Lot's Wife Edition 2 2016

CULTURE
What a tragedy
would loom upon
Melbourne if the
theatre turns to
ash... another
loss of culture
in the name of
predictable, safe,
savvy corporate
enterprise.
century, the premises would gain a whole series of names
and identities. In 1973, as the world went through a cultural
revolution, the musical Hair was performed and the cinema
was again renamed ‘The Palace’. In 1987, the Palace flourished
in a golden age when the site was converted into a
nightclub, opened then by Molly Meldrum. It was, for twenty
years, a successful music venue.
So, is it only bricks and mortar then? This is the
opinion of Jinshan Investments, who in 2012 purchased
the premises for $11.2 million, with grand plans of turning
the theatre into a 30-storey, 5-star hotel. However,
these dreams were short lived as the now former planning
Minister Matthey Guy denied the plans over an eighteen
month battle. Jinshan conceded to build a seven-storey
hotel.
After the plans were announced to the public, the
National Trust and Melbourne City council, along with ‘Save
the Palace’, began rallying to prevent the building’s destruction.
Jinshan began work on the theatre. The Imperial
French inspired ceilings were plastered over, the amphitheatre
slowly dismantled and the beautiful roman-inspired
marble staircase jack-hammered, its remains found on a garbage
tip out the front of the worksite. A mutilation indeed.
In their ruthless conduct, the corporate giant has ignored
the wishes of the public, the historical significance of the
site, and the overall integrity of the premises.
Now Jinshan argues the Palace has no heritage value
and thus can be demolished.
However, the National Trust and Melbourne City
Council rightly claim that the building is something far
greater than a material object, only valued by aesthetic
qualities. They argue the Palace’s worth lies in its historical
and social significance.
Is this enough? Every building carries meaning: a past,
present and future. The Palace is one that should withstand
the years. Every stage show, theatrical triumph and flop,
films, spilt drinks, missing props, dancing, and – above all,
every person entertained and performer in their element.
What a tragedy would loom upon Melbourne if the theatre
turns to ash, like the Pram Factory and Eastern Arcade; another
loss of culture in the name of predictable, safe, savvy
corporate enterprise. To date, the ‘Save the Palace’ Facebook
page has over 37,000 likes supporting the theatre’s existence.
Evidently, the public want the building to remain. If
Jinshan is successful, their plan is to leave only the face of
the Palace mounted upon the entrance of the hotel. A shadow
of its former, glorious self.
In May 2015, the initial VCAT hearing occurred.
However, a judgement was not made as Helen Gibson, a
member of the Tribunal, owned a National Trust membership.
The case was re-heard with a different panel, in the
interest of justice and avoiding potential bias. Thus, the trial
was pushed back another six months to the final week of
February with the Palace crumbling, unloved, dejected and
silent after so many years of life.
Both sides have spoken. A decision should be handed
down over the next few weeks. So, what happens if Jinshan
loses? If the Palace remains, gutted of its interior, what
will the premises’ future be? There is no use if the ‘For Sale’
sign is erected on a part-demolished building site. However,
there are prospective buyers – thus, options to secure the
theatre’s safe journey through the next century.
The State Government could purchase the premises,
as they did in the 1970s with a fifty precent share in the
Regent Theatre, as premier Dick Hamer made a heroic move
to save the theatre. However, the State Government, in
2013, declared they would not purchase the site. So, another
alternative: the British based, Mint Group, who successfully
guided Camden Palace Theatre in London through a
2004 re-opening as a live music venue named KOKO, have
expressed interest in buying the Palace and performing a
similar renovation.
Thus, if Melbourne City Council and National Trust
are victorious from the secondary hearing, there is a potential
resurrection for the Palace. From the darkness, may rise
a new beginning, one to inspire the next generation of performers.
Indeed, the damage caused by Jinshan investments
could be repaired by a minute restoration argued by heritage
expert, Anna Foley at the hearing. Therefore, if VCAT rules
in favour of the Melbourne City Council, and National trust,
there is a bright future for the Palace.
Now, all we can do is wait. Have faith in the justice
system, that the people’s voices will be heard.
Or else, should Jinshan succeed, and demolish the
heart of the Palace, the premises will become merely another
commercial building, its uniqueness lost, the final theatre
on Bourke St all but ash, resulting in the death of an icon.
46 | Lot’s Wife