SINGAPORE BIENNALE 2011:

WHERE HAVE ALL THE PAINTINGS GONE?

by Linda Solay

MASTER OF ARTS & CULTURAL MANAGEMENT

at

Lasalle College Of The Arts Singapore

Goldsmiths College, University Of London

April 2011

! #!

Yue Minjun, Armed Forces, 2007, OoC, 140x170cm

“Biennale curating all around the world today is shifting away

from caring primarily for artists, their artworks and ideas, and has become more focused on

caring for audiences and their encounters with art”1 states Singapore-based art critic Lee Weng

Choy in the most recent, Singapore Biennale 2011 focused issue of Broadsheet, one of

Australia’s prime contemporary art magazines. This notion of art for the people may now be

within closer reach than ever before, as the number of global contemporary art events is at an

all-time high and a broader middle class is slowly gaining both more interest and access to this

once highly elitist field of intellectual and cultural recreation. Along the way the call for artistic

immediacy and connection echoes loudly across the board, with Low Kee Hong, the Singapore

Arts Festival’s General Manager highlighting the aspiration to make audiences feel included,

both in the experiences of art and in the processes of its making2, whilst the Singapore Biennale

2010 aims to “cultivate deeper public engagement with the arts”.3

Bearing this in mind, I can’t help but chuckle when meandering across the near-endless

rooms of the Singapore Biennale 2011, filled with elaborate installations and projections and

interspersed with semi-bewildered looking cosmopolitan Singaporeans, who seem just to be

going for a ride with the spectacle. It may be at the time to as ourselves: If the biennale is

aiming to reach out to a new audience (albeit most of the Singaporean audience may be

somewhat “new”), wouldn’t one expect to also see included the medium most familiar to us as

mere humans, the one we first developed on cave walls and hence historically hold the closest

connection to? Paintings precisely, followed by drawings, appear to be increasingly rare in

today’s international biennale rounds however, with the Singapore Biennale 2011 being no

exception (comprising 14% in 20114, curated by Matthew Ngui, 4% in 20085 and 13% in

20066, both curated by Fumio Nanjo). Here Royce W. Smith makes the critical observation of

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

! @!

Yoshimoto Nara, The Little Judge, 2001, AoC, 194x162cm

biennales’ and contemporary art festivals’ risk of becoming increasingly

insular both despite and because of their grand spectatorial appeal, and there being difficulty in

examining actual grassroots responses to and eventual impact of the [spectatorial] art

exhibited.7 Equally, are we assuming that the Singaporean audience demands to be awed only

by New Media, comprising installation, video projections etc., or may there in fact be an

appreciation of balance between all different media as well? To my knowledge, no in-depth

studies have been executed on this subject, where one can begin to question if, even only from

this perspective and beyond larger political reasoning etc., the Singapore Biennale is in fact

making a strong and positive contribution to this island-state. So where did all the paintings go? With the general population most likely still being used to

seeing deeply established art forms such as painting and drawing, these were probably not

abandoned due to a sheer lack of interest; whereas we also have to keep in mind the

considerable influence of the art collectors, who clearly prefer “tangible” works which can be

easily described, purchased, catalogued, transported, stored and, eventually, re-sold.

Not surprisingly, however, Joan Kee notes how “for many curators, the opportunity to do an

international biennale poses an irresistible chance to create one's own vision of the universe.”8

Exactly which innovative universes may emerge out of this in future is yet to be envisioned, yet

according to sources who prefer to remain anonymous, two out of three SB2011 curators,

Matthew Ngui and Russell Storer, clearly stated their intention not to include any painters in

the biennale (although individual paintings by cross-media artists were permitted).

Understandably they chose not to make any official statements on the reasoning for this

preference, however invitations for personal interviews regarding their intentions also remained

unanswered.

Despite the growing trend to foster do-all grand biennale spectacles neglecting the

apparently less exciting media in 2D, there still appears to be some notable variation within the

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Z!R*+?%!$:!6NK2)-!.(1I21>=I![%T%I*LN%&2\!(1I21>=I!]&KI=2%>=IK3N\!P&!P&=I+3K3!*4!(*&2%NL*>=>+!^%32KT=I!=&O!5K%&&=I%!_>*'>=N3-8!='(/>#:",$3/#?/0")&/;$,$-(@(,)A/B$8A/$,%/*#C+()D!QX-!&*:!9!;@""ZAB!@X":!V!$%&'!()*+!,%%-!.(=IKU>=2%O!`7L%?2=2K*&3B!P!R*1&O2=UI%!*&!2)%!M&=1'1>=I!6K&'=L*>%!5K%&&=I%!@""X-8!!"#$%&'(()!QC-!&*:!Q!;6%L2%NU%>!@""XAB!#9@:!

! Q!

Yunizar, Kisah merah, the red story, 2008, AoC, 200x250 cm

“biennalisation of the artwold”9. The 10th Biennale de Lyon 2009

(curated by Hou Hanru), for example, focused on public and urban interventions, art activism

and live art installations, with only 8% of their artists engaging in painting or drawing10. In

contrast, the 6th Asia-Pacific Triennial 2009 (curated by Suhanya Raffel) in Brisbane, Australia,

featured a significant share of 36% in painting and drawing based works11, which also indicates

that painting-heavy biennales do not necessarily only occur in traditionally crafy locations (i.e.

the Jakarta Biennale in Indonesia).

This raises the question where Singapore seeks to place itself in the global biennale-

spectrum, and what could reason it is to purposefully include more established 2D media such

as painting and drawing - or not.

The first point of consideration is of course that our biennale symbolises a reflection of

our current thinking and hence “enables us to plug into the latest developments in

contemporary visual culture around the world”12 as Singapore Art Museum Director Tan Boon

Hui aptly points out. Biennales worldwide can bee seen as providing a snapshot of not only

artistic practices, however, but also as prisms of reflection for a broad range of concurrent

sociological, ethnographical, political, scientific and even psychological developments across

societies; indeed they are an important mode of re-interpretation of what it means to be human

in our day and age. Traditionalists have always resented change, and one may say through that

also evolution; yet it is important to note that traditionalists do not hold on to preceding modes

of operation because innovations are deemed unworthy, but rather because the previous still

gives complete satisfaction, without a sense of compromise.

Clearly the role of today’s biennales is not to please the masses with what has been investigated

and established decades ago, yet the general public may not always possess a developed habit

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!D!M&'>KO!(*NN=&O%1>-!.&*>2)!%=32!G%32!3*12)B!P3K=&!5K%&&K=I3!^*>1N!M-8!S*T%NU%>!#Q-!@""V-!)22LBYY&*>2)%=32G%323*12):&%2Y&*O%Y@CX:!#"!.a%!5K%&&=I%!O%!,+*&!_>%33!EK28!;,%3!5K%&&=I%3!O%!,+*&-!@""DA-!#XW@":!##!='(/E)'/0&+$/F$C+?+C/="+(,,+$3/#?/G#,)(@.#"$"D/0")/HI'+J+)+#,/G$)$3#-:(!;5>K3U=&%B!b1%%&3I=&O!P>2!H=II%>+-!@""DA-!@#VW@@V:!#@!6K&'=L*>%!P>2!<13%1N-!.6K&'=L*>%!5K%&&=I%!@"##!<%OK=!R%I%=3%B!V!PL>KI!@"#"8!;6K&'=L*>%!P>2!<13%1N-!P1'132!9-!@"#"A-!@:!

! 9!

Alan Oeui, Lee Brothers #8, 2009, OoC

of proactive inquisition, particular in the field of contemporary art. Where

Michael Lee urges the Singaporean public for action ("All we ask of the audience is that they

ask for more!"13), Fumio Nanjo, curator for both SB2006 and SB2008 and dedicating the

biennale primarily to its local audience, sees the situation more optimistically: He understands

the general population to oftentimes be a pure, new audience with a lot of curiosity; wanting to

see new art.14

Yet the question still persists if it is indeed harder for people to appreciate, reflect on

and hence feel rewarded by New Media art in comparison to more established media such as

painting and drawing for example, which can not only be measured by attendance numbers,

visitor’s book entries or even the occasional glance on people’s interaction with the exhibition

space and its contents. Whilst both an individual’s natural character and preceding historical

and/or theoretical knowledge of art clearly has the greatest impact on their interaction with any

artform, Vesna Krstich’s field study on ‘Installation Art and Viewer Participation’ found that

“installation art is unlike more conventional or traditional forms of art because it presents

participants with added responsibilities within a given spatial environment. The underlying

goals of installation art create a unique set of expectations for museum visitors [in the form of

physical immersion, kinesthetic navigation and interactivity]. In the face of these new

challenges, various inhibiting factors may deter potential participants from actively engaging

with the work in the intended manner.”15 Similarly, Eva McGovern is wondering if, despite an

impressive arts infrastructure in Singapore, the local audience already has confidence in

looking at, engaging with, and critiquing art forms that allow for relaxing the need for

straightforward object/end result and viewer interaction, particularly if there is no framework to

understand the demands placed upon the viewer to examine artistic processes and their links to !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!#Q!PIT=>*!R*O>Kc'1%d!^*NK&=+=!=&O!<K?)=%I!,%%-!K'#/G$"(&L/6E/H&&$D&/M,/G:"$)+,-/N,/0&+$!;F*&'!E*&'B!L=>=Y3K2%!=>2!3L=?%-!621OK*!5KUIK*2)%ef1%!g!3%%O!L>*h%?23-!@"#"A-!#":!#9!PI=&!(>1K?i3)=&i-!.M&2%>TK%GB!^1NK*!S=&h*!P>2K32K?![K>%?2*>!6K&'=L*>%!5K%&&=I%!@""X-8!!"#$%&'(()!QC-!&*:!Q!;6%L2%NU%>!@""XAB!#QZ:!#C!j%3&=!E>32K?)-!.M&32=II=2K*&!P>2!=&O!jK%G%>!_=>2K?KL=2K*&8!;b1%U%?-!<*&2>%=I-!(=&=O=B!(*&?*>OK=!]&KT%>3K2+-!@""QA-!#QW#X:!

! C!

Julian Göthe, Installation view, Singapore Art Museum 2011

the daily transactions between people. I agree with

her standpoint, that “in order for a biennale to have resonance to the people of its host city it

must address the character and behaviour of both its informed and uninformed

local/international audiences.”16 Whilst SB2011 co-curator Russell Storer points out that they

have worked on making the exhibition accessible and inviting17, I can’t help but suspect that a

good number of this new audience may require a space to pause, a breather in between all the

challenge. Noticing the recurrent praise for Navin Rawanchaikul’s large oil painting “Khaek

Welcome”, it in contrast stood out how only very few audience members chose to spend any

time at all with conceptually highly demanding art pieces such as Julian Göthe’s rope and

sculptural works, and left with notably blank facial expressions from Ryan Trecartin’s

engulfing video installation, I can imagine that a weighted balance of media and artistic

approaches may aid the Biennale in allowing its visitors to leave with a sense of both

motivation, learning and challenge. Whilst Trevor Smith sees this as underestimating the

audience, as it will leave them feel energised18, Eva McGovern points out the risk of

“exhausting” the audience19, which easily could lead towards the trend we are all in silent fear

of: dwindling visitors numbers and the government’s subsequent questioning if the already

reduced budget of S$6 Million should be re-invested in concurrent biennales in the coming

years.

Speaking of visitors’ relations to the artwork exhibited, one can quickly draw the

conclusion that individual artworks must be chosen based on their intrinsic quality rather than

their medium. After all, it is their content and message that forms the art in our contemporary

understanding, and only marginally the physical craftsmanship. Nonetheless the form and

aesthetics is the first point of contact between an audience member and the work, based on

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!#X!PI=&!(>1K?i3)=&i!%2!=I:-!.kL%&!F*13%-8!!"#$%&'(()!;<=>?)!@"##AB!@Q:!#Z!MUKO:!#V!MUKO:-!@@:!#D!MUKO:!

! X!

Ryan Trecartin, Installation view, Singapore Art Museum 2011

which s/he will chose to investigate it more closely –

or maybe not. (A simplistic yet potentially powerful analogy could be the one of interpersonal

relationships: unless we are particularly open-minded and curious, we will naturally tend to

connect with other people in our environment which embody the gender, age and aesthetic

presentation we prefer at this point in our life. This behaviour cannot simply be reduced to the

notion of being driven by what is “pleasing”, as it also indicates our established habits and

hence who/what we feel confident in interacting with.) The array of available media today

theoretically allows the artist to make an informed decision about his/her medium of choice;

about what form would best re/present the content or message of the artwork. However based

on my own observation, in our fast-paced age of instant access and availability of any

commodity, it is becoming more and more common for artists to possess not a single

artistically executive skill at all, and instead of investigating into different techniques and

media to develop one’s own repertoire of expression, it appears simple enough to only develop

the thought, as the concept manifests the most significant part of the artwork. In the near future

contemporary artists may even simply embody modern day philosophers…

The concern of painting and drawing not being deemed sufficiently ‘hip’ among the younger

population appears to be unfounded as well: A significant number of high-profile artists among

the regional art market can clearly demonstrate a well-developed engagement with these media,

ranging from Yue Minjun (CH), over Yashitomo Nara (JP) to Yunizar (ID); local upcoming

“talent” Alan Oei is equally popular in his meticulous craft.

Here my question is twofold: Will the number of technically skilled artist further

dwindle if they do not receive substantial support from major art events promising reputation,

such as biennales (as opposed to other events more directed to provide income, such as art fairs

etc.) and secondly, where would the Biennale find their highly accomplished, technically

refined artists if it wanted to?

Naturally there is still a great number of highly skilled contemporary artists out there, yet

looking at their proportion in relation to the entire contemporary arts market may reveal a steep

! Z!

Navin Rawanchaikul, Khaek Welcome, 2008, OoC, 274 x 92cm

decline over the past decades.

Clearly there are more elements of historical and sociological complexity involved, and

statistics are hard to come by based on the difficulty of defining both “contemporary” and

“skill”, yet I sometimes find a certain monotony emerging when wandering through graduate

exhibitions or artist run spaces, in Singapore as well as beyond, where I hope to experience

both the most diverse and experimental of today’s grassroots artistic developments. Paintings

and drawings are hardly seen here anymore, whereas an artist with thorough technical skill may

even stir up surprise among peers.

In a recent panel discussion on Southeast Asian contemporary painting as part of the

Appreciating Art Lecture Series at Singapore Art Museum earlier this year, SAM director Tan

Boon Hui sparked debate over his indirect urge of art schools to place more emphasis on the

teaching of “the craft of the hand; painting and drawing” whilst seated next to two senior

Lasalle fine art lecturers. He pointed out SAM’s struggle to “profitably and creatively” exhibit

Singaporean Painters of the past decade next to their Indonesian and Philippine peers, before

expressing concern that “the decline in artisanship at some point will translate over into a

failure of imagination.”20 Although this may be seen as a quite dramatic formulation of the

matter at hand, it can be pinpointed as an underlying issue of wide international presence.

Hopefully these strong statements can lead to not only further debate, but also to introspection

of today’s artists, to reflect on their practice, it’s purpose and language.

Shortly after the Biennale opening, a lively discussion emerged on local arts blogger Mayo

Martin’s site “For Art’s Sake!” on which “Sin”, an active contributor, noted the following:

“The problem most people don’t seem to realise is [how] conceptual art and installation art

seem to be the easiest to do, but it is very hard to produce a good/heartfelt/authentic/memorable

piece. Worse still, some people put in incredible effort to put up an installation which really

says very little.”21

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!@"!5**&!F1K!/=&!%2!=I:-!*#:)'($&)/0&+$,/G#,)(@.#"$"D/F$+,)+,-/F$,(3/O0.."(C+$)+,-/0")/B(C):"(/*("+(&P-!<_Q!;6K&'=L*>%!P>2!<13%1N-!6K&'=L*>%-!@"##A:!@#!<=+*!<=>2K&-!.6JL*>%!5K%&&=I%!@"##l!P!4K>32!I**il-8!1#"/0")Q&/*$R(S-!<=>?)!##-!@"##-!)22LBYYUI*'3:2*O=+*&IK&%:?*NY4*>=>233=i%Y@"##Y"QY##Y3L*>%WUK%&&=I%W@"##W=W4K>32WI**iY:!

! V!

Noting that most biennales worldwide, including the Singapore Biennale, are not

media-specific, such as the Experimenta International Biennial of Media Art in Australia or

Article 10 Biennale for Electronic and “Unstable” Art in Norway, the consideration of a more

equalitarian approach to media distribution at the Singapore Biennale lies near. I am surprised

that this thought may almost be seen as revolutionary when compared to the curation of many

other spectacles of a similar kind, which feature a similarly disproportionate array of artforms.

However, considering that the vast majority of grand art institution across the globe, from

MoMA to SAM, aim to have an even distribution of media showcased, then looking

furthermore at arts council from the Arts Council England to the National Arts Council

Singapore which are funding a balanced range of artistic media, all the way to our educational

institutions from Goldsmiths’ Department of Art to even our Nanyang Academy of Fine Art –

all of which employ a certain, approximated balance between the array of artforms. There is no

clear sense of favourism and no singular medium is deemed as more relevant or even important

than another. Individual’s perspectives working within these fields may always vary, of course,

but the official standpoint is and remains that of equality. Here it is noteworthy that the grand

international spectacle biennales can legitimately defy this joined quest for balance, on grounds

still to be clarified.

If the Singapore Biennale is to support it’s own population through a selection of artwork

which encourages open-minded investigation, confident experimentation as well as balanced

enjoyment and critical challenge, it would certainly help the cause to ensure a strong and

balanced selection of all different media, ranging from drawing over installation, media art,

mixed media, painting, performance art and photography to video art (listed alphabetically).

This would widen the spectrum of stimuli for both the experienced and novice audience

member and also reduce the possible risks of perceived elitism due to a lack of comprehension,

and resulting alienation from the arts. The Singapore Biennale clearly is an event with vast

potential for the contribution to a vibrant, inquisitive and pro-actively stimulating Singapore; a

potential which can be fostered to tremendous impact if done purposefully, with a clear regard

to it’s hometown. As Yuliya Sorokina states so succinctly:

“Biennales are … a contextual prism of place, problem & person.”22

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

@@!.&*>2)!%=32!G%32!3*12)B!P3K=&!5K%&&K=I3!^*>1N!M:8-!S*T%NU%>!#Q-!@""V-!!)22LBYY&*>2)%=32G%323*12):&%2Y&*O%Y@CX!

Bibliography

“Article 10 - Biennale for Electronic and Unstable Art, Stavanger, Norway,” 2010. http://www.article.no/. “Arts Council England,” n.d. Accessed 12 April 2011. http://www.artscouncil.org.uk/. “Asia Pacific Triennial of Contemporary Art.” Queensland Art Gallery, 2009. http://qag.qld.gov.au/exhibitions/apt. “Biennale de Lyon 2009,” 2009. Accessed 12 April 2011. http://www.biennaledelyon.com/. “Bus Projects Artist Run Gallery, Melbourne,” n.d. Accessed 10 April 2011. http://www.busprojects.com.au/. Cruickshank, Alan. “Interview: Fumio Nanjo Artistic Director Singapore Biennale 2006.” Broadsheet 35, no. 3

(September 2006): 136-139. Cruickshank, Alan, Matthew Ngui, Russel Storer, Trevor Smith, Joselina Cruz, and Eva McGovern. “Open

House.” Broadsheet (March 2011): 18-25. “Department of Art.” Goldsmiths College, University of London, n.d. Accessed 10 April 2011.

http://www.gold.ac.uk/art/. “Experimenta International Biennial of Media Art,” n.d. Accessed 12 April 2011.

http://www.experimenta.org/exhibitions-projects/currentExhibitions/current-2.html. Fominaya, Alvaro Rodríguez, and Michael Lee. Who Cares? 16 Essays On Curating In Asia. Hong Kong: para/site

art space, Studio Bibliothèque & seed projects, 2010. Krstich, Vesna. “Installation Art and Viewer Participation.” Quebec, Montreal, Canada: Concordia University,

2003. “LASALLE College of the Arts - Programmes,” n.d. Accessed 10 April 2011.

http://www.lasalle.edu.sg/index.php/programmes. Lee, Weng Choy. “Calibrated Expectations: A Roundtable on the Inaugural Singapore Biennale 2006.” Broadsheet

35, no. 3 (September 2006): 140-143. ———. “The Youths of Both Sexes.” Broadsheet 40, no. 1 (March 2011): 56-59. Lee, Weng Choy, Joselina Cruz, Matthew Ngui, and Kee Hong Low. “Process of Selection - 2008 Singapore

Biennale Interviewed.” Broadsheet 37, no. 3 (September 2008): 160-163. Low, Kee Hong. “General Manager’s Message.” In Singapore Arts Festival 2010: Between You and Me, 3.

Singapore: Ministry of Information, Communications and the Arts, 2010. Martin, Mayo. “S’pore Biennale 2011! A first look!.” For Art’s Sake!, March 11, 2011.

http://blogs.todayonline.com/forartssake/2011/03/11/spore-biennale-2011-a-first-look/. “MoMA - The Museum of Modern Art,” n.d. Accessed 10 April 2011. http://www.moma.org/. “NAFA Department of Fine Art,” n.d. Accessed 10 April 2011. http://www.nafa.edu.sg/fineart/index.htm. “National Arts Council Singapore,” n.d. Accessed 12 April 2011. http://www.nac.gov.sg/. “north east west south: Asian Biennales Forum II - Opening Remarks by Panelists,” March 16, 2009.

http://northeastwestsouth.net/es/node/323. “north east west south: Asian Biennials Forum I,” November 13, 2008. http://northeastwestsouth.net/node/256. “Singapore Art Museum,” n.d.. Accessed 8 April 2011. http://www.singaporeartmuseum.sg/. Singapore Art Museum. “Singapore Biennale 2011 Media Release: 11 March 2011.” Singapore Art Museum,

November 3, 2011. ———. “Singapore Biennale 2011 Media Release: 8 April 2010.” Singapore Art Museum, August 4, 2010. “Singapore Biennale 2006,” 2006. Accessed 8 April 2011.

http://www.singaporebiennale.org/2008/2006/index.html. “Singapore Biennale 2008,” 2008. Accessed 8 April 2011. http://www.singaporebiennale.org/2008/index.html. “Singapore Biennale 2011,” 2011. Accessed 8 April 2011. http://www.singaporebiennale.org/. Singapore Biennale 2011 Short Guide. Singapore: Singapore Art Museum, 2011. Smith, Royce W. “Cultural Development? Cultural Unilateralism? An Analysis of Contemporary Festival and

Biennale Programs.” The Journal of Arts Management, Law, and Society 36, no. 4 (2007): 259-272. Storr, Robert. On Biennales, Art Fairs and the Notion of Dialogue. Museum of Contemporary Art, Sydney, 2008. “Studio 1.1 Gallery, London,” n.d. Accessed 10 April 2011. http://www.studio1-1.co.uk/. Tan, Boon Hui, Milenko Prvacki, Ian Woo, and Susie Lingham. Southeast Asian Contemporary Painting Panel

(Appreciating Art Lecture Series). MP3. Singapore Art Museum, Singapore, 2011. The 6th Asia Pacific Triennial of Contemporary Art Exhibition Catalogue. Brisbane: Queensland Art Gallery,

2009. “THE LASALLE SHOW 10 Graduates' Showcase,” 2010. Accessed 10 April 2011.

http://www.thelasalleshow.com/2010/. “The Substation, Singapore,” n.d. Accessed 10 April 2011. http://www.substation.org/. “Xe Biennale de Lyon Press Kit.” Les Biennales de Lyon, 2009.

Illustrations Göthe, Julian. Installation view, Singapore Art Museum, 2011, ©Linda Sim Kermaier Nara, Yoshimoto. The Little Judge. Acrylic on Canvas, 194x162cm, 2001, Accessed 15 April 2011.

http://www.tomiokoyamagallery.com/artists_en/nara_en/. Oeui, Alan. Lee Brothers #8 (The Boy with the Purple Sleeve). Oil on Canvas, 2009, Accessed 15 April 2011.

http://opencontours.wordpress.com/tag/alan-oei/. Rawanchaikul, Navin. Khaek Welcome. Oil on Canvas, 274 x 92cm, 2008, Accessed 15 April 2011.

http://zhoudynasty.blogspot.com/2011/03/singapore-biennale-2011-part-i-national.html. Trecartin, Ryan. Installation view, Singapore Art Museum, 2011, ©Linda Sim Kermaier Yue, Minjun. Armed Forces. Oil on Canvas, 140x170cm, 2007, Accessed 15 April 2011.

http://www.yueminjun.com/. Yunizar. Kisah merah, the red story. Acrylic on Canvas, 200x250cm, 2008, Accessed 15 April 2011.

http://www.artnet.com/artists/yunizar/past-auction-results.