The Curious Case of Creative Australia rescinding it’s selection for the 2026 Vienna Biennale.
Sometime last century I worked with Khaled Sabsabi (Peacefinder), back when Khaled was a hip hop artist and I was a performance maker, two scrappy artists from what polite society likes to call diverse backgrounds trying to make art and put some good in the world via working with the community. Forward to the 21st century, and like we all do these days, (for better or worse), I follow my fellow artists’ progress from a distance via my cyber feed. Last week I felt a certain joy and pride when I found out Khaled and Michael Dagostino were chosen as the Australian representative team for the 2026 Venice Biennale.
A couple of days later I was left seething with disgust and dismay at finding out Creative Australia rescinded their selection. Talk about Cancel Culture, or perhaps Cancelled Culture! I wonder if Senator Claire Chandler and Co see the irony that the side of politics that likes to arm themselves as the freedom of speech worriers, and rally against cancel culture if the wind changes, is the one doing the cancelling here? Probably not, and if they did, I can’t imagine in the game of politics thia level of hypocrisy matters much.
While I can understand Creative Australia, and possibly the Biennale itself facing pressure about what artists and projects take part, Creative Australia had one job (albeit with two parts) to do. Firstly, to select a team for the 2026 Venice Biennale (via a decision informed by an understanding of art, creative vision, understanding of arts in Australia, and globally, understanding the event, and putting all this through a critical and well thought through lens free from bias, fear or favour. Secondly, and what many of us thought was the easy part, stand by and support the artists selected so they could do their job. Creative Australia did great with the first part, only to spectacularly FAIL by folding like a deckchair on the second part.
Let me fix the statement from Creative Australia (see below)
“Creative Australia is an advocate for freedom of artistic expression and is not an adjudicator on the interpretation of art.” *
*Unless powerful people and interests tell us otherwise and threaten to make a fuss, in which case Creative Australia reserves the right to throw the above sentiments overboard at the first opportunity.
Creative Australia stated, “However, the Board believes a prolonged and divisive debate about the 2026 selection outcome poses an unacceptable risk to public support for Australia’s artistic community and could undermine our goal of bringing Australians together through art and creativity.”
I will use the Anglo Australian vernacular here, ‘This is a piss poor excuse.’
Folding at the first whiff of controversy sends the message that powerful elements in Australia just need to say they don’t like an artist, project or arts organisation and artistic freedom is dutifully shut down, lest above mentioned sections of Australia feel uncomfortable for themselves or on behalf of their vested interests (whomever they may be in any given situation).
The most insidious and dangerous part of all this is the chilling effect it will have on Australian artistic expression. In a country where sometimes who gets to have an artistic voice is even more contested than the artistic content itself, this is extremely dangerous for our art, culture, and ultimately our democracy.
After this the various gatekeepers, i.e. funding bodies, arts producers, artistic organisations will have somewhere in the back of their minds, if not right up front, a real and strategic preoccupation over which artists and projects do they NOT SUPPORT in order to avoid a “a prolonged and divisive debate”. Which decisions will keep the peace? This will of course flow on to artists themselves who will start to self-censor just so they can get a bit of support (something that tends to happen to some degree anyway, but with this decision self-censorship will go to new levels self-censoring suckage.)
If Creative Australia thinks it has dodged a bullet here, they are mistaken, as they have dodged one and walked into a shotgun blast like Sideshow Bob walking into rakes. To begin with Creative Australia have just tainted all their future decisions on pretty much…anything. Every decision will now be tainted with did they not include/fund/choose/do something because of outside political pressure (again), or did they include/fund/choose/do something just to make up for their past decision/s? Can you hear that sound? That’s the confidence in Creative Australia decision making leaking out like a sad whoopee cushion.
Did Senator Claire Chandler and Co have a right to question and critic Creative Australia’s choice? Of course they did! We even expect it given the bold brand her political party is putting forward these days. However Creative Australia did not have keel over like one of those fainting goats at the first loud noise.
Creative Australia and the origins of whatever pressures they faced are betting our uproar will be a storm in a teacup and this sort of censorship is a viable option.
Now it is up to us to prove them wrong; we need to find ways to be inconvenient artists, inconvenient creatives, inconvenient academics, inconvenient audiences, and inconvenient citizens to prove that this sort of malarkey is far from the quiet easy way out. A blank empty pavilion in Vienna in 2026 is a great start, it shows solidarity, and is itself a worthy bit of art. An empty dead space, where art should have happened, but is instead an empty hole where Creative Australia’s courage, vision and integrity should have been.
Richard (Rik) Lagarto
17/02/2024
