David Lister: The Week in Arts

Tate Modern has just rehung its collection. The results are by and large striking, with major works from the likes of Ellsworth Kelly, Douglas Gordon and Steve McQueen on show for the first time. There is also the Tate's first display of works by artists working in Africa, and some fascinating art from South America. I was mesmerised by a film from the Brazilian artist Rivane Neuenschwander of magnified ants moving a piece of confetti.

And, of course, there remains one of the star attractions from last year's rehang - the darkened room where one can sit and contemplate Mark Rothko abstracts on all sides. It is a haven for meditation. No wonder staff at the gallery are referring to it as their cathedral.

But, one very significant aspect of the latest rehang does cause alarm bells to ring. It is a full three rooms given over to drawings from the UBS collection. UBS is not, of course, one of the great galleries of the world. It's a bank. It is the bank that is helping to fund Tate Modern by donating "a significant sum". These are the words used by both the Tate and UBS, as neither seems to talk in plain, old-fashioned figures.

I asked a senior figure at UBS why the bank would not say how much it was giving, and he replied: "The reason is that what is significant to one person may not be significant to an other person." Gosh, it's complicated. I rather think that as the Tate is a public institution, owned by you and me and not by UBS, we ought really to know where it gets its money from and how much it gets. But there we are; as I have had to say a number of times recently, the leaders of our national arts institutions are a secretive lot.

But however significant the sum - and for the sake of argument let's assume it's as significant as significant can be - why should a funder get three whole rooms for its private collection? If I won the lottery and decided to give a sizeable chunk to the Tate, would I get a room or three for any art that I own, or maybe my holiday snaps?

What is really significant about this whole significant deal is that this is the first time in Britain that a private funder of a national and nationally subsidised art gallery has gained, as part of the deal, a suite of rooms to show off its own private collection. As far as I know, UBS has no plans to sell its drawings on the open market. But were it one day to decide to do so, the fact that the drawings had been exhibited at the Tate would do no harm to the sale price. No harm at all.

I don't know what the head of the Tate, Sir Nicholas Serota, thinks of such goings on. He plays his cards close to his chest on such matters. It is his job to raise money for the Tate wherever he can in what are pretty difficult times, but I suspect he is not thrilled at having to set such a precedent. I'm certainly far from thrilled that the precedent has been set.

Trying to satisfy the demands of private and corporate funders against the demands of the balance sheet has never been an easy compromise to bring off. And in a year when the public spending review will bring little joy to the arts in terms of government money, it is likely to get harder still.

Now that the door has been opened to the money men to put their private collections on display in world-famous galleries, then it's a sure bet that this will be on the must have list for future contracts between galleries and culturally aware banks. If it doesn't end in tears, it will certainly end in some dull displays.

Give him a bell next time ...

The use of covermounts - those give-away goodies with newspapers - does involve a lot of important communication, not least when it's a CD being given away. But when The Mail on Sunday gave away Mike Oldfield's Tubular Bells, one individual was left out of the chain of communication - Mr Oldfield. And when he came across the newspaper, and his masterpiece attached, he wasn't happy.

Writing in the industry journal Music Week, he says: "EMI's decision to give away Tubular Bells was taken without my agreement or even the simple courtesy of EMI telling me about it... I have no desire to push my music to someone who has not sought it out."

Even though Music Week then deem it necessary to tell its music industry readers that "Mike Oldfield is the artist who released the classic album Tubular Bells", I'd say he's a reasonably important player in the process. He may not fully own his creation any more, but a phone call from EMI would have been polite.

* Barbara Green from Hebden Bridge writes to me to point out her indignation that tickets for the Royal Shakespeare Company production of King Lear at Stratford-upon-Avon are being sold on eBay. It seems that a £5 standing ticket will cost you £55.

I share her distaste for ticket touting in general, but I have to say that if tickets are to be sold on eBay, then I do feel a frisson of joy that among the pop concerts, West End musicals and sporting events, Shakespeare is at last getting a look-in.

It helps to give the lie to rumours that our society is dumbing down. Let's have more ticket touts for RSC productions in Stratford. Indeed, I'd like to see them all lining the banks of the Avon. "Who wants best seats? Front stalls; perfect view of Sir Ian McKellen in the raw. Come on, 'unaccommodated man' for £55. It's a bargain."

More from David Lister