1/5 Will M. 2 years ago on Google
I'm
something
of
a
culture
vulture,
and
I
must
have
visited
galleries
in
20
different
cities.
Serralves
is
the
only
one
where
I
ever
asked
for
my
money
back.
I'm
a
bit
embarrassed
that
this
is
so,
so
I
thought
I'd
explain
my
reasons
and
why
you
shouldn't
bother
visiting.
There's
no
single
correct
business
model
for
a
gallery,
but
a
few
classics
have
emerged
in
western
Europe.
There
are
the
prestige
institutions
like
the
UK's
National
Gallery,
where
income
from
touring
exhibitions
keeps
a
permanent
collection
free
for
the
public.
There
are
the
smaller
regional
galleries
operated
on
low
admission
charges
by
town
councils
or
by
site-specific
charities.
And
there
are
the
rich-enthusiast
collections
like
the
much-missed
Saatchi
Gallery
in
Swiss
Cottage,
where
everything's
ad
hoc
and
the
attendants
are
lively
art
students.
Serralves
is
none
of
these
things.
The
present
management
seems
a
little
cagey
about
the
site's
origins
and
the
way
that
a
former
private
estate
became
a
public
art
institution.
Whatever
took
place,
the
outcome
was
the
conversion
of
a
former
stately
home
and
its
grounds
into
paid
exhibition
spaces,
operating
as
a
business.
Today,
a
full
ticket
to
the
complex
will
cost
you
20.00.
By
this
point,
those
familiar
with
the
economics
of
the
tourist
industry
may
be
feeling
a
little
queasy.
Stately
homes
are
notoriously
expensive
to
run,
and
those
British
grand
houses
that
have
been
reconfigured
as
tourist
attractions
have
a
reputation
for
charging
high
admission
prices
but
leaving
visitors
feeling
distinctly
short-changed.
Think
of
Beaulieu,
or
Longleat.
Serralves
is
a
different
kind
of
institution,
but
it
has
exactly
the
same
problem.
Its
huge
modernist
building
and
grounds
are
located
in
Foz,
an
outlying
suburb
undergoing
rapid
and
remorseless
gentrification.
The
upkeep
must
be
prohibitive,
because
the
cost
of
admission
simply
isn't
reflected
in
the
art
on
show.
Despite
considerable
fanfare,
the
collection
in
the
main
house
was
patchy
at
best.
It
was,
however,
considerably
better
than
those
in
the
gardens,
where
unconvincing
attempts
had
been
made
to
present
a
handful
of
second-rate
sound
pieces
and
land
art
installations
as
the
products
of
a
dynamic
curatorial
policy.
I
would
have
quite
enjoyed
the
intimate
Miro
show
in
a
separate
garden
house,
except
that
perhaps
half
the
artworks
were
inaccessible.
We
were
told
this
was
because
the
exhibits
hadn't
been
displayed,
but
it
looked
more
like
staff
shortages
to
me.
Losing
faith
in
an
institution
is
a
miserable
experience.
One
inevitably
nitpicks.
Serralves
is
poorly-signposted;
the
site
maps
were
designed
for
colour,
rendering
useless
the
b&w
photocopies
with
which
we
were
provided;
the
'treetop
walk'
is
a
naff
attraction
that
belongs
in
a
safari
park;
the
tearoom
was
closed
without
warning
so
that
we
had
no
refreshment
after
our
long
walk;
etc
etc.
While
all
of
these
points
might
be
considered
trivial,
the
site's
nasty,
heavy-handed
policing
was
harder
to
ignore.
There
were
security
cameras
everywhere,
and
most
of
the
attendants
were
obviously
uniformed
rent-a-cops
from
a
local
agency
rather
than
bright
and
well-informed
arts
graduates.
All
this
added
up
to
a
miserable
experience.
We
were
glad
to
scuttle
off
to
the
shabby,
beautiful
Jardim
Botânico
with
its
superb
cafe,
and
we
had
better
aesthetic
experiences
at
the
Portuguese
Centre
of
Photography,
the
Soares
dos
Reis,
and
above
all
the
Banco
de
Materiais...
all
of
which
are
in
easy
walking
distance
from
the
centre
of
town.
For
tourists,
Serralves
just
isn't
worth
the
bus
ride.
If
I
lived
in
Porto,
I
guess
I'd
have
to
go
for
the
occasional
visiting
show.
But
I'd
definitely
skip
that
main
exhibition,
and
I'd
still
balk
at
those
admission
prices.