FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

It’s Still Not Too Late to Deserve Your CBE, Chris Ofili

by

This year the artist and former Tate trustee, Chris Ofili, was awarded the Commander of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire (CBE) by the Queen for “services to art”. The following letter was sent to him on 19 October 2005. There has been no reply. This is the first time it has appeared online.

MarkD

The Hypocrisy of Tate Chairman Paul Myners by Mark D

Dear Chris Ofili,

I have been informed by Mr Newman, Head of Legal, Tate, that a total price of £600,000 has been paid by Tate for your installation The Upper Room. The issue of a serving Trustee’s work being bought for such a large sum has been the subject of some controversy with page leads in The Sunday Telegraph and The Times, as well as other coverage in several issues of the Evening Standard, Independent on Sunday and today’s Telegraph. This coverage has not reflected favourably on you, Tate, or others involved, including Sir Nicholas Serota and Tate Chairman Paul Myners.

Attention has been drawn not only to the appearance of favouritism and conflict of interest, but also to the Tate’s claim of lack of funds for maintaining contemporary acquisitions and its drive “Building the Tate Collection”, when leading artists were asked to donate work. Last year you wrote in The Guardian to support this appeal, saying, “As soon as I heard about this request from the Tate, I felt as a trustee and an artist it would be an altogether positive thing to do.” It was not publicly known at the time, but it is now apparent, that when you endorsed this appeal for other artists to give their work, you knew that a major fund-raising effort was in place to buy your own work. In fact, one of the factors contributing to the shortage of funds is the allocation of a significant amount of them to you. This does not reflect well on you or Tate.

When you accepted the Trusteeship, you were bound by the Nolan Committee Seven Principles of Public Life. The first of these is “Selflessness: holders of public office should act solely in terms of the public interest.” I suggest that you cannot be seen to have acted in accord with this. This purchase of your work has been damaging not only to your reputation, but that of Tate. It has undermined Tate’s appeal for other artists to donate work, and your own endorsement of this appeal in the circumstances leaves a very bad impression of hypocrisy and opportunism.

I therefore urge you to redeem the bad situation that has been created by refunding the money for The Upper Room to Tate, and asking your gallerist Victoria Miro to do the same. Errors of judgement can be forgiven if they are corrected. They cannot be forgiven, however, if they are perpetuated. The current unsavoury associations with this purchase show no signs of abating. In fact they show every sign of being inextricably linked with future perception of your work and career. I cannot see that this will be at all in your real interests.

By demonstrating magnanimity, you will set a significant example to other artists as regards the Tate donation appeal. By donating your “most important work to date”, you will set a benchmark for other artists to follow. Tate cannot create the first class collection it aspires to and fill the gaps it wishes to, unless a culture is created where it is seen as fitting for artists to donate their best work to Tate. Donating the best work is generous; donating the second-best is tokenism, and will lead to a second-rate collection instead of a first-rate one. If a Trustee is not prepared to show the way, then there is no incentive for other artists to do likewise.

In this respect, I would draw your attention to the offer of a donation of Stuckist works to Tate. I was insistent that I would only accept the best works from the artists for this donation. Some were very resistant to this idea, as they felt certain pieces were highlights of many years’ work, and would impair their ability to mount their own future private shows. Nevertheless, they did all agree to meet my stipulation. Some of the artists have to fit their art around full-time job; some are dependent on sales of their art for an income; some work very slowly. Their offer was a genuine potential sacrifice, and a greater one than you will make, as the Trustee minutes record that five of your paintings have already been sold to collectors as an integral part of raising donations for Tate to buy The Upper Room.

As you have said, “The Tate isn’t a private institution, it belongs to the nation. So if artists give work to the Tate, they are giving work to the nation. There is a very long tradition of such artistic philanthropy in this country.” It is between you and your conscience as to how you are judged in regard to this tradition.

Yours sincerely
Charles Thomson
Co-founder, The Stuckists

More articles by:

CounterPunch Magazine

minimag-edit

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550

zen economics

Weekend Edition
April 21, 2017
Friday - Sunday
Diana Johnstone
The Main Issue in the French Presidential Election: National Sovereignty
Paul Street
Donald Trump: Ruling Class President
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Dude, Where’s My War?
Andrew Levine
If You Can’t Beat ‘Em, Join ‘Em
Paul Atwood
Why Does North Korea Want Nukes?
Robert Hunziker
Trump and Global Warming Destroy Rivers
Vijay Prashad
Turkey, After the Referendum
Binoy Kampmark
Trump, the DOJ and Julian Assange
CJ Hopkins
The President Formerly Known as Hitler
Steve Reyna
Replacing Lady Liberty: Trump and the American Way
Lucy Steigerwald
Stop Suggesting Mandatory National Service as a Fix for America’s Problems
Robert Fisk
It is Not Just Assad Who is “Responsible” for the Rise of ISIS
John Laforge
“Strike Two” Against Canadian Radioactive Waste Dumpsite Proposal
Norman Solomon
The Democratic Party’s Anti-Bernie Elites Have a Huge Stake in Blaming Russia
Andrew Stewart
Can We Finally Get Over Bernie Sanders?
Susan Babbitt
Don’t Raise Liberalism From the Dead (If It is Dead, Which It’s Not)
Uri Avnery
Palestine’s Nelson Mandela
Fred Nagel
It’s “Deep State” Time Again
John Feffer
The Hunger President
Stephen Cooper
Nothing is Fair About Alabama’s “Fair Justice Act”
Jack Swallow
Why Science Should Be Political
Chuck Collins
Congrats, Graduates! Here’s Your Diploma and Debt
Aidan O'Brien
While God Blesses America, Prometheus Protects Syria, Russia and North Korea 
Patrick Hiller
Get Real About Preventing War
David Rosen
Fiction, Fake News and Trump’s Sexual Politics
Evan Jones
Macron of France: Chauncey Gardiner for President!
David Macaray
Adventures in Labor Contract Language
Ron Jacobs
The Music Never Stopped
Kim Scipes
Black Subjugation in America
Sean Stinson
MOAB: More Obama and Bush
Miguel A. Cruz-Díaz
Minute Musings: On Why the United States Should Launch a Tomahawk Strike on Puerto Rico
Tom Clifford
The Return of “Mein Kampf” … in Japan
Todd Larsen
Concerned About Climate Change? Change Where You Bank!
Thomas Hon Wing Polin
Brexit: Britain’s Opening to China?
John Hutchison
Everything Old is New Again: a Brief Retrospectus on Korea and the Cold War
Michael Brenner
The Ghost in the Dream Machine
Yves Engler
The Military Occupation of Haiti
Christopher Brauchli
Guardians of Lies
James Preece
How Labour Can Win the Snap Elections
Cesar Chelala
Preventing Disabilities in the Elderly
Sam Gordon
From We Shall Overcome to Where Have all the Flowers Gone?
Charles Thomson
It’s Still Not Too Late to Deserve Your CBE, Chris Ofili
Louis Proyect
Documentaries That Punch
Charles R. Larson
Review: Vivek Shanbhag’s “Ghachar Ghochar”
David Yearsley
Raiding the Tomb of Lubitsch
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail