Rumours can be light on fact, heavy on interpretation, or they can be the forerunner of new truths. Either way they often raise interesting questions.

Moral rights in Architecture, the baby of a nameless salaried bureaucrat, has perhaps most famously been played out in 2001 between Architect Col Madigan and the National Gallery of Australia. Col Madigan was the original architect for the Gallery in 1982, as part of the firm Edwards, Madigan, Torzillo and Briggs.

Tonkin Zulaika Greer Architects were awarded a commission, following a limited national architectural competition in 2001, to resolve general maintenance/refurb issues, to create new gallery spaces and to resolve the entry to the gallery so that it had one.

What ensued was a protracted dispute between Col Madigan, the Gallery and the appointed architects. This was played out in the media, with cartoons, letters to the editor and petitions. Eventually this led to the project stopping, though not on a purely legal basis, but rather on a moral/political basis.

But what does a Gallery impatient to get on with the job do?

Wait for the original architect to die? Run a design competition again, appoint the architect as a juror and hope the same thing does not happen again? Or do they negotiate?

The director of the gallery, Brian Kennedy, is quoted below from Directors Comment 2002-2003 and states;

“An improved means of entry and approach to the Gallery continued to be considered throughout the year and we are grateful for the assistance provided by the building’s original architect, Mr Colin Madigan AO, in detailing design principles for the building. These will assist our planning of the new front entrance and future building developments. A Development Manager was engaged to work with the Gallery to secure a suitable design for a new front entrance and to oversee its construction to revised timelines and budget. This work is expected to be completed by the end of 2006″.

According to a Sydney Morning Herald article dated April 9, by Lauren Martin, the Gallery is still without a new Architect or a design. Six weeks ago while in Sydney I heard a different story. This story had a former student of Col Madigan, Andrew Anderson, from Peddle Thorp and Walker, as the new architect for the Gallery extensions.

Peddle Thorp and Walker, PTW have carried out 7 million dollars worth of extensions in 1998 to the National Gallery and have also been involved in extensions to the NSW art gallery.

If this is true, and on the surface it appears probable, what questions does it raise?

How has Andrew Andersons been selected? This is the critical question. Has he been selected, to placate the original architect, and to ensure that the Gallery is in a position to achieve the changes to the building that it requires?

If so, this is an unacceptable situation.

The National Gallery of Australia is a national institution that belongs to the people of Australia. It has a symbolic function both within the City of Canberra and aspires to be the premier Gallery in Australia. It has been funded by the Commonwealth and occupies a prominent site on Lake Burley Griffin. Its function as defined in the National Gallery Act 1975 is outlined below,

excerpt from act;
SECT 6
Functions of Gallery
(1) The functions of the Gallery are:
(a) to develop and maintain a national collection of works of art; and
(b) to exhibit, or to make available for exhibition by others, works of art from the national collection or works of art that are otherwise in the possession of the Gallery.
(2) The Gallery shall use every endeavour to make the most advantageous use of the national collection in the national interest.

This major extension to Gallery can easily be considered an endevour. The appointment, without competition or comment, of any architect, can hardly be argued in the National Interest. That an Architects Moral rights be respected is self evident. In this case however, it may be that a National Institution, to develop and change, is exposed to undue influence as exercised by the original architect.

This situation is not good for Architecture, the National Gallery of Australia or the National Capital.