The mountain’s Aesthetic Landscapes
Descriptions of the mountain’s beauty are innumerable. ‘When the sun is shining brightly it pierces here and there through the dusky foliage, so that the chequered light and shade and the alternation of green and gold colours produced are lovely to look upon. You feel you are in one of Nature's temples, in which every rock and loose stone is painted with fair colours, accurately tinted, and in perfect harmony.’ wrote E.P.D. Mercury in January 1899. Roy Bridges described it well, writing in the Melbourne Argus thirty years later, in 1931: “This beauty seems to be more than earthly, in the reaction of the mountain to the light of dawn and the splendour of the sunrise; or when the mountain appears to float in blue sea-haze, or responds to the interplay of light and cloud; or when, to the pale sun, its snows are dazzling white in contrast with the blackness of the immensity of its base; or when the height looms wine-dark against the sunset. It is grim and forbidding only in the darkest moods of storm. Its magnificence is changeless; its beauty moves with the pageant of the seasons.”
Scenic beauty is in the land and in the features of the land and it is one the key Purposes for which Wellington Park was reserved. But what about aesthetics? Beauty is a very important aspect of aesthetics, in for example, the exponents of the Picturesque style, but beauty is not the only aspect of aesthetic interest and beauty comes in many forms. Aesthetics is concerned with the entire artistic judgement generated by the artworks—which are also objects of moveable heritage.
One of the most important aesthetic aspects of the mountain is not its beauty, but its terror. This is the aesthetic appreciation of the Sublime. For example, the impact on a refined viewer of stupendous cataracts disgorging with their roar incalculable and seemingly unstoppable quantities of water was at once overwhelming, terrifying and transfixing: this was sublime.
“And over all there looms the gigantic figure of the mountain, with its head in the clouds, and its feet in the sea, filling the eye with its vast proportions, and impressing the mind by its awful majesty.”
The fusion of the two aesthetic effects was famously expressed by the pioneering native gardener James Dickenson in 1843, describing Wellington Falls as “A scene where the wild, the grand, and the sublime are merged in the romantic, the stupendous, and the terrible.”
Amongst this splendour, some critics beg to differ. In a widely reported lecture on Art and Ugliness read by a Dr Mercer in 1905, the good doctor opined on beauty and concluded that “the finest mountain in Tasmania was not Mount Wellington, as perhaps they thought he should say, but Mount Roland, and he descanted at some length on the particular beauties of this 'grand old feller.' Daily Telegraph Launceston 17 Aug 1905
ART CHRONOLOGY
The mountain appears in the first sketch of Collins Camp drawn by the Deputy Surveyor-General Harris, and all the great colonial-period landscape artists had a go at it.
Artists—printers, painters, photographers—over three centuries or more—have created a huge body of work devoted to the mountain. Sheridan suggested that there are more images of the Mountain than any other place in Australia outside of Sydney.
“From the 1840s with the parameters of travel extended, more was published about Tasmania’s mountains, and …Mount Wellington’s relationship to Hobart made it especially appealing, with picturesque scenes of Hobart Town nestled at the foot of a ‘lofty mountain ... forming a grand feature in the landscape’.” — Julia Horne In Search of Wonder
In the 20th century Robert Campbell (often described as an Australian impressionist) Joan Humble, Greg Hind and Jock Young (among many others), have painted views of Mount Wellington. Richard Bacon painted The Thumbs from Dru Point in 1976.’
From them we come to Jeff Dyer and contemporary landscape painters. Enshrine has catalogued in individual entries the oeuvre of 24 well-known landscape artists as well as half a dozen photographers.
Heritage Assessments
The 2002 interim listing of the Wellington Range area on the Register of the National Estate presented the artists chronologically: ‘Mount Wellington has been represented by artists from the earliest days of Hobart, starting with convict artists Joseph Lycett, Henry Gritten and Knut Bull. One of John Glover's most famous late 1830s paintings is a sweeping forested view of the range's northern slopes focusing on the site of the orphan asylum. During the 1840s, the notable British painter and sketcher, John Skinner Prout worked in many parts of the mountain, often in the company of his talented amateur colleagues: Francis Simpkinson De Wesselow and George T W B Boyes. Mary Morton Allport, Tasmania's first professional woman artist, and her contemporary, Louisa Anne Meredith also painted and sketched Mount Wellington, as did other nineteenth century artists, both residents and visitors to the colony, including Thomas Chapman and Charles Dicker.’
McConnell and Handsjuk briefly survey the aesthetic movements that underpin this history of appreciation of the mountain in their Summit Area Heritage Assessment report ‘The literature indicates that the aesthetic appreciation of Mount Wellington has been strongly influenced by the key aesthetic movements of the late 1700s to present – primarily the Romantic movement of 1800s to early 1900s, with its preoccupation with the ‘Sublime’ and ‘Picturesque’; and late 1900s to present fascination with wildness and naturalness (often referred to as the 'Wilderness' movement). The Arts & Crafts Movement of the late 1800s-early 1900s was also important, but in relation to Mount Wellington it manifested itself more in an interest in the rainforest gullies with their ferneries and the building of rustic huts, than in the Mountain as a whole or in its form. While the influence of the mid-1900s Modern movement in relation to the Mountain is not particularly evident, it is likely that it contributed to the interest in the native vegetation of the Mountain.’
‘In 19th century Tasmania the Romantic interests were fuelled by the new, natural and dramatic landscapes that were so abundant in the new colony. These were regarded as ‘Sublime’, and were sought after and promoted eagerly. Mount Wellington with its height, its sweeping and rocky summit ridge, often snow-capped, and its forested slopes was one example of these landscapes and had the advantage of being relatively easily accessible from Hobart, hence a major focus of interest. It was clearly regarded as a sublime landscape as indicated in an 1869 description comparing Mount Wellington to the European Alps which states with directness that Mount Wellington is "is equally grand and sublime". The panoramic views from the summit were also particularly valued by the Romantics. In relation to the Picturesque, the importance of Mount Wellington was generally manifested in paintings of the Hobart area which featured gentle rural scenes of mown fields, fences, occasional livestock, cottages and flour mills, but with Mount Wellington inevitably present as the natural backdrop to this rustic scene.’
‘The present day 'wilderness movement' is a new way of appreciating the wild and natural landscapes of Tasmania. It can be considered to be, at least in part, a response to a cumulatively significant loss of natural areas and natural values that is influenced by an understanding of ecology and a desire for an honest portrayal of the remaining natural values. Consequently those influenced by this movement are interested in the specific (small close up scenes – landforms and individual plants) and the extensive (landscapes).’ page 54-55.
Angus Barnes suggested in his 1992 thesis that the colonial painters saw the Mountain as a sentinel. An image ‘promoted by The Romantic painters. Often they would paint castles in the distant background as symbols of the noble and grand, towering above all. In Hobart, where no castles stood, The Mountain took their place.’
Another aspect for consideration of the mountain as an aesthetic object is in finding in any depiction the characteristics seen by the artist whereby the image is of a landscape, but the impression is of a portrait, of a personality. Is the mountain characteristically a masculine or a feminine entity? An observation of Max Angus’ on Mount Wellington in Simpkin de Wesselow Landscape Painter in Van Diemen's Land (and grasped by art archivist Anita Hansen) has it that “A mountain within sight of a city is not an anonymous object ... but an entity, alone, and above all, permanent, recognised by succeeding generations of people who live within sight of it. For them, it assumes a personality, a presence; they come to expect that a painting of such a well-known and much-loved mountain will have at least some of the quality of portraiture.”
MOUNTAIN PHOTOGRAPHY
“The mountain is among the most photographed places in Australia.”
— Gwenda Sheridan
Famous early photographers who published mountain photographs are the Anson brothers, J W Beattie, Stephen Spurling II and III, and later Frank Hurley. Other pre-1900 photographers include James Matheison Sharp, Charles Woolley, Alfred Winter, Thomas Nevin, and Charles Rudd. The Grist collection of historic photographs alone contains around a thousand separate images. The Mountain is the subject of a series of photographs by the respected photographer, Geoffrey Lea. And the art photographer David Stevens.
In the early 20th century, when postcards and newspaper photos became more numerous, many more photographers worked on the mountain, recognising its inherent beauty and value to both locals and visitors. These included both amateurs and professionals, and include: Ash Bester, H. Baily, J. J. N. Barnett, J. C. Breaden, G. M. Breaden, C. Gruncell, Dowie, W. Fellowes, W. Hale, H. J. King, Sears Photographic Studio, C. A. Shadwick, Harry Dart, R. C. Harvey, W. H. Cooper, A. Prosting, N. H. Propsting, H. J. Hellessey, H. S. Hurst, P. M. Koonin, Latham, W. Little, A. Mather & Co., McWilliams, McVilly and Little, Oldham, Rose Series, C. Southey, Trowbridge Bros., H. J. Turner, Underwood, Valentine Co., E. Verrell, J. Walch & Sons, W. Williamson, York, and H. T. Waterworth.
“This place is a ripping show …”
From the earliest beginning of the era of postcards, the Mountain has proved to be the most popular of all Tasmanian photographic subjects. The Grist collection alone holds around 800 different kunanyi/Mount Wellington cards, a sample of which are shown. Every photographer of note took photos of The Mountain. The cards were sent to both mainland and overseas addresses and helped to create an enthusiastic tourist market to the Mountain in the early 20th century.
More recently, a raft of professional and amateur modern photographers are following in their footsteps.
Mount Wellington has also featured as key locations for two recent movies: Manganninie (1979) and Devil's Hill (1991).
A new map of the aesthetic landscape
ENSHRINE commissioned Bruce Chetwyn to map a new aesthetic beauty boundary based on plotting into a GIS topographic skeleton the landform depicted in one of the iconic images of the mountain’s landscape: John Glover’s 1838 masterpiece Mount Wellington from Kangaroo Point.
John Glover’s 1838 masterpiece Mount Wellington
This scene has also been painted by Lycett Brierly, Prout, Forrest, Simpkinson de Wesselow, Henry Grant Lloyd, von Guerard, Piguenit, Tom Roberts and many other landscape painters.
Glover Overlay Aesthetic beauty depicted upon the visible landscape in Glover’s landscape
Glover Area The areas of Hobart (in red) visible in Glover’s painting
HERITAGE VALUES
The prime cultural value of the aesthetic landscapes is its aesthetic value, but the artworks themselves have historical and social value too.
HERITAGE ASSESSMENTS
“Aesthetics is a vital, major element of the historic landscape significance of Mount Wellington.”
— Gwenda Sheridan, The Historic Landscape Values of Mount Wellington, Hobart – An evolution across time, place and space 2010 page 8–9 [abridged]
Though now compromised, the mountain’s aesthetic qualities—admired for centuries, probably millennia—remain much as they ever were, allowing us to step back in time.
At the heart of the management plan in the opening list of values and qualities for which the Park is protected: ‘The considerable aesthetic value of the Park based on both the scale and grandeur of its natural setting, and the texture, colour and character of its component parts.’—WPMP page 13.
In the management plan’s Statement of Significance, under the Inherent Value topic Beauty, Landscape and Sense of Place on page 17 the characteristics of its aesthetic are sketched: ‘The geology, striking landform, cultural history, running waters and diverse vegetation, and temporal changes of lighting, climate and atmospheric effects all contribute to the Park’s outstanding aesthetic characteristics.’
Another assessment is in McConnell and Handsjuk’s Summit Area Heritage Assessment report itself page 54 which commences with the observation that: ‘The Mountain clearly has major aesthetic value, and has had aesthetic value since the colonial settlement of Hobart.’
Anne McConnell’s Pinnacle Development Plan states that ‘The aesthetic value of the Mountain is highly significant. The aesthetic value of the area contributes to its highly significant social value, which manifests in an extreme public sensitivity to development in the area.” McConnell reemphasised this assessment in the management recommendations of her 2010 Summit Area Heritage Assessment report to the WPMT on page v: ‘That the summit area be recognised as an area of high cultural significance, primarily for its landscape (aesthetic) … values...’
Sheridan concluded that the mountain’s aesthetic character is its most important asset.
HERITAGE RECOGNITION
The 2002 Listing of the Wellington Range area on the Register of the National Estate was based partially on its significance to art history and aesthetic appreciation.
ENSHRINE considers the aesthetic beauty exhibited in quality, diversity and historicity exceeds that of the Blue Mountains and The Glasshouse Mountains — both Australian Heritage Places.
“When we stand upon the pinnacle of the mountain, at the summit of our city, we also stand at the trough of our understanding of our city, at the bottom of our inability to accept, celebrate, and make better this place in which we live.”