Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Saturday, 19th July 2008 Change Date

Free Monet Print with The Scotsman

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Why I gave £100m of art to the Scots



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date:
28 February 2008
THE art dealer Anthony d'Offay made a £100 million gift of artworks to the nation yesterday, telling The Scotsman it was "a small way of saying thank you". The deal will see 725 works, including those of Andy Warhol and Damien Hirst, displayed free in galleries across Scotland.
No act of generosity on this scale has been seen since the early 20th century. Mr d'Offay hopes his donation, which recalls bequests by Samuel Courtauld and Henry Tate, will inspire other young art-lovers.

Yesterday he revealed how, 45 years ago, as an Edinburgh University art student, he visited the National Galleries of Scotland daily and used the capital's exhibitions as his "textbook". It was at this time he bought his first artwork for about £50 instead of going on a summer holiday.

Over three decades, Mr d'Offay and his wife, Anne, have amassed a vast collection spanning the biggest names in modern art. He will receive the £26.5 million he originally paid for the collection, which is now valued at £125 million. It ranges from more than 200 Warhol works to Hirst, Ron Mueck's popular giant sculptures, and a sailing boat installation by Scottish artist Ian Hamilton Finlay.

That art, in 50 "rooms" of work by 25 artists, will, from next spring, be shown in Orkney, Inverness, Aberdeen, Glasgow and Edinburgh, as well as London and four other English locations. The National Galleries of Scotland estimates about 500,000 people will see the art next year.

Mr d'Offay said bringing art to the young was his motivation and in later years he had bought many of the works with a view of gifting them to the nation.

"It's about education," he said. "You have to think of art as a factory of ideas, as a way young people can grow up and be inspired.

"Outside London and Edinburgh, it is very difficult to see great contemporary art. I was born in Sheffield and brought up in Leicester and I was very conscious that what I could see in museums was 18th-century portraits, Egyptian mummies and stuffed animals.

"Art is important because it stimulates young people's creativity. If you see great art it makes you ask questions and if you ask questions it makes you seek answers. It's always been in my mind that this is something I wanted to do."

He added: "A lot of things were painful to part with, but the jewel for me is walking into a museum and seeing a school party there.

"I don't think the sums of money are the interesting thing about what happened. The idea of 50 rooms of art shared across the UK is the important thing."

The National Galleries of Scotland and the Tate Gallery in London have negotiated the deal for the collection, at about a fifth of its true value, with £10 million in grants from the Scottish and UK governments. In a unique arrangement, the two galleries will show and manage the "Artist Rooms".

The collector had followed his father to Edinburgh University, where he decided to study art. It was in the capital that he met his first wife. He once described walking round the city's galleries as "the defining experience" of his life.

He bought his first piece, by the Scottish artist Martin Boyce, in the city, at a Traverse Theatre exhibition in 1962, after the artist offered it at half price.

Speaking to The Scotsman yesterday as the announcement was made at the National Gallery of Modern Art in Edinburgh, the 68-year-old spoke of his deep attachment to the capital and its art scene. Edinburgh, he said "was a beautiful, romantic city, of a size you can feel belongs to you". He said that when he arrived in Scotland to study in the 1960s, it was the "first time I'd been in a great city".

He explained: "The National Galleries of Scotland is the kind of experience that defines your life. This is about trying to make something happen in a place where it will make a great difference to young people, their appreciation of themselves and their era. It will inform what they do with their lives and how they see the world."

Asked why only one Scottish artist, Hamilton Finlay, was in the collection, he was puzzled. "I never thought of artists as Scottish, or English, or American, I just thought of artists, whether they were excellent or not. There are lots of great Scottish artists."

Unlike most donors, Mr d'Offay has asked for his name not to be attached to the collection. He said he hopes his gift will set a precedent.

He added: "In a time when, for many people in this country, religion no longer fulfils the role it did 50-100 years ago, what you believe in becomes very important. Art and creativity become something you can believe in."

The National Galleries of Scotland and the Tate are to set up a £5 million endowment fund to keep the Artist Rooms as a living collection with work by new artists.

From spring next year, they will show in Edinburgh and at least four other Scots locations – the Aberdeen Art Gallery and Museums, Glasgow's museums, the Inverness Museum and Art Gallery, and the Pier Arts Centre in Orkney. Five English galleries and others in Northern Ireland and Wales will also benefit.

Mr d'Offay said it was a condition of his gift that the exhibitions would be free. He will act as an unpaid curator for five years.

Sir Nicholas Serota, director of the Tate, said the sale was "an extraordinary act of philanthropy", adding: "I don't know of anything equivalent anywhere else in the world. This represents most of Anthony's wealth."

John Leighton, director of the National Galleries in Edinburgh, said it far outstripped any previous donation in Scotland. "This is an absolutely incredible act of generosity."

Sir Brian Ivory, chairman of the Dean Gallery in Edinburgh, said: "The annual spending budget of the National Galleries is £1.25 million. In effect, it would have taken us more than 100 years to come close to purchasing a collection like this. Collections like this do not come up for sale and so what has happened today is truly extraordinary."

Linda Fabiani, the culture minister, hailed the move as a "once-in-a-generation event".

The art world was last night abuzz with the news, with many likening the gift to those of the philanthropists of the past. Henry Tate, the 19th-century industrialist, donated his collection to the nation and added enough money for a building dedicated to British art. Samuel Courtauld gave a magnificent collection of mainly French Impressionist and Post-Impressionist paintings to found the Courtauld Institute in 1932.

ALL TOGETHER – LEADING TALENTS OF ART WORLD

ANTHONY d'Offay's art collection, the future "Artist Rooms", was independently valued by Sotheby's and Christie's. A conservative value from their estimates is £125 million in today's art market. Some highlights:

• GILBERT AND GEORGE (b.1943 and 1942): Nine works including George the C*** and Gilbert the S*** (1970), a sculpture in which the maverick artists are smiling at the viewer with cut-out letters pinned to their chests.

• DAMIEN HIRST (b.1965): Five works from the British artist including a large early spot painting, the recent butterfly diptych Monument To The Living And The Dead (2006), and Away From The Flock (1995), which is a sheep in formaldehyde.

• JEFF KOONS (b.1955): The Tate has one work by the US artist and the donation adds a further 17. While Koons won a reputation for explicit photographs and paintings of his porn star wife, Ilona Staller, there are no "controversial works" in the collection, a National Galleries of Scotland spokeswoman said.

• RON MUECK (b.1958): Three sculptures from 2005 – Wild Man, Spooning Couple, and Mask III. Mueck came to prominence with his tiny hyper-realist sculpture of his father, Dead Dad, which was shown in the Sensation exhibition in 1997. The artist's Edinburgh show in 2006 was a huge popular hit.

• BILL VIOLA (b.1951): Two works by the American film and video artist from 2001 – Catherine's Room and Four Hands.

Catherine's Room presents scenes from the life of St Catherine across a sequence of five screens, while Four Hands concentrates on actions made by a pair of disembodied hands reminiscent of Indian mudras.

His videos have also included footage of a woman dying and another woman giving birth.

• ANDY WARHOL (1928-87): A total of 232 works spanning the pop artist's career, including 50 paintings, 32 photographs, 50 early drawings and watercolours and four drawings from 1974 to 1981.

Particular highlights include the multiple Skulls from 1976 and Camouflage of 1986, a central exhibit in last year's Warhol retrospective at the National Gallery of Scotland.

• DIANE ARBUS (1923-71): Nearly 70 photographs by the American Diane Arbus, known for her portraits of people on the fringes of society, including transvestites, dwarfs and prostitutes, were a recent addition to the d'Offay collection. Neither the NGS nor the Tate hold any works. .

• IAN HAMILTON FINLAY (1925-2006): Regarded as one of the greatest modern Scottish artists, is represented by his installation Sailing Dinghy includes a sailing boat, poem and wall texts.

• ROBERT MAPPLETHORPE (1946-89): Three rooms of probably the best collection in the world after the Guggenheim Museum, including a portrait of Patti Smith. An NGS spokeswoman again insisted works by the artist, notorious for his shocking photographs from the US gay scene, were not "controversial".

• JANNIS KOUNELLIS (b. 1936): Anthony d'Offay rates the Greek-born Kounellis as one of the greatest in his collection. His untitled work of 1969 includes sacks of lentils, rice, peas, corn, beans, potatoes and coffee.

&149 JOSEPH BEUYS (1921-86): Six rooms of 136 works by the artist and social activist, including 110 drawings and watercolours rated of "international importance".

The full article contains 1666 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 28 February 2008 1:25 AM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
 
1

truthsleuth,

28/02/2008 02:40:23
Good of him

How much tax benefit does he get from the gift?
2

Vinnie Viddey,

28/02/2008 03:28:44
#1 Nothing like looking for a cloud in the silver lining. Who cares what tax benefit he get's from this? Far better that this collection be available for public viewing.

Well done and Thankyou
3

Jim Baxter RIP,

Sai Kung, Hong Kong 28/02/2008 03:35:58
#2 Absolutely. #1 Get a life.
Fantastic donation which I am looking forward to seeing when I next come back to Scotland.
A wonderful gift to the people of Scotland. Thank you.
4

donald,

glasgow 28/02/2008 05:53:06
A welcome gift. Hope Mrs McConnell does not lose them, like she did with the Jacobite broadswords inscribed "Prosperity to Scotland and NO Union".
5

Aýrshire Scot™,

28/02/2008 06:27:47
Why is there a picture of Linda Fabiani looking in a mirror accompanying this story?
6

subrosa,

28/02/2008 06:52:37
Wonderful gesture and do hope they escape from the central belt so as others get the opportunity to view them.
7

Rulesbutnotrulers,

Federation, not separation 28/02/2008 06:57:15
Thanks, but no thanks. While there are plenty of living artists whose work has real merit, sadly few if any are included in this collection. The modern art mafia has been allowed to get a grip on our galleries to the detriment of works of genuine talent and soul.

Junk should be recycled not reviewed.

Scotland deserves better.
8

Dancer,

Edinburgh 28/02/2008 07:02:53
Have I read this wrong? 100m`s worth given to Scotland. Half or so goes to the Tate, when has that located to Scotland. 10m paid for the collection a fith of its value. Who did they pay if it was a gift to Scotland.
9

Citylocal Fife,

Citylocal Fife News 28/02/2008 07:22:16
What a brilliant gesture - what I am dismayed about is the begrudging attitude of some of the 'posters'.
10

Highlander53,

Aberdeen 28/02/2008 07:58:12
What a fantastic gift, I agree how cynical some people are.
I love modern art, but if you don't - don't go and see it. I don't like football but councils and government spend money on stadiums and the like because some people do. That's what makes the human race so interesting.
11

McMillar,

Fife 28/02/2008 07:58:29
What a marvellous gesture, thank you. I will certainly make a point of going along asap to enjoy.
12

Unimpressed one,

28/02/2008 08:07:54
How anyone with any artistic taste can say that what's on offer is 'worth' £100 million, needs a serious dose of artistic appreciation. Agree with you Rules that the majority is junk.
13

danielrober,

28/02/2008 08:09:49
Well done sir.
14

paulr,

edinburgh 28/02/2008 08:14:23
Well I am a philistine and proud of it, a dead sheep in formaldehyde? if thats "ART" then i can live without it.
15

Gothic Rose,

28/02/2008 08:58:10
14#paulr. Modern Art, as I see it, requires a degree of imaginative, speculative, political and symbolic imagination.Of which I`m sure you have.More importantly, it requires a certain, cynical sense of humor.You have it:)
16

Doh,

28/02/2008 09:44:10


He has put the non-doms to shame.
17

GrahamH,

Edinburgh 28/02/2008 09:49:12
#14,you have proved part of it's point, you can't live without it - by commenting it demonstrates it has got some part of your life.

#1 - Do the math - it's a great gesture!!!
18

Tweedmouth,

Coldstream 28/02/2008 09:51:19
Fifty years ago - not a single one of the so-called 'artists' listed here - witht he possible exception of Dianne Arbus and Ian Hamilton Findlay - would have been given gallery room. This man D'Offay was at the spearhead of the 'movement' which has spent the last 30 years selling the public garbage and calling it art. Cows in formaldehyde (Hirst), homosexuals with bullwhips protruding from their anus (Mapplethorpe), Gilbert and George - 'professional gays' specialising in outraging public taste with obscenity, cheap silkscreen prints (warhol) - ALL of it is simple iconoclasm - shock the establishment with pronography, paedophilia, obscentiy, celebrity-ism and kitsch (Koons). For thirty years they managed to do it and became fabulously rich on the back of it. However, as Mr Lincoln famously said - 'you can fool some of the people all of the time, all of the people some of the time, but you can't fool ALL of the people, ALL of the time". The era of art as obscenity, art as outrage, art as sexual perversity - is fast fading. In 50 years you won't see any of this rubbish in any gallery - except as an example of how a movement can fool the establishment. D'Offay is 'offloading' a load of rubbish for £25 million of public money - and the dumb establishment is buying it - just at the time when it is about to fade from fashion. Transient rubbish is transient. It won't stand the test of time. In 100 years you will still be able to go to the Scottish National Gallery and see the genius of Monet, the glory of El Greco, the majesty of Carravaggio. You wont find Jeff Koons or Damian Hirst there in 2100 AD.
19

ruface,

Glasgow 28/02/2008 10:00:24
mmmm, modern art -its there to make you think. so enjoy thinking, and chatting. But more importantly it gives one the opportunity to put ones tongue firmly in ones cheek - and spout mince about how joyously life affirming it is.

Lovely stuff...
20

Gothic Rose,

28/02/2008 10:08:25
19#:)))
21

dontsendimdaahn,

London 28/02/2008 10:25:17
Some rather ungrateful comments on here. Public money being used to buy an investment for a fraction of its value is not imprudent. The tourism this will generate will yield a profit for your country and if the work does inspire the young, perhaps some might put down a Buckfast and pick up a paintbrush and canvas.
22

Red Tower,

Dunoon 28/02/2008 11:21:11
As I haven't seen the collection I would not venture an assessment as to its importance. But there is something salutary in making a gift, no matter its worth. "What's in it for me?" is the clarion cry of today and we are all the meaner as a result of its prevalence.
23

tresleithfm,

Edinburgh 28/02/2008 11:25:08
Good for him like or loath it, it's better for the public to have the chance to see it and make up their own minds.
24

Sylvia in Regina,

Canada 28/02/2008 11:28:47
#18 Tweedmouth SPOT ON!!! My good gawd!!! I would hate to have school children seeing some of the stuff that was mentioned in this article!
25

Highland Mighty,

28/02/2008 11:29:31
But what if America demands the return of American art to American museums?
26

Laughing Cow,

Edinburgh 28/02/2008 11:57:20
Only in Scotland could this story be seen as a negative thing - what a bunch of whinging, dour moaners we are.
27

Saltireblue,

East of West Lothian: 28/02/2008 13:18:56
Only in Scotland would I read negative drivel about such a positive story.

The negativity started with # 1's ludicrous comments regarding tax breaks. Honestly, what is wrong with you people that you cannot see any benefit without an offsetting negative? Take a long hard look at yourselves in the mirror. You truly are pathetic.

Well done, Mr. d'Offay, and thank you!

28

Tweedmouth,

Coldstream 28/02/2008 13:20:14
Just to expand on the main issue at stake here. A painting or photograph has no INTRINSIC value - it is just marks on paper or canvas. The intrinsic value is merely the cost of the paint and the canvas - a few pounds. It only 'acquires' value when someone pays money for it - say £1000 and the next person in the chain then 'believes' it to be worth at least £1000. But this is nothing to do with art - it is merely market value. People like D'Offay have made millions by persuading people to 'believe' that a dead cow in a tank of formaldehyde is 'art' with a value of £ millions. Intrinsically, a dead cow in a tank of formaldehyde has zero value - you can't eat it or milk it. Consequently the 'value' of £x million is merely what some poor sucker 'believes' it is worth. The scam which D'Offay and his ilk have perpetrated on society - is to 'boost' the exhibits they have an interest in. Millionaires like Saatchi are persuaded to buy these dead sharks etc. for £100,000 - with the strategy that they can then use their advertising skills and influence - so that when they sell it on they double or triple their profits. All of D'Offay's 'art' is arguably worthless; it will not exist in galleries in 100 years time since it has no real artistic merit - it only has 'fashionable' momentum. So this shyster has pawned off a pile of garbage - mostly obscene or kitsch - on the national galleries - and they have used public money to enrich this guy beyond his wildest dreams. His argument that he is 'giving' us £100 million for free is pure bullshit. This 'art' has no real value - but we just paid £25 million for it. What a scam. What a shyster.
29

Stephen Cowley,

Edinburgh 28/02/2008 13:41:34
Well said Coldstream! It's funny the journalists didn't address the tax implications and whether it's a real gift, not to mention how he came across £25 million in the first place. The value is surely the tax rebate he gets - presumably 40% higher tax rate on "£100 million value" i.e. £40 million, which is still a profit on the £25 million he is said to have paid!
30

CB,

Somewhere in the EU 28/02/2008 13:44:58
According to the National Galleries press release all taxes have been paid on the purchase price. Whether the collection is really worth 125 million I have no idea. However the works by Warhol alone must be worth several millions. Given the sheer size of the collection it is probably worth a lot more than the original purchase price of 25 million.

I think its a good thing that the National Galleries were involved in this purchase, it strengthens the exhibition of 20th century and contemporary art in Scotland tremendously.
31

AJ Fife,

28/02/2008 13:52:31
The Alex Salmond 'feel good' factor continues....
32

John H C,

edinburgh 28/02/2008 14:06:35
A lot of these pathetic comments are similar to those made about the French impressionists. See what happened to them! Good for you sir.
33

Stephen Cowley,

Edinburgh 28/02/2008 14:17:30
There may indeed be an excess of criticism here - Ron Mueck's pieces were quite striking I would agree - not so Damien Hirst's! Perhaps though, there were some valid early criticisms of the French Impressionists. The lack of social content of Monet's landscapes for example. Similarly, why should critics of "modern" art not have some valid points of view. In addition, the money questions are not automatically irrelevant - I welcome the info on the tax side from CB (above) - it gave me more info than the Scotsman team!
34

Stephen Cowley,

Edinburgh 28/02/2008 14:21:13
I wonder what the Nat Galleries means by saying (according to CB, above) that "all taxes have been paid on the purchase price". If it is a gift, why would tax arise on it? Do they mean their taxes - but why does tax arise for the Nat Galleries when they receive a gift?
35

CB,

Somewhere in the EU 28/02/2008 14:33:14
There does seem to be a shortage of information on this purchase (gift was a term used by Nicholas Serota, the National Galleries refer to it as a purchase) in the article and the postings to this forum. Full details of the acquisition are here:

http://www.nationalgalleries.org/collection/artist_rooms/4:5077/

Personally, I would say the purchase represents good value, as to buy all these works on the market would certainly cost much more. It's also a good deal for D'Offay: he gets his investment back in full, plus the prestige and respect afforded to him by the institutions and the art world at large.

Overall I think it is very positive for Scotland and the whole of the UK and I'm delighted the Scottish Government are clearly proud of this, it bodes well for Scotland's cultural policy going forward.

36

Stephen Cowley,

Edinburgh 28/02/2008 14:45:38
You may be right CB, though "value" is not merely "value for money" but also value in the situation (i.e. do these works complement other collections?) It doesn't seem to add much to the Scottish collections. Some of these pieces doubtless have resonance - the Ron Mueck figures struck a chord with many visitors for example. Some of the rest I have my doubts about. How much of the Nat Galleries budget is left for living Scottish artists?
37

Highland Mighty,

28/02/2008 14:51:08
32. SNP in 'taking credit at any opportunity' shocker.

Just WHAT has this got to do with the SNP?!
38

AJ Fife,

28/02/2008 15:05:00
#38,

Nothing....but I knew writing that would get right on your t*ts! :D
39

Saltireblue,

West of East Linton: 28/02/2008 15:27:06
# 29: Tweedsmouth:

Total rubbish.

You must live in a very dark and dour place. People like you give the Scots a bad name.

Sounds like you have never been in an art gallery in your life. Nor would you know art when you see it. Discussing the concept of 'value', only in terms of monetary value, tells me a lot about you and your 'values'.

You should be ashamed of yourself and the other ignoramuses on this feedback thread. What a bunch of losers!
40

Helmut Smegma,

Edinburgh. 28/02/2008 15:30:23
Art appreciation is for the minority.Sell them off and build/upgrade hospitals.
41

weary observer,

USA 28/02/2008 15:34:32
Tweedmouth - also Paulr, Unimpressed one - excellent points - thank you. My sentiments exactly.
Perhaps the man finally realized what a bunch of c__p it all really is and and smartly turned it into a tax benefit. $100 million of the $125 million 'value' is just value on paper and seems to mimic the inflated prices of many, many homes here in the US - no one is buying them...so Mr. d'Offay shrewdly gets back his original investment. Not bad...for HIM
42

Norman,

28/02/2008 15:41:50
Wouldn't he have been better selling these artworks, and handing over a cheque for the £100million to the galleries? Imagine what they could have done with that dosh?

And the Scotsman has the front page headline completely wrong, the Tate is not in Scotland.
43

Saltireblue,

Just West of East Kilbride: 28/02/2008 16:19:54
Why don't all of you Negative Nellies and Doubting Thomases go back into your dark little rooms, count your pennies, and calculate the inherent value of compound interest!

However, don't get overly excited, you might just blow out your candles.

Believe me when I say that you are beyond contempt.

44

Stephen Cowley,

Edinburgh 28/02/2008 16:25:42
Well Saltireblue, if your uncritically positive attitude to this art and the unclear financial gesture associated with it only leads you to conclude that those of a different opinion are "beyond contempt", that doesn't say much for the effect it has had on your mind!
45

weary observer,

USA 28/02/2008 16:45:22
Perhaps, Norman, because no one would PAY 100M for them -

Yes, 'beyond contempt'
A fair description of such 'art.'
46

Highland Mighty,

28/02/2008 18:09:21
39. That's also known as 'being called and duly busted'.

Back in your box, tedious nat.
47

TimW1234,

Ottawa, Canada 28/02/2008 18:54:11
At the National Gallery of Canada in the Permanent Collection we have a pile of felt artistically arranged in one of the larger rooms.

Most tourists seeing think that some workmen left behind some of their working material until they espy the label on the wall nearby.

It has languished there since the 1970s and the name of the "artist" will remain unnamed to protect the guilty. And you would not believe the price the Canadian taxpayer paid for it.

You are lucky, indeed, to get photographs by Diane Arbus and also the lithos or whatever by Andy Warhol.

#1 truthsleuth is a philistine and a poseur(euse). He or she spouts nothing but nonsense and subtefruge.

Scotland should be VERY grateful for the donation of Anthony d'Offay. Very well done, sir.
48

art-rights,

the world 28/02/2008 19:51:20
Comment# 18 and 29 the refernece to "gay art" is beyond any uselfulness to this article or the donation, perhaps the "writer" needs a course in art history and the sexual powers that have shaped it, if the "write" knew this he would see his "old masters" in a different "perverse" manner. Value of "art"? art has always been of value to humanity and prized as such, and even more so to the old masters who courted the rich and elite of their day. QUALITY Art materials art not cheap, and the process it takes to make such "ambguous art" is time consuming/costly, it would be far easier to paint "constable" canvases all day long. However, each to their own, you either like it or you don't.
49

,

28/02/2008 21:30:45
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
50

Pilrig.,

Livingston 29/02/2008 00:01:51
18 - good call for IHF. Little Sparta, one hasn't lived until one has visited it.
51

Pilrig.,

Livingston 29/02/2008 00:07:33
41 - a Sun reader writes.
52

John B Dick,

29/02/2008 01:51:29
He's right that the money isnt the big story.

He's wrong that the art is.

The big story is its a condition that viewing is free, and that makes it difficult to charge for seeing other the collections in the same buildings.

The man has just defeated Thatcherite charging for education maybe for ever. Politician of the year, I'd say.
53

Esther. Mexico.,

29/02/2008 06:22:10
What a generous gesture, as well as a refreshing infusion of 'controversial' work by talented artists.

Whether their work will stand the test of time...if we live long enough we'll find out.
Many of the works that we consider 'Priceless Masters' today, were created by artists who were also mocked and reviled during their lifetime.

Some of them died paupers, and few of them became wealthy unless they had a patron.
Perhaps it will be another generation who will correctly judge the merits of this work.
54

Richardinho,

01/03/2008 07:58:34
Have to say it's a funny kind of 'gift' which costs 26 million pounds!

Also I'm a bit troubled by the involvement of the Tate. I hope this isn't a case of the big gallery cherry picking all the best bits, and the wee gallery (eg. us!) left with the dross.

Taking my cynical hat off, this is an exciting collection of work, and the prospect of having major works by the likes of Boyce and Warhol on display in Scotland is mouthwatering.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.