{"id":2176,"date":"2020-02-12T13:34:15","date_gmt":"2020-02-12T05:34:15","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.brack.sg\/?p=2176"},"modified":"2020-03-06T09:12:32","modified_gmt":"2020-03-06T01:12:32","slug":"rice-rituals-and-relationality","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.brack.sg\/index.php\/2020\/02\/12\/rice-rituals-and-relationality\/","title":{"rendered":"Rice, Rituals, and Relationality"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

In December 2019, Brack collaborated with Post-Museum<\/a><\/strong> to host a sharing by Chu Hao Pei<\/strong><\/a>, a Singaporean visual artist who spent three months in residency at Cemeti Art House<\/a> –<\/strong> the oldest platform for contemporary arts in Indonesia. During his sharing<\/a>, Hao Pei was joined by Respondent Tan Yock Theng who spent 8 months in an ecology-centered and residential graduate school programme at Schumacher College. Hao Pei and Yock Theng and moderator Kei Franklin discussed the intersections of ecology, ritual, food sovereignty, and spiritual belief. This article presents a snapshot of the evening\u2019s discussion and was authored by Kei Franklin<\/strong><\/a>, Sara Wong, and Hyorim Yoo<\/em>. <\/h4>\n\n\n\n

Hao Pei begins his sharing with a provocative quote by Gus Speth: <\/p>\n\n\n\n


\u201cI used to think the top environmental problems were biodiversity loss, ecosystem collapse and climate change. I thought that with 30 years of good science we could address those problems. But I was wrong. The top environmental problems are selfishness, greed and apathy\u2026 and to deal with those we need a spiritual and cultural transformation. And we scientists don\u2019t know how to do that.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

During his residency at Cemeti, Hao Pei explored the connection between environmentalism and religious \/ spiritual systems of belief and practice. Cemeti was founded in 1988 with the intention of inviting local communities to engage with social and political questions through various artistic practices, in hopes of sparking eventual civic action. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Hao Pei’s sharing includes a table featuring ‘artefacts’ from his residency – seeds, tools used for farming, and objects that play a significant role in kejawen harvest rituals.<\/em>
Photo Credit: Cavin Lim.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Hao Pei\u2019s initial curiosity in this research was sparked in 2017, during a residency at Sa Sa Art Projects in Cambodia. He learned about the \u201ctree ordination\u201d movement started by a Monastery in Northwestern Thailand in the late 1980\u2019s – wherein monks asserted their political voices by tying their robes around trees to prevent deforestation \u2013 and was determined to continue exploring the intriguing intersection between faith and environmentalism. This led him to the residency at Cemeti where he engaged local farming communities in order to learn about the local agricultural calendar (pranata mangsa<\/em>) and its connection to harvest rituals (wiwitan<\/em>) and the rice goddess (Dewi Sri \/ Mbok Sri<\/em>) under the context of the Javanese belief system \u201ckejawen<\/em>.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

When asked about what intrigued him\nmost regarding kejawen<\/em>, Hao Pei replies: <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cI am fascinated\nby all the traditional agricultural elements in the Javanese culture from wiwitan<\/em>\nto pranata mangsa <\/em>and Dewi Sri<\/em>, as these are ways that the\npeople\u2019s faith is retained through their farming practices. The interviews that\nI conducted with various farmers and community members opened my eyes to the complexity\nof the cultural and religious layers that overlap with one another in Java. The\nhybridity is something unique, which few other places have. I remember one\nparticularly interesting interview with some older conventional (chemical)\nfarmers. They reportedly knew about wiwitan<\/em> and pranata mangsa<\/em>\nbut were unsure why they had stopped engaging with these practices. I found\nthis very peculiar. It was as if the rituals would soon exist only in\nmemories.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Hao Pei learned of the rapid loss of\nagriculture-based spiritual traditions and rituals in the wake of the Green\nRevolution in Indonesia. In the past, Javanese farming communities would\ncommonly practice a wiwitan<\/em> each harvest season in order to gratify Dewi\nSri <\/em>and secure a bountiful harvest. At the same time, seeds would be set\naside for the following planting season. Rituals of praise and gratitude for Dewi\nSri<\/em> accompanied pragmatic agricultural best practices, and in this way the\nmaterial and the spiritual realms supported one another. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cI\u2019ve come to believe\u201d says Hao Pei \u201cthat faith, religion and spirituality can do something which science and technology cannot \u2013 that is to encourage people to have belief and compassion. I\u2019m now convinced that looking back on history and how we traditionally sustained ourselves is the way to go \u2013 not inventing another ‘green’ product to be consumed nor using technology to ‘enhance’ sustainability.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Attendees are asked to ‘check in’ by choosing one of Hao Pei’s residency artefacts to represent how they feel at that moment.<\/em> Photo Credit: Cavin Lim.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Today, however, wiwitan<\/em> is rarely practiced outside of the context of somewhat-contrived, explicitly performative festivals. As of September 2019, the Indonesian government mandated that farmers use only seeds that are distributed through the centralised formal channels. One can easily see how this could lead to a rapid loss of seed diversity and possibilities of empowerment, autonomy, and sovereignty for farming communities. To resist this new mandate, Hao Pei teamed up with Sekolah Tani Muda, (which translates to young farmers\u2019 school) in order to distribute packages of unsanctioned seeds during political rallies and protests.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The diminishing practice of wiwitan <\/em>corresponds\nwith a rise in more centralised, monocultured, and technology-dependent\nagricultural practices, as well as with the explicit banning of spiritual\npractices that do not fall neatly within the bounds of one of Indonesia\u2019s major\nreligions, as defined and articulated by the state. As a result, knowledge about\npranata mangsa<\/em> and wiwitan<\/em> has been lost over time leading to a\ndisconnection of people from land. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

During her response to Hao Pei\u2019s\nsharing, Yock Theng offered an alternative way of thinking about the\n\u2018connection\u2019 between people and land. She shares: <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe thought of people\u2019s\nconnection with land, is premised on the possibility that one could \u2018connect without\n\/ disconnect.\u2019 The ensuing visual metaphor (of \u2018connection with\u2019), is that\nthere is simply a link between humans and the land. When, we use the word \u2018interdependency\u2019\ninstead, we add nuance and shift the tone into one of mutual reliance (hence, a\ncall for reciprocity) where our well-being and that of the land are both\ninterwoven and possibly even entangled. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

“The land precedes our existence – the history of earth dates back approximately 4 billion years. Homo sapiens, the first humans, only came about 200,000 to 300,000 years ago. History tells us that we’ve only been around for a tiny part of the evolutionary process. The land feeds and nourishes life (including us, both materially and some would say spiritually too); when life departs, our physical bodies decompose into soil, returning to land. When I situate myself within these perspectives, I can appreciate the view that humans are of the land (possibly even an extension or manifestation of land) and return to the land.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Yock Theng invites the audience to shift our understanding – from seeing humans as ‘connected’ to land, to seeing humans as ‘interdependent’ with land<\/em>. Photo Credit: Cavin Lim.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Yock Theng advocates for the need to\nexpand our understanding of human-land relationships, inviting a shift from a\nmore mechanistic and transactional paradigm to a more relational and\ninterdependent one. One point of intervention, she proposes, is shifting the language\nwe use: <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201dI think language\nis really powerful, albeit in a nondescript manner through the unspoken\nassumptions that underlie our frames of thought. The words, phrases and expressions\nthat we use are lenses through which we view the world, and they consequently\nshape our behaviour. They create the stories that we tell ourselves about\nourselves within the world. For example, do we refer to nature as a \u2018resource\u2019\nor to ourselves as an \u2018extension \/ manifestation\u2019 of nature? Changing how we\nlanguage is a way of shifting our relationship with ourselves, among ourselves\nand with the land.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cAn ongoing practice\nthat I have, is to constantly notice the language and frames that I am using,\npaying particular attention to the underlying orientations that are embedded\nwithin. By \u2018orientations\u2019 I\u2019m referring to, for example, a mechanistic paradigm\nversus a relational one, or a linear paradigm versus a complex one. I\u2019ve been\nasking myself: from which \u2018orientation\u2019 is my language originating? What hidden\nassumptions might be embedded in the words I am using? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

“This personal inquiry \u2013 shifting from a mechanistic, linear orientation to a more relational, complex one \u2013 has compelled me to learn more about other orientations towards the land (i.e. from indigenous cultures) and about the land; it has also shifted my behaviour (I find myself being more mindful of provenance) and encouraged me to engage in practices of crafting and producing (e.g. wood-working, kefir-making, knitting). I\u2019d love to invite everyone to partake in their own inquiry around how one can better navigate one’s relationship with land; and am curious how that unravels or what unveils.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

After his process of learning from and\nwithin the rice-growing communities in Java, Hao Pei created an exhibition that\nrevisited notions and artefacts of local wisdom through technological and\nsocial platforms. This seeming irony was deepened, according to Hao Pei, when\nhe realised that new forms of technology were enabling young people to become\nreacquainted with traditional forms of knowledge as the risk of the loss of\nthis valuable knowledge became ever more apparent.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Through their lively discussion, Hao Pei and Yock Theng invited the audience to reflect on the intersection between the ecological, the embodied, and the ethereal. Hao Pei\u2019s artistic process was inherently relational, a dialogical co-learning and co-creation with communities and the land. His final installation piece served almost as a \u2018punctuation mark\u2019 (or perhaps a comma? an ellipsis?) in a story of ongoing exploration. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Artist: Chu Hao Pei<\/a><\/strong> (b.1990) is a visual artist from Singapore. Formally trained in Interactive Media, Hao Pei began his practice under the School of Art, Design & Media (ADM) in Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. His artistic practice is informed by the shifting ecological, social and urban landscapes. By interweaving documentation and intervention as a strategy, he explores conflicts and tensions arising from state’s interventions on nature and culture. More critically, Hao Pei’s works examine loss, or potential loss, of nature and cultural heritage as a tactic to draw our attention to wider issues of environmental and cultural loss.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Respondent: Tan Yock Theng <\/strong>spent 8 months in residence at Schumacher College, an intentional learning community with ecology-centred programmes in the UK. There, she re-connected with soil and explored a different paradigm of relating to soul and society. She also explored the notion of embodying economics through a relational orientation. Her current inquiries include inviting other ways of knowing (and relating); and working from the premise of complexity and interdependencies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This residency sharing was supported by:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

National Arts Council Singapore<\/a>
Cemeti – Institute for Art and Society<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The session was hosted in the studio of Alecia Neo, Block 38 Malan Rd #01-06, where she is currently Artist-in-Residence at NTU Centre for Contemporary Art Singapore<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In December 2019, Brack collaborated with Post-Museum to host a sharing by Chu Hao Pei, a Singaporean visual artist who spent three months in residency at Cemeti Art House – the oldest platform for contemporary arts in Indonesia. During his sharing, Hao Pei was joined by Respondent Tan Yock Theng who spent 8 months in […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":36,"featured_media":2177,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_exactmetrics_skip_tracking":false,"_exactmetrics_sitenote_active":false,"_exactmetrics_sitenote_note":"","_exactmetrics_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[451,2,1],"tags":[466,464,372,63,469,66,330,471,510,133,511,475],"class_list":["post-2176","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-articles","category-conversations","category-uncategorized","tag-artresidency","tag-cemetiinstituteresidency","tag-chuhaopei","tag-environment","tag-farming","tag-food","tag-keifranklin","tag-ricefarms","tag-ritual","tag-sociallyengaged","tag-spirituality","tag-tanyocktheng"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.brack.sg\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2176","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.brack.sg\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.brack.sg\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.brack.sg\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/36"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.brack.sg\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2176"}],"version-history":[{"count":12,"href":"https:\/\/www.brack.sg\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2176\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2198,"href":"https:\/\/www.brack.sg\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2176\/revisions\/2198"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.brack.sg\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2177"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.brack.sg\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2176"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.brack.sg\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2176"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.brack.sg\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2176"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}