This morning on 2SER our guest historian, Nicole Cama, joined Mitch Byatt to look at the history of the prestigious and often controversial award, the Archibald Prize. The prize was founded by the eccentric journalist and publisher, Jules Francois Archibald. When he died in 1919 he left behind an estate then valued at £89,061, which was then an incredible amount of money. In his will he stated that part of his money go toward an annual prize “…to be styled The Archibald Prize for the best portrait preferentially of some man or woman distinguished in arts letters science or politics painted by any artist resident in Australia during the 12 months preceding the date fixed…” The Dictionary has an interesting article on the prize written by the former Director of the Art Gallery of NSW, Edmund Capon. Capon notes that there are two elements to the clause in Archibald’s will that have ensured the success and longevity of the prize: the first, that the prize not be judged by curators, art historians, critics or other such professionals but by the members of the Board of Trustees, that is, ordinary men and women; and  that the portraits had to be painted in the 12 months leading up to the award. As a result, artists have always created works of their time, depicting contemporary subjects. In this sense, the Archibald has become a social and cultural snapshot of the time within each prize is awarded, reflecting contemporary values. One particular year that stood out for its controversy was1943 when William Dobell won the prize for his portrait of fellow artist Joshua Smith. The reason why it caused so much controversy was because it was widely described as a ‘caricature’ and the way that Dobell painted Smith’s body was a complete break with traditional notions of how human form is represented in art. In response to all the chatter, over 150,000 people ventured to see the work, that’s a lot of people flocking to the Art Gallery of NSW back in 1943! Litigation followed, initiated by fellow artists, however, over a year later the judge determined that no court of law was empowered to set aside the decision of those legally appointed to judge the prize. In the end, in many respects, it’s as if the controversy this prize consistently elicits is the very reason why it is so successful. As Capon notes

"...it is the source of great debate, some wonderful controversies and above all an art exhibition that the public adores…for all the fun and widespread interest it generates, artists take it very seriously and the resources of passion, craft, imagination and talent that are invested in the hundreds of portraits submitted every year are testament to the current lively state of the art of portraiture in this country.”

What’s interesting is that Penelope Seidler, the subject of Fiona Lowry’s winning portrait this year, reportedly stood in front of her portrait and said “There’s no controversy.” It appears we’ve avoided the controversy this year, but the prize is certainly still alive. According to The Sydney Morning Herald’s article on this year’s prize, there were 884 entries and last year, 136,000 tickets were sold to the exhibition of the finalists, making it the gallery's most-visited paid show. Reference THE ARCHIBALD PRIZE,  The West Australian (Perth, WA : 1879 - 1954), January 31, 1925, p 11,  from http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article31277548, accessed  July 22, 2014 --- If you missed it, you can listen to Nicole's segment with Mitch here. Don't forget to tune in next week for more Sydney history courtesy of the Dictionary on 2SER Breakfast at 8:20am.