The latest Epstein controversy is getting incredibly portentous. Consider its
history. Mr. Epstein carves for the offices of the British Medical Association some statues eminently suitable for the offices of the British Medical Association. The B.M.A. sells its offices to the Southern Rhodesian Government, the statues at once lose their relevance and the Southern Rhodesian Government proposes to remove them. Forthwith the art world is convulsed. Letters of protest by every eminent figure but one in that exalted milieu appear in the Press. " Who that one ? you ask. Your heart instructs you." Sir William Llewellyn, President of the Royal Academy, who explains that he refrained from signing since he had not ascertained the views of his own council. But an omission can be as bad as a commission, and for comment Mr. Epstein announces that he withdraws his candidature for associate- ship of the Royal Academy—whereon the secretary ob- serves suavely that he cannot do that, as the candidature lapsed several years ago. And now Mr. Richard Sickert. He resigns not merely a problematic associateship but an actual membership of the Academy—all because Sir William Llewellyn never signed that letter. Must the Epstein cult be fatal to all sense of humour as well as all sense of proportion ?
* * *
Previous page
