By Choo Zheng Xi (Editor-At-Large) and KJ
We wonder if Rear-Admiral Lui Tuck Yew knows that our city was the subject of a Hollywood film. No, not Ivan Heng’s cameo in Luc Besson’s Fifth Element, but a full Hollywood film shot on scene in Singapore.
In 1978, Hollywood director Peter Bogdanovich adapted Paul Theroux’s novel “Saint Jack” to screen. Set in Singapore, the story’s protagonist Jack Flowers is a pimp who markets Singaporean girls for an international clientele. His grand scheme is to set up a posh brothel to service expatriates.
In 2010 Singapore, an admiral is tasked to dress up a repressed and repressive country’s arts scene and pimp it to the world. Yes, truth is indeed stranger than fiction.
With no hint of irony, Rear-Admiral Lui wants to launch a “sophisticated branding and marketing campaign” to sell Singapore as a Cultural Hub. Another Hub in the Singapore four-wheel drive, along with our Medical and Pharmaceutical Hub, Sports Hub and Technology Hub! But what if there is nothing to sell?
Never mind, to spearhead the Singaporean Cultural Revolution, private business to the fore!
And we know the tragedy of Cultural Revolutions. Might this cultural revival from our Economic Strategies Committee be the ominous start to the tragicomedy of Rear-Admiral Lui?
Everyone in his audience knows that Art in Singapore is damned to be nailed to the cross of financial imperative, a mere prop in the great play of The Singapore Economy. Only that mere props and utilitarian motives don’t make great plays.
Yet the déjà vu! This plays on and on in repeat mode!
Talk of a “knowledge-based economy” and “creative nation” is as old the 1997 financial crisis. Then in 2000, a “Renaissance City” masterplan was unveiled, throwing big money to grow culture. And in 2002, an Economic Review Committee sat and smoked, hoping to establish for Singapore “a reputation as a vibrant and exciting New Asia creative hub.”
The ESC 2010 is fully entitled to dust off this ancient storyline and adapt it to the times, no matter how hackneyed and insipid the dialogue, or how moth-eaten and ill-fitting the theatre costumes are. But maybe it’s time to ask why the Revival simply never came.
The recycling of stale methods and ideas aside, where have we failed in our numerous attempts in the last fifteen years? Are such government diktats counter-effective? Is the overbearing PAP government and its self-serving system of governance the very source of Singapore’s cultural impotence?
And what of the role of the mainstream media in contributing to this sad predicament? Singapore might have succeeded if the media had not been creatively castrated, but had instead stroked up some hard questions. A vibrant cultural city can hardly be built with a media curtailed by PAP-apparatchiks and strict publishing laws.
Cultural landmarks in New York like Greenwich Village and Harlem did not owe their international renown to government micromanagement and media censorship. The one unifying characteristic that defines the boroughs of New York and the subcultures in every borough is a spirit of freedom, dynamic social movements, and organic communities.
The Village was the epicenter of the counter-culture movement birthed in a historical moment where the tension of extreme societal disaffection intersected with a spirit of freedom, and that gave succor to the eternal Bob Dylan, Allen Ginsberg, and Jack Kerouac.
Similarly, the Harlem Renaissance of the early 1900s traces its roots to a culture of defying hegemonic social norms, manifested in the lyrical longing for social change that exploded into an apotheosis of expression.
In the absence of freedom and play, no amount of government grants and top-down directives are going to “create” creative spaces.
As the Nobel laureate Toni Morrison once observed, authoritarian regimes and dictatorial despots are often fools, but not foolish enough to give artists the freedom to follow their creative instincts and to publish their judgments. “They know they do so at their own peril.”
To Morrison, this specter of unwritten novels, swallowed poems, whispered fear, outlawed languages, upstaged plays and canceled films, is “as though a whole universe is being described in invisible ink.” Morrison’s words reveal such a Singapore.
In truly vibrant cities, the only ink that remains invisible, and should remain invisible, is the government’s.
When Bogdanovich and his crew filmed “Saint Jack” in Singapore, it was never cleared with the Ministry of Information. They knew it would be no-go. So instead, they submitted a bogus script entitled “The Jack of Hearts”, and then filmed “Saint Jack” under cover. Predictably, “Saint Jack” was banned in Singapore after its international release.
If Bogdanovich had not his guts and guile, the acclaimed “Saint Jack” would never have seen the light of day. It has been thirty years since, and the movie was un-banned only in 2006. Yet, the script of PAP governance and censorship can hardly be said to have changed.
Singapore’s cultural failure cannot be separated from its illiberal regime and climate of insularity: a wishful utopia haunted by a litany of laws.
Unless the very structures that constrain our creativity and stunt our growth are removed, we can only wish good luck (once again) to the uncommon courage of our rare Admiral, the Jack Flowers of our art industry.
And we would have enjoyed his tragicomedy even more if we weren’t ourselves his real victims.
LOL Cultural Hub..
Just another trick to pull in more international investors and better grades on international benchmarks
I think the brilliant Monty Python’s “Life of Brian” is also ban in Singapore. Ridiculous.
It is possible only if PAP is toppled. Other than that, any HUB is meaningless and an empty talk. The only successful HUBs PAP has created are prostitition HUB and gambling HUB and expensive ministers HUB.
I can think of one hub which we’ll definitely succeed at. HUBris.
watched the movie when it was ‘unbanned’ during the film festival some years ago.. cringed at how an acclaimed hollywood director had nothing much to contribute abt Singapore except it was a hotbed of prostitutes, druggies and secret society types. Mica should save its effort cos no one is going to bother watching. If i wanted achive shots of boat quay i’d watch a documentary. He should have hung up his camera aftr ‘The Last Picture Show’!
Loved Saint Jack. It showed how the Chinese were usurping the place of the Whiteys. definitely one of the best films about Singapore ever.
This is an excellent article. Nailed it really good lol…
I recall ..making Singapore “a Renaissance city”.. then it was my belief these guy were paid salaries and they need to justify their existence. You would also re-call David Lim motherhood statement “Opportunities for all Sin. ..” Till today PML says it and each time, my stomach roll.
I have concluded this a long time ago, these guys sit around the coffee table and jump up ideas to justify their existenace & their salaries.. example.. POST Boxes being painted but was said to be graffiti-ed.. How sad can SIN be - SIN is just not ready.
There are still alot of old guard PAP trained Ah-pek and Ah-ma waiting to jump on you if you are out of the line….
I was stopped by foreign worker jaga saying “hey you are not suppose to take pictures here…” I went “huh?” and i was on the public road and the bldg is a condo.. can you bet it..
This is the state of apathy of SIN run by many wish-cracks CS. Having said, a political party in power for so long, there is a long line of patronage.. everyone tow the line..
I have serious doubts a ex-career -soldier understands how the arts develop. My predictions is… SIN have plenty monies, go buy some ARTS…. make it happen.. 5 years down the road not my problem anymore..
Cool, was surprised to find out that the ban on Saint Jack was lifted.
ironically, i think controls bring out the creativity in artists! artists are pretty creative when comes to getting around controls. all the innuendoes- saying something without saying it explicitly strikes me as creative and entertaining too. :)
the problem of arts is deeper than just than the govt control. it’s also society mindset. we have parents who thinks arts are a waste of time and constantly telling their kids to do smth productive . i have friends who wanted to make music a career and did not do so eventually because they went to do smth ‘productive’. only one persevered despite the discouragement and he’s doing well now.
we should realise while there are many barriers to a vibrant arts scene, the first and the one that kills most dreams is at home.
There isn’t necessarily a direct correlation between oppression and censorship and the failure to flourish of a local arts scene.
Resistance artistes and musicians will have a lot to say about that. A rough fictional approximation of the power of music and art in the act of resistance – the classic La Marseillaise scene in Casablanca.
Real life examples – the use of music, poetry, theatre and dance to garner international support for the struggle against apartheid. Musicians in Nazi death camps continue to ply their trade.
Of course with the “right” amount of oppression, overt cultural development can be stifled, perhaps quashed, like how various left-wing Latin American musicians and playwrights were killed or exiled by junta regimes as part of their neo-liberal ‘shock’ revolution. But I don’t think we have anything quite like that here.
For those interested, the DVD of Saint Jack was being sold at HMV for 10 bucks! Don’t know if there’s any copies left.
And, if you want to know the full story of the “guts and guile” required to make the film, read KINDA HOT: The Making of Saint Jack in Singapore, written by Ben Slater.
Full disclosure: I am Ben Slater.
And yes, I agree with this article’s main thrust as well.
Hi Spiegel, I don’t think the equation is necessarily oppression + censorship = or =/= art challenged country. The cultural conditions that create a thriving arts scene are far more complex than that. As RW points out and I tried to inject a hint of in the piece, it’s also the hard nosed economic imperative and societal attitudes that make Singaporean uniquely challenging soil for cultural growth.
Josh, HUBris is bloody funny thanks for that :)
Ben, thanks for stopping by! I’m a big fan of the book and film, but haven’t got round to getting a copy of your book yet. I’m going to pop out to the nearest Barnes and Nobles to pick up a copy asap!
Zheng Xi,
Sure, but when you see these sentences being in bold:
“A vibrant cultural city can hardly be built with a media curtailed by PAP-apparatchiks and strict publishing laws.”
“Singapore’s cultural failure cannot be separated from its illiberal regime and climate of insularity:a wishful utopia haunted by a litany of laws.”
From these sentences, it’s clear what the main thrust of the piece is, and it is one I think is too parochial and misses the trees for the woods. Rather, as you said, “hard nosed economic imperative and societal attitudes” are far more convincing and comprehensive explanations.
Anything that is tangential to the primary goal of attainment of a stable rice bowl suffers, like how our national sports scene is bereft of local talent. It is perhaps instructive that our only “successful” artistes are those who are resonant in popular culture – mainly Chinese pop singers and actors who make it onto foreign silver screens. In a fervently consumerism-driven society, only consumer-friendly talents survive, or with luck, prosper.
Spiegel, you missed this bolded phrase: But what if there is nothing to sell? :)
But we’re basically on the same page!
ZX
But the context and the subsequent bolded sentences suggest that there is nothing to sell largely due to official interference with the arts.
In any case, your piece seems to want to have it both ways:
“Everyone in his audience knows that Art in Singapore is damned to be nailed to the cross of financial imperative, a mere prop in the great play of The Singapore Economy. Only that mere props and utilitarian motives don’t make great plays.”
Here is one thesis – pragmatic societal attitudes tied down artistic development. But this is contradicted by the other thesis:
“Singapore’s cultural failure cannot be separated from its illiberal regime and climate of insularity:a wishful utopia haunted by a litany of laws.”
“Unless the very structures that constrain our creativity and stunt our growth are removed, we can only wish good luck (once again) to the uncommon courage of our rare Admiral, the Jack Flowers of our art industry.”
So the laws are powerfully restrictive and their removal will be decisive for the local arts scene, but at the same time, it isn’t really the laws but the society itself that holds itself down. But which is it, really?
Either way, there is a place to fit the role of the government into the narrative – that would be the only consistent theme in both theses.
Spiegel, they’re not mutually exclusive. In fact, the illiberal regime and societal attitudes are mutually reinforcing. Changing laws is one step towards changing attitudes, but they’re both part of the same process. Phew I never thought I’d be doing a prac crit of my own work this is almost as tiring as a voce! :)
Another superfluous essay full of lamentations ! As SM Goh will say, ‘What constructive alternatives would you suggest to remedy the problem other than throw out PAP ?’
The only thing I agree is that by temperament/ image / public utterances thus far, R-Adm Lui Tuck Yew is a poor fit for promoting the Arts as MICA Ag Minister – he fits more the profile of a ‘bureaucratic-technocrat’ that will always try too hard.
I wonder how Rajaratnam, if alive today & fiesty as ever, would respond to a commentary like this ?
Like the writer, I find lots of the language of ESC rehashed & stale – but on the state of the Arts, surely it is wrong to say there is no positive advancement over the past 3 decades …..
I guess my point is, changing the law is cosmetic. It fundamentally changes nothing as it does not address the void in what drives a flourishing arts scene. Artistic expression is not a slave to the law, and in fact in many cases has flourished in the face of unfavourable legislation and political climates.
To accord importance to political stifling of the arts is, in my opinion, papering over cracks.
But its also equally erroneous to say Sing’s political system doesn’t negatively impact the culture scene. Of course the arts thrive in repressive regimes. But first, that doesn’t mean those artists are to keep quiet abt it. In Sing there is so many e.g. of censorship n ‘canceled films’ unstaged plays. Second, these repressive states with flourishing arts (I think usually underground or politicaly tame) are far from the vibrance cultural city that Sing aspire to be. I agree with the authors on this.
Will,
“the vibrance cultural city that Sing aspire to be”
I think this needs qualification. Who aspires to Singapore to be a vibrant cultural city? The government? A mostly apathetic people?
I agree that the censorship affects the arts scene, but not in the way that it is repressing its growth. The censorship in Singapore distorts the artistic produce – by defining the public space it can explore, censorship forces the omission of “sensitive” political themes. But “sensitive” political themes are not the be all and end all.
Expanding on the point of us being a consumer society – as far as I know, there are plenty of people here willing to part with good money to watch theatre, film, musical performances, dance etc – at the Victoria Concert Hall, Esplanade etc.
But I doubt you could say the same on the production side. Local theatre, despite its many willing actors in sec schools, JCs, unis and on professional stages, will never become the likes of the London West End or New York Broadway. The local film industry, whilst growing and maturing, has a practical upper limit imposed by costs and market opportunities. Same for literary and visual arts – the latter even more problematic since a lot of it is funded by wealthy patronage and not a mass market. Music professionals here can only make the big time by accessing wider regional markets – the domestic market is miniscule, and the local indie scene couldn’t possibly grow to anything like those elsewhere in the world.
We don’t have the critical mass to create anything on a significant scale, so we import our artistic produce. And certainly removing censorship laws will not change that – it’s not what prevents the development in the first place, it merely skews its content.
What I may also suggest is that our geographical/social limitation could also be a fundamental stumbling block. It might be fruitful to figure out the ratio of the size of our arts industries relative to our overall economy.
If it’s comparable to that of other cities or countries with notionally more vibrant arts scenes, then perhaps our problem is down to sheer size – too small to generate a critical mass that can survive in a small market.
This is an excellent article, a welcome change from the usual foreigner bashing tosh. I’ll check out the movie.
You know… I still can’t find a Singapore film that’s as good as some Iranian films, and Iran is way more repressive than Singapore. Even Malaysian films are so much better.
I know it’s fashionable to blame the state, but SG artists and directors need to share in the blame too.
As for size limitation, look at New Zealand. Same population, but the number of famous ppl in the film industry? Peter Jackson, Jane Campion, Sam Neill and many more.
Wahliao:
The potential “peter jackson”s in Singapore are all doing engineering/finance..
hoddio: You sure an engineering/finance type would have the imagination? If not then it’s their own fault isn’t it? Peter Jackson started out doing low-budget C-qualilty schlock horror like bad taste and meet the feebles.
The article is yet another tiresome blame-the-govt thing. Artists seriously need to take a look at the mirror. I’m no fan of the PAP but blaming EVERYTHING, even your poor artistic output, is pointless. Lets say the gahmen lifted censorship overnight; would great artistic works be produced? Not very likely. Probably another Ong Keng Seng pan-Asian piece of pretentious dullness that ultimately means nothing at all.
Just go visit Middle Rd / Dhoby Gaut / Albert Street area where Nanyang Fine Arts, SODA, School of Arts & many such design institutions are mushrooming ….
There IS progress ….
Be proactive, each artist must have the courage of conviction to dedicate himself to his cause.
Cursing the darkness won’t help a single bit, similarly for snipping pubic hair in public ….
You decry top-down, is there anything to stop bottoms-up individual initiative then ?
Much as I disdain Lui Tuck Yew’s dubious & inane public announcement that ‘he has never viewed porn’, I think it takes both conscious rigor & spontaneous energy to enliven the local arts & culture scene
Singaporeans involved in the production of the famous ‘Clone Wars’ animation series : isn’t that proof for A START that there is world class potential by local animators incubated by Lucasfilm ?
elephanto
Of course there are raw talents in Arts, Music & Sports in Spore but hijacked by Finance & Business Management careers. You know in Spore, there is no free lunch, even if you only have one arm left. There is no social security. It is not about poverty, it is about SURVIVAL. Who is going to look after your family if you cannot make it big? So it is too much a risk for artists & sports men and women.
With regards to media suppression, I love the statement in bold. It has a profound effect in narrowing or closing peoples minds esp young minds. They get to read only what the authorities want them to read for eg, Brit children cannot spell. Spore parents feel ‘one up’ but they do not have a clue how brilliantly or creatively Brits can write (Harry Potter being the most famous and many more). The media suppress the truth which can be an inspirtation and a recognition of weakness for improvement.
Why the need to suppress? Because the PAP fear exposing its weaknesses or where its policies fail. The above is just one example of the negative effect. What about world famous pianist like Lang Lang, tennis player like Roger Federer, and many many more. Do Sporeans get to read and know about their works and lives? Where would inspiration for the diverse pursuits be from? Football is there because it is big industry. The media in a way decides what is worth pursuing and leads the path.
If the media are not influential and powerful in setting the scene, why do companies pay big money to advertise their wares?
Imagine if instead of the ST focussing on mis-spellings of Brit children, they report on their out-of-this-world creativity, why and how the schools are letting children down, the education ministry might be kicked into doing something. On the contrary, the focus on others weakness (minor as they are), our education ministry gets praised and ministers get their salaries & bonuses raised. We don’t call this corruption, we call this stupidity to the core!
the symbolism of such, reflects what on singapore, values? harhar, what bout selling those.
Look at our tv programmes! Even game shows are copied or franchised. Is it the easy way out, cheaper production or is it because we really cannot come up with something to compete against the West? What hub is this if even the host of hubs does not have anything to show for?
Sorry, but the Admiral has not started yet. Must we be so prejudice? Also, I find the article convoluted with many nebulous insinuations. I think it is best to keep articles in TOC factual, straight-talking and simple. Thanks.
As good as saying `William Hung setting up entertainment school in New York’. Ha ha ha ha.
Dear Rear-Admiral Lui Tuck Yew,
Why so troublesome, just change ‘Uniquely Singapore’ to ‘Singapore HOE’, and save all your breath and other ministers’ as well!
P.S. HOE – Hub Of Everthing
Dear Rear-Admiral Lui Tuck Yew
Why so troublesome, simply change ‘Uniquely Singapore’ to ‘Singapore HOE’ can liao. Save all the ministers’ breath at one go and increase your productivity at the same time.
P.S. HOE = Hub Of Everthing
Singapore had a thriving film industry in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s. Just check out P.Ramlee etc…
Even my schoolmate Johnson Yap!
There was something called the Anti-Yellow Culture Campaign spearheaded by the now lionized S.Rajaratnam that targetted Rock musicians etc
While I know many would like to blame the victim, it is a little tricky when you have detention without trial!
“ Even game shows are copied or franchised. Is it the easy way out, cheaper production or is it because we really cannot come up with something to compete against the West?”
You said it and you get it. SinCity is also a CopyCat Hub !
Saint Jack the book and the movie were mediocre, just like Sinkapore.
It would be good if the article could talk about how other governments (Hong Kong or Taiwan) support their artists and businesses…besides government support, local support (audience, sponsors, etc) is also critical to an artist’s career, else they can never break into the international market, staying and working in Singapore. Or we can start ‘importing’ foreign artistic talents and offer them citizenship too? Would they come? Would they stay? Would they contribute?
Other countries with similar even lesser populations have produced arts and artists.. Nobel winners even. Certainly our stifling political climate has to do with it. Looking at the comments here about arts . . . how it’s a means to an end! That’s the problem!
So I don agrede with the critical mass argument (which is borrowed from LKY I think anyway). Statistically it does not hold water. America with 250million people has more nobel winners than 1.3billion China. Even Australia with 20 million and NZ with 5 million have a few nobel, international artists.
MLC,
“So I don agrede with the critical mass argument (which is borrowed from LKY I think anyway). Statistically it does not hold water. America with 250million people has more nobel winners than 1.3billion China. Even Australia with 20 million and NZ with 5 million have a few nobel, international artists.”
Your use of the number of Nobel Prize winners is a terribly flawed way to compare achievement between countries. Consider the fact that academia in the US has been well funded and undisrupted by major political or social breakdown in last two centuries – and indeed, have only become better funded as government and corporations pour money for military and commercially-driven research, and talented exiles from the Third Reich, Soviet Union amongst others came in (think Albert Einstein, Henry Kissinger, Werner von Braun, Enrico Fermi etc. etc.)
Despite political and social upheavals – Spanish American War, WWI, Great Depression, WW2, Korea, Vietnam, etc., universities weren’t dislocated, students and academics weren’t displaced (although large numbers of young men did volunteer to fight). The institutions were able to continue their good work – in fact, the Manhattan Project was carried out when? During the height of WW2. The space programme? During Korea and Vietnam. Game theory, MAD, and all those strategic and social scientific concepts? During the Cold War, along the corridors of the RAND Corporation. All these conflicts were fought elsewhere – it is significant in this regard to say that the American mainland has not been involved in conventional warfare at all since the US Civil War, and has never suffered aerial bombing.
China on the other hand was in the same time period wracked with a feckless Qing government, went through a period of warlord conflicts and civil war, got invaded by the Japanese, fought another civil war, joined in the Korean War at great expense of its own people and internal social development, went through a disastrous great leap forward and cultural revolution (where academics were amongst those attacked).
Their academia has comparatively few Nobel Prizes, only because the necessary resources were scarcely available, and the hard, sustained and funded work has never been possible for them until recent times. Whilst the US varsities held the lead and remained on the cutting edge, their Chinese counterparts in the last century were fleeing wars and persecution, and when they finally get back to their work have to play catch-up.
But China, the Chinese is acknowledged as the 2nd most intelligent race after the Jews, for the numerous science and arts contributed throughout history. Even the USA can’t play catch up and much of the medicine science and research was actually done , based on India, Iran and China old sciences.
I forget to add, the Jews actually won the most the Nobel Prizes. But Obama…Nobel Prize…anyone can win it:P
“But China, the Chinese is acknowledged as the 2nd most intelligent race after the Jews, for the numerous science and arts contributed throughout history. Even the USA can’t play catch up and much of the medicine science and research was actually done , based on India, Iran and China old sciences.”
Acknowledged by whom?
And a arts policy by a I don’t surf porn Navy General???? WHAT A EFFINGG JOKE.
Dismiss PAP topdown rigidity seem t0 be missing forest for the tree. THAT is the problem.
Wow Sad are you saying something about Obama’s race?
Where are your sources for your stupid quotes?
“Dismiss PAP topdown rigidity seem t0 be missing forest for the tree. THAT is the problem.”
Government rigidity, censorship, draconian legislation, and the ISA are undesirable impediments on our society indeed. But I’m not convinced by the thesis presented here that the local arts scene is being primarily impeded by mere censorship laws.
Looks like artists also know how to use the law:
http://www.fridae.com/newsfeatures/2010/02/18/9670.police-reports-lodged-against-singapore-pastor-over-offensive-gay-and-lesbian-remarks