Fake Or Fortune?
Day off today. Precious little to report again. I finally got round to watching the episode of "Fake or Fortune?" concerning Winston Churchill last night. They spoke with Churchill art expert David Coombes about whether a scene of a French town had been painted by the former Prime Minister or not. He expressed his doubts, questioning the quality of the figures in the painting and claiming that it lacked the (difficult to quantify) notion of "courage". I think Coombes means that his attitude to painting was often reflected through his style, in particular his use of bold brushstrokes.
I met him once at Chartwell (he's a lovely man) and told him that I was a studio steward. He asked me "Don't you find it terribly boring?". If the man who has spent 50 years compiling a catalogue of Winston Churchill's artwork thinks it must be boring, what chance have I got of convincing visitors otherwise? Although I'll concede there are days where he might have a point.
I'm paraphrasing here, but I'm pleased that the programme put across the view that Churchill was "a spirited amateur painter" as I also believe that's how he should be judged. That's invariably what I tell people who ask my opinion about his artwork and how he's more generally perceived across the art world in general. The collection at Chartwell is a labour of love and is of merit because of what it tells us about the man.
The programme seemed to uncover a great deal of circumstantial evidence to suggest that Churchill did indeed paint in the town in question. Ultimately Coombes remained on the fence, unwilling to declare it as a Churchill but unwilling to rule out the possibility.
I met him once at Chartwell (he's a lovely man) and told him that I was a studio steward. He asked me "Don't you find it terribly boring?". If the man who has spent 50 years compiling a catalogue of Winston Churchill's artwork thinks it must be boring, what chance have I got of convincing visitors otherwise? Although I'll concede there are days where he might have a point.
I'm paraphrasing here, but I'm pleased that the programme put across the view that Churchill was "a spirited amateur painter" as I also believe that's how he should be judged. That's invariably what I tell people who ask my opinion about his artwork and how he's more generally perceived across the art world in general. The collection at Chartwell is a labour of love and is of merit because of what it tells us about the man.
The programme seemed to uncover a great deal of circumstantial evidence to suggest that Churchill did indeed paint in the town in question. Ultimately Coombes remained on the fence, unwilling to declare it as a Churchill but unwilling to rule out the possibility.
Comments
Post a Comment