Art Under Control in North Korea. Jane Portal. London: Reaktion Books, 2005. 192 pp.
Reviewed by Ken Vos
Except
for a few small catalogues for temporary exhibitions, very little text
can be found on North Korean art in the English language. Therefore, a
book such as Jane Portal’s Art Under Control in North Korea
is already welcome by just being available. Well-illustrated and
transparently written, it is a useful introduction to North Korea’s
peculiar art world.
In
the last decade, North Korea seems to have discovered art as a
commodity to be sold on the world market. Increasingly, exhibitions on
various aspects of contemporary art of the Democratic People’s Republic
are being held in Europe. However, since the breaking up of the Soviet
Union and Kim Il Sung’s death in 1994, North Korean policies have
become even less predictable than before. Kim Jong Il has always had a
personal interest in the arts, and this is shown in his published
interventions to improve the quality of art production in the DPRK.
Whereas both traditional and contemporary art in South Korea are now
thriving because of increased affluence and political openness, North
Korean art seems mainly stuck in the late fifties. One of the most
interesting aspects of the Korean peninsula is that it is now home to
both the most democratic political system and the most authoritarian
one in Asia. It is hard to imagine now, but both countries share a
common history of art until 1945.
In
the book’s second chapter, “Historical Background,” far more attention
is given to developments in the political and social spheres than to
those in art, almost implying that the production of art is wholly
dependent upon factors outside of art. In fact, Portal devotes far more
space to societal and political conditions than to the historical
peculiarities of Korean art. Most thought-provoking to those who are
somewhat informed about Korean history is the chapter “Archaeology and
the Reshaping of History,” which shows how transparently the regime
tries to rewrite history for its own nationalistic purposes. Chinese
influences are trivialized or ignored, as are those from the southern
part of the peninsula in order to show that North Korea is the logical
heir to over 2,000 years of Korean identity. Of course, (re)writing
history for ideological purposes is common to almost all nations of all
times, but the North Korean examples must be unique for their
unashamedly naive directness.
The
most important chapter must be “The Production and Consumption of Art”
as it gives the reader some insight into the conditions under which
artists are expected to work either as part of collectives or as
individuals. Rightfully, a substantial part of this chapter is devoted
to the production of monumental art, although we do not really get any
insight into how proposals for such mostly collectively produced works
are evaluated. Clearly, some individual artists play a central role in
the coordination of institutions of art education and the running of
studios. As all credit for crucial decision-making is always taken by
the “Great Leader” (Kim Il Sung) or the “Dear Leader” (Kim Jong Il), we
usually can only know informally who the most influential persons in
North Korean art are. Art is, of course, produced for the state, but
also for sale to foreigners and foreign countries such as Japan,
although there are signs that the government has become more aware of
it as a means of earning foreign currency.
There
are a few weaknesses and distractions in this book, some of a technical
nature, others are the result of a deliberate choice. First, there is
the matter of transliteration of Korean. The author or the publishers
have decided to use their own version of transliteration, thereby
suggesting homophones that do not exist. Either the official national
system of the DPRK, or the now widely used national system of the
Republic of Korea, both perfectly logical systems with and without
diacriticals, could have been chosen. To be sure, there are always
strange exceptions, such as the names of Kim Il Sung and Kim Jong Il,
which are never romanized according to the DPRK’s own rules. Why this
is confusing can be seen from the fact that the vowel in “sun” is
exactly the same as the one in “jong,” whilst they should have been
written as “Sŏng” and “Jŏng” according to those rules. Personal names
in North Korea are usually written unhyphenated and as separate words,
but Portal chose to use a variant of the McCune-Reischauer
romanization, but without the diacritics that are an integral part of
it. In effect, this approach creates homophones where there are none,
and makes the Korean language unnecessarily confusing.
Although
the author takes much care in describing the political background of
North Korean art, only a little attention is paid to stylistic
developments in the decades prior to the establishment of the DPRK.
This approach suggests that Korean art from the last quarter of the
19th century mainly developed under the influence of Western and
Japanese art. The author is very reserved in her criticism of the North
Korean system, no doubt conscious of the fact that she cannot embarrass
those who helped her during her visit to the country. Although these
influences should not be underestimated, the image that is created is
that of an art world devoid of internal dynamism. Secondly, it now
appears that art in North Korea developed in complete isolation from
the period directly preceding it. Of course, socialist realism and
“revolutionary” art were known in Japanese-occupied Korea well before
the establishment of the Soviet zone in 1945. The graphic arts are
given ample attention, but crafts or applied arts such as lacquer or
ceramics are almost only mentioned in passing, and almost without any
information on policy, development, or quality. It seems that as these
media have only limited use for propaganda or education and they are
suffering from relative neglect by the state. Compared to the South,
there seems to be very little investment in conserving or developing
traditional crafts. All in all, a personal note is missing from the
business-like and straightforward writing of the author. Some insight
into the personal lives of artists would have made the book emotionally
more involving and maybe more of an invaluable reference to art life in
North Korea. After reading the book, we still know very little of this
isolated country’s most influential artists, except for their names and
a few of their works.
If
some aspects of North Korean art remain underexposed, the book
certainly succeeds in describing the fundamental characteristics
underlying the production of art. Portal succeeds in keeping her
political distance and avoiding the hyperboles and generalizations so
often seen in publications on this country. Naturally, for an author
relying on so much local help, it might be problematic to be too
critical. Ironically, the production of art in the DPRK might be more
demand-driven than it would be in a capitalist society—demand, of
course, being not of the free market, but regulated by the Party. Also,
although the regime is at least as nationalistic as it is socialist,
nationalism is rarely seen in the artists’ modes of expression. The
nature of art production is certainly socialist in that the individual
artist is always
subordinate
to the collective and almost always subservient to the state. A good
illustration of this situation are the so-called creation companies (changjaksa),
studios at which all official artists are employed, and in particular,
the settings in which, the production of monumental art by artist
collectives takes place. These creation companies and their employees
are expected to produce fixed quota of works, so there seems to be very
little room for individual creativity. Artistic qualities in the
official media are almost always expressed in collective or general
technical terms. It remains unclear how individual creativity is
appreciated in relationship to originality or authenticity, although
when artists are singled out for official praise, this is always in
terms of being a good example to be emulated by other artists. Artists
are expected to share the responsibility of educating the people.
The
book is well-illustrated with a wide range of subject matter in
photographs. It is particularly strong on showing the contexts in which
art functions. Art Under Control in North Korea
is a very good introduction to the peculiar socio-economic situation of
North Korean art and its recent history. It is anyone’s guess what may
happen in the field of arts as the relationship between the state
ideology of Juche
(“self-reliance”) and policy decisions is becoming ever more opaque. A
depressing illustration of the restrictive conditions under which
artists are expected to work is Kim Jong Il’s quote in an official
publication from 1983 (p. 126). In fact, this would not sound out of
place coming from an arbitrary populist politician elsewhere: “A
picture must be painted in such a way that the viewer can understand
its meaning. If the people who see a picture cannot grasp its meaning,
no matter what a talented artist may have painted it, they cannot say
it is a good picture.”
Ken
Vos is curator of Japan and Korea at the National Museum of Ethnology
in Leiden, the Netherlands. He has written on Korean painting,
ceramics, and other Korean and Japanese subjects. His latest
publication is Intruders: Reflections on Art and the Ethnological Museum, (Waanders, 2004), edited with Gerard Drosterij and Toine Ooms.