Every year there are a number of prizes, awards and scholarships that an artist can win; many of which offer money, travel and recognition that can be very important in an artist’s career. The Archibald Prize for portraiture is one of Australia’s oldest and best-known visual arts awards, and each year, in accordance with the bequest of Jules F. Archibald, the trustees of the Art Gallery of New South Wales invite artists to submit paintings in competition for the annual Archibald Prize.
The Archibald Prize competition, and each year’s winning entries, are subjects of great public interest.The competition encourages discussion about painting, portraiture, and larger questions about art and definitions of quality, as few other art prizes do. The prize of $35,000 and the publicity and recognition the prize generates for the winning painter encourages painters entering the competition to stretch their skills. The winning entry is judged by the Trustees of the Art Gallery of New South Wales, and the artist must have been a resident in Australasia during the 12 months preceding the date fixed by the Trustees for sending in the pictures.
The artists submitting works in the Archibald Prize must know the subject of the portrait and, in turn, the subject of the portrait must be aware of the artist’s intention. There also has to be at least one sitting by the subject for the portrait. Jules Francois Archibald, Born in Victoria 1856, is the man behind the Archibald prize. He had no desire to become famous, and during his lifetime, shunned publicity and remained evasive and enigmatic.
His interest in art led him in his later years to serve as a trustee for the Art Gallery of New South Wales, keen to promote the work of younger artists and writers.When he died in 1919, he left shares in his will with instructions that the money made from the shares was to be used each year as a prize for the best portrait painted by an Australian artist, ‘preferably some man or woman distinguished in art, letters, science or politics’. This year’s exhibition catered for all tastes, with many portraits of different styles, techniques and context, with the use of a variety of mediums including oils on canvas, acrylics on linen, and even charcoal and mixed Medias.Subject matters were both of a realistic, almost look-alike quality, while others were aesthetically different, some with no actual person in the portrait at all and required further reading.
The paintings were all hung at eye level so were easily viewed at a leisurely pace, and were spread out roughly around 12-14 paintings each rooms, with about 3 exhibition rooms in total. The paintings were well spotlighted and the room well lit for a clear look at all the paintings, each one spaced accordingly and placed in well thought-out positions.After walking into the first room of the exhibition, when you look straight ahead, the winner is placed at the end of the ‘hallway’ between each room, as if looking out proudly on the rest of the paintings that were unable to share the same glory. The winner of the 2004 Archibald Prize is Craig Ruddy with his portrait David Gulpilil, two worlds.
Mixed media on wallpaper on board. Gulpilil is one of Australia’s best known Aboriginal actors. Quote: Craig Ruddy, on the subject of his portrait: ‘..
. David is a man who crosses the lines that still divide two contrasting worlds …
One is an infinite world of spiritual connection with the land and universe as a whole, and the other a materialistic conformation of western civilisation. Simplicities and complexities infiltrate both worlds and David seems to strike a balance. ‘ Born in Arnhem Land in 1953, Gulpilil achieved international fame through starring roles in such films as ‘The last wave’, ‘Storm Boy’, ‘Crocodile Dundee’, ‘Rabbit Proof Fence’ and ‘The Tracker’. Between films Gulpilil leads a normal Aboriginal lifestyle.
Ruddy was contemplating painting such a portrait for some time. The bold free spirited line work of the charcoal and graphite contrast with the structured and refined opulence of the English wallpaper. I hope that the work represents the energy and spirituality that I experienced in his presence…” The painting is successful in its overall presentation to the viewer, requesting a response that encourages the audience to understand both the character of the person, and the presence of their personality evident in the portrait. This has been successfully achieved as Ruddy has captured the essence of David Gulpilil in an artistic, expressive way.
This year, there were 728 entries, 40 made it through to be exhibited, and there were 4 finalists. When you first walk into the 2004 exhibition, the first thing you see are 2 large canvases, painted in vibrant colours, with a realistic, almost life-like quality. Both paintings complement each other in both their use of colour and technique, each standing out for their striking facial expression, Jason Benjamin’s Bread and Circuses (oil on canvas) on the left-hand side of the room, with a serious looking face of a man, and the quirky expression of Robert Hannaford’s Self Portrait (oil on canvas) on the right-hand side of the room.Hannaford worked on this self portrait for a year.
It started when he once caught a glimpse of himself, and the way his right eye was cropped struck him as an interesting idea compositionally, and this became the impetus for his portrait. He never uses photo’s and for this portrait used a mirror. After 6 months of working on the painting, Hannaford decided to change the expression on his face from serious to a more light-hearted expression- that is the angled smile and raised eyebrow. This portrait I thought was successful in that it expressed what the Archibald criteria is based apon.
It captured the very essence of the subject’s character and persona, showing a quirky, cheeky aspect of his personality. The subject of the portrait, that being Hannaford himself, was aware of his intentions, that being to present to the audience a portrait that distinguished himself as a man in an expressive art form. The portrait showed his true character which allowed for a light-hearted and positive response from the audience. It gave an insight into the context of the subject and a personal view on the way the person in the portrait wanted to present himself to the world.
Almost every work exhibited is of very high standard, each with their own unique style and composition. Not only does the winner of the Archibald prize receive recognition and reward for such standards within the competition, There is also another unique aspect of the competition and that is The Packing Room Prize. This is a prize awarded by the workers behind the scenes who receive, unpack and hang all the entries. First awarded in 1991, the Packing Room Prize is adjudicated by the Gallery’s Storeman, Steve Peters – who continues to claim his right to 51 per cent of the votes.
This prize is traditionally awarded a couple of days before the Archibald, after the hanging of the finalists, with the winner receiving $500. In 2004 the highly-coveted Packing Room Prize of $500 was awarded to Evert Ploeg for his portrait of Jana Wendt (oil on linen). Ploeg left his entry to the last minute, and it was only through friends that he got the idea to paint Jana Wendt. His quote on the subject: “she has a very distinct face, good sculptural face.
.. ’ Jana is one of Australia’s most high profile television presenters/reporters.The sitting took place just 3 weeks before the Archibald deadline, and consequently the painting was still wet on the deadline.
Ploeg wanted something simple, very elegant and chic. He wanted the feeling he was having a conversation with her, and clearly the painting was successful in doing this. Ploeg ran out of time to paint the whole background and lounge in the painting- the linen showing through in areas; and although it looks unfinished, to some this gave an interesting effect to the portrait that the audience responded to positively.In contrast, the unfinished product did not appeal to some.
Born in Sydney 1963, Ploeg is regarded one of Australia’s most accomplished portraitist’s. The inclusion of a People’s Choice Award in 1988 has subsequently ensured wide engagement by the public in the prize and the related Archibald exhibition at the Art Gallery of New South Wales every year. This award offers an opportunity for the public to vote for their favourite portrait in the Archibald exhibition, and is awarded to the painting voted most popular by visitors.Both the artists and the selected voter each receive a prize of $2500.
This year, Craig Ruddy also won the People’s Choice Prize. It was only the second time the People’s Choice Prize was awarded to winner of the Archibald Prize. The other time was 1988, the year the People’s Choice Prize was introduced and Fred Cress’s portrait of John Beard won both awards. Each year, when the works are judged and displayed at the Art Gallery of New South Wales, there is great public interest and debate.
One of the most memorable entries was William Dobell’s portrait of fellow artist Joshua Smith in 1943.Dobell’s prize winning portrait is what broke with the original conventions that had been established with the Archibald, and what stirred controversy within the art critics and officials. Opposition to the win was intense and two Royal Art Society members, Joseph Wolinski and Mary Edwards, took legal action against Dobell and the trustees, alleging that Joshua Smith was ‘a distorted and caricatured form’ and therefore not a portrait. It was described as being ‘haunted with vivid expressive colours, linear distortion and almost mannerist attenuation of form’.
In contrast, the supporters of Dobell described the portrait as both ‘a likeness or resemblance of the sitter and a work of art’, which allowed for distortion for the purpose of art. The opposition were so outraged when Dobell’s painting won the prize that they went to the Supreme Court to try and prevent the prize from being awarded to him. At the end of the case, the judge said of the portrait that it was a ‘… startling exaggeration and distortion… clearly intended by the artist… it bears, nevertheless, a strong degree of likeness to the subject… I find that it is a portrait’.Controversy has once again broken out, with objections against this year’s winner Craig Ruddy.
Tony Johansen, a Sydney Kings Cross artist, is taking legal action against the NSW Art Gallery which awarded this year’s Archibald Prize for a portrait which, he says, was not a valid entry because it was a drawing, not a painting. Johansen told papers that he believed the rules of the prize should have ruled out Craig Ruddy’s entry, a charcoal and graphite sketch of the actor David Gulpilil.The Archibald’s entry criteria states portraits should be “a picture of a person painted from life” and a section added around 1993 limits the medium for portraits to “oil, acrylic, watercolour and mixed media”. For Archibald Prize judge Janet Lawrence, herself an artist and a gallery trustee, it was not easy to draw the line between a mixed-media sort of drawing and a mixed-media painting.
If the legal action proceeds it will add to the history of controversy that has dogged the prize since it was first awarded in 1921. Mr.Johansen, whose acrylic portrait of entertainer Carlotta, was not chosen as a finalist, denies his actions were motivated by bitterness. To him it’s all about principles, one of his complaints being that over time slowly the trustees have been changing the parameters for entry to the competition.
“Sour grapes seems to be mentioned every time there is a discussion on the merits of the Archibald Prize entries, finalists and winners,” Mr. Johansen said. These cases highlight the debate about the nature of portraiture, and the changes in the context of art and the ethics to do with it.Should the parameters be changed for entry into the competition as the years go on and the face of art changes? Is it really what Archibald would-have wanted? Should the winner be disqualified? These are all questions that have been raised with the recent controversy.
Technically, it is difficult to say whether a ‘mixed media’ portrait which did not include the use of paint should deserve to be awarded for a portrait prize which states it should be ‘painted’ but can include the medium of ‘mixed media’.Over the years, the context and guidelines for what is accepted into the Archibald Prize and what is not has changed considerably, and in order to prevent the prize possibly one day becoming something completely different to what it started, the rules should stay the same, and the winners in the future should be more carefully picked out. Aside from the more traditional, life-like portraits included in the prize this year, there were also portraits that challenged these traditional boundaries of what a portrait is and can be. Most evidently, this was done with what subject matters were used, and the meaning behind it.
One strikingly different and somewhat confronting entry in the competition that is a perfect example of this was Richard Bell’s portrait ‘I am not sorry’ (acrylic and oil on canvas). A self taught artist born in QLD. Charleville 1953, his portrait is of a Ned Kelly figure in a black t-shirt with the words on it- ‘White Girls’. Bell won the 2003 Telstra National Aboriginal and Torres Straight Islander prize with a painting featuring the words “Aboriginal art, it’s a white thing”.
He accepted the prize with a black T-shirt with the slogan ‘white girls cant hump’, this caused an outcry.He laughs when asked about this self portrait, a clear reference to that occasion and suspects his self portrait will also create waves. “I’m not the artist who won the Telstra award; I’m the guy who wore the t-shirt. One of the issues I deal with is blamelessness, and the label on the Ned Kelly’s t-shirt epitomizes blamelessness to me”.
Bell sifts complex issues such as violence towards Aboriginal women, the contested history of Aboriginal artists and presents them in a few pithy words which he has described as the equivalent of a 30 second sound bite.The Audience’s first initial reaction to this ‘portrait’ is of mixed viewpoints. A lot look at it in disgust that such a painting made it into the exhibition, and others once they’ve read into it, see it as an expression of the artists feelings towards society today. It is, in a way, difficult to interpret, as it is more a portrait on the artist’s feelings politically about the world he lives in, and not so much him physically but emotionally.
The portrait goes against the traditional criteria of a portrait, that being a ‘distinguished’ man or woman, but it is this difference that makes it not just a portrait to look at aesthetically, but in a cultural/societal view beyond what the subject is. It offers a critical response and also a cultural/subjective response; the audience’s reactions being of mixed contexts, more commonly just a quick judgement before reading into it. One clever way the curator placed the works was the positioning of David Paulson’s portrait Richard Bell, I am not Sorry (oil on canvas) right next to Richard Bell’s self portrait.This is a portrait of the artist Richard Bell in what Paulson thought he should be viewed as and not what he did get viewed as, and that was the man who wore the t-shirt, not the artist who painted the picture.
This is how Bell felt himself and tried to convey this in his self portrait. In his painting, Paulson is trying to convey to the audience that Bell is more than just the guy who wore the t-shirt, and he too should be viewed as an artist. The two works complement each other because they give each other an explanation of what the artworks are about and why they were produced.They aid each other in their interpretation and strengthens the meaning of the issues both Bell and Paulson are trying to pursue in their paintings.
Something that some audiences passed by, but others picked up on, and it was those people that gained a better understanding of the portrait. Another example of a portrait that went beyond traditional boundaries of the context of what a portrait is considered to be and what it can be was Paul Worsdead’s painting (me) oil on canvas.This is a painting of a bunny rabbit with the words, ‘autism as a metaphor’ painted above it. It is supposedly a self portrait of the artist conveying to the viewer how he feels on autism and about himself.
The painting received a few frowns, the artists just simply “tickled pink” he got in. it goes outside the norms of what’s included in a portrait painting, but certainly communicates to the viewer how the artist feels, and in turn gives an insight into their world.First awarded in 1921, the Archibald Prize quickly became a prize sought by artists, not only because of the money it offered and the publicity and public exposure it generated, but because it also gave artists an opportunity to have their work shown in a major art gallery. Previously, portraitists had been largely restricted to public or private commissions, and in contrast to this, restricted the general public in what they were able to observe at their leisure, and what kinds of art they were exposed to.
Fresh new Australian artistic talent was confined to an artists personal workings, and exhibitions like the Archibald allowed contemporary, less well-known/public Australian artists to have their artwork viewed as a serious art form. It gives people an opportunity to show their work in the National Art Gallery who otherwise wouldn’t, and in turn allows the general public admission to view and appreciate these artworks.Some artists who exhibit works in the Archibald are not professional artists, which in some ways is an extraordinary liberty for a gallery. A lot of the paintings are of well-known important people and faces of Australia which conveys to the audience that these are the people of our world today, who help shape the face of our nation, which in turn raises recognition to the general public of where these people stand in our world, and where the public stand in viewing these artworks.
The Archibald Prize, from its outset, has aroused controversy while chronicling the changing face of Australian society. Numerous legal battles and much debate have focused on the evolving definitions of portraiture. It has become one of the most popular annual art exhibitions in Australia, and one of Australia’s oldest and best known art prizes for portraiture
