No abstract

Abstract:In recent decades, cultural protocols have emerged as a non-judicial alternative to the inadequate legal protection of Indigenous cultural heritage. They are meant to protect Indigenous peoples from the misappropriation of their heritage by outsiders and enhance Indigenous peoples’ control over their own domain. This article examines the functioning of Indigenous cultural protocols within Australia’s contemporary art world. As we will demonstrate, cultural protocols have clear practical utility. They can raise awareness, instigate changes in behaviour, and operate as a conduit for correcting the unauthorized use of Indigenous cultural materials. Yet, a disjunction exists between codified ideals and a messy reality. Our analysis of two protocol transgressions shows that protocols do not automatically protect Indigenous individuals equally. Furthermore, although discussions about compliance are infused with rhetoric about the authority of “the Indigenous community,” Indigenous people with cultural connections to contested heritage objects do not always have a clear voice in decisions made about their use.

No abstract

Art centres and public patronage Jon Altman has written extensively about the Indigenous visual arts industry, including the roles played by community-owned Indigenous art centres and the importance of government support for artists and enterprises operating at considerable distance from key markets (Altman 2005, 2007a). He has repeatedly pointed to the economic, social and cultural benefits of government investment in art centres which accrue not just to Indigenous artists and to those who market their work but also to individuals and institutions in sectors like hospitality and tourism (Altman 2007b). Observing that Indigenous art centres constitute hybrid institutions which combine myriad commercial, cultural and social functions, Altman has consistently cautioned against pressuring such centres to operate independent of government funding. However, policymakers have often been reluctant to recognise art centres' mixed functions. As argued by Altman (2005), the ongoing failure to appreciate such hybridity lies at the core of Indigenous art centres' vulnerability and fragility.