I recently noted that the winner of Eurovision this year was as expected – a vote from the heart, a sympathy vote, a vote of support for that beleaguered nation. The Ukrainian act was a deserving performance, as recognised by the fact that the official judging panel placed them in the top six acts of 25 finalists, but the public vote of sympathy took the performance well out of the reach of any of the other acts, including the clear initial leader [the United Kingdom].
There’s another art form where similarly, I sometimes feel, that public sentiment or the need to satisfy it and the political correctness of the day rides over some of more deserving contributions from a purely artistic point of view. I don’t claim any expertise, and obviously different opinions exist to all manner of awards. In this instance, I’m speaking about the highly recognised Archibald Prize, Australia’s premier portrait painting award. which celebrated 100 years recently. This may not interest anyone out there, but I’ll continue anyway.
Writing in the Weekend Australian on the 14th May, that paper’s national art critic, Christopher Allen, expressed some very strong views [some might suggest, harsh views] about this year’s Archibald Prize, awarded last week.
The winner was artist Blak Douglas with his portrait of his friend, Lismore-based artist Karla Dickens, standing in muddy flood water and holding two leaking buckets.
I imagine other critics may have a completely different view, to what follows, but I found it interesting and something worth sharing. The article is headed ‘Political gesture’ the art of cruelty’.
So, in reflecting on this year’s Award, Allen wrote:
“What can one say to the trustees of the Art Gallery of NSW? Stop it or you’ll go blind?
The intensity of the ideological self-indulgence would be amusing if it weren’t also so sad.
But alas, they couldn’t bring themselves to award the Archibald Prize to the best picture when there was the irresistible temptation of a work by a black artist whose subject was a black woman. As a bonus, they got a reference to the Lismore floods.
Progressive signalling and compassion all at once!
In the process, they have gratuitously insulted Robert Hannaford yet again. His self-portrait is clearly the outstanding work in this year’s exhibition, far better than the winner on any set of criteria: it demonstrates much greater mastery of the technical art of painting, but also and more importantly it is superior in character, sense of inner life and humanity.
I have been in touch with many professional artists over the past week and the quality of Hannaford’s painting was obvious to all of them.
To overlook Hannaford again feels pointed, like a deliberate act of cruelty as well as stupidity. But it seems the trustees couldn’t bear to select an artist who happened to be male and white. It is as though, in some perverse logic, Hannaford had to be made to pay for all the imagined wickedness of humans who fall into those two categories.
He becomes a scapegoat immolated by rich and privileged people to make a show of dubious contrition for their own privilege.
But beyond the personal insult to a distinguished artist who has too often been overlooked in favour of third-rate pictures, the trustees have made it clear they have no interest in supporting good art; they are only concerned to make vacuous political gestures, in the process once more rewarding the most over-rewarded categories of artists in Australia today.
The result is a travesty, and it is further evidence to support my suggestion that the Archibald be transferred to more competent judges. It should be selected and judged by a panel – however constituted – of professional portrait painters, the kind that people actually commission when they want a good portrait.
These painters could be counted on to choose both the finalists and the eventual winner on more solid criteria than rich would-be progressives whitewashing their wealth with smug ideological choices”.
Strong words indeed, and no doubt, someone will take offence and want to accuse Allen of racial vilification or something similar, in this modern world, where a word out of place, or a slightly different opinion, or hint of criticism, is so often attacked as coming from some racially based or other motive. Sometimes, a political gesture’ needs to be called out too!! We’ve had plenty of those over recent months!
Following – the winner, and the Robert Hannaford self portrait
Readers can form their own opinion as to which of these portraits is the more deserving!
Site Title 
Leave a comment