unmoved by Art Under Attack at Tate Britain

The renovated front entrance to the Tate Britain opens up a new and open friends room under the dome, and a stylish marble spiral staircase. It was fun to create new geographical connections and I was keen to visit the new exhibition, Art under Attack, which aimed to describe the history of British iconoclasm, through three main themes of religion, politics and aesthetics. There was quite an effort to define iconoclasm, as image breaking, but also conversely meaning innovation.

It was difficult to interpret the dissolution of the monasteries as innovative, rather than the egotistical machinations of a crazy king. The children of King Henry VIII were variously catholic and protestant and sought to impose their new found laws as religious leaders. Therefore, it seemed inevitable that they would abuse their new and misunderstood power. While I detest the wilful destruction of art, I wonder where to draw the line between art that is propoganda, in the form of educational paintings and political statues, and art that conveys an accessible artistic message. When the message is no longer important, is destruction of art just another form of clearing out?

Further, what exactly is vandalism? In the streets of Berlin and other edgy cities, it has been described as art, but when it interacts directly with traditional art, that is not so acceptable. But then, so little of current art is in any way interactive, that it seems inevitable that tensions will overheat. While the concept offered so much, the actual exhibition seemed a little bland and conservative, representing the current status quo of repaired materpieces with photocopies of patterns of dissatisfaction.