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
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.
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
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 Archibald. Rachel 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:
This is such a well written piece! The works in the early years look better than the modern prize-winning portraits.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
Boa tarde e bom sábado minha querida amiga. Seu trabalho é espetacular e uma verdadeira aula de história. As pinturas são maravilhosas.
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.
Which is more important -the high status associated with winning an Archibald or the money?
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.
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.
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.
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.
A very interesting post. I learned a lot about the history of the Archibald Prize. My favourite was Ben Quilty's Margaret Olley.
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.
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
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.
Post a Comment