London: Royal Academy

Tue, 21 Oct 2008 10:58:00-0400

On my recent short trip to London, I spent an hour at the Royal Academy's current exhibition "Braque, Miro, Calder, Giacometti". I had no idea about the rationale for bringing these four together, but the names Calder and Giacometti were enough, two artists that I stumble across quite regularly and whom I have come to appreciate more and more. I had intended to go to the Francis Bacon show at Tate Modern. Although I don't favour these sort of big circus type events, Bacon is special in 20th Century painting, and one can only admire his artistic credentials when set alongside the conceptualists and the businessman-artists of the current day. There is also nostalgic appeal as I recall his Triptych in Aberdeens small but superb Art Gallery. However, the Royal Academy it was, and I'm glad I went. I'm sure the Tate would have been a log jam and the RA is a nice, comforting institution with none of the din associated with the big shows. I sometimes wonder why we go to large exhibitions, especially single artist ones. If we are not academic specialists, what do we expect to get from looking at such a vast arrangement of an artists work other than being able to see items which are normally in far off galleries, or indeed inaccessible. Understanding art is quite difficult - it often can't be done at one sitting even with a single painting. It is interesting of course to see the range and scope of a great artist and to compare early and late works, or different genres. But these shows often have to be taken in one huge gulp, and the result is naturally indigestion. I rather like exhibitions which shed light on the process of artistic creation. Influences, collaborations, friendships, rivalries. Sometimes this means an exhibition supported by contemporary references. I remember seeing a big Monet show in Zurich, and while the huge water lilies left me a bit cold, I found the documentation, description and photographs of the garden at Giverny very satisfying. When we look at art of the 19th and 20th centuries things like this predominate - they are everywhere. Whether they are famous alliances (Picasso/Braque), whether or not artists belonged to distinct movements or groups, the juxtapositions are inescapable, memorably because a lot of them are captured on film by the likes of Cartier Bresson who had access to many during the middle of the last century. And, finally, that is what makes the RA show. There are no so-called "big hitters" here but a coherent selection that contrasts the work of these four artists and illuminates where they drew on each other. A good example is the friendship that developed between Calder and Miro. Not artistic bedfellows, but you can see how Calder went from bemusement to understanding and assimiliation - in his paintings at any rate, and to a certain degree maybe in some of the sculpture. It is interesting as well to see the two sculptors Calder and Giacometti together. Both great individualists who developed their own styles and added something genuinely new to the genre. What links the four is their collaboration with the collector and gallerist Aimé Maeght. (The show is sub-titled "Aimé Maeght and His Artists"). This is also interesting, to follow the part played by the patron or gallery owner in all of this. I'm thinking also of the role played by todays movers and shakers - the Charles Saatchis and Steven Cohens of today. I'm not sure it is quite so benevolent, or that it will result in such an enriching legacy for the future. Well worth a visit in my opinion if you are passing.

Richard goes to London. Part I

Thu, 16 Oct 2008 14:08:00-0400

I've known London since my first heady visits in the early 1970's and have lived and worked there several times over the years. Disillusionment started setting in the mid 1990's - poor services, high prices - and I hadn't been back for 10 years. Until Tuesday that is, when I had to pay a flying visit on business. I was prepared for the worst, and so this is the first of a couple of blog posts about my reactions. I flew into Heathrow from Zurich on Tuesday afternoon, and decided to put things to the test by going to Richmond via public transport. Being used to the Swiss system, and remembering London Transport from previous times, I didn't have great expectations. However it actually went ok. Tube to Hounslow East, and bus to Richmond. No traffic snarl up getting into Richmond even though it was rush hour (5-6pm). Maybe the rush hour has moved. So it seems there has been a change, and my immediate impression was that it had been achieved my a massive overdose of buses - there were hundreds of them on the roads. Now the bad news. The tube station at Heathrow resembles some kind of obstacle course with big complicated barriers all over the place. I don't know if these are to foil terrorists or over-enthusiastic travellers with baggage trolleys. In truth they aren't a big problem but they were the first sign of what I soon realised was a very "nanny state" attitude towards the public. The tube station was full of London Underground staff, none of whom seemed enagaged in performing anything related to helping travellers. I tried the system out by approaching one such gaggle and asking a simple stupid tourist question about platforms. I got a very dismissive reply, I was obviously distracting them from their real business, although what that was still eluded me. Then I tried to get rid of some litter (my sandwich wrappings). Couldn't find a litter bin. I asked another group. Apparently litter bins are just the sort of thing terrorists like to park the odd bomb in. London seems to have an infatuation with announcement services and I found this irritating to a high degree. The bus to Richmond announced at every stop that it was "the H73 to Richmond" despite there being an LED display with the same info. I expect that it is useful for blind people, but all it is going to do is tell a blind person they have got on the wrong bus, and blind people never do this. Most of the blind people I have met have more awareness of which bus they are on than I do. Political correctness rearing it's ugly head. Same on the trains. The tube always had the "Mind the Gap" announcements which were tolerable because they were an anomaly. Now you are bombarded by announcements at any time the PA system has fallen silent for a few seconds. "mind the gap between the train and the platform", "be careful of the big step to the platform", "remember that there is no smoking on any trains"," do notleave your luggage unattended". Add to this the profusion of notices saying things like "Our staff have the right not to be abused or attacked", and adverts with gory tales of what happend to someone who verbally abused someone. It had never occured to me that I might want to assault or abuse a member of staff, but I was coming round to the idea. Signs telling you not to put heavy items in the luggage rack. Are all Londoners stupid with attention spans of 10 seconds? They must be starting to wonder. I liked the sign on the Picadilly line that said something like this: "Going to Covent Garden at the Weekend? Well I shouldn't bother if I was you. Not by tube at any rate. Gets very busy. Best to get off at one of these other stations and WALK" OH, I should add that the train from Richmond to Waterloo in the morning was actually on time and in fact rather clean. However as someone said about somnething else - these things are a duty, NOT a virtue. More later

Alte Zürcher Blog - London

London: Royal Academy

Richard goes to London. Part I