Editorial
Our National Gallery must continue to stand up to Gina Rinehart
New documents revealing how Gina Rinehart – the nation’s richest person – used personal, political and business connections to demand a “disrespectful” portrait by award-winning Indigenous artist Vincent Namatjira be taken down should ring alarm bells for all Australians.
The billionaire’s campaign is, as the Herald has previously argued, a study in the use of power, privilege and patronage – and of its limits.
Australia in Colour 2021 by Vincent Namatjira.Credit: Alex Ellinghausen
Documents released following a freedom-of-information request by reporters Linda Morris and Eryk Bagshaw offer an unsettling insight into a month-long campaign against two National Gallery of Australia portraits of the mining magnate.
The campaign began on April 8 when Seven chief executive and gallery chair Ryan Stokes received a complaint from Rinehart about her depiction in two works by Namatjira. A blizzard of other correspondence followed from associates of the billionaire, with more than 26 emails exchanged about the furore by May 2, according to the FOI documents.
Those friends included Olympic swimmers, a female entrepreneur and a patron of the arts. The entrepreneur, whose name is redacted in the documents, said Rinehart was an “inspiring woman” whose “leadership had propelled her to great success”.
She accused the gallery of a “grossly unfair depiction of a prominent figure in Australian society” that only serves to “perpetuate stereotypes and undermine the achievements” of Rinehart.
At least three complainants wrote in near exact terms that they and thousands of others would not be where they were today if not for Rinehart’s generous contributions out of the “kindness of her heart”.
Another complaint said the portraits “should be taken down and redone immediately”. A separate complainant laughably demanded the “insult” be met with a formal written apology from the NGA.
The contents of Rinehart’s original complaint have not been released, and all but one name of the complainants has been withheld, but they include elite Australian swimmers competing at the Olympics.
Rinehart may well be a generous benefactor and a successful business figure. But she is no match for the principle that the National Gallery of Australia must be free from undue influence over its creative output.
As NGA director Nick Mitzevich explained to complainants, one of the portraits which attracted Rinehart’s is part of a 21-panel painting of famous subjects all painted with a similar rawness.
Explaining the work in 2023, Namatjira beautifully summed up what Rinehart has missed in the work, and why her whinging must be dismissed: “With the arrangement of the portraits and the use of first names and nicknames, I’m trying to say that in my eyes everyone is equal,” he wrote.
“It doesn’t matter whether you’re the queen of England or an old Gurindji man fighting for his land; whether you’re a mining magnate, sportsperson, politician, musician, whatever – we are all equal here.”
The Sun-Herald endorses these sentiments and urges the National Gallery of Australia and any other cultural institutions being pressured by Rinehart to stand up to this attack on artistic expression.
Bevan Shields sends an exclusive newsletter to subscribers each week. Sign up to receive his Note from the Editor.