PROFESSIONAL

THE SOUTH AFRICAN

September 2008 • Issue 9 Vol 3 • RSA Subscription 180 p.a • September Print & Distrib. 7 000 copies • Online version available at www.arttimes.co.za

ART

TIMES

Neville Dubow 1933 - 2008

Page 2South African Art Times. September 2008

The South African

Art Times

September 2008www.arttimes.co.za

Published monthly by

Global Art Information

PO Box 15881 Vlaeberg,8018, Cape TownTel. 021 424 7733Fax. 021 424 7732

Editor: Gabriel Clark-Brown

editor@arttimes.co.za

Advertising: Leone Rouse

leo@arttimes.co.za

Subscriptions: Bastienne Klein

subs@arttimes.co.zaNews: press@arttimes.co.zaShows: show@arttimes.co.zaArtwork: art@arttimes.co.zaLayout: Newyearsday Media

Deadlines for news, articles and clas-

sieds 20th of each monthThe Art Times is published in the rstweek of each month. News and advertis

ing material need to be with the news andmarketing managers by the 15th- 20th of each month.Newspaper rights: The newspaper re

serves the right to reject any material that

could be found offensive by its readers.

Opinions and views expressed in the SA

Art Times do not necessarily represent

the ofcial viewpoint of the editor, staff or publisher, while inclusion of advertisingfeatures does not imply the newspaper’s

endorsement of any business, product or

service. Copyright of the enclosed mate

rial in this publication is reserved.

INTERNATIONALSUBSCRIPTION

Use our secure paymentportal onwww.arttimes.co.zaPay in UK Pounds, USDollars and Euro’s

NAMIBIA

Call John at:Tel: +264 81 1286585

By Patrick Burnett

A photograph featuring a semi-na

ked couple has sparked a debateover how corporates shouldhandle controversial art after Sasoldistanced themselves from thework when it won the prestigiousNew Signatures award.The photograph, Familieportret 2by Potchefstroom photographicartist Richardt Strydom, features apenis, a hint of panties and a bit of bosom. Declared the winner of theSasol New Signatures competi

tion at an event at the Pretoria Art

Museum two weeks ago, it nettedStrydom R60,000.

But Sasol were not impressed withthe rationale that the photographdepicted the “suffering middleclasses” and announced they weredistancing themselves from thework. The petrochemical giant did,however, conrm their support for the judging panel.

Artist and curator Clive van denBerg, quoted in Business Day, was

scathing. “This is an extraordinary

decision. If Sasol wants to sponsor

an art competition theymust accept that a function of artis to challenge and comment onsociety. If they want to supportsomething tame, they should stick

to rugby.”

Further questions have beenraised elsewhere, with Sasol being

seen as promoting itself as a

patron of the arts, but only of workthat it likes. And how could Sasol,

as one blog posting asked, adopt

a conservative approach when it’sown brand was concerned with

innovation?

Strydom’s image is described bythe judges of the competition as “apicture of loss and the loss of hu

man dignity depicting the extrememisery, pathos and dehumanisa

-tion of poverty.”

Francì Cronjé, Sasol New Signa

tures Competition Chairperson,explained: “The work depicts

a controversial level of nudity.

However, the judging panel felt theentry could be any South Africanfamily, or part of the global com

-munity of suffering middle-class.”However, Sasol issued a state-

ment on its website, accepting thedecision of the judges, but statingthat they had a right to express a

view on any decision.

“We also recognise that somemembers of the Sasol staff as wellas some members of the publicmay be challenged or even of

fended by the piece and we feel itis both responsible and appropri

ate, that we distance Sasol fromthe artwork.”

Contacted for comment, Strydom,

a graphic design lecturer at NorthWest University, defended hiswork. “I don’t think Sasol distanc

ing themselves from my workdiminishes the work and I put myfaith in the panel.”However, he said the controversyopened an “interesting debate”about the future of corporate-spon

-sored art competitions.

While corporate money wasneeded to develop the arts, corpo

-rates were also concerned about

their brand image, which could beat odds with artists.Commenting on the issue, Mikevan Graan, a playwright anddirector of the Africa Centre, whichorganises the Spier Contemporary,points out that there is a tensionbetween the interests of anyfunder and those of artists when it

comes to freedom of expression.

This would inevitably lead toconicts with society, politicians,funders and the public. “It’s therecognition of these inherenttensions that will help to managethese better,” he said.In this sense, Van Graan said the

funder was providing a space and

in so doing gained mileage, rather than being associated with every

form of freedom of expression in

that space.But Van Graan said that by bring

ing attention to one work, therewas a move to censorship. Thebetter way of handling the issuewould be to inform stakeholdersbeforehand about providing aspace for artistic expression rather than distancing or justifying works

in retrospect.

Van Graan notes that corporatesnever distance themselves fromsport. “And goodness knows thereare sufcient examples of embar

rassing things in sport,” he said.

In response to questions about

only wanting to be associated with

art it likes, Sasol Group Communi-

cations Manager Jacqui O’Sullivansaid: “Art is in the eye of the be

holder and while it is true that webelieve in innite boundaries, wealso have to responsibly consider the sensitivities of our variousshareholders.”O’Sullivan said the issue was notabout Sasol “disliking or labelingthe winning piece” but being

sensitive to different audiences,

“particularly our diverse internal

audience”.

She said Sasol would not censureor control the New Signatures judging process and were proud of their 19-year association with the

competition.

“We respect freedom of expressionand, with that, Sasol’s freedomto express an opinion. We alsorespect the many differing publicviews on what is perceived to be

acceptable.”

Other corporates have facedsimilar challenges and dealt withthem differently, however. PhilippaHobbs, curator of the MTN art col

-lection, remembers a piece by art-

ist Abrie Fourie on the Voortrekker monument that led to criticism bothfrom those who thought it wasglorifying apartheid and those who

believed it was mocking Afrikaans

culture. MTN hosted a debate onthe company intranet inviting peo

ple to air their thoughts and thenpublished the results in a company

publication.

“It’s best to be able to predict

controversy, but sometimes you

can’t do that and then the best wayis to acknowledge it and deal withit head on.”But Hobbs believes that peopleare far more tolerant than theywere 10 years ago, when therewere heightened political, religious

and racial sensitivities.

“When there is sensitivity thenone has to be very prepared witha professional strategy that isacceptable to the corporate worldand the art sector.”

Sasol runs for cover from controversial photograph

Why pay vast amounts

of money for qualitycontemporary

Art News ?

Go towww.arttimes.co.za

to nd this month’s

completeSA Art Timesfor free

Richardt Strydom’s

Familieportret 2

Front cover:

Ann Schweizer:

Rothmania capensis.

See it at

The Kirstenbosch Biennale 08

South African Art Times. September 2008 Page 3

KUNSGALERY

CAPE TOWN

JOHANS BORMAN

FINE ART GALLERY

A showcase for the best of South African Masters,as well as some leadingcontemporary artists.

Telephone: 021 423 6075www.johansborman.co.zaMon-Fri: 10h00 - 18h00Sat: 09h00 - 14h00or by appointmentIn Fin Art BuildingUpper Buitengracht Street, Cape Town 8001Cell: 082 566 4631E-mail: art@johansborman.co.za

Maggie Laubser,

Heron

- 1942

By Patrick Burnett

he shock cancellation of theDurban leg of the Spier Contempo

rary has been seen as a major blowor the KwaZulu-Natal arts scene,highlighting the tenuous natureof funding for the arts outside thecentres of Cape Town and Johan

-nesburg.

ith the Spier Contemporary, abiennial exhibition of contemporarySouth African art, having run in rstCape Town and then Johannesburgduring 2008, the cancellation hasleft Durban out in the cold when itcomes to harvesting the benets of he exhibition.It was due to be showcased at the

Durban Art Gallery from mid-

August, but a statement from theAfrica Centre, which organises the

Spier Contemporary, announcing

he reason for the cancellation as“sponsorship from a public sector donor not materialising”. Althoughdiplomatically not naming thesponsor involved - and with all con

cerned unwilling to point ngers - inhe aftermath of the cancellation thepublic sector donor has emergedas the eThekwini Municipality.he Durban Art Gallery has had toscurry around to ll the space thatwould have been taken up by the

Spier Contemporary.

Aimed at promoting the visual artsin South Africa, the Africa Centresays the Spier Contemporary has

attracted close to 20,000 visitors in

Cape Town and Johannesburg, andhas generated more than R3-millionworth of media exposure, while atthe same time providing a platformfor the participating artists.But with a stated goal of the projectbeing to address some of the imbal

ance in the visual art eld that is“acute for artists who are not basedin the major metropolitan areas of South Africa” the aborted KwaZulu-Natal leg has disappointed many.“It’s unfortunate,” said Clive vanden Berg, curator of the Spier Contemporary. “What is really ap

parent when looking at municipalart museums is that they are sorely

underfunded and neglected and

this is one of the symptoms of that problem.” Van den Berg alsoblamed “an administrative lack of capacity” for the sudden cancel

-lation.

He described the inuence of thecancellation as “profound”, explain

ing how he received inquiries about

participating artists on a weekly

basis. It was “unfortunate” thatthese artists would miss out on the

exposure.

“The range of work produced inSouth Africa is not going to be seenthere and it could only bebenecial,” he said.Brenton Maart, curator at theKZNSA gallery, a leading contem

porary gallery, said the exhibitionoffered in “one swoop” the ability tosee what was being produced byleading artists, an opportunity which

would now be missed.

“The longer term effects are that

because we are not able to see

what is happening, less of an inter

-est is generated in contemporary

art. The less you see the less you

want to see so it leads to a kind of

apathy and a loss of enthusiasm.”Maart said the cancellation exacer

bated the problem because funderswould not see KwaZulu-Natal asan important venue, worsening the

existing situation.

Solving the problem would requirea “signicant” increase in fundingfor arts and culture in the provinceand the creation of a management

system comprising artists, art ad-ministrators and business types to

administer the increased funding.This would mean that steps could

be taken well in advance of planned

events if there were unforeseen

circumstances.

Mike van Graan, director of the Africa Centre, said: “We were keento tour the Spier Contemporaryto the major centres, but requiredsponsorship to do this. Hollardgenerously covered the costs of the Johannesburg leg of the Spier

Contemporary and – from numer-

ous exchanges with the eThekweni

Municipality from 2007 already – we

were under the impression thatthey had committed the R450,000required to bring the exhibition to

Durban.”

However, van Graan said they had

been informed of reduced funding

for the event in June, leading to thedecision to cancel the event.He said one of the lessons learntwas to nalise contracts and makesure they were signed off well in ad

vance so that arrangements couldbe made to ll any funding gaps.With planning underway for the

next event due to run in 2009/2010,

van Graan said he was in favour

of Durban being included, as well

as Johannesburg and possibly theNational Arts Festival in Graham

stown. Another possibility was avenue such as Dakar in Senegal.“We have budgeted for this, butdon’t have all the funding yet. That’sthe basis for our fundraising andpartnership efforts over the next fewmonths,” he said. He said further details on the form the exhibition

would take would only be available

in November.Eric Apelgren, head of internationalrelations and governance in theeThekweni Municipality, expresseddisappointment that the event had

not made it to Durban and said

“every effort” would be made toensure that the next version did notsuffer the same fate.He said the municipality had madeit clear “from day one” that that theywould supply R250,000 towardsthe event, plus providing the galleryspace and a further R100,000 for the opening event.

He said motivating for more funding

had been difcult because therewas a lack of “emerging curators”involved and the municipality wasleft “wondering what would be leftbehind” after the event. Apelgren said his objective was to

create opportunities for emerging

artists and the Spier Contemporaryhad scored low in this area in the“short to medium term”. Askedwhether an event like the Spier Contemporary was not benecial

for its inspirational value for young

artists, he said: “I think that thereality is that in terms of budgetingcycles it is difcult to get R500,000

for one event.”

Funding crunch cancels Spier’s Durban leg

Last year’s

Spier 07

brought together tens of thousands of South Africanart lovers and art learners in Johannesburg and Cape Town.