Australian Music Centre | Breaking sound barriers

Composer Lyle Chan has been a Chair of the Art Music Awards' Judging Panels since 2023. We asked him what insights his four years have given him, and this is his reply, with additional writing by Leah Flanagan.

It's one of the most anticipated dates in the art music calendar - the annual night when practitioners across our many fields are honoured for something they achieved in the past year. As a Chair of the Art Music Awards' Judging Panels, I can say without hesitation it's been a pleasure to have performed this role since 2023.

The past four years have seen an intensification of something that actually started some ten years ago. In 2015 the pool of judges was significantly extended. This move did not arise from nowhere, but coincided with society's trends towards inclusivity. The arts, being reflective of society, incorporated this inclusivity, and this change to the Awards immediately had an effect. As always, all finalists and winners were resoundingly excellent and deserving, but now there was this exciting unpredictability about who would win.

We're not only talking about inclusivity in terms of gender, ethnicity and such demographic qualities. We're also talking about the inclusion of Australian music itself. The single biggest transformation in the past decade has been the pronounced adoption of Australian compositions amongst major arts presenters like orchestras, for which they should be commended.

Interestingly, on this point, about six years ago the Orchestral Work of the Year category was retired - partly because, in the years leading up, there hadn't been enough new orchestral works to have a competitive field. In hindsight you could say the category was retired too early, as there came this increased embrace of Australian works. But it was the right move regardless, because orchestral works became incorporated into Large Ensemble Work of the Year, where they rightly have healthy competition.

The impact of all this breadth and wider uptake is evident. It used to be that you'd never see a name you didn't already know amongst the list of finalists. Now, I notice the judges say things like "I'd never heard of this person but the work is amazing and it should be a finalist." Previously it would be unthinkable for the works of a Master's student to be contenders. Now they are. Now more artists are seeing people like themselves being finalists, so they put their hands up to be nominated instead of not bothering. More people feel they stand a chance of winning.

The area of the Awards that's seen the most change in my time as Chair is the arts community's relationship with the cultures, knowledge and creative traditions of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Again, we see the arts leading and reflecting society's growing awareness of First Nations achievement and cultural responsibility. I'm grateful to Leah Flanagan, Director, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Programs & Strategy at APRA AMCOS, for helping me write this section.

The Awards initiated policies centred on practising respect through principles of cultural authority, consent, attribution and the appropriate use of Indigenous Cultural and Intellectual Property (ICIP). Key to the development and implementation of these policies has been the expertise within Australian Music Centre and of Alyelhentye Nawu, APRA AMCOS's specialist team that provides guidance on ICIP and supports appropriate cultural governance processes.

Four years ago, there was still a lack of clarity amongst artists and judges about how cultural authority and ICIP should be understood. Some believed that because the creator of a work was Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander, the work would automatically contain ICIP (it may not), while others assumed that Indigenous artists themselves could freely use any Indigenous cultural material (they cannot, unless they hold the appropriate cultural authority or permissions to do so). What began as a complex area of policy has become far clearer through the ongoing educational work of this specialist team.

When nominations are received, works that may contain ICIP are reviewed by Alyelhentye Nawu, which provides observations and advice regarding cultural authority, attribution, permissions and cultural governance considerations. These observations are made available to the judges to assist their deliberations.

Four years ago, questions regarding the appropriate use of ICIP appeared more regularly amongst nominated works. Today, awareness and understanding have grown significantly, and it is now far less common for concerns to arise.

Most encouragingly, there is a greater understanding across the sector that ICIP responsibilities apply to everyone. Increasingly, nominated works demonstrate thoughtful engagement with cultural authority, consent processes and respectful collaboration with First Nations communities. While this progress is worth celebrating, respectful engagement with ICIP remains an ongoing responsibility that requires continual learning, dialogue and accountability. It is a success story that can only continue to grow through that commitment.