The Art Experience of the Indonesian People in the Industry 4.0 Era (A Philosophical View)

Game, Disruption ____________________ ABSTRACT ____________________________________________________________________ For Indonesian people, the world of art is an integral part of life. Art has become their identity since ancient time. It is because art and its products are born from the appreciation of everyday life. Art philosophy is inseparable from the meaning of daily life. The more a society produces art with high values and tastes, the more reflective capacity they must explore life. This reflective ability has helped enliven the development era, which has increasingly undergone fundamental changes (disruption) in all fields. Entering the era of industrial revolution 4.0, now the world of art and its meaning are slowly distorted. Revolution 4.0 dragged art into capitalism and ended in the obscurity of identity. Gadamer's study of how to view art as a game, symbol and festival become an interruption to restore the meaning of art in


INTRODUCTION
Recently, the progress of science and technology has been increasing rapidly. It has taken part in multidimensions of human life. Technology creates new realities and virtual realities that can even determine the human world's sustainability. With some specific features, world revolution 4.0 is currently emerging. Human culture and lifestyle drastically change due to this development; distance and time are shortened, while the use of human physical energy is decreasing. Within this speedy progress, people are too occupied and focus on pursuing their targets. Such pragmatism leaves a question of life's depth and meaning for modern people.
The art world, a way for humans to understand reality, also experiences a shift and superficiality in meaning. Art, as a representation of the way of life, has lost its substantive meaning due to technological advances. Redefining the experience of art is one way to rediscover the passion and life orientation. Previous studies have shown that the influence of the 4.0 revolution is in direct contact with art, especially the existence of human creators and connoisseurs of art. In Piliang's studies and analysis, it is shown that the influence of the 4.0 industrial revolution on the art world is the emergence of creative destruction (Piliang, 2019). Creative destruction is the destruction of systems, artistic ideas and being grafted with the concepts, systems and ideas brought about by the 4.0 revolution. In other words, there is a fusion of the art model and the identity of the actors and connoisseurs of art. In addition, Setiawan (2020) in his study does not deny that art has also undergone a changing era. In every age, art comes with its own unique characteristics and is different from certain other periods. Changes in this era have resulted in characteristic confusion. In the current era, art is faced with sophisticated technological devices so that the identity of art actors, especially those of professionals and amateurs, is difficult to distinguish. Another challenge for the 4.0 revolution for art is the loss of artistic energy as a binder of the community (Kusumastuti, 2019). Digital technology eliminates one of the functions of art, namely gathering people who want to watch, interact, gather and even show their class identity.
In understanding this phenomenon, the writer uses the hermeneutic-phenomenological method. Through hermeneutics-phenomenology reality is analyzed and understood to find the root of the problem. According to Palmer (1976), hermeneutics is an effort to understand the text: whether the text has been tested systematically and methodologically. The reality presented above is a text that must be further understood and analyzed. Through phenomenology, everyday experiences in a particular society are understood. Phenomenology is an approach to describe people's life experiences in a particular context (Creswell 1998). The phenomenological method was used to emphasize the existence, events, and experiences of Indonesian people in a particular situation (4.0 era). Combining the two frameworks helped the researchers deepen and sharpen the analysis of facts found in the field.
The interpretation and analysis of the text illustrates that the 4.0 revolution has had a significant impact on the world of art and the experience of art in Indonesia. Starting from that points, this paper aims to answer: how does art help Indonesian people formulate their identity in the era 4.0? In answering this question, the writer uses the Gadamer art criticism method. According to Gadamer, art is a means of understanding reality. Art is inseparable from the human world. For Gadamer art is not just an aesthetic pleasure but is able to reveal more deeply the essence of human existence (Poespoprodjo, 1987). Art as part of the life and identity of the Indonesian nation must be a means of reflection in this changing era.

Methods
This qualitative study employed a hermeneutic-phenomenology framework to analyse the data and conclusions presented by previous researchers about the concept of art. The library data collection aimed to understand previous thinkers' ideas in perceiving the concept of art. Than this data seen as a phenomenon arising from society in Indonesia. Furthermore, data is presented regarding the impact of the 4.0 revolution on people's artistic life, both for art creators and for art connoisseurs. In the next stage, Gadamer's art criticism steps were presented as an effort to see the meaning of art for human life, especially Indonesian society.

Revolution 4.0 and Challenges in the Art World
Ever since Rene Descartes published his ideas about the ability of the human mind, humans have been adventuring and made a revolution in life. They find autonomy and freedom through their intellect. The world is changing day by day. Elaborated human ideas have led to many discoveries. The revolution of ideas did not stop at the time; it has been going on as of today.
The term industrial revolution 4.0, which is a predicate of our current time, was brought up by Klaus Schwab through his work 'The Fourth Industrial Revolution' (Schwab, 2016). The revolution stage (until the 4.0 revolution) can be traced back to human life history. At first, human life was nomadic (moving); then, it was sedentary as humans survived by foraging foods. This change becomes the basis for a great revolution in the human life of which the fields are intertwined. The first industrial revolution (the 1790s) was marked by the mechanization of human production tools, specifically by the discovery of steam engines and waterpower utilization. The second revolution (the 1890s) was marked by mass production, assembly and use of electricity, whereas the third industrial revolution (the 1960s) extended to electronics, information technology systems and automation (Schwab, 2016;Savitri, 2019).
The industrial revolution 4.0 is characterized by the existence of robotic artificial intelligence (AI), massive internet technology (IoT), nanotechnology, biotechnology, three-dimensional printing, unmanned vehicles, and others (Schwab, 2016). Schwab asserted that the influence of the revolution 4.0 did change not only the external matters of human beings but also human beings as individuals (internally) (Schwab, 2016). In his perspective, the industrial revolution 4.0 is a new era that changes the outlook on human life, work, and patterns of relationships with others (Schwab, 2016). The revolution changes both the external and internal dimensions of human life.
This fast-paced creation and innovation in the industrial revolution 4.0 era produce a domino effect. Change does not only occur in one area (information technology) but rapidly spreads to all other areas of life. The famous motto is changing or die. This change is called disruption. Revolution 4.0 and disruption are closely related. According to Rhenald Kasali, the era of disruption was a fundamental change in civilization as it requires changes in culture, rules, ways of thinking and markets (Kasali, 2017). Disruption creates competition for ideas; this changes the world and human life. There are only two choices for people: adjust and adapt while developing or lose the competition.
However, revolution 4.0 and disruption affect human life. Artificial intelligence was created slowly and replaced the role of humans. Although human creation is quite effective in terms of time and space, the changes and mechanization reduce the depth of life and dimensions of affection. In the world of art, the invention of computers with the latest technology and threedimensional printing machines makes it easy to duplicate large amounts of artwork. In the end, the work of art reproduction is driven by pseudo needs aimed at capital purposes. Adorno had already warned of the influence of technology on art. His findings on the influence of capitalism in art also concluded that capitalization led to the decline of the art world. In the art of music, for instance, the creation of types of music is adapted to market tastes. The creativity of artists (in this case, composers) falls in the repetition of music favoured by mainstream society to bring financial benefits. In other words, the music created ignores quality and depth to fulfil an element of market taste (pleasure). Artworks are duplicated on the market's high demands. In the hands of capitalists, the quality of the art is degraded because it only satisfies the principle of likes/dislikes (pleasure) of the audience or the market demanding it. Eventually, the work of art becomes a passive object displayed on shop windows. It is revoked from its original context and does not bring transformative experiences that can help everyone find the depth of life in an ever-changing world. In the Da Ary study (2019), the process of reproduction and imitation of art also has a significant impact on the learning process, namely the absence in building the ability to imagine, creativity and also minimal interaction with the environment. Therefore to return art to its authentic purpose, it is necessary to dig directly from the environment. In other words, the environment is the inspiration for works of art. Artworks which produced through deep reflection or interaction with reality/environment will bring transformation to the lives of artworks and connoisseurs of art, but more than that is to restore the essence of art to its function (Da Ary, 2019).
Citing Baidou, Piliang stated that the meaning shifts of arts as described by Adorno occurred because of the basic instincts existing in humans as homo economics. This instinct has increasingly gained a dominant place (Piliang, 2016). It is the economic priorities that keep art away from its essential principles. This economic orientation becomes a basic motivation for humans to maintain their lives. On a larger scale, it is aimed at maximum capital accumulation.
Market logic in the capitalization of art marginalizes the profession of arts workers. The artwork produced by art workers is worthless because it is easy and quick to duplicate. The process of its creation (duplication) removes the primary elements of the artwork. The authority of art disappears with market tastes and fashion carried by community groups at a certain time. At another level, duplication breeds hybridization. The artwork is cut into pieces and grafted with other works of art according to the mass' taste. In such a case, digital image engineering technology (photoshop applications, etc.) plays its part well.
Walter Benjamin observed the loss of the authority of art in this technological era in his study. According to Benjamin, the technology that accompanies human life brings an impact on the waning 'mystical' or 'magical' aura in a work of art (Suryajaya, 2016). The aura, as described by Benjamin, is the autonomy of art (object) as a single reference. Art mass production eliminates the aura as they separate art from the history and context of the artwork. Although the loss of art's aura has a positive impact which is an entry point to rationally understand arts (eliminating the theological-magical elements of an artwork), such art cannot bring up the experience of 'presence' that is the message, situation, and condition experienced by artists through his work. This is what makes the human imagination come alive. Gadamer further explained the experience of 'presence' through this work of art. In the era of digital production, Benjamin's ideas may be obsolete, but it will be a living introduction to see the influence of technology on the art world.
The rapid change in the disruption era does affect not only the capitalization of art, but also the abandonment of valuable arts characterizing a community, society, or country. Precious art involves human culture since it is a product of society's mystical experience. In Badrul Isa's study, the technology that was present through the 4.0 revolution was able to present an aesthetic experience for art connoisseurs (Isa, 2019). However, no matter how sophisticated 4G technology to present an art before the audience as Isa claims, the mystical aesthetic experience that should be experienced by art connoisseurs is reduced and even disappeared from virtual or duplicate work. So, the mystical experience that changes the life of art connoisseurs is challenging to realize. This experience is formed through life's situations and conditions of artists. Apart from being a cultural product, it becomes a shared identity and a personal meaning. Malangan Mask, for example, is a typical Malang art product. It is the result of the reflection or mystical experience of Malang people towards their culture. Daniel A. Bell and Avner de-Shalit emphasize that the identity and ethos of a city or a region can also be seen from works of art produced by a community (Bell & de Shalit, 2011). Artworks become a representation of people's lives in a city. The artwork eventually becomes an icon of the city. With the uniqueness of its art, a city becomes a destination to visit. Thus, art as a mystical experience is a collective or individual marker giving an identity to a city. The loss of touch or experience of art also means the fading of culture as a shared identity. In the context of Indonesia, Nainunis Aulia Izza proves that the traces of art in Hindu-Buddhist statues in the archipelago have unique characteristics and are not found in other countries. This particularity has become a marker of national identity. Through this work of art, a person is brought into the spirit of Indonesian society that has existed since the Hindu-Buddhist era (Izza, 2020).
The era of disruption marked by the shifting of markets from factual to virtual space makes a work of art have a very broad market; however, at the same time, it revokes the characteristics of art as a typical product of a society or community. When the art market is shifted to virtual space, the economic nodes of a society relying on art will not develop or even collapse. Art commodities are traded through websites, and purchase transactions are carried out without having to meet with sellers. The next problem is the loss of society's passion or the next generation of artists as arts cannot be used as a buffer for economic life. In the 4.0 era, the way to keep the economy of local communities and art workers alive is by commodifying culture. They are finding a meeting point between the speed of technology and local wisdom that is also present through art (Irianto, 2016). One thing that can be done is the promotion of art in conjunction with the incessant promotion of tourism. In this promotion, art is displayed as an effort to empower local communities by inviting as many tourists as possible to visit an object or performer of art. Thus, tourists are brought in to understand and dive into the community in a place through works of art without losing the sacredness of the artwork. The synergy between art and the advancement of digital technology which is the real child of revolution 4.0 must work to maintain the identity of the local community. The commodification of culture through cultural tourism through art has often shifted to the art tourism industry, which is focused on art capitalization.
Revolution 4.0 offers a tremendous speed of information dissemination. This age of information also causes cultures to mix. Referring to Giddens globalization is meeting and interacting cultures from all parts of the world. The art world also experiences the effects of globalization (Giddens, 1990). Art globalization refers to the expansion of art's influence up to the extent that an art product is widely known beyond the area from which the artwork was created. These interactions create cultural barriers so that the identity of a culture is blurred. The industrial revolution era makes an art product easily imitated and followed. Art eventually becomes the common property and even annexed by other groups or countries because it is difficult to trace its origin. Malaysia's claim to Batik, Reog, folk songs and some typical Indonesian culinary are some of the examples. As a means of promotion, the globalization of art is seen as a positive thing. On the other side, however, it makes the authenticity of art threatened by losing the history of its origin (identity).
The shifting role and meaning of art due to the influence of revolution 4.0 invites people to reflect on the meaning of art once again. The philosopher, Hans George Gadamer, offers an alternative and a view to see art as part of human ways to enter the depth of life. The roar of civilization that always offers novelty does not necessarily make people participate in changing it; nevertheless, they see the basic principles that need to be maintained even though times change. As asserted by Gadamer, Art is a mirror to reflect on oneself.

Gadamer Art Criticism
Gadamer, the German philosopher, drew his attention to hermeneutics theory. Gadamer's touchpoint with art is when he tries to explore the problem of truth (ontology) and epistemology in philosophy (Suryajaya, 2016). In his view, art is one of the media to find the meaning of truth and knowledge; the art world is one of the self-criticism media for humans in finding meaning in life. Gadamer proposes three functions as well as a way of looking at art: as a game, as a festival and as a symbol. These will lead us to Gadamer's criticism of contemporary life. The meaning of art must be returned to its place so that the art world can bring humans to the depth of life.

Art as a Game
As a game, art has lived long in human culture. Moreover, John Huizinga referred to human nature as homo ludens (creatures that play). In the game, as Gadamer stated, the subject is the game itself because it has certain rules that must be obeyed and followed by the players. The player presents and represents himself through the game (Gadamer, Truth and Method, second revised Edition, 1989). At this level, Gadamer stresses that the activities in the game are the main aspects, not the goals the player wants to achieve (Gadamer, The Relevance of Beautiful and Other Essays, 1986). A player's self-presentation is the way he presents the artwork. Art as a game is a way for artists to present their experiences to others. Artists (who are involved in a performance/meaning of the art) are formed by the game. Art is separated from the player, but the two need each other. Art requires players to represent the purpose of art, while players need the art as a means of self-presentation. The audience acts as a participant and takes part in the game when near. The 'emotion' of the audience is stirred by a game. With this concept, Gadamer pointed out that art can change the players and participants/spectators; the ontological dimension of art becomes apparent (Gadamer, 1986).

Art as a Symbol
On the second level, Gadamer perceives art as a symbol. The understanding of the Gadamerian symbol follows the understanding of the Greek society symbol. For the Greeks, 'symbol' means the sign of wholeness. Symbols are always interpreted in terms of the union of two or several specific parts of an object so that it becomes one whole form. A symbol is a sign of agreement and commitment. The integrity of the agreement will become evident when the two or several parts are put together to form wholeness-a man and woman promise to preserve the integrity of their love with a heart-shaped necklace. The man wears half of the replica of the heart while the other half is worn by the woman. Determination of the two forms of 'heart' is what makes the heart symbol intact. Their love becomes one and whole when the two parts complement each other.
The essence of art for Gadamer is wholeness. Art as a symbol is a sign of a whole and complete presence. Symbols are representations of things. Symbols cannot be replaced by something else. In the context of art, Gadamer viewed art as a whole and cannot be replaced even by sophisticated technology. In other words, the reproduction and duplication of works of art still cannot present the meaning of the original work. He indirectly criticized the pattern of art capitalism employing mass production. He argued that art presents certain experiences and messages to the audience. The lives of art connoisseurs will transform when the experience takes place because of the intact presence brought by the artwork.

Art as a Festival
Festival is a means for many people to gather, and thus art as a festival' for Gadamer is a means to represent togetherness. In festivals, everyone has the same intention, which is a motivation that encourages and moves the community or group of people to take collective action. The festival makes everyone gather without limits and barriers. As explained by Gadamer, a festival is a self-presentation of a community in its perfect form.
Artwork for Gadamer is a means that unites all people from all backgrounds, just like a festival. Art must transcend all cultural limits and barriers. Furthermore, art must be free from all categories of boundaries preventing anyone from experiencing or enjoying art. Everyone has the same access without having to be limited by commercial capabilities, status, and so forth. Thereby, art is open to all. The artwork is also a community identity. Much like a festival, it becomes the collective identity of the people who organize them. Works of art also reflect the shared spirit of a community and can even be an identity for a city.

CONCLUSION
The cultural speech of Mochtar Lubis suggested that one of the Indonesian people's characteristics is to have an artistic spirit. According to Lubis, their spirit of art is an undeniable reality (Lubis, 1978). The cultural heritage with high value and taste characterize them. This valuable cultural heritage is internationally recognized and is still alive. For them, artworks are born from everyday experience. As Gadamer mentioned, artworks become an inherent identity of Indonesian people. The artwork is also an expression of their religiosity. Therefore, art criticism is one of the means for Indonesian people to distance themselves from the negative impacts emerging from disruption or revolution 4.0.
The roar of change created in revolution 4.0 reduces the value of art. Art duplication and capitalism, the loss of a community's artistic identity, and the mixing/grafting of art are the effects of disruption degrading the values of art. Living the experience of art is one of how Indonesian people find their identity in this ever-changing era. Archipelago's local wisdom crystallized in art is the essence of their daily life. Art is cathartic to adapt to the changes brought by the revolution 4.0. Art, as part of cultural expression, will provide benefits to the Indonesian people if it is rooted in the lives of all Indonesians. Thus, for the people of Indonesia, diving into the experience of art does not only confirm the identity of Indonesian people but is also a means to find the depth of life.