Letters: Painting's not the only art, Sir Denis
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.Painting's not the only art, Sir Denis
Sir: There was much to be thankful for when Sir Denis Mahon's generous bequest was announced ("A pounds 25m art gift to the nation ...with strings attached", 3 December). Not only will it transform the representation of Italian Baroque painting in our public collections, it will also embarrass the Government due to his stipulation that paintings must be withdrawn if museums are underfunded or sell works from their permanent collections.
But now that more details have emerged, the bequest gives cause for concern. Sir Denis's terms seem unacceptable - or at least, they ought not be acceptable to the National Art Collections Fund, which will own the paintings and ensure that his wishes are respected.
According to this month's Art Newspaper, the NACF will have to withdraw pictures from any institution which sold any painting from its permanent collection: "Sir Denis's condition refers only to the sale of paintings." Indeed, the donor proudly announced on the Radio 4 Today programme that he was a "paintings man" - as though this were a mark of distinction.
As it stands, if the National Gallery of Scotland or the Ashmolean were to deaccession their Bernini sculptures or Poussin drawings, the NACF would not automatically be obliged to withdraw the Mahon pictures they are receiving, whereas if they deaccessioned their Poussin paintings, it would.
As a charitable trust that acquires art in all media (recent acquisitions range from the Becket casket and a Chippendale writing desk to Canova's Three Graces and a video installation by Bill Viola) the NACF should not endorse a bequest that sanctions a hierarchy of art forms, with painting pre-eminent.
Its chairman, Sir Nicholas Goodison (a distinguished scholar of English furniture in general and barometers in particular), should ask Sir Denis to think again. It would be wrong if a bequest intended to draw attention to the philistinism of the British government should be marred by a philistinism of its own.
JAMES HALL
London SW11
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments