« THE MORNING RANT: The Ticking Commercial Real Estate Bomb – Lenders are Seeking to Secure a Smaller Loss Now Before It All Blows Up | Main | This Indictment is One for the Ages »

The Degradation of Art...Appreciation, and a question about culture [TJM]

Digging through the news to find some bit of culture to talk about, I stumbled across this article titled Our great art institutions have reduced British history to a scrapheap of shame by Hong Kong native Calvin Po.

It's an interesting look at the current state of the National Portrait Gallery and Tate Britain in London today. As Po says:

This summer, both the National Portrait Gallery and Tate Britain are presenting new displays that are meant to reflect the 'inclusive' and 'diverse' identities of Britain.

So, what does this immigrant to Britain think of how contemporary British cultural institutions are treating British culture?

Supposedly, I fit nicely among their target audience. In reality, as an immigrant looking to be included in this nation, I am perplexed by my visits. For two publicly funded museums tasked with telling the story of this country through the portraiture of its eminent figures and its art, their curators seem unsure if this is a nation worth being a part of, and if there's a fair story to tell about it.

We often talk about this sort of approach to culture through more popular art like film, but here we have an interesting look at how the high end art world is treating British history and art specifically. It's about as finger-waggingly nagging and embarrassed of actual history as you might expect.

A shame then that the wall texts think so little of the artwork itself. Portraits of the long-dead are chided for their connections to colonisation and slavery. John Locke's anti-slavery liberal theories, for instance, are caveated by his involvement in Carolina's constitution. William Gladstone's democratic reforms are negated by the existence of his father's slave plantations. It's hard to figure out what this scattershot approach to history adds to the understanding of visitors, other than serving as a nagging sign of the curators' moral high ground. I am reminded of Mao's Red Guards digging up the remains of historical figures to denounce them as counter-revolutionary.

It's an interesting look at the cultural fight of today through a new lens, and I encourage you all to read the whole thing. And yet, it brings me back to a question that I've been asking on and off in the comments for a little while now:

What is the difference between cultural institutions and culture?

If the institutions say one thing, but the culture at large does not abide, what is the point of the cultural institution? I'm not necessarily implying that the average Briton is gung-ho about preserving the historical record, but I somehow doubt that there's much fervor for erasing it either. To bump up my idea, I searched out a YouGov poll (spit) asking Britons what they think of Empire, and here are the results I found:

32% think that empire is something to be proud of
37% think that empire is nothing to be either proud of or ashamed of
19% think that empire is something to be ashamed of
12% don't know

So, essentially, the cultural institutions, as represented by the National Portrait Gallery and the Tate Britain, represent 19% of the British public while 69% don't think empire is anything to be ashamed of while the final 12% just couldn't be bothered. Does that sound familiar? It probably should.

So, what is the cultural institution doing? Is it leading? I assume they are, and I assume that decades of these efforts have had their effect and will continue so, but Britain has been navel-gazing about its role in colonialism for a long time. And still, only 19% feel ashamed for Britain's role in empire?

Where does culture begin and where does it end? If a cultural institution demands one thing be true, and the culture at large ignores it, what is the point of the cultural institution anymore?

Kings only rule as long as they behave like kings, and so do cultural institutions, maybe.