📰 CULTURAL REVOLUTION…
For those who’ve asked about my view in relation to the current saga about Aboriginal art, here’s this page from today’s ‘Australian’.
📰 The Australian contacted me last week to write a feature. The text is printed below.
CALL TO ACTION
by Dr David Hinchliffe*
The best of Aboriginal art is a powerful voice for First Nations people. It has the power to touch all Australians and to speak to us sometimes more cogently than words themselves.
It is vital that this art comes to us with integrity and is received by us with respect.
I want to begin by praising Skye O’Meara, and the APY Art Centre Collective for all their outstanding achievements over the last decade. She and the APY ACC have elevated art from these important remote homelands to a truly international level.
Magical art created in the dust of Central Australia is on the walls of cathedrals and palaces in Europe applauded by major national galleries and a delighted, enchanted public.
When there are great achievements, credit should be given and those achievements celebrated.
Likewise, if mistakes have been made, those too need to be highlighted, admitted and addressed….and quickly.
The Australian’s Greg Bearup has attempted to highlight that mistakes have been made. He has written about allegations made by those within the Collective (and from outside) about ‘tampering’ or inappropriate touching of artists’ works.
These allegations have been accompanied by what appears to be a genuine video of one of the APY’s most celebrated Aboriginal artists standing with 2 white assistants as the white assistants discuss how the painting should be developed and ‘juiced up’. One assistant has paint and brush in hand and inscribes a circle representing a rock hole.
This one video plus other criticism has sent a missile into the heart of the Australian art world which will have reverberations in New York, Berlin, Tokyo, Paris, and beyond.
Words of criticism, from people who may or may not have an axe to grind about the APYACC are one thing, but it is another altogether to see what is being criticised with one’s own eyes.
I for one would like to see what preceded this 15 second clip and what followed. It’s hard to ignore what seems to be the evidence of our eyes, but it would be helpful to see more to provide context.
Australian Aboriginal art has often been described as the last great art movement of the 20th century. It has evolved spectacularly into the 21st-century to provide a kaleidoscopic expression of an original ancient culture (the world’s oldest surviving), one which few Australians comprehend, or even try to understand.
The best of Aboriginal art has been a window through which white Australia (and the world) can glimpse a tiny fragment of 60,000 years of Aboriginal occupation.
That’s why it’s so gut-wrenching that those who for whatever reason would wish to knock this art movement off its pedestal and diminish the power and status of the art and the artists themselves have now been given fuel potentially by the people who have been trying to promote that art.
If you impugn the method by which the art is created, you impugn the art…and the artist.
So much of what white Australia knows of Aboriginal peoples dwells on the negative. We’ve seen that in this last week where stereotypes about crime and abuse are amplified and reinforced.
Apart from the occasional examples of inspiring personal achievement, the stories we mostly see are largely about dysfunction, loss, alienation and destruction.
Positive stories about Aboriginal communities who have successfully navigated the journey from ancient origins to the 21st-century, without losing dignity or integrity, are rare. They exist, but they rarely make the news and certainly not front pages or double page spreads.
The one consistent positive story associated with indigenous people has been the dazzling glory of contemporary Aboriginal art emanating from these traditional homelands in the very heart of this big hard land.
Now, even that is threatened.
The Australian has run column metres of both front page reportage and commentary on this issue, the clear effect of which will be to diminish Aboriginal art. That is not the intention I’m sure, but if action isn’t taken swiftly by APYACC and by authorities to deal effectively with the issues that have been raised, it will be the inescapable effect.
Art produced by Aboriginal people from these traditional communities speaks to us not only because of its rich beauty, but because of its integrity.
Allow me to explain why I see a substantive difference between Western and Aboriginal art.
When I see Jackson Pollock’s Blue Poles in the Australian National Gallery, I see it as a groundbreaking piece of abstract expressionism. Do I see much more than that? I know that he was probably drunk for at least part of the creation of the work as the large canvas lay on his studio floor. Maybe I think what a shame it was that the misogyny of the art world in the 1950s meant Pollock’s equally talented partner Lee Krasner was kept in the shadows of his fame.
Is there a deeper meaning to the Pollock… I personally think not.
But when I see a great Emily Kngwarreye in the NGA, I see a work of consummate abstract expressionism of more than equal value…but I also think it is much more than that. I know she was a wise nurturing elder, who took the opportunity of her last few years to put everything in her world on to canvas as it lay on the rich red earth of her country – from interpretation of sacred ceremonies and Dreamings to her basic food staples.
Is there a deeper meaning to paintings by Emily…you bet.
The best of Australian Aboriginal art is equal to the best of late 20th century art, anywhere in the world – in addition to which it is the most powerful visual expression of the world’s oldest surviving people.
It is both sublimely modern and profoundly ancient.
For this, it is unique.
Because this art has a deeper layer of meaning and profundity, the act of creating that art has an integrity that must be respected.
That’s why the video of a no doubt well-meaning, young white assistant, making a few brushstrokes on the canvas of a senior much-acclaimed, Aboriginal female artist has caused such offence to so many. And that is why it needs to be examined and explained much better than it currently has.
Ironically, there are white artists – some of them very prominent both in Australia, and around the world – who barely touch their artworks, except perhaps to apply their signature. The art world knows exactly who they are. Buyers are generally blissfully ignorant . These western artists have a concept for their work and get their apprentices and assistants to execute it, sometimes with a tweak here or there by the artist.
These exalted artists sit on pedestals in glass houses. This practice is in the tradition of the great European ateliers. Rubens, of course had a small army of assistants who used the master’s basic sketch or cartoon as a guide and then painted massive canvases which ended up adorning the walls of the same cathedrals and palaces which now display major works by Australian aboriginal artists.
There are substantive differences, however, in comparing these historic and modern examples of apprentice-produced art, and the particular alleged incident or incidents involving APY assistants.
No one has ever suggested that Rubens or some of the contemporary white artists who use assistants weren’t in full control and had final say of what was being done.
The allegations raised through The Australian paint a different picture.
The allegations are that the paintings have been “interfered with” and that the artists were not in control. That is a very serious allegation and, if proven, is an important first point of difference.
Secondly, the very success of Aboriginal art in these traditional communities draws heavily on its mystical, cultural and ceremonial origins. It is occasionally described by some of the more exuberant advocates (such as I) as “sacred”. Whether the art itself is sacred, or the modern expression of deep cultural stories, the fact remains it is much more than idle ornamentation. It’s not just pretty pictures.
Given the important derivation of this art movement, it’s understandable that we should expect paintings should come from the hand and mind of the original artist.
If there are collaborations, that fact should be clearly stated.
Where Aboriginal artists combine to produce wonderful collaborative artworks, they are identified clearly as “collaborations”.
The question here is: when it comes to assistants who do not share that same cultural history as the artist, how much of a painting can be “assisted” before that assistance is acknowledged?
The extent to which this is a one off or an indication of a wider culture of intervention within APYACC needs to be sorted out – and quickly. It damages, not just the integrity and standing of one artist or a group of artists or potentially an entire community of artists…
Even more importantly, it potentially damages the millions of dollars from art sales that go to remote Aboriginal communities.
Aboriginal art buys defibrillators, literacy programs, transport, and a host of basics for those remote vulnerable communities. They could potentially face devastation.
This is one of the reasons why I was delighted to buy so much of my collection of 1,400 indigenous paintings direct from the community centres (including approximately 60 beautiful paintings from the APY Collective). By bypassing the galleries (which are almost all white owned and in major cities), more of the proceeds are going directly into the remote fragile communities from which the art originates.
It has been one of the great joys of my life to share hundreds of these paintings for free to 3 universities, 5 schools, one hospital, and the Queensland Performing Arts Centre to help “spread the word” about this extraordinary art movement.
Now, as a result of these allegations and the poor response to them, a cloud hangs over the largest and most successful Collective of the art centres.
What to do?
Investigations can take a long time.
They are a feeding frenzy for media and a gravy train for lawyers.
Their findings can take months if not years and nothing guarantees the findings get translated into action.
In the meantime, great damage is done to public confidence in the art, to artists and to communities, usually without any tangible improvement.
Whatever the truth of these allegations, what is most urgent now is for tightening of the code of practice in relation to the integrity of the creative process, the running of Aboriginal art centres and the distribution and sale of Aboriginal art. It needs to be made clear and enforceable to one and all what is acceptable and what is not in the production of this art.
Of equal, if not greater importance is the mentoring and development of skills among Aboriginal people to take greater control of the distribution and sale of art from their communities.
There’s been longstanding criticism that black hands do the painting and white hands do the selling of Aboriginal art.
It is long past time that a new generation of mentored, educated Aboriginal people should be in greater control. Urban aboriginal artists like Richard Bell, Fiona Foley, and Birrunga Wiradjuri are outstanding examples of just that — taking control of their art.
If government money should be going into Aboriginal art, first and foremost, it should be going into the development of Aboriginal management of the industry. I’m not naive…I know jealousy and rivalries exist as much in Aboriginal communities as they do elsewhere, but we ought to have a greater confidence in this special industry, if it’s controlled by its own people, with strong management tools to guide it.
I began by praising Skye for all the good she has done in years past. But I feel I must end on a different note.
Skye, please acknowledge that too many allegations and damning images have been published to be ignored or swept aside.
For the sake of all that you have achieved at APY, for the sake of the artists, the industry, the communities and, as I said to you directly, Skye, for your own sake, please stand down. Whether you knew or not, whether you were involved or not, there is too much at stake for these allegations and images to be ignored or swept aside.
(* David Hinchliffe is an artist, a former Deputy Lord Mayor of Brisbane and a collector of Aboriginal art. His collection numbers 1400 paintings more than half of which are on long-term free loan to public institutions in south-east Queensland.)
For those who’ve asked about my view in relation to the current saga about Aboriginal art, here’s this page from today’s ‘Australian’.
📰 The Australian contacted me last week to write a feature. The text is printed below.
CALL TO ACTION
by Dr David Hinchliffe*
The best of Aboriginal art is a powerful voice for First Nations people. It has the power to touch all Australians and to speak to us sometimes more cogently than words themselves.
It is vital that this art comes to us with integrity and is received by us with respect.
I want to begin by praising Skye O’Meara, and the APY Art Centre Collective for all their outstanding achievements over the last decade. She and the APY ACC have elevated art from these important remote homelands to a truly international level.
Magical art created in the dust of Central Australia is on the walls of cathedrals and palaces in Europe applauded by major national galleries and a delighted, enchanted public.
When there are great achievements, credit should be given and those achievements celebrated.
Likewise, if mistakes have been made, those too need to be highlighted, admitted and addressed….and quickly.
The Australian’s Greg Bearup has attempted to highlight that mistakes have been made. He has written about allegations made by those within the Collective (and from outside) about ‘tampering’ or inappropriate touching of artists’ works.
These allegations have been accompanied by what appears to be a genuine video of one of the APY’s most celebrated Aboriginal artists standing with 2 white assistants as the white assistants discuss how the painting should be developed and ‘juiced up’. One assistant has paint and brush in hand and inscribes a circle representing a rock hole.
This one video plus other criticism has sent a missile into the heart of the Australian art world which will have reverberations in New York, Berlin, Tokyo, Paris, and beyond.
Words of criticism, from people who may or may not have an axe to grind about the APYACC are one thing, but it is another altogether to see what is being criticised with one’s own eyes.
I for one would like to see what preceded this 15 second clip and what followed. It’s hard to ignore what seems to be the evidence of our eyes, but it would be helpful to see more to provide context.
Australian Aboriginal art has often been described as the last great art movement of the 20th century. It has evolved spectacularly into the 21st-century to provide a kaleidoscopic expression of an original ancient culture (the world’s oldest surviving), one which few Australians comprehend, or even try to understand.
The best of Aboriginal art has been a window through which white Australia (and the world) can glimpse a tiny fragment of 60,000 years of Aboriginal occupation.
That’s why it’s so gut-wrenching that those who for whatever reason would wish to knock this art movement off its pedestal and diminish the power and status of the art and the artists themselves have now been given fuel potentially by the people who have been trying to promote that art.
If you impugn the method by which the art is created, you impugn the art…and the artist.
So much of what white Australia knows of Aboriginal peoples dwells on the negative. We’ve seen that in this last week where stereotypes about crime and abuse are amplified and reinforced.
Apart from the occasional examples of inspiring personal achievement, the stories we mostly see are largely about dysfunction, loss, alienation and destruction.
Positive stories about Aboriginal communities who have successfully navigated the journey from ancient origins to the 21st-century, without losing dignity or integrity, are rare. They exist, but they rarely make the news and certainly not front pages or double page spreads.
The one consistent positive story associated with indigenous people has been the dazzling glory of contemporary Aboriginal art emanating from these traditional homelands in the very heart of this big hard land.
Now, even that is threatened.
The Australian has run column metres of both front page reportage and commentary on this issue, the clear effect of which will be to diminish Aboriginal art. That is not the intention I’m sure, but if action isn’t taken swiftly by APYACC and by authorities to deal effectively with the issues that have been raised, it will be the inescapable effect.
Art produced by Aboriginal people from these traditional communities speaks to us not only because of its rich beauty, but because of its integrity.
Allow me to explain why I see a substantive difference between Western and Aboriginal art.
When I see Jackson Pollock’s Blue Poles in the Australian National Gallery, I see it as a groundbreaking piece of abstract expressionism. Do I see much more than that? I know that he was probably drunk for at least part of the creation of the work as the large canvas lay on his studio floor. Maybe I think what a shame it was that the misogyny of the art world in the 1950s meant Pollock’s equally talented partner Lee Krasner was kept in the shadows of his fame.
Is there a deeper meaning to the Pollock… I personally think not.
But when I see a great Emily Kngwarreye in the NGA, I see a work of consummate abstract expressionism of more than equal value…but I also think it is much more than that. I know she was a wise nurturing elder, who took the opportunity of her last few years to put everything in her world on to canvas as it lay on the rich red earth of her country – from interpretation of sacred ceremonies and Dreamings to her basic food staples.
Is there a deeper meaning to paintings by Emily…you bet.
The best of Australian Aboriginal art is equal to the best of late 20th century art, anywhere in the world – in addition to which it is the most powerful visual expression of the world’s oldest surviving people.
It is both sublimely modern and profoundly ancient.
For this, it is unique.
Because this art has a deeper layer of meaning and profundity, the act of creating that art has an integrity that must be respected.
That’s why the video of a no doubt well-meaning, young white assistant, making a few brushstrokes on the canvas of a senior much-acclaimed, Aboriginal female artist has caused such offence to so many. And that is why it needs to be examined and explained much better than it currently has.
Ironically, there are white artists – some of them very prominent both in Australia, and around the world – who barely touch their artworks, except perhaps to apply their signature. The art world knows exactly who they are. Buyers are generally blissfully ignorant . These western artists have a concept for their work and get their apprentices and assistants to execute it, sometimes with a tweak here or there by the artist.
These exalted artists sit on pedestals in glass houses. This practice is in the tradition of the great European ateliers. Rubens, of course had a small army of assistants who used the master’s basic sketch or cartoon as a guide and then painted massive canvases which ended up adorning the walls of the same cathedrals and palaces which now display major works by Australian aboriginal artists.
There are substantive differences, however, in comparing these historic and modern examples of apprentice-produced art, and the particular alleged incident or incidents involving APY assistants.
No one has ever suggested that Rubens or some of the contemporary white artists who use assistants weren’t in full control and had final say of what was being done.
The allegations raised through The Australian paint a different picture.
The allegations are that the paintings have been “interfered with” and that the artists were not in control. That is a very serious allegation and, if proven, is an important first point of difference.
Secondly, the very success of Aboriginal art in these traditional communities draws heavily on its mystical, cultural and ceremonial origins. It is occasionally described by some of the more exuberant advocates (such as I) as “sacred”. Whether the art itself is sacred, or the modern expression of deep cultural stories, the fact remains it is much more than idle ornamentation. It’s not just pretty pictures.
Given the important derivation of this art movement, it’s understandable that we should expect paintings should come from the hand and mind of the original artist.
If there are collaborations, that fact should be clearly stated.
Where Aboriginal artists combine to produce wonderful collaborative artworks, they are identified clearly as “collaborations”.
The question here is: when it comes to assistants who do not share that same cultural history as the artist, how much of a painting can be “assisted” before that assistance is acknowledged?
The extent to which this is a one off or an indication of a wider culture of intervention within APYACC needs to be sorted out – and quickly. It damages, not just the integrity and standing of one artist or a group of artists or potentially an entire community of artists…
Even more importantly, it potentially damages the millions of dollars from art sales that go to remote Aboriginal communities.
Aboriginal art buys defibrillators, literacy programs, transport, and a host of basics for those remote vulnerable communities. They could potentially face devastation.
This is one of the reasons why I was delighted to buy so much of my collection of 1,400 indigenous paintings direct from the community centres (including approximately 60 beautiful paintings from the APY Collective). By bypassing the galleries (which are almost all white owned and in major cities), more of the proceeds are going directly into the remote fragile communities from which the art originates.
It has been one of the great joys of my life to share hundreds of these paintings for free to 3 universities, 5 schools, one hospital, and the Queensland Performing Arts Centre to help “spread the word” about this extraordinary art movement.
Now, as a result of these allegations and the poor response to them, a cloud hangs over the largest and most successful Collective of the art centres.
What to do?
Investigations can take a long time.
They are a feeding frenzy for media and a gravy train for lawyers.
Their findings can take months if not years and nothing guarantees the findings get translated into action.
In the meantime, great damage is done to public confidence in the art, to artists and to communities, usually without any tangible improvement.
Whatever the truth of these allegations, what is most urgent now is for tightening of the code of practice in relation to the integrity of the creative process, the running of Aboriginal art centres and the distribution and sale of Aboriginal art. It needs to be made clear and enforceable to one and all what is acceptable and what is not in the production of this art.
Of equal, if not greater importance is the mentoring and development of skills among Aboriginal people to take greater control of the distribution and sale of art from their communities.
There’s been longstanding criticism that black hands do the painting and white hands do the selling of Aboriginal art.
It is long past time that a new generation of mentored, educated Aboriginal people should be in greater control. Urban aboriginal artists like Richard Bell, Fiona Foley, and Birrunga Wiradjuri are outstanding examples of just that — taking control of their art.
If government money should be going into Aboriginal art, first and foremost, it should be going into the development of Aboriginal management of the industry. I’m not naive…I know jealousy and rivalries exist as much in Aboriginal communities as they do elsewhere, but we ought to have a greater confidence in this special industry, if it’s controlled by its own people, with strong management tools to guide it.
I began by praising Skye for all the good she has done in years past. But I feel I must end on a different note.
Skye, please acknowledge that too many allegations and damning images have been published to be ignored or swept aside.
For the sake of all that you have achieved at APY, for the sake of the artists, the industry, the communities and, as I said to you directly, Skye, for your own sake, please stand down. Whether you knew or not, whether you were involved or not, there is too much at stake for these allegations and images to be ignored or swept aside.
(* David Hinchliffe is an artist, a former Deputy Lord Mayor of Brisbane and a collector of Aboriginal art. His collection numbers 1400 paintings more than half of which are on long-term free loan to public institutions in south-east Queensland.)