From Queen Victoria to Sausage Pants: art in the superhospital

We write concerning the article by Tembeck and Hunter in the January 8th, 2018 issue of the CMAJ. While regretting the delay, the article has only recently come to our attention and despite the time lag demands a response.

The intention of their piece was aimed at critiquing the art collection at the McGill University Health Centre’s Glen site, focusing primarily on the recently commissioned public art rather than on the impressive collection that inhabits our walls courtesy of our donors. It is strange that they did not mention the RBC Art and Heritage Centre of the MUHC which is responsible for the collection. In fact, since 2013 we have been mandated to preserve the heritage of the hospitals that moved to the new Glen site: the Montreal Children’s and Royal Victoria hospitals and the Montreal Chest Institute. We were in charge of collecting, storing and installing the art in their new home. The overall mission is to create a healing environment through critical curation informed by a coordinating committee and an advisory committee; these are made up of a wide range of individuals representing various areas of the arts and the different hospitals of the MUHC. It is clear to both committees that our constituents are the patients, the families and the employees. Their needs; whether distraction, relaxation or education, are an important consideration in our development of the healing environment.

As the hospital is frequently offered art, an acquisition committee has been established to ensure quality. They have also established a direction for preferred works or acquisitions; contemporary photography will be the principal focus but other media are included. With the help of the committees, there have already been five exhibits of contemporary photography or drawings. We aim to continue this practice of highlighting local contemporary artists with the objective to expose viewers to artwork they would not normally have the chance to see and push the boundaries of what is colloquially or academically acceptable within a hospital space.

The authors are largely critical of the public art. They fail to mention that the selection process was rigorously led by the Ministère de la Culture et des Communications. A specific committee for each art work was made up of three artists, and art historian, an architect and three from the institution. The committee started with 32 proposals, trimmed to eight, then four and finally one was chosen. The contemporary nature of the artists is evident and the pieces are all by working artists in Quebec as directed by the Politique d’intégration des arts à l’architecture.

Regarding the two works they selected for discussion, Queen Victoria is our heritage and we would be remiss to not have her on display. The sculpture was one of the priority pieces identified by the Royal Victoria Hospital as integral to the institution and the community. The central corridor that she has been positioned in will eventually be filled with other paintings referencing the history of the institutions and their evolution. However, Sausage Pants was hung in a barren corridor of low traffic at the old RVH site, and while distracting, has not been requested to be rehung anywhere, hardly an “old friend”. We prioritize pieces that remain in the collective memory, that represent the institution, and reflect contemporary curation. To date, more than 500 works have found a new home. We are extremely fortunate, we have been given the opportunity to thoughtfully plan and install pieces so that when patients and families ‘encounter art in hospitals’ it will change their experience in and understanding of the MUHC and what a 21st century hospital can be.