Brief reflection on Susan McCulloch's preface

Firstly, I cannot seem to find the book to which this preface belongs- poor form from the uploader.
Secondly, though this is a short passage, it has some interesting points. It speaks very generally about the revitalisation of the Indigenous art 'movement', and defines the use if new materials and exploration by urban artists as good thing, which it is. Or is it? This particular contention seems to ebb and flow into the consciousness of artistic debate daily, which is very confusing to the lay person struggling, for example, to grasp the significance of anscetral time in traditional indigenous art. Where McCulloch seems to be vibrantly optimistic about the exploration of urban artists bringing new mediums and techniques to their work, Felicity Fenner suggests controversy existed (though she doesn't specify from where) when in 1981

Bernice Murphy included Aboriginal work in the inaugural Perspecta survey exhibition of contemporary Australian art[1], which suggests (although we are well past 1981), that there are some in the indigenous community that don't share McCulloch's high regard for urban artistic exploration. 
So where does this leave Indigenous art's ability to be a 'movement' in a socially progressive sense? Nowhere, it seems. Unless a position is clarified from the indigenous 'factions', the difference of opinion will be a hindrance to their collective goals going forward.

---

[1] Fenner, Felicity. "Thinking Beyond Abstraction." Contemporary Visual Art + Culture Broadsheet 38, no. 2 (2009).