Lucian Freud portrait of Queen Elizabeth causes a stir

[Celeste McCall]

I should think that the queen might find it humorous. I would also think that she would love a portrait like that of herself to add to all the regal flattering portraits. It adds a touch of honesty to the collection.

[Katherine Annon]

I agree with you, Celeste.

And it's not as if Lucien Freud is an obscure painter. They knew his work when he was commissioned to do this painting. I think that they had a fair idea of what he would turn out.

Say the following folks were to do the same portrait of the Queen (if they were still alive): Bouguereau, Rembrandt, van Gogh, Sargent.

Wouldn't we have a very good general impression of how each artist would interpret it? I think we could certainly look at each one and take an accurate stab at who painted what...

I think that Freud turned out exactly what one would expect of Freud.

[Katherine Annon]

Oops again! Celeste, we may need to move this as per Karin's suggestion. Thanks for your patience with this newbie poster...

[Linda Ciallelo]

This is one of my favorite Lucian Freud portraits. It's certainly not a traditional portrait, but I still love what it says about this man, and I love the way it's done. This is one of my favorite paintings ever.

[Michele Rushworth]

To me it says he's got a big head.

[Celeste McCall]

This is so cute and comical and yet has a a real serious yet solid feel to it. I wouldn't want it in my house maybe but I can see why some would really like this.

[ReNae Stueve]

It does say he can not draw worth a darn. But look at that right (our right) hand. Amazing

[Linda Ciallelo]

I think it says that this man loves his dog and his dog loves him. It's not about perfect beauty, it's about humanity. It shows the "worth" that this man and his dog posess. It says that his feelings are as real and as valid as those of beautiful people that are perfectly proportioned, well groomed,and fashionable.

[Celeste McCall]

After looking at this portrait again, I am struck by the amount of near parallel diagonal lines. The dog's back, the man's shoulders, the sofa back the lines on the wall the lines of the fabric, etc. This is what seems to be missing in many portraits that are otherwise very wonderful. Just basic art, yet many forget this when composing the portrait.

I'm going to start doing more and more of this as an "on purpose" process. However, being well aware that this could look very contrived if not done skillfully.

[Linda Ciallelo]

I agree. I think that the artist purposely emphasized the misshapen head, and exagerrated the mans imperfections to make sure that we got the point of what he was saying. Even with all the deformity it comes through loud and clear that this man "feels", and so does his dog. I love the dog's face. And I could look at those hands all day.

I have been thinking about Lucian Freud's work often these days, when I labor to get all the lines "exactly" like the photo. It might be better to let your subconscious distort the exact slant of the lines a bit to look better for the painting. If we produce a painting that is "exactly" like the photo , what good is it? We might better have just used the photo.

Of course people still want to buy portraits that look exactly like the photo. I guess it depends on whether one is painting for the client or for a museum.