Editorial: The art of listening

The Suter Te Aratoi o Whakatu has its critics. As the central easel for the region's strong and vibrant visual art world, that is entirely natural ... and perhaps even desirable.

Art is partly about the conversation between creator and viewer, even if it is most often of the one-sided, interior monologue variety. And, as Oscar Wilde once put it, the only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about.

However, it is difficult to apply any kind of positive spin to the latest headlines involving the country's third oldest public art museum and gallery. Publicity around the Bishop Suter Trust's decision to eradicate a 110-year-old oak tree has not gone as smoothly as it might have hoped for.

The board must have learnt over the past decade or two that its plans and ambitions invariably attract keen scrutiny. A previous development plan which had the gallery encroaching on to the Queen's Gardens sparked bitter debate. The board would have known that opting to fell the tree was to court further controversy.

Nelson has often been criticised for failing to adequately protect its heritage and distinctive city-scape – of which notable trees are just as important as historic buildings, which we have lost too many of over the years. There are some people who value the natural world more than virtually anything man-made, and this sentiment can apply equally well to exotic trees as indigenous species.

Indeed, the redwoods, oaks, plane trees and gingkos dotted about the city are a living reminder of Nelson's past as an arborists' paradise in which species from around the globe have thrived. That this particular oak is now well into its second century, has its own distinctive profile within a historic precinct and appears to be in its prime only adds fuel to the fire.

The trust board says – with some conviction – that it genuinely believes the tree threatens the gallery buildings beside and beneath it. Therefore, it must also see it as a potential threat to the safety of its staff and the public. Its fears are given added weight by the fact that another tree caused considerable damage to the gallery 18 months ago. Its move to opt for a pre-emptive strike and remove the large oak is understandable.

The trust board's refusal to accept the offer of a city council arborist to examine the tree's health and report on safety matters is also understandable, up to a point – but much harder to defend. With its stance it runs the risk of further alienating some within the community that it would be far more desirable to have on side.

Clearly, the trust wants the tree gone.

Rejecting the offer of a free inspection by a credible tree expert can only give rise to the suspicion that its health and safety fears are more of the nature of a ruse aimed at deflecting the predictable criticism, and that the main motivation is to clear some space for its redevelopment ambitions. Again, it looks like it is refusing to listen to genuine concerns.

If old trees are important to the Nelson cityscape, then the Suter is of critical importance to our cultural treasury. That some people have become fixated with the gallery and its buildings and development, as suggested by chairman Craig Potton, is unfortunate.

However, that is the reality – and it is one that past Suter boards have helped create by virtue of their perceived intractability.

- © Fairfax NZ News

Newest First

Oldest First