Do Princes William and Harry realise what they are stirring up? They are going to commission a statue of their mother for the grounds of Kensington Gardens. It is more than understandable for them to seek to honour Diana’s memory. But how will the artist be chosen?
The Queen has the greatest art collection on earth – Leonardo da Vinci’s drawings at Windsor Castle are enough by themselves to justify that claim – but it was inherited from royal ancestors. The modern Windsors don’t usually go about buying or commissioning major works of art. It would raise too many issues about the funding of the monarchy and its influence on contemporary culture. Even new royal portraits are often commissioned by the National Portrait Gallery rather than the Queen.
For William and Harry to announce they are going to commission a public statue is a smack in the face for any idea that modern British art is democratic and egalitarian. The royals are weighing in on art, and their commission looks as if it will be an unmediated expression of their personal taste. Clearly, their choice of art will be influential and powerful.
It could also be stupid. The princes appear to know what they want – they are seeking to commission a statue of Diana, presumably a realistic one. So we are going to get another of the godawful attempts at lifelike statuary that already make British public spaces a laughing stock – and this one will come with the royal seal of approval.
Please don’t do it, your highnesses. Take some better advice. Or simply visit St Pancras station. Does Diana really deserve to be remembered with a third-rate bronze figure that lacks all creativity and imagination? The giant lovers at St Pancras, not to mention statues of sporting heroes throughout the land, prove that realistic statues are simply not the artistic forte of our age. No serious artist of out time does them. Only hacks are in this game. Therefore by definition, a lifelike portrait statue of Diana will be bad art.
If Michelangelo, Bernini, Canova or Rodin were still in business, then commissioning a statue from them would be a terrific idea. Sadly they are not. Perhaps the last British artist to make good portrait sculpture was Jacob Epstein, whose Winston Churchill has recently re-entered the Oval Office, but today this is a banal sub-artistic genre.
Commission a sculpture not a statue. That might mean anything from a sky mirror by Anish Kapoor to a sombre cast by Rachel Whiteread. It should be a work by a leading British artist, that will represent the modern Britain to which Diana very much belonged. This is no time to be trashing the contemporary culture she embraced with some dire chunk of conservative kitsch. Diana deserves the very best in British art, and that means something modern.
How about a work by Yinka Shonibare that explores Britain’s colonial history? That would work well in the gardens of Kensington Palace, whose architecture so strongly recalls the age of mercantilism. Alternatively this might be a magical setting for a piece of modern landscape art by Andy Goldsworthy or Richard Long. A memorial should offer a chance for contemplation. Modern art can create that mood much more poetically than some tacky portrait statue. If they fancy looking beyond the UK border, a sky space by the great American artist James Turrell would offer a very thoughtful and even spiritual context in which to think about Diana, the universe and everything.
For the royals to commission an ugly “realistic” statue would be a waste of money and a betrayal of Diana’s memory. She would be much better honoured by a modern masterpiece.
- This article was corrected on Monday 30 January to reflect that the funds for the statue are to be raised privately.
.jpg){kind=link}