And just late last month, an Aboriginal artist in Brisbane and an Indian Australian artist in Melbourne have both quit their galleries in disgust about the rip-offs. I am grateful that this issue is being aired again. Although its four years later, its still never too late to discuss rip-offs.
Over time, I have made many attempts to have the issue dealt with - contacting Aboriginal Community, the white art gallerists, and Grogan himself. Interestingly there was never a response from the likes of Safari co-founder Lisa Corsi, Anna Pappas Gallery or Iain Dawson Gallery, but there was this brief and only, facebook response from Grogan:
"thanks jenny.
i've read the protocols.
and look forward to seeing the film.
did you get a chance to see the show? if you'd be interested in starting a dialogue regarding the nature of my work i'd be up for that.
Lucas
Wednesday, 2 July, 2008 4:57 PM
It seems to me that the "dialogue" card has been used by Grogan and his gallerists as a justification for way too long now. Since when does ripping off designs and also turning nasty on the original designer constitute "dialogue", and why propose "dialogue" after the event?
There are many positive examples of Aboriginal artists collaborating with others, but what has failed to be discussed in the media lately is that it wasn't just that Grogan was ripping off designs in order to make money, but also the context that he presented them in. Bark paintings with gross portrayals of Aboriginal art, with Aboriginal people engaging in oral sex, boozing and vomiting which gallerist Iain Dawson described as "The other side to Grogan’s work is an intense social commentary on not only the figures he is representing but the manner in which he chooses to depict them. A white australian man exposing the seedy underbelly of what has become of the fragile indigenous population of this country is bound to ruffle some feathers."
Of course many Aboriginal people have objected and attempted to enter into the "dialogue". Here is a telling interview reply from gallerist Marita Smith: "It comes from a small group of people who are quite determined to derail Grogan's practice," she says. "I'm not prepared to censor the work because of a minority group who are offended by Grogan's work." Which I would say, is a very Australian type of response in its signature style of twisted ownership, arrogance and denial.
In 2008, I thought that engaging a Native Canadian viewpoint might actually get Australians to pay attention - you know, the exotic other, over the tried and tested local Aboriginal viewpoints. But more recently, I've put it to others and after much discussion, have decided that what we might need now is a white art critic to take issue with Grogans work and approach - coz it appears, whitey loves to only hear it from whitey.
Grogans profile really took off around the time of the original Letter to the Editor and the media interest that followed. He was just a student at the time, having sell out shows, and he is still happy to use the negative press on his website, without actually having any discussion with Aboriginal people. It also appears that Australians can appreciate and value Aboriginal art - particularly if they don't have to deal with Aboriginal artists at all.
Shame Australia!
NITV News story 2012:
http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/1717231/Grogan-art-accused-of-stealing-Indigenous-elements
It seems to me that the "dialogue" card has been used by Grogan and his gallerists as a justification for way too long now. Since when does ripping off designs and also turning nasty on the original designer constitute "dialogue", and why propose "dialogue" after the event?
There are many positive examples of Aboriginal artists collaborating with others, but what has failed to be discussed in the media lately is that it wasn't just that Grogan was ripping off designs in order to make money, but also the context that he presented them in. Bark paintings with gross portrayals of Aboriginal art, with Aboriginal people engaging in oral sex, boozing and vomiting which gallerist Iain Dawson described as "The other side to Grogan’s work is an intense social commentary on not only the figures he is representing but the manner in which he chooses to depict them. A white australian man exposing the seedy underbelly of what has become of the fragile indigenous population of this country is bound to ruffle some feathers."
Of course many Aboriginal people have objected and attempted to enter into the "dialogue". Here is a telling interview reply from gallerist Marita Smith: "It comes from a small group of people who are quite determined to derail Grogan's practice," she says. "I'm not prepared to censor the work because of a minority group who are offended by Grogan's work." Which I would say, is a very Australian type of response in its signature style of twisted ownership, arrogance and denial.
In 2008, I thought that engaging a Native Canadian viewpoint might actually get Australians to pay attention - you know, the exotic other, over the tried and tested local Aboriginal viewpoints. But more recently, I've put it to others and after much discussion, have decided that what we might need now is a white art critic to take issue with Grogans work and approach - coz it appears, whitey loves to only hear it from whitey.
Grogans profile really took off around the time of the original Letter to the Editor and the media interest that followed. He was just a student at the time, having sell out shows, and he is still happy to use the negative press on his website, without actually having any discussion with Aboriginal people. It also appears that Australians can appreciate and value Aboriginal art - particularly if they don't have to deal with Aboriginal artists at all.
Shame Australia!
Here's the original letter of complaint fyi:
This is an article that followed shortly after in 2008:
Iain Dawsons blurb:
http://www.iaindawson.com/pages/exhibitions_previous_view.php?ex_year=2011
the Brisbane story 2012:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/indigenous/painter-quits-in-row-over-artist/story-fn9hm1pm-1226524510727
the Melbourne Story 2012:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/arts/visual-arts/another-artist-quits-in-revolt-against-style/story-fn9d3avm-1226526043838
Texta Queens personal response 2012:
http://textaqueen.tumblr.comNITV News story 2012:
http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/1717231/Grogan-art-accused-of-stealing-Indigenous-elements
