It’s lovely here in the Art Fund director’s office, both elegant and cosy. Windows sweep from floor to ceiling, an Iznik bowl on a low table reflects the glow from a gas fire. But, even so, Stephen Deuchar doesn’t seem quite settled. It’s the way he moves warily across the room; turns to stare at his computer when it makes a noise.
Do you feel at home here yet? I ask. ‘No, not yet. But, actually, being uncomfortable isn’t a bad thing.’ Deuchar sits down on a sofa opposite me and grins. ‘I know from having spent 11 years in my last job [he was founding director of Tate Britain] that it’s much easier to see things clearly when you’re uncomfortable and new.’
So what does Dr Deuchar see? Well, the Art Fund is a curious place. Walking into its HQ is like falling down Lewis Carroll’s rabbit hole: every tiny room bustles with arty business; a lady with emerald eyeshadow, orange nails and big, bright magenta hair presides over reception. It’s a curious concept, too: a charity which uses private cash to save art for the public.
‘Amazing, isn’t it?’ says Deuchar. ‘Since 1903, we’ve helped to save over 860,000 works of art. I met a minister in Moscow last year who was so surprised by the idea he almost refused to believe in it. He kept saying, “A private institution that gives away money to museums and galleries? Is it possible? If only we had one in Russia!”’
So what’s there for a new director to do? Well, though the Art Fund is above reproach, it may still be in need of gentle reorientation. Deuchar doesn’t mention it, but his predecessor, charming David Barrie, now CBE, is said to have focused more on the distinguished membership than on the museums and galleries, which put some curators’ noses out of joint.
Comments
Join the debate for just £1 a month
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for £3.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just £1 a monthAlready a subscriber? Log in