Page 51 - Studio International - July August 1971

administration, that, although the Trustees may responsively and rapidly, a considerable degree thing occurs when an outside selector is
not, indeed cannot because of limited finances, of delegation is normal. The Trustees decide the commissioned to make an exhibition.
acquire all works recommended to them, they artist or theme, but the selection, design, etc., are Those who are fortunate enough to work
make no acquisition against the wishes of the largely left to the Director and staff (with or closely with artists gain the greatest insight. My
Director. without outside selectors). The Trustees would colleague, Michael Compton, who has been
Success and failures alike are therefore due to be approached if the additional weight of largely responsible for carrying through the
the judgement of the Trustees, Director and persuasion that they can bring to bear is needed, programme of exhibitions mounted by the Tate
staff (and, in the widest matters, of the if some major change of plan were to be mooted, since 1969, has spoken of the immense value of
Government). Failures cannot be attributed to or if some especially controversial decision was the experience gained by him in working with
the system except to the extent that, particularly to be made. Clearly the Trustees must be Robert Morris on his show and of the public
where staffing and large sums of money are informed and consulted because they are reaction to it—both experiences which extended
concerned, the notion of public responsibility ultimately responsible. his view of what may be involved in the
and the comparatively large number of people Involvement with living artists does not affect presentation of and response to a work of art,
involved outside the gallery means that decision- these relationships except that the needs and most of which is normally almost invisible and
making is a comparatively slow matter. wishes of the artist are an additional factor which incommunicable. The exhibition had to be
In the specific case of exhibitons, where must be taken into account and this requires a dismantled simply because most of the structures
decisions may be complex but need to be made greater degree of flexibility. Exactly the same had not been sufficiently substantially made to

withstand the hard wear imposed on them by
visitors. The only loss was that the exhibition
was available to visitors for a comparatively
short time and there were a small number of
fortunately slight injuries to participants. In
dismantling the first show we gained a second
exhibition which, though more conventional in
form was, I believe, very moving in its own right.
The shortcomings and difficulties which we
experienced with this particular exhibition have
provided valuable experience and insight into
the mounting of exhibitions which involve
participation or the in-place construction of the
exhibits.
I see no effect on the character of our future
dealing with living artists. This effect will
necessarily be produced by the changing forms
of art. That is, the Gallery must adapt its
methods, techniques and ways of dealing with
the artist to the demands that the art raises, so
long as it remains compatible in some degree
with the purpose for which the Gallery exists.
Cartoon by Garland in The Daily Telegraph,
25 May, 1971
Courtesy The Daily Telegraph, London
2 & 3 Robert Morris installations at the Tate Gallery,
London
Courtesy Tate Gallery, London

39