John Brack Retrospective

The John Brack retrospective exhibition at the NGV is an opportunity to re-examine the issue of was John Brack (1920 – 1999) a modern Australian artist or a reactionary and what relevance his work has to contemporary art. If he just created popular iconic, albeit slight satirical, images of Melbourne then is he conservative? Or did Brack have a critical view of Australian suburban life and other elements of modern content and design? Progress in modern art, along with the partisan struggle between the progressive modernists versus the ‘passéist’ (the Futurist term for passé art movements), was largely assumed. Although the questions of what direction the progress should take was under debate. Was the future of art primitivist, abstract, machine aesthetics, surreal, realist or what?

The issue of figurative painting versus abstract art loomed large in the early career of Brack. In the modern world artists and critics were reactionary by definition if they opposed progressive art. Does this mean that the John Brack and the Antipodeans were reactionary, figurative painters? The Antipodeans Group staged a single exhibition in August 1959 at the Victorian Artists’ Society. The Victorian Artists’ Society is still in existence and still teaches and promotes conservative painting. The Antipodeans were challenging Clement Greenberg claim of the centrality of abstraction to modern art. Had they recognized it as American propaganda or were they expressing conservative anti-American Australian attitudes? Brack’s apparent conservative and popular position encouraged the NGV to acquire several of his paintings early in his career.

Serge Guilbaut’s book How New York Stole the Idea of Modern Art – Abstract Expressionism, Freedom and the Cold War (The University of Chicago Press, 1983) provides a very detailed account of American art and Cold War geopolitics. The unique individual (American) abstract artist painting pure art was removed from class struggles or other political discourses. It is worth noting in this history, that that the first pure abstract paintings were not done by an early 20th century avant-garde modern artists but by an English mystic, Georgina Houghton in 1861. Following in this trend was Annie Besent, a theosophist. Both Kandinsky and Mondrian would have seen Annie Besent’s abstract paintings, as both were members of the Theosophical Society. Abstract art might have remained the interest of eccentric artists and mystics were it not for geopolitics.

There are other elements of modernism in Brack’s paintings: his many cityscapes and his interest in the machine aesthetic in his paintings of slicing machines, sewing machines, surgical equipment, modern flat surfaces and shop fittings. However, there is no political nor references to any current events in Brack’s paintings.

The John Brack retrospective exhibition is certainly popular but it is not just for the history or the iconic images. There is much in the art of John Brack that is relevant to contemporary art in Melbourne. Brack’s illustrative narrative style is still popular and is now common in contemporary art. And a visually literate population increasingly understands his references to art history. Brack’s later still life paintings with pencils and pens show elements of post-minimalist sculpture, like Melbourne’s Carl Scrase or Tim Sterling. And his anti-abstract and pro-figurative painting position is similar to Stuckism that has supporters in Melbourne’s street art scene.

About Mark Holsworth

Writer, independent researcher and artist, Mark Holsworth is the author of the book Sculptures of Melbourne. View all posts by Mark Holsworth

6 responses to “John Brack Retrospective

  • urbanmonk

    im no art academic, but i was surprised at how contemporary his style seemed considering it was from 50 odd years ago. Im a big fan!

  • mscate

    looks like an exciting exhibition, hopefully will have time to visit on the weekend.

  • me

    Little be know that John Brack was heavily influenced by Bernard Buffet ? google it

  • Hels

    What made art historians identify “Brack’s apparent conservative and popular position”? In the modern world artists and critics were reactionary by definition if they opposed progressive art? That was probably true for Lionel Lindsay and JS macDonald, since they were traditionalists and conservatives in their entire lives (not just their art lives). But was it true at all for John Brack?

    I have created a link to your blog, many thanks, and posed the same question.

    Art and Architecture, mainly

  • Hels

    Hi Mark,
    Your line in the email stopped me in my tracks: “The majority of Australia was conservative at the time (if not crypto-fascist) and anyone who did not choose to label themselves as radical at the time was assumed to be conservative”. Then I saw that Jeannette Hoorn used the same word!

    So I went back to Jane Hunt’s article called ‘Victors’ and ‘Victims’?: Men, Women, Modernism and Art in Australia. It dealt with gender issues in particular, but I was more interested in what Hunt had to say about traditionalism Vs modernism in the interwar period. Anyhow have a look at the post “Traditional Vs Modern Art: 1930s Australia”
    I owe you a beer.
    Art and Architecture, mainly

What are your thoughts?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: