Museums Galleries Australia Magazine Vol 27(1) Summer 2018

vol 27 (1) summer 2018 $15.00

Museums Galleries Australia

Finding creative solution to insurance risks Finding aa creative solution to your your insurance risks isn’t always Finding a creative solution to your insurance risksisn’t isn’talways always easy.

Arthur J. Gallagher works in conjunction with Museums easy. Arthur J. Gallagher works easy. Arthur J. Gallagher worksin inconjunction conjunction with with Museums Museums Galleries Australia to ensure weensure havewe a we detailed Galleries Australia to toensure have a a detailed Galleries Australia haveunderstanding detailed of yourunderstanding risk exposures. of your exposures. understanding of your risk risk exposures.

SimplySimply having insurance isn’t enough totoprotect your business. insurance enough protect yourbusiness. business.

Simply havinghaving insurance isn’tisn’t enough to protect your Our experienced brokers can provide the technical expertise expertise Our experienced brokers can provide the technical Our experienced brokers can provide the technical expertise toto to deliver youyou thethe right risk management program, along with deliver right risk management program, along with the deliver you the right risk to management program, along with the the insurance protectwhat what you’ve collected. insurancesolutions, solutions, to protect you’ve collected.

insurance solutions, to protect what you’ve collected.

To find out how Arthur J. Gallagher can help protect your To find out how Arthur J. Gallagher can help protect your collection, us today.

To findcollection, outcontact how Arthur Gallagher can help protect your contact us J. today.

collection, contact us today.

02 6283 65556555 02 6283

canberra@ajg.com.au 02 6283 6555

canberra@ajg.com.au

canberra@ajg.com.au In partnership with: In partnership with:

In partnership with:

BILYA KOORT BOODJA | CENTRE FOR NYOONGAR CULTURE AND ENVIRONMENTAL KNOWLEDGE - INTERPRETIVE DESIGN - GRAPHIC DESIGN - OBJECT INSTALLATION

COOK AND THE PACIFIC | NATIONAL LIBRARY OF AUSTRALIA - INTEPRETIVE DESIGN - GRAPHIC IDENTITY AND DESIGN - FABRICATION AND INSTALLATION

thylacine CANBERRA P +61 2 6299 7340 E canb@thylacine.com.au

P E

MELBOURNE +61 3 9427 9779 melb@thylacine.com.au

thylacine.com.au

Printers of premium books and merchandise to galleries, libraries and museums.

P: + 61 3 9545 6900 E: carolyn@bookconn.com.au www.bookconn.com.au

Nicholson Museum, University of Sydney ‘Death Magic’ Exhibition Designcase supplied a series of proprietary Vision, Prism, top‐hinged Prism and powered vertical rise Prism showcases, along with custom‐made showcases, plinths and exhibition furniture. Designcase is an award winning company with extensive expertise in high quality Museum and Gallery fit out projects. We are the Australian and New Zealand distributor for ClickNetherfield showcases and hold the only manufacturing licence for ClickNetherfield outside of Scotland. Designcase are also the sole, local manufacturer of Museum Grade, certified showcases in Australia and New Zealand.

Photography by Katherine Lu, courtesy of Sydney University Museums.

designcase Designcase is the showcase and exhibitions delivery arm of designcraft, supplying Museum Grade proprietary showcases, tertiary fitouts and exhibition furniture to the Museums and Gallery sector.

We offer a dedicated and extensive fabrication service, and a large range of Tertiary fitout and complimentary products.

We welcome the opportunity to discuss our company and products with you.

Contact designcase: 8 Tralee Street Hume Canberra ACT 2620 +61 2 6290 4900

designcase.info@designcase.net.au

www.designcase.net.au

Designcase are proud to be the sole distributor and manufacturer of ClickNetherfield showcases in Australia.

INFRARED SAFETY FEATURES

SPECIMEN STORAGE SOLUTIONS

DOUBLE STORY MOBILE SOLUTIONS TO MAXIMISE FLOOR SPACE

FINE ART RACKING SOLUTIONS

SECURE AND PRESERVE YOUR MOST PRECIOUS ITEMS UNIQUE ENGINEERED STORAGE SOLUTIONS THAT MAXIMISE SPACE WHILST PROVIDING THE ULTIMATE CARE

BRUCE DEWAR - STORAGE SPECIALIST 0419 940 585

BRUCE@CASTLEDEX.COM.AU

CASTLEDEX.COM.AU

ELECTRONICALLY CONTROLLED

ADVERTISE A JOB Does your museum or gallery have a position vacant?

Advertise your job with us to directly connect with qualified job seekers nationwide.

Members receive a discount - just enter MGAMEMBER in the checkout.

We have one of the best Australian job listings for anyone looking for work in the sector. www.museumsaustralia.org.au/positions-vacant

The Software to manage Your MOSAiC Of Heritage For more information contact Sally-Anne Tel: 08 9537 2874 E: Sales@ISTechnology.com.au

Search your collection on the web with ‌.

IST

Information Services & Technology

www.ISTechnology.com.au

Museums Australasia Multimedia and Publication Design Awards 2019

Celebrating the most original and beautiful productions by Australian and New Zealand cultural institutions TA R R ER

RS

AFT

T

S

HI

Open to members and non-members in Australia and New Zealand.

Call for Entries opens 1 February 2019

www.mapda.org.au

Members only Free to enter Online entry

CALL FOR ENTRIES OPENS 13 FEBRUARY 2019 WWW.MUSEUMSAUSTRALIA.ORG.AU

THE TECHNOLOGY TO TRANSLATE YOUR VISION IN ITS PUREST FORM. Creativity has few limits, your technology should be the same.

At Panasonic, innovation has the power to make technology invisible.

Be free to think about the image, not the equipment. To concentrate on the big idea, knowing that the small details are taken care of.

Alice Springs / Mparntwe, Northern Territory

Join us at the very heart of the nation in Alice Springs / Mparntwe for the

2019 MUSEUMS GALLERIES AUSTRALIA NATIONAL CONFERENCE Combining elements of our most recent conferences that focused on Museums and Galleries in their Cultural Landscapes (Brisbane 2017) and Museums and Galleries as Agents of Change (Melbourne 2018), in 2019 we travel to the geographical centre of the nation to tackle some of the biggest thematic areas that occupy much of our national conversation. Museums and Galleries are situated at the very centre of that conversation in relation to our place within our communities and the way we are deeply implicated in both a local and national understanding of Australia’s past, present and shared future.

And while focusing on our people, places and practices, there will be opportunity to consider purpose, relevance, diversity, equality, national identity, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander agency, our various publics and the nature of co-creation, generational transfer of knowledge and much more. Delegates will also be able to explore the majesty and wonder of the Central Australian landscape (with cultural tours and opportunities for day/weekend trips to Uluru, Kata Tjuta and other incredible places) and the people, communities, museums and galleries that call the desert home. Plan to stay a few extra days to enjoy all that’s on offer in the NT! As a very special bonus, delegates will experience the vitality of Contemporary Aboriginal Desert Art. A four-hour Desert Mob Art Fair on the closing afternoon of the conference will see hundreds of Aboriginal artists and artworkers making their way to Alice Springs from remote Aboriginal communities and art centres across the NT, SA and WA with thousands of artworks for sale and the opportunity to become immersed in not only the art but also among the artists who share their culture through their art to keep their communities strong.

• For sponsorship and exhibition opportunities email: mga@conlog.com.au • Registrations now open. Early bird registrations close 15 February 2019 • To stay updated, express your interest online at www.mga2019.org.au

10 Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018

Contents

In this issue President's Message. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Museums Galleries Australia National Council 2017—2019 president

From the National Director . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Council of Australian Art Museum Directors: A current overview. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Dr Robin Hirst PSM (Director, Hirst Projects, Melbourne)

vice-president

Simon Elliott

(Deputy Director, Queensland Art Gallery | Gallery of Modern Art, Brisbane)

treasurer

Council of Australasian Museum Directors: A snapshot of CAMD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Margaret Lovell (Contract Project Manager Canberra)

secretary

Approaches to fundraising . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Conserving collections: ‘finding joy in detail’. . . . 20 Reconsidering Australia’s history — The National Picture: The art of Tasmania's Black War . . . . . . . . 24 Australian art in exhibitions: A new monograph and national review of six decades . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Botanical art in Australian museums: Revival and relevance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

Carol Cartwright ([retired] Head, Education & Visitor Services, Australian War Memorial, Canberra)

members

Paul Bowers (Director, Exhibitions & Collections, Australian Centre for the Moving Image, Melbourne) Dr Mark Crees (Director, Araluen Cultural Precinct, Alice Springs) Suzanne Davies ([retired] Director, RMIT Gallery, Melbourne) Dr Lynda Kelly (LyndaKellyNetworks, NSW) Craig Middleton (Curator, Centre of Democracy - History Trust of South Australia, Adelaide)

The Holocaust and Human Rights: An inclusive critical field for museums. . . . . . . . . . 42

Debbie Sommers (Volunteer, Port Macquarie Historical Society, Port Macquarie) ex officio member

SAM, the new … new ‘hot’: Ceramics and the Shepparton Art Museum. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

Alec Coles OBE Chair, ICOM Australia; CEO, Western Australian Museum public officer

We the people: Collecting contemporary political history . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 Documenting Australian Society — UNESCO Australian Memory of the World summit. . . . . . . . 58 Pacific archivists’ guideline on Significance Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62

Rebecca Coronel, National Film and Sound Archive, Canberra state/territory branch presidents/ representatives (subject to change throughout year)

ACT Rowan Henderson (Senior Curator, Canberra Museum and Gallery, Canberra) NSW Rebecca Pinchin (Collection Manager, National Trust of Australia NSW) NT Ilka Schacht (Curatorial Manager, Museum and Art Gallery of the Northern Territory, Darwin)

QLD Emma Bain (Director (Exhibitions & Programs), Redland Art Gallery, Cleveland) SA Pauline Cockrill (Community History Officer, History Trust SA, Adelaide)

PO Box 24, Deakin West ACT 2600 Editorial: (02) 6230 0346 Advertising: 02) 6230 0346 Subscriptions: (02) 6230 0346 editor@museumsaustralia.org.au www.museumsaustralia.org.au Editor: Bernice L. Murphy Cover design: Selena Kearney Content layout: Stephanie Hamilton Printer: Adams Print, Melbourne

© Museums Galleries Australia and individual authors.

No part of this magazine may be reproduced in any form without written permission from the publisher.

Museums Galleries Australia Magazine is published biannually (from Volume 25 onwards) and online on the national website, and is a major link with members and the museums sector. Museums Galleries Australia Magazine is a forum for news, opinion and debate on museum issues.

Contributions from those involved or interested in museums and galleries are welcome. Museums Galleries Australia Magazine reserves the right to edit, abridge, alter or reject any material. Views expressed by contributors are not necessarily those of the publisher or editor. Publication of an advertisement does not imply endorsement by Museums Galleries Australia, its affiliates or employees.

Museums Galleries Australia is proud to acknowledge the following supporters of the national organisation: Australian Government Department of Communications and the Arts; Australian Library and Information Association; Museum Victoria (Melbourne Museum); and Western Australian Museum.

Print Post Publication No: 100003705 ISSN 2207-1806

TAS Janet Carding (Director, Tasmanian Museum & Art Gallery, Hobart) VIC Lauren Ellis (Programs Manager, Museums Victoria, Melbourne) WA Soula Veyradier (Program & Communications Manager, International Art Space, Perth)

COVER IMAGE: Morgyn Phillips, Eucalyptus polyanthemos, Red Box, graphite and coloured pencil on paper, no.76, in the Flora of Australia exhibition presented by the Botanical Art Society of Australia, 2018.

Cover image slightly cropped and altered in small details, with permission of the artist.

Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018 11

President's Message

W above:

Dr Robin Hirst.

e are living in a perplexing and surprising world. A world where major political policy changes are announced in the 280 characters of a tweet. The half-life of a tweet is around two hours. In other words, half of those who will ever read the tweet will have done so in a couple of hours. In museums and galleries, we work to different time-frames. The halflife of a text panel in a long-term collection exhibition is measured in years.

The world of museums and galleries is complex in character: large to small, specialist to generalist, city to rural, paid staff and those who demonstrate their commitment through freely giving their time, experience and supportive expertise. How do we thrive in the changing political, technological and social environment of today? How do we secure our value as we strive to meet multiple objectives, including the wishes of those who fund us?

Our forthcoming National Conference in May 2019 signals the time each year when we can all come together as a rich and diverse sector: to share what we have in common as well as appreciate our differences, while always being stimulated by changing practices and new ideas. Each place where a conference is hosted lends a special character to the event. In 2019 we’ll gather on Arrernte Country. The theme for the conference, in Alice Springs (Mparntwe), is ‘At the Centre’. It is one that will assist us to engage with the lands, places and the people who lie at the physical centre of our nation. It is also a theme that offers us the opportunity to examine what is central to our museums, linking us all in shared aims and resources across our huge country.

Increasingly governments are viewing museums and galleries as important parts of the economy, attracting tourism. We are also seen as players in the creative industries. But this is not the sum total of the roles we play. Whilst our economic contribution should be celebrated, we must remember that our long-term influence and social impact are very significant.

We do so much more From the time of the founding of our earliest museums and galleries, we have contributed to the making, and the dynamism, of a civil society through research and education. We inform, inspire and challenge. In recent years we have learned to work more collaboratively with all the different communities who want to tell their particular stories.

We care for much of the collective memory of the nation — which includes inter-generational memories and intangible heritage as well as objects, knowledge and material things. We engage all our citizens, not only the well to do, well-off or highly educated. We

exist as much for those who struggle with life, in very local circumstances, whose worlds might have have collapsed or who are suffering from isolation and disconnection from others. We are about meaning, identity and connection.

We don’t fit into a single box In the 2017 Foreign Policy White Paper, the last of eight chapters is devoted to Australia’s ‘soft power’ — our nation’s ability to influence the behaviour or thinking of others through the power of attraction and ideas. The White Paper recognises that Australia’s excellence in science and research, education and culture underpin our international influence. It also acknowledges that Australia’s museums and galleries — national, state and regional — are forging important collaborative partnerships with institutions and organisations in other countries. While they involve exchange of knowledge, culture and ideas, these partnerships are seen as keys to protecting and promoting our national interest and reputation, to building influence and creating shared understanding in a range of very different countries and regions.

If we focus on commoditising our museums and galleries by viewing them foremost as part of an economic or ‘industry’ landscape, we risk undermining the ability of our institutions to shape national debates and influence others internationally.

While we all benefit from social media and rapid interchange, other deeply held values are vitally important to care for. Our Indigenous colleagues will always be a reminder of the enduring importance of people, communities and country at the heart of any nation.

In the age of headlines, tweets and often-unverified news, our continuing role as publicly trusted institutions becomes even more important. One of our greatest responsibilities is to champion nuanced conversations and foster an informed and discerning public; to engage all, including the less fortunate, with the collective wealth we have in our collections, our networks, our archives and above all, the riches offered daily by our talented and compassionate staff.

The National Conference theme ‘At the Centre’ guarantees a special opportunity and location for us all in May 2019: to discuss what is, and what could be at the heart of the work of our museums and galleries.

In a world where tweets rock the politics, what keeps us on course? What defines us and what do we stand for? Our cultural institutions are more, much more, than bricks and mortar. [ ] Dr Robin Hirst PSM National President, Museums Galleries Australia

12 Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018

From the National Director

L above:

Alex Marsden.

ooking back over another year of activity, challenges and accomplishments, I am heartened by the great character and generosity of this sector and our membership.

The response to the development of the 10-year Indigenous Roadmap is emblematic of the sector’s desire to be consulted, to contribute useful research data to projects undertaken, and to make systemic and individual commitments towards change. The completed Roadmap is currently in the hands of the graphic designers and will be launched very soon. We are anticipating funding support by the end of the year to engage a fulltime Indigenous Engagement Officer, to provide advice and guidance to museums, galleries and communities. The officer’s role will also be to co-ordinate consultation throughout 2019 on the recommended updates to MGA’s benchmarking Indigenous policy and guidelines document, Continuous Cultures, Ongoing Responsibilities (CCOR).

Nationally, GLAM Peak’s very successful program of regional workshops on digital access to collections finished in July, with an overwhelmingly positive reaction to the initiative, and very useful data to support our or any other organisation’s requests for further investment in digital access programs.

Co-presenter Lucinda Davison transitioned from working for the project to being employed part-time at the National Office, in response to the priority that members have placed on our delivering a larger range of skills-development opportunities via different channels.

I have foreshadowed that we would be piloting a national professional development program to be delivered online, and following our first national webinar, on ‘How to write a conference proposal’ (which was a timely one, given the concurrent call for Abstracts for MGA’s National Conference in 2019), we will roll out a national webinar program from next February. This will draw on some great work delivered by our different State/Territory branches, and collaborations with experts active in our National Networks.

This is another example of the generosity of our many volunteer committees and networks — and an illustration of the way the national organisation is aiming to deliver better support to the sector and colleagues across the country, which complements the activities of others providing services and also fills some gaps.

Throughout 2018, MGA has been an active advocate, making numerous presentations and submissions at both state and national levels. One submission, for example, was on modernising copyright (especially about providing better public access to the large numbers of orphan works that are held by smaller

museums and galleries); and another was on the value of Canberra’s national institutions. Both of these submissions are available on our national website.

And there are more submissions in the pipeline — on the Protection of Indigenous Knowledge in the Intellectual Property System; and a renewed National Arts and Disability Strategy.

Recently, I was interviewed about my response to the announcement that the Commonwealth government had committed to providing $500 million to the Australian War Memorial (AWM), for further building works and new galleries and programs.

While I would not argue to remove funding from a cultural institution, I did make and will continue to advocate the following points: • The additional funding for the AWM is a one-off, unrelated to any national cultural policy or investment framework. At a minimum, there is a desperate need for a master plan for the national cultural institutions that would provide long-term and complementary strategic directions, funding commitments, and increased certainty for longterm planning.

• I also pointed out the logical inconsistency that if government considers memories of war held by one institution as worth $0.5b of additional funding, then how could the necessity of strengthened funding be denied for other nationally significant stories, held in Australian institutions large and small, situated across the entire country.

• When asked what else of value could just a small proportion of such funding be invested in, I talked about access and support for arts, culture and heritage organisations and practitioners in the regions. For example, a longer-term investment in helping museums, galleries and historical societies to provide digital access to their collections could power a wave of creativity, new research, and innovation.

• Finally, I argued that if a worthy intent of the extra funding for the AWM was to help healing — then let’s fund all museums and galleries to deliver on the 10-year Indigenous Roadmap for change. A commitment like this would enable such mutual understanding, respect and healing — national reconciliation on a huge and lasting scale.

My thanks for all your support and generosity, and very best wishes for the season from all of us at MGA.[] Alex Marsden National Director, Museums Galleries Australia

Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018 13

On the Horizon: 2019 National Awards: open for entries in February, for both publication design and projects. Awards will be announced at the National Conference.

Visit the website for more information: www. museumsaustralia.org.au/awards National skills and professional development webinar program: February–November MGA Indigenous Policy & Guidelines update: consultation period opens March Museum Methods: February–September, staged publication of updates throughout the year National Council Meeting and Workshop: 12 May, Alice Springs (Mparntwe) MGA National Conference in Alice Springs (Mparntwe): 13–17 May 2019 Register for early bird now: www.mga2019.org.au MGA AGM and election of new National Council: May, at National Conference National Council Meeting and Workshop: November Biannual MGA Magazine published in June/July and November/December 2019

Refer also to the myriad of functions, events, publications and PD offered by state and territory branches and national networks — check the relevant section of the national website for details and look out for your branch and network e-bulletins.

STOP PRESS Welcome to the Australian Museums and Galleries Association (AMaGA).

On 26th November, 50 members from around Australia gathered at the Special General Meeting held at the Canberra Museum and Gallery to vote on the motion for a new name for your organisation. The President outlined the background to the motion, highlighting the long period of consultation with members and stakeholders, and the strategic intent of the national council. Members present spoke for and against the motion.

82% of the votes cast (both those present at the meeting and from the 105 members who sent proxies) approved that we change the name in our constitution.

A message from the President has been sent to all organisational and individual members, affirming the belief of the National Council that we have taken an important step towards a clear and inclusive national identity for the organisation that will strengthen our presence and our advocacy.

The name will be launched officially in January 2019. And the next Magazine will have a changed name and design but we will continue to commission and develop outstanding articles very directly tailored to the interests of our sector, Branches and Networks.

14 Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018

Profiling CAAMD and its current work nationally and internationally

Council of Australian Art Museum Directors: A current overview

Chris Saines

T above:

Chris Saines CNZM, Director of Queensland Art Gallery | Gallery of Modern Art, and CAAMD Chair.

he Council of Australian Art Museum Directors (CAAMD), comprising the directors of the ten state-, territory- and nationally-funded art museums, draws on its collective experience to leverage and effect better outcomes for the art museum sector nationally. Its aims include: to facilitate collaboration between members, to provide a unified voice to Government, stakeholders and the cultural sector more widely, and to provide advocacy on a range of issues affecting the art museum sector.

The Council is not membership-based, nor does it have a secretariat beyond the support of the office of the current Chair, a position that rotates among members every two years. It meets as a group twice a year, to consider national and international issues of concern to the member institutions.

Members of the group also belong to the ICOMaffiliated International Committee for Museums and Collections of Modern Art (CIMAM), and they represent Australia within the International Group of Organisers of Major Exhibitions, the Bizot Group (an informal association of the world’s leading museums that engage in organising exhibitions, founded in 1992 in France). This additional inter-organisational involvement, combined with our day-to-day experience working at the helm of Australia’s leading art museums with incredibly skilled multidisciplinary teams, creates a rich mix of perspectives and insights whenever we come together. Issues discussed in the recent past have included Australia’s ‘immunity from seizure’ legislation (Protection of Cultural Objects on Loan Act, 2013), which enables international exhibitions-organisation for our museums; the growing partnerships with Asia; the importance of provenance for museum collections; and the cumulative impact of government ‘efficiency dividends’ imposed on public institutions.

One of the group’s recent initiatives to engage the sector more widely has been a national forum that invites directors and senior staff of other art museums — be they regional, metropolitan, university or private institutions – to gather for a day of discussions and workshops. These forums, of which there have been three to date, provide an opportunity to share knowledge and build sector-wide capacity. The aim is to broaden understanding of current issues and strengthen collaboration in the sector, without necessarily expanding the Council itself.

The first CAAMD Forum (held in Canberra, in 2016) considered the changing role of cultural institutions,

major capital projects, effective partnerships and advocacy. The second looked at the digital space, new models of Indigenous art display, and institutional responses to ethical and moral dilemmas facing museums. After this event, we conducted a survey asking for input on both the Forum’s format and subject matter. This year, we applied that feedback to both the format and individual session topics for our Forum at QAGOMA in Brisbane, in September, which was attended by 60 museum professionals from around the country. This year’s Forum saw CAAMD members relinquish the podium as much as possible, in favour of inviting more external, Indigenous and regional voices to the microphone.

Though attendees at the national Forum come from institutions that vary in scale and context, in approaches and governance models, we still have much in common. We all strive to build meaningful engagement with and responsiveness to Indigenous art and artists, and their communities. We all work to engage with and grow our audiences, and to navigate the complexities of collecting and exhibiting visual cultural material in a rapidly changing world.

We are all mindful of making museums more sustainable into the future, as evidenced by recent work by both the Bizot Group and the Australian Institute for the Conservation of Cultural Materials (AICCM). We confront ethical issues around provenance, rightful ownership and, in the #MeToo era, the effects of inappropriate conduct.

We are also, as a sector, experiencing a renewed drive for the modernisation and expansion of our built assets through ambitious capital projects. At the same time, we are seeing more focus than ever on the expansion, innovation and integration of our digital footprints. We all generate data and arguments to persuade our governing and funding bodies of our museum’s importance to its community. Moreover, many of us live in a world that measures success numerically and instrumentally, then clips our wings through efficiency dividends. It seems increasingly common within the sector, noticeably in a number of major regional areas, for art institutions to be reorganised to replace expert art museum direction with a more managerialist leadership structure.

This is one area where CAAMD has taken a strong position — advocating the primary role of qualified and experienced museum professionals to local government councils and other overseeing bodies that may seek to impose a less art-focused model of management on an important regional gallery or museum.

Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018 15

One area where CAAMD has taken a strong position [is] advocating the primary role of qualified and experienced museum professionals to local government councils and other overseeing bodies that may seek to impose a less art-focused model of management on an important regional gallery or museum

This last batch of issues in particular revolves around how we measure success in the cultural sector — a topic that has received mainstream coverage in recent months. In The Australian in September, Robert Phiddian took policy makers and cultural leaders to task for chasing the perfect metric. Attendance, visitor responses and the ascribed economic benefit of blockbusters are not the only things we should measure, he argued. Phiddian’s main point was that culture is produced and experienced by humans, and that artists strive to create something meaningful.

Their success in this can be judged but not necessarily be counted. The same week in Crikey.com, shadow federal Arts Minister Tony Burke lamented the departmental focus on economic impact and attendance numbers when he received a briefing note on an exhibition he was opening.

Indeed, of all the questions CAAMD faces, those relating to advocacy and communicating the value of what we do in art museums seem to be the most pressing. In having these conversations at a high level with the Council, my fellow Directors and I hope to be able, in turn, to convey our collective experience and advocacy in ways that will benefit the sector more widely. [ ] Chris Saines CNZM is Director of the Queensland Art Gallery | Gallery of Modern Art (QAGOMA), Brisbane, Australia. He has worked for over 35 years in leading galleries in Australia and New Zealand as a director, curatorial and collection manager, educator and curator. He is currently Chair of the Council of Australian Art Museum Directors (CAAMD).

Text citation: Chris Saines, ‘Council of Australian Art Museum Directors: A current overview’, Museums Galleries Australia Magazine, Vol. 27(1), Museums Galleries Australia, Canberra, Summer 2018, pp. 14–15.

16 Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018

Profiling CAMD and its current work nationally and internationally

Council of Australasian Museum Directors: A snapshot of CAMD

above:

Daryl Karp (CAMD Chair)

right:

CAMD Women's Leadership Program event and workshop, South Australian Museum, Adelaide.

Daryl Karp

Who we are

T

he Council of Australasian Museum Directors (CAMD) provides a forum for the directors and CEOs of the major regional, state and national museums in Australia and New Zealand to: share experiences, collaborate on ideas, and combine the collective wisdom of the group to address strategic issues affecting the industry.

Established in 1967, CAMD was incorporated under the Victorian Associations Incorporation Act in 2005. The current elected executive of seven, including chair, deputy chair and treasurer, is drawn from our 22-member museum directors/CEOs, with operational input and extraordinary support from an Executive Officer (P/T).

What we do We meet twice a year to share experiences, network, and work collaboratively toward the shared ambition of advancing the sector. We make submissions on policy matters and provide input to inquiries; we liaise with governments on behalf of members in articulating the value of museums and galleries; and we collaborate with our colleague organisations to support concerted funding initiatives.

Formal and informal communications are supported with a weekly online newsletter, incorporating key media relevant to museum members and their staff, including information on job opportunities in CAMD museums. At the heart of such regular communication is an annual survey of member museums to facilitate internal benchmarking and provide support for wider advocacy.

CAMD’s key achievements in recent years include:

• a formal mentoring program to develop women leaders in our sector (80 women have participated in this initiative to date); • an Australian collections valuation framework; • establishment of a Parliamentary Friends of Museums, Libraries and Galleries initiative.

Memorable past projects have included the development of the Atlas of Living Australia (‘a collaborative, national project that aggregates biodiversity data from multiple sources and makes it freely available and usable’).

The Atlas incorporated an initial contribution of 12 million records in 2007, and a national program of activities across Australia as part of the United Nation’s International Year of Biodiversity (IYB) in 2010. (see Atlas website at <https://www.ala.org.au/>)

Why we matter CAMD museums in Australasia collectively curate more than 80 million objects representing Australasia’s natural and cultural heritage, and through their exhibitions and programs, they attract more than 20 million visitors annually. The museums, their programs and their collections represent one of the foundations for Australia’s and New Zealand’s identity and shared heritage. They provide the source for major research, education and engagement programs across diverse arenas — including, for example: democracy; honouring national sacrifice; history; social history and applied arts; Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander culture; science and technology; biodiversity; palaeontology and geology.

As a result of their stewardship of museum collections over decades (and even centuries), our museums’ authority on a host of subjects and our effective engagement with a range of audiences, museums are trusted and highly valued by the Australian community and tourist visitors.

Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018 17

left: CAMD hosts launch of Parliamentary Friends at MoAD at Old Parliament House, Canberra, August 2017.

Collections valuation framework CAMD members have recently prepared a best-practice collections valuation framework, to enable valuation of museum collections at fair value.

Collaboration among CAMD museums and consultation with industry bodies — such as Chartered Accountants Australia & New Zealand, CPA Australia, and the Heads of Treasuries Accounting and Reporting Advisory Committee — have ensured a practical and robust framework for museums to guide their collection valuations.

Daryl Karp is the Director of MoAD at Old Parliament House.

Previous positions were as the CEO of Film Australia, and Head of Factual Television at the ABC. Daryl was awarded the 2017 Telstra Business Women’s Awards in Public Sector and Academia Award — Australian Capital Territory Winner.

She is currently Chair of the Council of Australasian Museum Directors (CAMD).

Text citation: Daryl Karp, ‘Council of Australasian Museum Directors: A snapshot of CAMD’, Museums Galleries Australia Magazine, Vol. 27(1), Museums Galleries Australia, Canberra, Summer 2018, pp. 16–17.

Parliamentary Friends of Museums, Galleries & Libraries Senator James Paterson and Luke Gosling OAM MP have recently co-chaired the Australian Government Parliamentary Friends of Museums, Galleries & Libraries. This initiative was hosted by the Museum of Australian Democracy at Old Parliament House, and saw around 40 members of the Australian Parliament and their advisors and staff attend.

18 Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018

Forming a roadmap and strategies to secure non-government support

Approaches to fundraising Frank Howarth

L above:

Frank Howarth.

et’s start with what philanthropic fundraising is not. It’s not a process of begging, of asking for a few crumbs from the table. It is also not a process of saying: This is what we do; we think it’s important; so you should give us money.

So what is fundraising? It’s a process of finding someone who shares your objectives so that together you can solve a problem.

There are a number of sayings about fundraising.

One of my favourites is ‘People give money to people they like for causes they care about’. On a different tack, one of my other favourites is ‘It’s amazing what you don’t get when you don’t ask’. The overriding guide to effective fundraising is to find those people who care about your cause, and to ask them for their help so you can jointly address that cause. This sounds deceptively simple, but the process of getting there is a mixture of art and science. In this article I want to talk a bit about that process, and how you can apply it to your particular cultural ‘cause’.

I learned about fundraising on the job. When I took over as Director of the Royal Botanic Gardens and Domain Trust I knew nothing about fundraising.

If anything, I had the typical Australian attitude that asking for support was effectively begging, and anyway I didn’t know how or whom to ask. Through the process of establishing the first fundraising foundation at the Royal Botanic Gardens, and the second foundation at the Australian Museum, I learned a great deal. Since then, I’ve been applying my accumulated knowledge of fundraising to helping other organisations in the culture and environment sectors position themselves to make successful asks for support: from individual donors, philanthropic foundations, and corporate partners.

Another myth in fundraising is that people in cities are more generous, and it’s easier to raise money philanthropically in the big cities. In fact, Australian Tax Office figures indicate that on a per capita basis, people in regional Australia are more generous than those in the cities, likely through a greater awareness of their local community and particular needs.

Regional Australians spend a greater proportion of their income on philanthropy than those in cities, so if you are located in a country town, fundraising is still a good option for you.

First, some fundamentals. There is a change in motivation in the spectrum from individual donors through to corporate partners. I’ve summarised this in a diagram (below, left).

I should note that it’s important to remember that while corporates are more motivated by achieving corporate objectives, the people you deal with from that corporate body are human beings with human motivations and passions. Bear in mind that saying I mentioned earlier — about people giving to people they like for causes they care about.

There are three key elements in establishing an effective fundraising program. First, you need to have a clear strategic direction for fundraising.

Second, you need to set out what your cause is, in a problem-to-solution form. Third, you need to have the people, systems and processes in place to operate a fundraising program.

Good fundraising always needs a good strategic underpinning. Your fundraising strategy needs to be anchored in your corporate strategy, so that you only fundraise for things you actually want to do, and you can demonstrate to a potential donor or corporate partner that you have a clear view of your future and where each element of your fundraising fits into a larger picture. A savvy donor will only support an organisation that knows where it’s going, is well managed, and is viable.

Once you have your organisation’s priorities established, it’s really useful to take a step back and look at how you would set out the purpose of your organisation in one overarching, problem-solution ‘cause’ statement.

For some organisations this is easy. An environment organisation might say that ‘our overall priority is to reduce biodiversity loss through establishing more private conservation reserves’, or ‘by making our rivers cleaner’. For cultural organisations the task of mapping defined goals may seem harder, but it’s just as important. If you were to summarise the purpose of your art gallery, regional museum or historical society, how would you frame that in one or two sentences, and most importantly, in a problem-solution form?

Mission and vision statements should give some guide to this task, but they are often phrased as solutions only. If your mission is to inspire people through contemporary art, what ‘problem’ does this address?

It’s useful to start by distilling your mission down to a statement like: ‘Our purpose is to solve/address a problem/challenge/crisis/opportunity through

Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018 19

educating/exhibiting/teaching/training’ — or similar.

It’s also important to ensure that you have an appropriate legal framework in place for fundraising.

The legal issues around philanthropy can be quite complex, and if you’re not sure about your charitable status you should have this checked by your legal advisor. It’s also worth noting that gifts in wills are not tax-deductible to the donor (since the donor is deceased). While personal tax deductions also don’t apply to gifts from corporate partners and sponsors, some companies will look for your charitable status as a test of your bona fides, so it’s worth making sure that everything is in place.

Assuming you have a secure legal framework, a strong strategic focus, and a clearly articulated case for support, the next thing is to ensure that you have the right people and systems in place to operate your fundraising program. For some entirely volunteer-run organisations, fundraising can be carried out at very low cost, although some appropriate IT systems are necessary — which I’ll come back to later. However, for most organisations fundraising costs money, and this is generally looked at in two ways.

First, there are the fixed overhead costs to have a fundraising system, including staff, IT infrastructure, and web and print collateral. Generally speaking these overheads would absorb somewhere between 15% (for large organisations with big fundraising programs) to 28% (for small organisations just setting up a program) of your notional fundraising income. Putting this another way, if your target is to earn $100,000 per year, then you can assume the overheads will be between $15,000 and $28,000 per year if you are paying for staff and IT costs.

The second way of looking at costs is assessing the marginal cost to run any particular type of fundraising program. This is usually expressed as the cost to raise $1. If you’re just setting up, and your first activity is to run a broad-spectrum mail or email campaign to potential supporters, then this initial activity is not likely to recoup its costs. However, once your mailing is more targeted, you can expect the cost to drop to about $0.40 to raise that $1. There are some very efficient areas of fundraising, and these include: ‘peer to peer’ programs, where somebody else asks their friends and associates for support on your behalf; gifts in wills programs; and capital fundraising programs.

Each of these should be closer to $0.10 to raise that $1.

The people part of fundraising is crucial. I mentioned earlier that people give money to people they like for causes they care about, so establishing personal relationships with actual and potential donors is crucial. I generally look at staffing in two parts. First, there is the role of leading the fundraising program, working closely with other staff and board members, and spending a significant proportion of time with potential and actual donors. Then there is the other, arguably even more important, role of making sure that all the administrative processes happen. The single most important infrastructure part of a fundraising program is a client relationship

management (CRM) system. This tracks every aspect of your contacts with potential and actual donors and supporters, and it is crucial that it is kept up-to-date.

Someone in your fundraising team needs to take on that role, plus the other administrative roles. Finally, it is crucial that your fundraising webpages and any print collateral are always up-to-date with correct names, email addresses and phone numbers.

I want to say something about how you locate your donors, whether they are individuals, philanthropic foundations, or companies — a task known as prospect research. Most fundraisers look at three key aspects of prospects that need to be satisfied if they are to become donors. First, you need to find people or organisations that are interested in what you do and share the same goals. If someone’s giving is entirely around medical charities or crisis aid, then it is unlikely they are going to support arts and culture — so don’t waste a lot of time asking them. Second, the people or organisations you’re going to ask need to have the ability to support you at the level you’re seeking. Your ask needs to be matched with the donor’s ability to pay. Third, and most importantly, you need to establish a linkage or connection between the potential donor and your organisation.

Typically, people with such linkages might be members, volunteers, board members, former staff, or supporters who regularly attend events and openings.

Finally, I want to mention what is often seen as a difficult area of fundraising, and that is support through gifts in wills, also known as bequests. We are seeing a significant growth in the desire of older community members to have a lasting impact on causes they care about through a gift in their will. We should not shy away from helping those people fulfil their wishes. Gifts in wills fundraising is a major area of potential support. The costs of a bequests program are low, the returns are relatively high, but of course when those returns will be realised is less predictable.

As a rule of thumb, if you invest $1 in a bequest program now, you will get that $1 back in four or five years, and 16 times that initial investment in about 10 years.

Philanthropic fundraising is an increasingly important area of income for cultural organisations.

Research shows that the growth in philanthropic support for the arts and culture sector is at least equalling reductions in government support. There are potential donors for your organisation out there.

You just have to know how to ask them! [ ] Frank Howarth has been Director of Sydney’s Royal Botanic Gardens and Domain Trust, and of the Australian Museum. Since leaving the Australian Museum in 2014 he formed his own company and provides advisory services in philanthropy, cultural leadership and innovation. He serves on several cultural and tourism boards.

Text citation: Frank Howarth, ‘Approaches to fundraising’, Museums Galleries Australia Magazine, Vol. 27(1), Museums Galleries Australia, Canberra, summer 2018, pp. 18–19.

20 Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018

Some guidance for appraising conservation challenges

Conserving collections: ‘finding joy in detail’[1]

above:

Marcelle Scott.

right:

In 2017 the Yackandandah Shire map was conserved by The University of Melbourne’s Grimwade Centre conservators and members of the Yackandandah and District Historical Society.

The work was done in the local Public Hall, where the map is now on permanent display. The project was a collaborative one, supported by the Indigo Shire Council and the Yackandandah and District Historical Society.

School students visiting the Public Hall to see the map and talk about its conservation. It proved to be a perfect talking point, with conversations ranging from how the map was made and how it was being conserved, to why they like knowing about where they live.

Marcelle Scott

I 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

Henderson, Jane, 2018.

‘Managing Uncertainty for Preventive Conservation’, Studies in Conservation, Vol. 63(S1), pp. S108–S112.

The National Trust, UK (n.d).

‘Conservation Principles’.

Available at: <https://www. nationaltrust.org.uk/features/ our-conservation-principles> ibid.

The National Trust, 2011.

The National Trust Manual of Housekeeping: Care and conservation of collections in historic houses. The National Trust, Swindon, United Kingdom.

First published in 2005.

Reynolds, Fiona, 2011. Foreword, in The National Trust Manual of Housekeeping…, ibid.

Abey-Koch, Madelaine, 2011.

‘History of Housekeeping’, in The National Trust Manual of Housekeeping…, pp. 21–33.

n 2003, the UK National Trust revised their definition of conservation: from the concept of ‘permanent preservation’ to ‘the careful management of change’.[2] This significant step, taken the same year as the UK recorded its (to date) highest-ever temperature, was emblematic of the Trust’s ‘response to social, economic and environmental change’.[3] In recognising that you ‘can’t stop the clock’, the Trust locates conservation within a wider ethos of stewardship. This is a valuable, more people-centred perspective of conservation that I think we can all relate to, regardless of our role, training, collection, budget, or even the hemisphere in which we live.

On their own, however, definitions lack the detail required to help put theory into practice. Two years after revising their definition of conservation, the UK National Trust produced a clearly written reference book that aims to do just that. With more than 900 pages of practical advice on the conservation of an extensive list of object and material types, the new revised Manual of Housekeeping is both an enjoyable read and a detailed primer for anyone with an interest in conserving collections — in museums or houses, public or private.[4] In her Foreword to the National Trust manual, Fiona Reynolds, then Director-General of the UK Trust, describes housekeeping as a ‘pragmatic word for a deeply skilled and vital task’.[5] With these few words, Reynolds addresses the concern that the

important work of conservation might be trivialised by what some might see as a somewhat old-fashioned term. She sets the tone for the book that both pays homage to the traditional housekeeping practices and recognises the knowledge, experience, and skills required to manage and conserve the things we value.

She has also captured the essence of conservation: its practical, complex, and essential aspects.

Mould, insects ‘and other hurt or spoyle’; the agents of deterioration While the ‘careful management of change’ was a new, more meaningful way of defining conservation, the idea was neither simple nor new. In her will of 1601, Elizabeth ‘Bess of Hardwick’ (Countess Shrewsbury) gave clear advice as to how her tapestries and other furnishings were to be looked after and kept in situ: … have speciall care and regard to p’serve the same from all manner of wett, mothe and other hurt or spoyle thereof and to leave them so preserved to contynewe at the sayed several houses …[6] Like housekeeping, and other professions that have changed over time, conservation practices have also changed, as have the contexts. It relies on highlytrained technical specialists with specific materials knowledge and developed analytical, and practical

Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018 21

left:

School students visiting the Public Hall to see the map and talk about its conservation. It proved to be a perfect talking point, with conversations ranging from how the map was made and how it was being conserved, to why they like knowing about where they live.

skills, as well as contributions from a range of other skilled practitioners, including citizen experts who bring both practice-based and place-based knowledge.

Conservation can be both preventive and interventive. It can be routine or challenging, and sometimes full of risk — to the practitioner, the environment, or the object; or sometimes to all three.

It is no surprise, then, that conservation manuals — like that produced by the UK National Trust, and the more recent Western Australian Museum online publication, Conservation and Care of Collections — need such a hefty page-count to do justice to the subject matter and to their readers.[7] If you have been to a conservation workshop, or read any of the published conservation manuals, websites, or information sheets, you may be familiar with the ‘agents of deterioration’ and the risk management approaches designed to mitigate their adverse effects.

Sometimes ten, sometimes nine, depending on how you count them, the agents of deterioration include (paraphrasing the published literature): • high light levels, especially daylight and other sources of heat and UV • pests • extreme temperatures, high or low • extreme relative humidity, high or low • loss of, or dissociation from provenance documentation • physical damage, e.g. from overcrowding in storage, mishandling, etc.

• fire • water • chemical damage from indoor or outdoor pollutants • theft and vandalism While many of these risks are present in everyday settings, they all pose particular risks to collections.

Their impacts can, however, be mitigated with planning, good management, and regular preventive conservation maintenance.[8] This requires a sustained commitment from everyone involved. It can be demanding and overwhelming, especially if the processes are unfamiliar or outcomes uncertain.

Looking at it another way, as Jane Henderson argues, preventive conservation can be an opportunity to ‘find joy in the detail’ and to ‘bring innovation and creativity into problem solving’.[9] This approach recognises that there is no singular ‘right’ approach that will be relevant in all contexts. It means recognising what is feasible, and what is not.

Depending on the context, it might mean deciding that providing access to a collection is ‘a greater priority than preservation’.[10] A conservation ‘toolbox’ approach that adapts standard conservation and risk management approaches to what is practical and sustainable for your collection can help transform a list of risks to a practical to-do list that might look something like the following:

7.

8.

9.

10.

Western Australian Museum, 2017. Collections Care Manual.

Available at: <https://manual. museum.wa.gov.au/>.

Canadian Conservation Institute, n.d. Agents of Deterioration. Available at: <https://www.canada.ca/en/ conservation-institute/services/ agents-deterioration.html>.

Henderson, Jane, 2018.

‘Managing Uncertainty for Preventive Conservation’, op.cit.

Wickens, Joelle and Debra Hess Norris, 2018. ‘The Imperative of Soft Skill Development in Preventive Conservation Practice and Training’.

Studies in Conservation, Vol. 63, no. S1, pp. S301–306.

22 Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018

Some guidance for appraising conservation challenges

• keep a back-up of the collection register • maintain the museum building and make it secure • install a fire alarm • block UV from the storage and display areas • keep the spaces clean and check for signs of insect, rodent, or other pest activity

Let’s hear it for the four agents of preservation A focus on what might damage collections, rather than the over-arching processes that preserve collections creates a kind of deficit model of conservation. My colleagues, Nicole Tse, Ana Labrador, Robert Balabar and I prefer a more positive perspective. We view our work through the four agents of preservation: people, place, objects, and time. In this model, people — particularly those who are looking after their personal or their community’s heritage — are central to conservation of our collective heritage, rather than a preoccupation with ‘fixed textbased classification systems’.[11] It is the agency of people that builds understanding of the intrinsic value of heritage, and garners support for its conservation and transmission.

Acquiring an object (legally and ethically) into a well-managed museum is an act of preservation.

Documenting it, accessioning it, interpreting it, and keeping the catalogue up-to-date and secure, are fundamental preservation activities. Doing all this while engaging and growing a team of loyal volunteers and supporters who understand and promote good museum practice, the importance of collections, and making them accessible are conservation and preservation acts of heroic proportion.

Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018 23

Engaging and growing a team of loyal volunteers and supporters who understand and promote good museum practice, the importance of collections, and making them accessible are conservation and preservation acts of heroic proportion

Joelle Wikens and Debra Hess Norris remind us all that ‘there are no universal standards’, but the ‘the Gold Standard’ of preventive conservation is ‘one that an institution can achieve’.[12] If you are working within your means, take some time to reflect on what you have actually achieved, and congratulate yourself and your colleagues for all that you have done to conserve the objects, stories, contributions, achievements, failures, and losses that are embedded in the collections you manage. You have already made a very significant contribution to our authentic cultural record.

Best wishes to all who, through the ‘careful management of change’, are helping to conserve Australia’s distributed cultural record. May the coming year bring you many joyful conservation moments. [] Marcelle Scott is a conservator and conservation educator with more than thirty years’ experience across the museum sector. She is currently a Research Fellow at the University of Melbourne’s Grimwade Centre for Cultural Materials Conservation, where her research focusses on conservation theory, ethics, and pedagogy, examined through a citizen conservation model.

Text citation: Marcelle Scott, ‘Conserving collections: “finding joy in detail”’, Museums Galleries Australia Magazine, Vol. 27(1), Museums Galleries Australia, Canberra, Summer 2018, pp. 20–23.

far left:

All welcome! Locals were welcome to view the map while it was being conserved in the Public Hall. middle:

Journalists from local print and radio covered the story. From L-R: ABC Goulburn Murray local radio journalists Allison Jess, Ben Nielson, and Grimwade Centre conservator Lois Waters. See the short video made by the ABC journalists at <https://www.facebook. com/ABCGoulburnMurray/ videos/1582953178406572/>. left:

Posters about the project were put up in shop windows and venues throughout the town.

11.

12.

Tse, Nicole, Ana Labrador, Marcelle Scott and Robert Balabar, 2018. ‘Preventive Conservation: People, objects, place and time in the Philippines’.

Studies in Conservation, Vol. 63(S1), pp. S274–S281.

Wickens, Joelle and Debra Hess Norris, 2018. ‘The Imperative of Soft Skill Development in Preventive Conservation Practice and Training’.

Studies in Conservation, Vol. 63, no. S1, pp. S301–-306.

24 Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018

Unparalleled resources for reviewing Aboriginal and colonial histories in Hobart

Reconsidering Australia’s history — The National Picture: The art of Tasmania's Black War

above:

Jonathan Holmes.

right:

Installation view of Benjamin Duterrau's The Conciliation [1840, oil on canvas, 119 x 168 cm, TMAG] and 10 Plaster Bas-Reliefs: Timmy; Attention; Trucanini, wife of Woureddy; Anger; Surprise; Mannalargenna, the chief; The manner of straightening a spear; Woureddy, a native of Bruny Island; Incredulity; Suspicion [1835, painted plaster, nine of which are approx 35 x 27 cm and Timmy is 55 x 39.6, TMAG].

Photo: courtesy of Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery.

Jonathan Holmes

I 1.

2.

3.

4.

Greg Lehman, ‘The Conciliation: A Founding Document’, June 2013, (online, accessed 30.10.2018) <https:// tawatja.com/2013/06/01/ the-conciliation-afounding-document/>.

Lehman 2013.

Lehman 2013.

The National Picture: The art of Tasmania's Black War, curated

by Tim Bonyhady and Greg Lehman, National Gallery of Australia, Canberra, 2018.

n June 2013, Greg Lehman — co-curator with Tim Bonyhady of the compelling recent exhibition, The National Picture: The art of Tasmania's Black War* — published The Conciliation: A Founding Document.[1] In this article Lehman notes that the Museum of Australian Democracy (in Old Parliament House, Canberra) recognises a painting titled The Conciliation (1840) by the colonial artist, Benjamin Duterrau (1768-1851), as the 'first historical epic painting in the Australian Colonies’, and MOAD goes on to say that 'it now marks the long path towards legal acknowledgement of Tasmanians of Indigenous descent’.[2] Lehman argues that despite the Museum recognising the painting as a founding document in Australia's history, there has been very little in-depth research into its meaning. As he explains: Such is the poor level of awareness by most Australians of Aboriginal history, that few will be able to proceed very far beyond a basic reading of the picture’s denotive content.

The group of figures are mostly Aboriginal.

One man is shaking hands with another.

Some of the figures are gesturing toward this interaction. Others watch or are preoccupied.

There are dogs and a kangaroo, as well as several spears. No buildings are in sight.

It is probably daytime. For most viewers, progressing an interpretation of the painting as an historical document will be difficult beyond this reading.[3] When the impressively researched exhibition opened this year during Canberra’s winter, The National Picture drew together intensive collaboration between two museums and two scholars across considerable distance. The resulting achievement has produced both a remarkable exhibition and an outstanding publication of enduring value. First shown at the NGA but split across two floors (May– July); later more tightly configured in three adjacent galleries at the Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery in Hobart (August–November), the exhibition’s importance in Tasmania has entailed a further showing in the north of the state (Queen Victoria Museum and Art Gallery, Launceston, where the tour will end on 17 February 2019).

Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018 25

With the institutional resources that only the NGA could provide as lead partner, while TMAG was prepared to lend a considerable number of its most valuable holdings, in partnership with other loans, the guest curators were enabled to create an absorbing and challenging visual account of the central painting's gestation in the 1830s and its enduring significance. Their research reconstructed the work’s historical, political, social and cultural context, as well as reflecting on the harrowing aftermath of the depicted ‘event’ itself, while bringing fresh attention to its longer-term implications for the descendants of the first peoples of Tasmania.

Benjamin Duterrau’s arresting painting, The Conciliation (in TMAG’s collection since 1945) was a study for a much larger historical work referred to as The National Picture, which Duterrau finished in the early 1840s. Now lost, this latter painting was around three metres by four metres in size and would have dwarfed the surviving Conciliation. The two works sought to portray a defining episode in Tasmania's Black War, which was brought to a close during the early 1830s.

Both paintings represented an imagined ‘moment’ in late 1831, when the missionary and government

representative, George Augustus Robinson (1791– 1866), achieved a tense pact with members of the Big River mob, one of the last significant groups of Aboriginal Tasmanians fighting settler occupation on the island. The apparent ‘conciliation’ came to represent a more general pact that would eventually see the Aboriginal population incarcerated on Flinders Island later in the 1830s.

As Lehman and Bonyhady observe in their finely researched analysis of the surviving painting and its numerous preparatory works,[4] the relatively minor British artist, Benjamin Duterrau, arrived in Tasmania in August 1832 — just eight months after the journeyman builder and Methodist missionary, Robinson, had returned to Hobart with twenty-six Aboriginal Tasmanians from the Big River tribe.

Agreeing to give up their resistance to the 'British invasion' in return for regular food supplies and protection, their arrival in Hobart was widely seen as indicating that open conflict between settlers and the Aboriginal clans of the island was drawing to a close.

Although Duterrau hadn’t arrived in Tasmania until later in 1832, he rapidly became friendly with Robinson and sought to record these momentous local events. Like the earlier-arrived artist John Glover,

26 Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018

Unparalleled resources for reviewing Aboriginal and colonial histories in Hobart

Duterrau made studies of a number of the Aboriginal Tasmanians with whom Robinson was associated.

This was before they were exiled to Flinders Island in what was widely regarded as a litany of broken promises — by both Robinson and the Tasmanian government.

In his ‘conciliation’ efforts, George Augustus Robinson had set up his first mission camp on Bruny Island south of Hobart in 1829. In a harbinger of the tragic events to come, he oversaw a camp in which the Aboriginal Tasmanians succumbed to a range of illnesses, dominated by complications from common colds, flu-like symptoms and pulmonary complaints, and the mission camp was all but decimated by the end of 1830. While still ostensibly supervising on Bruny Island, Robinson, with financial support from Lieutenant-Governor Arthur, embarked on a campaign to bring in almost all of the surviving Aboriginal groups living outside settled districts between 1830 and 1835, for ultimate trans-shipment to the newly

formed mission, Wybalenna, on Flinders Island.

The peace-making endeavours of Robinson’s missions were largely brokered by a group of six notable Aboriginal individuals whom he had originally befriended on Bruny Island, and who travelled across Tasmania with him on his several ‘conciliation’ journeys of the 1830s. They included the Tasmanians Woureddy (d. 1842) and Trucanini (1812?–1876), who had become partners in 1829, along with Tanleboueyer (1807–1835) who would later marry the renowned north-eastern chief, Manalargenna (c.1770– 1835). Manalargenna is thought to have joined the missionary expeditions sometime later in 1830.

All natural leaders, these figures were amongst a number of prominent Aboriginal Tasmanians who would become especially renowned in the Colony during this traumatic period of history, and it was as a result of their distinction locally that they were represented in a large number of paintings, drawings, sculptures and prints by artists such as Benjamin

Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018 27

Duterrau (1768–1851), Thomas Bock (1795–1851), John Glover (1761–1849) and Benjamin Law (1807– 1882). Duterrau, for instance, during the two years after his arrival in Hobart, created four significant, almost life-size oil portraits of Woureddy, Trucanini, Manalargenna and Tanleboueyer (all dating from 1834).

These works provided a dramatic presence — with two equally compelling portrait busts of Woureddy and Trucanini by the sculptor Benjamin Law (1897– 1882) — in the exhibition's first gallery when shown in Hobart. The paintings had eventually been sold for £20 each to the Government of Tasmania in 1837, although by that time Woureddy and Trucanini had been disappeared to Flinders Island in Bass Strait; and both Manalargenna and Tanleboueyer had died — the former similarly in exile on Flinders Island, while the latter perished in Hobart.

Co-curator Tim Bonyhady has commented that a key motivation for the purchase of these portraits by the Government was as a form of memorial to a

above:

Installation view of Benjamin Duterrau's (L-R) Woureddy, 1834; Truggernana, 1834; Tanleboueyer, 1834; Manalargenna, 1834. Photo: courtesy of Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery.

28 Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018

Unparalleled resources for reviewing Aboriginal and colonial histories in Hobart

people and a culture that was passing. The mood had obviously changed just over a half-century later, however, because the portrait paintings appear in a crowded installation of the state museum’s permanent collection, as recorded in a photograph by John Watt Beattie titled The Tasmanian Room (1902). There the vivid portraits are displayed in the Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery amongst a panoply of taxidermied fauna and preserved flora and other Tasmanian-related objects. In Beattie’s photograph they have moved from a world of human events into a natural history context, displaced and stripped of any agency — an agency they most certainly must still have had while displayed in the Legislative Council in the latter part of the nineteenth century; and an agency that was restored to them so powerfully in this exhibition.

Duterrau seems almost immediately to have recognised the longer-term implications of the

arrival of the Big River Mob in Hobart. As soon as he established himself in Tasmania, he set to work on a project lasting over ten years, to produce a suitable representation of what he understood to be Robinson's achievement: namely a picture of ‘reconciliation’ and a kind of treaty that would symbolise Robinson's purported success in bringing armed conflicts to an end in what early became known in local accounts as the Black War. The Duterrau historical project began with individual portraits, and from 1834 until the early 1840s his attention was consistently drawn to the subject of conciliation in drawings, etchings, bas-reliefs and several important paintings of Robinson and of Aboriginal hunters — all of which were brought together in the recent exhibition as likely studies for the eventual ‘big picture’.

In the second gallery in Hobart, the curators chose to display the numerous scaled-up portrait bas-reliefs

above:

John Watt Beattie, The Tasmanian Room [1902, albumen print, Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery. Presented

by Mrs FV Thomson, 1989].

Photo: Courtesy of Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery.

Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018 29

(or plaster-modelled images in shallow relief ). This grouping vividly highlighted the key protagonists next to the striking painting of The Conciliation, while the life-sized encounter titled Mr Robinson's first interview with Timmy (1840, NGA) was displayed on the adjacent wall. The latter work has a vivid presence, being only marginally smaller than The Conciliation itself. It was probably the model for the central group that included George Augustus Robinson and Timmy in both The National Picture and The Conciliation.

Elsewhere in the exhibition Duterrau's Native taking a kangaroo of 1837 (NGA) not only alludes to then-current hunting techniques (Aboriginal hunters were by then using European dogs to capture kangaroos); but the figure — in almost exactly the same extended pose, except now with a spear and maireener shell necklace — later becomes the model

above:

Benjamin Law, Woureddy, an Aboriginal Chief of Van Diemen's Land, 1835 cast plaster, painted Benjamin Law, Trucaninny, wife of Woureddy, 1836 cast plaster, painted Collection: National Portrait Gallery, Canberra

30 Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018

Unparalleled resources for reviewing Aboriginal and colonial histories in Hobart

for one of the central figures in The Conciliation (1840), where its scale suggests that it was also to be an important component in The National Picture.

In the space of three relatively small galleries at TMAG, the curators were able to achieve a remarkably cohesive experience – one that was all the more strangely compelling because of the striking maladroitness of the principal artist, Duterrau. Placement, of course, is everything; and the separation of the four large portrait paintings along with the Benjamin Law portrait busts (all of which more recently have been seen as parenthetical sentinels to the Conciliation in the Henry Hunter Gallery at TMAG) highlights the centrality that the figures of Trucanini, Woureddy, Manalargenna and Tanleboueyer command in the imaginative construction of The Conciliation.

This is so much the case that these four celebrated Aboriginal Tasmanians are not only identified by the authors as central figures in the ‘treaty’ discussions but also highlighted a second time as key background figures (primary historical ‘witnesses’) in the composition of the major painting that Duterrau eventually developed. Their significance is further underscored in the previously-mentioned (lost) National Picture, and Mr Robinson's first interview with Timmy (1840) where, flanking Robinson, the background figures of Manalargenna and Woureddy appear to have been drawn directly from the original 1834 portraits, while they are given much more prominence than originally evident in the preparatory work, The Conciliation.

Death by violence, starvation and disease had led the estimated 4,000 Aboriginal Tasmanians at the turn of the century to be reduced to around two hundred surviving by 1840, the overwhelming majority of whom were now in exile on Flinders Island. With the knowledge of their tragic eventual fate, the ten pencil and watercolour landscape drawings and portraits by John Skinner Prout (1805–76), and the seven depictions by Simkinson de Wesselow (1819– 1906) — all assembled in the third gallery in Hobart — were especially poignant. These works are amongst very few visual documents recording life on the island between 1836 and 1847, when Wybalenna was eventually abandoned; and they provide an enduring representation of a desperately reduced population of Aboriginal people, now clothed in European cast-offs and exiled from their traditional homelands.

The years spanning the promise of the portraits of 1834 and their later interpretation in The Conciliation in 1840 may help to explain what the curators perceived as Duterrau s contingent and ambiguous approach in the later composition. By this time, as Tim Bonyhady's chapter in the catalogue, The Art of Pacification , so effectively elucidates, Robinson's star

had become increasingly tarnished.[5] By then Duterrau would have been keenly aware that his aim to celebrate Robinson's achievement in a history painting of national consequence was now contested, as reports began to emerge of the plight of the exiled Aboriginal Tasmanians and Robinson’s role in their demise.

The reversed small versions of ‘the national picture’ in the exhibition are a signifier that a subtle shift occurs in the mood of the later summarising painting, and hence of Duterrau's more questioning conception.

In works such as The small outline of a national picture (1835, TMAG) there are several notable exclusions that were introduced to The Conciliation, and presumably also The National Picture. The kangaroo in Native taking a kangaroo of 1837 is now reworked and included in the foreground, whereas it is absent in the smaller studies; and there is a distinctive lack of ornament in the early works, whereas ornament becomes a prominent feature of the more elaborated Conciliation.

Lehman's analysis of the subtle adjustments in iconography that appear in The Conciliation is astute and informative. On a meta-level a narrative of exhortation, suspicion, intervention and potential resolution is built up, and the uneasy interplay is underscored in the foreground where the warriors prepare their weapons in readiness for further conflict, and a tense truce between kangaroo and dog is intimated. Elsewhere Greg Lehman argues that the lack of a necklace on Timmy's neck is replaced with nothing but Robinson's handshake and the broken promise it symbolises ,[6] whereas all

right:

Installation view of John Glover's Mills' Plains, Ben Lomond, Ben Loder & Ben Nevis in the distance [1836, Deddington Tasmania, oil on linen canvas, 76.2 x 152.5 cm, TMAG]; The bath of Diana, Van Diemen's Land [1837, Deddington, Tasmania, oil on canvas, 76 x 114 cm, National Gallery of Australia]; Mount Welling and Hobart Town from Kangaroo Point [1834, Deddington, Tasmania, oil on canvas, 76.2 x 152.4 cm, Nerissa Johnson Bequest Fund 2001, Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery and National Gallery of Australia].

Photo: courtesy of Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery. above:

Benjamin Duterrau Native taking a kangaroo 1837, oil on canvas, 121.5 x 167.5 cm, National Gallery of Australia, Canberra, Purchased 1979.

5.

6.

The National Picture, p. 86.

Tim Bonyhady, ‘The art of pacification’, in The National Picture: The art of Tasmania’s Black War, pp. 73–126.

Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018 31

of the other Aboriginal people in the painting bear body ornaments as a distinctive signifier of their heritage and culture. Lehman identifies Woureddy as the figure tugging at his maireener necklace on the far right-hand side of the painting while his wife, Trucanini, exhorts him to listen to Robinson.

Woureddy's gesture clearly points to the loss of culture threatened by this ‘truce’.

The second gallery in Hobart, which focused on The Conciliation, also included several portraits of George Augustus Robinson along with fascinating pages from his missionary notebooks — all clearly intended to highlight the principal role that he played in the pacification process. Furthermore, there was an intriguing juxtaposition between The Conciliation painting, displayed on the far wall, and three of the four John Glover paintings in the exhibition which were presented on the facing wall: a juxtaposition that underscored the troubled question of presence and absence already alluded to in this review.

Lehman and Bonyhady are among a number of scholars who have observed that the Aboriginal Tasmanians were in effect made to disappear from the landscape and towns between 1804 and the declaration of martial law by Governor Arthur in 1828.

Indeed, the prologue of the exhibition introduces one of the first-known representations of violent confrontation between settlers and Tasmanian Aboriginal people in Tasmanian art: a small oil painting by an unknown artist titled Aboriginal raid on Milton Farm, Great Swanport, Tasmania (c.1832). This is a potent marker and inclusion in the exhibition, even though the tiny painting and two associated drawings come at the end of a period of relatively sustained conflict during the previous decade — prolonged events of conflict and violence that have abundant testimony in diaries and manuscript documents but were barely touched upon in the visual record.

Another significant inclusion in the exhibition was an anonymous painting of the 1820s casting further light on this question of presence and absence. In The new road leading to the northward road from New Norfolk, Van Diemen's Land (c.1825), barely distinguishable troopers in the distant background appear to be marshalling a road gang of convicts; meanwhile in the foreground, on the near side of the River Derwent, two Aboriginal men stand watching from behind a tree, completely unobserved and invisible to those on the other side of the river. It is really only these two works, along with various

32 Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018

Unparalleled resources for reviewing Aboriginal and colonial histories in Hobart

versions of the famous painted boards conceived by George Frankland, Tasmania's Surveyor-General, and titled Governor Arthur's Proclamation to the Aboriginal people (1829–1830), that give a sense of the lengthy conflict that so strongly defined the island’s history in the 1820s. For the most part, the Aboriginal peoples of Tasmania are excluded from the visual record during that crucial decade of most bitter struggle and violence.

In light of this relative absence of representations of Aboriginal Tasmanians in the first thirty years of colonial rule in Van Diemen’s Land, the sudden focus on the plight of the surviving groups in the 1830s and 1840s within such a large body of local visual art was compellingly highlighted by this exhibition. It raises profound and enduring questions about why this occurred in the nineteenth century.

The exhibition included four paintings by the outstanding colonial artist, John Glover, who also incorporated Aboriginal groups in his 1830s paintings of the Tasmanian landscape. Facing The Conciliation in the Hobart installation were Glover’s Mills Plains, Ben Lomond, Ben Loder and Ben Nevis in the distance (1836); The bath of Diana, Van Diemen s Land (1837); and Mount Wellington and Hobart Town from Kangaroo Point (1834): and they all highlighted a profound conundrum that confronted both Glover and Duterrau.

Each of the Glover paintings depicts groups of Tasmanian Aborigines — sometimes in large numbers — going about seemingly normal activities in the landscape; and like Duterrau, Glover painted these works after considerable contact with groups of Aboriginal people whom Robinson had been able to persuade to surrender. Art historian Ian Mclean, in an essay Figuring Nature: painting the indigenous landscape , has argued convincingly that Glover's compositions in these paintings have authenticity, the authenticity of a witness — of camp life, corroborees, and entertainment; and furthermore, like Duterrau, Glover was keenly aware of the impending destruction of traditional Aboriginal society and culture.[7] The choices the two artists make in the 1830s are starkly contrasted and highlighted by McLean: Duterrau's aim is history painting, the individuals have agency, and they have identity, not just in that contemporary context but also for the many descendants of the original population; Glover's paintings, on the other hand, can best be described as natural histories and, as McLean notes, the artist clearly intended not to individuate his subjects. Glover wrote to Robinson at the time, when presenting him with the commissioned painting, Natives at a corrobory, under the wild woods of the Country [River Jordan below Brighton, Tasmania] (c.1835), which was also included in the second TMAG gallery:

The Figures are too small to give much likeness — my object was to give an idea of the gay happy life the natives led before the White people came here and also to an idea of the Scenary of the Country. [8] If on the one hand indigenous presence and agency are emphasised with great authority (and they were highlighted, too, in the final TMAG gallery where contemporary interventions by artists such as Julie

The chances of finding Duterrau’s huge National Picture, which disappeared [after] 1851, now appear to be slim.

Nevertheless, we have The Conciliation — conserved with so many of its companion works in Hobart — to continue to impose its presence as one of the key documents of Australia's early colonial history.

Gough, Ricky Maynard, Gordon Bennett and Geoff Parr clearly emphasise these issues), the antithetical trope — that of absence, and the political decision to disappear the Aboriginal population from mainland Tasmania — remains one of the deeply troubling realities of the time, and continues to have great relevance today. Glover's solution was to evoke an ahistorical world that prefigures European occupation, albeit with the exception of Mount Wellington and Hobart Town from Kangaroo Point;[9] Duterrau's solution was to face the problem front on, and to try to account for what he considered to be Robinson's achievement in bringing about a peaceable solution to the Black War, even if he also flags the impending demise of the Aboriginal Tasmanians along with their unique society and culture.

The chances of finding Duterrau’s huge National Picture, which disappeared sometime after the auction of the artist’s estate in 1851, now appear to be slim. Nevertheless, we have The Conciliation — conserved with so many of its companion works in Hobart — to continue to impose its presence as one of the key documents of Australia's early colonial history.

7.

8.

9.

Ian McLean, ‘Figuring nature: painting the indigenous landscape’, in John Glover and the Colonial Picturesque, Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery (curated by David Hansen), TMAG, Hobart, 2003.

McLean 2003, p. 130.

Even in this example one could argue that the river separation between the old society and the new acts as a metaphor for the impending exile of the Aboriginal Tasmanians, now ‘disappeared’ over the water to the Furneaux islands.

Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018 33

above:

Installation view of The National Picture: The art of Tasmania's Black War at Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery. Photo: courtesy of Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery.

The curators of this memorable exhibition have created a challenging and exemplary case study of the meaning and context of this important painting, and its continuing significance in our national history. [ ] * The National Picture: The art of Tasmania's Black War was shown at the National Gallery of Australia, Canberra (12 May–29 July 2018), the Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery, Hobart (17 August–11 November 2018), and the Queen Victoria Museum and Art Gallery, Launceston (24 November 2018–17 February 2019).

Jonathan Holmes is Emeritus Professor and Honorary Fellow in the School of Creative Arts, Faculty of Arts, Law and Education at the University of Tasmania. He writes mainly on Australian art, craft and design and, since the late 1970s, has curated over 35 exhibitions for various bodies.

Text citation: Jonathan Holmes, ‘Reconsidering Australia’s history - The National Picture: The art of Tasmania's Black War’, Museums Galleries Australia Magazine, Vol. 27(1), Museums and Galleries Australia, Canberra, Summer 2018, pp. 24-33.

34 Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018

How temporary exhibitions have changed the experience of our art and history

Australian art in exhibitions: A new monograph and national review of six decades[1] Angus Trumble

T above:

Angus Trumble.

Australian Art Exhibitions: Opening Our Eyes, Alison Inglis, Joanna Mendelssohn, Catherine De Lorenzo, Catherine Speck ISBN: 9780500501214 ISBN-10: 0500501211 Format: Hardcover Language: English Published: 1st September 2018 Publisher: Thames and Hudson (Australia) Pty Ltd Country of Publication: AU Dimensions (cm): 30.7 x 24.8 x 3.7 Weight (kg): 2.64 RRP: AU$100

1.

2.

Joanna Mendelssohn, Catherine De Lorenzo, Alison Inglis and Catherine Speck, Australian Art Exhibitions: Opening our Eyes, Thames & Hudson Australia, 2018, 9-780500-501214.

A. B., ‘Exhibition of Pictures,’ Sydney Morning Herald, Thursday, 6 May 1847, p. 3.

he colony is reviving from its paralysis’, wrote ‘A.B.’ to the editor of the Sydney Morning Herald on 4 May 1847, referring to the previous few years’ economic depression in New South Wales. ‘Good pictures are arriving from England — many are already here; many persons are now in the colony capable of producing respectable pictures and works of sculpture… An assemblage of works of art will create strong public attention.

Emulation will be excited, and the taste of the colonists will be improved.’[2] In a sense, these simple propositions of aesthetic quality, of artistic ability, of cause and effect, and of engaging an audience or audiences, still pretty much guide those of us who organise exhibitions of works of art today — 170 years later. We will, of course, mostly hesitate before resorting to such loaded, early Victorian concepts as improvement and respectability and maybe even emulation. However, you don’t have to dig very deeply to discern comparable principles and cognate impulses, dressed more appropriately for our time, in which art has evidently turned into a hybrid creature very different from the paintings and sculpture that ‘A.B.’ had in mind.

Few of us would today embark on mounting a really terrible exhibition (despite very occasional evidence to the contrary); or wish it upon an indifferent public, or entertain the ambition, the fervent hope, of little or negative impact — or indeed none at all. Inevitably, we also recall particular art exhibitions that have had lasting, even formative influence — and may even have propelled us into the work that we do — but certainly changed the way we see and experience art itself, its materiality, facture, and ways of representing the world.

For me personally, five exhibitions stand out in memory, all from within the last twenty-six years: two in Europe, two in the United States, and one in Canberra. These were The Age of Angkor: Treasures from the National Museum of Cambodia (National Gallery of Australia, Canberra, 22 August–25 October 1992); Tilman Riemenschneider: Master Sculptor of the Late Middle Ages (Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, 10 February–14 May 2000); [Joachim] Patinir (Museo del Prado, Madrid, 7 March–10 July 2007); Golden Seams: The Japanese Art of Mending Ceramics [Kintsugi (金継ぎ, literally ‘golden joinery’)] (Freer Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C., July 2009), and De Neige, d’or et d’azur: Chu Teh-chun [Zhu Dequn] et la manufacture de Sèvres (Of snow, gold and azure: Chu Teh-chun [Zhu Dequn] and the Sèvres factory) (Musée national des arts asiatiques Guimet, Paris, October 2011–February 2012). Although all were almost as different from each other as it is possible to be, upon much reflection in retrospect, all of them shared the capacity to collapse barriers of time and distance, and to shine powerful beams of light onto worlds I hardly knew existed. Each, in its way, was to me lifechanging.

The present, lavishly illustrated and gorgeously produced volume, reviewing Australian exhibitions exclusively, provides a rigorous, exhaustive analysis of the kind of impact to which I have just referred, but it spans the past fifty or sixty years. It specifically focusses on a sequence of exhibitions all over the country that have, between them, brought about a revolution in our perceptions ‘of Australian art and culture, history and art history’. It seeks to bridge an increasingly discernible division between the activities of collecting institutions and the life of the academy, and to trace the contribution also of state and federal governments, directors, curators, artists and critics to the rapidly evolving ways in which we see ourselves — and others see us — through the prisms of Australian art.

It is, at first, a curious thing to encounter so many reproductions of the covers of other books and catalogues, including even that of Sydney Moderns: Art for a New World on the back of the dustjacket.

At times, the book can feel in other ways a little like an institutional echo chamber. The youthful Daniel Thomas, for example, is to be seen, pixie-like, tapping away on the typewriter in his Sydney flat, his ashtray atop a stack of books; Patrick McCaughey looks smug in the company of the late Diana, Princess of Wales, while Ron Radford channels Muammar Gaddafi.

This book is nevertheless an important survey of the evolving meanings in Australian culture, even of contemporaneity itself — and of the important roles played by objects and display in forming the gradually developing intellectual, philosophical and social agendas surrounding Australian art: agendas that, in turn, are obviously shaped by it.

As with any major Australian Research Council Linkage Project Grant – involving multiple authors, universities and institutional partners spread over three states – in this instance one discerns the ebb and flow of a variety of voices. However, this truly national team has ably mined superb archives of relevant visual and other material. These range from hatted Edwardians in Sydney, mobbing The Light of the World

by William Holman Hunt on its sensational Australian tour in 1906, to a shot documenting the dance performance at the opening of the Campbelltown Arts Centre’s With Secrecy and Despatch (2016) by the Wiritjiribin Dance Group, led by Shari Potts.

Beginning with the initiatives of various state gallery directors in the 1950s and 1960s, twelve meaty chapters proceed logically through the ‘moment’ of E.G. Whitlam and the creation of the Australia Council for the Arts. There follows an analysis of a group of exhibitions that sought to redefine the very nature of art in Australia, and the coming of that wearisome beast, the ‘blockbuster,’ and its consequences for good and ill.

Then come changing attitudes about the colonial past; our national addiction to marking centenaries, and these days bicentenaries; and the greater seriousness with which, over the years, we have treated Australian Modernism and Modernism in

Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018 35

Australia (not by any means the same thing at all).

Feminism and the gradually improving fortunes of women artists then follow; the Aboriginal art ‘revolution’ since Papunya is surveyed, along with the transformation of approaches to exhibiting the momentary present.

A case is well made for exhibiting a ‘new’ Australia through the past few decades, taking account of the proliferation of new and different modes of engagement. The book concludes with a hymn in praise of the value of exhibitions — which, if that were not so urgently needed right now, could feel redundant. That it is certainly not redundant is, or should be, a matter of grave concern. I wondered about a chapter that might have been devoted to those gigantic projects that never made it onto walls; haven’t most of us in long careers nurtured such a grand projet, only to find that one day it has been scratched from the program? No doubt certain other readers will also turn to the helpful appendix devoted to career paths, as I did, and be crestfallen to discover that one isn’t there; but this I think merely reflects the exclusively Australian coverage.

When I started out as an art museum curator, there was I believe a tacit acceptance that the curatorial footprint ought, if possible, to be kept as light as possible; that ideally works of art ought to be able to speak most eloquently for themselves, unimpeded, and as harmoniously as possible; this might occur in (and sometimes out of ) sequence, both individually and en bloc. That is not to say that there wasn’t room for strong counterpoint; for assertive visual argument, or the occasional coup de théâtre. It wouldn’t be much fun if there weren’t these opportunities.

Nevertheless, in a way, your job was on the whole to be as unobtrusive as possible — to enable the works themselves to be the main experience, not the curatorial uses made of them.

Since those prevailing values of an earlier period, I have noticed an increased tendency to flag curatorial interventions, to profile them explicitly in the work of interpretation, and to be far keener to provoke, to argue a case, to play up strong, sometimes stark contrasts, even to indulge in the heady joy of orchestrating really jarring collisions. The Australian curator may not yet be a rock star, but one senses she is moving in that direction.

Even before this discernible shift towards increased curatorial ‘presence’, some exhibitions could feel rather bossy; or fussy, feeble, dry, wet, too big, or not big enough. Some projects implied a dangerously elevated appetite for risk; others shunned risk altogether. Some exhibitions were a little too brittle in their cheerfulness; others heaped gloom on an already pronounced excess of lugubriousness. They might rejoice in the courage of their conviction, or conspicuously lack it. Some could be brilliantly paced; others felt labyrinthine, over-chosen and/or confusing.

No doubt similar tendencies, whether weak or at times excessive, continue today, and will persist for as long as exhibitions continue to be organised and mounted.

What is undeniable, however, is that whatever their texture or contents, their subject or style or argument, exhibitions of original works of art play into simultaneous, multiple narratives of Australian art history. These impacts only gain traction afterwards, but as a direct consequence of what was presented on public walls over a mere few weeks or months.

Sometimes an exhibition continues to have an extended life in memory long after its close, the true value of which – value, that is, to our shared national life in visual culture — is so much greater than mere ticket sales or visitor numbers could ever suggest.

Those of us who have long experienced institutional life, whether in universities or art museums, are obliged for practical reasons to pay heed to audience indicators and visitor numbers. Yet ideally we do this so that we may, at times, mount a relatively expensive show that, in our judgment — which is fundamentally what we are employed to exercise — desperately needs to be shown.

A journalist once asked Premier Zhou Enlai what, in his opinion, had been the full impact of the French Revolution? Zhou’s answer, after a long and thoughtful pause, was: ‘It’s too early to say.’ This anecdote (and variants) gained traction in the wake of Vietnam and, more recently, as a measure of the sage Chinese ‘long view.’ Yet I think it applies also to the lingering impact of art exhibitions, even when they may profoundly touch the experience of a mere few, and not the infinitely-to-be-desired many of current data evaluation by sponsors, government or grant bodies.

Those few, after all — which includes critics, historians, artists, and other contemporary creators and interpreters — have a persistent habit of reflecting on the experience of an exhibition afterwards, of reprocessing it, and of eventually spreading their insights to the many. With social media (and all other audience-extending channels) this process of the formation of artistic judgment and taste in Australia is accelerating beyond our capacity to keep up with all the really outstanding exhibitions now occurring across our country (and sometimes sent abroad).

This impressive volume, recently published, constitutes an important record of how that process of conceiving, collaborating, debating and realising public exhibitions has been developing through the past six decades. [ ] Angus Trumble, FAHA, is a former Director of the National Portrait Gallery in Canberra. Previously he was Curator of European Art at the Art Gallery of South Australia in Adelaide, then Senior Curator of Paintings and Sculpture at the Yale Center for British Art in New Haven, Connecticut.

Text citation: Angus Trumble, ‘Australian art in exhibitions: A new monograph and national review of six decades’, Museums Galleries Australia Magazine, Vol. 27(1), Museums Galleries Australia, Canberra, Summer 2018, pp. 34-35.

36 Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018

The long tradition of visual artists illuminating natural history in museum collections

Botanical art in Australian museums: Revival and relevance

Alison Wishart

I above:

Alison Wishart.

n 2001, I walked into an exhibition at the National Library of Australia and was transfixed. I was surrounded by paintings of banksias: their precision and detail were beautiful. For me, this was the ‘wow’ moment that every exhibition curator and designer hopes to achieve.

Banksias are spiky, sharp, messy plants, but Celia Rosser’s intimate watercolours rendered them serene.

It was a revelation, and an experience I have never forgotten — and never repeated — in 17 years of visiting numerous exhibitions since that day.[1] In 2018, to further my love of botanical art, I caught the train to Katoomba, west of Sydney, to attend the opening of Blue Mountains Botanica at the Blue Mountains Cultural Centre. I was so shocked by the experience that I wrote a review to try and understand my negative reaction to an exhibition I expected to embrace.[2] This led me to try and answer the question, what is botanical art and what is its role in the 21st century?

Botanical art commenced as a means of identifying different herbal plants for scientific classification, and their use as medicines. Visual representations (or artworks), usually accompanied by descriptions of plants’ therapeutic properties, can be found in early codices dating from the first century BCE.[3] These drawings and their accompanying text were copied and translated again and again in subsequent publications, often becoming less like their original botanical specimens and more inaccurate with each rendition. The golden age of botanical art emerged after the Age of Enlightenment and the expansion of science, when rich patrons commissioned skilled artists to draw the numerous exotic specimens ‘discovered’ and collected during and after the Age of Exploration. In the late-18th century, the quest for scientific knowledge merged with artistic practice, resulting in an exquisite refinement of botanical art.

Ferdinand Bauer is one of the best-known botanical artists from this period. He accompanied Matthew Flinders on his circumnavigation of Australia in 1801–3 and produced more than 2000 drawings of Australia’s flora and fauna. Such was Bauer’s dedication to accuracy and colour fidelity that he enhanced a numbered colour code used by other artists to denote the colour details of the plants he was sketching in the field — so that when he was back at his desk, in Vienna or London, and had time to mix pigments to gain the correct shade, he could virtually ‘paint by numbers’. His refined understanding of nature’s palette obliged him to use more than 400 numbers to indicate the different shades of green.[4] Botanical art is closely related to what later

became known as ‘flower painting’ (usually in watercolours). This genteel artform flourished in the Victorian and Edwardian eras, since it was regarded as an appropriate leisure pursuit for middle- and upper-class ‘ladies’. They were tutored in the refined drawing-room skills of painting and embroidery, while their lower-class sisters were taught the practical skills of cooking, cleaning and sewing. However, these feminine flower painters were not encouraged to stray into botany, as studying the reproductive parts of plants involved an understanding of sex, which was considered licentious and unlady-like.[5] Nevertheless, the intrepid work of ‘flower hunters’, such as Ellis Rowan and Harriet and Helena Scott, added greatly to the 19th-century canon of botanical knowledge of Australian flora.

The Botanical Art Society of Australia defines botanical art as: ‘a liaison between the disciplines of art and science’: Specifically, the aim is to capture the essence of the plant, its form, texture and growth habits, in a two-dimensional medium such as painting and drawing.[6] The Society’s exhibition in May 2018 at the Ainslie Arts Centre, Canberra, displayed selected works from 109 botanical artists, which were then gathered into a commemorative book: Flora of Australia.[7] This event was part of a worldwide celebration of botanical art, in exhibitions held simultaneously in 25 countries, which showcased native flora.

Some authors point to the ‘subtle differences’ between botanical art and botanical illustration.[8] Both offer accurate renditions of a plant, but the former is produced primarily for aesthetic purposes and the latter for the purpose of scientific identification and understanding the life-cycle of a plant. The Margaret Flockton Award exhibition (a companion exhibition to Blue Mountains Botanica) fits into the latter category. Named in honour of the first scientific illustrator employed at the Royal Botanic Garden Sydney from 1901 to 1927, this award celebrates contemporary botanical illustration that still supports scientific objectives.[9] These botanically explicit, extremely detailed drawings could also be considered botanical art.[10] Their beauty lies in their completeness and exact detailing, evident even under magnification.

Blue Mountains Botanica stretches the usual understanding of botanical art to incorporate art works that include ‘botanical elements’. This extends to other formats such as James Blackwell’s use of laser-cut paper and natural seeds, Edith Pass’s

Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018 37

above: Edith Pass’s installation ‘Hollow Men’ is displayed in front of Jennifer Leahy’s ‘Timeslip’ digital HD work in Blue Mountains Botanica, Blue Mountains Cultural Centre, Katoomba, 2018. On the right-hand wall are watercolours

by Julie Nettleton. Photograph

by SilverSalt Photography.

38 Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018

The long tradition of visual artists illuminating natural history in museum collections

It is generally accepted that photography cannot replace botanical art for the purposes of identifying plants

above:

Lapidia apicifolia by Natanael Nascimento dos Santos from Brazil, the winner of the first prize in 2018 for the Margaret Flockton Award.

flannel flower installation, and Jennifer Leahy’s HD multi-media art.[11] Depending on your perspective, this variety is either an excellent example of lateral curatorial thinking or a corruption of a special artform and its ancient traditions. However, simply because an artwork features flora does not make it ‘botanical art’ — renowned Scottish artist-designer Charles Rennie Mackintosh drew beautiful roses, but he was not a botanical artist. The essence of botanical art is its concern for botanical accuracy versus a more generalised or imaginative depiction of plants.

Perhaps you might ask: ‘Does it matter?’ Is it important to distinguish between botanical art, botanical illustration, and other ways of incorporating botanical elements into art?[12] Or, is this conjecture distracting from a more fundamental question: What is the purpose of botanical art/illustration today, given that we have excellent photographic equipment and microscopes with which to study, identify and describe our flora?

It is generally accepted that photography cannot replace botanical art for the purposes of identifying plants; however, it is an aid. Botanical art is more resourceful in providing a three-dimensional depiction, and can even incorporate aspects of the fourth dimension (of time). It can show the different stages and seasons of a plant in seed, flower, and fruit in the one drawing, and it can represent the size of each part and stage of a plant’s life-cycle relative to the others.

A contemporary role for botanical art is encouraging environmental conservation. One of the subtle but persuasive ‘take home messages’ of Blue Mountains Botanica was that botanical art encourages viewers and artists to better appreciate the natural environment — for its beauty, biodiversity, and cultural significance — and this can motivate us to work together as a community to ‘care for country’ as a legacy for future generations. Botanical art can remind us of what we lose when gullies, parks and remnant bush are forfeited to developers.

Similarly, it is through the work of such accomplished botanical artists as Ferdinand Bauer and Marion Westmacott that we know what a ‘bridal flower’ (Solanum bauerianum [Solanaceae]) looked like — an extinct plant named after Bauer, which

Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018 39

right:

Solanum bauerianum (Solanaceae), by Marion Westmacott, c. 2004. Reproduced with artist’s permission. Digital copy provided by the State Library of New South Wales.

40 Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018

The long tradition of visual artists illuminating natural history in museum collections

above:

Blue Mountains Botanica catalogue, Blue Mountains Cultural Centre, Katoomba, 2018.

Designer: Hannah Surtees.

once grew on Norfolk and Lord Howe Islands. Bauer sketched the plant when he visited Norfolk Island in 1804–5 but did not colour his drawing. Nearly 200 years later, in the absence of photographs or colour illustrations of this extinct plant in both flower and fruit, Westmacott, a contemporary botanical artist, relied on Bauer’s code to colour the drawing and ‘revive’ the plant’s full depiction.

By comparing the real colours of living plants in Western Australia with the numbers in Bauer’s colour code, and studying his extant colour sketches of those plants, researchers were able to ‘crack’ Bauer’s colour code in 2000.[13] Botanical art can crucially record the biodiversity of an earlier era that human activity has since depleted, and so help us appreciate what we are losing.

The discipline of botanical art is experiencing a revival as more artists (particularly women) again take up its challenges and rewards. As most artists work from nature, this field can take them to places where particular plants can be found, and it encourages an appreciation of their natural habitat. Examining a plant in order to draw it accurately, and in great detail, requires deep concentration — focussing on specific features but also becoming more cognisant of the ambient environment.

Part of botanical art’s continuing appeal today is that it provides a refreshing counterpoint to the dominance of the computer screen and the clock. Meanwhile its flourishing raises another question: Which cultural institutions today are collecting this art?

Botanical art exhibitions are increasingly popular and prolific. In the past two years in the Sydney area alone, there have been exhibitions presented

by Sydney Living Museums (at Customs House), the Australian Museum (Sydney), the State Library of New South Wales, The Royal Botanic Garden Sydney, and those already-mentioned in the Blue Mountains.[14] These exhibitions resonate with viewers when they allow the art to ‘sing’: about our natural heritage and how important it is to protect its bounty. There is still an appetite today for botanical art, however it is defined, and a need for it to remind us of the beauty and responsibility of living in the natural world. [ ] Alison Wishart has worked as a curator or collection manager for 15 years. As a Senior Curator at the State Library of New South Wales, she wrote the exhibition text for Botanical Inspirations in 2017.

Text citation: Alison Wishart, ‘Botanical art in Australian museums: Revival and relevance’, Museums Galleries Australia Magazine, Vol. 27(1), Museums Galleries Australia, Canberra, Summer 2018, pp. 36–41.

Endnotes 1. The banksias, a three-volume collection of every banksia species in Australia, featuring Rosser’s work was published in Melbourne in 1981 by Monash University Press. You can see her original works by visiting her studio and gallery in Fish Creek, Victoria; see <https://www.abc.net.au/news/201705-02/botanical-artist-celia-rosser-banksia-collection/8475578>.

2. The review is available at: <https://visual.artshub.com.au/news-article/ reviews/visual-arts/alison-wishart/review-blue-mountains-botanicablue-mountains-cultural-centre-256417>, (accessed 31 October 2018).

3. Martyn Rix, The Golden Age of Botanical Art, London: Andre Deutsch, 2012, p.

14. Pedanios Dioscordes, a doctor who travelled with the Roman Army in the 1st century CE is thought to have written (in Greek) the text which appeared in Aniciae Iulianae picturis illustratus, nunc Vindobonensis Medicus Graecus in 512, a publication which is held in the Austrian National Library in Vienna.

4. For more information, see <https://paintingbynumbers.dxlab.sl.nsw.gov.au/ colour-code/ferdinand-bauer>, and David J. Mabberley, Painting by Numbers: The life and art of Ferdinand Bauer, Sydney: New South Publishing, 2017, pp. 5–18.

5. See Leonie Norton, Women of Flowers: Botanical art in Australia from the 1830s to the 1960s, Canberra: National Library of Australia, 2009, pp. 2–3.

6. See <https://www.botanicalartsocietyaustralia.com/ about/>, (accessed 31 October 2018).

7. Botanical Art Society of Australia, Flora of Australia: A Botanical Art Worldwide Exhibition linking people to plants through botanical art, presented by the Botanical Art Society of Australia, 2018.

8. Caroline Berlyn and Anna Jug, Close to Nature: May Gibbs and Australian Botanical Art, room brochure for an exhibition at Carrick Hill, Adelaide, 2018.

9. See <https://www.rbgsyd.nsw.gov.au/science/botanical-illustration/the-margaretflockton-award-2018>, (accessed 31 October 2018). $7000 prize money is awarded annually for the best illustrations created and submitted by professional scientific illustrators and illustration enthusiasts from all over the world. The next exhibition will be held at the Royal Botanic Garden, Sydney, 30 March–14 April 2019.

10. See for example, the botanical art/illustrations in Janda Gooding, Brush with Gondwana: The Botanical Artists Group Western Australia, Fremantle: Fremantle Press, 2008.

11. Edith Pass works as a florist, (see <http://www.floralink.com.au/aboutfloralink/>), and Jennifer Leahy as a photographer (see <http://www. silversalt.com.au/art#!/page/260878/about); James Blackwell is a fulltime artist (see <https://james-blackwell.com/about/>) and Julie Nettleton specialises in ‘modern botanical art’ (see <https://julienettleton.com/>).

12. David Mabberley regards the need to define botanical art as ‘fatuous, and likely snobbish, hair-splitting’, Painting by Numbers, p. 235.

13. Mabberley, Painting by Numbers, p. 153.

14. See <https://sydneylivingmuseums.com.au/2016/07/06/botanicalart>; <https://australianmuseum.net.au/event/scott-sisters-exhibition>; <http://www.sl.nsw.gov.au/exhibitions/botanical-inspirations>; <https://www.rbgsyd.nsw.gov.au/whatson/botanica>.

Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018 41

above: Morgyn Phillips, Eucalyptus

polyanthemos, Red Box, graphite and coloured pencil on paper, no. 76 in the Flora of Australia exhibition presented by the Botanical Art Society of Australia, 2018.

42 Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018

Expanding concerns with human rights across the horizon of museums

The Holocaust and Human Rights: An inclusive critical field for museums

top:

Avril Alba.

middle:

Jennifer Barrett.

bottom: right:

A. Dirk Moses.

The Holocaust and Human Rights, Sydney Jewish Museum.

Avril Alba, Jennifer Barrett and A. Dirk Moses

T

he Holocaust and Human Rights, the newest permanent exhibition at the Sydney Jewish Museum (2018), outlines the achievements and failures of the human rights movement. It focuses on historic and contemporary human rights struggles in Australia and the region, exploring and questioning our individual, communal and national responsibilities in upholding human rights today.

Holocaust museums and their museological practices (including the architecture, affective spaces and exhibition design) have become highly influential forms of memorialisation, as is evident in many new human rights museums that often have a Holocaust ‘core’ or basis. Yet issues of comparison, and in particular whether utilising the Holocaust as an analogical resource can serve to highlight or obscure other atrocities, remain contentious.

Linking or comparing the Holocaust to other atrocities has been perceived as diminishing this specific event or, conversely, as canonising the Holocaust over other genocides. Contending with these methodological issues and international debates was pivotal in the development of the Holocaust and Human Rights exhibition at the SJM. In the intensive

research undertaken to create the exhibition, we harnessed the public forum of the museum to explore the nexus between the Holocaust and human rights and to see how this connection could be most fruitfully deployed in an Australian context.

The diverse museological and site research we undertook with the SJM generated valuable information and primary source material that formed the basis of the exhibition development. We analysed the historical and museological frameworks of often-controversial Holocaust museums that have explicitly linked Holocaust history to human rights paradigms such as at the Kazerne Dossin (in Mechelen, Belgium) and the Anne Frank House (in Amsterdam). Our research also took us to museums in South Africa, where the history of the Jewish diaspora, genocide and colonialism intersected; and to the Canadian Museum for Human Rights (Winnipeg), a fellow-Commonwealth country with a similarly distinctive record of First Nations and colonial history interactions raising human rights issues, as well as both having experienced significant post-war immigration.

At these institutions, we undertook extensive interviews with museum directors, curators, educators and board members, to ensure that we were able to explore and critique the most current

Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018 43

approaches in this area. Similarly, we examined the exhibitions on view in these institutions, with a critical eye and a desire to develop a distinctive Australian intervention within the field. As we assessed and documented potential connections and intersections between Holocaust history, memory and human rights, we reached the following conclusions: 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

The Holocaust can provide an effective framing device to explore human rights challenges if accurately historicised in terms of the language used in international society in the 1940s.

Nazi targeting of Jews was recognised but was also contextualised as part of the regime’s general criminality. Shock at the extent of this criminality motivated United Nations delegates to pass the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in November 1948.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights can also be fruitfully utilised as a framing device – but again, it must be adequately historicised to understand its limitations and omissions.

A focus on local and/or regional human rights issues would provide an effective and authentic entry point to contemporary international human rights agendas. Engagement with pressing local and national issues would allow the researched exhibition to address the changing nature of human rights broadly, while also serving to enrich ongoing connections between communities of interest in an Australian context.

Consultation with local communities, and in particular with local Indigenous communities in Australia, has been imperative to ensure that the definition and content of human rights in the exhibition accounts appropriately for Indigenous knowledge, experience and struggles for human rights.

While not a vehicle for political advocacy, the exhibition as finally presented should challenge visitors to conclude their visit to SJM on a note of reflection, acknowledging the complexity of the issues that have been raised. If its intents are realised, the exhibition experience might also stimulate visitors to apply what they have learned in a variety of life situations, or further investigate contemporary issues raised.

Proceeding from this basis, we created a new conceptual paradigm through which the connection between the Holocaust and human rights could be deployed in an Australian setting by articulating the following key objectives for the exhibition.

The Holocaust and Human Rights will: 1.

2.

3.

4.

Connect the historic and thematic content in The Holocaust exhibition to contemporary human rights issues, debates and concerns, with an emphasis on current issues most pertinent to Australia.

Offer, as the first permanent human rights exhibition in an Australian museum, a distinctly Australian contribution to the growing international interest in and proliferation of museums focused on human rights.

Function as a self-directed learning space for all visitors, and be a place for questioning and inquiry.

Provide space for reflection and contemplation by encouraging visitors to connect the historical materials to contemporary human rights debates and violations.

With the conceptual boundaries firmly established, the detailed work of interpretation and information delivery began. To provide historical context and encourage affective as well as intellectual engagement with human rights issues, the exhibition is structured around four main components: 1.

2.

3.

4.

Historical introduction Human Rights timeline Coming to the Table multimedia installation Reflective space

The Introduction sets the historical and thematic boundaries of the exhibition, connecting it to The Holocaust exhibition while also ensuring its own internal logic and consistency. The focus is on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Genocide Convention, adopted by the United Nations in successive days in December 1948. At the adoption of the Declaration, Eleanor Roosevelt, who led its development stated: MAN’S DESIRE FOR PEACE LIES BEHIND THIS DECLARATION. THE REALISATION THAT THE FLAGRANT VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS BY NAZI AND FASCIST COUNTRIES SOWED THE SEEDS OF THE LAST WORLD WAR HAS SUPPLIED THE IMPETUS FOR THE WORK WHICH BRINGS US TO THE MOMENT OF ACHIEVEMENT HERE TODAY. While both the UN Convention and Declaration marked positive declarations of principle, the former excluded population expulsions, cultural genocide and political groups, while the latter omitted economic,

44 Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018

Expanding concerns with human rights across the horizon of museums

social, minority, and indigenous rights. Meanwhile, neither seriously inhibited state sovereignty. Since their passing, human rights violations and genocide have continued to mark global society. In the SJM exhibition, reflection on these statements, their achievements and limitations, readies the visitor to contemplate the challenges that have faced the human rights movement since their adoption at the end of the 1940s.

Since the UN Declaration, human rights consciousness has grown alongside further mass atrocities and other human rights violations.

Nevertheless, the events included in the Sydney exhibition timeline were recognised as having a major impact on the development of human rights and human rights consciousness in Australia and internationally. They provide a local and global overview of the gains and losses of rights and freedom, and show that significant challenges remain to ensuring that the human rights of all are respected and upheld.

Split into three distinct sections, the exhibition timeline’s blue line charts the development of key United Nations instruments of protection. The black line charts Australia’s human rights achievements and shortcomings; and the red line charts some of the major genocides and human rights violations of the last century that have occurred despite developments in human rights protections. The two AV screens present in the exhibition meanwhile explore the history and content of the 1948 UN Declaration and Genocide Convention, and the further genocides and major HR violations that have occurred since 1948.

Coming to the Table Coming to the Table is the centrepiece of The Holocaust and Human Rights exhibition. It embodies the complex and ongoing process of negotiating and upholding human rights, in both its content and design, by inviting visitors to both intellectually and physically ‘come to the table’ and think deeply about the human rights issues we face today. The development of robust mechanisms to protect human rights is a complex and dynamic process requiring the input of individuals, communities, and legal experts.

In the debate and political struggle to safeguard human rights, opinions about the urgency of human rights issues and the best means to address them vary and, at times, clash. Using a montage of historical sources and multimedia, Coming to the Table invites the visitor to join these debates and to learn about and reflect upon key human rights issues facing Australia and Australians today.

Coming to the Table explores four human rights themes:

• • • •

Indigenous Rights Disability Rights Asylum Seekers and Refugees Rights LGBTQI Rights

Four multimedia tabletop projections explore these human rights issues. Each topic is introduced through a series of short video clips framed with 3–4 questions, for example: In what ways have Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people sought change? How have perceptions of disability changed over time?

What responsibilities does Australia have with regard to the international refugee crisis? What factors shape Australian policies and attitudes towards members of the LGBTQI+ communities?

The space was designed to facilitate and reflect the process of communication, with video installations and seating that allows visitors to talk and interact about the issues they are encountering. Group visitors and students are able to explore content around each of these questions either on their own or facilitated by an educator. There is potential to engage more deeply in the debates that surround these complex issues.

The installations are programmed in such a way that they can either have all four human rights issues running at once or have the four stations focus on a single issue to suit a range of education programs and approaches.

The exhibition also takes seriously its mandate of human rights, and hence both accessibility and diversity were paramount concerns. For example, Coming to the Table explicitly addresses the struggles of often marginalised groups but presents the information in such a way that individuals from these groups speak for themselves rather than being ‘spoken about’.

The Holocaust and Human Rights ends with a space specifically designed for visitors to reflect and respond to the materials they have viewed. They are challenged to think about their own responsibilities in upholding human rights and the possible ways they can contribute to the development of more robust human rights mechanisms. In this space, visitors can leave short messages and impressions, express their opinions on the matters raised and their hopes for the future of human rights cultures in Australia and internationally. These responses are collected by the museum and will be used to inform education programs and to promote further engagement with the exhibition issues and themes. [ ] Research and institutional support: Research and development for The Holocaust and Human Rights was undertaken as a collaborative project between the Sydney Jewish Museum (SJM) and the University of Sydney. The exhibition

Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018 45

is an official non-traditional research output of the Australian Research Council Linkage Project LP140100795: Australian Holocaust Memory, Human Rights and the Australian Museum. The project is funded by an ARC Linkage Grant jointly held by the University of Sydney and the SJM. The project team: University of Sydney: Chief Investigators — Dr Avril Alba, A/Professor Jennifer Barrett, Professor A. Dirk Moses; Research Assistant: Sarah Haid, Sydney Jewish Museum; Creative Director: Jisuk Han; Curator: Roslyn Sugarman; Redevelopment Education Officer: Marie Bonardelli.

Avril Alba is Senior Lecturer in Holocaust Studies and Jewish Civilisation in the Department of Hebrew, Biblical and Jewish Studies at the University of Sydney. Her monograph The Holocaust Memorial Museum: Sacred Secular Space was published in 2015. She is also co-editor, with Shirli Gilbert, of the forthcoming Holocaust Memory and Racism in the Postwar World (Wayne State University Press, 2019), and has curated several major exhibitions.

Jennifer Barrett is an Associate Professor of Museum and Heritage Studies in the Department of Art History at the University of Sydney. She is currently Director of the University’s Culture Strategy. Her monographs include: Australian Artists in the Contemporary Museum (with Jacqueline Millner, Ashgate, 2014) and Museums and the Public Sphere (Blackwell, 2012). Since 2014 Jennifer has been Chair of the Board for Museums and Galleries NSW. Dirk Moses is Professor of Modern History at the University of Sydney. His coedited anthologies, The Holocaust in Greece and Postcolonial Conflict and the Question of Genocide: The Nigeria-Biafra War, 1967–1970 appeared in 2018.

Text citation: Avril Alba, Jennifer Barrett and Dirk Moses, ‘The Holocaust and Human Rights: An inclusive critical field for museums’, Museums Galleries Australia Magazine, Vol. 27(1), Museums Galleries Australia, Canberra, Summer 2018, pp. 42-45.

above:

The Holocaust and Human Rights, Sydney Jewish Museum.

46 Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018

Profile of a regional art museum in Victoria

SAM, the new … new ‘hot’: Ceramics and the Shepparton Art Museum

1. Endnotes

Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018 47

Rebecca Coates

I

n the contemporary art world and beyond, ceramics has undergone a significant repositioning. Now regularly hailed as the hip, happening and heretical art form of today, ceramics is no longer brown, brown, brown, burdened with sober traditions of ‘craft’.[1] Leading ceramicists and potters, master craftspeople, and contemporary artists from around the globe have extended their practice to work in this tactile, age-old medium. Shepparton Art Museum (or SAM as it is affectionately known) is at the centre of this trend — some would say we continue to ride the crest of what has been a very long wave. SAM, however, is not a fashionably late adopter. It’s had a leading focus on ceramics for nearly sixty years.

This article explores SAM’s difference from many of its Victorian regional gallery peers; it discusses ‘Why Ceramics?’; it briefly touches on two of the major national acquisitive art awards that have made such significant contributions to the collection: the Sidney Myer Fund Australian Ceramic Award (SMFACA), and the Indigenous Ceramic Award (ICA); and finally the article flags SAM’s ambitious plans for a new, stand-alone art museum scheduled to open in late 2020.

Shepparton Art Museum is a strong Australian public gallery, set squarely in the centre of regional Victoria. Greater Shepparton has a population of around 64,000 people, and is located on the Goulburn River floodplain. It is about 2 hours north of Melbourne by car — still the main means of transport in regional Victoria. Travel to the large city of Bendigo takes less than an hour and a half, while Benalla can be reached in just under 30 minutes. Although there is a regional rail line, services are infrequent and rolling stock old — that is, until election time.

Shepparton also has a long and proud Indigenous history, which continues as a strong living culture.

Located on the traditional lands of the Yorta Yorta Nation, also comprising the Bangarang and other clans, Shepparton is home to the second most populous Indigenous language group in Australia, and the largest Aboriginal community in Victoria outside Melbourne. The community has a robust history of Indigenous advocacy and leadership, both nationally and internationally. In the 2016 census, an estimated 3.4% of residents cited their Indigenous heritage, while approximately 16% of residents were born outside Australia.[2] Shepparton is also known for its diverse, multicultural population. Waves of migration from the 1930s onwards have resulted in a strong, culturally rich community. In the aftermath of World War 1, migrants came mainly from Southern Europe, predominantly Greece, Italy, Macedonia and Albania. After World

above:

Rebecca Coates.

left:

Installation view (detail), Australian Commercial ceramics, c. 1930s–1960s, Cornucopia 2016. Image: Chris Hawking.

1. For details of this shift, see Rebecca Coates, ‘Place, Identity and Ceramics: Shepparton Art Museum and 80 years of Collecting’, 80 Years of SAM, The Collection, Shepparton Art Museum, 2016, pp. 17–25.

2. Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), http://www.censusdata. abs.gov.au/census_services/ getproduct/census/2016/quickstat/ SED27504, accessed 28 May 2018.

48 Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018

Profile of a regional art museum in Victoria

War II, further migration occurred from Europe, with many Turkish immigrants settling in the region. In the late 1980s, Punjabis from India and Pacific Islanders began to arrive. In the 1990s Greater Shepparton welcomed Afghani, Iraqi, Sudanese and Congolese populations. In the 2016 census, Shepparton had a greater proportion of people born in Asia than any inland area except a few mining regions. And more of the population was born in the Middle East and Africa than in any Australian region other than its capital cities.[3] SAM works to develop strong ties with many in these communities: creating exhibitions, programs, a permanent collection, and educational opportunities that have meaning and value for many.

Economically, Greater Shepparton is a key regional hub, with a strong farming community recognised as a significant producer of dairy and orchards — often dubbed the ‘fruit bowl of Victoria’.

SAM is now recognised for many things that differentiate it from its colleagues and other regional galleries. It has a unique collection focus, as the leading collection of Australian ceramics in regional Australia. The ceramics collection spans objects from Australia’s first European settlement, Indigenous artists working in the ceramics medium, and contemporary artists expanding our understanding of ceramics in a current context. The SAM collection also includes notable Australian historic works of art, a growing contemporary collection, and an important collection of Indigenous Australian artworks. The promised donation of Carrillo and Ziyin Gantner’s collection of Aboriginal Art, as part of the new SAM development project, will significantly add to the Museum’s holdings of Aboriginal work largely from remote communities.

SAM’s history is not one of gold-rush Victoria.

It was not one of the first regional galleries to be developed — in contrast to Ballarat (founded in 1884), Warrnambool (1886), Bendigo (1887), and Geelong (1896). These galleries were founded earlier, due in large part to the gold rushes, land booms, and wool export from the 1850s to 90s.[4] Where the histories overlap, however, is in the shared ambitions for all these art museums and galleries, and the unique history of how each came into being. ‘Local communities, not governments’, as art historian Caroline Jordan has noted, ‘were responsible for instituting Australia’s first regional galleries.’[5] Their colonial architecture often reflected the British art gallery tradition of creating an Enlightenment temple of learning.[6] Collecting for a ‘fine collection’ began in 1936, with Australia’s leading portrait painter, Sir John Longstaff, advising the gallery to acquire ‘work by a contemporary

artist’, a collection focus that is maintained to this day.

It was not, however, until 1965 that SAM, or Shepparton Art Gallery as it was then known, achieved a permanent home, built with financial assistance from the Victorian Government and the Shepparton Preserving Company Limited (SPC).[7] Another significant shift in Shepparton Art Gallery’s history was its change in name to Shepparton Art Museum in 2012, at the same time as the gallery spaces were substantially renovated. The term ‘gallery’ is one that is widely used in Australia, originally adopted from Britain where it is preferred.[8] In Australia there is a general perception that the term museum is more readily associated with social and natural history than art. While we now have notable examples of other art museums in Australia, for SAM the change was a chance to develop a new brand, designed to be young, contemporary, engaging, and attractive to a diverse regional demographic.

The change in title from gallery to museum also sent a clear message to those working in the arts and cultural sector. The term ‘museum’, observing principles-driven management framed by the Parisbased International Council of Museums (ICOM) and its Code of Ethics for Museums,[9] enhances a museum’s standing and ability to borrow significant works from other leading art museums and galleries around the world.

In a regional context, what works in a major city is not always best for country audiences. SAM’s branding is contemporary and inclusive. The democratisation of art galleries and museums has been a global trend in recent decades.[10] In a world of millennials and in the age of the ‘attention economy’, the art museum needs to evolve.

Ceramics and Shepparton So how did the intersection of ceramics and Shepparton come about? Mr Keith Rogers, the first full-time director (1970‑73) made ceramics a focus of the growing collection, along with Australian prints and fibre art. All were affordable and the field was wide open. Awards and corporate sponsorship became important in developing the collection, and they remain so today. In August 1971, the first Caltex Ceramic Award for $400 was presented to Joan Campbell, as part of a wider Australian trend at the time for corporate bodies to support contemporary art awards.

Subsequent directors continued to build on this ceramics legacy. Peter Timms noted, during his time in the post, that no ceramics industry had ever existed in the immediate area, and local artist-potters were

3. Daley, Wood, Regional patterns of Australia’s economy and population, The Grattan Institute, Melbourne, 2017, pp. 27-28.

4. See Caroline Jordan, ‘The South Kensington empire and the Idea of the Regional Art Gallery in Nineteenth-Century Victoria’, Fabrications, Issue 20, No 2, 2011, pp. 34–59.

5. Jordan (2011) 6. See Tony Bennett, The Birth of the Museum, Routledge, London, 1995, for a more complex history.

7. See Rebecca Coates and Sarah Gory (eds), 80 Years of SAM, The Collection, Shepparton Art Museum, 2016.

8. The term gallery was adopted by the Public Galleries Association Victoria (PGAV), the peak body representing public galleries across Victoria, which now includes galleries and art museums in its membership.

9. International Council of Museums (ICOM), ICOM Code of Ethics for Museums (2004), http://icom. museum/fileadmin/user_upload/ pdf/Codes/code_ethics2013_eng. pdf, accessed 28 November 2016.

See also Bernice L Murphy (ed.), Museums, Ethics and Cultural Heritage, Routledge, UK, 2016.

10. See for example Andrew Goldstein, ‘Newfield Director Charles Venable on his Data-Driven (and Maybe Crazy) Quest to Save the Art Museum’, February 12, 2018, https://news.artnet.com/art-world/ newfields-director-charles-venableindianapolis-art-museum-1218602, accessed 2 November 2018.

11. Peter Timms, ‘An eighty-year affair’, 80 Years of SAM, The Collection, Shepparton Art Museum, 2016, p. 6.

Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018 49

few,[11] so there were no obvious artistic or social reasons for Shepparton to concentrate on ceramics.

Yet in addition to being readily affordable, ceramics were robust in material — well able to withstand the heat and chill of Shepparton’s climate, in a gallery with limited temperature control.

The 1970s was also a period when many regional galleries were being encouraged to specialise — the aim, of course, being to attract tourists and other visitors to enjoy local communities. Publications such as Director Victoria Hammond’s Australian Ceramics (1987) cemented the Gallery’s commitment to ceramics, while its strong advocacy of the artform in turn increased the value — and price — of Australian ceramics (therefore indirectly helping to support artists’ careers).

Two exhibitions and Awards at SAM have played central roles in SAM’s positioning, at the same time providing a prime stimulus to the growth of the ceramics collection, while continuing to challenge our understanding of the medium’s potential for contemporary artists to challenge, surprise and delight.

In the late 1960s and 1970s, art prizes across a range of artforms enabled regional galleries to engage with contemporary artists and showcase their works, which were otherwise not regularly presented in regional galleries as they are today. These prizes were often acquisitive, enabling regional galleries to continue to build their collections while also presenting feature exhibitions. Towards the end of the 1970s, however, regional galleries tended to shift beyond the exhibition model of an art prize, which many saw as a lesser way to support contemporary artists: there can only be one winner; judging can seem arbitrary; and there are other, less expensive ways for sponsors to support practising artists.

Commercial sponsors, such as Caltex — whose involvement in Shepparton profoundly assisted the growth of the collection — have also come to favour sustained engagement with communities.

Nevertheless, awards and prizes continue, albeit in modified forms today.

SAM’s two major national acquisitive awards focus on ceramics. The Sidney Myer Fund Australian Ceramic Award (SMFACA) is one of the most prestigious awards in the visual arts in Australia.

It allows some of our finest contemporary ceramic artists to develop new work, and it enhances SAM’s ceramics focus and national profile. The biennial SMFACA acquisitive prize, valued at $50,000, enables innovative new ceramics works to enter the SAM Collection. Building on an earlier version of the Sidney Myer Fund’s support of this Award (which

above:

Installation view (detail), Yasmin Smith, Open Vase Central Leader Widow Maker, 2017. Shortlisted for the 2017 Sidney Myer Fund Australian Ceramic Award. Collection Shepparton Art Museum.

Image: Christian Capurro.

50 Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018

Profile of a regional art museum in Victoria

began in 1991) the career of many artists has been boosted with prize money generous enough to make a difference — or, for a time, to give up a day job. Some previous winning artists have included Deborah Halpern, Gwyn Hansson-Piggott, Stephen Benwell, Ramesh Mario Nithiyendran and Jenny Orchard.

Over 26 years of the Award’s presence in SAM, more than 175 works have been acquired, and related art careers in the area of ceramics have flourished.

In 2015, after many transitions, the SMFACA was reconfigured to accept entries from Australian artists exclusively. From an EOI process, five artists are now shortlisted and invited to develop substantial new work, with support from SAM curatorial and other staff. Judges are invited from around Australia, bringing extensive knowledge of artists, art history, and the medium of ceramics — both past and present.

The award fosters innovation, curiosity and taking risks. In addition to honouring a winning artist, a number of the exhibited works enter the SAM collection. Meanwhile, all artists have a substantial body of work at the exhibition’s conclusion: to sell or re-display. SAM looks forward to the next edition in 2019: producing new experiments in clay as

each artist brings their own unique approach to the ceramics medium.

With Shepparton as home to the largest Aboriginal population in Victoria outside Melbourne, SAM fittingly has added an award that recognises and celebrates Australia’s oldest living culture and people.

Established in 2007, the Indigenous Ceramic Art Award (ICAA — today shortened to ICA) was the first art award to celebrate the rich and diverse use of ceramics by Indigenous artists throughout Australia.

The (now six) Indigenous Awards and exhibitions have presented the work of more than 50 artists, and the ICA has created important opportunities to commission and showcase new works by leading Indigenous artists.

In Aboriginal cultures, the use of clay predates European settlement — extending back to the making of tools and painting on bodies, bark, and cave walls. These traditions have been extended by the ceramic artwork of Thancoupie, and Ernabella and Hermannsburg Potters amongst others.[12] While the development of the ICA further reinforces the SAM Collection, it has also found new ways to support Indigenous artists, including through the Award’s

above:

Yhonnie Scarce, Servant and Slave 2018, Winner of the 2018 Indigenous Ceramic Award, Collection Shepparton Art Museum.

Image: Christian Capurro.

12. See Christine Nichols, Earth Works: Contemporary Indigenous Australian ceramic art, Flinders University City Gallery, (ex. cat.), Flinders University Art Museum, Adelaide, 2012, p. 26.

Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018 51

Ceramics have to be experienced in their materiality rather than virtually to realise their full potential

13. Bagot was set up as an experimental facility by Ivan McMeekin in the late 1960s to develop indigenous people’s technical skills. For a brief period, English potter Michael Cardew briefly taught there, bringing world attention to the centre. After Cyclone Trace in 1974, many of the artists who came in to Darwin to learn at the centre returned to their Torres Strait Island lands, taking skills and a ceramics interest with them.

14. See Director’s Foreword, 2018 Indigenous Ceramic Award, Shepparton Art Museum, 2018, p. 5.

15. Glenn Barkley, ‘I am a rock – the Archipelago of Ramesh’, Kuandu Biennale, DATE, https:// ssfa.com.au/assets/Uploads/ exhibition-assets/2016-kuandubiennale/Ramesh-Essay-FNL. pdf, accessed 11 October 2018.

16. Julie Ewington, ‘The Apotheosis of dirt’, The 2017 Sidney Myer Australian Ceramic Award (ex. cat.), Shepparton Art Museum, 2017, p. 10.

17. See Barkley 2016, ‘I am a rock’, footnote 9.

18. See Glenn Barkley, ‘So Hot Right Now? Contemporary Ceramics and Contemporary Art’, Artland, Issue No. 51.4.2014; Barkley’s guest-edited The Journal of Australian Ceramics, Vol. 55, No 1, April 2016; Gareth Clark, ‘Studio Pottery: Is Glenn Barkley really the worst studio potter in Australia’, CFiles, 11 November 2016, https:// cfileonline.org/glenn-barkley-worstcontemporary-ceramic-art-cfile/, accessed August 2018 .

19. Rebecca Coates, ‘Ceramics in the Expanded Field’, 2015 SMFACA (ex. cat.), Shepparton Art Museum, 2015, p. 6.

accompanying Cultural Program. In the 1980s, Aboriginal works by Hermannsburg potters and from other Central Australian missions producing ceramics began to be acquired by then Director Joe Pascoe, along with a small number of works by local Yorta Yorta people. However, it was the acquisition of a collection of stoneware vessels made at the Bagot Pottery in Darwin in the 1990s that significantly upscaled SAM’s collection of Aboriginal pottery,[13] at the same time broadening our understanding of an Australian ceramics collection: all leading to the first Indigenous Ceramic Art Award in 2007.

The Indigenous Ceramic Award initially honoured the outstanding Thaynakwith artist, Dr Thanacoupie Gloria Fletcher James AO (1937–2011). It has since featured work by Alison Milyika Carroll from Ernabella; by artists from Hermannsburg; by Torres Strait Islander artist Janet Fieldhouse and Danie Mellor (who has Queensland rainforest Aboriginal heritage); and by local Yorta Yorta artist Vera Cooper.

In 2018, the ICA was won by Yhonnie Scarce, from an exhibition that included installations and artwork

by Dean Cross, Penny Evans, Jan Goongaja Griffiths, Jock Puautjimi and Jackie Wirramanda, along with other Indigenous artists. Meanwhile the event’s name also shortened to the Indigenous Ceramic Award (ICA). Like the Sidney Myer Award, the ICA has similarly evolved to concentrate on a smaller number of artists (now seven), who are supported to develop a substantial new body of work.[14] Seeking to broaden local involvement, the 2016 and 2018 ICA exhibitions were co-ordinated by SAM’s Community Engagement Officer — Belinda Briggs, a proud Yorta Yorta woman. With a prize of $20,000, the Award has since its inception had the ongoing support of Principal Sponsors the Sir Andrew & Lady Fairley Foundation, and Mr Allan Myers AC QC. Sustained and far-sighted commitment of this kind, along with other support, has enabled many acquisitions to SAM’s collection.

The rise of ceramics within contemporary art’s mainstream follows a number of trends. In part, it is

about the visceral pleasure of making, the licence to get your hands in the mud, along with the malleability of the medium. Better ceramic technology has also helped: kilns are simpler to use, and non-toxic glazes are more readily available.[15] There are many workshops teaching all things ceramic, motivated by everything from community art to socially-engaged contemporary art practices. Then of course there is our post-industrial love of all things hand-made in reaction to highly manufactured industrial products.

Clay fits well with the endless search for individuality in an increasingly crowded world. Above all, there’s the fact that ceramics have to be experienced in their materiality rather than virtually to realise their full potential.

Success is never simple. Art writer Julie Ewington has described the ceramic medium’s appeal as connected with a fondness for ‘muddy stuff, clay’.[16] She also alludes to the skirmishes of words and images circling around some of these bright young creators — such as Ramesh Mario Nithiyendran, of Sri Lankan background, who incorporates elements from Hinduism to Catholicism and also gender politics.

Nithiyendran’s work has been described as a ‘slop stacking aesthetic’.[17] Glenn Barkley (curator, writer, collector, and lately artist) has also been celebrated and vilified in both earnest editorials and online chatter that accuse him of de-skilling the master craft and the studio pottery tradition.[18] Both artists cite the influence of another veteran Australian contemporary artist working in ceramics, Jenny Orchard — winner of the 2017 Sidney Myer Fund Australian Ceramic Award, for her subjects and technical mastery, with her imaginary creatures and organic assemblages conceived as hybrid sexual entities. Stephen Benwell is another artist in this category, also a previous winner of the SMFACA. There’s room for many approaches to ceramics, of course, as there has always been. But if necessary, one can always encapsulate it all as the ‘expanded field of ceramics’.[19]

52 Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018

Profile of a regional art museum in Victoria

& left: Installation view, 80/80. Eighty Years of SAM. The Collection. Shepparton Art Museum. Images: Amina Barolli.

top

Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018 53

New developments at SAM SAM is currently undergoing its most ambitious development in the 80 years since the first painting was acquired for the collection in 1936. In May 2015, Greater Shepparton City Council resolved to accept the findings of a bold Feasibility Study and Business Case focused equally on the social, cultural and economic arguments underpinning the creation of a new museum. It envisaged an AUD $34.5M multi-purpose building that will provide a new home for SAM; a Visitor Centre for Shepparton; and new premises for Kaiela Arts, Shepparton’s local Indigenous community arts centre. In May 2015, councillors endorsed the Business Case and the borrowing of $10M towards the new building: an ambitious commitment for a local council located in a regional centre not especially known as an arts and cultural mecca.

The business case proposed both a tourism opportunity and a ‘landmark’, or ‘iconic’ building for Shepparton residents, with ‘arts’ and ‘culture’ positioned as key vehicles to facilitate multiple ambitions. Richard Florida is famous for his thesis that creativity is linked to economic growth, and that high-profile international events, activities and business clusters will attract creative workers from related fields yielding higher economic productivity.[20] Management consultants McKinsey and Co. have also found that a thriving cultural sector is an essential part of what makes a city great, while in 2014, an article in The Economist noted that more than two dozen new cultural centre developments focused on museums were due to be built in various countries over the following decade, with an estimated cost of $250 billion.[21] The new SAM, designed by leading international Melbourne-based architects Denton Corker Marshall (DCM), is planned to commence construction in early 2019, and open in late 2020. It will provide a much-needed new home for SAM, which is currently without adequate collection storage or back-ofhouse spaces, while increasing exhibition spaces and including venues for workshops and educational activities. SAM’s ceramics collection will be showcased throughout the building, extending beyond the gallery spaces. Sustainability and the building’s environmental footprint are also important factors in the design.

Co-locating each of these unique and complementary activities in a combined building is a first in Shepparton, and possibly Victoria, while extensive Indigenous consultation and collaboration brings the potential of the project to be a major vehicle of reconciliation, ensuring celebration of local Indigenous communities’ continuous living culture,

people and history. For Shepparton Art Museum, this inclusive narrative will be realised through its exhibition program along with public and educational activities, while drawing on the strengths of the art museum’s collection to tell a story that is both locally relevant and engages with contemporary global ideas.

The new SAM has the potential to become a building that brings people together: to enjoy art; to meet and relax with friends; as a place to work; or as a place to visit and get involved. This is the next stage in the exciting life of a regional art museum, with a unique collection focus, ceramics at its core, and a remit to attract audiences near and far.

Artists, audiences, exhibitions, a unique collection, and context are core to this vision and the project’s success. [ ] Dr Rebecca Coates is the director of Shepparton Art Museum (SAM). She is an established curator, writer and lecturer, with over 25 years professional art museum and gallery experience in both Australia and overseas. She has a PhD in Art History and was previously a Lecturer at the University of Melbourne in Art History and Art Curatorship, where she is an Honorary Fellow.

Text citation: Rebecca Coates, ‘SAM, the new … new ‘hot’: Ceramics and the Shepparton Art Museum’, Museums Galleries Australia Magazine, Vol. 27(1), Museums Galleries Australia, Canberra, Summer 2018, pp. 46-53.

20. See Richard Florida, The Rise of the Creative Class, 2002. For a discussion of culturally-led urban regeneration; see also Joanne Fox-Przeworski, John Goddard and Mark De Jong (eds), Urban Regeneration in a Changing Economy, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1991.

21. See The Economist, ‘The Bilbao Effect: If you build it, will they come?’, Jan. 6, 2014, https:// www.economist.com/specialreport/2014/01/06/the-bilbao-effect, accessed 28 May 2018.

54 Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018

Considering how to curate social change in the present tense

We the people: Collecting contemporary political history Craig Middleton

T above:

Craig Middleton.

he following research has been informed by a George Alexander Fellowship that I undertook in early 2018. I was awarded the Fellowship by the International Specialised Skills Institute of Australia in 2017, with a goal to investigate the practice of social and political history institutions, exhibitions, and programs in the United States. The Fellowship period was for a modest three weeks, and thus is considered a starting-point for a much larger project.

In this article, I share thoughts on one aspect of the project — contemporary collecting — and propose how it might be employed as a practice to empower audiences and communities, strengthen collections, and diversify the historical record.

A snapshot of Australian democracy In a recent article published in The Conversation, Mark Triffitt, Lecturer in Public Policy and Political Communications at the University of Melbourne, claimed that ‘Nearly every indicator of a healthy Western democracy is failing globally. Public trust and voter engagement have declined over the past decade in established, core democracies around the world, including in the US, Europe and Australia.’ (Triffitt, 2018).

In fact The Economist’s Intelligence Unit 2017 Democracy Index listed only 19 full democracies in the world. Australia is among the top 19, ranked at 8th. However, in response to the election of President Trump, the US was downgraded from a full democracy to a ‘flawed democracy’; meanwhile as political participation increased in the wake of Brexit, the UK’s ranking rose (Democracy Index, 2017).

In a globalising world, the Australian Government is continually defining what it means to be Australian.

Such discussion is not new — it has been conducted since at least the Federation of Australia in 1901.

Australian values as currently defined by the Australian Government are: • • • • • • •

respect for the freedom and dignity of the individual equality of men and women freedom of religion commitment to the rule of law parliamentary democracy a spirit of egalitarianism that embraces mutual respect, tolerance, fair play, compassion for those in need and pursuit of the public good equality of opportunity for individuals, regardless of their race, religion or ethnic background (Department of Home Affairs, Australian Government, 2018)

My interest is how, and if, in a political climate that is seeing the decline of western democratic ideals,

these values play out in museum and gallery contexts in Australia. Recasting the question: Do contemporary Australian museums embody these ‘Australian’ values?

And in particular, in publicly funded museums, which are arguably, although not expressly, tasked with whole-of-government priorities, such as contributing to the upholding of these values.

Stephen Harrington, Senior Lecturer in Journalism, Media and Communication at the Queensland University of Technology, in an article titled ‘Australians couldn’t care less about politics? Really?’, gives us some hope in commenting that ‘Just because people don’t think their vote has much of an effect doesn’t mean that they’re not otherwise engaged with what is going on in the world of politics’ (Harrington, 2016). Fears of disengagement are focused on systems rather than personal commitment to the ideals of democracy. The claim here is that the nature of political participation is changing.

I would argue that as a socially engaged arts and cultural sector we have the potential to recognise and adapt to this changing political landscape.

Museums Change Lives Museums are well-placed to contribute to a changing political landscape, and as the UK Museums Association’s widely recognised policy document Museums Change Lives asserts, museums ‘enrich the lives of individuals, contribute to strong and resilient communities, and help create a fair and just society’ (Museums Association, 2013).

It is with this in mind, and within the political context presented earlier, that I believe new models of contemporary collecting within museums have the potential to contribute to what Museums Change Lives articulates.

Contemporary collecting at political events A primary function of museums, historically, has been to collect, document, and interpret cultural material for the education and enjoyment of publics.

This is still very much the case today. As a curator of political history I am concerned that much of the material culture related to politics, activism, and social change produced for political events (elections, protests, rallies, and demonstrations) is being lost due to often inflexible structures inherited by museum practice as it relates to collecting policies and procedures — particularly impacting on collecting relating to political events. Others, including artist and curator Jo Derbyshire, agree and have led contemporary collecting projects (Darbyshire, 2018).

Barbara Cohen-Stratyner (2017) claims that collecting by curatorial staff at protest-events does happen; but it is a controversial practice, often limited by the policies and procedures that underpin traditional modes of museum collecting — that is, how and by whom decisions are made, and the kinds of processes and paperwork employed by museums

Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018 55

left:

Campaign material, Smithsonian National Museum of American History. Photo

by Craig Middleton.

when collecting. For publicly-funded institutions, having staff attend highly political events can be seen as problematic. Furthermore, the resource implications of sending staff to events are ones that cultural institutions increasingly struggle to absorb, as such activities may divert time from other important functions.

In spite of all this, material culture that is generated as part of political events is largely ephemeral and hard to collect when events are over. Things gets chucked, reused, and forgotten about (Middleton, 2013), and as such they often get erased, albeit unintentionally, from the historical record. Much campaign material (how-to-vote cards, corflutes, campaign flyers, and so on) is increasingly being generated digitally. It could be argued therefore that it is important that we collect as much of the physical material as possible before it becomes a thing of the past. While major parties and political candidates, and large campaigns and movements have extensive resources — or even archives in which to keep such material — smaller parties, independent candidates, and grass-roots movements often lack any real means to conserve the records of their social history.

While the idea of collecting everything at a political event, such as an election, might be considered resource-heavy and daunting for museums, there are nevertheless considerations to be given to priority areas based on who has produced such material, and

how it might provide significant contributions to the preservation of social history.

The National Museum of American History, a Smithsonian National Institution located in Washington DC, is probably the most well-known institution for its collecting of contemporary political material from political events. The NMAH has, concerning events at least since the American Civil War, made it a priority to be collecting a variety of contemporary objects that represent significant moments in American social history (for example, the 2017 Women's March on Washington). This collecting focus is taken in order not only to represent a particular historical event within the museum, but to capture the sense of a particular social and political moment that might have mobilised a group of people to enact their rights of citizenship. Without preserving the physical material generated by such events (even when it might have been regarded as ephemera), the ability of museums — at least in their current form — to represent such moments in meaningful ways is somewhat limited.

What is significant in how the National Museum of American History approaches contemporary collecting is the process of recording adopted.

Curators attend many and various protests, elections, conventions, and so on. They take with them large document bags — capacious enough to stow even placards. At a chosen event they collect as much as

vol 23 (1) summer 2015 $15.00

Museums Australia

More on collecting political ephemera can be found in previous magazines: Craig Middleton, ‘One man’s trash is another man’s treasure: Australian political ephemera’, Museums Australia Magazine, Vol.23 (1&2), Museums Australia, Canberra, Spring & Summer 2014, pp.29—30.

Jo Darbyshire, ‘How it really was – Collecting the story of the Roe 8 protest in WA’, Museums Galleries Australia Magazine, Vol. 26(2), Museums Galleries Australia, Canberra, Autumn–Winter 2018, pp. 34–37.

56 Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018

Considering how to curate social change in the present tense

right:

Poster display, Smithsonian National Museum of American History. Photo by Craig Middleton.

bottom:

New York Historical Society women’s march display.

Photo by Craig Middleton.

possible, as well as things that protesters might leave behind. If negotiations can’t take place at the time in a quick and efficient manner, curators will hand out and collect contact details — noting time contingencies, and that an individual's motivation to attend a political event is not to discuss a potential donation.

Curators take everything back to the museum afterwards, and they make decisions about what is to be officially accepted and accessioned later.

This means that curators won’t lose anything of significance in the trash that might have been gathered; and they won’t lose the interest of the people handing over their placards and signs because of onerous paperwork requirements. For anything important that was unprocessed at the time of gathering, efforts can be made to contact individuals later. Such contingency processes make collecting faster, easier, and more achievable within the context in which curators find themselves at political events.

An important consideration that informs this manner of contemporary collecting is the position of the museum in relation to participants at political events, at least for publicly funded museums. That is, if participants are attending a protest, it is usually

Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018 57

an event generated against a decision of government (for example, the treatment of refugees). Why then would a participant (an undocumented migrant, for example) want to supply their name and contact details to a public servant? The NMAH recognises the possible compromising of both donors and staff in this respect, itself being partially funded by the federal government, and it amends collecting practice to safeguard public rights while not excluding important social and political histories from its collection records. Such practice recognises that both policy and procedure must be able to embrace agility in particular settings.

References 1. Cohen-Stratyner, Barbara (2017). What democracy looks like: crowd-collecting protest materials , in Museums and Social Issues, 12:2, pp. 83-91.

2. Department of Home Affairs, Australian Government. Australian Values Statement <https:// www.homeaffairs.gov.au/ about/corporate/information/ fact-sheets/07values#b>, accessed 21/8/2018.

3. Economist Intelligence Unit (2017).

Democracy Index 2017: Free speech under attack, <https://pages.eiu.com/ rs/753-RIQ-438/images/Democracy_ Index_2017.pdf>, accessed 21/8/2018.

4. Harrington, Stephen (2016).

‘Australians couldn’t care less about politics? Really?’, The Conversation, <https://theconversation.com/ australians-couldnt-care-lessabout-politics-really-53875>, accessed 21/8/2018.

5. Middleton, Craig (2015). ‘One Man’s Trash is another Man’s Treasure’, in Museums Australia Magazine, 23(1), Summer, Canberra, ACT. 6. Middleton, Craig (2018). Political history and museum practice: Collecting, engaging, exhibiting, http:// www.issinstitute.org.au/wp-content/ media/2018/06/MiddletonFinal.pdf accessed 21/8/2018 7. Museums Association, UK (2013).

Museums Change Lives <https:// www.museumsassociation. org/download?id=1001738>, accessed 21/8/2018.

8. Triffit, Mark (2018). ‘A growing mistrust in democracy is causing extremism and strongman politics to flourish’, The Conversation, <https://theconversation. com/a-growing-mistrust-indemocracy-is-causing-extremismand-strongman-politics-toflourish-98621>, accessed 21/8/2018.

9. Jo Darbyshire, ‘How it really was – Collecting the story of the Roe 8 protest in WA’, Museums Galleries Australia Magazine, Vol. 26(2), Museums Galleries Australia, Canberra, Autumn– Winter 2018, pp. 34–37.

Taking things a step further Crowd-collecting, as Cohen-Stratyner (2017) explains, is a practice by which museums’ publics collect materials from political events such as protests, rallies, and demonstrations they attend. This kind of practice is modelled on the contemporary practice of crowdsourcing, which is used primarily in the philanthropy and funding sectors, but increasingly being modelled for all sorts of purposes.

This is arguably already happening within the cultural sector to a certain extent — for example, through libraries that collect how-to-vote cards and other ephemera during local, state, and federal elections in Australia. In fact, at the recent South Australian state government election in March 2018, along with the most recent by-election and local government election, I collected material to send to the State Library of South Australia, and also mobilised some of my friends and colleagues to do the same.

In this situation, libraries might receive duplicates and irrelevant material, which can then be sifted through, and finally appropriate material is accessioned into the collection and irrelevant material discarded. Because such items are rarely of any personal value to the donors, there is no need for return, nor for difficult conversations to be had later about why an institution might not accept a donation.

Such process is very different from that of usual collecting practices by institutions.

Museum collecting policies are seemingly stricter, and for many good reasons — limited storage space, finite capacity of staff to support ongoing care of works, and so on. Additionally, to avoid museums becoming burdened by numerous unprovenanced objects, policies around collecting have tightened up necessarily in recent years. Yet how will museums remain relevant if their collections do not represent a broad and diverse citizenship? Arguably the core functions and ways of working within museums need to evolve as funding diminishes, while increasing pressure is put on institutions to deliver more social

outcomes. This is where I believe crowd-collecting can have an impact, albeit a modest one.

I would argue that through re-imagining how we collect, and what we collect, we can inspire and empower active citizenship. The act of collecting is after all a political act, and the decisions we make as individuals represent particular worldviews. However, by mobilising groups of people to collect actively, on behalf of museums, what is most meaningful to them can help to ensure that museums remain relevant to people’s lives.

A model of crowd-collecting could invite participants to become associated with a museum on a long-term basis, while also producing mutually beneficial outcomes. On the one hand, the participants would be supporting the collecting activity of a museum, one of its core duties, and thus feel meaningfully involved in advancing the work of the museum. On the other hand, individuals attend events that are meaningful to them, and are able to share their passion, participation, and world-view with the museum afterwards. What this enables is a productive collaboration between public and museum. It presents opportunities for a much more democratic model of collecting, and inevitably the results of such activities would be reflected in the collection itself, which in turn would support the development of diverse exhibitions and programs that could encompass broader world-views.

Crowd-collecting, in my opinion, is an act of participatory citizenship, an act of engaging in the life of a museum, and an activity able to have an ultimate impact on decision-making about our shared histories, and what does and does not end up on the historical record.

While radical change takes time, disruption of traditional practices and expansion of engagementpossibilities can open up space for meaningful change to occur. It seems to me that a niche area of contemporary collecting, such as at political events, could be a good place to start such experimentation. [] Craig Middleton is Curator of the Centre of Democracy, South Australia, and a National Councillor for Museums Galleries Australia. In January 2018 he undertook a George Alexander Foundation Fellowship with the International Specialised Skills Institute of Australia, to explore political history and museum practice in the United States.

Text citation: Craig Middleton, ‘We the people: Collecting contemporary political history’, Museums and Galleries Australia Magazine, Vol. 27(1), Museums Galleries Australia, Canberra, Summer 2018, pp. 52­–57.

58 Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018

UNESCO Australian Memory of the World summit, Canberra, 2018

Documenting Australian Society — UNESCO Australian Memory of the World summit in Canberra, 2018

top:

Michael Piggott.

above:

Adrian Cunningham.

right:

Sorry Books in the collection of the Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies (AIATSIS), Canberra.

Photo by Rob Little, reproduced courtesy of Canberra Museum and Gallery.

Michael Piggott and Adrian Cunningham

The challenges of assessment

n 4 December 2018, about 50 delegates from across the many strands of the documentary heritage community will gather at the Canberra Museum and Gallery under the auspices of the UNESCO Australian Memory of the World Program. The summit meeting will consider progress in our combined efforts to assemble and preserve properly representative national holdings of documentary heritage material. More importantly, it will explore how we might work together more effectively to ensure best possible documentation of Australian society, using the evershrinking resources available for the purpose.

A vast quantity of documentation is created and destroyed every year in Australia. Indeed, with the advent of digital technologies, the world now creates more data every year than it has the physical capacity to store and keep. Only a minuscule harvest from this vastness is able to be preserved for use by future generations. Only a tiny sliver is worth the effort and expense of preserving. But what documentation needs to be included in this sliver? Are there wasteful overlaps and concentrations? Are there gaps and silences? Are we keeping the right stuff? Are there time periods, issues, communities, minorities and phenomena that urgently need targeted documentation strategies? Are there important aspects of life in Australia for which inadequate documentation is created in the first place, and which need to be proactively documented before all record of those activities disappears from collective memory forever? In short, what documentation does Australia really need to make, keep and use to enable current and future generations to understand, explain, debate and account for our national collective experience?

Such questions of national holdings coverage are fundamental, and go beyond matters of funding, digitisation and online discovery — vital though these are. If a specific issue remains unrecorded, a community undocumented, or a nationally significant individual’s recollections are uncaptured, downstream processes like digitisation and metadata tagging are irrelevant.

O

Australia’s documentary heritage holdings At present in Australia, documentary heritage holdings are built with, at best, limited self-awareness of the greater whole. Collection development and appraisal are often reactive and uncoordinated.

What are the consequences of this lack of coordination? What picture does the total stock of Australian documentary heritage present?

How representative is it in terms of our historical experience, our changing population, localities, and multiple national characters? Are we making the best use of the limited resources that Australia is prepared to devote to the cause of preserving and providing access to documentary memory?

Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018 59

The December 2018 summit will canvass the documentary heritage problem with key stakeholders, commencing a conversation and (hopefully) a process, or series of processes, for coordinating an effective and sustainable response to the challenges posed. The summit will only be the start of a process, not a means for reaching definitive conclusions or solving all of the issues that constitute the terrain.

Scope and definitions The scope of our interest here is ‘documentary heritage’. This is identical to the scope of the UNESCO Memory of the World Program. The Guidelines for the UNESCO Memory of the World Program provide the following definitions: A document is an object comprising analogue or digital informational content and the carrier on which it resides. It is preservable and usually moveable. The content may comprise signs or codes (such as text), images (still or moving) and sounds, which can be copied or migrated. The carrier may have important aesthetic, cultural or technical qualities. The relationship between content and carrier may range from incidental to integral.

Documents are the result of a deliberate intellectual act and come in numerous forms: Text items such as manuscripts (of any age), books, newspapers, posters, correspondence, business records, computer files etc. The textual content may be recorded in ink, pencil, paint, digits or other medium. The carrier may be paper, plastic, papyrus, parchment, palm leaves, bark, stone, fabric, hard disk, data tape or other material.

Non-text items such as drawings, maps, music scores, plans, prints, diagrams or graphics.

The recording medium and the carrier may be similarly diverse.

Audiovisual items such as sound discs, magnetic tapes, films, photographs – whether in analogue or digital form, however recorded and in any format. The physical carrier may be paper, various forms of plastic or celluloid, shellac, metal or other material.

Virtual digital documents, such as websites, which may be an assemblage of data from a variety of sources on a single or multiple computers, or from one or more data carriers on a single computer.

Documentary heritage comprises those single documents — or groups of documents — of significant and enduring value to a community, a country or to humanity generally, and whose deterioration or loss would be a harmful impoverishment.

The work of documenting society is carried out by a wide range of organisations, institutions and initiatives that are committed to enabling the longterm preservation of and access to Australia’s documentary heritage — in other words, the documentary component of our national estate. The records of this heritage encompass archives, libraries, museums, galleries, local historical societies and a wide range of community and non-government collections and initiatives. Material of unknown quantity and significance is also held in private hands, including in company and organisational archives that may or may not provide public access.

We regard the identification, ongoing preservation, and enabling the use of documentation of Australian society to be a collective responsibility exercised by this multiplicity of institutions, initiatives and programs, where the focus of individual efforts may be national, regional, local, or communitybased. In our vision of success these various efforts should coordinate with each other to ensure that best-possible use is made of the limited resources available in Australia to preserve and provide access to documentary heritage. Collectively, the aim should be to enable easy, ongoing use of a distributed corpus of documentary heritage that provides representative evidence and memory of the most significant aspects of life in Australia — those things that make Australia distinctive and that help to define ‘the Australian experience’, in all of its ever-evolving complexity and diversity.

The current landscape Government archives and libraries generally have the largest holdings and budgets, and operate under legislative remits, arts policies, understandings about jurisdictional collecting interests, and protocols for the treatment of estrays. Complementing these organisations are thousands of museums, galleries, local library and local museum collections, historical societies, halls of fame, mechanics institutes, oral history groups, heritage centres, universities’ archives and special collections, pioneer associations and keeping places. Museums and galleries usually have collections of documents and archives that document, relate to or support research into the objects that they preserve and/or display.

Overall, these sectors and their members generally operate with a very limited sense of contributing to the national documentary heritage estate, and there have been scant efforts to foster awareness of the larger interrelationships that link these resources as part of documentary heritage at a national level. There is no overarching system, national plan, ‘guiding mind’ or leadership nurturing a sense of being part of a nation-building enterprise and inter-generational preservation of shared memory.

Discussions about collection building and appraisal have tended to happen within, not across sectors, professions and regimes (e.g. Meeting of Cultural

60 Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018

UNESCO Australian Memory of the World summit, Canberra, 2018

above:

Archival finding aids for Bathurst District Historical Society Photographic Collection.

Photo by Roslyn Russell, reproduced courtesy of Bathurst District Historical Society.

Ministers, CAARA, NSLA, CAUL); or sometimes they engage particular institutions collaboratively (e.g. before an auction). Occasionally, national laws (such as those concerning copyright and export controls) and programs (such as the Commonwealth’s Cultural Gifts and Community Heritage Grants schemes) have prompted linkage thoughts that in theory span our national documentary heritage patrimony.

Sporadically, a documentary need is perceived (e.g. Prime Ministers’ papers) and a set of eclectic solutions evolve contingently. Sometimes, national campaigns have targeted formats at risk (e.g. nitrate film; manuscripts in private ownership), funding shortfalls (e.g. for Trove) or discovery needs (GLAM Peak’s digital access to collections).

Since the demise of the Collections Council of Australia (early in 2010), arguably the only entity now embracing Australia’s total documentary heritage landscape is the UNESCO Australian Memory of the World Committee.

Previous issue-tackling efforts in Australia, and some good things we can build on Since the 1990s, institutions such as the National Library of Australia (with active promotion by the now-defunct Australian Council of Libraries and Information Services/ACLIS) have conceived of a ‘distributed national collection’. This had parallels with the work of the Heritage Collections Committee, formed through representatives of the directors’ councils of museums (CAMD) and art galleries (CAAMD) in 1993–1996 — a committee that was later upgraded to the Heritage Collections Council in 1996 under the then-Cultural Ministers Council (CMC).

The HCC pursued crucial work in interface with the federal government in the 1990s, during which the concept of a ‘distributed national collection’ spanning and linking all public collecting institutions was first advanced. Meanwhile in 1992, the National Library of Australia hosted an ambitious, week-long national summit in Canberra entitled ‘Towards Federation 2001’, which aimed to set a cross-domain agenda

for coordinating the collecting, cataloguing and preservation of Australia’s documentary heritage.

There have been other occasional attempts to engineer national coordination. During the 1990s there was also an Archives Working Group of the Cultural Ministers Council, which carried out some excellent and valuable work, particularly in relation to records relating to Indigenous Australians. In 1999 the National Scholarly Communications Forum hosted a round table in Canberra on ‘Archives in the National Research Infrastructure’ — which was a national summit in all but name, and which agreed on a set of recommendations that served as a ‘to do’ list for national leadership for many years. This in turn inspired a November 2001 theme issue of Archives and Manuscripts on Australian documentation strategies.

In 2006, in Adelaide, the Collections Council of Australia (formed in 2004) held its first national summit: a cross-domains gathering of representatives of collecting institutions, designed to share expertise and form a national strategy for digitisation of collections. However, changes in government commitment and resourcing impaired the eventual finalisation and adoption of a national strategy for digitisation by cultural ministers.

Long-forgotten resolutions developed through these various cross-sector conferences, round tables and summits set out significant action agendas. But unfortunately, little real progress has ever been made in their implementation. Aside from a small body of published writings and long-archived strategy proposals, nothing of real substance or durability has eventuated to achieve an integrated approach to caring for Australia’s documentary heritage.

Nevertheless, we have achieved a great deal collectively over many years in other areas of our professional remit. The high international standing of the Australian documentary professions as innovators and standards-setters testifies to this. The National Library of Australia has a long and proud track record of exercising national leadership of an Australian library system, through initiatives such as the Australian Bibliographic Network, Conspectus, the ‘Distributed National Collection’, the Community Heritage Grants Program, and most recently, Trove.

We are not unused to cooperating for the greater good, with an awareness that we share common interests and a recognition that the whole can be greater than the sum of its parts.

In the area of organising resources, we have a variety of national and international standards for metadata, recordkeeping systems design, and archival intellectual control, even if our track record in implementing these standards is patchy at best.

We have made considerable progress in the area of digital preservation; meanwhile for access we have the afore-mentioned Trove system. For many years the University of Melbourne’s eScholarship Research Centre (previously the Australian Science Archives Project) has done exemplary work in documenting and supporting access to the distributed national

Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018 61

collection of archives relating to science and technology. Similar efforts and achievements can be seen in the Australian Women’s Archives Project.

From time to time, Royal Commissions into hot societal issues, such as the ‘stolen generations’ and forced child migration, have highlighted gaps in the available documentation. This in turn has mobilised resources and collaborative action to fill these gaps through initiatives such as oral history and indexing projects. While these efforts have inevitably been somewhat piecemeal, they do show what can be done when there is a collective recognition of the need to do a better job of documenting Australian society.

Arguably, the main lasting achievement of the Collections Council of Australia was its publication of Significance 2.0 in 2009. This manual, which has government endorsement within the context of national arts policy,[1] provides an agreed methodology for assessing the significance of heritage collections and items. This is an important and useful tool for assessing the value and utility of existing documentary holdings, and potential future additions to the distributed national collection, within the context of the wider documentary universe and society’s need to remember, understand, and account for itself.

So, while we have to be realistic about our ambitions and our past failures, we do have some useful foundations to build on, and an enviable track record of collaboration and innovation. This positions us well to identify some modest proposals for making progress towards the vision articulated above.

Principal issues contributing to the overall problem •

•

•

•

• •

•

Deciding what must be documented, identifying high-risk areas that need attention, setting priorities, and resolving who to involve/engage in the process.

Clarifying what schema/categorisation system(s) we should use to frame our thinking (e.g. ANZSIC categories; topic/subject lists; geographical issues, etc.).

Determining how to build a clear understanding of the current state of things (existing initiatives, collections, institutional mandates, appraisal and collection development policies) Mapping the current state of things against an agreed, desired state — deciding what are the main gaps/risks; rationalising areas of duplicated or low-value effort.

Enhancing community awareness of these issues and tasks, and advocating for appropriate support/resources.

Achieving inclusivity and flexibility in our models, frameworks and mechanisms — enabling, encouraging, acknowledging and tracking community effort.

Identifying mechanisms, systems, entities for coordinating effort and taking responsibility for progressing particular initiatives.

Some existing models, both internationally and within Australia There are many options to appraise (e.g. sector/ topic-specific initiatives; geographic/jurisdictional efforts), that could inform/inspire our efforts and guide collective action.

During the forthcoming summit, delegates will hear about efforts in Canada and New Zealand that may inspire or provide models for action in Australia.

We will also hear about some sector/location/topic specific initiatives in Australia, where coordinated action is being or has been taken. These include coordinated documentation initiatives relating to: science, Tasmania, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders, multicultural communities, and gay/lesbian communities. There are doubtless many other models and initiatives that it would be good to learn about, so please be prepared to share your knowledge and ideas of such things — either at the summit or afterwards.

Possible next steps •

•

• • •

Agreement will be needed on key issues that require further research, and who should lead and participate in conducting the research or developing research proposals.

We need to resolve which entity or entities will have overall carriage of the work going forward (UNESCO Australian Memory of the World Committee, undoubtedly; and who else?)

How might we seek to influence national policy in the areas and tasks identified?

Should an overarching strategy or plan be developed? If so, who should endorse it?

What consideration should be given to other resolutions/action items? [ ]

The UNESCO Australian Memory of the World Program is very grateful to the National Archives of Australia, the Canberra Museum and Gallery and the Australian Society of Archivists, whose generous sponsorship and support has made it possible for the summit meeting to be convened in Canberra.

Michael Piggott is a retired archivist still occasionally professionally involved, and currently is a Deakin University Senior Research Fellow based at the National Library as part of an ARC grant examining the representation of multicultural Australia in state and national libraries.

Adrian Cunningham worked for 36 years in a variety of national and state archives and libraries, in a diversity of roles. He is now semi-retired, but does occasional paid consulting and pro bono professional work. He has published widely and is a Fellow of the Australian Society of Archivists.

Text citation: Michael Piggott and Adrian Cunningham, ‘Documenting Australian Society — UNESCO Memory of the World summit in Canberra, 2018’, Museums Galleries Australia Magazine, Vol. 27(1), Museums Galleries Australia, Canberra, Summer 2018, pp. 58–61.

1. https://www.arts.gov.au/ what-we-do/museums-librariesand-galleries/significance-20

62 Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018

Some help for archivists in assessing the value of their holdings

Pacific archivists’ guideline on Significance Assessment

Roslyn Russell

top:

Staff of the National Archives of Fiji showcasing their Memory of the World inscription. Photo and permissions courtesy of the National Archives of Fiji.

above:

Roslyn Russell.

PARBICA — the Pacific Regional Branch of the International Council on Archives — has recently released a very useful Guideline on significance assessment for archivists in the Pacific region, as part of its Recordkeeping for Good Governance Toolkit — Guideline 24: Assessing Significant Records in Archival Holdings.

A reference group of archivists from nine Pacific nations — Australia, the Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, the Solomon Islands, Tuvalu and Vanuatu — has steered the Guideline to publication. It is available for downloading from the PARBICA website.

The focus of the first part of the Guideline is on the role of significance assessment in disaster preparedness — a critical matter in a region where the effects of climate change are sharply being experienced, with rising sea levels and extreme weather events such as cyclones a common occurrence.

The Guideline is intended to help archivists to ‘identify significant records and collections in order to factor these significant records and collections into your organisation’s disaster planning’. It has been designed to be used by archivists, records managers,

and anyone else who is responsible for the care of documentary heritage collections.

The Guideline’s second part is based on the concepts and methodology of the Collections Council of Australia’s Significance 2.0: a guide to assessing the significance of collections (2009). As one of the authors, with Kylie Winkworth, of Significance 2.0, it is very pleasing to see that it has been adopted by the archives sector in the Pacific, and to have the flexibility and utility of this methodology recognised

by PARBICA. The Guideline states that: Archives and organisations have different collecting responsibilities and approaches, so significance assessment may take different forms. The purpose of this guideline is not to provide a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach but instead present some options to consider when implementing a significance assessment regime for your organisation. This guideline can be used by archives with legally mandated collecting responsibilities as well as those archives with a less-prescribed acquisitions policy.

Museums Galleries Australia Magazine – Vol. 27(1) – Summer 2018 63

Some of the applications of the significance assessment methodology, apart from setting priorities for disaster preparedness, are mentioned in the Guideline, including ‘assessing the relative significance of particular records over others’; and the placing of iconic records or collections on registers such as those compiled by the UNESCO Memory of the World Program for safeguarding documentary heritage.

Other applications of significance assessment in an archival context include enhancing appraisal processes, and contributing to research projects.

The Guideline refers to the changing nature of significance, and the fact that ‘certain records and collections may hold different values and meanings for different groups of people’. The Guideline emphasises an important aspect of the significance assessment methodology — that the process of assessing significance must be ‘transparent and collaborative, to ensure many different viewpoints are reflected in your significance assessment’.

Part 3 of the Guideline deals with the application of significance assessment to disaster planning, and advocates its use in determining appropriate storage; documentation of the location of significant items and collections; and prioritisation of these as part of the disaster recovery process. All disaster team members should be aware of these significant items and collections to enable an early response.

Many museums in Australia also maintain archives as a key part of their operations. Museum archivists and other collection managers will find the PARBICA Recordkeeping for Good Governance Toolkit Guideline 24, on Assessing Significant Records in Archival Holdings, of great assistance in managing their significant archival collections. [ ]

top left:

Roslyn Russell is a historian and museum consultant, and one of the authors, with Kylie Winkworth, of Significance 2.0. She is currently Chair of the UNESCO Australian Memory of the World Committee. She has presented workshops on significance assessment in Australia and overseas.

Text citation: Roslyn Russell, ‘Pacific archivists’ guideline on Significance Assessment’, Museums Galleries Australia Magazine, Vol. 27(1), Museums Galleries Australia, Canberra, Summer 2018, pp. 62–63.

PARBICA RecordKeeping Toolkit on Significance Assessment (Fiji). top right: Staff of the National Archives of Fiji showcasing their Memory of the World inscription.

Photo and permissions courtesy of the National Archives of Fiji. above:

PARBICA 17 conference group photo. Photo courtesy of the National Archives of Fiji and Ros Russell.

www.tashcosystems.com.au tashco@tashcosystems.com.au

Galleries of Remembrance The Shrine of Remembrance Photographer Vlad Bunyevich.

The National Anzac Centre Albany WA Photographer Lee Grifď&#x192;&#x17E;th.

Galleries of Remembrance The Shrine of Remembrance Photographer Vlad Bunyevich.

Showcasing Australia For The Past 40 Years