LETTER TO STURT
The Constitution of Sturt Gallery & Studios Limited
To foster and promote in Mittagong and at such other places as the members of
the of the Association shall from time to time determine an active creative interest
in handcrafts and other forms of artistic expression and appreciation.
To whoever it may concern, and in particular the membership of Winifred West Schools Ltd,
Upon receiving and reading the constitution for Sturt Gallery & Studios Limited ACN (SGS) presented by Winifred West Schools (WWS) Governors and framed as an outcome of the STURT Review Process there are concerns to be addressed. That is, the process that followed WWS Governors’ pausing of the STURT operation in February 2024. Concerningly, there appears to be a schism between STURT’s purpose historically and what is being flagged in the SGS purpose for being.
A primary concern is to do with the STURT operation’s proposed ‘placedness' and where it is located geographically now and looking ahead given that strategically a great deal depends upon this. That is, that there appears to be an assumption that STURT is, and should be, fixed to the location the operation was founded upon for 80 plus years ago – Cnr Waverly Parade & Range Road Mittagong NSW. That is at odds with what can now be regarded as the foundation STURT Rules – AKA Constitution.
What is not reflected in the proposed SGS constitution drafted by WWS, and what can now be described as the STURT operation’s foundation document is a clear indication of STURT'S placedness looking ahead.
That is the document that Winifred West, STURT’s founder, put in place and within which she flagged that the location of the operation, would then be Mittagong, "and at such other places as the members of the of the Association shall from time to time determine.” … SEE BELOW AND HERE.
Given that the SGS Constitution is a WWS instrument the placedness expressed, and flagged within it, is entirely of WWS making and it potentially does not, indeed doesn't attempt to, and arguably cannot, speak for SGS members, the implication is that SGS members are quasi WWS members but without the benefits WWS members may enjoy etc.
Whilst this is contestable, so too is the notion that SGS is, or will be, an independent standalone operation, determining its own strategic direction, policies and priorities unencumbered by obligations to any other operation.
As always there are schisms between ‘law’ and ‘lore’ and that is never more evident than it is within the realm of cultural institutions and cultural landscapes. Moreover, when ‘placedness’ and ‘cultural realities' comes into play there is ever likely to be a contest of ideas, and sometimes divergent perceptions. Understandings and meaning is, as always, invested in the context.
Here language is important given that the STURT Community of Ownership and Interest [LINK 2]is multi-layered and widely dispersed and moreover there is a narrative that suggests that SGS is intended to be ‘independent’ and operational at arm's length from WWS operationally.
If SGS is dependent upon WWS as a ‘landlord’ and possibly as a financial 'underwriter’ then the independence spoken of is conditional upon SGS being a pyramidal corporate entity – refence link – that is reflective of the status quo – a corporate structure paused for it being financially unsustainable.
Notably, Winifred West herself spoke of an ideal corporate structure being analogous to the TREE OF LIFE and the importance of networking. Currently, that MINDset is translatable as being to do with rhizomatics and by extension RHIZOMATIClearning – and by implication divergent thinking as opposed to convergent thinking. Arguably, given Winifred West’s pedagogical experimentation at STURT between 1942 and at the time of her death in 1971 STURT by-and-large operated rhizomatically albeit as a standalone operation within the network of WWS Ltd and underwritten by WWS Ltd.
The constitution WWS is proposing for SGS clearly has utility as a charitable corporate entity however, and as always, the devil is in the detail. Arguably IF WWS is proposing that STURT operates as a standalone independent entity in a 21st C context SGS’s ‘purpose for being‘ needs to set that out in the company’s objectives. Therefore, there is a case to be put that the objectives should overtly afford:
- SGS to operate overtly as company limited by guarantee in multiple geographic locations; and
- SGS to operate in such a way as to establish formal collaborative and cooperative affiliations with kindred operation within Australia; and
- SGS to operate in such way as to initiate the establishment of say a STURT TRUST FUND or FOUNDATION to facilitate the funding of satellite educational and training operations; and for
- SGS to operate in such way be able to receive funding from government, corporate and philanthropic agencies uninhibited by its relationship with WWS ; and
- SGS to operate as a not-for-profit enterprise and publisher of research outcomes initiated within the SGS operation and affiliated operations; and
- SGS to operate in such a way as to offer creditable experience and qualifications to cultural producers that win those things as consequence of them being engaged with SGS ; and
- SGS to market and promote the SGS operating in such way in such way as it can be understood in the wider community as a standalone operation functioning at arm’s length from WWS at whatever places and in whatever manner the governance of the SGS operation determines from time to time; and
- Moreover, the constitution is silent on the ownership, management and curation of the STURT PERMANENT COLLECTION, and given its significance that is concerning.
Currently, it is important to acknowledge that WWS for whatever reason is yet to indicate and articulate any conditions or restrictions it may be contemplating in regard to SGS being:
- A tenant on WWS on land; and/or being
- Underwritten by WWS to what extent and/or under what conditions if at all.
Arts organisations are particularly prone to controversy. Their currency is culture, so it’s hardly surprising that they are often the focal point for cultural debates. Experience at the front line navigating an arts organisation through controversy is invaluable when the contest of ideas becomes apparent. ‘Governance’ inevitably gets involved when issues get exposure via the press and social networks.
Relatively few of Australia’s institutions with cultural issues needing attention have too few people around the table with scars from similar battles, and with the instincts and with then resilience to be insightful and useful. Given that these things are most often acquired through practical experience at the coalface elsewhere there is utility in having such expertise and experience at hand at DECISIONtime.
Given that the constitution for Sturt Gallery & Studios Limited ACN (SGS) presented by Winifred West Schools (WWS) is a WWS instrument, thus the matters deliberated upon above arguably need to be addressed by the membership of WWS and its governance. Ideally that should be as soon as possible given the proposed February initiation date. If ambiguity is to be avoided whenever and wherever that is possible generally what we do comes out of who and what we believe ourselves to be. Cleary that is being tested.
I look and others in my network look forward to your response with considerable interest.
Yours sincerely,
Ray Norman
Sturt Alumni, Polemicist, Cultural Producer,
Cultural Geographer, Researcher
No comments:
Post a Comment