Unraveling the Mystery: Lucian Freud's Alleged Early Work | Perspective
Вставка
- Опубліковано 14 лис 2022
- Can art detectives Philip Mould and Fiona Bruce prove that a painting of a man in a black cravat is one of the first pictures ever painted by celebrated and controversial British artist Lucian Freud, even though Freud himself denied painting it? From Series 5 Episode 1.
Subscribe and click the bell icon to get more arts content every week:
/ perspectivearts
Perspective is UA-cam's home for the arts. Come here to get your fill of great music, theatre, art and much, much more!
📺 It's like Netflix for history... Sign up to History Hit, the world's best history documentary service and get 50% off using the code 'PERSPECTIVE' bit.ly/3zj7Soo
Gee, it was so good to see Bendor back in the series. His calm professionalism is a definite asset to the show.
It is nice to see Bendor. This is an episode in series 5 which was filmed in 2016. The current series filmed in '22 is series 10, after Bendor left the team.
This is an old episode before he left to do his own show called Britain's Lost Masterpieces. You should watch it if you want to see him again.
Bendor is dilfic
Bendor is great.
@@chipwalter4490 what's dilfic? He's oddly sexy to me.
"Fake or Fortune" is one of my all time favorite tv shows. Thank you for posting it in 1080P HD quality!
Lucien Freud loved hating people and it shows in his work. He made everybody ugly just like he was inside. Having said that, this show Fake or Fortune is great! One can’t expect to be a fan of all the artists they feature. The fact that I watched a whole episode based around and artist’s work that I’m not a fan of, is s testament to how good of a program this team puts together. Thank you for posting them online!
Odd, so odd, and a Freud, just dark Ego stuff.
No... no hatred
Narcissist
You know it’s lazy to evaluate a person from only one source.
I agree with you completely
A cliffhanger of a show. Absolutely wonderful, and so underrated! Thank you for this wonderful journey in a lost British art world in the quaint British countryside. ❤
What stands out for me and not discussed, is how on earth Lucian Freud arrived at this portrait using the young handsome colleague as the model? He painted what he would perhaps look like at 60yrs old! It's very possible Lucian was searching for a personal style with contrasting ideas that didn't crystallize at the time of this "Unfinished", portrait. I had never heard of him, but the fact that he "Liked hating people", assures me I would have loved knowing him specially in a British Pub.
I like this channel tremendously, it's a world- class production experience with British wit and elegance. BRAVO 👏!!!
*Imagine this painting actually fetching the highest price of all his paintings due to the controversy, the landscape, and the fact he actually did the Painting. I bet this happens.*
"He denied the Painting because he didn't want the College Foe to profit from his work." That's is so obvious.
You can't take Freud's word for it that he didn't do it, it just means he doesn't remember. I did a lot in the late 80s I don't remember either.
If he simply had forgotten it, he shouldn't _deny_ it. He was embarrased by it because it is such a naive, subpar painting made before he had developed his basic _craftman_ skills. But it is amazing to see all these naked emperors who want to believe it is a masterpiece.
Yes that's true...
@@Stroheim333 I didn't hear anyone saying that the painting was a masterpiece. They're just interested in whether or not it can be attributed to Freud. If it can be attributed to Freud, it's worth a considerable amount of money. If not, then it's worthless.
@@Stroheim333 The point is why not respect the artist who rejected it?
@@chloeuntrau4588 Strange comment, there.
So much talent and honesty in the young Freud. This episode is rich, a fine re-run.
Each and every program you offer is a joy to watch. This one, however, was extraordinary, compelling and completely engrossing.
He was quite the contrarian. His grandfather would have had a field day if he had had Lucien on his couch.
A delicious hour, as usual, with this program. I always learn so much while being charmed and delighted by the experts.
At the end, it’s odd that the current owner actually looks like the subject of the painting.
Might be why he bought it
And the portrait looks like it is aging in his behalf.
Dorian Gray perhaps?
I'm going to guess that the part of the portrait not by Freud was the original landscape which was by someone else. Freud decided to experiment by doing a portrait on top of the original work, which is why you can see some of it on its side in the present work. Freud may have considered the work not good enough to be a part of his official body of works intended for the world to see and/or he simply considered the painting not to be a work by him because it contained the work of another artist in it.
Why is nobody picking up on another obvious reason why Freud disowned the painting - his feelings for/relationship with the subject - Jameson?
The focus is on Dickie & Dennis, nowhere is Jameson brought up.
EXACTLY.
This is my first time watching and it was very intense to see. Thanks for all the hard work.
An enthralling mystery I couldn't wait to get to the bottom of! Well done!
Such a great series! Thanks for posting.
Glad you enjoy it! Tons more to come
I binged watched this whole series and thoroughly enjoyed it.
Nice! I bet we've got some episodes you haven't seen. This is the first one we've posted so there's tons more to come
@@PerspectiveArts I hope so. Thanks
@@PerspectiveArts Bring it!!! 😘
According to the introduction to the program, the painting was auctioned for a large sum as a Lucian Freud work in spite of the artist’s statement that he hadn’t painted it. I have watched 3 episodes of this series where the negative opinions of the “experts” destroyed the possible values of the works in question. How strange that the opinions of the “experts” and “authorities” have such power to affect value when the opinion of the artist is ignored.
Ah yes, that old nugget of works the artist does not think should be credited because it was before they developed as an artists. Seen it many times.
Art and a sweet Airedale under the table what a great way to spend a snowy Sunday!
Correction, the terrier is Fiona's Irish Terrier.
Fantastic show. Each episode is captivating.
The feeling, from the immediate beginning; was of an original hand but unsatisfied, vaine artist..such an delicate, intelligent portrait!
Very well done, throughout - both program, presentation as well as painting! Thankyou
"Such a delicate, intelligent portrait!" -- You and the emperor without clothes.
@@Stroheim333 I am smiling as that is my thought too.
@@darrendazcox Thumbs up. It amaze and bewilder me that it is so difficult for just art critics and lovers to observe what they see. When someone discover a juvenile piece written by a big author, the literary critics recognize that it is naive and amateurish, although interesting for the sake of research. But if someone find scrawls by a 10 year old Picasso or Van Gogh, the critics and art lovers overestimate it completely.
@@Stroheim333 And exactly what makes YOU an art expert?
@@Stroheim333 Show me where someone found a ten-year-old artist's anything.
What a great show. They dont make shows like this. Its amazing.
They do. This is a BBC show, and they make all kinds of great tv. You just arent watching the right shows
Exceptionally interesting investigation... Goodness I watched it on a single breath. 👏👏👏
Loved the show I was glued to the set. Well done indeed.
Glad you enjoyed it This is the first of many episodes to come!
You guys are great , bravo such amazing programming thank you for being fantastic
Wow! Immensely captivating! Thanks for sharing!
such a fascinating piece! Thank you
Fascinating research! So interesting! Absolutely admire your thinking process and perseverance 💐✨💐✨💐
10:45 "Constant razz" -- Oh! Constant ROWS! The "w" is barely there!
Spectacular level of research.
JF was such a contrarian and despised those two men so fiercely that he just might have denied authorship out of spite, thus preventing them or their heirs profiting from ownership. Yep, I can see that after the description of JF's personality.
Good point, actually. JF doesn't want people associated with the subject of the painting make money from its authorship.
What an amazing episode.
My guess is that he said he only painted part of it because there were aspects of the painting that he wasn't satisfied with.
Yes, like the background only, not his, but a canvas he picked up and started on and began to see the background blend in
This is such an interesting story with twists and turns
I'm left wondering whether the background landscape of the painting was indeed a backdrop ...and whether a painting exists from that place/time which looks like that? ...intriguing
Absolutely fascinating to see the depth of research that went into this case leading to an incomplete answer.
However, Lucian Freud had his reasons for disowning this painting. They were private reasons and that should have been respected, especially as he is no longer able to explain or defend his decision, even if he wanted to.
His answer WASN'T incomplete. Reluctant, yes, but hardly incomplete. In the end he did admit the authorship of the piece.
That's life. After you are dead the world will do as it will with your belongings and name.
I really want to know what “the egg-cup episode” entailed.
They have no right to go against the painter even if if it was one of his paintings if he denied the picture they should of stopped any investigations
I just LOVE, LOVE this tv program!!❤😀👍
I adore this series! 🍸
It's his first painting of John Turturro.
That landscape behind and face itself gives me an idea, that person is actually laying down on a field. I didn't watch till the end yet but in the middle it seems so. Face shape start make sense much more, whoever did pain it.
Freud was all IN DENIAL about the painting's authorship, even violently disgusted at the mere accusation. Later on, however, he did admit that it is one of his earlier painting studies.
Masterpiece Presentation
A "portrait by Lucian Freud on repurposed canvas with landscape by unknown artist" in other words he clearly knew he painted most if not all of the portrait but would not allow the painting to be added to his body of works because the rotated landscape painting was by someone else at the school. He was very accomplished in his own right so he would only want his work that he did completely to be in his portfolio. I would venture to suspect one of the fellow art students he had a strong rivalry with had done the landscape but discarded the canvas unfinished for other students to repurpose. Lucian simply did not want his talent associated or shared with that artist, whomever it may be. Imagine sharing a painting with another artist that you disliked & how much that would or could change the value of this painting in particular. I honestly feel that is why the daughter said she feared he would destroy the painting if he had seen it in person because the dislike for the other artist would have brought anger out & he would have wanted to destroy the connection or idea of sharing a work with them. It would be very interesting to identify the other artist especially if it was Dennis Miller because would really be a collaboration of hatred. It might explain how Dennis came to have possession of it. He possibly could have done it out of spite or by some admiration for Freud that he refused to originally acknowledge. I hope they continue researching it rather than selling it. I really enjoyed this episode!
Maybe Freud was high or drunk when he painted it -- hence once he got sober, he realized what an unaesthetic work it is/was.
Such a portrait, made by a very young man shows his genius.
Lucian needed some therapy from his grandfather.
Aha.. I pointed correctly at jamersons pic too @ 45:21 before the owner did.. I did wonder that, the portrait didn't look like Lucien at all.. But definitely the guy in the picture.. Wow.. Truly talented young lucien was..
Wonderful ❤
I don't like his later work, but do like this piece.
Such an interesting episode!
However, the solicitor's notes just say that he mused about what he may have painted 65 years later. Considering the amounts of paintings he produced in this time span this is not facts. But, him admitting it before his solicitor under confidentiality - which he clearly valued - is a giant clue. Especially because he denied it to everyone else, that is very much his personality.
I'm playing Devil's advocate - Did Freud's solicitor betray his confidentiality?
I’VE BEEN PAINTING & DRAWING ETC. SINCE THE BEGINNING OF TIME - ONE NEVER FORGETS - ESPECIALLY A PIECE OF WORK THAT COMPLEX AND LARGE - NOW THAT BEING SAID, YES HE COULD/MIGHT OF NOT CARED FOR THE WORK AND DENIED HE PAINTED IT - NOW I WILL WATCH THE DOCUMENTARY
That was a good result. I tend to agree with the experts and the evidence given that it is partly by Freud and therefore it does have some merit and value attributed to him
Lucien sounds really quirky, a true candidate for his father's couch!!
Grandfather.
So interesting 🤔 exiting story
It is worth a lot, extraordinary.
If I was Freud, I would denied the printing, because it was finished by someone else. Unfortunately, the art market needs Freud painting to make profit.
I agree 100%! The whole art world is a huge fraud!!!
I need to see what make experts...."experts". Too me I believe they are people with absolutely no talent at all in the art world so everything looks great! Such madness!
This painting is more interesting to me than the Mona Lisa
very interesting.
What a great show.
I used to excell in art as a kid, but my mother would hit my hand as she didn't want me to focus on art as she so no future in art. My dad quietly bought some paints in a tiny tin box and my dad entered my painting in a competition and i won. The school i went to was so poor just like my parents, we had no art supplies. Our teacher was impressed with my pencil drawing and she bought paints out of her own funds. i paint a few paintings and friends of parents saw them and asked for them, and my mother never asked me, and gave them away. She was determined i was not going to waste my "life as an artist". When i wanted to study architecture she refused and insisted i study the sciences only so i gave up doing any more art.
i think i could have produced some good art. i now have arthritis in my hands and am partially paralyzed but i am going to try to creat art and hopefully get rich....yeah sure! 😅😅😅😅😅
That blue is clearly your color, Fiona! Gorgeous!
I don't comprehend the value of art -- expect maybe it is one-up-manship for the rich or rising rich. Van Gough couldn't sell even one painting even though his brother owned an art gallery/studio. In his time his works were less than worthless. I don't understand the astronomical prices for art works.
me too!! I think Van Gough's art is bad....really bad! I used to draw and paint like that in 4 or 5th grade. Now a Vemeer is a different story! Very difficult to reproduce.
So ridiculous!
I don't know why people buy the rubbish and hang in the house. In a garage sale it would be difficult to sell for $5. Just ridiculous!
02:30: 'I never think about technique.' Erm...yup.
I love this show.
Without watching the whole thing I’d say that it was stolen and the artist didn’t want the thief profiting off it so he denied it.
Talent, small or great, intelligence, all these aspects of being human so valued in modern western culture, have very little bearing on whether or not an individual is a decent human being. My mother was a member of “the great artists can get away with atrocious behavior” club. We once had a huge fallout over Gaugin and his abominable treatment of Polynesian women. I did not say he was not a great artist, I said he was a poor excuse for a human being.
Lucien Freud seems to have enjoyed playing the miserable, mean spirited snob. His work is astonishing (if also mean spirited at times) but that genius does not make his behavior something to overlook. On the other hand many of his fellow travelers weren’t much better. They drank deeply from the vast lake of human jealousy, competitiveness and greed for recognition. I sometimes wonder how folks so incapable of self reflection can produce such extraordinary art.
Wonderful presentation, as always.
It is a painting from an art school. Maybe the landscape on its side was sitting there in the live scene background when it was sketched out and included to reflect the art school environment.
How about, if he denies creating the work, then no one can sell it for his. To spite someone?
But who's to say that it wasn't someone else's - like someone standing close to it before it was dry???
Watching this made me watch more about Lucien Freud ,documentaries etc reading about his life etc ,half way through I recognised he was on the spectrum ,his personality etc the way he painted ,I knew this portrait was real ,paint colours etc lol did art history ,great fun to watch
so...who did the landscape underneath? and who left a hair in it?
I picked him immediately out of the lineup of students, on a small laptop screen.
Lately I found some first painting of Picasso, Dali and other in my grandmas closet LOL
So who painted the rest?
That's what I want to know!
He should have been sent to the tower for that disgusting "portrait" of her Majesty!!!
is this a new episode?? is this series back on BBC?
Lucky man to have a painting by a famous artist who painted it in his youth before his fame
I would love to be in the art trade in my next incarnation so I am trying hard to live a good life now to enable me to have that choice when the time comes. Auctioneer, dealer, expert, writer/programme maker, artist even, all would be a great life for me.
I'm not mad, just an atheist with my own individual set of beliefs carefully formed over time and as valid as anybody else's beliefs.
I think the DNA theory was rather flawed. Even assuming that the hair would have been from Freud or someone in his maternal line, there are many ways in which a hair of his could have ended up on someone else's picture in the general mess in that school. Conversely, the fact that the hair isn't his doesn't prove the issue one way or the other, again because the hair could have got there in any number of ways.
Yes - a very flawed theory. So many ways that one hair could’ve attached to an oil.
What a great channel.
Im about to launch a new internet radio station here in Peeth, Western Australia and would love to promote this channel and restream the audios, with your permission.
Regards
Michael
When this episode first started I was like....if he said it's not his then why would that not be true? But as I am watching I remember that I was looking through an album not too long ago from work that I did in college and I do not remember a few of the drawings and paintings at all. Yet there I am sitting there holding them posing for a picture. I know I did them but I have no recollection of doing them at all. Could be the weed. Lol. I have no idea. But excited to see the rest of this episode.
Very good point.
Hehe. I'm a professional musician with a long history of recording the music I write. I too have the same problem when someone plays an old recording. I can't remember for the life of me that recording session.
Very beautiful matured painting thx
The portrait looks like the present owner than any other persons dead or alive😆. The landscape on the background could just be a sideways laid painting at the back of the model while painting it.
I noticed the same thing. And of, course, the whole circle of those 2 friends who gave it to the present owner, the model, John Jameson -- they're all part of the Oscar Wilde Society. LOL!!
Great program, but ads every five minutes?
Is it possible LF just decided that he didn't want those two artists to profit from his work, and just decided to deny them profit?
He Freud had something in common with Francis Bacon in that practice of having someone go in and destroy paintings he wasn't pleased.... they were apart of this group of the times.....
He denied the Painting because he didn't want the College Foe to profit from his work." That's is so obvious.
Yes, early evidence showing his lifelong love of greenish greys!
WE MISS BENDOR GROVNER!
If my art ever finds its way to a show like this there is one that is my fav.. a marquetry piece about 8"×12" with butterfly and bird of paradise with runes on the back and beautifull wood..very happy with it...the runes say surrender it to the light of truth. You need to xray it as I embedded lead wire into letters sealed inside (glued together that way) :)
Interesting that LF looks like Wittgenstein.
" At The Saint Johns Fete we learned that they even had something
called a PIG ROLLING COMPETITION which was one by a LADY
called MRS. DEATH, and FRANKLY the MIND BOGGLES!"
LMAO!!!!!!
No, that’s my son Timmy’s first painting.
nice one! love it! 😅😅😅
i would take it to auction....of course as prob the goal all along
The owner stated in the beginning he meant to auction it. This isn't a revelation.
If he chose to paint over someone else's work, perhaps that was why he couldn't claim it as his own.
It is so ugly it defies words. Even for a Freud.