aboriginal-art.de

Book Review

The review below was created specifically for this website. Any external links are for information only and such content is not the responsibility of the authors.

McLean, Ian: Double Nation - A History of Australian Art, Reaktion Books, London 2023, ISBN 9781789146974.

'Double Nation' is not a book purely about history, nor is it one purely about Australian art (although the 149 illustrations might be admired). It is about the braiding of both themes together with issues of British empire, economics, and politics, to analyse all their roles in constructing the idea of nationhood within the body politic (which might gererously be defined to be 'anyone living in terra nullius') of the continent of Australia. In one sense, therefore, art is analysed as the tool of politics.

Creating a shared nationality that transcends the myriad differences between its people, most of whom are strangers, is the great achievement and necessary condition of the nation-state. From this derives its legitimacy, distinguishing it from, for example, religious and dynastic states. Public institutions such as national art galleries and academies are a principal means through which the state creates its nationality. [1]

Which thread is primary in the weave of the book is impossible to say. Which body politic is meant exactly is also indefinite, since much of the book emphasises how the British settlers used every trick in all threads of that braid to deny, exclude or exterminate the original, Indigenous peoples of Australia - ultimately unsuccessfully. Which period of history is somewhat better defined by McLean:

Empire, 1770-1916: British Australian art during colonial rule.
Art Wars, 1916—45: the bitter struggle to define a national art that erupted in the 1920s and '30s.
Nation, post-1945: the apotheosis of Australian art after the Second World War and its dissolution from the mid-1960s.

... although he (or his publisher) could not resist including an Epilogue mentioning developments, particularly the ebb of nationalism and growth in acceptance/appreciation of Indigenous contemporary art, up until the 1990s. For greater detail on that period, McLean recommends one of his other books, 'Rattling Spears'. [2]

The book 'Double Nation' could be considered a philosophical treatise, since epistemology, metaphysics, logic, ethics, aesthetics, and politics all play roles. However, it is a very practical philosophy, practically a 'Who done it?' detective novel, collecting the evidence to discover who/what is responsible for the current state of art in Australia. The key evidence is from artworks; the key suspects are artists and their backers (politicians, the moneyed classes, influential institutions).

The meaning of 'double' in the book title is multiply defined. One meaning is that the art history of Australia is divided, doubled by the presence of both settler and Indigenous art histories. [3] Another meaning is that the history of the nation has (at least) two sides, which interact, 'doubling down' the complexities of each. A third meaning is in terms of Orwell's doublethink, which allowed (and allows) cosmopolitan white Australians [4] to purchase Indigenous artists' work without thinking too hard about historical genocide or present poverty-lines. A fourth meaning is in terms of a deconstruction of Australian art history, whereby the tension between concepts (white/black, coloniser/colonised, eurocentric/Jukurrpa-based, capitalist/self-sufficient) creates meaning. McLean explained this during a roundtable discussion in Perth, Australia, on 30th August 2023:

Those who know their contemporary theory will recognise this as Derrida’s definition of deconstruction. Because it was my motivation for writing Double Nation, I wrote it as a deconstruction of the national tradition of Australian art. Fortunately, there was a classic text to deconstruct: Bernard Smith's 'Australian Painting' (1962, 1970) [5]. It is a settler national narrative because it firstly validated Australia’s founding as a white nation with its sovereignty guaranteed by the legal doctrine of terra nullius, and secondly, it sought to overcome the provincialist legacies of its settler colonial origins by ignoring Indigenous culture and focusing on the relationship between European art made in Australia and its sources in European traditions. This exclusion of indigenous presence has been called a blindness, and in 1980 Smith admitted as much. Yet Smith had always been aware of Indigenous art; indeed, he admired it. But in affording no place for it in his narrative, his history discursively eliminated the Indigenous, which is the imperative of settler colonialism. [6]

Beyond issues of pure politics or pure aesthetics, McLean examines the historical and economic trends which influenced or constrained the creation, appreciation and valorisation of art in Australia, and towards the British empire. The book is complex, convoluted, spiced with anecdotes and historical ironies, enticingly illustrated, and sophisticated. Yet the book is also dangerously well-argued: the casual reader is at risk of swallowing a post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy hook, line and sinker ... simply because the bait on the hook is so tasty. Caveat lector!

So, who should read this book? Frankly, there is something there (somewhere) for everyone. Those who should read it are students and art historians wanting to fill in gaps in their knowledge or ponder multiple interpretations of their chosen field. Those who will enjoy reading it, with a lighter touch and fewer professional responsibility, are those who regularly visit Australian art museums and wonder how/why some of the stuff is hanging there?

Professor Ian McLean, recently retired, has published extensively on the subject of Australian art, particularly Indigenous and contemporary art. His books include Indigenous Archives: The Making and Unmaking of Aboriginal Art, with Darren Jorgensen (2017); Rattling Spears: A History of Indigenous Australian Art (2016); Double Desire: Transculturation and Indigenous Art (2014); How Aborigines Invented the Idea of Contemporary Art (2011); White Aborigines: Identity Politics in Australian Art (1998); and The Art of Gordon Bennett (1996).

P.S.

The first irony that I found in the book, before reading even the first word, was a peculiar image of a kangaroo opposite the opening page of the introduction. Subtitled 'George Stubbs, The Kongouro from New Holland, 1772, oil on panel', the animal seemed more like a large, skinny rat. Yet it reminded me immediately of an artwork in a December 2023 exhibition 'REVISIONS' in Cologne, in Germany, at the Rautenstrauch-Joest Museum, where the Indigenous artist Hilda Nakamarra Rogers had commissioned in China a copy of Stubb's work then overpainted the figure of the kangaroo with rows of colourful dots, 'correcting' Stubb's fantasy. Readers can view the original artwork by Stubbs in the collections of the National Maritime Museum in London, or online here. The artwork by Hilda Nakamarra Rogers is an artistic act of re-appropriation. Details can be read on page 6 of the online brochure of the 'REVISIONS' exhibition.

In his book, McLean used the painting by Stubbs as McLean's literary form of appropriation, referencing it as the first painting discussed in a seminal (and entirely colonialist, hence diametrically opposed to McLean's book) art reference tome by Bernard Smith published in 1962 in Melbourne and reprinted in four editions over half a century [5]. Amusingly, Smith had reproduced not the original painting by Stubbs but a bad copy in the form of an engraving. McLean explains the history of Stubb's painting, which had been commissioned by the famous botanist Joseph Banks, after Bank's first voyage to Australia with Captain Cook. It had been painted in the atelier of the English artist Stubbs, who was known for his paintings of horses, based on skins and sketches provided by Banks ... all in order to advertise and promote the idea of a British colony in Australia. McLean further notes on page 12 that, when the artwork came on commercial sale in 2012, both the UK National Maritime Museum and the National Gallery of Australia made bids. The NGA 'vied for possession on grounds of national heritage, but British law ruled in favour of [the Maritime Museum]'.

Therefore, we find here in the history of one artwork, the first ever painted of a kangaroo, the struggle for control and possession that is absolutely central to colonialism.

For further reading, with various approaches different to McLean's, see books listed in [7].