HINDSIGHT is a fine thing, as indeed is ambition. Put together, however, the formula is most frequently for the former to follow the latter – and for the result to be regret.
This is where the Scottish National Gallery (SNG) in Edinburgh finds itself after scaling back and delaying a £17 million revamp that, despite years of planning, it appears not to have thought through properly. To be clear: it’s not unusual for major building projects to be delayed. In this case, the completion date was to be first 2018 then 2019 and is now 2020.
Given the frequency of such setbacks in construction projects – a recurring problem of over-ambitious initial estimates – the wearied public is more inclined to raise an eyebrow than a livid objection.
However, it is for having underestimated the complexity of the work, and its concomitant costs, that the SNG finds itself, as it were, in the frame.
Put simply, as regards part of the project, extending an art gallery over a railway line was, realistically, never going to be easy in the material world.
Originally declaring itself “excited” by the project, it seems the Gallery got carried away. So much for hindsight. However, we cannot fault the SNG for ambition, driven by an urge to improve what it has to offer art lovers. By the same token, its decision to suffer embarrassment now rather than worse ignominy later, when it might be “many millions” of pounds over budget, could be seen as being prudent and wise.
Certainly, it’s a departure from the ignoble tradition in public life of keeping the fingers crossed while the costs add up. That’s when the public raises more than an eyebrow. – and rightly so Besides, there is still enough to be excited about in the revamp and, while Scottish art won’t get its own section now, it will still be fine to see it in the body of the kirk, among the international masters.
Meanwhile, the Gallery will surely have learned something from this project: if only that marrying ambition to reality is a fine art indeed.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here