Minerva Elements Records
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
-
ItemBoundaries between individual and communal authorship of Aboriginal art in context of Clifford Possum’s Tjapaltjarri’s art and the case of RvO’Loughlin (2001)( 2019)ABSTRACT This research concerns the oeuvre of Clifford Possum Tjapaltjarri in the context of art fraud. Clifford Possum Tjapaltjarri was an Anmatyerr man (c.1932 – 2002). His art was the subject of Australia’s first criminal law prosecution for fraud over Aboriginal art: R v John Douglas O’Loughlin (2001) unreported NSWDC, 23 Feb 2001. The research examines boundaries between individual and communal authorship of Aboriginal art in the context of this case. The case is used to highlight changing boundaries around authorship of Aboriginal art. Communal art practiced in the Papunya region changed with the birth of the Western Desert art movement. Individual authorship became prominent in attribution. Artists such as Clifford Possum Tjapaltjarri became famous in their own right. In 2004, at the National Gallery of Victoria, Clifford Possum was celebrated with the first retrospective of a Papunya Tula artist in an Australian public gallery, an exhibition spanning thirty years of his work. This research claims that the cultural tensions for individual artists such as Clifford Possum, raised by this change, have been seldom noted and are highlighted especially by art fraud. The boundaries between individual and communal authorship are measured by looking at representation of those boundaries by the artist, his community, museums, the art market, and the law. With the development of contemporary Aboriginal art, I argue that the art market and also public galleries have insufficiently acknowledged the communal basis of traditional Aboriginal art, at least up until the present decade. Fred Myers’ pivotal text ‘Painting Culture’ (2002) and Vivien Johnson’s art histories on Clifford Possum Tjapaltjarri and Western Desert art are central to this project with Myers’ work providing the key intellectual leadership on the topic. I look at recent writing drawn from an Aboriginal perspective, for example by curators Luke Taylor and Hetti Perkins. The work of anthropologists Elizabeth Coleman and Eric Michaels also provides an important topic-specific context on art fraud surrounding Indigenous art in Australia and links concepts of authenticity with critical theory. Literature on authorship, including by Foucault, is consulted although not designed as a key framework for this thesis. The conclusion was that although boundaries around individual and communal authorship of Aboriginal art may have changed, the O’Loughlin case failed to acknowledge the two modes of authorship, and further to this, current Australian law is lacking in protecting Indigenous cultural property and collective authorship around Aboriginal art.
-
ItemIs Rawlsian liberalism compatible with Islam?: A case study of post-Soeharto Indonesia( 2015)This thesis explores the interaction between law and religion in a democratic state where religion plays a significant role in public life, using post-Soeharto Indonesia as a case study. It considers the relevance of John Rawls’ thinking about constitutional democracy, specifically his political liberalism. Rawls addresses value pluralism, and the proper use of state authority. A case study of a prosecution under Indonesia’s Blasphemy Law demonstrates the contribution Rawls’ thinking can make in a democratic, majority Muslim country. The 2005 jailing of Yusman Roy for promoting dual language Muslim prayer (sholat dwi bahasa) in East Java is investigated to illustrate how law can be deployed to control minority (and allegedly deviant) Muslim voices. The case study deals directly with issues central to Rawls’ thinking, as he pays special attention to the role of fundamental freedoms, including religious freedom. The case study considers diversity within the majority faith of Islam, the place of Islamic doctrine in state law and policy, and the prominent role played by the Majelis Ulama Indonesia (MUI, the Ulama Council of Indonesia) in shaping public debate on these issues, especially as regards blasphemy. It finds a convergence between, first, the government’s aim to respect the place of the majority faith, and, second, MUI’s aim to promote itself as the arbiter of orthodox, mainstream Islamic doctrine. The Blasphemy Law was upheld by the Mahkamah Konstitusi (Constitutional Court) but the thesis finds it inconsistent with the state’s obligation to respect religious freedom. Rawls’ political liberalism can play a valuable role in understanding Islam in Indonesia because Islam is not monolithic, and limits on the exercise of state power are just as relevant to members of the majority faith as they are to other faiths. Further, Indonesia’s status as a constitutional democracy reduces the strength of claims that ‘Western’ political theory cannot apply in other settings. The thesis finds that a trend towards greater centralisation of Islamic authority is not consistent with the diversity in Indonesian Islam, or its liberal and democratic constitution which, for Rawls, is legitimate only when the state exercises power consistent with constitutional essentials, endorsed by citizens.
-
ItemDRUGS PROSECUTIONS IN VIETNAM: THE MODERN PROPAGANDA TRIAL(MONASH UNIV, FAC LAW, 2008-01-01)
-
Item
-
Item
-
Item
-
ItemSubjects of Jurisdiction: the dying, Northern Territory, Australia, 1995-1997(Routledge-Cavendish, 2007)
-
ItemAccess to justice in Vietnam: State supply – private distrust(Routledge, 2016-01-01)
-
ItemThe Merits and Limits of Comparativism: National Treatment in International Investment Law and the WTO(Oxford University Press, 2011-01-01)
-
ItemTribal Constitutionalism: States, Tribes, and the Governance of Membership(Oxford University Press, 2011-01-01)
In settler societies, tribal self-governance creates a legal distinction between indigeneity (defined by settler governments) and tribal membership (defined by tribes). Many legally indigenous persons are not tribal members, and some tribal members are not legally indigenous. This book considers the membership rules included in the constitutions and membership codes of nearly 750 recognized tribes in Canada, New Zealand, Australia, and the United States. It addresses the first-order question of tribal constitutionalism: who are the members of tribes, and how are they chosen? The question is of practical and theoretical import. A large proportion of indigenous peoples in each state are not enrolled in a recognized tribe, and the majority of indigenous peoples do not live near their tribal territories. The book's empirical study challenges many of the assumptions used to model tribalism in theories of cultural pluralism, especially those that depict tribes as distinctively insular, ascriptive, and territorially-confined. The book shows that while they are descent-based groups, tribes also self-constitute relationally, by enrolling non-descendants in accordance with cultural and social criteria, and by recruiting from other indigenous communities. The book draws on tribal law and practice, political theory, legal doctrine, policy, and demographic data to critically assess the strategies used by tribes and states to manage the jurisdictional and ideological challenges of tribal membership governance.