On 6 April 1955 The Australian Women’s Weekly announced that it was establishing ‘the richest art prize in the Commonwealth and one of the biggest portrait prizes in the world’. Over the next four years the magazine would award £8,500 in prize money, and the prize would become a popular and prestigious event in the Australian visual arts community. A selection of winning and shortlisted entries travelled to all the major state art galleries, enjoying large attendances and positive reviews. The Weekly’s portrait prize was conceived and positioned as a clear alternative to established art prizes of the time, specifically the Archibald Prize, and the magazine promoted its initiative proudly and extensively across its well-read pages. Yet less than four years later, the magazine announced that it was unexpectedly discontinuing this lucrative prize, citing disagreements with state art institutions, specifically with the National Gallery of Victoria. Given its short-lived nature, The Weekly’s art prize has largely disappeared from many Australian art historical accounts. However, this prize was not a oneoff, opportunistic endeavour; it was part of The Weekly’s longstanding commitment to reporting on, supporting and engaging with contemporary artists and institutions of its day – an element of the magazine’s coverage that has also been neglected in Australian art and social histories. My article presents a brief history of the magazine’s prize as an endeavour that self-consciously differentiated itself from similar art prizes of the time in order to position The Weekly as an active supporter of artists. I will explore the context around its establishment, the nature of its structure and breakdown of participating artists, and the circumstances surrounding its cancellation. While the prize was not exclusively open to women, it was an early and unique example of providing female-focused opportunities for the participation and representation of women in the visual arts; its untimely demise can therefore be seen as something of a lost opportunity. The Weekly’s prize represents a fascinating historical precursor, an early example in the ‘wave’ of art and literary prizes that were established from the 1950s onwards. Its brief history crystallises many of the ongoing challenges faced by women artists when working within established institutional systems dominated by implicit (and

中文翻译：

---

澳大利亚妇女周刊艺术奖简史，1955-1959

1955 年 4 月 6 日，《澳大利亚妇女周刊》宣布它正在设立“英联邦最富有的艺术奖和世界上最大的肖像奖之一”。在接下来的四年里，该杂志将颁发 8,500 英镑的奖金，该奖项将成为澳大利亚视觉艺术界的一项流行和享有盛誉的活动。精选的获奖和入围作品前往所有主要的国家艺术画廊，参加人数众多并获得积极评价。《周刊》的肖像奖被设想和定位为当时公认的艺术奖项的明确替代品，特别是阿奇博尔德奖，该杂志在其广为人知的页面上自豪地广泛宣传其倡议。然而不到四年后，该杂志宣布意外停止这个利润丰厚的奖项，引用与国家艺术机构的分歧，特别是与维多利亚国家美术馆的分歧。鉴于其短暂的性质，《周刊》的艺术奖基本上从许多澳大利亚艺术史的记载中消失了。然而，这个奖项并不是一次性的、机会主义的努力；这是《周刊》长期致力于报道、支持和接触当代艺术家和机构的一部分——该杂志报道的一个元素在澳大利亚艺术和社会历史中也被忽视了。我的文章简要介绍了该杂志的奖项历史，这是一项有意识地将自己与当时类似的艺术奖项区分开来的努力，以便将《周刊》定位为艺术家的积极支持者。我将探讨其成立的背景，其结构的性质和参与艺术家的分解，以及其取消的情况。虽然该奖项并非只对女性开放，但它是为女性参与和代表视觉艺术提供以女性为中心的机会的一个早期和独特的例子；因此，它的过早消亡可被视为某种失去的机会。《周刊》奖代表了一个引人入胜的历史先驱，是 1950 年代以来设立的艺术和文学奖“浪潮”中的一个早期例子。它的简短历史清晰地体现了女性艺术家在由隐性（和 虽然该奖项并非只对女性开放，但它是为女性参与和代表视觉艺术提供以女性为中心的机会的一个早期和独特的例子；因此，它的过早消亡可被视为某种失去的机会。《周刊》奖代表了一个引人入胜的历史先驱，是 1950 年代以来设立的艺术和文学奖“浪潮”中的一个早期例子。它的简短历史清晰地体现了女性艺术家在由隐性（和 虽然该奖项并非只对女性开放，但它是为女性参与和代表视觉艺术提供以女性为中心的机会的一个早期和独特的例子；因此，它的过早消亡可以被看作是一种失去的机会。《周刊》奖代表了一个引人入胜的历史先驱，是 1950 年代以来设立的艺术和文学奖“浪潮”中的一个早期例子。它的简短历史清晰地体现了女性艺术家在由隐性（和 《周刊》奖代表了一个引人入胜的历史先驱，是 1950 年代以来设立的艺术和文学奖“浪潮”中的一个早期例子。它的简短历史体现了女性艺术家在由隐性（和 《周刊》奖代表了一个引人入胜的历史先驱，是 1950 年代以来设立的艺术和文学奖“浪潮”中的一个早期例子。它的简短历史清晰地体现了女性艺术家在由隐性（和