I arranged with the Warburg Institute to take my son to visit its library and archive.   I had scarcely been back since I was a postgraduate student there in the late 1970s.   Little has changed:  the open access stacks of the library arranged according to Warburg’s intellectual principles, such that a Renaissance treatise is shelved next to the latest offprint;  the gunmetal grey filing cabinets of the Photographic Collection where I worked every Friday.   I had never seen the archive which was established in the early 1990s to make Warburg’s own papers more publicly available.   They still have serried ranks of card index boxes in which Warburg developed the intellectual system of his ideas, neat little rows of notes interleaved with articles, images and transcripts from early twentieth century books and journals.   What comes across is the continuing relevance of Warburg’s ideas and the intellectual integrity of the library as a whole, which makes it more baffling that London University should have challenged the terms of the Warburg family’s 1944 deed of trust in court.

I occasionally walk across Hyde Park to or from my dentist.   Today, it meant that I found myself crossing Hyde Park Corner at lunchtime, giving me an opportunity to admire Charles Jagger’s astonishing monument to the artillery in the first world war.   I know that everyone else already knows and understands the historical and artistic significance of this work.   But, seen in the midday sun, I found it very moving to see this great monument to the suffering of the Great War, the names of the battlefields carved in stone, the single soldiers standing in commemoration, the bas reliefs showing scenes of battle.   It’s a gun salute in stone:

Continue reading →

One of best features of the building we occupy on Burlington Gardens is the statues on the façade:  serried ranks of figures from the British and European past (‘English worthies’ and ‘illustrious foreigners’) whose subject specialisms – art, science, medicine and law – reveal that the building was originally designed as the headquarters of the University of London.   As part of David Chipperfield’s plans for the renovation of the building, we’ve just had Linnaeus restored.   It shows how wonderful the building will look once the façade has been properly cleaned and repaired, the bird shit removed, and the building restored to its full mid-Victorian, late neoclassical glory.   Here is Linnaeus:

Here is Leibnitz unrestored:

Continue reading →

I arranged to take some patrons up onto the roof of Burlington House this evening in order to show them the scale of the site and the significance of our plan to connect Burlington House to the old Museum of Mankind building in Burlington Gardens.   It was originally all one site, with a courtyard in front of a mansion built in the 1660s, transformed in the early eighteenth-century by Lord Burlington and sold to the government by the Duke of Devonshire in 1854.   Richard Carew-Pole who is leading our fund-raising says the site as a whole is the same size as the British Museum.   Oddly, I had scarcely been onto the roof before last week:

Continue reading →

Today has been preoccupied by the opening of our exhibition Radical Geometry:  Modern Art of South America.   It’s a period of art with which I was wholly unfamiliar:  abstract, lucid, strongly idealising, politically motivated, bringing the language of modernism from the Bauhaus to south America.   I particularly like the wonderful third room which includes playful, wire, polyhedral sculptures from a group of Venezuelan artists called The Dissidents.   The work all comes from the collection of Patricia de Cisneros in New York and the curators are both graduates of the Latin American studies programme at Essex University.

One of the consequences of writing my blog is that I’ve become more attentive to my surroundings.   This morning in the course of my short walk to breakfast I noticed the rooftops all in the space of roughly 100 yards of the junction of Bond Street and Burlington Gardens.   Of course, I should have noticed them long ago:

Continue reading →

I went to a wonderful talk last night by Lisa Jardine in conversation with Patrick Wright about St. Paul’s.   She made the case for Wren having inherited the high church, royalist interests of his father, who was Dean of Windsor and preserved the Garter ceremony through the civil war, and his uncle, Matthew, who was Bishop of Ely.   Her view of St. Paul’s is that it is concerned with artifice and theatre, a work of the baroque, as evident in the false outer wall of the chancel which disguises a thinner interior and in the false outer dome concealing a smaller inner dome.   I’m not totally convinced.   I’ve always thought of Wren as more interested in solving issues of construction than in creating strong visual effects,  belonging to the generation of the Royal Society more than Archbishop Laud, a friend of Hooke, of course, interested in science and optics more than theatre:  big on masonry too.