The bureaucrats of the Australian artworld have not been in touch with with artists for some time.
Look at the Board, look at the experts, most are completely unknown to most artists, and most artists are unknown to them.
They are never seen in the galleries where living artists exhibit and ply their trade. They see art via the bubble, or bubbles, exclusive VIP events. No wonder their judgement is so uninformed.
The arts bureaucracy needs to take a long hard look, and resign.
That seems to be a popular point of view at present. There must be a groundswell of artists and organisations that have felt sidelined by the way grants are awarded.
I've worked continuously over thirty eight years for several of the largest philanthropic foundations in the world,,based in NYC.
Where I observed the humiliating trials of DEI struggles sessions, imposed on the staff by management.
Many were married middle aged women from former Soviet block countries and central Asia. They understood the bitterness oppression.and they fled it with their families.
After experiencing Institutional DEI and what amounted to brain washing sessions, most resigned their positions.
Woke and DEi became moral compromises that most Americans could no longer stomach. Hence the orange man wining the popular vote.
As for John's superficial visits to NYC to and Boston, he allows no time to marinate within American culture.His perception of America like many Australians appears formed by Hollywood movies to which he is very. fond.
Harry, nobody's arguing that hiring staff on the basis of who or what they are, when they are patiently unsuited to do a job, is bad policy. The term, though, has now become so politicised that we're seeing thousands of competent people being fired because of Musk & Trump's inflammatory use of 'DEI'. Your dear leader now sees it as the root of all evils, reflexively blaming a recent air disaster on DEI. If you think I'm a bleeding heart for all things woke, you're not reading very closely. I defer to your lengthy experience of the US, but surely you shouldn't be saying 'marinate', but 'to get pickled'.
John, Your petticoat is showing again, not to mention your Trump De Synd.
If your pen is your sword it obviously needs sharpening ,too much scribbling has blunted it.
As for the Delta Air Lines roll over. The young lass flying it was 26, yes it could have been a lad or even a geriatric. She had her commercial pilots license one month based on 250 hours of training !
In the olden days before the extreme left concocted their nasty political poison DEI, merit based on proven attainments ment something. As you well know having paid the price of others stupidity.
Yet, you have an oddly inverted political perspective, trying to walk the fence. I'd bet those who essentially 'canceled' you from your former job adhere to the DEI- woke philosophy.
Now you're just being snippy. The Delta Airlines incident doesn't justify dumping 1000s of people from jobs on trumped up 'DEI' accusations. I'm not saying that DEI hasn't led to plenty of bad results. I'm saying it shouldn't be used as a blanket justification for extreme, self-interested policy. I'd sooner be on the fence than jump into the pit of resentment & paranoia that takes generalisations for facts.
I am glad that you expose how deep rooted the problem within the insular Australian art world has become. It is not just that they made bad decisions - but that they don’t have tools they need to make good decisions in the first place, namely, wide and diverse life experiences among decision-makers. They only ever hang out with people who think, speak, live exactly like them - so they are never challenged to think beyond that.
It is clear that most in the Australian art world don’t even realise why their decision was dubious. You do - and that’s great!
Why should tax payers fund an art world that has become so disconnected from it? The easy money only makes things worse.
I think you've tapped the heart of the problem. Given their predilections as to who should sit on committees, Creative Australia was always going to make the kind of choices they did. We need to ask who selects the selectors, and why.
Where do you stand on taxpayers cutting off funding? You are clearly not a fan of Trump but can you see why ordinary people would so definitively turn away from wanting to fund government agencies and orgs - and museums and art organisations are very much government agencies running off taxpayer's money, except they are run like clubs.
I want to be convinced that there is merit - so do convince me please.
I think those most urgently in need of taxpayer funding are the regional art galleries, where a little goes a long way and may be spent hiring part-time staff, etc. Creative Australia - like the Australia Council before it - has solid principles, but its performance has been gradually undermined as an internal culture has developed in a distinctly 'club-like' manner. The real problem is that these institutions tend to grow more and more self-consciously 'radical' in their refusal to consider anything that doesn't tick the right political boxes, showing a self-righteous contempt for anything with a hope of commercial success. As a result, CA keeps veering ever further from the mainstream. This is a long conversation that I'll probably pursue in future posts. I wouldn't halt taxpayer funds, but we need to justify decisions in a far more responsible manner. Is it possible?
The bureaucrats of the Australian artworld have not been in touch with with artists for some time.
Look at the Board, look at the experts, most are completely unknown to most artists, and most artists are unknown to them.
They are never seen in the galleries where living artists exhibit and ply their trade. They see art via the bubble, or bubbles, exclusive VIP events. No wonder their judgement is so uninformed.
The arts bureaucracy needs to take a long hard look, and resign.
That seems to be a popular point of view at present. There must be a groundswell of artists and organisations that have felt sidelined by the way grants are awarded.
I've worked continuously over thirty eight years for several of the largest philanthropic foundations in the world,,based in NYC.
Where I observed the humiliating trials of DEI struggles sessions, imposed on the staff by management.
Many were married middle aged women from former Soviet block countries and central Asia. They understood the bitterness oppression.and they fled it with their families.
After experiencing Institutional DEI and what amounted to brain washing sessions, most resigned their positions.
Woke and DEi became moral compromises that most Americans could no longer stomach. Hence the orange man wining the popular vote.
As for John's superficial visits to NYC to and Boston, he allows no time to marinate within American culture.His perception of America like many Australians appears formed by Hollywood movies to which he is very. fond.
Harry, nobody's arguing that hiring staff on the basis of who or what they are, when they are patiently unsuited to do a job, is bad policy. The term, though, has now become so politicised that we're seeing thousands of competent people being fired because of Musk & Trump's inflammatory use of 'DEI'. Your dear leader now sees it as the root of all evils, reflexively blaming a recent air disaster on DEI. If you think I'm a bleeding heart for all things woke, you're not reading very closely. I defer to your lengthy experience of the US, but surely you shouldn't be saying 'marinate', but 'to get pickled'.
John, Your petticoat is showing again, not to mention your Trump De Synd.
If your pen is your sword it obviously needs sharpening ,too much scribbling has blunted it.
As for the Delta Air Lines roll over. The young lass flying it was 26, yes it could have been a lad or even a geriatric. She had her commercial pilots license one month based on 250 hours of training !
In the olden days before the extreme left concocted their nasty political poison DEI, merit based on proven attainments ment something. As you well know having paid the price of others stupidity.
Yet, you have an oddly inverted political perspective, trying to walk the fence. I'd bet those who essentially 'canceled' you from your former job adhere to the DEI- woke philosophy.
Now you're just being snippy. The Delta Airlines incident doesn't justify dumping 1000s of people from jobs on trumped up 'DEI' accusations. I'm not saying that DEI hasn't led to plenty of bad results. I'm saying it shouldn't be used as a blanket justification for extreme, self-interested policy. I'd sooner be on the fence than jump into the pit of resentment & paranoia that takes generalisations for facts.
I am glad that you expose how deep rooted the problem within the insular Australian art world has become. It is not just that they made bad decisions - but that they don’t have tools they need to make good decisions in the first place, namely, wide and diverse life experiences among decision-makers. They only ever hang out with people who think, speak, live exactly like them - so they are never challenged to think beyond that.
It is clear that most in the Australian art world don’t even realise why their decision was dubious. You do - and that’s great!
Why should tax payers fund an art world that has become so disconnected from it? The easy money only makes things worse.
I think you've tapped the heart of the problem. Given their predilections as to who should sit on committees, Creative Australia was always going to make the kind of choices they did. We need to ask who selects the selectors, and why.
Where do you stand on taxpayers cutting off funding? You are clearly not a fan of Trump but can you see why ordinary people would so definitively turn away from wanting to fund government agencies and orgs - and museums and art organisations are very much government agencies running off taxpayer's money, except they are run like clubs.
I want to be convinced that there is merit - so do convince me please.
I think those most urgently in need of taxpayer funding are the regional art galleries, where a little goes a long way and may be spent hiring part-time staff, etc. Creative Australia - like the Australia Council before it - has solid principles, but its performance has been gradually undermined as an internal culture has developed in a distinctly 'club-like' manner. The real problem is that these institutions tend to grow more and more self-consciously 'radical' in their refusal to consider anything that doesn't tick the right political boxes, showing a self-righteous contempt for anything with a hope of commercial success. As a result, CA keeps veering ever further from the mainstream. This is a long conversation that I'll probably pursue in future posts. I wouldn't halt taxpayer funds, but we need to justify decisions in a far more responsible manner. Is it possible?