Review by Anthony Frater (Arts Wednesday)

Michael Zavros: Alex with his tefflin in the sea.

On the 30th of July 2026 the Art Gallery of New South Wales announced the winner of its annual People’s Choice award as part of this year’s Archibald Prize. The winner is a painting by Michael Zavros called, Alex with his tefflin in the sea. The physical likeness between artist and subject is eerily uncanny. In fact Zavros recently did a DNA test and found he has Ashkenazi Jewish heritage.

Nonetheless, the subject of the painting, Alex Ryvchin, is the co-Chief Executive Officer of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry. According to their website, the ECAJ “is the peak body of the Australian Jewish community, representing and advocating for the (Jewish) community to government, in the community, and around the world.” They advocate on behalf of community interests, combat antisemitism, and speak publicly on social and security issues affecting Australian Jews.

The work is a realistic depiction of Alex Ryvchin, large scale, standing in profile looking back at the viewer, he has a somewhat haunted look in his eyes and a deeply furrowed brow, with his tefillin (shel yad) tied to his non dominant arm in what could perhaps be described as a blasphemous very Dead Sea like scene (though it very obviously isn’t the Dead Sea), for like a modern day Jesus Christ, son of God, he seemingly walks on water.

The work is undeniably provocative for a number of reasons: first, apart from the fact that it actually won the prize, one also considers recent events here at home and in the Middle East and Ryvchin’s outspoken advocacy for what he believes in, or in some cases more importantly what he is not outspoken about, and the extreme ideologies he adheres to. The work unashamedly does not take into consideration those who might be offended by it, and let’s face it, it’s art so why should it? It would not be the first time offence has been taken by a work of art and it’s important to defend the rights of anyone who might inadvertently – or in this case is it deliberate – hurt, harm or offend the feelings of others. Isn’t that democracy, isn’t that free speech? Our feelings can get hurt every day, many times a day, human beings are passionate beings and express themselves in ways that others might not like, or in ways that hurt feelings.

Having said that, offence, harm or hurt feelings are purely subjective experiences. What some might be – let’s use modern vernacular – triggered by, others might think, oh-dear-ho-hum let’s move on – but this is a painting that has triggered many: those who are offended by it and those who were prepared to vote for it – many times over.

The work is not anything remarkable artistically. Ryvchin has said he is proud of it. This is a political work designed to perhaps offend and attract controversy, but equally to find adoration. Throughout the history of art there have been many paintings that operate in similar ways: Eugene Delacroix’s, Liberty Leading the People, or, Francisco Goya’s The Third of May 1808, or, Diego Velazquez’s Las Meninas. In this storied work Zavros has attracted both adoration and controversy, the latter in terms of potential hurt, harm and offence. Art in its many guises and forms has never become anything by staying safe, and, as Marcel Duchamp once said, art is what the viewer says it is, it’s the viewer who completes the work, or, Andy Warhol who said, art is what the artist can get away with.

The gallery boasts that this years People’s Choice prize had a record-breaking number of voter entries, given this year’s total visits was way down on previous years it’s probably fair to deduce that the galleries voting system may have been belligerently manipulated: it is not difficult for one person to register several votes and if feelings are strong enough and passions are high it is a grave and erroneous risk.