26 November 2022

Archibald winning portraits in Australia: Rabbi Porush by W.E.Pidgeon

Let's Face It: The History of the Archibald Prize (1999) was a great book by Peter Ross. See earlier references to the prize-winning Port­rait of the Artist Joshua Smith by William Dobell, for example.

Rabbi I Porush, 1961
by WEP
Archibald Prize Archives

John Feltham Archibald (1856-1919) was born to a hard-working, rural Irish family. The lad was first app­ren­ticed to the Warrn­am­bool Ex­am­iner, then at 19 he moved to Melbourne to work in a newsp­ap­er’s print­ing room. Archibald headed north in 1878. He created a part­nership in Sydney with a newspaper colleague, and started The Bul­let­in in 1880, Aust­r­alia’s first quality weekly magazine of pol­it­ics, business and lit­erature. Famous literary men eg Henry Lawson, Banjo Patt­er­son vis­it­ed often, as did top illustrators eg George Lambert, Norman Lindsay.

Peter Ross was very honest about the Bulletin, saying first editor Archibald was a racist and anti-Semite. Its motto was "Australia for the white man". Alas this biz­arre mix of pol­­itical activism and bitter xeno­ph­obia seemed popular then.

In 1902 Archibald was locked in a Sydney Psychiatric Asy­lum. When he could go back into the community, he sadly had to sell his share of The Bull­etin. But happily he was made a NSW Art Gall­ery Trustee, 1915. He died in 1919, leaving a large estate with these cl­auses in his will. Part was used to
1] create WW1 fountain in Hyde Park by French sculptor François Sicard
2] fund the Journalists' Associat­ion Bene­vo­lent Fund and
3] en­d­ow the art prize, judged by NSW Art Gallery Trustees.

The Archibald Bequest gave a prize for the best portrait painted by an Aus­tralian art­ist, of someone distinguished in art, let­ters, scien­ce or politics. Clearly Archibald’s int­en­t­ions had been to perpetuate the memory of great Austral­ians. But there were many legal challenges.

So the Trustees had to be specific in their Condit­ions of Entry. The prize was first awarded was 1921, won by WB McInnes for his Por­t­rait of architect Desbrowe Annear. Then Mc­In­nes again in 1922 with a Portrait of Prof Harrison Moore. And in 1923 with his Por­trait of a Lady. Then in 1924 with a Portrait of Miss Collins. By then the Sydney critics were angry because 1 Mel­bour­nian was hogg­ing the award. And he won 3 more times before WW2! And from 1925, another Victor­ian artist John Long­staff won 5 of the prizes!

The 1920s was a European decade of great innov­ation with Cubism, Sur­r­eal­ism, Dadaism and Bauhaus abstracts competing. But in Aus­tr­al­ia, the tradition of C19th acad­emic portraiture was thriv­ing, ?pres­erved by its geographic isol­at­ion from Europe. Did the Ar­chibald Prize attract con­serv­at­ive­ art­is­ts who weren’t in the mod­ern­ist movement? Or did more modernist artists adopt tonal realism, to win the prize?

Stanislaus Rapotec, 1960
by Judy Cassab
Art Gallery NSW

A modernist who resisted the traditionalism of the ear­ly Archib­al­ds Grace Crowley had entered the compet­it­ion, only to be turn­ed down by the trustees. The Bull­et­in knew that women art­ists should be excluded! The first woman artist to win was Nora Heysen, Hans Heysen’s daughter. Even then the Sydney Morn­ing Herald questioned the trust­ees’ sanity, in giving her the 1938 award!

In the 1940s the youn­g­er, more mod­ern artists were becoming more frus­trated with the same conserv­at­ive, male choices made by the trust­ees. William Do­bell received much criticism when his work Portrait of the Art­ist Joshua Smith was awarded the Prize in 1943.

Archibald Prize went to William E Pidgeon, 1961
Israel Porush (1907-91) grew up in Jerusalem, studied in an Isra­eli yeshiva until 15 then was sent to secular Ger­man school in 1922. From 1927 he studied at Berlin Uni and at Ber­lin’s Rabbinical Seminary, then he compl­eted a doct­oral thesis in maths at Marburg Uni. In 1933 he migrated to London. In 1939, war encouraged him to become senior rabbi at Sydney’s Great Synagogue, holding it for c33 years. He was head of the Syd­ney Rabbinical Court 1940-75 and welcomed the post-war refug­ees. He was res­p­ected for com­b­ining rabb­inical learning, se­cular sch­olarship and leader­ship, becoming President of the Ass­ociation of Jewish Min­is­ters of Aus­t­ralia & New Zealand.

W.E Pidgeon/WEP left his magazine in 1949 to do portrait paint­ing, com­m­iss­ions becoming his livelihood for 25 years. He joined the Journ­al­ists' Club Syd­ney, WEP submitting a port­rait of the modern­ist jour­nalist Kenneth Slessor to the Archibald. He didn’t win until his port­raits of Ray Walker 1958 and artist Ll­oyd Rees 1968.

 Ray Walker, by WEP, 
1958, 
Art Gall NSW

Lloyd Rees, by WEP, 
1968, 
Art Gall NSW

WEP was fascinated with relig­ions and had close Jew­ish ass­ociates eg Sali Her­man, Judy Cas­sab. He believed other por­traits were mov­ing towards more ab­­stract expr­es­­­s­ions, whereas his style was still trad­it­ional. And many of his port­raits were commiss­ion­ed, im­posing greater const­raints.

R’Porush was the only rabbinical portrait that won the Archibald, but he was not the first hopeful. R’Francis Lyon Cohen by Jos­eph Wol­inski featured in the first Archibald (1921). And the same artist put in a portrait of Coh­en’s successor, R’Abraham Wolinski (1931). A 1940 port­rait of R’Leib Falk by Valerie La­zarus al­so got into the exhibition.

The Ar­ch­ib­ald was never far from controversy. The 1961 winning port­rait was of Rabbi Dr Israel Porush by WE Pidgeon/WEP (1909-81). R’ Porush was dressed in his traditional prayer shawl, apparently at the reading platform bef­ore the Holy Ark. But it was actually painted in WEP’s North­wood studio in 6 sittings in 1961. WEP’s portrait of R’ Porush could have been seen as too tradit­ional, but the AGNSW curator emphas­ised that this rabbinical portrait won at a time when the White Australia Policy was still nasty!

Sydney Morning Herald art critic dis­mis­sed WEP’s work as tame, tradit­ional and completely ped­estrian. The crit­ics did­n’t ack­now­ledge the portrait’s social sig­nif­icance, calling it just another depiction of a white middle-aged man in ceremonial rob­es.

Kenneth Slessor by WEP, 
1962
Art Gall NSW
 
How ironic that racist Archibald had funded a competition which eventually charted Australia’s transformation into one of the wor­ld’s successful cul­turally diverse societies. Not only was this WEP’s 12th entry in the competition, and his 2nd win. Since Arch­ibald died,  3 Jewish artists have won:

1] Viennese Australian Judy Cassab won for her portraits of fellow ar­t­ists Stan Rapotec 1960 and Margo Lewers 1967.
2] Wendy Sharpe won for self-portrait Goddess Diana 1996
3] Yvette Coppersmith won for a self-portrait, referencing New Zealand P.M Jac­inda Ardern (2018). Archibald must have been turning in his grave.

See the ABC’s 2021 series Finding The ArchibaldRachel Griffiths’ mission was to find an Archibald portrait that captured Austr­al­ia’s changes, with the NSW Art Gal­l­ery’s Archie 100: Century of the Ar­chibald Prize.  And read Bul­letin magaz­ine in June 1964. To see each winning portrait, go to The Art Gallery of NSW 

Margaret Olley by Ben Quilty
2011
Art Gallery NSW


18 comments:

roentare said...

This is such a well written piece! The works in the early years look better than the modern prize-winning portraits.

Andrew said...

I gather the prize has been awarded every year so there has always been a painting worthy enough. To me the word portrait speaks of a traditional style of representing someone on canvas. That's just my thought and what would I know.

Train Man said...

Portraits are so personal - no wonder critics disagreed. But I love Judy Cassab portraits, so if you can, add one of hers for a more colourful comparison.

Hels said...

roentare

thank you. Go slowly through the 100 years of winning portraits in the Art Gallery of NSW
https://www.artgallery.nsw.gov.au/prizes/archibald/
and see if you can see a smooth change over the years, from dark to more coloured, from traditional to more modern, from respectable to less so.

I think my favourite winner was the prime minister Gough Whitlam, in 1972.

Hels said...

Andrew

there _were_ a couple of years with no awards made (1964 and 1980), but it would be interesting to know why. Were there no talented portraits in those two years? Or were there some other events that had nothing to do with painterly talent eg ongoing court cases?

Hels said...

Train Man

Very personal, yes!! I have added Judy Cassab's portrait of Stanislaus Rapotec for which she won the Archibald in 1960. See the work in the Art Gallery of NSW.

DUTA said...

No doubt, rabbi Porush deserved a portrait in his honour.
However, I find no 'prizing' quality in his portait done by WEP. It's quite an ordinary portrait depicting a rabbi wearing his proper religious outfit. Nothing special about it.

Luiz Gomes said...

Boa tarde e bom sábado minha querida amiga. Seu trabalho é espetacular e uma verdadeira aula de história. As pinturas são maravilhosas.

Fun60 said...

Art is so subjective, and I doubt I would agree with the judges' choice. There is a programme on SKY arts called 'Portrait of the Year' which is a competition for professionals and amateurs. I find the choice of the three judges fascinating and usually not my cup of tea.

Joe said...

Which is more important -the high status associated with winning an Archibald or the money?

Hels said...

DUTA

that was true for many critics, yes. Critics thought the Archibald artists _did_ show great respect to important men in ceremonial robes. But the critics hoped that a painted portrait would show more than just a physical likeness of the subject, as a photo does. They had hoped the portrait of R'Porush should have shown his experience, personality, intellect and values.

Hels said...

Luiz

After 100 years of Australia's most important portraits, the Archibald Competition has exhibited a wide range of talented candidates and winners. Some of the winning portraits are in private collections and difficult to find, but many of them are in wonderful public galleries etc.

Hels said...

Fun60

I have also seen the SKY arts programme 'Portrait of the Year' which again re-confirmed that art is very subjective. As long as the judges explain their choices, I am happy enough to live with whichever way they go.

It is probably for that very reason that the Archibald Prize also has a Peoples Choice Award. Not worth nearly as much money as the main prize awarded by the judges, the ordinary viewers at least have a chance to express their own views.

Hels said...

Joe

each year the winner receives $100,000, so for a struggling artist the money is certainly very important. But for the galleries, private buyers, universities and art academies, and the art world, status was everything.

Almost certainly I would never have heard of William Pidgeon, had his work not been publicised after his first Archibald victory. Ditto Henry Hanke and Normand Baker.

diane b said...

A very interesting post. I learned a lot about the history of the Archibald Prize. My favourite was Ben Quilty's Margaret Olley.

Hels said...

diane

Out of the many hundreds of competitors and winners in the Archibald Prize since 1921, the author of my best book, Peter Ross, chose exactly the same as you - Ben Quilty's portrait of Margaret Olley.

Desmo Architects said...

Art is so subjective, and I doubt I would agree with the judges' choice.
thiết kế nhà bếp
thiết kế nội thất
thiết kế biệt thự
thiết kế chung cư
thiết kế phòng ngủ
phong cách thiết kế nội thất

Hels said...

Desmo,

I agree with you totally. As I said to Fun60, art is very subjective and quite often the judges will award the prize to a painting that you might think is _very_ ordinary.

Presumably that is the reason that the Archibald Prize also has a Peoples Choice Award. This is where the ordinary viewers have a chance to express their own views, if they believe the judges are too academic, old fashioned or hoity toity.