Letters
Throes of the Academy
Sir: John McEwen takes a very rosy view of the Royal Academy (13 November), now in the throes — once more! — of trying to sort itself out financially. It is certainly true that the contemplation of antiquity improves the human mind, and no one would deny that the RA has played a central (if not always all-important) part in the nation's artistic life. No doubt it is a great British in- stitution reaching out for the future. However, it will scarcely be effective if it tolerates starvation salaries and continues to pride itself on the sketchiest education department in existence (however wonder- ful the part-time lady curator may be). Such characteristics may well appeal to the pre- sent Prime Minister but in practice they make little sense.
Potential donors to the RA Appeal will also be discouraged by the Academy's ap- parent attitude to women — despite Mr McEwen's enthusiasm for the world of the male-dominant. He might have mentioned that there were two women among the founding members of the RA: Mary Moses, and Angelica Kauffmann — she who hesitated between the arts of painting and music; in 1982 she would have been well advised to follow the latter career. Of more than 20 names in the RA Trust Appeal brochure one only is a woman's, and that is of the professional fund-raiser. Has not the President taken cognisance of the parts women have played (and are playing) in both business and the arts? Does no one realise at the RA that, according to Fortune magazine, over 50 per cent of all capital wealth in stocks, shares and bonds in the US and Britain is registered in women's names? How much worldly wisdom and acumen is the Royal Academy really bring- ing to its appeal for £6 million?
Roderick Thomson
Army & Navy Club, Pall Mall, London SWI
Previous page
