Art
Private purse
Giles, Auty
Alan Bowyer
(Roger Francis till 24 April) Nine Painters (Sue Rankin till 27 April)
Aschool of thought exists which sees he British art-buying public as pro- foundly philistine. Unlike the wealthy businessmen of West Germany, say, who gleefully abase themselves before any avant-garde artefact of a sufficiently 'anti- bourgeois' nature, their British counter- parts prefer to keep faith with their own sometimes limited judgments and reserve their cheque books for the RA Summer Show or Watercolour Society. I must confess to finding such evidence of so- called British philistinism endearing since truly personal taste seems at all times preferable to the pursuit of fashion. The philistines I personally fear are those who now regard all Fine Art as peripheral, given our brave new computerised age, and who actively seek to eliminate the Fine Art tradition from British art school curri- cula.
The present Royal Family is often repre- sented as a source of uninspired patronage. In portraiture, Cuneo's canine study of our Sovereign, sometimes known as Corgi and Bess, evidently bears no comparison with Van Dyck's equestrian portrait of Charles I or comparable glories of former times. But in the absence of any contemporary Hol- bein, Van Dyck or even Sickert, to whom should the Royal Family and their advisers turn? I suggest that Britain's best living
portrait painter is Lucian Freud, but even the Tate Gallery, who are about to pay fl
million for a de Chirico, seem unable to find money for his major work. Last week's correspondent pointed out that the Tate Gallery own far fewer works by such putative heroes as Warhol, Schnabel, Kief- er and Morley than do the Saatchi family, but then the Tate's annual budget, in- tended to cover a far wider spectrum of art, is also considerably less than that of the Conservative Party's publicists. What the Saatchi family or any other private buyers do with their money seems to me their own affair. The Tate, on the other hand, must reckon with a degree of public accounta- bility.
Last week I witnessed a cross-section of the British art-buying cheerfully disporting themselves. They were responding enthu- siastically to the work of a charming octogenarian, Alan Bowyer, at Roger Francis Gallery (533 King's Road, SW10). By the end of an entertaining evening, enlivened by the presence of Joanna Lum- ley, who wrote a thoughtful catalogue appreciation, and by a singi(ng duet, many of the 55 watercolours painted by Mr Bowyer during the past seven months bore small red stickers. After a lapse of two years, brought about by failing health and eyesight, well-wishers had managed to persuade Mr Bowyer to begin painting again. No doubt this explains why many of these little watercolours were charged with a new-born freshness, no less Prima- veral than that of Miss Lumley herself. I imagine these paintings will bring their buyers innocent pleasure and possibly, on dark days, some of the revived feelings of hope experienced by the artist. Mr Bowyer's subject matter contained not a single huntsman, bosom or ship of the line. Perhaps these are not essential, after all, to the British buyer?
Together with the Royal Academy Sum- mer Show, the Spring Exhibition of the Royal Watercolour Society at Bankside Gallery (48 Hopton Street, SE!) is another favourite venue of those many private buyers who enjoy rather less impressive resources than the Saatchi family. What will visitors find there? Dreaded examples of semi-topographical illustration and sketches rather a long way 'after Turner' are admittedly present but so, too, is much fresh, intelligent work which dispels all fusty associations. Three excellent paint- ings by Jane Carpanini, including 'The Bridge, Conwy', reveal aspects of water- colour's potential as a modern medium, as also do exciting works by Muriel Pember- ton and Jacqueline Rizvi. A sensitive study from his home county — Pembrokeshire — is the contribution of the surprisingly youthful president of the Society, Maurice Sheppard. Perhaps the most striking ex- hibits are four large works by Hans Schwarz who, for some mysterious reason, remains an absurdly underrated and under- priced artist. The sheer vigour of his work points the way for young artists unwilling to be overawed by the traditional con- straints or associations of watercolour as a medium.
While Roger Francis customarily shows work by young former students of the Royal College of Art at his gallery — the current exhibition is an exception — Sue Rankin seems anxious to perform a similar service for up-and-coming artists of talent who have passed through the Royal Academy Schools. Her current exhibition features work of nine painters who have trained together at the Ruskin and then the RA Schools. While young artists from the Royal College seem obsessed by their work's inner meanings, the artists at Sue Rankin's gallery (670 Fulham Road, SW6), are less obviously introspective and favour a more perceptual and objective approach. The contrast reveals, more than anything, the differing attitudes of teaching staff at these two major postgraduate establish- ments. Of the two, ex-Royal College stu- dents' work seems, in the main, slightly closer in idiom to Neo-Expressionism — that fashionable purveying of artistic anguish by rich young Germans and Amer- icans, for which there seems such an inexhaustible, and often inexplicable, in- ternational demand. By contrast, former RA Schools students seem to produce somewhat less tortured and emphatic work, perhaps because they have received less encouragement to do so. Today reti- cence and charm havF become qualities almost as undervalued in art as in life itself.
Those who continue to value either are strongly urged to take this chance to see well-made, lively and often lyrical paint- ings by young artists such as Bridget Tempest, Thelma Chambers and Clova Stuart-Hamilton or charming little studies by Lucy Smith. Of the male participants in the show Saied Dai seemed more settled on course than the remainder. But these are early days for painters with abundant promise.
Previous page
