The Dobell Case
09/05/19 • 71 min
One of the world’s leading art prizes, The Archibald Prize, has been the battleground for debates and disputes about the definition of portraiture since its inception in 1921. It was established in 1919, pursuant to the will of Mr J F Archibald (a former editor of The Bulletin). Its annual exhibitions at the Art Gallery of NSW have reflected the evolving tastes and trends of Australia’s visual arts culture and offered public exposure to new interpretations of the portraiture genre. The legal case brought against the 1943 Archibald Prize winner, William Dobell (then a relatively unknown artist), forms part of a long history of art-world litigation built around questions of taste and changing definitions of art itself. Dobell’s prize winning portrait used distortion and exaggeration to capture the essence and character of his friend and colleague Joshua Smith; the artist sought to create an image, not merely copy one. The final, convention-breaking painting created huge public interest and stimulated debate about the definition of portraiture.
The resulting court case, brought by two disaffected Archibald Prize entrants against Dobell and the Gallery’s trustees, saw two of the greatest advocates of the day—Garfield Barwick KC (for the plaintiffs) and Frank Kitto KC (for the Art Gallery of NSW)—contest the differences between caricature and portraiture over a four-day trial. In the result, the decision of the trustees was upheld: Attorney-General v Trustees of the Art Gallery of NSW (1944) 62 WN (NSW) 212. However, the case took its toll on Dobell and the other participants in this extraordinary dispute.
This September marks 75 years since the case.
One of the world’s leading art prizes, The Archibald Prize, has been the battleground for debates and disputes about the definition of portraiture since its inception in 1921. It was established in 1919, pursuant to the will of Mr J F Archibald (a former editor of The Bulletin). Its annual exhibitions at the Art Gallery of NSW have reflected the evolving tastes and trends of Australia’s visual arts culture and offered public exposure to new interpretations of the portraiture genre. The legal case brought against the 1943 Archibald Prize winner, William Dobell (then a relatively unknown artist), forms part of a long history of art-world litigation built around questions of taste and changing definitions of art itself. Dobell’s prize winning portrait used distortion and exaggeration to capture the essence and character of his friend and colleague Joshua Smith; the artist sought to create an image, not merely copy one. The final, convention-breaking painting created huge public interest and stimulated debate about the definition of portraiture.
The resulting court case, brought by two disaffected Archibald Prize entrants against Dobell and the Gallery’s trustees, saw two of the greatest advocates of the day—Garfield Barwick KC (for the plaintiffs) and Frank Kitto KC (for the Art Gallery of NSW)—contest the differences between caricature and portraiture over a four-day trial. In the result, the decision of the trustees was upheld: Attorney-General v Trustees of the Art Gallery of NSW (1944) 62 WN (NSW) 212. However, the case took its toll on Dobell and the other participants in this extraordinary dispute.
This September marks 75 years since the case.
Previous Episode
Rhetoric and reality: the making of English medieval legislation
In this lecture, Professor Paul Brand looks at the different rhetorics of legislation enacted during the thirteenth and early fourteenth centuries, a period when the initiative in legislation still clearly lay with the King and his advisers (rather than with the Commons in parliament) and also a period which saw the enactment of legislation with a major and continuing impact and importance.
Visit the Supreme Court Library Queensland website for more: https://legalheritage.sclqld.org.au/2019-lecture-one
Next Episode
Next Witness panel discussion
This month we have a special edition of the podcast featuring a panel discussion on the relationships between art, aesthetics and justice.
The event was a part of the recent Next Witness exhibition in the library featuring the works of contemporary Australian artist Julie Fragar. Inspired by her experiences as an observer in the Queensland Supreme Court, Fragar’s large, layered paintings reveal the human factors in the judicial process.
Joining the artist in discussion were the Honourable Justice Thomas Bradley, Dr Karen Crawley and Professor Kieran Tranter. The panel was chaired by Angela Goddard, Director of the Griffith University Art Museum.
https://legalheritage.sclqld.org.au/exhibitions/next-witness
If you like this episode you’ll love
Episode Comments
Generate a badge
Get a badge for your website that links back to this episode
<a href="https://goodpods.com/podcasts/selden-society-lecture-series-australia-4599/the-dobell-case-186483"> <img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/goodpods-images-bucket/badges/generic-badge-1.svg" alt="listen to the dobell case on goodpods" style="width: 225px" /> </a>
Copy