The Concept of Time
Time can be understood as the flow of history, unfolding against the backdrop of space, what is often referred to as nature. This perspective was introduced by the French philosopher Alexandre Kojève, who interpreted and expanded upon the ideas of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. Kojève’s reading of Hegel positions time not merely as a sequence of moments but as a dynamic process intertwined with historical development and human consciousness. In this view, history itself becomes the stage upon which time materialises, shaped by human action as the main.
Louis Althusser’s interpretation of Hegel’s theory diverges from a linear conception of time by emphasising the distinction between time and history. He proposed that time should be understood through a synchronic framework, in which multiple temporalities coexist rather than follow a single, continuous flow. In this view, the present is not merely a transitional moment between past and future but an expansive site of possibility, an “open future” shaped by structural conditions and ideological forces.
Across different conceptual frameworks, one fundamental question persists: What does time mean to us, and how do we understand its nature? In the era of industrial capitalism, time has been transformed into a measurable unit of efficiency, fragmented and instrumentalised as a tool for optimising production, a system often referred to as “timepiece.” Today, in the age of digital capitalism, time is further disassembled into endless, reconfigurable fragments, no longer bound by continuity but instead shaped by algorithms, automation, and networked economies. The perpetual restructuring of time places humanity in a precarious position, raising existential concerns about agency, autonomy, and historical continuity. If time can be endlessly broken apart and reassembled, what remains of human temporality? And in the absence of humanity, would history, or even time itself, continue to exist? So now that the concept of time has been created to serve some things.
Thailand, formerly known as Siam, holds a unique position in Southeast Asian history as the only nation in the region that was never formally colonised. This distinction is often emphasised in general Thai historical school text books. During the reign of King Mongkut (Rama IV), the wave of colonial expansion reached the shores of Southeast Asia, posing significant challenges to Siam’s sovereignty. Despite maintaining diplomatic alliances with European powers, the ruling elites remained vigilant in safeguarding their political stability and social status. The strategic adaptations of the Siamese monarchy and nobility during this period underscore the complexities of power dynamics in the face of encroachment.
The concept of modernisation became increasingly evident during the reign of King Chulalongkorn (Rama V), who actively sought to engage with Western nations to strengthen Siam’s position on the global stage. His Majesty’s travels across Europe were not only diplomatic efforts to maintain international alliances but also opportunities to observe and adopt elements of Western culture and governance. Upon his return, King Chulalongkorn introduced various cultural and institutional developments, including the establishment of museums, the promotion of stage plays, and the integration of Western artistic aesthetics and values into Siamese society. These efforts reflected a broader vision of modernisation, ensuring Siam’s resilience in an era of colonial expansion.
The term Siwilai, a transliteration of the English word “civilise,” carries connotations of advancement and progress, akin to the Thai words ‘araya’ and ‘charoen’. Embedded within siwilai is the idea of an “achieved state of development,” often associated with the adoption of Western customs and practices. As the Thai historians observe, siwilai was closely linked to “Western things and ways of conduct,” signifying an aspiration toward modernisation.
Land of Siwilai
However, the process of localising these foreign influences was neither straightforward nor seamless. Divergent interpretations of siwilai, particularly in its broader socio-political context, transformed it into a contested concept within Thai cultural history. Over time, it evolved into an arena of political negotiation, reflecting the tensions between tradition and modernisation, as well as the power dynamics inherent in the construction of national identity.
The pursuit of Siwilai carried significant consequences, shaping both the trajectory of Thai modernisation and the survival strategies of the monarchy. In many ways, the Thai rulers’ embrace of Siwilai was driven by the imperative to safeguard sovereignty, both in response to the looming threat of European colonisation and out of concern for maintaining their own political authority. By selectively adopting Western models, the monarchy sought to satisfy European expectations while minimizing the conditions that might invite colonial intervention. However, in the long run, the process of modernisation and nation-building introduced new challenges. Siam, later Thailand, grappled with the complexities of constructing a cohesive national identity, navigating tensions between tradition and progress. Additionally, with the progress of modernisation in the 19th Century led to the termed “inner colonialism,” wherein central authority asserted control over peripheral regions, underscoring the complexities of Thailand’s path to modernity.
Khrua In Khong, a master painter during the reign of King Mongkut (Rama IV) in the Rattanakosin period, is widely regarded as the first Thai artist to incorporate Western mural painting techniques, particularly in his use of perspective, depth, and volume. His work represents a significant artistic transition, blending traditional Thai aesthetics with Western stylistic elements. Through his innovative approach, Khrua In Khong redefined visual representation in Thai art, offering new ways to portray space and narrative while preserving the essence of Thai traditional identity. His legacy continues to be recognised as a pivotal moment in the evolution of Thai artistic expression.
Khrua In Khong, who remained a monk throughout his life, seamlessly integrated his devotion to Buddhism with his artistic pursuits. His deep spiritual commitment was reflected in his work, as he sought to depict the life and teachings of the Buddha in the most exquisite and compelling manner. His murals not only served an aesthetic purpose but also functioned as a didactic tool, making Buddhist teachings more accessible to a largely illiterate population.
King Mongkut (Rama IV), who had spent years as a prince regent and a monk, held great admiration for the artistic innovations of Khrua In Khong. Recognizing his unique style, the king commissioned him to create significant works, including the mural paintings depicting the Ayutthaya Chronicles in the Royal Palace and the Royal Phongsanusorn Halls, an assembly hall constructed during his reign adjacent to the ordination hall of Wat Phra Sri Rattana Satsadaram. Khrua In Khong’s artistic transformation was profoundly shaped by Western painting techniques, particularly the use of linear perspective, atmospheric depth, and volumetric forms. His murals, such as those in the chapel of Wat Boromniwat and Wat Bowonniwet Vihara, reflect a fusion of Thai and Western aesthetics, creating a surreal and transcendent visual experience.
The Old Master and his mysterious paintings
SIRAWIT CHATU is a multidisciplinary artist whose practice navigates the intersections of contemporary philosophy, visual culture, and historical inquiry, with a particular focus on Thai history. His work critically examines the interplay between popular culture and traditional Thai art, highlighting the ways in which these elements converge, diverge, and transform over time. Through a conceptual approach rooted in juxtaposition, the artist interrogates shifting cultural perceptions, revealing how historical narratives and artistic traditions are continually reinterpreted through contemporary lenses.
Through his artistic practice, SIRAWIT CHATU engages with Thai art by integrating both traditional and contemporary elements, creating a dynamic interplay of meaning through juxtaposition. His work explores the tension between preservation and transformation, where these elements simultaneously deconstruct and reconstruct each other’s significance. Central to his practice is the notion of replication, a fundamental aspect of traditional Thai art that serves as both a method of learning and a means of traditional transmission. While replication in contemporary discourse often carries connotations of imitation or reproduction, the artist challenges this perception by repositioning it as an active process of understanding, adaptation, and reinterpretation.
In his previous exhibition SIMULACRA at RATS, TARS Unlimited 2nd Floor, SIRAWIT CHATU explored the concept of hyperreality through the contradiction of historical and fictional narratives. By positioning replicas of Khrua In Khong’s works alongside curated subtitles from science fiction films, the artist examined the fluid interaction between historical representation and mediated fiction.
SIRAWIT CHATU with past, present and future
SIMULACRA rendered the past not as a fixed or objective reality but as a reflective surface for the present, an evolving construct shaped by interpretation and context. The exhibition’s setting within the space and fragments of RATS further reinforced this dialogue, serving as both a conceptual and physical framework where tangible historical remnants intersected with speculative imagination. In doing so, SIRAWIT CHATU invited the audiences to reconsider the boundaries between authenticity and simulation, historical fact and artistic reconfiguration.
In his latest series, SIRAWIT CHATU further develops his exploration of the intersections between historical replication and contemporary aesthetics. Expanding on his previous engagement with Khrua In Khong’s works and the visual language of subtitles, this new body of work reinterprets traditional Thai mural painting through a conceptual lens. The series unfolds across panel compositions that echo the format of temple murals.
SIRAWIT CHATU’s engagement with time is informed by philosophical perspectives drawn from Hegel, Althusser, and Kojève, which he integrates with the enigmatic imagery of Khrua In Khong’s murals. This synthesis extends to visual references such as the Chao Phraya River, a site of historical and cultural flux, further anchoring his work within the broader discourse of Thai cultural fabrication. By layering historical replication with theoretical inquiry, the artist constructs a visual and intellectual space where the totality of past, present and future converge, challenging notions of temporality and cultural continuity.
The Totality of Juxaposition
In this series, SIRAWIT CHATU draws from the poetry of Jorge Luis Borges, whose meditations on ontology and identity deeply resonate with the artist’s conceptual framework. Borges’ exploration of time as an unstable construct informs the artist’s approach, as he reconfigures and reinterprets Khrua In Khong’s paintings to examine how temporal perception shapes spatial meaning and, ultimately, identity. Through this process, the artworks suggest that time does not merely shape space but is embedded within it, an ever-shifting force that constructs and deconstructs meaning.
This engagement with time and representation is further expanded through references to Khrua In Khong’s mysterious painting in the 19th-century , a period marked by the onset of modernisation and cultural transformation. By juxtaposing these historical visual languages with contemporary conceptual inquiries, Chatu blurs the boundaries between historical representation and illusion, challenging fixed perceptions of temporality. The artist’s selection evokes a sense of timelessness, where past and present coalesce, inviting a reconsideration of how history is framed, reinterpreted, and continuously reshaped.
The series comprises three panel paintings, Time is the Substance I Am Made Of, a diptych titled The Divided Self, and a single-frame painting, No One Has Ever Lived in the Past. No One Will Ever Live in the Future. The artworks collectively interrogate the interwoven nature of time, space, and identity, exploring their fluid interplay within a conceptual framework. While each piece functions as an individual meditation on temporality and selfhood, they simultaneously exist in dialogue with one another, juxtaposed, superimposed, and intersecting in a way that resists fixed interpretation. Through the dynamic layering, SIRAWIT CHATU challenges conventional notions of time’s linearity, instead presenting it as a totality in which past, present, and future collapse and reconstitute within the visual field.
In the second edition of the MOMENTUM project, SIRAWIT CHATU explores the complex interplay of time, history, identity, and the totality of juxtaposition. Time is the Substance I Am Made Of serves as an extension of his ongoing artistic practice, reflecting his deep engagement with the perception and interpretation of time. His work critically examines national identity, considering how it is shaped by external forces while simultaneously allowing individuals to construct their own sense of self.
With a keen interest in the modernisation of Siam during the 19th century, the artist inquiries the shifts brought about by European aesthetics and ideologies. Through his practice, he questions how these influences shaped the nation’s artistic and cultural landscape, inviting the audience to reflect on the very essence of time, both as a historical force and as a conceptual framework.
By weaving together historical narratives and contemporary interpretations, Time is the Substance I Am Made Of explores the tension between tradition and progress, challenging us to reconsider the ways in which time informs identity, space, and artistic expression.