“I found in Toronto an open and fresh atmosphere unlike the blasé atmosphere in England,” Henry Moore remarked while attending the official opening of the Henry Moore Sculpture Centre at the Art Gallery of Ontario on October 26, 1974. “Every Torontonian I have met has been so friendly and open and warm.”
Beyond a good rapport with the people he had encountered since the Moore Centre was first proposed in 1967, the British artist found a city that was very receptive to his pieces, a number of which were already held by local private collections. The centre, now marking its 50th anniversary, would become home to the world’s largest public collection of his work — but its founding was not without controversy, both local and international.
When Viljo Revell designed Toronto’s new city hall, he envisioned placing a major sculpture in what would become Nathan Phillips Square. As early as 1960, Revell discussed a commission with Moore, but funding was unavailable. In March 1966, the art advisory committee for the new civic area informed city council that Moore’s Three-Way Piece No. 2 (which came to be known as TheArcher) was available for just over $120,000. When council rejected the offer due to the cost and fears that the piece was simply too modern and weird for the public to handle, Mayor Phil Givens backed a successful fundraising campaign that secured donations from the local business community. Council approved the installation of Moore’s work in September 1966, but the perception that Givens was willing to blow lots of money on controversial public art played a part in his defeat during that fall’s municipal election.
Henry Moore in front of Three Way Piece No. 2: Archer in his first visit to Toronto, March 1967. (AGO Photographic Collection. Edward P. Taylor Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario. Reproduced by permission of The Henry Moore Foundation / © The Henry Moore Foundation. Photo: AGO)
During a city-hall reception for Moore in March 1967, J. Allen Ross, the former president of the Canadian division of gum maker P.K. Wrigley, requested that Givens ask Moore about the possibility of acquiring more of his work for the city. According to Givens, Moore indicated that, while he felt his work should stay in England, he didn’t believe that the Tate Gallery would be able to accommodate all of it. As a result, he said, “perhaps something might be possible.”
Among those who overheard the discussion were AGO president Samuel Zacks and gallery director William Withrow. Both were involved with plans to expand the gallery, which hadn’t seen a major addition since 1935 and was able to show only up to 5 per cent of its collection at a time (Withrow later commented that “a building this size would service a city the size of Orillia”). They realized that acquiring a collection of Moore’s works would be a coup that could help secure more provincial funding. The next day, they met with Moore to discuss the possibilities.
The AGO had provided Moore with a useful bargaining chip in his discussions with the Tate, to which he intended to donate a substantial number of pieces. When the British government announced that it was prepared to kick in a large amount of money for a Moore gallery at the Tate, a group of 41 younger British artists signed a letter protesting the decision. Failing to realize that this money would be on top of funding for an expansion to the Tate, they objected to the idea of so much space being devoted to one artist in London’s only major permanent gallery dedicated to contemporary art. The Moore-centric gallery was never built, and a donation made by Moore in 1978 was integrated into the Tate’s collection.
Construction of Moore Sculpture Centre, Stage I expansion, Parkin Partnership, Architects and Planners. (AGO Photographic Collection. Edward P. Taylor Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario. Photo # 5832. Photo: AGO)
Zacks sent a letter to Moore proposing a gallery and sculpture court, writing that it “would be most meaningful, not only to Toronto, but to this whole continent, which holds your work in the highest esteem.” Moore visited Toronto in December 1967 to discuss this option, and talks continued over the next few years. One of the most memorable occasions involved an impromptu dinner party at a London restaurant in early 1969: Moore, several AGO officials, architect John C. Parkin, and Premier John Robarts were in attendance, and the group ended up telling jokes and singing songs from Yorkshire. The upshot was that the artist would donate between 400 and 600 of his works; the selection would depend on the situation with the Tate.
Alan Wilkinson was hired to curate the new gallery in late 1969. “Moore’s openness and generosity meant that he was often receptive to new projects — another book or exhibition — and would agree at least in principle to new ventures,” he wrote in his book Henry Moore Remembered. “A special relationship between Moore and Toronto had been established. He had been received with warmth and affection. The English flavour of the city made him feel at home. And, most important of all, Moore was aware of how much Toronto cared about him and his work.”
Henry Moore supervising the installation of the Henry Moore Sculpture Centre with David Mitchinson, Alan Wilkinson, Mary Moore, and William Withrow. (AGO Photographic Collection. Edward P. Taylor Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario. Reproduced by permission of The Henry Moore Foundation / © The Henry Moore Foundation. Photo: AGO)
Moore’s initial donation was around 200 items, but he later donated 200 more. The collection consisted of full bronzes, plaster models, maquettes (scale models), etchings, lithographs, woodcuts, and drawings, as well as items that had inspired his work, such as driftwood and pebbles. Copies of all of his subsequent prints and drawings would be sent to the AGO, inscribed with “for Toronto.” Moore worked with Parkin to design a space where his works would be placed sequentially to help students observe the evolution of his craft. An adjoining gallery was named in honour of his wife, Irina.
The plaster forms of his bronzes formed a key part of the collection. Early in his career, he had destroyed them so that they wouldn’t share the fate of Auguste Rodin’s forms, which were used to make poor castings after his death. “The original plaster cast is the real work of art,“ he told the Toronto Star in 1971. “The bronze reproduction is never exactly as good.” He made agreements with galleries, including the AGO, guaranteeing that once the plasters had been donated, no further casting could be done.
From left to right: Ad for the AGO expansion and opening of the Moore Centre in the November 1974 edition of the Key to Toronto tourist magazine; cover of the November 1974 edition of Key to Toronto.
“Most of the public don’t understand what these plasters signify,” Withrow told the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle. “They think of plaster in terms of the ugly busts of Beethoven or casts of Greek sculpture in the art schools, but these are original works of art — even more original than the bronzes. They’re done with his own hands, they’re one of a kind.”
In September 1971, Premier William Davis used what the Globe and Mail described as “a psychedelic pneumatic drill” for the groundbreaking of the Henry Moore Sculpture Centre — the key component of the first stage of the AGO’s expansion. The following month, Moore came to Toronto to uncrate Working Model for Three-Piece Sculpture No. 3, the first piece intended for the gallery.
In 1973, Moore received a letter from Michael Lambeth, chairman of the Toronto chapter of Canadian Artists’ Representation, asking him to remove his name from the gallery and to agree that the AGO should not permanently display his work. It was a period of nationalistic fervour about Canadian artists, and CAR believed that the Moore Centre was a threat to their ability to display work in major institutions. The group, which had tried and failed to take over the gallery’s board of trustees, insisted that the gallery should instead honour painter Tom Thomson.
Illustration from the October 6, 1974, edition of the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle.
In response, Withrow argued that the AGO’s second stage of expansion would contain large spaces for permanent Canadian art exhibitions and that Moore’s work would enhance the institution’s reputation at home and abroad. In a January 1974 letter to Lambeth, Moore said he believed art was international, allowed different cultures to inspire one another, and should be made available to people wherever they lived.
There were others who were not happy about the AGO’s expansion plans. In October 1973, city council sent its application for rezoning to build the second stage back to committee for further study after Alderman Elizabeth Eayrs called its appearance “brutal” and incompatible with the neighbourhood. Fellow alderman John Sewell was concerned that the existing building would be destroyed (it wasn’t) and that it would cause the removal of 15 mature trees. “I don’t think an art gallery has the right to go around and say its buildings are going to be better than trees,” Sewell said.
Photographer unknown. Protestors demonstration at Stage I opening of the Henry Moore Sculpture Centre, Art Gallery of Ontario, October 26, 1974. (AGO Photographs Collection, Edward P. Taylor Archives and Library, Art Gallery of Ontario. Photo #1084. Photo © AGO)
Some neighbours were also unhappy about the expansion. “We see it as an outsider, really, because it doesn’t serve any of the needs of the community,” local resident Wesley Lore told the Toronto Star in May 1974. “People in the area get nothing out of it except all the traffic and the encroachment on their park.” Lore then indicated that, although he was interested in art, he had visited the gallery only once. Alderman Dan Heap couldn’t say whether an influx of galleries and art shops would be good or bad for the area. Jackie Sellgren of the Grange Community Storefront feared homes were being converted into businesses and warned the Star that “most of the residents don’t relate to the art gallery. We use Grange Park but the gallery is used by rich people when they come downtown. It’s an archaic institution.”
Moore was on hand when Large Two Formswas installed at the corner of Dundas and McCaul Streets in May 1974. Though he wasn’t happy with its initial placement outside the Moore Centre, he realized it would help distinguish the gallery from the rest of the AGO. It quickly became a magnet for children looking to play and construction workers looking for a place to relax. When asked whether he worried that some people found sexual connotations in the sculpture, he acknowledged that was possible. “I’ve always been inspired by the human form,” he told the Toronto Star, “especially the mother figure. But the world is full of sexual imagery. It’s all true to life. All part of nature. If people wanted to, they could give a sexual meaning to a sculpture of flowers.” The work would be moved in Grange Park in 2017.
Photo of a workman resting on a Henry Moore sculpture from the May 29, 1974, edition of the Toronto Star.
During a Q&A at a press conference shortly before the Moore Centre opened, a representative of CAR expressed their irritation at the honour bestowed on Moore and complained that the AGO had “shamefully treated” Canadian artists. Moore responded that “art is international and should be made available to people all over the world. For artists to try and shut themselves off from artists of other nations is a very dangerous thing.” He then added that “Hitler in his time and Russia today have demonstrated that nationalism can only be the enemy of art. Had I taken only British sources for my own work, it would have gone nowhere. We as artists must love one another in order to survive in an atmosphere which erroneously regards art as peripheral to the human condition.”
On opening day, Davis and Moore gave speeches; the artist once again praised Torontonians for their openness and friendliness. “Pink faced, with an occasional shy grin, ignoring the microphone, he chatted to us all for a few seconds just as if he were at home and wondering hopefully if the kettle were boiling for tea,” British art curator Bryan Robertson observed. Patrons were entertained by a jazz band, while children ran around and were treated to clowns, magicians, and a puppet show. “I am fascinated by seeing all the steps Moore takes from the initial drawings up to the complete piece of sculpture,” Kingston art student Adrienne Alison told the Toronto Star. “But it is really neat just to see the people here today. The age range is fantastic — from little kids to the very old.”
Henry Moore Sculpture Centre, ca. 1970's. (AGO Photographic Collection. Edward P. Taylor Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario. Photo # 1824. Reproduced by permission of the Henry Moore Foundation / © The Henry Moore Foundation. Photo: AGO)
Robertson praised the gallery. “The easy design, the spaces, the décor and cases, the un-pompous installation, is all exactly as it should be,” he wrote in the Times. “The Moore Centre will of course change Canada: no student of Moore’s work can possibly know what he has done at first hand, working directly onto plaster, until the galleries in Toronto have been explored. What came through so reassuringly last week is the vital evidence of Moore’s continuing creative energy.” Critics from elsewhere were also pleased; Americans produced especially glowing notices. “If New York should be toppled as North America’s art capital,” Detroit News art critic Joy Hakanson wrote, “odds are that Toronto will be the city to do it.”
Local writers had their reservations, though. The Toronto Sun’s Percy Rowe thought that the bronzes should have been displayed outside and suggested that the recently created Leslie Street Spit would have been an appropriate spot. In the Toronto Star, Robert Fulford complained that the Moore Centre was “one of the oddest displays ever installed in a museum. There are far too many sculptures for the space provided and the room’s main impression is clutter.” (Fulford was much happier with Large Two Forms, which he said “changes the whole mood of the street and greatly compensates for the boxy style of the architecture.”)
Exterior view of rear facade from Grange Park, Art Gallery of Ontario. (Artwork © 2021 The Henry Moore Foundation. Image © Art Gallery of Ontario)
In 1982, Moore provided a grant worth more than $200,000 for exhibitions and catalogues. When he died in 1986, Wilkinson and Withrow attended his funeral at Westminster Abbey. “All his life, he had a vision of the unity of life and art, of the unity between what he saw and what he created,” poet Stephen Spender observed in his eulogy. “And in that art, energy released into form was more important to him than any particular notion of beauty.”
Sources: Henry Moore Remembered by Alan G. Wilkinson (Toronto: Art Gallery of Ontario and Key Porter Books, 1987); the October 25, 1974, edition of the Buffalo Evening News; the September 8, 1974, edition of the Detroit News; the September 26, 1970, September 9. 1971, October 15, 1971, November 19, 1986, and October 24, 1987, editions of the Globe and Mail; the October 28, 1974, edition of the Los Angeles Times; the November 2, 1974, edition of the Times; the January 22, 1972, July 17, 1973, October 11, 1973, May 4, 1974, May 20, 1974, October 28, 1974, and November 9, 1974, editions of the Toronto Star; and the October 20, 1974, edition of the Toronto Sun.
Donate