were held to solicit views from the citizenry or experts from relevant fields with regards to their visions or desires for the transformation of City Hall into the National Art Gallery. Even though the objective 139 ibid. Norman Foster. Rebuilding the Reichstag, p.86. The following information on the public consultation session is extracted from this source. 140 194 behind City Hall’s transformation was to return it to the citizenry, there was no official solicitation of public opinion. Before MICA’s finalization of the design results, an exhibition of the competition entries was held, and the public was encouraged to give feedback on the proposals.141 With the release of the competition results, it was forwarded that a survey carried out at the exhibition revealed that the public’s preference elided with that of MICA’s, in the selection of Studio Milou’s design.142 The details of the survey, carried out in an impromptu and informal manner, were not released.143 No information was available on the profiles of the interviewees, or if they represented an accurate and adequate sampling of the population. While the Reichstag and City Hall started out with similar objectives, their approaches differed in the incorporation of the public in the artistic and architectural interventions. On one hand, the refurbishment of the Reichstag involved the citizenry in its decision-making processes behind the Wrapped Reichstag, and, to a lesser extent, the architectural transformation of the Reichstag. Through the open and consultative political processes, the Reichstag is truly restored as a symbol of democracy. Seen in comparison, the highly centralized decision making process behind City Hall’s transformation into the National Art Gallery contradicted MICA’s intention to return the building to the citizenry. While the new glass roof structure of the National Art Gallery was purported as the “public sign” that signaled the return of the building 141 Tay Suan Ching. “Speak your mind,” in The Straits Times, 6 October 2007, p.16. Ministry of Information, Communications and the Arts. “Appointment of Architect for Singapore’s National Art Gallery,” available from: http://nationalartgallery.sg/wpcontent/uploads/8_Media_Release_28_May_2008.pdf, accessed 22 June 2011. 143 ibid. There was no release of statistics or information on how, where and when the surveys were carried out. 142 195 to the populace, it was not realized through concrete practices that were open to and inclusive of the citizenry. The expression of openness conveyed through the visuality of the new glass and steel structure of the National Art Gallery façade was thus hollow and superficial. In effect, even though the doors of the National Art Gallery were now open to the man on the street, it remained an exclusive state institution, with a highly centralized decision making process. The visuality of the National Art Gallery thus functioned as a mask used to project the image of accessibility and openness, in order to facilitate the building’s transition into a public institution that is effectively no different from before. 196 [...]... Biennale was: …to position Singapore prominently as an international centre and regional thought leader in the field of visual art… complement[ing] the achievements of other areas of the arts and cultural scene, collectively enhancing Singapore’s international image 32 And the commissioning of For Singapore was one of the ways that the goal of “enhancing Singapore’s international image” was achieved Having... perspective includes the country’s ban on chewing gum and Playboy magazine; the imposition of caning penalty for graffiti vandalism; and the death penalty for possession of more than 15 grams of heroin for anyone above the age of 18.48 This is 45 ibid The City Hall façade was where the self-governance of Singapore was declared in 1959, and the site of the Malaysian proclamation in 1963 The declaration of independence... perception of Singapore as a cultural centre The objective of “enhancing Singapore’s international image” was also achieved by holding the Biennale in concurrence with the Meetings The foreign delegates, and international print and broadcast media that had arrived in Singapore for the Meetings gave the Biennale a global audience The Biennale catered not just to the local arts community and art-going public,... projection of For Singapore on the City Hall façade, thus increasing the visibility of the artwork.25 By bringing For Singapore out of the institutional boundary of the museum, it was able to garner the attention of a wider audience Besides the regular visitors to the museum and the local arts community, it was also targeted at the ordinary man on the street The projection of For Singapore during the Singapore... light, the opening of the doors of City Hall to the public for the first time during the Singapore Biennale was a strategic decision made to facilitate its transition into the National Arts Gallery, or from a state to public institution Dedicated to the display, promotion, research and study of Southeast Asian and Singapore art, the National Art Gallery is envisioned as a regional and international hub... allow for any unitary or authoritarian conception of life Read against the City Hall façade, or the exclusive stageset of the PAP, the voices serve to overturn its reputation as a paternalistic state The image of For Singapore, circulated internationally through the foreign press and media, depict the PAP as an inclusive administration that allows for the coexistence of a diversity of worldviews, accommodative... While the “big signs” or scale of projections contribute to “make things seem official,” it is the image of the City Hall façade that imbues the project with the “voice of authority.” For the City Hall façade, through its historical associations and classical architectural forms, is the image of authority The texts, authoritative and impartial in tone, draws on the history of the façade as the stageset... little about.”76 For most, the interior of City Hall was a visual mystery until it hosted the Singapore Biennale The use of City Hall as one of the sites of the Singapore Biennale came a year after the announcement in 2005 that the building, together with the adjacent Supreme Court, would be transformed into a museum that has been tentatively titled the National Art Gallery by 2014.77 As mentioned in Chapter... recommended that visual arts development could be enhanced through the organization of a biennale dedicated to 24 Mugilan Rajasegeran “Glowing start to Biennale,” in The Straits Times, 2 September 2006, p.1 ibid 26 Singapore Ministry of Information and the Arts Renaissance City Report: Culture and the Arts in Renaissance Singapore (Singapore: Ministry of Information and the Arts, 2000), p.4 27 ibid 28 Singapore...2.3.2 An Ambivalent Mask Projected onto the City Hall façade, For Singapore attracted an audience that went beyond the foreign delegates and media that had converged in Singapore for the International Monetary Fund and World Bank Meetings A free outdoor party open to the public was held at the Padang on the inaugural night of the Biennale .24 Attended by 2000 people, it took place simultaneously with the ... Singapore on the City Hall façade was thus given an international audience Circulated as an image in the international press and media, the City Hall façade did not only appropriate the aesthetic... stone-cladded façade of City Hall as a symbol of the nation’s colonial past The National Art Gallery façade thus condenses within a singular visual gestalt the projection of Singapore as a fusion of. .. other areas of the arts and cultural scene, collectively enhancing Singapore’s international image 32 And the commissioning of For Singapore was one of the ways that the goal of “enhancing Singapore’s