Thread by @cjayanetti

If you’re interested in BLM or MeToo, this story will interest you:

How the Tate banned a young black female artist after she spoke out about her alleged abuse by a powerful Tate donor.

By me, for @VICEUK /THREAD (CN: racism, abuse... everything)

vice.com/en/article/n7v…

In 2012 Jade Montserrat met Anthony d’Offay, one of the most powerful figures in the British art world. Over the ensuing months and years, she alleges that he used his power to establish a controlling and abusive relationship with her /2

d’Offay has faced numerous accusations of sexual harassment from different women. In Montserrat’s case, those accusations extended to him repeatedly showing her his collection of art depicting slavery, racism and torture /3

Then came the photo. It is exactly what you can see, there on the left. It was December 2017 and she tweeted it alongside a statement about d'Offay's abuse – and suddenly Tate managers became aware of what was going on /4
vice.com/en/article/n7v…

The Tate suspended links with d’Offay – because of other women’s complaints rather than Jade’s (more on that later). But in early 2019 they restored links again because *reasons* /5

Fast-forward to last summer. Jade has been lined up to take part in an art programme at the Tate. The Tate tweets in support of Black Lives Matter. She responds by tweeting about the Tate's failure to cut off ties with d'Offay,

The Tate? Bans her. /6

To be precise, one of their directors told Amy Sharrocks, the lead artist on the programme Jade was lined up to take part in:

"You can't work with Jade Montserrat" /7

What ensued - and you'll need to read the article for full details - was extraordinary. Tate directors revealed to Sharrocks that the torrent of legal threats from d'Offay were such that the institution could barely keep functioning.

After this Guardian article by @BenQuinn75 was published, Tate bosses claimed the legal situation had changed. Director Maria Balshaw reportedly said she would likely be sacked if Jade was allowed to take part theguardian.com/artanddesign/2…

Sharrocks refused to throw Jade under a bus. The Tate kept moving the goalposts. In the end, the entire programme was scrapped - around the same time the Tate finally announced it was cutting all ties with d'Offay.

The way the Tate behaved was remarkable. They claimed Jade had sent hostile messages to Tate staff, but produced no evidence to back it up. They told journalists one thing but said another thing internally:

Meanwhile - and I couldn't fit this into the piece - the Tate's reputation was taking a battering because of its behaviour towards Jade, as well as its handling of other issues such as job cuts and a racist mural at one of its restaurants

I want to emphasise this again actually. Compare and contrast. On the left is what the Tate were telling journalists. On the right is what the Tate were telling each other.

Oh, and remember that photo? The one with the golliwog?

The Tate's ethics committee decided it was a private matter in an 'apparently consensual relationship' and required no action or public statement

So to sum up: while the Tate was publicly preaching Black Lives Matter, it was privately shutting down criticism by a young black female artist about how it had handled accusations of racism and abuse against one of its key backers.

vice.com/en/article/n7v…

Final word to Jade:

"It's that [James] Baldwin quote. You're a victim until you're able to articulate your victimhood - and then you're a threat."

/END
vice.com/en/article/n7v…

One final thing - I want to thank @misszing and Vice's legal team for enabling this article to run, and to run at length.