Has Inverleith House in Edinburgh been 'saved'?
The answer is, as is often the case in this world: yes, and no. Its fate certainly seems have been carefully adjusted. It looked, in October of last year, that its days as an art gallery were numbered.
Its doors were literally closed after the meaningfully-titled I Still Believe in Miracles show. And a Botanic Gardens (RBGE) statement clearly stated: "Inverleith House will no longer be dedicated to the display of contemporary art, and RBGE is looking at options for the alternative use of the building."
It all appeared very sudden, and there had been no consultation with the arts world. Its sudden change in circumstance was somewhat of a bombshell in the cultural world.
There were protests, an expertly organised petition, an open letter from major artistic figures which read like a Who's Who of the art world (including Martin Boyce, Douglas Gordon, Anish Kapoor, Richard Wright, Tracey Emin, Jim Lambie, Ed Ruscha, Victoria Miro and Richard Armstrong) and, eventually, the Scottish Government got involved, leading to the establishment of a high-powered working group.
The petition asked that this "beautiful building remains open to the public as an arts space and gallery, for the foreseeable future." Now, following the published report of the working group (whose report included both a wealth of good ideas and some carefully worded criticism of the RBGE), the House will remain a venue for exhibitions.
But it will be, it seems, quite different from the Inverleith House of the last 30 years. There will be shows, but not necessarily contemporary art, and not necessarily visual art, and exhibitions will be interspersed with events that are designed to make money.
Perhaps the art world will be relieved the House is not being, as was once rumoured, transformed into a boutique hotel, convention centre or artisanal cafe. But whether it will return to being a key site for the display of contemporary art? That remains to be seen. It will be interesting to see the make up of a new arts advisory group, and how much notice is taken of their input to the workings of the RBGE.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here