The Archibald Prize: Was it a painting or a caricature?

But the real court drama began when William Dobell rose to his feet. This simple action made WW2 vie for the front page.

Critics, artists and selected members of the public came out to debate the art prize that has been fraught with controversy – The Archibald Prize.

In her forward to the Archibald Prize: An Illustrated History, 1921- 1981, Anna Waldmann, wrote that this prize has stirred the imagination and rattled the art establishment since its inception.

As the famous editor of the Bulletin, the ‘bushman’s bible’, John Archibald was highly influential in late nineteenth century politics, literature and art.

The Bulletin has been provocative, idealistic, almost destitute but seldom dull.

It was seen as a symbol of a new phase, the journalistic “maturity” turning spotlight on the emergence of an Australian social and cultural awareness.

“We were born when the printed word and the soapbox were about the only means of communication,” said an unflustered editor. “I was a nursery for all of our most hallowed artists and writers …”

Joshua Smith as he appeared in Dobell’s portrait.

The Bulletin has been accorded the tribute of the “best magazine” ever produced in Australia.
Archibald passed away in 1919. According to his will he left an estate valued at nearly ninety thousand pounds. Thus, the Archibald Prize was born. The inaugural Archibald was awarded in 1921.

The four hundred pounds in prizemoney went to W.B, McInnes for his portrait of prominent Melbourne architect, Harold Desbrowe-Annear.

McInnes won again in 1922 and 1923. In all, McInnes won the prize seven times, five times in the Archibald’s first six years.

But there are good times and bad.

The real drama began in 1944, when the winner was William Dobell for his portrait of Joshua Smith. In was an incident that summarily vied with WW2 for the front pages. 

Joshua Smith in the flesh.

Two other entrants, Mary Edwards and Joseph Wolinski, took legal action against Dobell and the Trustees.

The classification of the painting was not a portrait, as defined by the Archibald bequest, but a caricature.

The upshot was that the case was heard in the Supreme Court in October 1944. The ‘caricature case’ was described by one newspaper as “the biggest legal smash hit since Ned Kelly.”

In 24 hours, Day 2 of the Dobell case, began with standing room only.  

Press clippings -- that help turn the trial into a smash hit.

In the end, the court eventually found Dobell free of the charge and ordered the claimants “to pay costs for Dobell and the Trustees.”

It became known as “the case that a stopped a Nation.”

Arguably, Edmund Capon, in the Archibald Prize: Illustrated History, said, “If art be a medium that confuses, confounds and disturbs … the Archibald Prize is fulfilling an artistic role.

“When artistic conceptions and expressions are so radical, it is perhaps surprising that the prize survived at all. But it has and will continue to do so.”

<< Frank Morris from a Background from the Archibald Prize: An Illustrated History, 1921-1981.

Main: Willian Dobell and the painting that led him to court.

William Dobell: My life