Museum and gallery goers have been backing British culture, despite the economic downturn. Record numbers have joined the national fundraising charity, the Art Fund, boosting its membership by 15% last year.
The fund allows regional and national institutions to acquire important works for their collections.
"It might look surprising when set next to some of the more urgent charitable causes," said Stephen Deuchar, director of the Art Fund. "Yet there has been a quickening of the philanthropic pulse which means that more people, not just the upper echelons, are doing more to support galleries and museums. There seems to be a greater understanding that the quality of British life is bound up with the quality of these things."
Deuchar puts the trend down to an urge to improve communities and the reinvention last spring of the fund's National Art Pass, allowing holders to gain discounts and free admission to arts venues.
"When this organisation started, it was about large-scale philanthropy and the good of the nation. Now it has been replaced by the feeling that it is about the individual and the world they want to live in," he said.
In 2011, the Art Fund supported or pledged to support the acquisition of almost 150 works of art. Items acquired with its help included Alex Katz's portrait of Vogue editor Anna Wintour, which is now in the National Portrait Gallery and currently its most popular picture and bestselling postcard.
Comments
31 December 2011 8:06PM
This report looks like a cut'n'paste from a press release. And it looks like a good news story so why not.
But there's no mention of the huge incentive they gave last summer to recruit new members - a free 3-month membership offer that went viral on the web and probably gained them loads of new members who subsequently signed up when the 3 months were up. But that increase in membership may have been purely (and probably was) a one-off associated with that promotion - so to report a huge increase in members without mentioning how they were acquired is a little bit economical with the facts.
So it's only good news if that feat can be repeated, or if all the new members renew in year 2... Probably too early to call at this stage - a properly researched journalistic article would have pointed this out.
31 December 2011 8:12PM
Surprised that there is no reference in the story to the Guardian Extra offer earlier this year, which gave 3 months free membership of the Fund. We took advantage, made good use of our passes, and then received a very good discount on an offer to continue our membership for another year. I'm sure we were only 2 among many who will have done the same.
31 December 2011 8:22PM
Not at all. The rich have always been happier to donate to glamorous charities in the realm of art and culture rather than charities that deal with the grubby end of life.
31 December 2011 8:54PM
I'm one of the new members of the Art Fund. I began thinking about it when I went to a regional exhibition in which they'd been involved - and I reflected on how much I'd benefited from free museums throughout my life, especially when I was growing up. But there was also the plus that the free admission and discounted admission to exhibitions offered by the Art Pass would give me the incentive to visit museums, galleries and exhibitions when full price charges put me off. It feels like a small extravagance and a very small means of acknowledging what museums and galleries have meant to me. It doesn't mean I don't give to other charities - and I mentally calculate my Art Fund pass with cultural expenses (as pleasure) rather than with charitable giving (an inadequate set of donations to organisations that are concerned with social responsibility and justice in an unjust and unequal society).
31 December 2011 9:49PM
I guess the membership is about as rich and glamorous as the National Trust if Mr and Mrs G. are anything to go by i.e. not a lot of either sadly. It is a bargain by any standards and with spin offs like being able to use the often surprisingly excellent catering outlets in museums and art galleries without necessarily paying the entrance charge, helping them to keep open in these hard times.
As another poster has suggested its likely most members regard it as part of their leisure/cultural activity spend not affecting their charitable giving (I can't speak for the rich and glamorous on that of course).
1 January 2012 10:17AM
It would be nice to think that the Art Fund was used by regional galleries to purchase the work made by regional based artists unfortunately in most instances it is used to buy the work made by artists firmly entrenched in the London art world ( usually with a bit of a name and a price bracket to go with it).
Perhaps this is due to the way the art world is structured, regional galleries being showcases for the London gallery network coupled with a careerist currying of favours for the future amongst the regional curators. It may also be due to a lack of confidence amongst these regional based curators who are afraid to back anything that is not already been given the green light by their "betters".
On the other hand it could be something within the criteria for receiving funds through the Art Fund. The Art Fund is of course based in London and most of the trustees have london connections.
So yes lots of people donating to the art fund but most of this money disappearing into the well lined pockets of well heeled galleries and well connected artists.
Shame really when so much really good stuff goes unrecognised.
3 January 2012 10:32AM
Art Fund membership is a bargain compared to some other museum membership schemes. I'm saving money by giving up several memberships and using the Art Fund discount instead.