I set off on a summer holiday to Hong Kong full of arts-related excitement. Aside from a plan to eat my bodyweight in dim sum, most of my intention was to get a look at the burgeoning HK art scene. I’d been reading about how big name art fairs such as Frieze had set up in HK, using the city as a bridge from their traditional European markets to the east. HK, so I’d read, was the perfect intermediary – officially Chinese and yet kinda not, free enough to allow sales of Chinese artists to the west and Western artists to the newly minted east.
In light of this, my expectation was that the small gallery scene in Honkers would be pumping. This was in error. And it got me thinking about cities and scenes, energy and action, and most of all the elements in a city’s infrastructure that allow the arts to flourish.
HK is a major and magnificent world city, but it doesn’t contain a major and magnificent gallery. I saw a good show at the HK Arts Centre and a couple of fun, tiny things in the Sheng Whan precinct – really, really small shows in spaces the size of living rooms. A Damien Hirst show was opening the day after I left, but that was about it. The problem? Money and space, as always.
Turns out that the art world in HK is a market-based affair – the big events come a couple times a year, but year round the artists and galleryists struggle for space and cash in the world’s most expensive city to rent. There is no shortage of skilled practitioners keen to make a mark. But, thanks to the difficulties in getting seen and shown, they’re either migrating elsewhere, or making do on a shoestring. Sound familiar?
In a market-dominated city such as HK, the argument against the arts is one of fundamentals – what’s in it for us? Why should the city give up scarce real estate for marginal practices? Viewed through a Friedmanonic lens, this argument makes sense.
After HK I flew to Singapore, and found a different take on economic fundamentalism. Singapore has struggled for years against a reputation of staid conservatism (fact – it remains illegal to publically chew gum in Singapore). Yet in recent times the Singaporean government has poured millions into public art programs, galleries and art schools. They realised that the thing missing in their city – soul – could come from a healthy investment in the arts.
In Singapore I saw spaces of real power and excellence. The work wasn’t quite world class. But the spaces were, and the work will come from those eager kids studying in the new and vast purpose built practice spaces. Don’t be surprised to read of Singapore as a centre for the best in world arts in a decade or so. Testament to the power of investing in activities that don’t reap obvious rewards on a spreadsheet, but enrich the unseen heart of a place.
