ONE of Scotland's leading businessmen has harshly criticised the decision by drinks giant Diageo to sell the £10 million masterpiece The Monarch of the Glen - among the most celebrated artworks in the country.
The drinks firm announced last week that it would sell the famous piece, created by English painter Sir Edwin Landseer in 1851, at Christie's auction in December because it had "no direct link to our business or brands".
Now renowned banker Sir Angus Grossart, a key figure behind the £66m revamp of the Burrell Collection, has branded Diageo "unworthy" of the feted artwork and in a letter published in today's Herald described the sale as a "slap in the face".
Read more: Donald Trump's US Election victory is a 'devastating result for the world'
And the former vice-president of Royal Bank of Scotland demanded that "noble Scottish prince" should be gifted to a public institution for free.
He writes: "This decision should be reversed by the board of Diageo, and before it becomes a major public issue."
Sir Angus compared the international display of the artwork before putting it under the hammer as akin to "a captured prince being taken to Rome to be sold for the highest price, to any buyer".
He said the decision to sell the oil-on-canvas "seems like a specious rationalisation of a procurement decision, rather than a considered group decision of the reputational and Scottish issues involved."
But Diageo argued that they have loaned historic works of Scottish galleries and recently gifted a key piece to the country.
The Monarch of the Glen had been was on loan for 17 years to the National Museum of Scotland.
Read more: Donald Trump's US Election victory is a 'devastating result for the world'
Sir Angus, chair of Noble Grossart, is a former vice chairman of the Royal Bank of Scotland and has served as a chair of the National Museums of Scotland, the National Galleries of Scotland, and the Heritage Lottery Fund and is still deeply involved in cultural affairs: he is chairman of Lyon & Turnbull, the Burrell Renaissance and the Edinburgh International Culture Summit.
He said Diageo's decision to sell the painting "has to be challenged, and changed".
In the letter he comments on the "highly contentious" takeover of The Distillers Company by Guinness in 1986, and how the painting became owned by Diageo, which was itself formed in 1997 from a merger of Guinness and Grand Metropolitan.
Sir Angus writes: "Great significance was placed in the repatriation of the Monarch to Scotland, where it became a major feature in the head office in Edinburgh, and reinforced the senior executive presence in Scotland.
"Over time, the painting was freely lent or made available, always in a context which presented Diageo as a committed corporate participant in Scottish public and cultural life.
"This was not symbolic but was promoted strongly as confirming the integrity of their intentions and an acknowledgement of their wider responsibilities, as a major company in Scotland."
Read more: Donald Trump's US Election victory is a 'devastating result for the world'
Sir Angus concludes: "Is it to raise £10m for a company which is capitalised at £52bn? It beggars belief that the board has endorsed this proposal....It is hoped that a more considered judgement, and wiser counsel will prevail, before this is allowed to happen."
A Diageo spokesman said: “We have recently announced that we are gifting the Thin Red Line by Robert Gibb, acknowledged as one of the most important works of Scottish military art, to National Museums Scotland on behalf of the nation. We have also confirmed that the Macnab by Sir Henry Raeburn will remain on loan to the Kelvingrove Art Gallery in Glasgow. Therefore, Diageo is responsible for two major works by Scottish artists being available to public view, which we believe is a significant cultural contribution in Scotland.”
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel