A practical issue with the $27m Library forecourt proposal: it cannot be built as illustrated by government. The on‑ and off‑ramps at the southern end of the Domain Tunnel are fixed, as are the Library building and, likely, the Morshead Fountain at the Royal Botanic Garden’s southern gate. Between the Library and the fountain sit five traffic lanes and a narrow median.
The NSW Government renderings keep both the Library and the fountain in place, yet still show a forecourt occupying the space now taken by the road and median, but still have 5 traffic lanes. Unless major infrastructure is relocated, or there are trespasses into the Domain or the Royal Botanic Gardens, the scheme as shown is unworkable.
Given this government's cavalier way with heritage, I wouldn't be surprised to see them carve into the Domain or the Gardens. Or create another traffic tangle, like Rozelle. The only certain things about the scheme are that it would end up costing more than the budgeted amount, be of little tangible value, and be impervious to public & expert criticisms - while the AGNSW cuts staff & programs. Thanks for the insights, John
It was good to see that Vivien Gaston was lecturing about portraiture in the context of the travelling Archibald Prize exhibition. She’s an art historian who brings a literary sensibility to everything she says about art and Geelong was lucky to have her. Human representation, its distortion and its transcendence, is pertinent to this award and the complexity that trails in its wake. Louise Hearman won the Archibald with her remarkable portrait of Barry Humphries who embodies caricature with Dame Edna and Sir Les and co. Not forgetting that with Sandy Stone parody was transcended by the poignancy of the suburban chap with his ‘vehicle’ and his quiet worries. And this survived when Max Gilles – with a Guy Rundle script – appropriated Humphries’ character for his impersonation of John Howard. Gilles has high claims to be our greatest impersonator – his Hawke a thing of wonder.
But caricature and authenticity loom with the Archibald. Think of all the fuss and fury back in 1943 when William Dobell won the Archibald for his portrait of Sir Joshua Smith and was subsequently attacked because it was said to be a caricature. Well, as Robert Hughes said in The Art of Australia, the painting – with all its grandeur – was a caricature and this was Dobell’s fundamental idiom, it was the language through which he made art and he created the typology he represented. All sorts of legendary Australian figures – Les Murray arguably the greatest poet anywhere, Lionel Murphy, the former attorney-general who asked the question, ‘How about my little mate?’ – looked like figures from Dobell.
Its strangely incongruent how you rail against all these policies being instigated by a left leaning progressive govt, yet keep implying it is the fault of conservatives and right leaning politics. Even more bizarre is how you see the current President of the USA influencing our policies. I'm trying to recollect if you thought the Biden govt had the same level of influence on Australia and what criticisms you directed toward them.
A few months ago I went to some of those meetings with the local arts org discussing the upcoming funding allocations from Creative Australia. My personal curiousity was to find out why all the grants needed to become anonymised and after receiving the same sort innocuous blather about "privacy" you've recounted here it became clear to me as the discussion progressed that my suspicious theory was entirely correct. That being, over the last decade increasingly large financial grants are being allocated to groups and individuals professing to DEI oriented identitarian politics. Thus, with anonymisation the significant funds being directed to LGBTQUI+, racial and ethnic claimants and people with a wide range of mental and physical challenges can be obsfuscated and protected from questioning.
Its a beautiful protection racket really...Creative Australia virtuously protects vulnerable, marginalised groups from being critiqued by nasty people who might actually think merit, skill and vision are what public funds should be dispersed to foster. Sadly, it would appear that light skinned humans of heterosexual orientation with mainstream (even conservative) social values are incredibly untalented producers of art, though they be the statistical majority of the population.
Hello Pearl, I hardly think it's 'bizarre' when you see way the Coalition is tearing itself apart, with one faction going full Trump and the other trying to appear more responsive to the issues that keep losing them supporters. Labor has everything its own way, and is adopting some very questionable stances. It's not 'progressive' at all in its Arts policies. There wasn't much to say about Biden, because he obviously had no big influence on the way our pollies think. The bad politics we have today are the fault of both left & right, so I can't see any issue with criticising both extremes. As for the 'DEI' stuff, it's a term I'd prefer not to use, as it's been debased by so many ideologues. The problem, I believe, is deeper than that, although full transparency would reveal a whole host of minoritarian fixations. I agree with the basic point that a militant identity politics undermines any sense of merit and basic fairness. This is how the left fuels the narratives of the right. Thanks for the feedback. J
It is the case that governments of all stripes over the years have become evermore resistant to transparency . FOI requests get harder more costly, government programs are outsourced to third parties that can often effectively evade questioning by senate estimates so on.
Its not just the recipients names that is secret- even what the project being funded actualyis, is secret ! .
These grants are not that different to a government awarding a contract for say maintaining a public garden , its public money being paid out to 'x' to deliver something creative for public benefit.
I'm getting to the stage where I automatically assume something will be bad, although I'm occasionally pleasantly surprised. Better an open mind than a vacant one.
Dear John,
A practical issue with the $27m Library forecourt proposal: it cannot be built as illustrated by government. The on‑ and off‑ramps at the southern end of the Domain Tunnel are fixed, as are the Library building and, likely, the Morshead Fountain at the Royal Botanic Garden’s southern gate. Between the Library and the fountain sit five traffic lanes and a narrow median.
The NSW Government renderings keep both the Library and the fountain in place, yet still show a forecourt occupying the space now taken by the road and median, but still have 5 traffic lanes. Unless major infrastructure is relocated, or there are trespasses into the Domain or the Royal Botanic Gardens, the scheme as shown is unworkable.
Regards,
Rob
Given this government's cavalier way with heritage, I wouldn't be surprised to see them carve into the Domain or the Gardens. Or create another traffic tangle, like Rozelle. The only certain things about the scheme are that it would end up costing more than the budgeted amount, be of little tangible value, and be impervious to public & expert criticisms - while the AGNSW cuts staff & programs. Thanks for the insights, John
By Peter Craven today:
It was good to see that Vivien Gaston was lecturing about portraiture in the context of the travelling Archibald Prize exhibition. She’s an art historian who brings a literary sensibility to everything she says about art and Geelong was lucky to have her. Human representation, its distortion and its transcendence, is pertinent to this award and the complexity that trails in its wake. Louise Hearman won the Archibald with her remarkable portrait of Barry Humphries who embodies caricature with Dame Edna and Sir Les and co. Not forgetting that with Sandy Stone parody was transcended by the poignancy of the suburban chap with his ‘vehicle’ and his quiet worries. And this survived when Max Gilles – with a Guy Rundle script – appropriated Humphries’ character for his impersonation of John Howard. Gilles has high claims to be our greatest impersonator – his Hawke a thing of wonder.
But caricature and authenticity loom with the Archibald. Think of all the fuss and fury back in 1943 when William Dobell won the Archibald for his portrait of Sir Joshua Smith and was subsequently attacked because it was said to be a caricature. Well, as Robert Hughes said in The Art of Australia, the painting – with all its grandeur – was a caricature and this was Dobell’s fundamental idiom, it was the language through which he made art and he created the typology he represented. All sorts of legendary Australian figures – Les Murray arguably the greatest poet anywhere, Lionel Murphy, the former attorney-general who asked the question, ‘How about my little mate?’ – looked like figures from Dobell.
Its strangely incongruent how you rail against all these policies being instigated by a left leaning progressive govt, yet keep implying it is the fault of conservatives and right leaning politics. Even more bizarre is how you see the current President of the USA influencing our policies. I'm trying to recollect if you thought the Biden govt had the same level of influence on Australia and what criticisms you directed toward them.
A few months ago I went to some of those meetings with the local arts org discussing the upcoming funding allocations from Creative Australia. My personal curiousity was to find out why all the grants needed to become anonymised and after receiving the same sort innocuous blather about "privacy" you've recounted here it became clear to me as the discussion progressed that my suspicious theory was entirely correct. That being, over the last decade increasingly large financial grants are being allocated to groups and individuals professing to DEI oriented identitarian politics. Thus, with anonymisation the significant funds being directed to LGBTQUI+, racial and ethnic claimants and people with a wide range of mental and physical challenges can be obsfuscated and protected from questioning.
Its a beautiful protection racket really...Creative Australia virtuously protects vulnerable, marginalised groups from being critiqued by nasty people who might actually think merit, skill and vision are what public funds should be dispersed to foster. Sadly, it would appear that light skinned humans of heterosexual orientation with mainstream (even conservative) social values are incredibly untalented producers of art, though they be the statistical majority of the population.
Hello Pearl, I hardly think it's 'bizarre' when you see way the Coalition is tearing itself apart, with one faction going full Trump and the other trying to appear more responsive to the issues that keep losing them supporters. Labor has everything its own way, and is adopting some very questionable stances. It's not 'progressive' at all in its Arts policies. There wasn't much to say about Biden, because he obviously had no big influence on the way our pollies think. The bad politics we have today are the fault of both left & right, so I can't see any issue with criticising both extremes. As for the 'DEI' stuff, it's a term I'd prefer not to use, as it's been debased by so many ideologues. The problem, I believe, is deeper than that, although full transparency would reveal a whole host of minoritarian fixations. I agree with the basic point that a militant identity politics undermines any sense of merit and basic fairness. This is how the left fuels the narratives of the right. Thanks for the feedback. J
It is the case that governments of all stripes over the years have become evermore resistant to transparency . FOI requests get harder more costly, government programs are outsourced to third parties that can often effectively evade questioning by senate estimates so on.
Its not just the recipients names that is secret- even what the project being funded actualyis, is secret ! .
These grants are not that different to a government awarding a contract for say maintaining a public garden , its public money being paid out to 'x' to deliver something creative for public benefit.
The secrecy means almost anything could go on.
This is all too true. First the Libs, now Labor shun transparency. It's the media's role to hold them accountable, but this isn't happening any more.
Therefore what you are doing is essential 👍
I'm getting to the stage where I automatically assume something will be bad, although I'm occasionally pleasantly surprised. Better an open mind than a vacant one.
🙂
John my dad was assistant director of public works NSW my mum was matron of crown st women’s
All of what’s going down in the sector is contrary to the 101 of good management practices
PS a bugbear of ours is a uncritical assumption by too many that anything the government arts sector does is automatically’ good’