Martyrs for Art

# 580

Trouble round the barbie at Creative Australia

Khaled Sabsabi is no terrorist, although this is the impression anyone might get if they took all their news from the Murdoch press. The opposing point of view is that last week, Sabsabi became a martyr for his art.

Rarely has a statement in a press release seemed more ridiculous than Creative Australia’s claim that by de-selecting Sabsabi to represent Australia in the 2026 Venice Biennale, it would avoid “prolonged and divisive debate”. For the past week, all we’ve had is divisive debate, or rather sustained outrage from the art crowd, and mostly silence from the government and the people at CA that pulled the plug.

It's a long story but let’s start with the committee that selected Sabsabi in the first place, who don’t seem to have considered the implications of their choice. Given the state of affairs in Gaza and Israel, where a brutal massacre by Hamas and an unrelenting assault by the IDF have split the world into vehemently opposed camps, was it really the right time to choose an artist of Arab and Muslim heritage, whose work is rife with political statements about conflict in the Middle East? Let alone one who signed the 2024 petition calling for Israeli artists and curators to be blacklisted from the previous Biennale. So much for ‘freedom of speech’.

One could never expect Sabsabi to be neutral about Gaza. His whole identity and background oblige him to take a partisan stance. More humanist than militant, the horror he feels about the destruction of Palestine is shared by everyone who wishes for peace rather than endless war. Yet with video works such as You (2007), which features the late Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah; and Thank You Very Much (2006), which deals with the 9/11 attacks, he created a sense of ambiguity that his detractors have been able to exploit ruthlessly. In any pub test, a video of Nasrallah with a divine light shining from his face might be considered an endorsement.

The selection committee at Creative Australia must live in a bubble if they couldn’t see the reaction this choice would provoke. Why was it left to journos from The Australian to do a bit of research the committee members should have done? The answer, most probably, is that the committee could have looked at these videos all day and seen nothing wrong. When a group of people share the same prejudices and ideology, they are able to normalise things others find unacceptable.

Sabsabi obviously did not intending to glorify violence and terror in these works, more likely making a statement about the tragic human capacity to embrace such tactics – leading to the same vicious circle we see in the Israel-Hamas conflict. But for those unfamiliar with his errr… subtleties, images of the Hezbollah leader or planes crashing into the World Trade Centre set off alarm bells.

The selection committee should have had enough understanding of the political sensitivities to think twice about the Sabsabi appointment. When the Opposition are pursuing a scare campaign trying to depict Albo, Penny Wong and co. as anti-Semites – most likely in a bid to sway Jewish voters who deserted them at the last election – the last thing the government needed was this utterly gratuitous fracas.

Suddenly, Arts Minister Tony Burke found himself confronted with another scandal-in-the-making, and could only plead that under the principle of CA independence and ‘arms-length’ funding, he had no say in this decision. Can he claim as much today, after Labor politicians denounced the choice in Parliament, and the selection was swiftly revoked? It sounds a lot like political pressure, if not actual intervention.

Unhappily, Burke has form in such matters, having presided over the appointment of artist, Abdul-Rahman Abdullah to the Council of the National Gallery of Australia in September last year, praising him for the “authentic leadership” he would bring to the role. When Abdullah proceeded to send out a series of inflammatory anti-Israel messages on social media, he was swiftly retired. Neither Burke nor NGA director, Nick Mitzevich, made any statement at the time. As Abdullah’s main “leadership” experience seemed to be six years on the board of the Perth Institute of Contemporary Arts, one can only assume that he was appointed for reasons other than his expertise in the boardroom.

Such incidents, and now the Sabsabi wrangle, provide fuel for the pernicious culture wars Peter Dutton sees as a way of gaining favour with a volatile electorate. One can understand Labor’s panic, but these are largely self-inflicted wounds caused by their own board appointments. At CA the lack of fundamental political nous was astonishing, and the resignations and indignation that have followed have only done further damage to Labor’s credentials. What might have been seen as a positive gesture towards Australia’s Muslim communities now looks like a rejection. Jewish communities angered by this episode will not be easily swayed by the about-face.

Perhaps the most noteworthy resignation was that of Lindy Lee, who as a member of the board of CA, put her name to the unanimous decision to rescind Sabsabi’s appointment, only to change her mind the next day, saying: “I could not live with the level of violation I felt against one of my core values, that the artist’s voice must never be silenced”. Such a rapid backflip does not suggest those “core values” were deeply ingrained. It might be unkindly suspected that Lee’s change of heart was prompted by the realisation – after a dark night of the soul – that she could find herself on the wrong side of the ideological fence. Either way, it does not suggest any great strength of character.

Normally, in such cases, I’d incline towards holding firm with the original decision, rather than stirring up a backlash that proves more damaging than the initial controversy. On this occasion, subsequent investigations suggest that perseverance may not have been the best policy.

Now that the door was ajar, a disturbing coda appeared, in the form of a follow-up story in The Australian which investigated the Eleven Collective, a group of Muslim artists initiated by Sabsabi, who appear to have conflicts of interests when it comes to who is applying for and receiving grants, and who is sitting on the selection committees. The story points out that members of the Eleven Collective have received roughly $1 million in grants since 2018.

The peer assessment process has always been a grey area, and it would be difficult to prove collusion rather than business-as-usual. Art appreciation is not a science, and the priorities of a particular group of people chosen to sit on a committee may not square with the views of the general public, or even with an alternative group of art community representatives. That’s the way it is, but it doesn’t make the optics any more appealing. None of this would have come to attention had Sabsabi not been chosen for the Venice pavilion. Now the spotlight will be on these committees, as critics search for more fuel for the bonfire.

As a thought experiment, ask yourself what would have happened if CA had selected a Jewish artist to represent Australia at the next Biennale. Would such a choice have been greeted with acclaim or roundly criticised? Are there Jewish artist collectives that have an equivalent stake in the CA grant processes?

As the week progressed, The Australian’s journos dug a little deeper, and found that CA had also been handing over money to artists who have been singing the praises of assassinated Hamas leader, Yahya Sinwar, on social media. Lest we forget, Sinwar presided over a massacre of liberal-minded Jews who were probably among the most sympathetic group in Israel when it comes to the Palestinian cause. He was one of the masterminds of a strategy that has left Gaza in ruins, and a death toll that is pushing towards 50,000. A real hero, who must have known he was handing Netanyahu and the hardliners who keep him in power, an excuse for a relentless onslaught on Palestinian civilians.

In Australia, our commitment to “freedom of speech” allows people to praise characters such as Sinwar if they so desire. It’s quite another thing for these people to expect handouts from the taxpayer when they have expressed views that are antithetical to the line taken by a government that has been trying to walk a narrow political tightrope between two hostile parties.

The same people who worship Sinwar would be horrified if CA handed money to an outspoken supporter of Netanyahu. As for “freedom of speech, would CA feel OK about supporting to an avowed Neo-Nazi, on the grounds that one’s political opinions are not to be taken into account with any grant application?

The idiocy of those who post hot-headed political statements is that they blindly believe they are right, and therefore should be supported at all times, while their opponents are wrong and must be excluded. It’s no smarter than that.

Even more reprehensible are those media commentators who have tried to attach themselves to the Sabsabi bandwagon with lame “freedom of speech” arguments, or in the case of Ella Barclay’s piece in The Conversation, which was reproduced in The Guardian, make bizarre comparisons between Sabsabi’s image of Nasrallah, and Sidney Nolan’s Ned Kelly paintings. “Australian art has long depicted outlaws,” read the headline.. “Great art should spark debate.”

It's a rather broad assumption that Sabsabi is creating “great art”, but pure nonsense to put Nolan’s images of a 19^th bushranger and folk hero alongside the leader of a contemporary militant group known for supporting terrorism. Barclay also informs us that the late Adam Cullen “is revered for depicting violence and darkness in Australian culture.” Really? “Revered”??

Another piece by Samuel Cairnduff in Limelight, makes a long, drawn-out argument in favour of “artistic freedom” and “the role we expect culture to play in our society”, citing other examples of encroaching intolerance such as the STC protest where the cast wore Palestinian keffiyehs on stage; and pianist, Jayson Gillham, who treated Melbourne concert goers to a political lecture when they came to hear him play. Cairnduff believes this is all part and parcel of “artistic expression”. He seems to think it is the sacred duty of institutions to back anything an artist chooses to do or say, because this fosters discourse and debate.

His strident conclusion is that “Australia cannot afford a cultural sector that retreats at the first sign of controversy.”

On the contrary, Sam, Australia cannot afford to keep confusing “artistic expression” with partisan political positions. Our institutions most certainly cannot afford – literally cannot afford - to alienate half their constituencies while providing a political platform for the other half. Should they be perfectly even-handed and let the opposing side have their say as well, in no time at all museums, theatres and concert halls will have devolved into political debating forums, hostile to artists whose work is not actively engaged. This is already happening in a soft way, with the current institutional obsession with race and gender. This “freedom of expression” is freedom to self-destruct.

It's a sad, sick moment when we’re reduced to judging artists by their religious and political affiliations rather than their work, but in Sabsabi’s case it’s hard to make a separation, as so much of his art is overtly political. If the CA committees were determined to link art and politics, perhaps they might have looked at an artist who deals with Climate Change, a topic where there is much greater consensus.

Now we’re left with the hopeless predicament of sorting out what comes next with the Biennale appointment. The other artists and commissioners on the original short-list have come out in solidarity with Sabsabi, signing a letter calling for his reinstatement. This means that any artist who steps into the breach and agrees to show in the Australian pavilion would have to be immune to the enormous moral pressure brought to bear. On Instagram, artist Jason Phu, called for “a boycott on the pavilion forever” – an unlikely outcome.

Reinstating Sabsabi would be a colossal embarrassment to Labor and reignite the media controversy. I can’t imagine how it could happen. On the other hand, I’m bamboozled as to what they are going to do with the pavilion. A non-show is looking increasingly likely.

When will governments learn to stop treating arts and culture as if they were mere opportunities for a party? The political grandstanding of contemporary artists is treated as a charade to be played out for the benefit of industry insiders, not to be taken seriously by the rest of the world. It’s only ‘what artists do’, as if they were no more than spoiled children misbehaving in public.

The Venice Biennale is widely considered the world’s leading showcase for contemporary art, and politics is always part of the mix. This is not, however, an invitation to court controversy. With one thoughtless, self-generated drama we’ve laid ourselves open to international embarrassment on a grand scale. Any artist who ends up in the Australian pavilion will be stigmatised as a traitor and opportunist, a mere substitute for the original choice, even if that choice was a questionable one. Meanwhile, Sabsabi has become a martyr and a hero, regardless of his actual work, which may be good, bad or indifferent. When the dust settles, Sabsabi might sit back and count his blessings. In the world of contemporary art, this is how reputations are made.

The art column this week, for The Nightly, looks at Pompeii: Inside a Lost City at the National Museum of Australia. It’s one of those blockbusters art gallery types like to sneer at, although it will attract a much bigger audience than all the cool contemporary things they adore. From my point of view, Pompeii is a completely fascinating subject but judging from the way they’ve packaged this show, I’m not sure the NMA has fully appreciated the ancient treasures they have on their hands.

The film being reviewed is Gia Coppola’s The Last Showgirl, featuring Pamela Anderson as a relic of Las Vegas antiquity who still wants to get out on stage every night in her feathers and rhinestones. It’s a sad film, but about a hundred times better than anything in which you may have previously seen Pam perform – which is not to say it’s a masterpiece. More like a credit, really. I wish I could give Creative Australia such a high mark.