Page 56 - Studio International - April 1973

a very good picture by another 18th-century artist MB: But there's a slightly different situation with quality Turners of a particular kind there is. But the
was considered after the Stubbs. So I said, in the gifts. The trustees, who have the power to veto general feeling was that it would be greedy to try and
face of the Stubbs, this other painting isn't in the gifts, will often say almost the reverse of what they stop a very good Turner, because there are so many
same class ; but what governed the decision just as say over purchases : that if the director really thinks good Turners here. With this particular picture we
much was that, having committed so much money this is a worthwhile acquisition, and it's going to have just bought, however, I would have had no
towards the Stubbs, there was no longer that sort of cost no money, then although the trustees don't compunction about opposing export because,
money left to buy the other 18th-century picture. much like it they will accept it because the director firstly, it's historically very important, and secondly,
NR : I'm sure Richard will appreciate that there are is firmly for it. There are some things that just aren't it's the sort of picture that only makes sense with
factors other than pure assessment or taste which accepted even for free. But if the director's keen on a all the others. To have that in some museum in
control what one does, principally of course whether gift which the trustees are not enthusiastic about America, as the one Turner they'd got, would be
the Tate has funds available. That's of the greatest they will accept that— in the same way that if the absolutely ridiculous. Thirdly, it's a very good
importance, because we're only free to act if we act director is against a purchase, they will not buy it. picture in itself as well, but that is a case where we
within our budget. Once we go outside our budget RC: Do you distinguish consciously between build on our strength: The new Stubbs is the
then we are dependent on the government. You've purchases which fill an historical gap and purchases reverse : with Stubbs we have a weakness, and we
got to persuade the government, which is a damn you consider to be great works of art which must be bought it not just because it filled a gap in Stubbs
sight more difficult than persuading the trustees. bought whether they fill a gap or create a surplus ? but because it was an exceptionally good picture by
Ronald Alley: We find it terribly difficult to raise NR: I do in my own mind, because I think we are an historic British artist.
extra money from private sources, with the exception always likely to be torn between these two functions RC: But Stubbs is one of the great needs in the Tate,
of the Friends. of acquiring great works of art, and fulfilling the I think you'd all agree, and isn't there a danger here
NR : Yes. I'm not sure that we've done all we should didactic purposes of the collection. And these are that because you've just acquired a major work by
outside the Friends ; but I think it's a question of fairly clear to see. I think it would be folly only to go Stubbs, he will therefore hang fire again for a few
private approaches to private individuals. Because out and buy five-star masterpieces ; and on the other years and nothing more of his will be acquired ?
although we had a good year or two when we began hand one has also got to beware of over- MB: No, if you look at our Report, particularly in
the Friends, it was only by dint of people bullying emphasizing the need to have a fully representative conjunction with the previous Report, you will find
their chums in the City, and our first initiative there collection at the expense of everything else. And that we tend to buy in batches. One year we bought
simply gave out. There is no tradition of giving here again we're always conscious of trying to hold three Hogarths, not just one. In the last Report we
among the great companies, in fact they defend the balance between these two functions. bought a de Loutherbourg, and in this Report there's
themselves by saying that it's against their RA: I think we have to take into account that the one of his pictures on the front cover and another one
shareholders' interests, and they've opted out. So Tate is the onlymuseum in the British Isles that has inside.
that we are thrown back on the private individual, anything approaching a representative collection of MC: The same thing applies to Richard Hamilton,
who is sometimes discovered quite by chance. 20th-century art. And there is a strong case for for example, and Henry Moore, Barbara Hepworth
RC: If the members of the modern collection staff having a well-balanced collection in this country and Ben Nicholson in the 20th century. But so far as
are really enthusiastic about a work which they think where people can come and see examples of the purchasing policy is concerned, it does go to
the Tate ought to buy, and you are not, how is this Cubism and Futurism and the other movements— a some extent pro rata: that is to say, if you can
resolved ? Is there any general rule, or is it judged on stronger case, even, than would apply say in a possibly imagine such a thing, an artist twice as good
each particular case ? country like Holland, where it's much easier for as another artist tends to have twice as many
NR : As far as I'm concerned, it's judged on each people to pop over the border into Germany and pictures. But it tends to be the bequests and gifts
particular case. I've always tried to take the view where also there are other museums with collections which give us particular richness in one field or
that in order for me to be able to persuade the that complement one's own. Therefore we do have another. And we would not avoid them.
trustees, I must myself be convinced. And therefore this feeling of responsibility. NR : Yes, but I think Richard's posing of the problem
I listen very carefully to what the younger MC: This applies a fortiori to the British collection, is very exact; and also what Martin said about the
members of the staff say ; and in fact I think they have both Martin's aspect of it and the 20th-century acquisition of the Stubbs. One hopefully tries to do
argued with great effect. We have bought a number British collection, where there's a considerably both at once, and occasionally one can do that: you
of things which perhaps left to myself I would not greater element of filling in : any artist whose work— both acquire a great work, and happen to fill
have done. this sounds a nasty thing to say — goes beyond a something which is required in the general story.
RC: So you do find yourself swayed sometimes by certain imaginary threshold of quality one would go But I agree with you entirely in that I've always
the arguments put forward by the staff? for. Whereas in the case of foreign artists one has to taken the view that collections are great because
NR: Absolutely. It's a question of conviction. I may think also whether we have comparable works by an of their inequalities; and some of these have
be wrong, but it seems to me that as the director of an artist working in the same vein. In other words, happened by chance, like the Turner or Blake
institution, it's highly desirable that I myself should putting it at its most banal, to the extent to which the (which we've built on, so to speak) and some by
be convinced so that I can put the thing with my Gallery is a representative collection — both didactic part design, like Henry Moore and Barbara Hepworth
entire backing to the trustees. Now you may say and a source of reference—with foreign artists we and so on, and some like Rothko, where we've got a
that that is limited to my own shortcomings. And have to think more in terms of general trends, group of things.
that's perfectly true. movements, groupings and so on. Whereas with RA: Or say Giacometti, where we managed to get a
MB: But I think it's fair to say that occasionally you British artists, since we are the only collection of its whole group of works at a very advantageous price,
have said to me, over British things, 'I'm not very kind in the world, we think of individual artists : thanks to his generosity. I certainly would not take
convinced, but you are obviously so convinced of its what was this artist doing at this point of time ? the view that, having acquired these Rothkos and
worth that I will let you speak for it.' Although the Should this be an element of the collection ? these Giacomettis, we should stop there. I would be
director first states the case at the Board meeting, RC: But if anyone talks in casual terms about a all in favour of building on these strengths.
Norman will often do this and then say to one of us : museum, and they try to remember the collection RC: What is your relationship with the National
'have you anything to add ?' And he will occasionally which that museum contains, they talk about the Gallery, both in terms of acquiring major works by
say :'Martin has not convinced me as to the merits of marvellous holdings in this, or the fantastic group of old British masters which are perhaps paralleled in
this, but hear what he has to say.' Which is a sort of that. And this is the kind of thing I would have Trafalgar Square, and in terms of buying so-called
intermediate stage between saying :'no, I am not thought a rational acquisitions policy militates modern masterpieces which will one day have to
convinced I will not speak for it; and saying : 'yes, against; because it's an act almost of madness, hang there?
I am thoroughly convinced, and I will speak for it.' getting outstanding groups of one painter which NR : Both these queries have been subject to
NR : This is a fair point, because it shows the different unbalance the whole collection maybe but become dispute in the past. But under the present director
categories between those things which I have not a kind of glory. of the National Gallery we've lived very peaceably,
agreed to bring forward at all so that they don't come MC: I think we do do this : Turner is conspicuously because I discovered early on after his appointment
to the trustees; and those things which I've never over-represented, albeit not by purchase. that he had no intention of pursuing the acquisition
been entirely convinced about but which I'm willing NR : Collections are made by chance as well as by of work from the Tate, neither from the 20th century
to let have a run and see if we can persuade them. design. collection nor from the late 19th century, which had
And this is one lesson I've learnt from actually MB: But we have recently gone out and bought an been perhaps a feature under his predecessor. So
working with the trustees ; that it often happened in oil painting by Turner. This may seem somewhat that we knew we could go on in that field without a
the past that if one trustee was really enthusiastic surprising, and yet the one and only Turner painting sudden demand being made on us for another
about a work, others would say : 'well, it's not my we would ever buy is his first exhibited oil painting, batch of pictures for transfer to the National Gallery.
thing, I simply don't understand it, but if you think which has been on loan here for years and years. We Of course in the meantime our legal relationship with
so well of it I think we should have it.' And there's a were given the chance to buy it and we did so. A few them has changed, because in the past the National
degree of that kind of give and take on the staff side years ago we were criticized for not trying to stop Gallery trustees had absolute right of removal, in
as well. In other words, it's not a dictatorship. the export of The Dort, which is one of the highest fact of requisition, and this they did exercise on two
182