Back from Japan, where I attended the opening of the Aichi Triennale, I’ve been a little slow getting into the swing of things. One positive bit of news was that Sydney Contemporary Art Fair seems to have been more successful than expected. Sales are said to have comfortably exceeded the previous year’s totals, even allowing for the downpours that literally put a dampener on the launch.
Meanwhile, the ABC’s arts coverage continues to astonish. For unknown reasons last week, Matthew Qvortrup, Auntie’s senior reporter in Alice Springs, decided to write a completely anodyne story about the Emily Kam Kngwarray show at Tate Modern. As the exhibition has been running since 10 July, it’s a little late for a puff piece, especially at a distance of 15,000 kms. Our erudite reporter – who has a PhD from Oxford! – did not pause to wonder why Emily’s name is now spelt “Kngwarray”, while all her relatives mentioned in the story are “Kngwarreye”. It seems the relos don’t get to partake of the new “official” spelling. They must have missed the extensive consultation process. Or perhaps, as in Emily’s case, the change is only conferred posthumously.
The online story features no fewer than four reproductions of Earth’s Creation (2007), Emily’s largest and most famous painting. It’s curious that the curators, for reasons yet to be disclosed, decided to exclude this work from the Tate exhibition.
Although he may have degrees in law and political science, Dr. Qvortrup doesn’t seem to have studied art history, or Journalism 1.01. It ain’t news that Emily Kame Kngwarreye is a famous artist or that she’s having a show in London. The real stories should be about how the show was selected. Who paid for freight and shipping? What sort of reception is the exhibition getting in London? Why are museums and auction houses choosing to collaborate with some dealers and treat others as pariahs? What was the Tate’s actual contribution, both finanicially, and in terms of curatorial input? I could add a dozen more queries to the list, but the story was nothing more than fairy floss two months past its expiry date. One presumes it was an example of the ABC’s online policy of using news as a personalised “mood booster”. If you’re a feeling glum about Gaza or Ukraine, well here’s a story about puppies, or one about an old Aboriginal lady who becomes a world-famous artist
The lobotomisation of the media leads inexorably to the lobotomisation of the public. Dispense with criticism and investigative reporting and we are left with an endless parade of these insipid, small newsy pieces. And here’s a more sinister equation: the dumber and more illiterate we become, the more willingly we embrace a populist politics that promises magical solutions to complex problems.
Please forgive the segue into politics, but when I sat down to consider the current news cycle, all I could see was chaos. In America, the catalyst has been the assassination of rightwing activist, Charlie Kirk, which has brought forth scenes of mystical reverence straight out of the Middle Ages, and conspiracy theories from both right and left. When the madness subsides it will be fascinating to see what bizarre permanent memorials are left, and what scars have been inflicted on America’s already deranged collective psyche.
In Australia, the Liberal Party is embracing a different kind of chaos. It’s no revelation that the Libs have lost successive elections by increasingly large margins through alienating their traditional supporters. It’s basic math that the Party will never return to government unless it can convince young people and educated, middle-class voters in urban electorates that they are serious about issues such as climate change. Instead, obviously seduced by the sage wisdom of Sky Channel, a sizeable group of Liberal and National MPs are loudly demanding that we dispense with the Net Zero target for 2035.
Simple observation: it’s a target, not an authoritarian order. It gives us something to aim at and lets us gauge how well or badly we are doing. At present rate of progress, we won’t meet this target, but that’s no reason not to try. Even if the climate crisis were as exaggerated as some politicians like to believe, it’s still in this country’s long-term environmental and economic interests to transition to renewables as quickly as possible. Why is it so hard to understand that what’s better for the environment is better for everyone, especially younger generations faced with a hotter, more disaster-prone world? These youthful voters are not convinced of the need to protect the big miners’ profits at the expense of their own future – even when that tired, phoney mantra of “jobs” is used as bait.
Allowing for the fact that automation and AI are diminishing the number of jobs on a daily basis, who would want to be labouring outdoors when the heat becomes infernal? The more fervently the Coalition denies global warming, the more they repel the emerging generations for whom it is a source of existential dread.
The anti-Net Zero putsch has been led by such geniuses as Barnaby Joyce, renowned for his fine political acumen and social skills. It’s been a long time since the Nationals were the party for farmers and rural Australia. Today they are the cheerleaders for the mining industry, dancing around Gina Rinehart as if she were the golden calf. Whatever profits trickle back to the taxpayer from the resources boom, they are as nothing compared to the wealth that pools in private hands. Besides, it’s not as if Labor has adopted an intransigent attitude towards the big miners, as shown by the WA government’s willingness to allow a new gas plant on the Burrup Peninsula, against all advice from conservationists and archaeologists concerned about damage to the unique rock art.
In Labor, the miners have a sympathetic partner, but they would obviously prefer a group of slavering sycophants. It leaves the general electorate with no real alternatives, merely a choice of complicity or greater complicity. The Greens, who pose as an alternative, have all but eliminated themselves as a political force by blocking moderate legislation on decarbonisation and housing, while proposing their own pie-in-sky schemes. This brings us back to the Independents, who are making gradual inroads into the political process one seat at a time. There may never have been a time in Australian history when independent thinking is more necessary.
Although Sussan Ley is probably not the answer to the Coalition’s problems, she has at least understood the nature of the crisis the party faces. To be competitive the Libs need to recapture the centre, not go veering further to the right. There is no point in reflexively opposing everything Labor does, when those positions have proved popular enough to produce a landslide election victory. If the Libs take a contrary stance on issues where the public has already nailed its colours to the mast, they will continue to bleed votes. Even allowing for the bigots who want to march in the streets chanting anti-immigration slogans, Australia is not the United States. The Trumpist brand of wilful ignorance and brutality holds no appeal for local voters. It’s not attractive, it’s frightening.
Ms. Ley was on a hiding to nothing from the moment she assumed the leadership, and her own party has wasted no time in loosening her grip on the throne. The more extreme elements won’t be happy until they have taken her down and installed one of their own, such as that ‘Hooray Henry’, Angus Taylor, or military man, Andrew Hastie.
This was made crystal clear by the grandstanding actions of Jacinta Nampijinpa Price, who managed to insult the Indian community when she suggested they were being brought over in large numbers to shore up Labor’s votes. In fact, as natural small business owners, the Indians should be textbook Liberal voters. The failure to win them over lies with the Libs, who are repeating their epic failure with the Chinese community, whom they lost during the last election through a rash of hostile statements about China.
In America, it seems that racial or ethnic bias is catnip to a significant proportion of the population. In Australia, regardless of the efforts of the Neo-Nazis and the anti-immigration protestors, it’s electoral poison. As to why Albo felt obliged to echo Donald Trump’s line about “very fine people” in the 2017 Charlottesville protests, by saying “there’s always good people who turn up to demonstrate their views…” that’s a step too far in currying favour with the masses.
Ms. Price compounded her woes with the Indian community by refusing to apologise for the insult – or even recognising that an insult is something felt by another party, rather than a misconstrual of your poorly-expressed, personal views. She seems to believe that being outspoken is the same as being honest, even when the things you are saying are palpably false.
When she wouldn’t profess support for her party leader, Price’s fall was inevitable. This would-be “rock star” MP seems to see herself as an Aussie Candace Owen, willing to say things that are directly contrary to the views of those with whom she most readily identifies – in her case, Indigenous Australians. She won a fleeting kudos with the right-wingers for her opposition to the Voice, but that poorly framed referendum was always going to be lost. In a calculated manner she has taken on the Trump gospel of never admitting you were wrong and never saying sorry. It’s an ugly trait and it gives an impression of invincible arrogance. In Australia, the smart politicians go mea culpa straight away and move on. I remember watching former QLD Premier, Peter Beattie, do this on television one night, instantly taking the heat out of a potential meltdown.
Given Price’s textbook display of disloyalty, Ley had no choice but to drop her from the front bench. The next day, the ever-reliable columnists in The Australian portrayed Price as a “martyr” for her dedication to free speech. What made this seem even more ridiculous is that it coincided with the Charlie Kirk assassination. In the volatile arena of American politics, Kirk is a martyr in the eyes of millions, with demagogues queuing up to instrumentalise his death.
Our local martyr merely got dumped from the Opposition front bench for dumb statements and disloyal behaviour. It’s a perfect illustration of the way the USA is playing for keeps, and we’re just playing.
As American politics becomes more violent, more dangerous and extreme, we have a small group of wannabee Trumpists thinking how great it would be if we could take Australia down that same path. It’s a recipe for electoral oblivion.
This is not just a tragedy for the Liberal Party it’s a very bad thing for the healthy functioning of democracy in this country. An Opposition divided against itself, wallowing in unattractive ideological claptrap, is not an effective watchdog on the government. Although Albo is hardly the raving left-wing firebrand we meet daily in the Murdoch media, his government is showing all the signs of wanting to consolidate power through those time-honoured methods of spin and secrecy. If we take Labor’s treatment of the Arts as any indication, there’s a set of knuckle dusters inside the velvet glove.
The Liberals have considerable scope to point out Labor’s hypocrisy and opportunism, but instead they seem to be intent on vilifying ethnic communities and railing against climate change. As a first step in dealing with their chronic “woman problem”, the Libs appoint a female leader, then instantly start trying to bring her down. Labor has its own factional tensions but is always capable of putting on a unified act in public.
On this site, I’ve tried to stay focussed on issues of art and culture, but it’s impossible to isolate these issues from a broader political discussion. When a Minister is as much of a machine man as Tony Burke - Minister for Home Affairs, Minister for the Arts, Minister for Cyber Security, Minister for Immigration and Citizenship, and Leader of the House - there are many issues that get glossed over. It’s nuts for one person to be in charge of so many diverse portfolios. Until last year Burke was also Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations!
Clearly something has to give, and the Arts is always the leading candidate. Over the past couple of years, we’ve seen Minister Burke give Nick Mitzevich a five-year extension as Director of the National Gallery of Australia, just as a scandal broke over a proposed exhibition of work by the APY Art Centre Collective. One wonders what role the Minister played in shelving an “independent” report into the APYACC, which South Australian Minister for the Arts, Andrea Michaels, is now claiming doesn’t exist. Does it all come down to the semantic difference between a ‘review’ and a ‘report’? If this were the case, it’s hard to explain how the government could justify spending all that time and money sending a committee to interview people for hours at a time. Or how someone could tell me they had actually read this non-existent report.
This is but one issue that requires further investigation, were anybody in the press inclined to do their job. Instead, we get nothingburgers such as the ABC story on Emily’s show in London. It’s also an area where an effective Opposition would be asking questions in Parliament and Senate Estimates.
It appears that Mr. Burke sees the Arts as the soft touch among his numerous portfolios. He knows that arty types, with the exception of Tim Storrier, will always vote Labor, and so feels completely relaxed in turning a blind eye to any mishaps and scandals at the NGA. He’s happy to accept advice that saw the Australian Design Centre stripped of its $200,000 federal grant, with no explanation. Neither he nor Nick Mitzevich felt obliged to issue any public statement on the inflammatory social media posts that saw Abdul-Rahman Abdullah quietly resign from the NGA Board of Trustees, after a fulsome public welcome. Burke is ideologically committed to the doctrine of First Nations First, which, for all its virtuous intentions, has created a mechanism for putting mediocre Indigenous art ahead of even the best work by other kinds of artists. He was fully supportive of the decision to send Khaled Sabsabi as our next representative at the Venice Biennale, fully supportive of the decision to drop him, then fully supportive when Sabsabi was reinstated. How supportive can you get!
In brief, Mr. Bourke is allowing the Arts portfolio to simply drift along, being mainly intent on avoiding scandals at all costs. In doing so he is willing to endorse whatever bad decisions are made by his minions or his advisors. It’s a fertile field for cronyism, incompetence, cover-ups and corruption, but hey, it’s only the Arts, so who cares?
Jacinta Nampijinpa Price’s (temporary?) fall from grace was a pathetic media sideshow for a politician who had begun to believe her own propaganda. To grapple with more substantive political issues, we need to look closely at the decisions being made by those who hold the levers of power, such as Tony Burke. We need to question the value of feel-good proclamations such as First Nations First, when the government is willing to override all expert advice on the Burrup Peninsula.
It’s a pathetic situation when an Aboriginal politician such as Ms. Price, seeks to win the approval of an overwhelmingly white group of political and corporate powerbrokers (even to the extent of Gina Rinehart helping out with her legal expenses) by putting herself at odds with most Indigenous interest groups. Meanwhile, Labor is professing an undying love for Indigenous people that doesn’t translate into action. One reader recently noted how curious it was that “First Nations First” seems to apply only to the arts, not to the business world or most other spheres of human activity. As ever, ‘the Arts’ is the perfect place for symbolic action, while other domains are comfortably under the sway of Money and Power. The grand illusion is to pretend the arts are not slaves to the very same masters.
There’s a lot of art on the way, but this week the only extra piece I have for you is a review of the National Theatre Live broadcast of Suzie Miller’s hit play, Inter Alia, with Rosamund Pike in the starring role. Like so much of Miller’s work it’s about the legal profession and the particular pressures to which women – such as Pike’s Judge Jessica Parks – are subject. Moral and ethical issues are handled in almost seminar fashion, but there’s enough drama to make this production more than a set of talking points. I’d recommend a viewing for its intellectual clarity and willingness to address issues of social importance – which is more than can be said about most of our Honourable Members.
Thanks for pointing me to the ludicrous ABC puff for the Tate show, John. But far worse than the mis-spelling of Emily's name is the incorrect assumption that the Alawarreye women spoken about are Emily's grandchildren. She had no offspring. And then there's the failure to question Kelli Cole about her role in the NT's chaotic ATSIAGA/National Aboriginal Art Gallery saga. She was appointed senior curator there at one time.
Finally, a small point - Oxford Uni awards DPhils not PhDs!
John, love the breath and depth of your post as always but I am curious why you titled it Chaos Theory. Do you mean the situation being a chaos or chaotic?
Chaos Theory is a mathematical framework to study chaotic systems which tend to show deterministic patterns where the starting point makes a huge difference in the outcome like weather systems.