Have you noticed the new artworks hanging around (pun intended) on campus? Artworks by Indigenous artists have been recently displayed in buildings around campus, including in the Marie Reay Teaching Centre, for all to see. While ordinarily I would support the movement of art pieces out of storage and into the community, recent events at ANU concerning the staffing and budget cuts have made me skeptical of their new presence. 

The use of art by Indigenous artists from Australia is an intentional choice from the University. On the surface, it embraces Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander culture, but seemingly does nothing beyond the national standard to support Indigenous education and experience on campus. While the steps they take to ensure success in tertiary education may be framed as being progressive and supportive, they merely align with the standards set in the Indigenous Student Success Program delivered by the Department of Education. This is nothing profound, and the addition of these artworks may just be another attempt at virtue signalling to a progressive student cohort.

Just as acknowledgements of Country have been standardised in order to prevent offence, rather than sincerely acknowledge the rights to Country that First Nations people have, artwork from the same cultures is frequently bought and displayed away from the lands they were created on in order to signal a broad-minded persona. Australians may appreciate Indigenous artwork and even display some in their homes, but our culture lacks the insight necessary to appreciate them appropriately. The display of any artworks by Indigenous artists by predominantly white-Australian organisations (such as our own) often seek to benefit the organisation, not the artist. 

The piece Dapar (the universe) — A life beyond: the Brian P Schmidt story, displayed on the second floor of the Marie Reay Teaching Building, shows this quite clearly as it was commissioned by the Office of the Vice-Chancellor as a “puff piece”. The work was completed by Jesse T Martin of the Wagadagama and Yuin/Senpol-Lapa peoples.

As the administration undergoes continuous criticism due to the fierce cuts to staff and courses, it feels that all choices are thoughtfully and manipulatively made. The lack of insight staff and students have into the changes is one such example. It is an attempt to control the image of the University, which has been tailored to appear forward-focused, liberal and excellent. Another example, I believe, is the choice to display art from a culture that the ANU has made minimal strides to support in order to portray an image of cultural progression during a time of financial crisis. More than this, recent cuts to the College of Art and Social Science have impacted Indigenous academic courses and access to support systems for Indigenous students, as evidenced in a letter to Woroni from CASS academics. Propaganda has become more complex and more difficult to recognise, and having insight into the images and stories you are being told (and the biases pushing them) grants essential freedom.