Sunday Feature

[Belgrove]

A potentially interesting programme at 6.45pm today on the changing remit of Tate Modern ‘to decolonise and to deal with its patriarchal past’. Prior to this envisioned change, I’ve noticed a decline in the quality of the curating of the shows that the gallery mounts, and in the content of the catalogues it publishes to accompany them.

[Bella Kemp]

Chopping onions in the kitchen on Sunday evening I heard the usual guff from some smug academic deriding the 'canon' . According to him, those who love those works that, over time, have stayed the course and offered much joy and hope to millions are in fact delighting in the fact that many are excluded from this and we take some kind of bitter pleasure in a game of one-upmanship. Perhaps I did not hear the fellow fairly over the onion sizzle, but there has been so much of this lately I turned to Classic FM. Having said that, I am all in favour of widening the canon (whatever that might be, by the way) to include works that are non-European in origin. Widen it, expand it, but don't kick the foundations.

[Constantbee]

Chopping onions in the kitchen on Sunday evening I heard the usual guff from some smug academic deriding the 'canon' . According to him, those who love those works that, over time, have stayed the course and offered much joy and hope to millions are in fact delighting in the fact that many are excluded from this and we take some kind of bitter pleasure in a game of one-upmanship. Perhaps I did not hear the fellow fairly over the onion sizzle, but there has been so much of this lately I turned to Classic FM. Having said that, I am all in favour of widening the canon (whatever that might be, by the way) to include works that are non-European in origin. Widen it, expand it, but don't kick the foundations.

Let's hope your only tears were from the onions That's typically where I usually listen to R3, too. Acoustics can sometime be good in kitchens. Not so many soft furnishings to dampen the sound waves ...

[Ein Heldenleben]

Chopping onions in the kitchen on Sunday evening I heard the usual guff from some smug academic deriding the 'canon' . According to him, those who love those works that, over time, have stayed the course and offered much joy and hope to millions are in fact delighting in the fact that many are excluded from this and we take some kind of bitter pleasure in a game of one-upmanship. Perhaps I did not hear the fellow fairly over the onion sizzle, but there has been so much of this lately I turned to Classic FM. Having said that, I am all in favour of widening the canon (whatever that might be, by the way) to include works that are non-European in origin. Widen it, expand it, but don't kick the foundations.

Where I struggled with this programme was in the notion that Tate Modern somehow enshrined the ‘Canon’ - surely its too early to say what the Modern canon really is. Already Dali is falling out of fashion . Even Picasso is being criticised for the artistic equivalent of poor quality control. Some of the video installations already seem a bit 90’s. It also skated over the “ Tate “ problem a bit . If they really feel that troubled perhaps they should sell a few works and sponsor some underprivileged kids...

[Belgrove]

I feel sorry for the director in having to think upon these issues and respond to what are, presumably, government pressures in order to justify their grant. The programme seemed to concentrate on Tate Modern.

A while back I attended a session at Tate Britain, where the opinions of members was being sought on a proposed rehang of the permanent collection of the gallery. Tate Britain evidently sees itself as playing second fiddle to Tate Modern and was seeking ways for freshening and raising its profile. Apparently rehangs happen every 10-15 years, but a more radical approach was being proposed than had been done hitherto through grouping the collection according to historical and sociological themes rather than art movements. These were inevitably the themes current at that time (slavery, racial issues, social inequality, the environment...). Some sort of consensus emerged from the vox pop that these topics would be better explored and served by individual thematic exhibitions rather than a grouping of the entire permanent collection, which would then be fixed for a decade or more, during which those themes may wane in relevance or perceived importance. I know not what has become of the idea, but wonder if this thematic rehanging is also being considered at Tate Modern, and that the programme gave a hint as to what may emerge.

[Serial_Apologist]

I feel sorry for the director in having to think upon these issues and respond to what are, presumably, government pressures in order to justify their grant. The programme seemed to concentrate on Tate Modern.

A while back I attended a session at Tate Britain, where the opinions of members was being sought on a proposed rehang of the permanent collection of the gallery. Tate Britain evidently sees itself as playing second fiddle to Tate Modern and was seeking ways for freshening and raising its profile. Apparently rehangs happen every 10-15 years, but a more radical approach was being proposed than had been done hitherto through grouping the collection according to historical and sociological themes rather than art movements. These were inevitably the themes current at that time (slavery, racial issues, social inequality, the environment...). Some sort of consensus emerged from the vox pop that these topics would be better explored and served by individual thematic exhibitions rather than a grouping of the entire permanent collection, which would then be fixed for a decade or more, during which those themes may wane in relevance or perceived importance. I know not what has become of the idea, but wonder if this thematic rehanging is also being considered at Tate Modern, and that the programme gave a hint as to what may emerge.

If that is so, it would be more in line with Tate Britain's decision from the start to display thematically rather than transhistorically; ie to have depictions of dreams placed in close proximity, even if created centuries apart. A serious mistake, in my view.