Is it a reasonable first choice of art museums to see in London? I'm interested in most periods and modes of art, trained in Modernism but happy enough with older and newer. Are there iconic works, or is it mostly new and/or rotating?
If not Tate Modern, then which art museum in London is a great choice? Or is seeking a strictly "art" museum a mistake, see British Museum, V&A etc first?
Thanks!
I am not a particular fan of the Tate Modern. (I know others will disagree - that is what art is all about!)
Last visit, a couple years ago, I was quite disappointed on how limited the permanent collection on display was. Certainly not extensive like MOMA's Modernists collection. My experience was primarily of temporary exhibits of contemporary artists rather than Modernists.
I don't generally enjoy exhibitions with warning signs that the works may not be appropriate for all visitors. There was at least one such rotating exhibit along with others that I found generally uninteresting. You can easily explore current exhibitions on the website. https://www.tate.org.uk/whats-on
Some enjoy the re-purposing of the building and the architecture or the cafe and rooftop bar. I was so disappointed with the exhibitions on my visit that I left without exploring these aspects.
There are many "great choices" for art museums in London. I'm sure my list off the top of my head leaves out some that others will fill in:
National Gallery
National Portrait Gallery
Wallace Collection
Tate Britain
Courtauld Gallery
Kenwood House
as you note - some fine art as well as applied arts in the V & A, but wouldn't be my first choice for paintings
Lots of museum choices in London - I'm sure there is no "best" way to decide which to visit first. Some will want museums that define themselves as "art museums", other travelers will be more drawn to the British Museum, Sir John Soane's House, Freud Museum, or other options. Consider what interests you - not what some guidebook or other traveler thinks should be seen.
I enjoyed the Tate Modern both times I visited. I am an "art lover", self educated and have been to many art museums in the US and Europe. I feel the V & A is sort of exhausting, with lots of "stuff." The British Museum is well worth your time but is more historical in nature. I was disappointed in the Wallace. The National Gallery and Portrait Gallery are outstanding.
Thanks, very helpful. National Gallery vs the Tate (not Tate Modern) - any preference there? I think National Gallery maybe, nice to see some of the greatest hits of the past thousand-ish years from all over Europe.
I was interested how the building had been converted, but I was not 'blown away' by the art. However, I'm not a big fan of modern art although I do like it once in awhile. I really liked the Courtauld Gallery. It is small, but lovely paintings on display.
I also do not like how the art is NOT displayed in chronological order but arranged thematically into broad groups.
Tate Britain vs National Gallery, my take:
Tate Britain - focus on British artists through the centuries. If you are interested in seeing an extensive collection of British artists - this is the place to go. You won't find better single of English/British collections (or at least I haven't) elsewhere. My personal favorites - Turner, Blake, the Pre-Raphaelites, Constable.
National Gallery - major internationally recognized art museum with an outstanding collection of Western European works; major artists, major works such as: https://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/stories/top-20-paintings
Again, I would say neither is "better" - depends on the visitor.
I thought of another outstanding spot for art: Apsley House. Wellington's House - the first Duke was given a number of paintings from the Spanish Royal Collection. Check opening hours - not open every day. https://www.wellingtoncollection.co.uk
The National Gallery is by far the most important and prestigious collection, way above what the Tate Britain holds.
Tate Modern is loved by Londoners. It’s a truly impressive building and always a must visit for me. The temporary (paid) exhibitions are often excellent. The whole South Bank area, where the Tate Modern is located, is well worth a visit.
The Courtauld and Wallace Collection are smaller but very interesting galleries.
I have some affection for Tate Modern.
If I were to think of some collection highlights off the top of my head, there might be Roy Lichtenstein's Whaam, Henri Matisse The Snail and Rothko's Seagram Murals. Louise Bourgeois' Maman is on display until 25th August. That would kinda make Tate Modern a "one work worth going to see and visiting the bookshop" gallery visit for me. One of the best works in Tate's collection.
This past November, we visited both Tate Modern and Tate Britain as well as the National Gallery and V&A. All different animals. My husband and I are kind of art geeks so we had been to all previously and enjoyed our return visits.
My take, Tate Modern skews large format and contemporary, and as others upthread have mentioned, is heavy on the special exhibit vs permanent collection. I am thrilled to gaze at a giant Matisse or get lost in any Rothko. So, the Tate Modern works for me.
A few extras to recommend it besides the art - there’s a top floor deck overlooking the Thames with a very nice straight-shot view to St Paul’s Cathedral. And, in my very unscientific, but extensive sampling of Victoria Sponge cakes at all London museum cafes, the Tate Modern’s sponge (ground floor cafe) ranked at the top.
All of that said, bang for my London art buck (with a very nice Victoria Sponge) - National Gallery is the winner.
The good thing about the national galleries in London is that it doesn't cost you any art bucks. Just going to see one thing for free is still pretty good value for money (even minus sponge cake).
Judging art and whether a museum is a reasonable first choice is a personal thing right? I couldn't stand Tate Modern, and except for photography I generally can't stand modern art. I would rather view the portraits by Sir Joshua Reynolds or 17th century Dutch genre. In the end you gotta go and determine for yourself.
The National Gallery is definitely the one to see for the best overview of international art in London.
I still think Tate Modern is worth visiting just for the sake of getting down to Bankside, seeing the building and maybe seeing some of those works I mentioned, or none of them, and seeing something else. The shops are good, especially the one on the Turbine Hall level, and the catering is all to a decent standard by "Tate Catering", a commercial offshoot of "Tate Galleries". Tate Galleries is partially public-funded and receives revenue to support the gallery from catering and other enterprises. Tate hasn't been able to bounce back after covid with the same success as other galleries. If you buy a cake it definitely does help support the art.
If I were visiting London just now I'd probably include the Jenny Saville exhibition at the National Portrait Gallery. I remember seeing her work in Glasgow many years ago (at the McLellan Galleries?) and it was truly ground breaking at the time. One of the best painters of her generation and the scale of some of the work is daunting.
I might ramble a few words about Tate Britain in another post. It's nice to visit too.
Judging art and whether a museum is a reasonable first choice is a
personal thing right?
I get what you're saying, but It's a bit too postmodern for me to say that subjectivism is the end of the road in this sort of comparison. Maybe somebody much prefers the art wall a kindergarten to the Met; but the Met is better, objectively I think.
But I do get what you're saying. Let's note that I'm open to nearly all types and eras of art, and open also to opinions on which are the best London art museums.
Thanks!
I'm not sure I can add anything useful, but I will try.
First off, the Tate Modern has both "Modern Art" and "Contemporary Art." There is a difference, and it's valuable to understand. Modern Art is generally understood to encompass works from approximately 1860 to 1970. There are a lot of -isms that belong under the umbrella term "Modern," such as Impressionism, Fauvism, Cubism, Surrealism, and Abstract Expressionism.
Contemporary Art is art of our time. It is understood to include work that pushes boundaries, for example beyond traditional media. Performance art, video, immersive installations, and a banana taped to the wall with duct tape are some examples. In addition, contemporary art often tackles social, political, environmental, and sexual issues.
The Tate Modern, as I said, has both. So you may find much to love in the Tate Modern. I was there last week, and I didn't linger with things I didn't particularly like, but I liked a lot of the art there and did linger for a while. (I had tickets to Shakespeare's Globe, which is practically next door, so it was a convenient stop for me.)
There are a lot of great art museums in London (ORDTraveler has a very good starting list). Don't push yourself to visit all of them. If I were going to pick one, without a doubt it would be the National Gallery.
I'll just add one other thing: I visited the V&A last week when it was in the mid 80s in London (before the heat wave). I stayed less than a half hour, because it was unbearably hot in the museum. I actually felt ill. As I was leaving I kept being drawn in to rooms and I wish I could have spent more time there.
I spent time at both the Tate Modern and the Tate Britain last year when I was solo in London, but I probably wouldn't have gone if they didn't both have special exhibits I wanted to see. The Tate Britain had an incredible display of John Singer Sargent paintings, and the Tate Modern had the Infinity Mirror Rooms exhibit by the artist Yayoi Kusama. Both were brilliant and I spent a lot of time at each one, but I didn't go through much of the regular museum exhibits (although the Tate Modern also had an interesting Yoko Ono exhibit that I enjoyed).
So you might want to check and see what else will be on view at that time. And that goes for all the museums.
Tate Britain's definitely worth visiting too. It doesn't really compare to The National Gallery in its scope.
Collection highlights for me might include The Turner Galleries (best collection of Turners globally)
Henry Moore sculptures (good being able to see large scale works from
this really important British artist indoors)
Tate Britain is worth a visit just because it's free too. It's a nice old building. It's got a large open central space too, like Tate Modern, called "The Duveen Galleries". There's one or two large scale installations there per year. Tate Britain can be very chill midweek mornings.
If you know where Westminster Abbey is, it's maybe a 15 or 20 minute walk out to Tate Britain along Millbank. If you cross the road at the Abbey, the park and gardens alongside The Thames, at least some of the way, are worth walking through. The elevated park benches that let you see over the embankment wall, and look at the river, are a really great spot to sit. They're all the way up Millbank too.
There's a good cafe at Tate Britain, but if you're out that way, The Regency is a bit of a landmark. If you're ready for lunch at 12 midday, go then. It gets busy. There's a Pret on Horseferry Road if you want to take something down to the river. There's also St John's Gardens on Horseferry Road to sit and eat, and a nice Italian deli opposite if memory serves.
I don't know if it would apply to you, Hank, but for anyone who's interested in Tate, getting a membership is a good idea. If you compare it to the entrance fee to MoMA or The Met, it looks OK value. If you're in London more than once a year and like art it starts to look quite appealing if you've got the disposable funds.
A good benefit is the members' rooms at Tate Britain and Tate Modern. At Tate Britain it is in a very ornate part of the building that had lots of sympathetic restoration work a few years ago. At Tate Modern it's high up, looking across to St Paul's. It has a small outdoor terrace that is great at sunset on a nice evening.
Entrance to exhibitions numerous times might be good for some who are in London a bit.
I have to agree with Laurie Beth:
Blockquote
I was interested how the building had been converted, but I was not 'blown away' by the art. However, I'm not a big fan of modern art although I do like it once in awhile... I also do not like how the art is NOT displayed in chronological order but arranged thematically into broad groups.
Blockquote
I do like Modern art (a little cooler on much of Contemporary), but I could not find the pieces I would like to have seen. I got tired just trying to ferret out how they had stuff arranged. And the roof terrace, which was one of the things that had drawn me to the building, was closed for a private event that day. Kind of a bust. The thing I saw that I liked the most was the spider sculpture (huge!) in the atrium.
I visited the National Gallery and was pleased that I could beeline to the works I wanted to see.
One thing I'd recommend to a gallery fan is to check for events at the major galleries. I've been to quite a few artists' talks, with a Q&A etc. It can be quite intellectually stimulating and entertaining. Usually a paid exhibition will have a programme of events and talks.
Tate's film programme is somewhat depleted from the amount of screenings they used to put on, but there's still some in this rather long ink I'll paste below.
Google "events" or "public programmes" for the other major galleries if this sort of thing interests anyone.
OP I haven’t read all the replies but after numerous London stays I’ll advise that you research these museums; each different and unique and not all based on art.
Horniman Museum
National Maritime Museum
Sir John Soanes Museum
V & A Museum ( if just for a spot of tea in the cafe)
The Cinema Museum
I haven’t been to the Tate Modern in over a decade.
Friday and Saturday evenings can be a nice quiet time to see Tate Modern. It's open until 10. You have to watch out for the young peoples' events on a Friday. once a month, 3rd Friday of the month if memory serves me correctly? They can be quite busy and a bit noisy. Friday or Saturday evening is ideal if you are a member and want to use the members' room, though there's also a bar on level 6 and The Corner Bar on level 1. Corner Bar is open evenings all week. The link I pasted above covers it.
Anyway, all a bit off topic for Hank, but hopefully semi-interesting to others with an interest in the Tate galleries.
Thanks everyone!
And Gerry in particular your help has been splendid, thanks very much. I appreciate the detail and scope of your responses.
Unfortunately, the Tate Modern no longer has evening hours, per its website. I think they never resumed after the pandemic.
Visitor numbers to both Tates are still quite down on pre pandemic, with the Tate Britain in particular suffering from low numbers, in contrast to the British Museum and National Gallery which have seen large increases. All of which makes the Tates good places to go if you don’t like too many people!
Unfortunately, the Tate Modern no longer has evening hours, per its website.
Ach, that is a shame. Thanks for the correction. I can't find it and it's (obviously) a few years since I was there in the evening.
There is still "Tate Lates" at Tate Modern once a month I suppose. Next one is 25th July. There may be a sound system with music in The Turbine Hall, or down in The Tanks galleries. If it's in The Tanks it's well isolated and the rest of the galleries are quiet still. There will be other "activations" in some collection galleries or on concourses. It's kinda fun too if you want to get into it.
"Late at Tate" has being running for a long time at Tate Britain. Next one 5th September. Many other galleries have copied the formula. MoMA PS1 had quite a lot of inspiration for their outreach events for young people from Tate I'm sure.
Art to me is very personal, so it's a bit hard to recommend art that someone might like. That said I do enjoy the Tate Modern. If you are looking for art exhibitions, in addition to the museums recommended above, I would recommend looking at the Barbican, the Hayward Gallery (on the Southbank), the Photographer's Gallery, and the RA (Royal Academy of the Arts). If you are thinking of getting a pass as suggested above, I would also also look at the National Art Pass: https://www.artfund.org/national-art-pass
It gives you discounted or free entrance to to nearly all the major museums in London and many across the UK. For big museums like Tate Modern and National Gallery you get 50% off for special exhibitions. We use it all the time.
I visited Tate Modern in 2008 before I'd visited MoMA and LACMA. I loved it. But I love modern art, Mondrian in particular. I recall being very impressed to see some of my favorites in person, but that may be because it was my first major modern art gallery visit. It's free and easy to get through and just a short walk from a fabulous lunch at Borough Market, so I recommend it. I am actually headed back to it on my upcoming trip to take my husband to see it.
Lesley thanks, I am now actually leaning Tate Modern. I'd also like to see the Globe Theater, and get a burger at Heard, two Michelin star chef Jordan Bailey's burger joint (which is not far from Borough Market.
London will be at the end of our trip, and the two sixteen year olds with us will likely have more fun walking through some crazy contemporary art than looking at more old paintings.
I went to the Tate Modern a couple weeks ago and had a really nice tea in their restaurant overlooking the River Thames.
It was my last day in London and I only made it as far as the gift shop (I’m ashamed to admit). I was looking for a unique T-shirt for my best friend who was dog sitting for me. She loved the one I got her from the Tate Modern. They have a fantastic selection of T-shirts. I am definitely planning on returning to have a proper look when I head back at Christmas.
Happy Travels!
Look at the Current Exhibitions on the Tate Modern website to see if any of these interest you. I saw one in May that has since ended (Anthony McCall - Solid Light) that I really liked and was worth the entrance fee. Other than that I looked at some of the permanent collection and admired the building itself, but the temporary exhibit was the highlight for me. I really enjoy the area around the museum as well.
Two good reasons to visit the Tate are the walk across the Millennium Bridge to get there and back, and then as noted there's a patio several flights up that will give you a great photo of the skyline including St. Paul's.
It's a cool space but the art left me cold. Did enjoy the Courtauld very much.
Is it a reasonable first choice of art museums to see in London?
Yes, as are a half-dozen others based upon your personal perferrences in art. I will be there during the first week of August. One of my down-time tasks while traveling in Germany and the UK is to review the current collection and maps for each museum I plan visit. In a museum like the Tate Modern, with a very broad range of art, I tend to cherry-pick which areas or rooms I want to see and have no qualms about bypassing a wing or floor, regardless of what "not intersting to me" art I may miss.
I found Tate Modern extremely frustrating. Very little of their important Modern Art was on display. What was on display tended to be buried in a trendy exhibit with a lot of more mediocre recent work. The themes for the exhibitions tended to be a bit juvenile. I had to ask at the information desks for the locations of art works that I had wanted to see, many from Rick Steves 100 Masterpieces book or from his various videos. It took a while to find someone that could tell me where those pieces were. Many were not on view. I am a not a particularly conservation art viewer, but I struggle to appreciate Rothko and other highly conceptual art. I had actually gone hoping to see a good selection of Rothko paintings all together to sit with and contemplate, learn from. No luck. Only one on view in the midst of a lot of lesser stuff. I frankly dislike Pop Art quite a bit and they seemed to have plenty of that. I couldn't find a lot of the art from 1900 to about 1955, which I usually appreciate. Lot's of social turmoil in those years that was faithfully recorded by some very honest artists. Some of the Contemporary Art was brilliant, a lot wasn't. A few of the Performance Art pieces and films were the best. It seems to me that a lot of the better Contemporary Art exhibitions seem to be in smaller museums and galleries. Being successful enough to get into the Tate Modern might not be the best thing.
I would camp out in the V&A jewellry room, if they'd let me....
-Alison
