UK PM Removes Raleigh Portrait from 10 Downing Street!

[MisterBadger]

The first female British Chancellor has done a similar thing. She's ordered the removal of all pictures of men in the 11 Downing Street state room in favour of artworks of or by women. Look, I understand that she wants different artwork and she's perfectly entitled to do so but it just seems a bit ott to me.

Rachel Reeves orders removal of all pictures of men in state room

The Chancellor announced that every painting in the room would be replaced by artworks of or by women in order to celebrate 'amazing women who have gone before us'.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Perhaps she just said it in the hope that thousands of Daily Mail readers will expire of apoplectic indignation...

 

[MisterBadger]

Looks much better now in number 10. Seriously, those were pretty gruesome portraits, relics of the English colonial era. The paint is off. I don't think there's anything wrong with Paula Rego as a representative of contemporary art. All the better that her art shows the suffering of oppression but also the strength of women. There are currently cultures in which the disenfranchisement of women is being promoted. Standing up for women's rights has nothing to do with a woke attitude to life.

@UB 40 - The English colonial era lasted from the 12thC (if we start with Ireland), or the 16thC (if we look at global aspirations), and ended about 1960. If you get rid of all the art from that period because some of its connotations offend modern sensibilities, there won't be a lot left.

As for me, I'd have kept those portraits of Queen Elizabeth I and Sir Walter Ralegh as two pretty admirable and inspiring people.

 

[SmokeyJock]

They should hang up that tapestry of Simon Sudbury being beheaded during the peasants revolt as a reminder of the fate of past chancellors who catered solely to the whims of the rich, that's still nicely historical

 

[UB 40]

And maybe it’s just that: (to quote The Telegraph) A spokesperson said: “The change of artwork is long planned, since before the election, and is timed to mark 125 years of the Government Art Collection (GAC).”

 

[UB 40]

@UB 40 - The English colonial era lasted from the 12thC (if we start with Ireland), or the 16thC (if we look at global aspirations), and ended about 1960. If you get rid of all the art from that period because some of its connotations offend modern sensibilities, there won't be a lot left.

As for me, I'd have kept those portraits of Queen Elizabeth I and Sir Walter Ralegh as two pretty admirable and inspiring people.

Nothing wrong to hang the pictures in the British Museum. I wouldn’t mind.

 

[First Sealord]

10 and 11 Downing Street are not the private properties of the Prime minister and the Chancellor of the Exchequer. These individuals are temporary tenants of these premises.
It's fine and dandy to shuffle, replace curtains, furniture, cutlery, if you want. Change the bedroom mattress if it's not to your liking.
If the Chancellor wishes to promote women's role and contributions, she can organize an art exhibition, for example.
Portraits of previous occupants, influential figures and monarchs are there for a reason. Having them removed is, to me, a profound sign of disrespect and should not be allowed. It's wrong.
What would Starmer's reaction be upon learning that his successor had his portrait removed from 10, Downing Street?

 

[condorlover1]

@UB 40 : Don't you mean the National Portrait Gallery?

 

[condorlover1]

@First Sealord : Removing the current inhabitant of Downing Street might get you bonus points from the UK general population!

 

[UB 40]

@UB 40 : Don't you mean the National Portrait Gallery?

That might be the ideal place.