Big news this week is the handing down of the Review of the APY Art Centre Collective, commissioned by the government of South Australia, with the support of the Northern Territory and Federal governments. Many were sceptical that the three-person panel, with minimal experience of the visual arts, would produce the goods. The results, however, are dramatic.
Unlike the ‘independent’ review commissioned by the National Gallery of Australia, which was narrowly focused on the works to be included in the abortive Ngura Pulka exhibition, the second review has been sweeping in its scope. More than 200 people were interviewed and a broad range of issues investigated, from interference with supposed autograph paintings, to APYACC business practices, to the nature of the working environment, to the authenticity of documents submitted for grant applications.
There were nine areas of concern, and even though the substance of the report has yet to be made public, the NT Minister for the Arts, Chansey Paech, has confirmed that the panel found evidence of wrongdoing in every single one of these categories.
The panel has referred their findings to the Office of the Registrar of Indigenous Corporations (ORIC) and the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC). Although the panel has no legal standing, both these bodies have the power to initiate legal proceedings.
One might think this would be enough to make everyone accept there was a great deal of substance to the stories in The Australian that started the controversy. Instead, the media reponse has been astounding in its wilful wrongheadedness. Both the ABC, and most concerningly, my own newspaper, the Sydney Morning Herald/The Age, have published seriously lopsided pieces. The Guardian has been weirdly silent.
The idea seems to be that if a story is broken by the wicked Murdoch Press, one is duty-bound to take the opposite side. This is not simply bad, knee-jerk journalism, it’s an insult to the integrity of writers such as Greg Bearup and Rosemary Neill, who have reported the facts. No matter how much one might dislike the Oz’s editorial line, this doesn’t mean every story must be tainted with right-wing bias. It’s just not true, and an extensive behind-the-scenes smear campaign against Bearup has not convinced anyone who actually knows him that he’s anything but a straight-shooter.
Although the Oz was obviously ready to take a victory lap when the review came in, it’s stated that they tried to talk to APYACC board members, Sally Scales and Sandra Pumana and manager, Skye O’Meara, but were snubbed.
On the other hand, Skye and Sally were willing to speak at length to the ABC, and to the Herald’s Gabriella Coslovich, about how unfair and “traumatic” this has been for them and the poor artists. The review will only “extend the suffering”, Skye told the ABC. “It has been taxing and traumatic justifying your integrity, justifying your artistic practice.”
In the same article, Sally Scales invoked the spectre of the elders, who “worked so hard” for her. She said she was “disappointed the review did not resolve the allegations against the collective” – ie. disappointed it didn’t let them off the hook.
Finally, we had a rousing shot of ‘whataboutism’, when the ladies complained the whole problem with the Aboriginal arts industry wasn’t the APYACC, it was those terrible “carpetbaggers”. Don’t look here, look over there!
I had a first-hand taste of this tactic a few months ago, when the charming Skye launched a verbal assault on me at the Frida Kahlo opening at the Art Gallery of SA. If I didn’t shut my trap, she was going to tell the world about my cosy relationship with “carpetbagger” John Ioannou, about whom I wrote a couple of articles some 15 years ago. Ioannou was speaking out about the deficiencies of the art centre system, and those questions deserved to be asked. If he has blotted his copybook since, I haven’t been on hand to observe or record it.
For Skye, characters like Ioannou and a host of others, whom I won’t name, are the cartoon villains who need to be blamed and pursued, while she is admired for her business acumen. But what is the APYACC anyway, but a very refined form of carpetbagging that bypasses the art centres and poses as a deeply humane enterprise? We’ll see how humane it is when the contents of the latest review are made public. Forget the sentimental stuff and follow the money, would be my advice.
And so we come to Gabi Coslovich’s sad story in the SMH, which again quotes Sally and Skye at length. The latter complaining about the “constant examinations” to which the group has been subjected. The former invokes those long-suffering elders again, then asks: “How many times do we have to justify our successes… Do people think we’re dumb Blacks from the bush?”
The answer, Sal, is “No”. We don’t think you’re a dumb Black from the bush, but a smart cookie from Adelaide. We also take note of your meteoric career, which has seen you go from the status of non-artist to major artist in the space of 2-3 years and won you a place on the Board of Trustees of the NGA – by any standards, a superhuman achievement! However, wouldn’t it be better for everyone if you stepped aside from NGA involvements while these allegations are pending? And wouldn’t it have been better if Skye had stepped down while investigations were under way? This is surely the correct procedure, even for those who are as innocent as newborn babes.
We also note how you have completely changed your story, from denying categorically that any white assistants had touched the works, to suddenly saying it’s perfectly fine for the assistants to work on your pictures, and that it’s racist to see anything wrong with that. Fortunately, the interviewers from the ABC and the SMH, who told us about your trauma, didn’t seem to notice these contradictions. Feeling confident that the ABC was on-side, you then ventured into a Radio National interview with Sally Sara (another real live journo), for which the expression “train wreck” springs to mind.
There were no such worries with Gabi Coslovich, who quoted the Review panel’s quite proper disclaimer, in a letter to the APYACC, that it was not their job to declare innocence or guilt but to refer their findings to other bodies.. In the story this seems to portray the panel as inherently sympathetic, making their referrals only out of a sorrowful sense of duty. An act of politeness is spun into an implicit statement of support.
This is perfectly consistent with the APYACC puff piece Coslovich wrote for The Good Weekend in September, after having been flown in to sing the group’s praises. Yaritji Young was wheeled out in that article to refute the Oz’s nasty charges, and lo and behold, here she is again in a video on the SMH website, assuring us her paintings are all her own work, so why don’t we just leave these folks alone?
You may recall that only last year Coslovich was responsible for a frontal attack in the Australian Financial Review on Michael Blanche’s gift of Rover Thomas’s largest painting to the National Museum of Australia. She produced a number of “experts” to throw its authenticity into doubt, although none of them appear to have laid eyes on the actual work! In the meantime, the NMA produced photos of Rover with the painting and testimony from people who were present when it was produced. This did not deter our intrepid Nancy Drew, who doubled down and demanded the NMA go through a long and costly FOI process. They complied, and once again proved their case. The article in which she reported the NMA’s findings read like a series of further accusations rather than an apology.
Not for a minute would I imply there was some direct bias in these stories, but I do wish Nancy would pay a little more attention to detail, and perhaps be slightly more sceptical with her sources. As it is, her articles have committed NINE media to a particular version of the APYACC story that may prove difficult to sustain if ORIC or the ACCC choose to commence legal proceedings.
To my mind, the entire saga is starting to look like a parable for the state of journalism in Australia today. When Greg Bearup has the courage to pursue a topic that was widely discussed but universally avoided, he is ganged up on by other media that have zero evidence to offer, only the self-justifying statements of the accused, who have given them an “exclusive” – or at least, an interview they won’t be giving to the Oz or to anyone who asks difficult questions. Why is this happening? Do the other journos just hate the Oz? Do they believe they are helping and supporting Aboriginal people, even though the most vehement critics of the APYACC have been other Aboriginal art communities? Do they believe that figures such as Brenda Croft and Djon Mundine, who have spoken out against the group are mere pawns of the Murdoch press? Maybe they just prefer to write propaganda – it’s much easier than thinking critically.
Enough trouble for one week. I’m happy to say that the art column looks at work from an impeccably run art community, namely Yirrkala, in the Gulf of Carpentaria. The show, Miwatj Yolngu: Sunrise People, at Bundanon, brings the best of Arnhem Land to the Shoalhaven. The highlight is an incredible selection of paintings by the senior Yolngu women, supplemented with metal engravings and audio-visual pieces. I don’t think I have any new insights into this work, but it’s as good as anything you’ll see in contemporary Australian art.
I wish I could say something up-tempo about this week’s film. Paul King’s Wonka set my teeth on edge, and made me finally admit to Timothée Chalamet fatigue. I know a lot of people have loved this cheery confection, but when has that ever been a decisive argument in favour of quality?
Finally, I’m including a piece from the AFR, on the Scandinavian duo, Elmgreen & Dragset, who feature in this year’s NGV Trennial. I met the artists in their stupendous Berlin studio earlier this year, and am finally getting around to running the story. There’ll hopefully be other profiles during the Triennial. There’ll be a lot more to come with the APYACC story as well, but you may have to start with the court reports.