When we talk about the revitalization of Aboriginal art being the success story of modern Australian art, I don't even know how to think about it - Does this mean that Indigenous art is simply more abundant in the contemporary gallery? Or that it is flourishing more so that in Indigenous art's history? Was Aboriginal art ever lost?

Indigenous art has only been brought to the contemporary gallery for the past 30 years, but it is one of the the most ancient art forms on the planet. Does the fact that Indigenous art only recently came to the present day gallery mean that it wasn't appreciated by the Western culture before?

Aboriginal art sells three times as much as non-Aboriginal Australian art every year, yet - do the artists themselves see any of the benefit from the sales of the work? Are their communities really benefiting? Or are the artists simply being ripped off? Indigenous art has helped put Australian art on the market - Is the Westernized culture of Australia using Indigenous art as a platform to reach into the contemporary art world hubs like New York, Berlin and London?

Or, has Aboriginal art influenced modern Australian art made by non-Indigenous artists?

Perkins says modernity "erases the old with the new" and that Indigenous art is contradicting this idea - we are able to follow the path of Indigenous art from it's ancient origins through colonization and up until today. Traditional Aboriginal imagery and technique is still used in the contemporary work of Indigenous artists. Also, many Indigenous region's styles are melding together, keeping Aboriginal art ever-changing.