“Comfort, Discomfort” (Part III)

SIGNIFICANCE AND SOME IMPLICATIONS OF THE BISHOP’S CHAIR (SOCIO-CULTURAL ASPECTS TO “Y” FAMILY) (*Art installation I executed by using the bishop’s chair as material culture on art.) The “Y” family belongs to the top of the social strata however the matriarch of the family grew in a below middle-class family. But because of hard work and marriage to a rich Chinese man her life turned into what she has now—- prosperous life. (**The bishop’s chair installed in the kitchen of the “Y” family.) The reason for mentioning this is to establish the fact that the owner’s (“Y” matriarch) act of choosing for the object, bishop’s chair, is a reflection of a fusion of aristocratic and “lowly” (This is just my own jargon— and I’m not pertaining to low taste…”) orientation in furniture. Below middle class Filipinos even during the Commonwealth (I am pertaining to the American Regime—- turn of the century) used to sit on floor and used *dulang (low-rise table) as their table. If they were fortunate enough, they [would] purchased or made wooden *bangko or *silla [chair]. Moreover I want to make an introduction (if I may use the term?) as my parallel (particularly a chair) overview study on evolution in furniture design and its meaning in the context of Philippine colonial art. I made an interview with Professor Corazon Hila regarding the significance of a chair on art and culture in the Philippine context. She mentioned that a “chair” is an “acquired taste” [acquired lifestyle] among Filipinos because there was not an existing culture of “chair” in the country before the colonial times. The chair was first seen by the Filipinos inside a church. But because of their exposure with Colonial crafts and art, they were able to adapt the said culture. The culture of chair that is a western idea has a long and dramatic history. There are anecdotes during the Renaissance period recorded by art historians about incidents involving chair and its significance in socio-cultural status of an individual like Duke Federico Gonzaga and Vespasiano. The former had his daughter imprisoned because she just sat on her father’s chair. The latter even had his son to be sentenced to death for usurpation. The reason for these incidents all boils down to the concern attached to the concept of chair, which is synonymous to power and position. That is also the attached idea in a bishop’s chair. Actually the word bishop literally means chair. Apparently, because of the constant change in times, concepts, and meanings of objects, the word chair now has a different connotation. The same truth with the bishop’s chair of the “Y” family, it is not only its meaning that has changed but its physical characteristics as well. It is no longer about dignity or power of comfort, and class (before dignity and power were synonymous to discomfort and rigidity according to Professor Hila)—- this was especially evident in clothing and furniture. The bishop’s chair that I am describing has now a lower back seat compared with its “ancestor”, which has a “high back seat” and solid seat. Today, furniture is about innovation and comfort. However comfort may mean the same to all people but this was not the case to “Y” matriarch. When I interviewed her why she chose (a seat of six chair was commissioned to a Capampangan craftsman in the 1980’s) such design for the bishop’s chair [please see photos], she said she wanted to be comfortable when she sits. That is why she also chose sulhiya (the chair; native material made from rattan) and wood material. If I would ask a 21^st century individual he or she may say [to choose] something that has “cushion” on it. But to the owner (let me just the “owner” instead of “Y” matriarch), sulhiya is already something that is comfortable because she said the material is “presko” (meaning air could pass through underneath the seat because of the spaces in the rattan weave). Sulhiya is a Filipino innovation in furniture. However it is still considered nowadays as not as comfortable as the cushioned seat. But during the time that [their] bishop’s chair was made it was the “in thing” and was considered comfortable. It was also labeled as “classy”. It is a fact that a material made of narra is costly. But because of the economic status of the owner, she was able to acquire it. So here, in this point, my position that a chair can speak of its owner’s socio-cultural and economic status has been established, and vice versa. “Comfort, Discomfort” is not my original title on this art installation. I simply entitled it before as “Archaeology” but my professor suggested it because of the imagery that the material culture displays, and the experience of having the feel of both comfort and discomfort once seated on it. Well, with all that being said, I conclude, the impact of the association or attachment of a material culture to a person depends on the desire and “comfort” that it gives. _____________________________________ *** Please read “Comfort, Discomfort” Part I and II blog posts so that you could follow through the discourse. Thanks!