Throughout I’ve tried to maintain a tone of more or less impartial observation - considering the damage this illegitimate professional interference causes and caused. On a comprehensive scale and exponential, since it’s hardly been acknowledged, let alone un-picked and reversed - so one might have been justified to take a harsher line. As for reparations many who suffered are dead.

I’ve also avoided suggesting a thorough investigation (social, political and cultural) by an international team - as things stand it would almost certainly be pushed to a whitewash and why should, once more, the only alternative be people funding themselves to avoid pressure. But sooner or later it will be impossible to block ; what everyone needs is more information... Judging by the kind of minds at work in other documentary investigations, I would say at least half-a-dozen countries could come up with their independent take on the phenomenon. The UK should and could provide unique insights... from its early dealings to ramifications touching the whole gamme - writing, music (modern and pop), architecture and the whole visual range from fine art to Carnaby St. Plus the special role of the art-school phenomenon which provided the needed figures to fill out swiftly assembled international teams.

My own position in this is more or less one of a footnote personality of the time - one whose dislike for much which was heard and seen (especially after the mid-60’s) meant often I’d not have cared if the art world never heard of me again and I of them ; I imagine many acted on this and departed for good. But I continued participating - punctuated by travel which, ironically, was available via Hidden Hands patronage although I had no real understanding of this - so I was used to fulfill needs too. I would have preferred to stay and work in an honest ambiance without having to witness the avalanche of breast-beating by US second-raters with their PR machine and most of London locals happy to kow-tow. Their conceit was genuine - they believed their own publicity.

Andy Warhol seems to be the only one who had some kind of intuitive take on it - and fooled around testing the system rather effectively ; picking a group of locals to see if he could create stars of them, regardless of talent. He could. His story has certain elements of Joseph Heller’s “Catch 22” and another lesser known book which I’ve always thought significant “Yours for Decency” about a famous US hoax of the early post-war years. In the London of today a repeat of the experiment of Warhol is going on with less flair. If Warhol was active in the UK of today he’d be doing something quite different. In these terms it needs to be working with the “air du temps”.

Paris fought a long and over-confident defence to avoid submitting to the US - while in other fields of importance it was successful - taking over leadership of European visual culture in modernism. It’s not surprising they under-estimated the task. No-one understood that content and quality was not a priority... facts were made to fit the desired end result. To weaken the French efforts the Americans soon co-opted the Italians and Germans into their camp - as virtually occupied countries they had little power to cut their own deals and no doubt saw short-term advantages

Switzerland too became a competent marketer of modernism ; dividing old Europe was effective if you held most of the cards. The results are still all around us... certain figures like Max Bill did make an enormous and high-level effort with success, which was to attract the concerted attention of the HH eventually and his Ulm school was closed down after the students participated in anti-Vietnam demonstrations - he had already gone by that time.

It was a conversation I had with Bill on his last visit to Paris which helped me see the new policy of the Post Cold War cultural tzars. He didn’t fully comprehend what was afoot but was already professionally perturbed in the early 90’s.