[SWP] Lot 14 (Old RAH Site)

[abc]

What the does this shit have to do with this development?

everything

the development is based on a fraudulent industry

Aboriginal culture is fraudulent?

It's telling that you see no problem with the rest of the development occurring on the old rah site..

I didn't say Aboriginal culture is fraudulent...don't put words in my mouth.
I said the industry is fraudulent. Look into the advisory panel to this facility. They're industry people.

[Patrick_27]

The sheer breadth of our state’s collection would set us part.

Is there somewhere that describes this collection? Google has not been my friend here.

Does it have significant breadth and diversity to allow meaningful rotation, or is it just large?

The vastness of it all is somewhat to hard to explain without waffling. My limited understanding comes from having previously worked at the museum and was fortunate enough to have had a couple of tours through the storage facility at Netley and staff of the research and design team who mostly work with the collections explain these things to me. A recent article by InDaily regarding the funding shortfalls for the proposed storage facility best describe the Aboriginal collection:

“The SA Museum holds the biggest and one of the oldest collections of Indigenous Australian cultural material in the world, with more than 30,000 spiritually and anthropologically-significant pieces sourced – ethically or otherwise – from across Australia’s approximate 250 Aboriginal language groups. Among the Netley collection is a remnant from the first Aboriginal flag, an Eora man’s wooden club that Lieutenant David Blackburn fashioned into a whip upon arrival in Australia on the First Fleet, and intricate contemporary Yolngu bark paintings. Those pieces lie alongside 5000 spears, 3000 boomerangs, 500 bark paintings and drawers brimming with hundreds of intricately woven baskets, neck-pieces and sculptures.”

I believe what’s holistically agreed upon int terms of how to curate a new Aboriginal gallery is that it wouldn’t be solely artefacts but using artefacts to start and guide in the telling of history and the stories associated allowing that more regular rotation of content (think MONA in Tassie). I personally would also consider including the Museum’s Pacific Cultures Gallery in Tarrkarri Centre, presently it gives off the old school Colonial vibes being at the SAM and I understand that perhaps some of the reluctance to return those particular artefacts is a matter of inadequate storage/facilities to take them in their country of origin.

Beyond the Aboriginal collection in the Museum’s storage is further mineral samplings (notably the world’s largest opal collection), taxidermy either complete or awaiting completion i.e. the finest specimen of adult and infant Thylacines, and an entire collection of Industrial Age content (though I believe they have started to gradually thin out this collection due to costs associated with storing and up keeping). They have (or had?) an awesome Middle Ages sword collection mostly from Asia also. Back to the Industrial Age collection, at the time I was working there, this was the most favoured to move into the space occupied by the Aboriginal collection on display due to its size and relevance.

Since having worked in this sector, I believe the long term solution to what is becoming a cultural infrastructure conundrum is to spend big money all at once and please the various (desperate) stakeholders and subsequently save in the future. SAM are bleeding money, only not as much as they could if it weren’t for the majority of their back end administration staff being employed by Dept. of Premier & Cabinet and the UoA funding their professors, otherwise it would be much worse. AGSA have survived due to large and regular bequests coming through this past few years. State Library seem to be the most self-sustainable of the lot. But ultimately the until all three are funded adequately and given the means to undergo major upgrades and expansions, they’re never going to live up their potential and will continue to bleed - Tarrkarri is a welcomed start but it needs to go further, whether it’s sold to the public as an investment in education rather than culture/the arts so be it, just make it happen.

[Llessur2002]

Thanks Patrick that's very much appreciated. I've not found it easy to track down much information online about what the collection actually includes.

It does sound like the North Terrace institutions combined need a bit of an overhaul, hopefully whatever becomes of the Lot 14 site will help to advance this.

[claybro]

The extent of the Aboriginal collection in SA is not really widely known or appreciated. Here is the perfect opportunity for SA to create something spectacular and world renowned, and not just a token kitsche venue of stale fixed displays. i really hope that the current government pushes on with this as a priority- not just a pause to scrounge for more funding. As others have said- every state is dipping in to this space, but if promoted properly-it would be a centre for worldwide study....a "one stop shop" if you like.

[SBD]

We need a huge bequest/benefactor to combine all the cultural institutions with enough operating funds to maintain and develop them together under one banner. Washington DC has the Smithsonian Institution that started from a large bequest.

We have the Elder Conservatorium, Bonython Hall, etc, but nobody has provided enough money all at once to match what the Smithsonian has become.Who are the big money families in SA now? The Shahin Institution? Gupta Complex?

[gnrc_louis]

We need a huge bequest/benefactor to combine all the cultural institutions with enough operating funds to maintain and develop them together under one banner. Washington DC has the Smithsonian Institution that started from a large bequest.

We have the Elder Conservatorium, Bonython Hall, etc, but nobody has provided enough money all at once to match what the Smithsonian has become.Who are the big money families in SA now? The Shahin Institution? Gupta Complex?

Do they actually want to be combined? What benefits are there from combining a museum with an art gallery? They seem like quite disparate institutions to me. Also - bigger is not always better.

[SBD]

We need a huge bequest/benefactor to combine all the cultural institutions with enough operating funds to maintain and develop them together under one banner. Washington DC has the Smithsonian Institution that started from a large bequest.

We have the Elder Conservatorium, Bonython Hall, etc, but nobody has provided enough money all at once to match what the Smithsonian has become.Who are the big money families in SA now? The Shahin Institution? Gupta Complex?

Do they actually want to be combined? What benefits are there from combining a museum with an art gallery? They seem like quite disparate institutions to me. Also - bigger is not always better.

In the context of this discussion, the overlap is Aboriginal art/artefacts. More generally, they both have curators managing a collection of things that were created in the past.The restoration and storage trades probably overlap too.

According to Wikipedia, the Art Gallery was established with a bequest from Sir Thomas Elder. The South Australian Museum was separated from the Art Gallery and Library by the Government in 1939. They had all been part of the South Australian Institute. I guess a one banner idea restores that synergy.

Edit: They seem to have all been part of Arts SA from 1996 to 2018, and are now managed by a branch of the Department of the Premier and Cabinet. So they are already under a single banner, it just doesn't have a flash public unifying name.

[gnrc_louis]

This is far too much imo: https://indaily.com.au/news/2023/05/15/ ... al-centre/

[SRW]

The premier is suggesting the centre will now cost $400-$600 million for something of 'international significance', without committing to funding it.

I suspect they may be laying the groundwork to expand the vision of the centre to 'justify' expanding its budget. It could be a 'two birds, one stone' strategy where they make it a multi-institute exhibition building (AGSA, SAM and Tarkarri) that redressses First Nations representation as well as chronic underinvestment in the state's cultural facilities.

I am agnostic here. I think a standalone Tarkarri with the correct curatorial and educational mission could be a major drawcard. But I was struck by a factoid from that AFR article that the proposed building would have more space than AGSA and SAM combined, and have wondered whether it could be shared (given concurrent upgrades for AGSA and SAM are unlikely).

[A-Town]

$600m is an obscene amount of money to spend on a museum in times like this.

[Patrick_27]

How is $600m a lot to spend? If anything $200m was nowhere near enough even as a projected price tag. No one would be saying the same if this were a contemporary gallery, which would cost the same (if not more)…

[gnrc_louis]

How is $600m a lot to spend? If anything $200m was nowhere near enough even as a projected price tag. No one would be saying the same if this were a contemporary gallery, which would cost the same (if not more)…

In a state such as South Australia with a fairly small budget, how is $600m not a lot to spend? That's also ridiculous - I think many people would be saying the exact same thing if it were $600m for a contemporary gallery. It's a huge outlay and I would guess quite possibly electoral suicide for any government. Just look at the issues the proposed AFL stadium is currently causing the Tasmanian Government - and that's a far smaller sum of money on arguably something with much broader appeal.

[SRW]

Bear in mind, the premier did not confirm the $600 million amount. That figure was surmised from a leading question that the centre's cost could end up 'more or less' equivalent to the hydrogen plant. I think the review has offered a few different options, most of which probably sit closer to $400 million.

[A-Town]

No one would be saying the same if this were a contemporary gallery, which would cost the same (if not more)…

Wow, seriously? The type of gallery/museum it is makes no difference. It's the price tag attached to it.

[Algernon]

How is $600m a lot to spend? If anything $200m was nowhere near enough even as a projected price tag. No one would be saying the same if this were a contemporary gallery, which would cost the same (if not more)…

In a state such as South Australia with a fairly small budget, how is $600m not a lot to spend? That's also ridiculous - I think many people would be saying the exact same thing if it were $600m for a contemporary gallery. It's a huge outlay and I would guess quite possibly electoral suicide for any government. Just look at the issues the proposed AFL stadium is currently causing the Tasmanian Government - and that's a far smaller sum of money on arguably something with much broader appeal.

A stadium for the unwashed masses may have more total appeal, but then the next question is of who it appeals to and what value does it bring to the table.

An AFL stadium may bring in some interstate dollars, but when you factor in that the same money goes straight back the other way for an away game, it's a bit of a zero sum game there.

A museum on the other hand has the potential of specifically targeting a tourist dollar that may not be captured because there is no substitute. In this case, I'd only support an Aboriginal gallery over a contemporary art gallery. In around 10 years of living in Europe, I can say I have had precisely 0 people ever say to me that they need to see an Australian contemporary art gallery before they die. On the other hand, Aboriginal/First Nations cultures do conjure some fairly strong interest. I haven't lived all around Europe, but I can say from experience that Germans and Austrians have really been proactive in seeking this info from me with the view for travel. Anecdotal of course, but I think it serves a pretty basic point that contemporary art has its substitutes and Aboriginal culture/art has none. You can only see it in Australia and if we just happen to be sitting on a vast collection in a warehouse, why not put what is there to use!

Specifically on the issue of the Tasmanian stadium proposal (as you brought it up), the ultimate spend is over 700 million and it really calls into question the priorities of a government that is addicted to federal money to solve its own problems, and when that money is there, would spend it on a 24,000 seat stadium rather than address the real issue that 51% of the state's adult population is functionally iliterate. I don't bring it up to butt heads on that topic, but rather that I think opposition may be organised around a single issue of the total spend (which indeed is high for both), but formed in quite different contexts.