T H E   S I N   O F   A P A T H Y

C O N C E P T

   As members of the human race who believe in equality and justice that transcends nationalities, race, and culture, who testify we are compassionate and caring, and who proclaim to be global citizens, we are sinfully apathetic to the sufferings of our fellowmen in the unfortunate areas of the world. We remain silent en masse, as if in collective amnesia or conspiracy. War, Famine, Shelter, Poverty, Disease, and Disaster, have become cacophony to ours ears. What we do not witness in our presence, we do not believe in the urgency and responsibility of our actions. We bask in the rewards of material wealth that we have worked for, reviling in our perceived intellectual superiority and cold economic power.

   Resources are not to be hoarded, but to be shared. The world is created by our minds, and our learned minds can visualise and comprehend the unfortunate horrors in the world. We should not rest until we have done our part, not to assuage our guilt, but to strive towards attaining the essence of humanity that is the essence of our living.

S C R I P T

H I S T O R Y

    The Sin of Apathy was first conceived in June 1991, and submitted to the National Sculpture Exhibition curatorial committee for review. The artist made impressions of the installation to illustrate the work. The artist was called up for interview by the curatorial committee, which consisted of Mr T K Sabapathy, an art historian, and the late Dr Ng Eng Teng, a sculptor. The artist prepared a short clip showing the artist vehemently facially expressive, and Mr Ng asked if the artist had contemplated how the audience would react to strong displays of emotion and gesticulations. Mr T K Sabapathy was intrigued with the possibilities of the work. The two curatorial members proceeded to clarify how the artist planned for the logistics. On satisfying themselves that the artist was capable of installing the work, Susie Koay, the curator of the National Museum of Singapore ( the forerunner of the Singapore Art Museum), issued a letter of Commission from the National Museum of Singapore that aided the artist towards receiving a grant of four thousand Singapore dollars from an arts patron and philanthropist Mr Chng Heng Tiu.

   The aritst secured the machines: Sony Hi-8 video recorder, video editing console, video tape recorders, and playback devices. The artist worked in partnership with the local talent contracting company, which served the Television Corporation of Singapore (the forerunner of the Media Corporation of Singapore). The local talent contracting company was able to secure the low budget services of part-time local extras to the artist's specifications.

     There were six faces. Each individual actor was paid fifty Singapore dollars for the Sunday afternoon's shooting. The artist prepared the individuals, directed and filmed the complete shooting in his studio-room. It was a one-man production house.

    For the voices, the artist secured the services of his family members and friends, who read from a simple script prepared by the artist. No professionals were employed.

   The main expense was the rental of the 12 television screens and video players for the duration of the exhibition. The artist also had to purchase six metal racks with twelve adjustable shelves. The plan was for the installation of these racks in a circle in a dark secluded room, where a small hiatus permitted the audience to be in the centre of the work. The installation was deliberately sited to allude to the persecution of the audience by angry souls as in a court trial on Judgement Day. The initial title of the work was "We, the guilty, persecuted for the sin of indifference". On reflection, the artist decided that the title was verbose, and replaced it with the succinct "The Sin of Apathy".

   The aritst was unable to complete his work in Singapore, and had to continue his editing in Dublin, Republic of Ireland, where he continued to rent simple video-editing devices in his home studio at Glasnevin. He detailed his instructions in print, and couriered the 12 tapes back to Singapore, for his trusted friend, Mr Tan Wee Keng, to install. The journey half-way across the seas was not without peril for the Singapore customs stepped in and submitted the tapes to the censorship board to ensure that the tapes did not contain pornographic, violent, or politically-disruptive material.

    Mr Tan Wee Keng was an undergraduate student at the National University of Singapore School of Business. Over long distance calls, the collaborator, Mr Tan, obtained instructions from the artist, to assemble the racks, and layout the work at the National Museum of Singapore. This installation took place over days, and the collaborater had to electronically coordinate the start and stops of the recordings, and purchase black cloth to drape over the screenings. This was a Herculean undertaking for Mr Tan, who was in the midst of preparation for his examinations, and whose father had recently passed away, and who had never installed a piece of artwork. Mr Tan was successful in his endeavour, and the artist was grateful to him for his vital role.

   Every morning, Salleh Japir, a curator at the National Museum, would switch on the twelve players. The Sin of Apathy could be heard echoing throughout the corridors of the National Museum. As the work was sited in the last room, it served as an aural magnet to command the presence of the audience who would first weave through the web of works by other artists.

   In the knowledge of the artist, and from available literature, the Sin of Apathy was the first video installation exhibited in Singapore. The provocative Sin of Apathy was unique in that it addressed the national consciousness over critical issues: materialism, egocentrism, self-satisfaction, apathy, collective malaise, global citizenship, and humanitarian aid.