Letter: Private prejudice, public interest and Bow's 'House'

Mr James Lingwood
Monday 29 November 1993 19:02 EST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Sir: Once more, Eric Flounders conflates private prejudice with public interest (Letters, 25 November). The decision by the Bow Neighbourhood Committee, on his casting vote, not to allow Rachel Whiteread's House a briefly longer life takes no account of the prodigious interest this sculpture has generated. Only last weekend more than 3,000 people signed a petition on site in only 12 hours. Many of these were not representatives of the 'chattering classes' whom Mr Flounders acknowledges may be interested, but people who live and work locally.

We do not deny that Artangel agreed that the site should be cleared by today. However, our agreement also implied that the work would be visible for a period of about three months. We had hoped to begin work at the beginning of June. For reasons beyond both Artangel's and Rachel Whiteread's control, we did not gain access to the vacated property until August. Given the several false starts we had suffered, our specialist contractors could not begin until September.

All that Artangel had requested from Bow Neighbourhood Committee was an extension to compensate for the loss of time at the beginning. Then the sculpture would come down. We believe that this was, and remains, an extremely modest request. To turn it down places iconoclasm and intolerance before genuine local and national interest.

Yours faithfully,

JAMES LINGWOOD

Co-Director

Artangel

London, W1

29 November

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in