King Charles III at the US Congress ✎

Watching the King deliver a wonderful address with grace and humour, referencing shared cultural icons of Oscar Wilde and Charles Dickens, it shows the respect and dignity a head of state should command.

My favourite part is when he said: “America’s words carry weight and meaning, as they have since independence. The actions of this great nation matter even more.”

I think the respect and dignity of the US government has been on the decline ever since Donald Trump. His rudeness and disrespectful attitude to his so-called allies (esp. Canada), and his vindictive egomania, has really tarnished the gravitas of the US.

Anyway, well done King Charles. 

✲✲✲

My favourite system of government is a Parliament with a constitutional monarchy. The best argument in favour of this approach was articulated by Sir Walter Bagehot. Bagehot famously divided the British government into two distinct branches: the dignified and the efficient. The Crown is the “dignified” part of our constitution. Its purpose is not to “govern”, but to provide the symbolic historical foundations of our nation. I think this is a deeply conservative institution and, my goodness, I can’t overestimate its importance. The Monarch is not elected, and don’t take sides in debates. They are a living bridge to our past, our culture, the nation’s history and continuity. They represent the nation’s shared identity from centuries ago to the present day which transcend the prevailing political differences of the day. 

In divided & difficult times, the Monarchy is consistent and visible. Their value to the UK is immeasurable.

The church of St Martin-in-the-Fields ✎

I was lucky to capture a burst of the setting sunlight against a cloudy evening.

At Trafalgar Square.

Do art galleries devalue the art in their tacky gift shops? ✎

This is the from the blockbuster Van Gogh exhibition last year at the National Gallery:

 

I felt a bit embarrassed. 😔

I think Van Gogh would be shocked by what’s been done to his work.

His sunflowers motif were a lifelong, almost spiritual, expression of “gratitude” of being face to face with nature. E.g. see Gauguin’s depiction of Van Gogh’s magnum opus. The power of his art comes from his energy and excitement; and Van Gogh was a troubled soul.

Quite a lot of his paintings were done in an asylum, and it feels v. disrespectful to slap his face and works on tacky bags, jewelry, kitchen towels, tea matts, and everything else etc. 

Van Gogh always wanted “validation” (esp. among the respectable Paris salons), but he certainly had a respect for art.

I get museums are strapped for cash, but is it too much?  🤔

Yellow Islands by Jackson Pollock (1952) ✎

From the Tate.

I don’t enjoy the chaos & nor do I really appreciate the appeal.

But I can see how revolutionary it was in art history.

No doubt a reflection of the world during the atomic age. The nuclear arms race, power of electrons and molecular matter. Artists from this era lived through two world wars, the Holocaust and the Great Depression. How do you make art that is meaningful? The expressionists turned inwards to themselves, and painted what they felt instead.

To me, a bit cheap and cheerful - more of a craft than art.

The Grand Turk Giving a Concert to his Mistress by Carle van Loo (1737) ✎

I saw this at the Wallace Collection.  It’s a historically significant work of art.

Carle van Loo was part of the 18th century French Rococo movement, and especially the “Turquerie” trend of the time.

This was a European artistic trend for “Oriental” scenes (v. popular in the 18th century). It was a reflection of the French aristocracy’s fascination with the exotic East. And, as the Wallace Collection argue, one of the “best examples of the Turquerie”. It was exhibited at the Salon of 1737 and was one of a famous pair.

The “mistress” is singing positioned to the left of the Grand Turk, leaning in towards a musical score. Laden with symbolism.