1 00:00:09,280 --> 00:00:12,000 Speaker 1: From The Australian. This is the weekend edition of the Front. 2 00:00:12,160 --> 00:00:17,400 Speaker 1: I'm Claire Harvey. Art rage heard of it? It means 3 00:00:17,640 --> 00:00:21,120 Speaker 1: art outrage and Australians turn out to be world champs. 4 00:00:21,520 --> 00:00:23,600 Speaker 1: In fact, even though fewer than a third of us 5 00:00:23,600 --> 00:00:26,920 Speaker 1: are regular gallery goers, we all reserve the right to 6 00:00:26,960 --> 00:00:31,280 Speaker 1: throw a massive tantrum if some artwork annoyse or offends us. 7 00:00:31,800 --> 00:00:36,240 Speaker 1: Some galleries play into it, some can't cope. Sometimes they 8 00:00:36,360 --> 00:00:41,680 Speaker 1: panic and apologize. But isn't art supposed to be provocative? Today? 9 00:00:41,840 --> 00:00:45,680 Speaker 1: Chief Culture correspondent Tim Douglas joins us to explore why 10 00:00:45,760 --> 00:00:49,239 Speaker 1: we're so quick to take offense and to recall the 11 00:00:49,320 --> 00:00:57,160 Speaker 1: exhibition that shocked him. Tim, you've written the cover story 12 00:00:57,160 --> 00:01:00,480 Speaker 1: for this weekend's culture section in the Weekend Australia. Can 13 00:01:00,520 --> 00:01:02,560 Speaker 1: you read me the first couple of paragraphs? Please? 14 00:01:02,800 --> 00:01:06,840 Speaker 2: Sure. Controversy swells like a boil on the backside of 15 00:01:06,880 --> 00:01:10,000 Speaker 2: the visual arts in Australia. Every so often the sector 16 00:01:10,080 --> 00:01:12,319 Speaker 2: is forced to drop its strides and have the protrusion 17 00:01:12,360 --> 00:01:15,959 Speaker 2: inspected in the surgery of public opinion. It's there the boilers, 18 00:01:15,959 --> 00:01:19,080 Speaker 2: either considered benign and left to its devices, or lanced 19 00:01:19,120 --> 00:01:23,560 Speaker 2: in the name of good taste or political expediency. The boil, however, 20 00:01:23,600 --> 00:01:28,160 Speaker 2: will be back. Artists snout, audiences feel it. Cultural institutions 21 00:01:28,319 --> 00:01:30,080 Speaker 2: live or die by the prognosis. 22 00:01:33,760 --> 00:01:36,480 Speaker 1: Tim You've been covering the arts for many, many years, 23 00:01:36,520 --> 00:01:38,479 Speaker 1: and you and I have both been in journalism for 24 00:01:38,600 --> 00:01:40,840 Speaker 1: longer than we might like to admit. We're old enough 25 00:01:40,840 --> 00:01:44,080 Speaker 1: to remember some of the big controversies where something that's 26 00:01:44,080 --> 00:01:46,480 Speaker 1: bubbling away in the art world spills over into the 27 00:01:46,520 --> 00:01:49,200 Speaker 1: pages of the mass heads that we work out. One 28 00:01:49,200 --> 00:01:52,280 Speaker 1: that I remember in particular is something called Piss Christ. 29 00:01:52,400 --> 00:01:53,040 Speaker 1: What was that? 30 00:01:53,680 --> 00:01:56,720 Speaker 2: The full name of the work is immersion in parentheses 31 00:01:56,960 --> 00:02:00,400 Speaker 2: piss Christ. And it's a work by Andres Serrano, a 32 00:02:00,480 --> 00:02:06,960 Speaker 2: photographer who has created this image of a crucifix showered 33 00:02:07,040 --> 00:02:09,120 Speaker 2: in urine. 34 00:02:11,040 --> 00:02:14,680 Speaker 1: Here's this art or blasphemy. So you see guys like 35 00:02:14,720 --> 00:02:18,040 Speaker 1: this guy defending the gallery, will you ask him if 36 00:02:18,040 --> 00:02:19,160 Speaker 1: you believed in Jesus Christ? 37 00:02:19,320 --> 00:02:21,560 Speaker 2: And he told me to go after myself. So clearly, 38 00:02:22,440 --> 00:02:26,720 Speaker 2: very controversial work that had been shown internationally before. It 39 00:02:26,840 --> 00:02:31,560 Speaker 2: was programmed by then National Gallery of Victoria director Timothy 40 00:02:31,600 --> 00:02:36,959 Speaker 2: Potts to show at an exhibition about confronting religious artworks 41 00:02:37,000 --> 00:02:40,040 Speaker 2: broadly at a large show at the MGV in nineteen 42 00:02:40,080 --> 00:02:40,640 Speaker 2: ninety seven. 43 00:02:41,760 --> 00:02:46,280 Speaker 1: It prompted the kind of media outrage that comes around 44 00:02:46,280 --> 00:02:49,639 Speaker 1: every few years. If somebody killed the guy who put 45 00:02:49,680 --> 00:02:53,400 Speaker 1: the cross in the jar, and who was killed by 46 00:02:53,600 --> 00:02:56,720 Speaker 1: let's say, a Christian bride on himself. You know, if 47 00:02:57,080 --> 00:02:59,840 Speaker 1: he exhibited the little narcissism, I'm. 48 00:02:59,639 --> 00:03:00,480 Speaker 2: Not going to it. 49 00:03:00,520 --> 00:03:04,440 Speaker 1: How do you exercise restraint? It wouldn't be dead. And 50 00:03:04,480 --> 00:03:07,200 Speaker 1: one of the central questions that people were arguing about 51 00:03:07,400 --> 00:03:11,760 Speaker 1: was whether or not this was art. That's often what 52 00:03:12,080 --> 00:03:14,440 Speaker 1: art controversies come down to, isn't it. It's like, well, 53 00:03:14,680 --> 00:03:16,200 Speaker 1: I could have done that, My four year old could 54 00:03:16,200 --> 00:03:18,320 Speaker 1: have done that. It's not really art, but I don't 55 00:03:18,400 --> 00:03:18,840 Speaker 1: like it. 56 00:03:19,400 --> 00:03:21,880 Speaker 2: That's right. I mean it's the classic trope. My four 57 00:03:21,919 --> 00:03:24,480 Speaker 2: year old could have done this. Fingerpainters that could do 58 00:03:24,520 --> 00:03:26,760 Speaker 2: that better. My grandmother's blind, she could have done this 59 00:03:26,800 --> 00:03:31,040 Speaker 2: in sleep, etc. We're used to hearing those comments. But 60 00:03:31,040 --> 00:03:34,280 Speaker 2: I think it's really interesting that Australians do art rage, 61 00:03:34,360 --> 00:03:37,840 Speaker 2: I think better than any country on Earth. Only twenty 62 00:03:37,840 --> 00:03:41,840 Speaker 2: seven percent of Australians, according to the most recent Australian 63 00:03:41,840 --> 00:03:45,800 Speaker 2: Bureau of Statistics figures, visit art galleries annually, and yet 64 00:03:46,080 --> 00:03:49,560 Speaker 2: everyone seems to have an opinion, especially when it comes 65 00:03:49,560 --> 00:03:53,560 Speaker 2: to works of controversy, or works as with piss Christ 66 00:03:53,600 --> 00:03:57,680 Speaker 2: that are deemed blasphemous or are taken, in that case 67 00:03:57,800 --> 00:03:59,080 Speaker 2: all the way to the Supreme Court. 68 00:04:00,000 --> 00:04:01,800 Speaker 1: Only the most recent one that I can think of 69 00:04:02,240 --> 00:04:06,320 Speaker 1: was about a sculpture outside the National Gallery of Australia 70 00:04:06,400 --> 00:04:09,240 Speaker 1: in Canberra. What was that sculpture of and why was 71 00:04:09,280 --> 00:04:10,080 Speaker 1: it such a big deal? 72 00:04:10,920 --> 00:04:14,040 Speaker 2: That is Ora Boris and that's a work by very 73 00:04:14,040 --> 00:04:19,680 Speaker 2: well renowned sculptor Lindy Lee. The work was deemed controversial 74 00:04:19,720 --> 00:04:24,960 Speaker 2: because it was the second most expensive commission made by 75 00:04:25,279 --> 00:04:28,880 Speaker 2: the National Gallery in its history. The work itself is 76 00:04:29,080 --> 00:04:32,440 Speaker 2: in no way controversial to look at it to Chinese 77 00:04:32,480 --> 00:04:35,599 Speaker 2: infinity symbol. It's quite beautiful to look at in fact, 78 00:04:35,760 --> 00:04:40,720 Speaker 2: but it was criticized for being a luxury. Our art 79 00:04:40,720 --> 00:04:43,159 Speaker 2: critic at the time, Chris Rallen, suggested that perhaps the 80 00:04:43,200 --> 00:04:46,320 Speaker 2: money would have been better spent bolstering the National collection 81 00:04:47,120 --> 00:04:47,880 Speaker 2: that sculpture. 82 00:04:48,120 --> 00:04:50,400 Speaker 1: I went and saw it at the Gallery not long 83 00:04:50,400 --> 00:04:54,760 Speaker 1: ago and it seemed utterly inoffensive to me. Was this 84 00:04:54,839 --> 00:04:58,840 Speaker 1: about the money and does expense and the perception of 85 00:04:58,960 --> 00:05:01,960 Speaker 1: taxpayer expense and fuel these controversies. 86 00:05:02,400 --> 00:05:04,640 Speaker 2: It was about the money. And we answer your question, 87 00:05:04,760 --> 00:05:08,840 Speaker 2: it does because the NNGAA has a you know, infamous 88 00:05:08,880 --> 00:05:13,520 Speaker 2: history with spending taxpayers money to bols through its collection. 89 00:05:13,600 --> 00:05:15,839 Speaker 2: Of course, the most famous of that is the nineteen 90 00:05:15,839 --> 00:05:19,080 Speaker 2: seventy three purchase by then Director James Mollinson and then 91 00:05:19,120 --> 00:05:22,719 Speaker 2: Prime Minister GoF Whitlam of Jackson Pollock's nineteen fifty three 92 00:05:22,960 --> 00:05:25,839 Speaker 2: work Blue Poles. 93 00:05:25,160 --> 00:05:27,480 Speaker 1: At the Art Gallery of New South Wales. A one 94 00:05:27,560 --> 00:05:30,320 Speaker 1: point three million dollar controversy goes on display to the 95 00:05:30,360 --> 00:05:34,000 Speaker 1: Australian public for the first time. It's the Jackson Pollock painting. 96 00:05:35,120 --> 00:05:37,400 Speaker 2: It was brought in nineteen seventy three for one point 97 00:05:37,440 --> 00:05:41,120 Speaker 2: three million, which adjusted for inflation now is thirteen million, 98 00:05:41,200 --> 00:05:45,640 Speaker 2: but the painting is valued now at five hundred million dollars. 99 00:05:46,200 --> 00:05:48,839 Speaker 1: We need a vision in this country. 100 00:05:48,880 --> 00:05:51,359 Speaker 2: And I do hope the Australian people will not feel 101 00:05:51,360 --> 00:05:53,560 Speaker 2: that we have played a hoax on them. Mean a 102 00:05:53,640 --> 00:05:56,279 Speaker 2: dog could do that, but I mean the controversy still 103 00:05:56,320 --> 00:06:02,679 Speaker 2: swells around that work starts in twenty seventeen, Victorian Senator 104 00:06:03,040 --> 00:06:06,080 Speaker 2: James Patterson suggested we should sell that artwork to pay 105 00:06:06,160 --> 00:06:09,400 Speaker 2: down the national debt, which I think is kind of 106 00:06:09,520 --> 00:06:13,839 Speaker 2: an outrageous proposition given what it adds to the cultural 107 00:06:13,880 --> 00:06:15,039 Speaker 2: fabric of this nation. 108 00:06:18,400 --> 00:06:21,400 Speaker 1: It's interesting to look back on arts controversies that were 109 00:06:21,400 --> 00:06:24,279 Speaker 1: once very hot. The Impressionists were regarded as kind of 110 00:06:24,320 --> 00:06:28,520 Speaker 1: cultural vandals. The Cubists were the same. The Surrealists, of course, 111 00:06:28,520 --> 00:06:32,000 Speaker 1: were the same. But I often think back to a 112 00:06:32,040 --> 00:06:35,440 Speaker 1: controversy that raged in May two thousand and eight when 113 00:06:35,480 --> 00:06:39,960 Speaker 1: police raided a gallery in Sydney where photographer Bill Henson 114 00:06:40,080 --> 00:06:44,400 Speaker 1: was exhibiting pictures of young people without any clothes on. 115 00:06:44,880 --> 00:06:46,720 Speaker 1: Do you remember that controversy and how do you look 116 00:06:46,760 --> 00:06:47,479 Speaker 1: back on it now? 117 00:06:48,600 --> 00:06:50,960 Speaker 2: I do remember it. It was front page news for 118 00:06:51,040 --> 00:06:55,919 Speaker 2: weeks because then Prime Minister Kevin RD interjected and called 119 00:06:56,200 --> 00:06:57,160 Speaker 2: the works. 120 00:06:57,120 --> 00:07:00,000 Speaker 1: I find them absolutely revolving, very strong. 121 00:06:59,760 --> 00:07:04,400 Speaker 2: Word to describe art. Bill Henson has continued to have 122 00:07:04,440 --> 00:07:07,760 Speaker 2: a very successful career, but I haven't spoken to him 123 00:07:07,800 --> 00:07:09,560 Speaker 2: about that time in his life, but imagine would be 124 00:07:09,600 --> 00:07:12,160 Speaker 2: a very difficult thing to get past. It was a 125 00:07:12,240 --> 00:07:15,360 Speaker 2: huge storm at the time and a really interesting time 126 00:07:15,400 --> 00:07:19,160 Speaker 2: as an arts journalist to come to terms with that 127 00:07:19,560 --> 00:07:25,040 Speaker 2: complicated tension between what is art and what is not art? Ultimately, 128 00:07:25,240 --> 00:07:27,360 Speaker 2: his name is continued to drag through the mud for 129 00:07:27,400 --> 00:07:29,120 Speaker 2: a couple of years, and so I think it's kind 130 00:07:29,160 --> 00:07:31,680 Speaker 2: of remarkable actually that he's managed to go on and 131 00:07:31,720 --> 00:07:37,240 Speaker 2: have a flourishing career despite those very interesting times. 132 00:07:37,880 --> 00:07:40,400 Speaker 1: It must have been absolutely harrowing for him. Of course, 133 00:07:40,440 --> 00:07:43,080 Speaker 1: the children who were featured in those photographs had been 134 00:07:43,080 --> 00:07:46,200 Speaker 1: photographed with the permission of their parents. The families came 135 00:07:46,200 --> 00:07:48,200 Speaker 1: out at the time and said Bill has not done 136 00:07:48,200 --> 00:07:52,280 Speaker 1: anything wrong. This work is not sexual. But I mean 137 00:07:52,360 --> 00:07:54,800 Speaker 1: the reason that it was so controversial is this sort 138 00:07:54,800 --> 00:07:58,120 Speaker 1: of shadow of pedophilia and child sexual abuse which Australian 139 00:07:58,160 --> 00:08:00,200 Speaker 1: society was only just kind of getting to grip with 140 00:08:00,320 --> 00:08:03,480 Speaker 1: at the time. Bill Henson is of course not in 141 00:08:03,520 --> 00:08:07,640 Speaker 1: any way a predator or an abuser. But it was like, 142 00:08:07,800 --> 00:08:11,320 Speaker 1: even though he hadn't sought a controversy, it came to him. 143 00:08:11,360 --> 00:08:13,160 Speaker 1: You know. It wasn't like Peace Christ was it where 144 00:08:13,200 --> 00:08:16,080 Speaker 1: he did deliberately, you know, sought to provoke. 145 00:08:16,760 --> 00:08:18,120 Speaker 2: I think you're right. I think it was a turning 146 00:08:18,120 --> 00:08:21,720 Speaker 2: point in the shadow of the Royal Commission to which 147 00:08:21,800 --> 00:08:23,720 Speaker 2: you alluded, And I think it was a real turning 148 00:08:23,760 --> 00:08:26,400 Speaker 2: point in terms of social media at that point was 149 00:08:26,440 --> 00:08:29,920 Speaker 2: beginning to change the way we communicated, the way we 150 00:08:30,120 --> 00:08:34,920 Speaker 2: sourced our news, and that dare I say mob mentality 151 00:08:35,000 --> 00:08:39,920 Speaker 2: at that point began to shift. It's like the pitchforks 152 00:08:40,000 --> 00:08:42,480 Speaker 2: were out before we knew what was what was happening. 153 00:08:42,520 --> 00:08:45,719 Speaker 2: And I think that thread has continued and it has 154 00:08:45,760 --> 00:08:50,079 Speaker 2: only gotten stronger, as as that mass communication tool has 155 00:08:50,160 --> 00:08:51,600 Speaker 2: changed the way we live our lives. 156 00:08:51,760 --> 00:08:53,920 Speaker 1: It's a real class thing, isn't it. It's a kind 157 00:08:53,920 --> 00:08:58,440 Speaker 1: of accusation from people purporting to represent you know, the 158 00:08:58,480 --> 00:09:01,320 Speaker 1: working class, or the great math, or the ordinary Australian 159 00:09:01,400 --> 00:09:05,960 Speaker 1: or sensible people, that the kind of cosmopolitan, degenerate elite 160 00:09:06,640 --> 00:09:09,360 Speaker 1: are out of touch and are corrupting society. That's a 161 00:09:09,400 --> 00:09:11,560 Speaker 1: very old idea. It's a dangerous idea, isn't it. 162 00:09:11,559 --> 00:09:13,400 Speaker 2: It's a dangerous idea. But I think it speaks too 163 00:09:13,520 --> 00:09:18,280 Speaker 2: to this historic view of artists in Australia. I don't 164 00:09:18,440 --> 00:09:22,360 Speaker 2: feel as though the art sector has ever really been 165 00:09:22,520 --> 00:09:26,959 Speaker 2: truly valued in this country. You know, the arts are 166 00:09:27,040 --> 00:09:28,840 Speaker 2: funded to the tune of two hundred and thirty million 167 00:09:28,880 --> 00:09:32,480 Speaker 2: dollars annually and yet contribute sixty seven billion dollars to 168 00:09:32,520 --> 00:09:35,360 Speaker 2: the GDP and sport to take an example. And the 169 00:09:35,440 --> 00:09:37,920 Speaker 2: last thing I want to do is create some sort 170 00:09:37,920 --> 00:09:40,640 Speaker 2: of dichotomy between sport and art, because as Gideon Hay 171 00:09:40,640 --> 00:09:43,400 Speaker 2: once said to me, art is sport is cricket is dance, 172 00:09:43,480 --> 00:09:46,360 Speaker 2: his life, his ballet is everything. But I mean to 173 00:09:46,360 --> 00:09:49,520 Speaker 2: put that in context. Sport gets one point three billion 174 00:09:49,559 --> 00:09:52,600 Speaker 2: dollars in funding and adds fourteen billion dollars to the GEDDP. 175 00:09:53,600 --> 00:09:57,800 Speaker 2: The arts are funded four times less and contribute five 176 00:09:57,840 --> 00:10:00,400 Speaker 2: times more. And so I think it's a really interesting 177 00:10:00,440 --> 00:10:03,559 Speaker 2: statistic because there are these great figures. Ninety eight percent 178 00:10:03,600 --> 00:10:05,840 Speaker 2: of Australians engage in some way with the arts, from 179 00:10:05,880 --> 00:10:10,400 Speaker 2: television to dance to the visual arts, and yet we 180 00:10:10,440 --> 00:10:12,880 Speaker 2: still don't value it as deeply as we could. 181 00:10:13,600 --> 00:10:15,959 Speaker 1: You're, of course part of the cosmopolitan elite. But are 182 00:10:15,960 --> 00:10:18,240 Speaker 1: there artworks that you've had to report on that have 183 00:10:18,320 --> 00:10:20,800 Speaker 1: shocked you or made you feel a little bit uneasy? 184 00:10:20,800 --> 00:10:22,760 Speaker 1: I must have been. The Bill Henson photographs made me 185 00:10:22,800 --> 00:10:24,960 Speaker 1: feel a little bit uneasy. I wasn't down there with 186 00:10:25,000 --> 00:10:28,080 Speaker 1: my pitchfork, but I did think I'm not sure about that. 187 00:10:28,800 --> 00:10:32,280 Speaker 2: Yeah. Look, one that springs to mind is Herman Niche's 188 00:10:32,760 --> 00:10:35,560 Speaker 2: one p fifty action. This is an Austrian artist who 189 00:10:35,640 --> 00:10:37,679 Speaker 2: passed away a couple of years ago, but it was 190 00:10:37,720 --> 00:10:40,200 Speaker 2: a very controversial work that was programmed for the Dark 191 00:10:40,200 --> 00:10:44,640 Speaker 2: Mofo Festival in Tasmania in twenty seventeen. It featured five 192 00:10:44,720 --> 00:10:49,480 Speaker 2: hundred liters of bovine blood, a freshly slain bull carcass 193 00:10:50,040 --> 00:10:57,560 Speaker 2: onto which twelve white clad disciples were sacrificially crucified as 194 00:10:57,800 --> 00:11:01,839 Speaker 2: a full orchestra, canducted by the artists himself in a 195 00:11:01,840 --> 00:11:05,199 Speaker 2: wheelchair at the time played on. The work was almost 196 00:11:05,280 --> 00:11:07,720 Speaker 2: canceled a couple of times. It was kind of it 197 00:11:07,760 --> 00:11:11,280 Speaker 2: was national news. There were protesters everywhere. Protesters tried to 198 00:11:11,280 --> 00:11:13,880 Speaker 2: buy out the tickets for the event so that they 199 00:11:13,880 --> 00:11:17,440 Speaker 2: could cancel it. It was a pretty remarkable and pretty 200 00:11:17,559 --> 00:11:20,439 Speaker 2: confronting show. I still have the blood on my vans 201 00:11:20,480 --> 00:11:22,200 Speaker 2: to prove I was there. I keep them in a 202 00:11:22,240 --> 00:11:25,960 Speaker 2: special special glass. 203 00:11:27,120 --> 00:11:29,719 Speaker 1: The GDP contribute a bit, so. 204 00:11:29,679 --> 00:11:32,600 Speaker 2: I think the broader idea of that piece was about 205 00:11:32,880 --> 00:11:36,600 Speaker 2: life and death. It's a pretty intense way to represent it, 206 00:11:36,640 --> 00:11:38,640 Speaker 2: for sure, you know, but I think it was really 207 00:11:38,640 --> 00:11:42,240 Speaker 2: important work for Tasmania to show, and it also backed 208 00:11:42,360 --> 00:11:45,760 Speaker 2: the philosophy of the museum of old and new art, 209 00:11:46,120 --> 00:11:51,480 Speaker 2: which was to show art at all costs, to confront 210 00:11:51,520 --> 00:11:55,240 Speaker 2: people with something perhaps that might challenge them or might 211 00:11:56,000 --> 00:12:02,520 Speaker 2: challenge the prevailing political orthodoxies of the day. 212 00:12:02,559 --> 00:12:06,240 Speaker 1: Coming up? Is there a double standard in anything goes 213 00:12:06,320 --> 00:12:23,920 Speaker 1: world of contemporary art? At any time in society, Going 214 00:12:23,960 --> 00:12:27,760 Speaker 1: back to the Bible, there are shibaliths that can't be challenged. 215 00:12:28,040 --> 00:12:29,559 Speaker 1: In the past, those might have been things that we 216 00:12:29,559 --> 00:12:33,480 Speaker 1: would today consider uncontroversial, like the idea that women should 217 00:12:33,480 --> 00:12:37,640 Speaker 1: have jobs or that children have rights. Now the shiboliths 218 00:12:37,679 --> 00:12:40,280 Speaker 1: are probably related to the conflict in the Middle East, 219 00:12:40,920 --> 00:12:45,520 Speaker 1: maybe to the status of trans people, maybe indigenous people. 220 00:12:46,800 --> 00:12:49,120 Speaker 1: In your piece in The Australian Today, you write about 221 00:12:49,120 --> 00:12:51,960 Speaker 1: a moment when even David Walsh, the kind of you know, 222 00:12:52,679 --> 00:12:55,720 Speaker 1: controversialist in chief at Mona in Tasmania, kind of had 223 00:12:55,760 --> 00:12:59,160 Speaker 1: to back down and apologize. Was that disappointing to you 224 00:12:59,240 --> 00:13:01,240 Speaker 1: and can you tell us a bit about what happened there? 225 00:13:02,240 --> 00:13:05,960 Speaker 2: So in twenty nineteen, Santiago Sierra, a Spanish artist, proposed 226 00:13:05,960 --> 00:13:08,600 Speaker 2: the work that was going to be the headline work 227 00:13:08,640 --> 00:13:12,880 Speaker 2: at Dark Mofo, the midwinter festival. That work was called 228 00:13:12,960 --> 00:13:16,040 Speaker 2: Union Flag and the idea behind The work was that 229 00:13:16,880 --> 00:13:21,040 Speaker 2: Indigenous Tasmanians might donate their blood, which would be pulled 230 00:13:21,040 --> 00:13:25,360 Speaker 2: into a bucket into which the Union flag, a symbol 231 00:13:25,360 --> 00:13:32,319 Speaker 2: of colonialism, would be submerged. There was an immediate outrage 232 00:13:32,600 --> 00:13:36,480 Speaker 2: from Indigenous people, who broadly had not been canvassed about 233 00:13:36,480 --> 00:13:37,000 Speaker 2: this work. 234 00:13:37,760 --> 00:13:41,640 Speaker 1: Aboriginal people have spilt way too much blood over the 235 00:13:41,679 --> 00:13:44,080 Speaker 1: past two hundred years. We don't feel like we need 236 00:13:44,080 --> 00:13:44,680 Speaker 1: to bleed in. 237 00:13:46,320 --> 00:13:48,720 Speaker 2: There were calls for the work to be canceled within 238 00:13:48,880 --> 00:13:52,520 Speaker 2: days of our story coming out in the paper. David 239 00:13:52,520 --> 00:13:55,719 Speaker 2: Walsh and then Dark Mofo director Lee Carmichael refused to 240 00:13:55,760 --> 00:14:00,880 Speaker 2: blink because Mona, as part of its philosophy, is kind 241 00:14:00,880 --> 00:14:03,880 Speaker 2: of give zero f's organization. I mean, that's what it does. 242 00:14:03,960 --> 00:14:06,760 Speaker 2: It's the Sex and Death Museum that shows the artworks 243 00:14:06,760 --> 00:14:08,800 Speaker 2: that are too edgy for anyone else in the major 244 00:14:08,960 --> 00:14:13,200 Speaker 2: state funded galleries or national funded galleries to show. So 245 00:14:13,240 --> 00:14:15,960 Speaker 2: it was a real moment for them, a philosophical fork 246 00:14:15,960 --> 00:14:16,400 Speaker 2: in the road. 247 00:14:17,160 --> 00:14:20,720 Speaker 1: Yeah, where they weren't just challenging the sort of pedestrian 248 00:14:21,040 --> 00:14:25,360 Speaker 1: shibaliths of the mob, but the things that be degenerate, 249 00:14:25,400 --> 00:14:26,760 Speaker 1: elite hold sacred right. 250 00:14:26,960 --> 00:14:32,120 Speaker 2: That's true, but Eventually they were forced to concede they 251 00:14:32,120 --> 00:14:36,080 Speaker 2: had made a mistake and that they hadn't consulted enough 252 00:14:36,120 --> 00:14:39,760 Speaker 2: with Indigenous Australia, and the work itself was almost canceled, 253 00:14:40,040 --> 00:14:45,800 Speaker 2: the festival to almost suffered that fate. However, in waiving 254 00:14:45,840 --> 00:14:51,080 Speaker 2: that white flag, rightly or wrongly, Mona really shifted to 255 00:14:51,160 --> 00:14:54,680 Speaker 2: that place. It has always rebelled against the middle, the 256 00:14:54,720 --> 00:14:58,720 Speaker 2: place where the state funded and national funded galleries live. 257 00:14:59,120 --> 00:15:01,520 Speaker 2: And so I think it's been a real moment for Mona, 258 00:15:01,560 --> 00:15:04,960 Speaker 2: and I think for art in Australia, where we realize 259 00:15:05,000 --> 00:15:08,520 Speaker 2: there is a line and you cross it at your peril. 260 00:15:09,560 --> 00:15:11,360 Speaker 1: I find it a little bit disappointing and then sort 261 00:15:11,360 --> 00:15:14,000 Speaker 1: of a little bit hypocritical, probably that you know, it's 262 00:15:14,040 --> 00:15:18,560 Speaker 1: okay to go poking finite suburban life for heterosexual marriage, 263 00:15:18,720 --> 00:15:22,360 Speaker 1: or Christians would say at Christianity, but you can't make 264 00:15:22,360 --> 00:15:27,200 Speaker 1: fun of things that are in the present moment untouchable. 265 00:15:27,920 --> 00:15:31,960 Speaker 2: Those touchstones have moved, those sacred cows have shifted, you know. 266 00:15:31,960 --> 00:15:34,160 Speaker 2: In our piece on the Weekend, we have Chris Fallen 267 00:15:34,280 --> 00:15:38,520 Speaker 2: and the other great critic, John McDonald basically saying, if 268 00:15:38,560 --> 00:15:42,920 Speaker 2: you say anything disparaging about the artwork of say women 269 00:15:43,120 --> 00:15:47,320 Speaker 2: or trans people or Indigenous people, you're canceled. And so 270 00:15:47,960 --> 00:15:50,760 Speaker 2: it seems like we've crossed another rubicon in terms of 271 00:15:50,760 --> 00:15:53,880 Speaker 2: criticism or how we perceive works, or how people are 272 00:15:55,160 --> 00:15:58,600 Speaker 2: allowed to interact with work or to have opinions on them. 273 00:15:58,640 --> 00:16:01,560 Speaker 2: And so I think it's a really time for criticism 274 00:16:01,640 --> 00:16:05,000 Speaker 2: in Australia too, in terms of what we can say. 275 00:16:11,360 --> 00:16:15,360 Speaker 1: Jim Douglas is The Australian's chief culture correspondent. You can 276 00:16:15,360 --> 00:16:17,560 Speaker 1: read his feature on the state of contemporary art in 277 00:16:17,600 --> 00:16:20,840 Speaker 1: the newly launched Culture section of The Australian, in print 278 00:16:20,880 --> 00:16:24,000 Speaker 1: in today's weekend edition of the paper, or online at 279 00:16:24,040 --> 00:16:28,560 Speaker 1: the Australian dot com dot au slash culture. This episode 280 00:16:28,600 --> 00:16:30,920 Speaker 1: of The Front was hosted by me Claire Harvey and 281 00:16:31,040 --> 00:16:34,000 Speaker 1: produced by Jasper League. Thanks for joining us on the 282 00:16:34,000 --> 00:16:37,560 Speaker 1: Front this week. Our team also includes Kristin amiot Leat, 283 00:16:37,560 --> 00:16:41,040 Speaker 1: Sam mcgluw, Tiffany Dimack, Josh Burton and Stephanie Coombs.