'It's not education it's self-flagellation': Douglas Murray on British museums | SpectatorTV

[Music] thank you Douglas for the cover piece this week you have written about the culture wars infiltrating museums what's been happening well I start off with a description of going to the Pitt Rivers Museum in Oxford this past week the Pitt Rivers museum has always been an interesting Oddity of a museum a collection of of many 19th century collected artifacts it's um it was a place famed among other things for the Pickled heads that it had in it and even as an undergraduate more than 20 years ago now it was it was it was known of us being an oddity but an oddity from another time um and I discovered on returning this week that it's now become an oddity of our own time uh the museum is filled with condemnations of the museum The Collection is filled with condemnations of the collection almost everything tells you about the sins of European colonialism European racism there are of course all of the nods to the religion of our time there are segments on beyond the binary because I'm sure that's what everybody wants when they go to the pit Rivers collection and we see for instance anime characters from the 1990s show a strong queer icons my point is that the museum is effectively abolishing itself it's saying that the collection was put together by bad forces and it has to be saved in the modern era reinterpreted and indeed accused now this as I say in my cover piece this week is not at all unusual it is something that is going on the collection after collection of Museum and Museum after museum across the land and the Oddity of this is not just that this is in fact encouraged by for instance the Museum's Association which which tells collections in your in the UK how to quote decolonize but of course that the collections themselves are doing it we just saw last weekend the welcome collection of London's Houston Road announcing that it was closing its exhibition why because it had tried to decolonize but it couldn't tear itself away from its dead white male Origins and so the welcome collection announced that it would be closing it couldn't justify itself so in the end it stopped Ed you've read Douglas's piece what did she make into his Deep dive of what's happening in museums and the collections that are present there well I've got a huge problem uh with Douglas's piece which is that I agreed with quite a lot of it so it's going to be quite hard to have an argument I think if one unpacks it I mean Douglas has used some pretty forceful examples to make his point as you would expect from uh one of the country's most successful columnists and I being a sort of bland neutral slightly flabby figure uh sit somewhere in the Midland this which is that I get engaged in the culture wars because I think to a certain extent both sides take rather extreme positions I think that it is in the 21st century perfectly possible to look at a museum collection uh that was a crude say in the 19th uh Century or the 18th century and say how did this Museum come by these objects were they taken fairly purchased in good faith and transported back to the UK or were they looted by British soldiers and if they were is that something that we should consider when we put these things on display and one of the reasons I get asked onto programs like this is because I'm in favor of returning the Parthenon sculptures the default position which to a certain extent to coin a phrase every Schoolboy learns is that Lord Elgin saved the Parthenon sculptures and they would have been blown up by these feckless or been allowed to be blown up by these factors Greeks if Lord Elgin hadn't intervened I don't think that's an accurate depiction at all about how the Parthenon sculptures came to be in London and even if it was I think now in the 21st century a perfectly reasonable request from the Greek government to potentially have them back should be considered um in a sensible way but I do think as well and this is where Douglas May well disagree with me so we'll get some juice out of this uh that it is worth thinking about cultural seven sensitivities in the 21st century I mean he cites the Rex Whistler mural at Tate now I wasn't a trustee of tape when the trustees made the decision to close the restaurant because the images of uh in the mural were deemed to be offensive but I respect their decision it wasn't taken lightly it was thoroughly uh examined and I'm afraid it is the case that in the 21st century a lot of people wandering into the restaurant and seeing Rex whistler's mural regardless of the context would find those figures offensive and it was on the table to have an explainer or whatever about why those Figures were there but it was considered very carefully and I I support that this is the key point I support trustees looking at these issues and making decisions on that basis but he I fully concede to a certain extent and indeed I have trolled my own museum Tate sometimes the labels go completely over the top and are bordering on the ridiculous um let me just if I may pick up on two things there first of all what I'm writing about is a different issue than dxession de-accession is its own issue at the moment I think we would disagree on the argument marbles but de-accession of course has already led to its own types of lunacy such as for instance the belief that all bronzes from Benin must be handed back this came to the extent that uh two a couple of years ago after the summer of George Floyd Lambeth Palace got rid of tubing in bronzes handed them back to Benin when in fact these bronzes were gifts to Ronald runtsy the Archbishop of Canterbury who has it happened uh christened me as a boy um they were given him the 1980s and he handed them back as if his successors rather Lambeth Palace handed them back a couple of years ago as if they were holding on to a set of stolen Hot televisions secondly what uh Ed vasey mentions about uh I'm glad he says that I use strong examples in my piece and I'm sure he'd expect that there's no point in writing and using weak examples but the example of take Britain um I think with all due respect it is entirely wrong about the Tate trustees took action with extraordinary levity the trustees of the Tate are ignoramuses to a man and a woman every single one of them and let me explain briefly why the Rex Whistler mural was commissioned in the 1920s it includes two tiny figures of black children clearly in distress being pulled by women in frilly frocks laughing it's clearly as any scholar or fan of Rex Whistler knows something he does in all of his murals which is to say it in Arcadia ego this is a a Fantastical idyllic scene in which he deliberately across all four walls puts in tiny details to say even in this alleged Paradise the worm of human evil exists the trustees of the Tate did not consider this who they listened to were two activists on Instagram from a group called White pube white pubes the slogan is F the police F the UK F the Tate now I don't need to tell Lord vasey F the Tate is not a chance you often hear on the streets of London most people don't have that strong views on tape Britain this was a malevolent tiny group of activists who decided to defame Rex Whistler the trustees of the Tate far from looking into this immediately got scared they closed the room they took Rex whistler's name off it they defamed him first of all as a racist and then put up a sign saying that he had the racist views of his time why do I mind this not just because the Tate is meant to house and look after one of our great collections but because Rex Whistler died childless fighting on his first day in Normandy in 1944 how dare one of the great collections of the UK be in the hands of people who would defame as a racist somebody who joined up on the first weeks of the war in 1939 and laid down his life fighting Nazism these people are not looking at these things carefully any more than they have the example of Stanley Spencer who they've also decided to defend in their collection as a racist these collections are in the hands of people who are Unworthy of the things in their care Ed I think that is I think now Douglas has slightly descended into caricature I mean I wasn't a trustee of take when this decision uh was made but the idea that uh Tate would make a decision to close this restaurant uh and uh remove the mural which they haven't done by the way uh somebody had put up an Instagram two activists to put up an Instagram post uh is absolutely laughable and I see nothing wrong with museums first of all thinking hard about how a collection is viewed by an audience in the 21st century as opposed to an audience that visits uh in the 19th century and that could include uh the shrunken heads at the pit Rivers Museum and I think it's perfectly uh in order for museums to put in context how objects were acquired by that collection and in fact the context of the time in which they were acquired so I see uh absolutely no problem uh with that at all and I think so I think that it's it's uh the idea that you wouldn't modernize your displays and your collections and put them in context in the 21st century I think is uh laughable the idea is that our Museum should kind of sit in aspic and be exactly as our Victorian forefathers uh visited them before uh seems to me laughable I'd like to ask you each a question to challenge your perspectives um and Douglas to you first this point about context is important isn't it um putting aside some of the more extreme examples where they've just decided to shut down collections would you have an issue with curators deciding that rather than shutting things down they would like to give a modern context and they would like to give more information to those visiting the museum I mean presumably that is their remit of course so that people really understand what they're consuming and perhaps some of the atrocities behind what they're consuming oh yes absolutely by the way Ed Rosie sets up as a tall man as politicians of his kind always do not nothing you would ever do Douglas no I don't need to believe me I don't need to um he sets up a straw man by pretending that I or anyone like me thinks that we should preserve our Collections and aspic I don't believe that at all I think that trustees obviously always have to reinvigorate and renew collections what I think is strange is that they should hate the collections which they are in charge of again I come back to the point I followed unlike Ed extremely closely the activities that they take in recent years and also observed extremely closely the way in which they decided to make Stanley Spencer one of the other two great artists of the 20th century in their collection into a posthumous racist for no good reason at all so yes that's what I find strange but to get back to your point Kate the interesting thing about this were retain and explain thing is it's absolutely fine and admirable so long as it isn't a one directional political hit job and let me give you an example of what a one-directional political hit job looks like if you want to for instance say parts of this museum were put together by in an era of colonialism in Europe or colonialism in Britain fine who doesn't mind that I don't mind that I don't think anyone would mind that but here's what I mind is when you for instance as at the pit Rivers get that and then a strange silence on everywhere else in the world for instance the kingdom of Benin which has already come up a couple of times if you stand before the display on the kingdom of Benin in the pit Rivers Museum in Oxford do you learn anything about slavery curiously enough no do you learn that the kingdom of Benin was practicing slavery long after the British Empire decided to abolish it and sent its ships across the seas trying to stamp it out anywhere else no and you would leave believing that the rest of the planet lived in Eden until the wicked Europeans arrive it's not education it's self-flagellation I think that uh without wishing to descend into cliche two wrongs uh don't make uh a right and um it is set to us to put into context the collections that we have in this country and how they were Acquired and 99 of them were acquired uh perfectly uh legitimately and it's a great thing as well that we have these British institutions that display uh an extraordinary range of artifacts and paintings from all over uh the world but I think when the Benin bronzes were looted uh that we should own up to that fact and think about returning but Ed some of the Benin bronzes were given to this country by the prime minister of Nigeria after Independence what do we do with those uh well I mean I'm not gonna I don't know enough about Robert Francis you haven't thought about it enough but if he uh if uh if they require legitimately you know it's a matter of a Lambert Palace if they were if they're their possessions what they what they wish to uh what they wish to do with them and I have two contributions for you Ed first is um do we not Risk by removing so-called offensive artwork um losing parts of History losing those uncomfortable offensive parts of History uh do we not risk suggesting that these things never happened at all and actually to a more fundamental point about offense as well since when is it wrong for art or great works of literature to be offensive to challenge us for us to be uncomfortable with what we see if we decide that such works are too risky for people to be exposed to what are we going to be looking at when we go into museums what's going to be there to challenge us I think it's a very fair Challenge and I think it's a very nuanced debate and to a certain extent you should do it um object by object I think as I say I wasn't a trustee when uh the Tate trustee is considered the Rex Whistler mural but they clearly took the view that these were effectively racial character chores and no uh attempt to put them in context or whatever would necessarily reduce the offense that a modern 21st century audience whether it's black or white would feel when they were coming in to have a nice lunch at Tate so they've taken that decision and I think you know what I want to get across there I think Douglas is to be frank being very very unfair to think that this was a sort of decision taken uh you know in a nanosecond um I'm being wired over a couple of um digestive biscuits and a cup of tea I think it was thought through very carefully over very early can I ask everybody thinks about the Stanley Spencer trustees can I ask Ed what he thinks about it as far as I'm aware Stanley Spencer is still on full display at Tate Britain and is not called a racist in by Tate or anyone else I can assure you can look this is very important with a former Arts Minister because you have to be on top of these things I'm sorry but as with the Benin brontes you have to be on top of this you know the ornament museum has just returned the men in bronzes to Nigeria Nigeria hasn't thrown off his hands in horror and said you shouldn't return these you've got them perfectly legitimately and I'm on top of Stanley Spencer in the sense and I say Stanley Spencer remains on full display at Tate and it's not called a racist yes he is go down there today if you have the time and you will see that his Masterpiece the resurrection at cookham in in the accompanying description as I say in my piece claims that Stanley Spencer used racialized images of black people now it doesn't bother to say that in this extraordinary Masterpiece as I'm sure you'll agree it is if you know the painting in this extraordinary Masterpiece that displays the the resurrection of the Dead on the day of judgment in Stanley Spencer's Church nearby churchyard in cookham it shows people of all Races emerging from the ground uh you know calling somebody a racist that is not calling him a racist go back to the quote I give him the piece as with Rex Whistler they look at the work in their in their truck in their care with the most hostile lens imaginable there was nobody black in cookham in the 1920s please let me finish finish your point Ed response I'm going to ask one more question and then we're going to wrap up because we're well over time Douglas you have 30 seconds a reasonable estimation of the Spencer painting in the Tate is that because there was nobody black and cook them at the time if you wanted to show the resurrection of all of humanity yes he relied on photographs from National Geographic does that make him a racist obviously not is it what he has impuned as being by Tate yes it's right by the painter I don't agree that's the case at all we'll go down and see it to Ed and Douglas uh add to you first do you think that the way in which museums are now curated and the way that art is presented to us has become too politicized or do you think that the interventions that are taking place now are crucial to a modern understanding of what happened in the past well I started this uh debate by saying that I agreed with a lot of uh what Douglas wrote in his article as I say I think that the extreme positions are taken on uh both sides and I think that on one side questioning or uh referring to the fact that you know some objects were acquired in by GBS means Were Somehow being unpatriotic and unbritish or as Douglas is uh in terms of working himself up just now you know that we're going around calling Stanley Spencer a racist I think is ludicrous but at the same time I do accept that there are plenty of examples in our museums at the moment where people have taken it to the other extreme and there are kind of gratuitous labels and narratives that don't really fit you know I am quite woke on these issues I mean I see nothing wrong for example in terms of gcses and a levels in extending uh the English literature curriculum towards world uh literature I don't see anything wrong with those kind of things and people foam at the mouth if you dare to suggest that children children British schools might study authors who weren't born and bred in Britain and wrote from outside so I see nothing wrong with looking at our curriculum looking at our the objects in museums putting them in context and extending the range of objects that people see and uh re-imagining the narrative Douglas 21 extensioned politics feature in museum curation and to what extent is it inevitable I mean ultimately the people making these decisions will come with not a neutral point of view and and you're always going to have some lens put on what is presented to you um the job of Trustees of a collection is to ensure the continuation of the collection is to know that it is in your hands for your generation to pass on to the next one I say in the piece how extraordinary it is that so much of what I described has gone on under a conservative government and I think Lord vasey has just demonstrated why and how it is please call me in but but as I say I think that essentially what we have is the National Heritage is to a great extent in the hands of people who don't much care for it even in one famous essay and spectator reviewing Stephen spender's Memoir said that that reading Stephen Spender in mangling the English language was like watching a very valuable vars in the hands of a chimpanzee um watching our national Collections and their trustees and curators at the moment is like seeing all the most precious things in our culture in the hands of chimpanzees they are utterly for the task they had been appointed to Adam Douglas thanks for joining me [Music]

Channel: The Spectator

Views: 110,869

Keywords: The Spectator, Spectator, SpectatorTV, Spectator TV, SpecTV, The Week in 60 Minutes, TWI60

Id: p6pjdUlI_Gk

Length: 20min 53sec (1253 seconds)

Published: Fri Dec 02 2022