Showing posts with label Geordie Greig. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Geordie Greig. Show all posts

Sunday, January 26, 2014

Geordie Greig / Breakfast with Lucian Freud / Review by Tim Adams

Lucian Freud

Breakfast with Lucian: A Portrait of the Artist by Geordie Greig – review


Geordie Greig's life of Lucian Freud gives us the gossip but fails to capture the artist
breakfast with lucian
Lucian Freud, 1983: 'an absolute absence of remorse and a singular fidelity to his work'. Photograph: Jane Bown
Geordie Greig stalked Lucian Freud from the moment his Eton college master took him to London to see an exhibition of the artist's work at the Antony d'Offay gallery in 1978. The 17-year-old Greig, now editor of theMail on Sunday, was transfixed in particular by the exposed ginger genitalia that are the focus of Freud's painting Naked Man with a Rat, the experience of seeing which was, he recalls, "like encountering Keith Richards crossed with Picasso: libidinous, risk-taking, bold and threatening". There were other distractions at the time for the diminuitive art lover, "the Sex Pistols and the Clash" among them apparently, but Greig had a private inkling Freud "would somehow be important". When he got back to school he immediately sent the painter a letter asking for an interview for the school magazine. He received no reply but so began a "mission to know about him and his paintings which was to last 30 years".
  1. Breakfast with Lucian: A Portrait of the Artist
  2. by Geordie Greig

The subtext of this posthumous, gossipy biography is the tale of Greig's shameless pursuit of that mission. Lucian Freud was never a man afraid to say no. He said no to the Krays, among many others, when they asked him to repay gambling debts. He often said no to wives and lovers and children when they asked him for money or fidelity or loyalty. He said no to anyone who asked to be painted by him (with the exception of Kate Moss). He said no to potential biographers – paying one off having read a draft, "appalled that so many intimate details would enter the public domain" – and apparently sending East End gangster friends round to another's house to put the frighteners on to prevent publication. He said no to a CBE "for entirely selfish reasons".
But eventually, it seems, after about 20 years of a courtship that involved many unread letters and rejected commissions and the writer eventually taking up residence in the basement flat of the building where Freud had his studio, he said yes to Geordie Greig.
"This book has avoided his obstructions," writes the author oddly and triumphantly of his deceased subject in the preface. The subsequent account of an extraordinary, complex existence rests partly on conversations the pair had at Sally Clarke's restaurant in Kensington Church Street, where Freud breakfasted most mornings in the last decades of his life with his loyal friend and assistant David Dawson, and a revolving cast of characters that occasionally included Greig.
From accounts of this table talk the editor aspires to be the artist's Boswell, though the vaunted intimacy – recounting his children's impressions of meeting the artist, his wife sharing a carol sheet with Freud at the Rothschilds' annual Christmas party, a scrawled diary entry of his own name in Freud's hand – at times feels a little desperate. At one point, Greig relates a story of "delivering a copy of the Evening Standard [of which he was editor] to Freud's home one evening". The front door was opened a fraction and a 10in serrated knife was pointed at Greig, who essayed a nervous laugh. "'Lunatic Artist Stabs Editor ofEvening Standard is not a good way to be remembered,' I said." "I can think of worse ways," Freud muttered and let Greig in for a cup of tea.
If anything, the forced-entry feel to much of the book adds to its sense of a private life, once guarded with menaces, now exposed. Greig has done a lot of legwork – tracking down lovers and confidantes and subjects of Freud's work, including Raymond Jones, who posed for the portrait holding a rat, the painter's first full-length nude. Jones's account of sitting is revealing of the twin obsessions of Freud's life. "Sometimes there was a knock at the studio door at Holland Park and a woman would come in and go straight into the bathroom," Jones recalls. "Lucian would have said to me, 'I am just taking a break. I won't be that long.' More often than not there was then the bang, bang, bang noise of her being shagged, not on his bed but always behind the bathroom door. Lucian would have a bath after his exertions, wandering back into the studio naked. He would say, 'I've just had a bath to settle myself down and now we will carry on.'"
At one point, Greig asks the artist how he spent his time in the periods of his life when he seemed to have been slightly less than manically productive. "Well, there were girls," Freud remarked with some understatement.
The balance between Freud's devotion to his art and to his libido seems to have been always weighted toward the former, but that is a difficult emphasis for a biographer to observe. At times in his portrait of the artist, Greig seems at pains to remember, and to begin to analyse, the greatness of Freud as a painter, but generally, the story of the complicated parade of debutantes and heiresses and wives and daughters of close friends who shared Freud's bed (or bathroom), consecutively and concurrently, takes over. Greig's years as editor of theTatler prove invaluable here as love triangles become dodecahedrons: "In 1948, the year that Freud married Kitty," he will typically write, "and also when his first child Annie was born, he met Anne Dunn… a stunning charismatic 18-year-old artist with whom he would have an intermittent affair for the next 25 years. One time in Lucian's studio Anne was struck by some pictures she saw stacked up there, painted by Lorna Wishart's [a former lover] son Michael.
Two years after Lucian started his affair with Anne, she married Michael, and Michael confessed he had a brief sexual relationship with Lucian. To complete the circle, Kitty later revealed to her daughter, Annie, that she had had an affair with her Aunt Lorna's former lover and rival to Lucian: Laurie Lee (and in 1950, Lee married Lorna's niece…). And so on.
That Freud negotiated these webs of romance and deceit – there are 14 acknowledged children and maybe 30 more – is attributed to a couple of traits: his absolute absence of remorse or guilt, and his singular fidelity to his work. Greig absolves him from the fallout about as lightly as the painter absolved himself. Asked by the author: "Did you want children?" Freud replied: "No… but it seemed quite exciting when women were pregnant. I don't like babies. I think partly because they are so vulnerable. But I'm very good with older children." The children that Greig interviewed would appear to dispute the simplicity of that latter statement, though Greig asserts that they "loved him unreservedly".
Freud never professed any interest in his grandfather Sigmund's principal legacy and to his credit, the author does not attempt much in the way of sub-Freudian psychoanalysis of his subject. He leaves the reader to weigh any possible connections between Freud's emigre childhood (he escaped Nazi Germany aged 10), his lifelong anxiety about his own legitimacy (fuelled by the taunts of his estranged brothers, Clement and Stephen), his troubled relationship with his mother and his chaotic, creative life. Despite, or because, of all its anecdotal detail, however, this book does not convincingly lead you to an intimate understanding of the artist. For that you would, of course, be better off looking again at the paintings.



Geordine Greig / Breakfast with Lucian Freud / Review by Frances Spalding

Lucian Freud
Poster by Triunfo Arciniegas
Breakfast with Lucian: A Portrait of the Artist, by Geordie Greig – review

Fascinating and appalling: the most revealing account of Lucian Freud ever written
Lucian Freud, in his Notting Hill home. Fascinated by Freud for more than 30 years, Greig was eventually admitted to the artist’s inner circle. Photograph: Geordie Greig
Geordie Greig's book is an unapologetic mixture of intelligent perception and high gossip. It deepens the reader's understanding of Lucian Freud, as both man and artist, but it also connives with the kind of mythology that stultifies inquiry. It is both fascinating and appalling. Freud had a reputation for being a man with no boundaries. This book likewise heeds no conventional restraints, mixes genres, seeps into questionable places, and fills gaps with cumulatively repetitive and often mawkish interviews with Freud's models, or connective passages that might have come straight out of Who's Who – were they not entirely concerned with sexual history. And yet no person interested in Freud will ignore this book. It is, overall, more revealing than anything about him yet written.
  1. Breakfast with Lucian
  2. by Geordie Greig

It begins benignly, in Clarke's, a light-filled upmarket restaurant, with starched white tablecloths, in Kensington Church Street. Here, for at least the last decade of his life, Freud breakfasted most days of the week. He would enter via the delicatessen next door, as breakfast is not normally served, and was usually accompanied by David Dawson, his assistant, who brought all the broadsheets and the Daily Mail, which they spread over the large circular table at the back of the room. Guests, too, might be invited, especially on Saturday mornings, when the gathering sometimes swelled to a small salon. One regular was Greig. Sometimes he brought his three children. Freud, with the sweetness of age, pretended to take cherries out of their ears, sang ditties, recited poems by Walter de la Mare or Rudyard Kipling, or drummed on the table with his spoon or fist.
It is good to be reminded of his charm. Only a few pages further on, stories about him, reported by his bookmaker friend Victor Chandler, show him behaving like a foul-mouthed drunken lout. A camp waiter irritates him with a teasing remark and he lashes out verbally and with his fists. At the River Café, he and Victor walk in next to two couples and Freud is instantly offended by the overpowering perfume worn by the two women. He shouts out: "I hate perfume. Women should smell of one thing: cunt. In fact they should invent a perfume called cunt." This story is made additionally nasty by the observation, on Chandler's part, that the two couples were north London Jewish: anyone living more than half a mile north of Hyde Park was beyond the pale in Freud's world, but he was himself Jewish, and if, as Chandler suggests, there was antisemitism behind his crass protest, it was not only "strange" but inexcusable.
But we are used to shocks and uneasiness in connection with Freud as they are the stuff of his art. His powerful paintings attract and repel, sharply dividing his audiences into those who admire or abhor. Few escape the frisson they generate in the viewer. Lawrence Gowing, in the first extensive survey of Freud's art, argued that, even when familiar, his pictures continue to shock, owing to "unpredicted discords", "unsparing involvement" or "the chill of incongruity". Gowing ventured the idea that Freud wanted painting to be found embarrassing. And he may be right. Freud famously promoted the naked portrait, in such a way as to disturb and disconcert the viewer. And perhaps nowhere more so than when he included in one of these a live rat.
Animals recur in Freud's portraits, often adding a touch of tenderness that can be lacking in the figure. He brilliantly conveys the weight and feel of a dog's paw or muzzle as it rests on limb or in lap. It is said that he took pride in his grandfather Sigmund Freud, not as the founding father of psychoanalysis, but because originally he was a skilful zoologist and the first to identify the sexual difference between male and female eels. But in Naked Man with Rat (1977-78), the animal, drugged with a sleeping pill and Veuve Clicquot, arouses no sense of mutual sympathy between it and the sitter, even though the man reclines with one hand over the rat and its tail is draped over his naked thigh, close to his genitals, fully revealed by the splayed legs. Knowing how long Freud's portraits take to paint, the sitter, Raymond Jones, asked if the rat needed to be present at the start of the portrait. Couldn't it come in later? "No," Freud replied, "because it is the whole emotional attitude that matters … If the rat were not there your mind would be working differently."
"If you don't know them," Freud once said of his sitters, a portrait "can only be like a travel book." He also claimed that it was wrong to look for resemblance in a portrait and that he wanted his own portraits to be "of" people, not "like" them.
Any possibility of a trite summary is banished by Freud's insistence on close observation over a long period of time, a method best described, in detail, by Martin Gayford in his account of sitting for Freud, Man with a Blue Scarf. Gayford was pleased to enjoy supper with Freud after the sittings but soon realised that Freud's scrutiny of him continued as they chatted.
But it is often hard to pin down the psychological matter in a Freud portrait. Greig, after seeing Naked Man with Rat as a schoolboy, sensed risk and danger, and felt he was "left in no doubt that truth could hurt". Yet any narrative is deliberately withheld; the parts remain separate, as the eye registers the sitter's raised arm and open hand, the held rat and its pointing tail, the genitals and the blank upward stare on the sitter's face. The painting achieves the "intensification of reality" that Freud sought, but it remains a travel book: its truths still trapped in mere outward appearance.
Threaded through Greig's book is the story of his obsession with Freud over 33 years. It began at the age of 17 when, thanks to the insight of an English teacher at Eton, he was taken to an exhibition of Freud's art at the gallery belonging to Anthony d'Offay, then a leading contemporary art dealer. Smitten, Greig began writing to Freud at intervals, but for years received no reply, until he was able to use his position in the world of journalism, as literary editor of the Sunday Times and then editor ofTatler, to draw a response.
He finally met Freud face to face and found himself "in Freudland". It was, he says, "all so familiar from the paintings – bare floorboards, torn sheets piled up, rickety kitchen chairs, a decadent sense of neglect". But it no doubt helped that, while living in New York, Greig had an affair with the daughter of one of Freud's two wives, Caroline Blackwood, by her second marriage. One of the games Greig plays, perhaps too often in this book, is spotting the near-incestuous connections between Freud's lovers and friends.
Owing to the commission Freud received to paint the Queen, he is linked with Van Dyck in Greig's mind. Both men, the book argues, conquered English society as the most formidable portraitists of their age. But Van Dyck set a model for aristocratic and society portraiture that impressed Joshua Reynolds and survives to this day.
Freud, on the other hand, has so far failed to convert contemporary portraitists, with their love of surface tricksiness, to the virtues of intense, obsessive scrutiny. Yet who can forget his small portrait Francis Bacon, not seen since it was stolen in 1988, or his profound record of the searing melancholy in John Minton's character? Given the conundrum of Freud, we might ask, in Thomas Mann's words: "Who shall unravel the mystery of an artist's nature and character! And who shall explain the profound instinctual fusion of discipline and licence on which it rests!"