No, we shouldn’t mourn the axing of Leunig — it’s time to let go of toxic nostalgia

A Storied Career Marked by Contradictions

Michael Leunig’s career spanned more than five decades, during which he became a defining voice in Australian political and social commentary. His cartoons, often characterized by a blend of whimsy and sharp social critique, resonated with multiple generations. Many Australians grew up with his work, finding comfort and insight in his unique perspective.

However, Leunig’s work has also sparked significant controversy. One notable example is his 1995 cartoon “Thoughts of a baby lying in a child care centre,” which elicited strong reactions for its portrayal of working mothers. The cartoon suggested a sense of guilt and failure experienced by children in childcare, a perspective that many parents, especially working mothers, found offensive and out of touch with modern realities.

This tension highlights a broader contradiction in Leunig’s work: while he championed individualism and anti-capitalist ideas in his early career, his later work often reflected a resistance to evolving social norms, particularly those related to gender roles and minority rights.

The Shadow of Toxic Nostalgia

Leunig’s departure invites reflection on the cultural nostalgia that surrounds his work. For many, his cartoons evoke a sense of longing for the 1970s—a period often romanticized as a time of clear social roles and simpler values. This nostalgia, however, can obscure the exclusionary and sometimes regressive attitudes embedded in that era.

Critics argue that Leunig’s later cartoons reveal a retreat into what has been described as a “reactionary politics of male victimhood.” For instance, a 2017 cartoon depicting a solitary figure facing an LGBTQ+ crowd was interpreted as an expression of personal alienation that failed to acknowledge the broader context of social privilege and systemic inequality.

Such work underscores a disconnect between Leunig’s perspective and contemporary social movements. It reflects a resistance to change and an inability to fully engage with the experiences of marginalized groups, which challenges the notion of his work as universally inclusive or progressive.

Balancing Appreciation and Critique

It is important to recognize that many Australians continue to appreciate Leunig’s cartoons for their artistic merit and cultural significance. His ability to blend humor, poetry, and political commentary has left an indelible mark on the nation’s cultural landscape.

At the same time, uncritical admiration risks perpetuating outdated values and ignoring the harm caused by some of his more controversial views. The debate surrounding his departure from The Age reflects a broader societal reckoning with the legacies of influential figures whose work spans vastly different social contexts.

This balance calls for a nuanced understanding that honors Leunig’s contributions while also acknowledging the limitations and problematic aspects of his later work. It encourages a critical engagement that neither dismisses his influence nor overlooks the need for progress.

The Cultural Shift Beyond Leunig’s Era

Leunig’s firing by Nine and the end of his regular presence in The Age symbolize a cultural shift. The media landscape and public discourse have evolved, embracing diverse voices and perspectives that challenge traditional power structures.

This transition reflects a broader societal movement away from the masculinist larrikinism and rigid social roles that characterized much of Leunig’s era. It signals an openness to new narratives that prioritize inclusivity, equity, and social justice.

Rather than mourning the loss of Leunig’s platform, this moment can be seen as an opportunity to celebrate the progress made and to support emerging voices that reflect the complexities of contemporary Australian society.

Navigating Public Mourning and Legacy

Mourning is a deeply personal and often involuntary process, shaped by individual experiences and emotional resonance. While some may feel a genuine sense of loss at Leunig’s departure, it is neither possible nor appropriate to mandate collective mourning.

Public rituals of mourning typically accompany the passing of individuals who have had a profound impact on society, often in the context of death. Leunig’s firing, while significant, does not equate to such a loss, and the language of mourning may overstate the nature of this transition.

Instead, the focus might better rest on critically assessing his legacy—celebrating his artistic achievements while confronting the contentious elements of his work. This approach fosters a mature cultural conversation that respects history without becoming trapped in nostalgia.

What this means

Michael Leunig’s departure from The Age closes a significant chapter in Australian cultural history. His cartoons, once celebrated for their charm and insight, have increasingly revealed tensions with evolving social values. While his artistic legacy remains influential, it is essential to move beyond a nostalgic attachment to a bygone era that often excluded or marginalized others. Embracing this transition allows Australian society to honor Leunig’s contributions without being constrained by the limitations of his worldview. Ultimately, the focus should be on fostering a media landscape that reflects the diversity and complexity of contemporary Australia, welcoming new voices and perspectives that challenge old paradigms.