Letter: Artistic amendment

Dr Nigel Vaux Halliday
Friday 26 September 1997 23:02 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Sir: I notice that where the portrait of Myra Hindley has been removed from the Royal Academy's "Sensation" exhibition, there is now a sign explaining that the work "has been defaced by vandals".

The RA's own Norman Rosenthal writes in the exhibition catalogue that "It has always been the job of artists to conquer territory that hitherto has been taboo". Would it not be more accurate, therefore, for the RA to explain that the Hindley portrait has been "amended" by a number of conceptual artists who have dared to conquer the RA's taboo about the moral freedom of art?

Dr NIGEL VAUX HALLIDAY

Liss, Hampshire

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in