Much as I’d love to riff on the Harris-Trump debate, which made for rivetting TV entertainment this week, I have some big personal news. After more than 40 years the Sydney Morning Herald has decided to dispense with my services. I can’t say I’m surprised, as I’ve felt out-of-step with the direction the paper has been taking over the past 2-3 years, and have not been afraid to vent my frustration in this newsletter. If I’m thought to be reckless, the truth is: I could have said a whole lot more.
There wasn’t a farewell party merely a brief, curt note from Editor, Bevan Shields (app. January 2022), who told me the SMH is “pursuing new digital strategies”, which doesn’t really explain anything. Bevan Shields’s personal touch was to say that I had been “disrespectful and unprofessional”, which is a bit much coming from someone who never spoke with me about any issue, never me sent an email or a text (although he replied to one), and didn’t show up for the only lunch date we ever scheduled, when I was already in place. As the SMH made a habit of mutilating and censoring my columns without informing or consulting me – although they left my name on them – I’m not quite sure how they define “disrespectful and unprofessional”. Until 2022, as a columnist, I’d never experienced such sustained and consistent disrespect.
Indeed, when the SMH brought in a new pay wall this year, I lost my online access to the paper. Despite repeated requests it was never restored, meaning I would have to pay to read my own articles.
Art criticism may be a dying profession, but if I was slightly surprised by my abrupt cancellation it’s because the past two columns, on Hiroshi Sugimoto at the MCA, and Lesley Dumbrell at the Art Gallery of NSW, were greeted with the instant replies: “Fantastic piece” and “Great piece”. This doesn’t suggest there was any serious problem with the quality of the work.
I’ve always believed I’m writing for a large interested audience, and receive a lot of feedback from readers both at home and abroad. There have been numerous invitations to review shows and art events in different parts of the world, which I’ve enjoyed doing – partly because it has allowed me to gain a global perspective on how Australian art fits into the bigger picture. Readers have told me they appreciated reading about these things from an Australian perspective. It’s also allowed me to build up a network of contacts in many different places that I doubt can be matched by any other Australian art writer.
The SMH, as you may have noticed, has a lot to say about “independent journalism”, but doesn’t seem to be very fond of the genuine article. When it comes to the arts, I have pushed story after story, issue after issue, with almost no result. Under Bevan Shields’s inspired leadership the SMH has ignored or fudged stories about the Powerhouse Museum – which will end up costing the NSW taxpayer more than $2 billion for a negative result; and the APY Artists Collective, where they preferred to leave the investigative stuff to The Australian. There are many questions that could be asked of Australia’s art museums, but the editor liked to publish “supportive” pieces. Frankly, this supine approach is silly and counterproductive. I’ve written both praise and criticism of the art museums as the occasion demanded – for decades – and maintained excellent relations. If a newspaper allows any institution to believe they will always get glowing reviews and reports, it’s a virtual invitation to behave badly.
As for the general direction of the SMH, well there’s an endless stream of ‘pop culture’, while ‘critics’ are not supposed to be critical. Alas, to borrow the line Bob Hughes borrowed from the Bard, for a book of essays, I’m nothing if not critical.
Anyway, without dragging it out, a newish Editor who apparently doesn’t know his arse from his elbow when it comes to the visual arts and its institutions, has chosen to end an association that goes back to 1983, with one small letter. Do I feel sad about this? Yes, but also relieved not to keep wondering what will be expunged from the column, week after week. I’ve tried to do my job without fear or favour, taking on the issues the SMH either refused to touch, or embraced with soft propaganda. If I’ve been penalised for this I’m leaving with my integrity intact, and a determination to keep writing about topics that require some straight talking. If we believe that everything and everyone in the art world is so nice we have to support their every deed, it opens the door to nepotism, corruption, laziness and incompetence on a grand scale. It’s a recipe for mediocrity, and that, I’m afraid, is where the SMH arts coverage is going. I’ve always thought – unfashionably, perhaps fatally – that it’s the role of the media to hold individuals and organisations accountable for deeds that run counter to the public interest.
As for the SMH’s “new digital strategies”, I hope they can see a way to integrate digital and print more successfully, as it has often seemed as if the left hand has nothing to do with the right hand. This has led to the unbelievably stupid headlines the SMH give their on-line articles, and an obsession with the number of clicks an article receives. It should be obvious to everyone that short, trashy, sensational stories will always get more clicks than a lengthy, thoughtful piece. Does this mean trash is better? Smart papers use digital as a way of channelling readers towards print, not replacing print altogether. The cult of clickability seems to lead, inevitably, to the dumbing down and tabloidisation of the so-called ‘quality’ press.
The AFR film column is unaffected by my SMH news. The only thing I’m posting this week is, ironically enough, a visual arts bio-pic on Pierre Bonnard, or rather Marthe and Pierre Bonnard. It would be almost impossible to make a movie about Bonnard that didn’t pay close attention to his mysterious wife and muse, but in this feature she gets equal billing. It’s not easy to make a good film about an artist’s life, but Martin Provost has managed to put together a convincing portrait, with only a few hiccups.
BTW. If you are in any way displeased with the SMH’s actions, and wondering what this means for their visual arts coverage, you may wish to say a few words to:
Bevan Shields, Editor, SMH
Bevan.shields@smh.com.au
Melanie Kembrey, Spectrum editor
Luke McIlveen, Executive Editor, SMH
luke.mcilveen@nine.com.au
Tory Maguire, Managing Director, Publishing, NINE Media
tory.maguire@nine.com.au
Or the Board of NINE Media
https://www.nineforbrands.com.au/about/
Mailing address for all the above:
1 Denison Street, North Sydney, NSW, 2060
PO Box: Locked Bag 999, North Sydney, NSW 2059
T +61 2 9906 9999