George Petelin examines the conflict between the "spirituality" of art and the materiality of the market
Brisbane based artist Hollie recently won the 1990 Moet and Chandon Fellowship. Here George Petelin looks at what this may mean to Hollie's work and career and at what such sponsorship means to Australia; he questions whether the arts should 'just take the money and run' or whether we should negotiate for a more thoughtful application of corporate sponsorship.
Is Hollie's work powerful because it draws on mystical union beyond our ken, or, is it just due to her judicious adaption of the colour effects of neoimpressionism and Op art?
According to the spiritualist cant that promotes her work, such a question deserves only one answer. So I wonder how winning the Moet and Chandon fellowship will oblige her to face the material side of art production and use, and subsequently, what effects this may have on her.
Entering and winning a Moet is every artist's and their dealer 's dream. But why? Previous winner Joe Furlonger honestly admits "it is because of the money". Fifty thousand dollars and accommodation near Paris are not to be sneezed at. And we shall see that this is only part of the material conditions that the Moet precipitates.
However, let us for a moment return to the power of Hollie's work. If it is truly mystical, and literally "pulsating
with the energy of the life force", as the Moet and Chandon catalogue essay proclaims, perhaps all artists and dealers should be careful of standing too close to it-just in case that, like impure treasure seekers in Raiders of the Lost Arc, they get zapped by crackles of vengeful lightening and become incinerated into the material dust whence we all came.
So I... The rest of this article is available to subscribers of Eyeline