Paul Sheehan, ‘Art in replying to a critic’s critic’, The Sydney Morning Herald, 07.06.99
The acerbic pen of art critic John McDonald has exposed an ideological divide in the art world - and a deep vein of personal attack - since his surprising appointment to the important position of head of Australian art at the National Gallery of Australia.
The attacks on Mr McDonald include the serious accusation of plagiarism.
In his farewell piece as the Herald’s chief art critic last Thursday, he wrote: “There is a well-known critic who has specialised in telling people that my work is all ‘plagiarism’, although she is unable to cite any evidence in support. These comments, which she has wisely refrained from immortalising in print, have been intended to inflict maximum damage. So far as I can see, the motivation is nothing more than petty jealousy.”
The critic is Joanna Mendelssohn.
Since Mr McDonald brought the issue into the open, two judges of the Pascall Prize for criticism - the forum where Ms Mendelssohn, a former Pascall winner, made her accusation - confirm that Mr McDonald was blackballed by Ms Mendelssohn as a plagiarist.
“It was the most outrageous thing I’ve ever come across,” said Bruce Elder, a former Pascall winner and cultural commentator for the Herald and the ABC.
“For two years in a row, Joanna Mendelssohn, without a scrap of evidence, alleged that John McDonald had plagiarised work. It was the most appalling example of personal vendetta I’ve ever come across.”
When contacted by the Herald last week, Ms Mendelssohn responded: “It appears that one of the judges is quite happy to give his gloss on confidential discussions. He came into the discussions with a very strong agenda.”
She said she complained about Mr McDonald in a letter written to the Herald in August 1998.
The letter states: “Curiously enough, Mr McDonald understood me well enough when he later rephrased some of my observations...but as he does not credit me as a source, those of your readers not fortunate to read Art Monthly will be left with the impression that these are Mr McDonald’s own original insights.”
Last week, she added: “If you have to churn out 2,000 words, week after week, as John did, there is a tendency to rely on exhibition catalogues.”
Mr McDonald took strong exception to all this.
The Herald asked Ms Mendelssohn last week to provide samples of alleged plagiarism.
She did not do so.
* * *
Paul Sheehan, '15 sign NGA petition’, The Sydney Morning Herald, 23.06.99
The din of disapproval in sections of the art world over the appointment of Herald art critic John McDonald to the National Gallery of Australia has become a more discreet murmur.
A letter has arrived at the National Gallery in time for today’s council meeting, protesting McDonald’s appointment as head of Australian art. The letter was signed by 15 art scholars, gallery owners and artists.
The protest letter calls on the gallery council to reassess McDonald’s appointment on the grounds that he did not meet the academic criteria required for the job and had an essentially reactionary approach to contemporary art.
The group which prepared the letter was co-ordinated by Brad Buckley, associate professor at Sydney College of the Arts.
The group realises its protest cannot overturn the appointment. National Gallery director, Dr Brian Kennedy, has enthusiastically backed the selection of McDonald and described the protest as “provincialism”.
The chairman of the National Gallery’s council, media proprietor Kerry Stokes, told the Herald McDonald was “the outstanding applicant” and characterised the public attacks as “the unfortunate, petty and political side of the art world”.
Also offsetting the protest has been a flow of letters to the NGA supporting McDonald. Kennedy said he had received “dozens” of positive letters.
McDonald, who often lampooned Australia’s avant-garde art movement - which is heavily represented in the protest against him - takes up the job in September.
No comments:
Post a Comment