It is one of those situations in which the preposterousness of the suggestion takes your breath away, even as you find yourself mildly surprised that what is being proposed hasn’t already happened.
On the one hand, there’s the sheer unlikeliness of the idea that the serene corridors of Buckingham Palace with their slightly fusty elegance will one day be filled with paintings supported on balls of elephant dung or life-size images of children with penises projecting from their foreheads.
On the other, you can’t help feeling that in an era when everyone is supposedly “into art”, the Royal family must surely have a quasi-official collection of contemporary art stashed away somewhere – even if they’re unaware they’ve got it.
The suggestion by Tessa Murdoch, curator of a new exhibition of Tudor and Stuart court art at the Victoria & Albert Museum, that the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge should be buying cutting-edge modern art – to “engage with the contemporary” and encourage the wealth of young artistic talent that exists in this country – is being treated as though it is something outrageously novel. Yet isn’t it in some ways almost wearyingly predictable?
Public interest in art has expanded massively over the past two decades, which can only be a good thing. The David and Victoria Beckhams of this world like to think of themselves as mavens of contemporary art, which is probably also in the wider scheme of things not an entirely bad thing. More than that, there seems to be barely a public-funded project in this country that doesn’t attempt to “add value” through art – the Olympics being only the most visible recent example of this. Private views of “difficult” contemporary art, which 30 years ago would have been attended only by a scruffy huddle of the cognoscenti, now rival film premieres and society parties in terms of paparazzi-pulling power.
And if the Royal family were to embroil themselves in the rackety super-bling of the contemporary art scene, it certainly wouldn’t be setting a precedent. The royals of the past didn’t buy great works of art just because they liked them – though some undoubtedly did – but because art was an inescapable aspect of grandeur. Now, art is an inescapable aspect of cool. And cool is arguably of considerably more value to the Royal family than grandeur.
The House of Windsor has done an extraordinary job of maintaining a dignified distance (in the face of hugely publicised setbacks) while hanging in with increasingly informal times. Say what you like about William and Kate, they are refreshingly unstuffy in comparison with their forebears. Aligning themselves with contemporary art – the new rock’n’roll, as it’s been referred to for nearly two decades – feels an astute piece of brand management. Indeed, given their age and the fact that Kate has a degree in art history, it would seem rather odd if it didn’t happen purely of its own accord.
Yet if William and Kate do get involved in buying contemporary art, it certainly won’t be under the aegis of that magnificent institution the Royal Art Collection – that great hoard of painting, sculpture and objets d’art amassed by William’s ancestors which ranks as one of the world’s great collections.
While it’s tempting to imagine the members of the Royal family going out with the royal cheque book to make acquisitions that will stamp their taste on the collection, they don’t own it. The Royal Collection is held in trust for the nation and administered by a charitable trust. Acquisitions, such as they are these days, are made by the trustees, the latest being a suite of Warhol prints of, unsurprisingly, the Queen.
While Tessa Murdoch talks of the Duke and Duchess encouraging great portraiture, royals have little say in the commissioning of official portraits. If they wish to become contemporary art collectors, the Cambridges will have to spend their own money on their own entirely private collection to be housed in their own apartments. The last royal to do this on any scale was the Queen Mother, who bought mid-20th-century Neo-Romantic painters such as Graham Sutherland and John Piper – then at the cutting edge of British art – on the advice of Kenneth Clark, the hugely influential director of the National Gallery.
But what would William and Kate buy that would immediately identify them with the taste of their time, and which current art grandee would advise them? Charles Saatchi? The YBA generation – Hirst, Emin et al – whom Saatchi helped to fame may be associated with youthful bravado, but they are old enough to be the Cambridges’ parents and well past their sell-by date from an artistic point of view.
The fact is that there is nothing in contemporary art that screams now the way Warhol and Lichtenstein did in the Sixties, or Hirst and Emin arguably did in the Nineties. The young artists of today are a rather well-mannered, studious bunch comfortably absorbed in refining and tweaking the developments of previous decades in an art world where the barriers have long been comfortably set.
A cynic such as, well, Hilary Mantel might say that made them and the Cambridges well-suited to each other. Indeed, royal patronage might seem the last nail in the coffin for modern art as a subversive, anti-establishment force. Yet in all honesty, that old chestnut really bit the dust long before William and Kate were even born.
Follow Telegraph Art on Twitter
The Books That Shaped Art History, Richard Shone and John-Paul Stonard (editors). Thames & Hudson. £24.95.
Archives Select a Month... February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 Search Recent Comments Henk commented on Spain 1 Chile 0 (after extra time): Surely it freddie beck commented on Who remembered BA had a stake in Air Mauritius?: Excellent Droitwich commented on Air New Zealand on weed: the biofuel sort: Guys if yo J.Healy commented on PICTURE: The new United Airlines livery revealed: Ugly. Con Darth Rex commented on Don't fancy yours much...: Beauty is Bob commented on PICTURE: The new United Airlines livery revealed: When you'r Tracy commented on PICTURE: The new United Airlines livery revealed: The older Maarten commented on PICTURE: The new United Airlines livery revealed: Hmmm, look Matt commented on Don't fancy yours much...: From which Victoria Moores commented on Virgin unveils its new colours: Hi Caio,T Recent Entries Virgin pair and Baltic Miles take the plaudits at 2013 Loyalty Awards Kingdom's prince gives up Airbus's queen Does AA-US Airways deal signal final piece of US merger jigsaw? What was Steve Ridgway's biggest Virgin regret? Case of the missing American tail American steps up game with new interior Customer service the Ryanair way What next for Italian airlines? American's new livery - in good company? Can Frontier succeed in Trenton? Flightglobal Blogroll FlightbloggerThe DEW LineLearmountImage of the Day blogUnusual AttitudeHyperbolaAs the Cro(ft) FliesThe Flight BlogAsian SkiesWings Down UnderThe Flight International BlogRunway GirlEditor's blog Subscribe by E-mail Delta at LAX - tell me something I didn't know By Edward Russell on March 8, 2013 3:28 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0) | So Delta Air Lines is expanding at Los Angeles. What else is new?The Atlanta-based SkyTeam alliance member has been dribbling out the expansion since December when it loaded flights between Los Angeles and Seattle (from 8 April). Flights to Nashville (from 8 April) were added in January, Anchorage (from 21 June), Bozeman (from 22 June), San Jose, California (from 1 July) and Spokane (from 10 June) in February. It will also begin flights to San Jose, Costa Rica, from 1 July.Delta will boost frequency to Guadalajara, New Orleans, Oakland, Phoenix, Puerto Vallarta, Sacramento and San Francisco as well, it says.
Flickr user InSapphoWeTrustStephen Hedden, team leader for network planning at Delta who focuses on the US west coast, said that the airline is taking advantage of "opportune flying" on aircraft that have down time at either Los Angeles or outstations with its new flights, on the sidelines of the Network USA 2013 forum in San Antonio on 4 March.Delta is testing markets to see where best to allocate its aircraft out west beyond its third quarter schedule, he added.Even with the expansion, Delta will still be third fiddle to United Airlines and American Airlines in terms of available seat kilometres (ASKs) out of Los Angeles in July, according to Innovata FlightMap Analytics. United will have a 14.1% market share with 1.9 million ASKs, American a 12.7% share with 1.7 million ASKs and Delta a 10.3% share with nearly 1.4 million ASKs.While it may be third, Delta benefits from a large network of partner airlines at the airport. Its strategic partners Alaska Airlines, Air France-KLM and Virgin Australia, and codeshare partners Aeromexico, China Airlines, China Eastern, China Southern, Hawaiian Airlines, Korean Air and WestJet all serve Los Angeles.It will be interesting to watch what routes Delta sticks with and what it does not as it tests out markets Los Angeles, especially as the competitive landscape changes with the American-US Airways merger. Categories: Airlines, airports, Americas Tags: delta air lines, lax, los angeles 0 TrackBacks 
Kingdom Holding didn't respond when Flightglobal inquired, a few weeks back, about the situation with its A380 - the Trent 900-powered MSN2 - but this story appears to confirm what had been suspected. The company, whose investments include the social network Twitter, doesn't seem to have mentioned the buyer or the reason for the sale, but presumably prince Alwaleed will have to slum it in his private 747-400 for the foreseeable.Of course, if his royal highness has sold the real A380, perhaps he'll also consider putting his model version on eBay. Which he part-owns as well. So keep your eyes open. Categories: A380, Africa/Middle East, Airlines, Quirkies Tags: A380, Kingdom Holding, Prince Alwaleed 0 TrackBacks 





