Modern British Sculpture at the RA

I know even less about scuplture than other art forms, so I took myself off to be educated. I was disappointed and came away a little dispirited. Not because I did not enjoy some of the works but I thought the curation was awful.

It started badly with pictures of eight Epstein sculptures from the old BMA building, and eight titles. I couldn't match them. There was no explanation, which turned out to be a blessing when I read the drivel in subsequent rooms. For instance Barbara Hepburn and Henry Moore "took on the burden of public exhibition" - I presume that meant they were lucky enough to sell works to the taxpayer.

The selection of works was odd. I can accept the famous Carl Andre firebricks as sculpture, as minimalist as some paintings. A Damian Hirst work of real living flies and really offensively smelling meat in a large glass case is at least 3D.  I really don't know why 20 or so page 3s from the Sun stuck to a wall should be regarded as sculpture. There was a very amusing film about the objects people use to prop open windows and doors (etc) which I really enjoyed but could not fathom what it was doing there.

A large, seat-height, hessian-covered, rectangular, wooden box proclaimed itself to be an exhibit that was an exact replica of another hessian-covered wooden box that had been a show stopper at another exhibition, another venue and another period. We were nevertheless invited to sit on it. I was pleased to note that this seemed to have the effect of stopping anyone sitting on the more permanent stone benches which had no such invitation.

Carping aside, there was a stunning statue of Adam by Epstein (not for ladies of nervous disposition). Unfortunately he is 12 foot high and looking upwards and there was nothing to show his face - a ceiling mirror would have helped. I enjoyed a maze of perspex panels called exhibit (the artists escape me). The Hepburn and Moore works outshone their descriptions completely. There was an enormous imperial statue of Queen Vic, with 3 other structures in the room, the common link being construction by one-time presidents of the RA. The overall effect is unexpected - go and see it yourself. There were many smaller works of either beauty or interest, but sadly I think I shall remember this exhibition for the bad points.

Any one care to disagree?