Australia’s richest woman seeks removal of her portrait from exhibition
Australia’s richest woman seeks removal of her portrait from exhibition
www.cnn.com
Australia’s richest woman seeks removal of her portrait from exhibition | CNN
116 comments
-
I would have never seen this picture if she hadn't done this.
-
And even those who saw it would have seen it in the context of a lot of other portraits in the same style, where it doesn’t stand out as anything personally directed at Rinehart.
-
It doesn’t really matter. She’ll wield her power, get her way and then go on living her toxic existence feeling like she won even though, quantitatively, more people think she’s a cunt.
But we can all tell ourselves this somehow makes a difference
-
The picture is still up, maybe there is justice in this world.
-
-
-
-
I'm in fuckin tears
-
Now that is art
-
Works perfectly! Her picture should be the standard for this meme from now on.
-
-
Vigooooooo 👻
-
Despot of carpatia?
-
-
-
Another case of the Streisand effect
-
Its really wierd to me that Streisand effect became the accepted name for this.
For example the 1st child's play is saw In the UK was 3. Purely because it was banned
Attempt at clarification edit
I had no interest in yhe child's plat movie franchises until the 3rd movie because it was banned
-
It's a catchy name and it was among the first examples of the effect in the internet era that amplified the effect many fold. There is no reason for me to know about Streisand's house and there is no reason for me to know about this painting. I have only know about them because the internet exists.
-
Can you repeat or clarify that second sentence? I'm pretty sure there was a typo or mistyped word somewhere, and usually I wouldn't mention it, but in this case I actually can't interpret the meaning.
-
The first child's play movie wasn't saw, the UK definitely wasn't 3 when you had seen it, and saw was never banned in the UK although Grotesque and several Chainsaw Massacre films were. /s
-
-
-
if she weren't rich, i'd feel bad for her. her status and authority, unfortunately, make her an acceptable target for nonviolent criticism, such as really ugly portraits.
-
her status and authority, unfortunately, make her an acceptable target
Agreed, but It's really more that she's a complete arsehole. As a nimby mining magnate, she is a sponsor of organised climate denialism and vocal about it herself, a race she clearly has a horse in. She's also an active libertarian who wants to further dismantle the welfare system, and reduce taxation, and wants Australian workers to be cool like Africans and work for $2 a day. And a vocal Trump supporter.
It's not the painting that makes her ugly, it's her behaviour and ideology.
-
it's her behavior and ideology that makes the painting accurate :3
-
It's crazy to me how
most if notall billionares cheerish exploiting poor wages and keeping poor people poorer while hoarding unimaginable wealth that's enough for lifetime for generations of their family. That's because billionares are mentally sick. -
Yeah no famous artist has ever felt the need to pain me ugly. Hell the most artistic depiction of me is a charcoal drawing by a guy who didn’t know we’d gone out for hookah a few times a few years prior. But regardless artists are only depicting her poorly because of how poorly she behaves.
-
-
It's not uglier than the other portraits in the set. Its really weird that she would object when she is sharing a wall with royalty.
-
Regardless of her money, she's an ugly individual. And I don't mean physically
-
Yeah, I was going to say I'm not Australian, so I'm not super familiar with her, but from what I do know of her, this portrait seems fitting.
-
-
Punching up (nonviolently, as you say) is always valid.
-
Punching up is the only way to punch
-
-
Rinehart has an estimated net worth of $30.2 billion USD, according to Forbes.
Piece of shit.
-
She is basically the Koch brothers, but bigger, dumber, and more evil.
The only reason why the Koch family is probably worse, is because their influence flows through the American state.
All this is to say, it's a good bet that after this story dies down, the gallery will quietly acquiesce and take down the painting. This will either be followed by a carrot, or a removal of whatever stick she used.
-
If there ever was an example of the Streisand effect, this is it!
-
Man... You could just fucking own it and be far better off in every way. Just speaks to the crazy ego these people have.
-
Only commenting to give this post even more engagement, lol
-
SameEdit: Bump
-
Ahem.
The proper internet terminology is:
"Bump."
-
-
-
-
Exactly the painting my wife and I thought about - simultaneously...
-
-
I will never not appreciate the Streisand effect.
-
Madam Harkonnen
-
The
spiceiron must flow.
-
-
This is the image.
wantja Arts/Vincent Namatjira/Copyright Agency/Getty Images
-
Maybe she could buy the painting? I'm sure the artist would be willing to part with it for a donation of a few billion to charitable causes.
-
But then there will be even more paintings. She has no problem with hiring thugs for it.
-
It belongs to the national gallery and therefor cannot be sold.
-
-
My initial reaction was that it was probably unflattering on purpose but after seeing the others I think that might just be the artist's style and she just has an unfortunate face for it.
-
Ahhh yes, good, shame that racist fat cunt globally.
-
She'd have done better claiming, "It doesn't even look like me‽ Kind of a shit artist imo, if we're all just being honest."
Apparently, there's no going back from the Streisand effect. And now, here we all are, looking at her actual gremlin face... understanding that the painting is somehow true. She should have let it go
-
The article could have ended after the very first sentence.
Art is subjective.
-
I think it's funny how on .ml I can't call this woman a bitch, but I can say I want to cut off her head and eat her liver.
-
It's because no one's actually going to cut off her head, so it's okay to fantasize about it. If it becomes common to call her a bitch it could impact her reputation and cause people to take her less seriously, which would make it harder for her to get good terms in business negotiations, affecting her bottom line. .ml is a tool of the oligarchy.
-
ml is a tool of the oligarchy.
All social media is, or becomes it very quickly. Controlling the narrative is a vital strategic asset.
-
-
-
As Australia's only Barbi-llionaire, I vote to replace her portrait with a funny portrait of me in the exhibition instead.
-
Ugh.
-
-
I have seen stories on this topic posted several times. I upvote it every time and will continue to do so.
-
Best of luck. Get back under your bridge! Shoo!
-
Surely there's a billboard near her home that they can put that on?
-
The Picture of Gina Gray.
-
I'm sure no artist will ever paint her in an unflatering way after hearing this. Did NGA leak this or did she make a public statement?
-
Stay humble, bitch.
-
This is the best summary I could come up with:
That certainly seems to be the case with a painting by indigenous artist Vincent Namatjira, which includes a portrait of Australia’s richest person, mining magnate Gina Rinehart.
Other subjects in the piece include the late Queen Elizabeth II, American musician Jimi Hendrix, Australian Aboriginal rights activist Vincent Lingiari and the former Prime Minister of Australia Scott Morrison.
Australian media has reported that Rinehart approached the NGA’s director and chair to request the painting’s removal.
Australia’s National Association for the Visual Arts (NAVA) has spoken out to support Namatjira, CNN’s affiliate 9News has reported.
“While Rinehart has the right to express her opinions about the work, she does not have the authority to pressure the gallery into withdrawing the painting simply because she dislikes it,” NAVA’s executive director Penelope Benton said, according to 9News.
NAVA offered its “unwavering support” to National Gallery of Australia, 9News reported, stating that it was concerned that Rinehart’s demand to remove the portrait “sets a dangerous precedent for censorship and the stifling of creative expression.”
The original article contains 502 words, the summary contains 169 words. Saved 66%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
-
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
That is some funny shit right there
-
no sense of humour, so sad.
-
Even if you want to be mad at her for being rich and being part of the oligopoly that is creating suffering and impending environmental doom, can you blame her for requesting the portrait be taken down? It's really unflattering and doesn't look that much like her. She didn't demand it, she asked. No one likes being humiliated, and that portrait probably made her feel terrible. There's nothing wrong with making a request, most people in her position would do the same.
She should create a foundation to called "The Institute for Reduced World Suffering" and make the charter bylaws include her picture on anything sent out, any website, any marketing material, and her photo must be on any material generated by the organization, and it can only be 1 type of picture that she chooses, then she should have an artist do a really flattering picture of her that makes her look nice. In the Institute's first year, she should offer 10 10,000 grants to those who study reduced world suffering and in announcing the grants opportunity she could include her picture in the advertisements. She could let anyone apply and she chooses the winners. She could turn a strange situation into something wonderful if she wants.
-
Okay, I don't mean to be rude, but fucking what
-
if only i had written "stay humble, bitch" the people of lemmy would like me 😭
-
-
-
-
It sucks that this unflattering portrait is put in a museum and my unflattering portrait of the whore who turned me down isn't in one.
-
Gallery art's such a joke man. Gives artists a bad name.
-
To be fair, check out the other paintings. This is a pretty good exhibit!
-
Yeah I seen em. It's all awful. Looks like he's got a famous great grandfather and he's cashing in on the name.
-
-
116 comments