Isn’t it iconic?
Missing page in Ralph Hotere’s legacy
The Dunedin Public Art Gallery sells socks, mugs and tote bags. You can buy a tea towel printed with the words “large fancy room filled with crap” or a tiny, limited-edition state house that glows in the dark when you place it over a tealight candle.
Back in January, the shop in the foyer was filled with arty wrapping paper and ironic gift cards. There was a Frances Hodgkins self-portrait on a Karen Walker scarf and a DIY magnetic wall art kit by the sculptor Sara Hughes.
There were no books about Ralph Hotere.
Artwork by Otago’s most famous artist filled the¯gallery’s first floor. Ralph Hotere: Atete (to resist) was the first large-scale Hotere exhibition to be presented in New Zealand for more than two decades. It showed in Dunedin from last November to February, before moving to Christchurch Art Gallery Te Puna o Waiwhetu¯ where it is currently on display.
The partnership project between the two galleries was described as a celebration of Hotere’s artistic achievements that “brings his vision to a new generation”. But that generation better be quick. Because when the exhibition is dismantled in late July, it may as well have never existed.
No visual record is available for public purchase. There is no catalogue, no lavish art book, no merchandise — not even a postcard to say Ralph Hotere was here.
Now, the Weekend Herald can reveal what was happening behind the scenes — the protracted negotiations between the exhibition partners and the trust that controls reproductions of Hotere’s work, and the wero (challenge) laid down to that trust by some of Hotere’s wha¯nau at the Dunedin opening, reported publicly here for the first time.
“This is difficult for me,” Ani Tahere, daughter of Charlotte Courtenay, Hotere’s youngest sister, said at the exhibition opening. “But this is the time, this is the time . . . do
The lack of a publication means the thinking around the exhibition becomes more fixed to this moment in time, rather than existing in book form for the future. Cam McCracken, Dunedin Public Art Gallery
not hold on to Uncle Ralph’s art behind closed doors, in the dark. That is wasteful, it is wasteful of Uncle Ralph’s life work.”
Tahere declined to comment further (the full wero, and a response from the Hotere Foundation Trust, is published on page 17), but Andrea Hotere, the artist’s daughter, told the Weekend Herald she believes her father would have wanted an exhibition catalogue, “because it becomes part of the record”.
“Dad’s work is full of aroha. That aroha needs to be allowed to flow in the light.”
It is common practice to produce a book alongside a major art show.
Consider Gordon Walters: New Vision or Frances Hodgkins: European Journeys — two recent high production-value publications, filled with essays and images, supporting big exhibitions of these significant local artists.
Why was there no such record of the Hotere show?
There are clues, perhaps, in author Vincent O’Sullivan’s new book The Dark is Light Enough: Ralph Hotere: A Biographical Portrait — 366-award-winning pages, and not a single reproduction of a Hotere artwork.
Last month, the biography won the general non-fiction category of the Ockham New Zealand Book Awards. O’Sullivan says the decision to include no works by the artist was deliberate and he sought no copyright permissions from the Hotere Foundation Trust.
“I just knew it was a difficult area, and if a certain area is difficult . . . as Faulkner said, ‘if you know there are bears in the woods, don’t go into the woods’.”
The author says he believes the lack of a publication to support the current Hotere exhibition is a “denial” to the future: “They’ve taken an important element of the Hotere story and simply removed it from the future knowing about it.”
Back in January, when the Weekend Herald first queried the absence of Hotere publications on the Dunedin Public Art Gallery shop shelves, the response was brief — there had been some “initial scoping around the feasibility of producing a catalogue and/or merchandise” but the decision was made to focus solely on the exhibition, “which is what we think people are most excited about”.
Now, correspondence released under the Local Government Official Information Act reveals what really happened. The pages document the period between May 2018 when Dunedin and Christchurch art gallery directors first wrote to the Hotere
Foundation Trust seeking support for a “major publication” to accompany the upcoming exhibition, to a twosentence email sent to the trust in December 2019:
“Compliments of the season,” wrote Cam McCracken, Dunedin gallery director. “As a courtesy, I’d like to let the Trust know we do not plan to produce an illustrated publication to accompany the Hotere exhibition.”
What went wrong?
“That’s a question for the Hotere Foundation Trust,” McCracken said.
The trust’s full response, supplied to the Weekend Herald by chairwoman Judith Ablett-Kerr, runs to nearly 1500 words. As a “key stakeholder” it says it supported a Hotere retrospective, but claims that was ultimately replaced by a new exhibition concept — A¯ tete, which would “focus on Ralph as an artist of protest”.
“The Trust was dismayed that such a change of direction had been made without consultation . . . and was disappointed that the much-awaited retrospective exhibition was not to take place.”
UNDER NEW Zealand law, artists hold copyright to their works for the duration of their lifetime and 50 years after their death. When Hotere died in 2013, copyright (except for commissioned pieces) passed to the Hotere Foundation Trust.
“The Trust is always mindful of the stand that Ralph Hotere himself publicly took in relation to other people making money out of the artists’ work at the expense of the artist,” said Ablett-Kerr, adding the trust had been advised there would be opportunities to produce its own merchandising alongside the exhibition — “consistent with Ralph’s own enjoyment of merchandising associated with artworks”.
Ablett-Kerr says when the trust was advised of the detail of A¯ tete, “the new concept exhibition”, it accepted a verbal apology from the director of the Dunedin Public Art Gallery and an acknowledgement from him “that they ‘had dropped the ball’”.
And at that point, she says, a requested concession made in relation to copyright fees, “appropriate when the Trust was the key stakeholder and there were merchandising opportunities relevant to a retrospective”, had to be revisited.
Material released to the Weekend Herald reveals planning for a largescale Hotere book was well advanced. Multiple essays had been commissioned and a $20,000 Creative New Zealand funding grant approved. Design specs proposed a 256-page, hardback production that would sell for $75. At its heart: an estimated 120 artworks that would require copyright permissions.
The correspondence shows that while a reduced one-off copyright fee of $3500 was negotiated, the Hotere Foundation Trust would ultimately seek a standard commercial fee of $250 per image — pushing copyright costs up to as much as $30,000.
Cost was a factor in the decision to dump the book project. But there were other considerations, including a request from the trust that it preview any text relevant to each image.
Cam McCracken: “The lack of
feasibility was due to this significant fee increase. But also the other conditions outlined . . . In our view, this would require the book to have been fully authored prior to copyright clearance, which we considered impossible in the time frame and outside how we normally work.”
Judith Ablett-Kerr: “The Trust never sought editorial control in relation to any writing and would not do so. The Trust did want to fact check any writing that was personal rather than opinion-based . . . the written word, even if inaccurate, has a tendency to become ‘the truth’ with the passage of time”.
Released emails show the Hotere Foundation Trust had questions about one particular proposed essay author. Her name has been blacked out and the Weekend Herald has been unable to confirm her identity, but Ablett-Kerr said the writer had not been previously identified to the trust and it only became “coincidentally” aware of their involvement. McCracken later described this as “a minor communication lapse for which we apologised” — but it does appear to mark the beginning of the end for the book project.
Some 75 pages of correspondence were released to the Weekend Herald. It is August, 2019, when the trust writes seeking the identities of all essay writers. Over the next few days more detail emerges, including the galleries’ plans for at least nine “guest contributions” to support major texts being developed by five curators. There are emails. Meetings. Correspondence in which the trust states “it is difficult to recognise your description for the project today as being the same one advanced by you, both in writing and in several meetings . . .”
In September, the exhibition partners write to the trust with even more detail, including the names of all essayists, a note on formatting (“as per an appropriate Ma¯ori tikanga advised by those from Hotere’s ru¯ nanga”) and confirmation texts will cover three themes — journeys and places, protest and dissent and colour and materials. The trust is invited to contribute a short foreword to the publication, but: “. . . We will not be offering you editorial input into the content of the publication, the selection of curators or writers, approval of the design process or format . . .”
In October, the trust responds. Its three-bullet point letter includes the line: “HFT is not able to endorse the new project.”
And there is more bad news. While the trust says it will still consider applications for copyright permissions, these will now be “dealt with and charged for on a commercial basis”. Further correspondence confirms that charge will be $250 per image, with the added proviso the trust be supplied relevant text.
“Good to have this information from the Trust,” writes McCracken, in an email to his Christchurch Art Gallery counterpart Blair Jackson. “And the confirmation we sought that the book is no longer feasible.”
This week, Ablett-Kerr said the Dunedin Public Art Gallery never advised “that financially it could not afford to pay for the images”. She said the trust would have considered a request to review its commercial fee, but no approach was made. And, while the trust could not formally endorse the new exhibition and any publication “when it did not know the content of the exhibition” it did give, free-of-charge, copyright permission for Hotere’s own voice-over to be used alongside his Godwit/Kuaka mural — a recording usually only heard at Auckland Art Gallery.
According to Ablett-Kerr, both Hotere and the trust had been waiting for a retrospective exhibition and, as the key stakeholder, the trust had been assured it would be consulted and kept up to date with progress.
“Regrettably, the promised consultation was not readily forthcoming,” said Ablett-Kerr.
TE ARA Encyclopedia of New Zealand records that Hone Papita Raukura “Ralph” Hotere ONZ (Te Aupo¯uri and Te Rarawa) was raised in Mitimiti, Northland and died in Dunedin, aged 81. He is known for his political art (works that protested the Aramoana aluminium smelter, the Springbok tour and the sinking of the Rainbow Warrior, for example), his minimalist “Black Paintings”, his large-scale collaborations with artist Bill Culbert and his associations with poets like Hone Tuwhare and Bill Manhire.
Art historian Jonathan ManeWheoki places Hotere “at the forefront of mainstream New Zealand art history. But in a sense he also stands outside of it, both as a Ma¯ori and as one of the most cosmopolitan, sophisticated, international artists New Zealand has yet produced.”
The Hotere Foundation Trust was created in 2003. Its aims are listed on the Charities Register: Acquire, preserve, maintain and house artworks by Ralph Hotere and other artists. Make the artworks available as far as is practicable for public viewing and educational purposes. Encourage, promote and develop public awareness in NZ of the artworks.
At first, a major book to support a landmark exhibition seemed a perfect fit.
When the Dunedin and Christchurch art gallery directors wrote to the trust in May 2018, they claimed the proposed publication would “make a significant contribution to new scholarship on Hotere’s art practice”.
They drew comparisons with the recent Gordon Walters blockbuster — a major exhibition and a book about the modernist painter’s work (the Walters Estate waived all copyright fees).
“We are united in our belief in the importance of Hotere’s work and the opportunity this project has to bring the full depth and scale of this art practice into a national and international spotlight,” wrote McCracken (Dunedin) and Jackson (Christchurch).
Eight days later, on official Hotere Foundation Trust letterhead, Judith Ablett-Kerr QC replied: “The Trust wishes to express its wholehearted support of the proposed project . . . and looks forward to a mutually productive, effective and happy working relationship.”
Ablett-Kerr has been with the Hotere Foundation Trust since its inception. The three other current trustees are Lewis Ablett-Kerr, Neville Martin and Mary McFarlane, an artist and Hotere’s wife at the time of his death. The trust’s most recent annual return (filed last September) shows cash assets of $107,497.
The 2003 Deed of Trust, accessible via the Charities Register website, lists seven trustees, including Hotere. They include Kriselle Baker, an art historian with a PhD and books on the work of Ralph Hotere. She has confirmed to the Weekend Herald she was approached — but declined — to write for the proposed exhibition publication. Her take on what happened next?
“. . . I don’t know, but it’s certainly doing a disservice to the artist’s legacy.”
During her time with the trust, Baker says she worked on an online “catalogue raisonne”, an art world term for an annotated, comprehensive listing of all known artworks by a single artist. When she left the trust (“I felt I couldn’t contribute”) she handed her research over — and has no idea what has happened to it since.
“[Hotere] is on a par with Colin McCahon as far as our artists are concerned. He did something extraordinary quite early . . . for younger artists coming through, he’s hugely important and still incredibly relevant . . .
“If there is no ongoing record, there’s nothing to build on and the artist, their legacy, just fades away.”
Public art galleries and institutions around the country hold works by Ralph Hotere.
Many are available for viewing online, where the words “by permission of the Hotere Foundation Trust” appear frequently. Google media reports post-Hotere’s death, and a theme emerges: “Trust to guard Hotere works” (2005), “The art of secrecy” (2009), “Hotere trust refusal at odds with its own aims” (2019), and, just this year, “Bitter feud over Ralph Hotere’s legacy”.
The proposed book of the Hotere exhibition was, by any New Zealand publishing metric, a big deal. Initially costed at up to $70k, documents show at least 14 writers (and possibly more — names were redacted in material provided to the Weekend Herald) were on board.
McCracken says no significant expenditure had been incurred when the project was cancelled; no photography had been completed and only one commissioned writer had delivered text.
The less tangible cost?
“The lack of a publication means the thinking around the exhibition becomes more fixed to this moment in time, rather than existing in book form for the future.”
McCracken says Ralph Hotere: Atete ¯ (to resist) achieved its aim of putting a national spotlight on Hotere, but “this audience will always be limited to those who were able to visit the exhibition”.
In late March, the Hotere exhibition moved north. Blair Jackson, Christchurch Art Gallery Te Puna o Waiwhetu¯ director, says he is disappointed the galleries could not make an accompanying publication happen.
Jackson says the Hotere Foundation Trust is “entitled to manage the rights as they see fit” and that, historically, the Christchurch gallery’s dealing with the trust has been “relatively standard”. However, there are wider issues to potentially address:
“For many years, our industry has lobbied for law reform as we have limited ‘fair dealing exceptions’ available to us under the Copyright Act 1994. If legislative provisions do not cover our intended use, then we do rely on licensing arrangements and ultimately restrictions imposed can limit public access to images online and in print.
“Publications are purchased for many different reasons, whether as a reference or as a souvenir . . . importantly, they remain as a resource for a much longer period than the exhibitions they document.”
They’ve taken an important element of the Hotere story and simply removed it from the future knowing about it.
Vincent O’Sullivan, author