The art of the people
Exhibition displaying items from the 1932 revolution era opens to the public tomorrow, writes Ploenpote Atthakor
To mark the 1932 revolution, a crucial event in Thailand’ s modern history when a group of young soldiers and civilians brought about political transformation from absolute to constitutional monarchy, academic Chatri Prakitnontakan is putting together an exhibition, “Revolutionary Things”, where he, together with fellow scholar Kittima Chareeprasit, will display rare objects relating to the historic change and reconceptualise them.
The art exhibition is one of the few events commemorating the 1932 Siamese Revolution by the People’s Party. Can you explain what are those “revolutionary things” and how important they are?
“Revolutionary Things” is an exhibition covering an array of objects, artworks, and designs influenced by the political ideology of the People’s Party. Most of them share a similar “thing” — an image of what we perceive as a symbol of democracy: that symbolic constitution on a foot-tray (similar to the one at the Democracy Monument) and a popular motto created by — or under the influence of — the People’s Party
As we know, the People Party’s revolution marked a major turning point in Thailand’s political history as well as what was supposed to be the advent of the country’s democratic system. Within 15 years (1932-1947), the People’s Party devised and introduced many significant policies that uprooted the longstanding dogmas and norms in order to develop and modernise the country in different aspects through “constitutionalism” and “the Six Principles”, namely to maintain national independence in all respects including the political, the judicial, and the economic; national security; economic well-being; as well as guaranteeing equality, liberty, freedom, and public education to the people.
Such political concepts and ideologies were manifested in artworks, designs, and architecture, resulting in an array of cultural works that are unique to that time period. Items on display at the exhibition provide a window into the life of commoners, equality and modernity during this time.
I can see that those objects are rare or even peculiar. Some are so hard to find. What inspires you to look for them and how long does it take before you can have this exhibition?
It’s an extension of my previous work which focused on art and culture during the People’s Party era dating more than 10 years back. While collecting information during my research, I came across a number of objects that were largely “unseen” or received little attention from the public as they were commoners’ art items. Many were things that people used in their everyday life, like a jar, bottles of refreshment drink, match-boxes, etc. All contain the image of that symbolic constitution on the foot-tray. Back then I focused on my work but decided to take photos of those objects in the hope I would have a chance to display
them one day. That chance just came amid the renewal of public attention and interest in the 1932 revolution over the past few years, with wide debates both in academia and the public sphere, probably as a show of dissent against the 2014 coup.
Those debates inspire me. While people tend to look at the 1932 Revolution as a power struggle involving a small group of elites, without the consent or awareness of the people, most of the exhibits prove otherwise. In my view, the fact that these items were made by ordinary people for practical use, not the things that the state ordered them to make means they are evidence as to how the people in that period related themselves to the Siamese revolution. With this, it’s not just a power struggle among a small elite group as we have been made to believe.
Secondly, the items apparently debunk an old belief that only a few people could comprehend the democratic principle, brought about by the People’s Party and that the symbolic constitution was so sacred that people just worshipped it without understanding. Some even likened the symbol as Phraya Phahon’s child. We found this symbol in religious works, but they were really not treated as sacred, intangible items. More importantly, that symbol was widely used in plain, everyday items like beer and drink bottles, ashtrays, and lamps. If the symbol was really sacred, as we have been told, people would dare not use it that way. The taboo of using sacred items can be seen in a case of a hotel in Chiang Mai which caused public anger when it adapted temple architectural style in its building.
This exhibition is a long-time project indeed if we start counting from the time when I first found the items, albeit inadvertently.
To put together the exhibition, it took about one and a half years after Ajahn Kittima Chareeprasit, an instructor at Fine Arts Faculty of Chiang Mai University and founder of Waiting You Curator Lab and I discussed the idea and we agreed to jointly curate these works.
Please discuss some of the special items on display at the exhibition, perhaps in symbolical significance or the difficulty in attaining them.
One special piece is a part of a pediment from the sermon hall at Wat Talingchan temple in Bangkok. The work, featuring a deity holding the symbolic constitution on a foot-tray over her head, is extraordinary. In fact, we have found this symbol in several religious works, but it appears only as a small detail. But this piece, with a fivemetre-width, is the main component of the gable. I have never found a work that is so clear and remarkable. This means that the abbot who had the piece made must have had a progressive mind or even admired the transformation that followed the revolution. Otherwise, he wouldn’t have picked it as a theme for this piece.
I found it by chance when searching for information for my work about 4-5 years ago. It was taken from the building which was under reconstruction as the temple wanted to replace it with a new one. Fortunately, the temple did not throw it away and agreed to loan the piece for the exhibition.
Another significant piece is an ashtray. In my opinion, it’s crucial because of the way the important symbol was applied to such plain, simple object, not to mention that it is an object containing negative connotations. This is key evidence that our belief about sacredness is untrue.
Its wide use shows us the public impression about the transformation period as the society entered a new era that was modern and progressive.
The third piece is a replica of the old meru (cremation building) at Wat Traimitr temple which had been demolished. This piece is special because the building was the first crematorium constructed for the commoners. Before 1932, cremations were conducted in the open which is not so hygienic. Not to mention that burning a corpse in the open always is also a ghastly sight. But since the People’s Party attached importance to the life of ordinary people, they instructed the Fine Arts Department to design a closed and modern crematorium at this temple in 1941. The structure later became a prototype for crematoriums at temples across the country.
You once mentioned that there are attempts to “erase” the art produced or influenced by the People’s Party as in the case of the Supreme Court building. How comes these objects have not been destroyed and are still available today?
Most of the exhibit objects, though politically symbolic, were produced for actual use. As items used every day, their political implications may not be that strong compared to other formal structures such as the Praab Kabot monument that was built by the People’s Party to commemorate the successful suppression of the resistance led by Prince Boworadet in 1933.
The same can be said of the Democracy Monument and some other architectural structures such as the old Supreme Court complex or the objects that had a significant link to the People’s Party like the 1932 plaque that mysteriously disappeared. Another reason for their continued existence is that these objects were produced in bulk and over time several items became precious collectibles, among them commemorative medals, matchboxes, buttons, brooches etc. As collectibles, the objects have been circulated and exchanged in antique markets as there is constant demand from buyers.
What is your expectation from the audience? Will they learn anything from the exhibition?
I believe that the exhibit serves as historical evidence and will help people get a clearer picture of the 1932 revolution. Previously, past studies have tended to focus on chronicles and memoirs, which in my view, are not enough. These objects on display serve as evidence and a tool that enables us to better understand the thoughts of people in this era.
Chatri Prakitnontakan teaches architecture at Silpakorn University. His jointly curated ‘Revolutionary Things’ art exhibition with help from Kittima Chareeprasit will open tomorrow and run until July 19 at the Cartel Artspace.