Opinion

Arts and the politics of race

THE Venus de Milo and Michaelangelo's statue of David should be removed from their museum homes. They are an inaccurate picture of the men and women of times past.

They give the wrong impression. We are not all white and perfect.

What is an accurate depiction in art?

Tasmanian aboriginal activist Nala Mansell successfully protested and had two sculptures of Tasmanian Aboriginal leaders Truganini and Woureddy, removed from an auction in Melbourne.

She claimed the busts wrongly perpetuated the myth that Truganini was the last true Tasmanian Aboriginal.

It is a belief that perpetuates a myth, not in this case, art.

Their worth is only partly based on who they were.

When the politics of race enter the world of art, we should all shudder.

Ms Mansell's argument only serves to diminish the other worthy arguments that support Tasmania's aboriginal culture - past, present and future.

The Tasmanian Greens said: ``To treat these images purely as works of art is disrespectful to the ancestors of Truganini and Woureddy''.

Am I missing something here?

Posted By: Danielle Blewett on 25/08/2009 3:34:00 PM | Comments (4)

comments

Date: Newest first | Oldest first

A work of art belongs to the artist, and anybody the artist chooses to give or sell it to. A work of art does NOT belong to the models upon which the art is based. There is no copyright involved, yet one argument of the greens states that there would be in any other case. My question is...if the myth remains that the Tasmanian aborigines did become extinct, but the art works are fictitious because that is not the case...then who did the Tasmanian government pay a huge amount of money to in recent years due to the extinction of the Tasmanian aborigines?

Posted by truist, 25/08/2009 4:57:06 PM, on The Examiner

This is absurd. A piece of art is an insight into how the artist see the world. Complaining that these pieces are not an accurate depiction is like saying Jackson Pollock's Male and Female is not a true anatomical representation of the human body. How about we leave politics out of art and enjoy the amazing works for what they were created, as art.

Posted by newly, 27/08/2009 11:00:52 AM, on The Examiner

Of course the busts are works of art! But that doesn't mean the Aborigines can't feel victimised by whites for the treatment they have received & are still receiving, at the hands of government. It also doesn't stop them objecting to the faces of deceased relatives being put on show. They can even dispute the value, based as it is on the artistic value of the item. But that does not remove the label of art from the items.

Posted by salamander, 27/08/2009 12:32:28 PM, on The Examiner

Of course, this is ridiculous, but sadly predictable. I was in South Africa a couple of weeks ago and, while in the Kimberley art gallery came across a wonderful metal sculpture of a dog by the black South African sculptor Willie Bester.Some information posted alongside the work said that a more prestigious gallery had rejected the work because 'it is not African enough' The language of apartheid still lingers

Posted by buboes, 13/09/2009 2:32:18 PM, on The Examiner

Blog with Danielle Blewett every Tuesday on the issues that are making news at home and abroad . . .