[SWP] Lot 14 (Old RAH Site)

[gnrc_louis]

It is one hell of a lot of money for something I still just can't see as being a major international attraction.

The question is, what will replace it if this gets canned? The original Adelaide Contemporary proposal, or something else?

Premier Peter Malinauskas casts doubt over $200m Adelaide First Nations Cultures Centre

Premier Peter Malinauskas has cast doubt over the future of $200m plans for an Adelaide First Nations Cultures centre, vowing to hunt for more funding if “the project goes ahead at all”.

Asked if the flagship arts and cultures centre on Lot Fourteen would go ahead, Mr Malinauskas said the rare, precious land parcel must be best-used for the state’s long-term interests.

“There isn’t a parcel of land coming up between the (Adelaide) Botanic Gardens and the railway station really in any of our lifetimes,” he told parliament.

Mr Malinauskas last October rejected “substandard” $200m plans for the First Nations Cultures centre after a $50m cost blowout, froze the project and ordered a review by “eminent Australians”.

Responding to a question from Liberal deputy leader John Gardner on Tuesday, Mr Malinauskas told parliament that review had been received by Cabinet last week and would be “under active consideration” ahead of June’s State Budget.

“Naturally, the government will be turning its mind to any opportunities to attract other revenue in the event that the project goes ahead at all,” Mr Malinauskas told parliament.

“So that’s what we have to work through. As it currently stands, the government’s policy is to pursue the project. But we now have to contemplate that in the context of a full suite of recommendations from the expert review panel.

“And then, in due course, we can also turn our mind to other opportunities around funding.”

Echoing his statements when freezing the project, Mr Malinauskas said the $200m funding “was already seeing curtailment to the previous design in a way that compromises the project”.

Mr Malinauskas last October insisted he was determined the Liberal-initiated project at Lot Fourteen go ahead, but argued he saw no sense in investing $200m of public money “for a substandard outcome” that failed to deliver something of “international significance”.

The Centre for First Nations Cultures’ managing contractor had advised sticking to the $200m budget would require a significant building downgrade, he said at the time, which would deliver a centre of “local state-level standard”.

Construction on the landmark indigenous art gallery started in December, 2021, when the centre was named Tarrkarri, meaning “the future” in Kaurna language and symbolising “the setting of strong foundations for the Centre and where the Centre is located on the Adelaide Plains”.

From: https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/sou ... 357c525aaf

The Adelaide Contemporary with a large component of aboriginal art is the best option imo

[Nathan]

The Adelaide Contemporary with a large component of aboriginal art is the best option imo

Which is exactly what the Adelaide Contemporary plan was. It's what started this whole thing — SAM thought AGSA was stepping on their toes regarding Aboriginal culture, and got into Marshall's ear about it prior to the election.

With the most important collection of Aboriginal cultural material in the world and an internationally regarded collection of European, Asian and Australian art, Adelaide Contemporary’s unique curatorial signature will enable visitors to look at Australian art in a global context.

In a world-first, the Gallery of Time will draw from the State’s collections to place Aboriginal art and culture in conversation with work from European and Asian cultures. Using storytelling, encounters and diversity, it will encourage new ways of seeing and understanding Aboriginal and other art collections.

Adelaide Contemporary will honour Aboriginal art and culture, welcoming diverse voices and fostering links with communities State-wide as well as with international partners.

[[Shuz]]

I can't see any reason why this can't just be a two-stage project. Build the front half, and then build the back half at a latter time when the funding allows?

Museums and galleries around the world are no stranger to extensions and expansions over time.

[abc]

they should put the police horses there

[Llessur2002]

I can't see any reason why this can't just be a two-stage project. Build the front half, and then build the back half at a latter time when the funding allows?

Museums and galleries around the world are no stranger to extensions and expansions over time.

But is there a sound business case for spending such a significant amount of money, even in stages, on a dedicated Aboriginal gallery? I understand this is a sensitive area and that not all benefits can be measured in dollars but for such a large outlay of taxpayer funding at a time when those dollars are tight, borrowing is no longer as cheap as it was and other priorities have recently been pushed to the forefront taxpayers will still expect to see a demonstrated financial return on investment. Proceeding without this would not be responsible governance.

I'm not discounting the importance of promoting and displaying Aboriginal artwork and culture but can this be better done through cohabiting more diverse institutions as opposed to creating a very expensive new one solely for this purpose? If high visitation rates don't eventualise or enough materials exist for a regular and suitably diverse rotation of exhibits to encourage repeat visitation then should this be built in its planned format?

I presume these are some of the questions that the review has explored and, given the recent comments, I'll hazard a guess that the answers are not all positive in this regard.

I love the idea of a more diversified contemporary gallery, still with a significant proportion devoted to Aboriginal art and culture but retaining the flexibility to adapt that putting all gallery-related eggs into a very specific basket would not allow. It is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build something significant on North Terrace so it needs to be done right.

I do hope that some of the design elements of the building can be retained - I thought the renders looked pretty spectacular.

[Patrick_27]

I find it interesting that the same people that are beating their chest over there being no merit in building an Aboriginal cultural centre, are arguing for a contemporary gallery instead. First of all, contemporary art galleries are an overdone concept and their merit is polarising and purely subjective. Secondly, should we even bother trying? The Victorian Government have broken ground on a billion dollar contemporary art gallery that will house their existing contemporary art pieces and new collections with other states following suite. We barely have a contemporary art collection at our disposal which would mean the cost of building the gallery infrastructure paired with acquiring a collection would be double the price tag of this current proposal. At least with the current plan, we know that we have the largest and most diverse collection of Australian Aboriginal/First Nations artefacts and art in the world, no other state has that and yet we’re sitting here debating the merits of having a designated gallery to house all of these, seriously?

[madelaide]

I find it interesting that the same people that are beating their chest over there being no merit in building an Aboriginal cultural centre, are arguing for a contemporary gallery instead. First of all, contemporary art galleries are an overdone concept and their merit is polarising and purely subjective. Secondly, should we even bother trying? The Victorian Government have broken ground on a billion dollar contemporary art gallery that will house their existing contemporary art pieces and new collections with other states following suite. We barely have a contemporary art collection at our disposal which would mean the cost of building the gallery infrastructure paired with acquiring a collection would be double the price tag of this current proposal. At least with the current plan, we know that we have the largest and most diverse collection of Australian Aboriginal/First Nations artefacts and art in the world, no other state has that and yet we’re sitting here debating the merits of having a designated gallery to house all of these, seriously?

absolutely spot on

[Levesque]

Additionally, being both European and North American myself, I can tell you for a fact that people from these regions do not care to visit a contemporary art gallery in Australia. They all want to see the cultural aspects that make Australia a different location than visiting an old European city or American one. An Indigenous cultural centre of any kind will certainly be an attraction to all tourists. This would certainly convince others visiting Australia, that Adelaide is the cultural capital of Australia. Everyone in Europe that I have met and shown this project always laud the idea of the contemporary art galleries, which arent too popular to begin with unless they have a famous persons art so they can upload it on instagram or elsewhere. The architecture of the proposal is always the example I go to show why Australian architecture is better than European from 1960s onwards. Additionally, those who enjoy contemporary art I think would get just as much enjoyment out of an Indigenous art or cultural centre, but I dont think the opposite is true.

[Nathan]

I find it interesting that the same people that are beating their chest over there being no merit in building an Aboriginal cultural centre, are arguing for a contemporary gallery instead. First of all, contemporary art galleries are an overdone concept and their merit is polarising and purely subjective. Secondly, should we even bother trying? The Victorian Government have broken ground on a billion dollar contemporary art gallery that will house their existing contemporary art pieces and new collections with other states following suite. We barely have a contemporary art collection at our disposal which would mean the cost of building the gallery infrastructure paired with acquiring a collection would be double the price tag of this current proposal. At least with the current plan, we know that we have the largest and most diverse collection of Australian Aboriginal/First Nations artefacts and art in the world, no other state has that and yet we’re sitting here debating the merits of having a designated gallery to house all of these, seriously?

AGSA has a very significant collection which is kept in storage. Only a fraction is able to be displayed in the current gallery. Plus a gallery like that also hosts touring exhibitions, which can be a big source of revenue (for reference, I went to the Andy Warhol exhibition at AGSA last weekend. Two months after it opened, and it was packed.)

I also don't think someone else having a bigger gallery negates one here — I've been to plenty of amazing regional galleries that don't need to be the main one for the country (and often that can be worked as a positive, being free to have more diverse programming). I spent a week in Kagawa last month, exploring the islands of Naoshima, Teshima and Inujima which are filled with various galleries, varying from fairly large (Bennese House Museum) to ones that house a single artwork. It was utterly amazing, and not once did I feel it was diminished just because there's a National Museum of Modern Art in Tokyo.

[Patrick_27]

Noted, Nathan. But maybe I didn’t articulate my point very well, I recognise that AGSA (like the Museum) has majority of their collection in storage but how much of it can be classed as ‘contemporary’? The vast majority of AGSA’s collection is historical (colonial, Islamic, Aboriginal) as far as contemporary goes from my understanding we have some pieces belonging to the minimalist and neo-dada movements but nowhere near enough to justify an entire contemporary gallery. My counter point is that taking the bulk of the Aboriginal collections held by AGSA and SAM and placing them in their own gallery will allow both institutions to display their more niche collections that have been in storage for years and perhaps even then start expanding on them which might then justify our own contemporary gallery in years to come.

[abc]

would prefer taxpayer money to be spent elsewhere given we're heading into a recession and we need infrastructure upgraded

unless the plan is to sell off this land to private developers...land earmarked as future parklands by the Rann government mind you

[ml69]

I support the Indigenous cultures building. This is more likely to put Adelaide on the map for interstate and overseas visitors than another contemporary art gallery.

A building which tells the story of our indigenous people, an honest warts-and-all storytelling of their history.

I’ve been to the Atomic Bomb museum in Hiroshima and it is an absolute must-see. One of the things that captures you are the graphic images of what it was like in the days after ground zero, combined with the real-life artefacts retrieved from the rubble. It was really warts-and-all.

I think an Indigenous cultures building that tells the good but doesn’t shy away from the bad could be just as captivating. This would be a far more interesting approach than a building that just displays art and artefacts.

[Mpol02]

I support the Indigenous cultures building. This is more likely to put Adelaide on the map for interstate and overseas visitors than another contemporary art gallery.

A building which tells the story of our indigenous people, an honest warts-and-all storytelling of their history.

I’ve been to the Atomic Bomb museum in Hiroshima and it is an absolute must-see. One of the things that captures you are the graphic images of what it was like in the days after ground zero, combined with the real-life artefacts retrieved from the rubble. It was really warts-and-all.

I think an Indigenous cultures building that tells the good but doesn’t shy away from the bad could be just as captivating. This would be a far more interesting approach than a building that just displays art and artefacts.

I completely agree. And it’s a beautiful building on the outside. i think it’s be a great addition.

[Llessur2002]

I find it interesting that the same people that are beating their chest over there being no merit in building an Aboriginal cultural centre, are arguing for a contemporary gallery instead. First of all, contemporary art galleries are an overdone concept and their merit is polarising and purely subjective. Secondly, should we even bother trying? The Victorian Government have broken ground on a billion dollar contemporary art gallery that will house their existing contemporary art pieces and new collections with other states following suite. We barely have a contemporary art collection at our disposal which would mean the cost of building the gallery infrastructure paired with acquiring a collection would be double the price tag of this current proposal. At least with the current plan, we know that we have the largest and most diverse collection of Australian Aboriginal/First Nations artefacts and art in the world, no other state has that and yet we’re sitting here debating the merits of having a designated gallery to house all of these, seriously?

No chest beating intended on my part Patrick - I acknowledge this has the potential to be a hugely sensitive issue but that shouldn't necessarily mean we can't discuss and debate the merits of various proposals for the site.

I guess on my part there is a level of ignorance as to what Aboriginal art and artefacts are held in the various collections. The section in the museum is largely spears and shields from memory - interesting to look at once or twice but I haven't personally felt the need to return over and over again. I'll normally have a glance if we're walking through the museum but the displays look pretty much the same as they did a decade ago. A large collection is one thing but does it have the required diversity to be able to refresh the exhibits with something suitably different to encourage people like me to be repeat visitors? This is a genuine question - I don't know what the answer is.

Again on the art side - is the centre to display art only in traditional Aboriginal style e.g. dot paintings, cave drawings etc, or will it exhibit all types of art by Aboriginal artists? If it's the former then that's great - but again, is there suitable diversity to attract repeat visits? Genuine question. If it's the latter then I can also see the argument that the art should be housed in regular galleries and not siloed into this one.

I'm also leaning on my own tastes and experiences. I love contemporary galleries and am a little confused as to some of the comments around them not being popular. Every one I have been to has always felt very busy. I also think they attract people who would not otherwise want to visit an art gallery - they tend to have a very diverse set of exhibits across many, many mediums and are also generally quite interactive. I like the idea that you'll never really know what you're going to see when you visit one. For example, I've been to the Tate Modern on multiple occasions and am likely to return next time I visit London - it's always an enjoyable experience and changes significantly each visit. I've been to MONA once and for the same reasons I will very likely go again next time we're in Tassie.

I'm also somewhat ignorant as to the true level of interest of indigenous culture amongst tourists - it might be massive, it might be relatively insignificant. I hail from overseas and have had multiple visits from friends and family over the years and no-one apart from my dad has ever asked to do anything related to this on a visit. Wine tours, beaches, trips to Sydney, Melbourne etc yes. A visit to Tandanya? No. Maybe my sample isn't representative so again this is a genuine question/observation and not chest beating. I presume there have been various studies commissioned into this so it would be great if someone could point me towards the results.

For $250M I feel we would need something substantial that will absolutely maximise visitations to SA and also generate enough income/economic activity to financially offset the huge cost of building it. If an Aboriginal centre/gallery can do this better than a contemporary gallery (or other alternative institution) then that's great. As per my previous comment I presume there has been a lot of investigation into this exact point behind the scenes and the ultimate decision to proceed or not will reflect the results of that. Otherwise, if something cannot be proven to provide the benefits that proponents are suggesting will materialise then maybe the site should just be returned to the Botanic Garden.

Its all very well for comments above to say that the Aboriginal centre will put us on the map but for a left wing government to be showing signs of distancing itself from the proposal at a time when focus on Aboriginal issues, reconciliation etc is at the highest it has been in a very long time then there must be something that simply does not stack up.

[[Shuz]]

Technically, the Labor Malinouskas Government is actually more right-wing than the previous Liberal Marshall Government.