The National Portrait Gallery’s latest exhibition, “Lucian Freud: Drawing into Painting,” invites visitors to explore the lesser-known side of the renowned artist’s oeuvre. Unfortunately, this retrospective reveals that Freud, while a titan of painting, often faltered in his drawings. Instead of showcasing the depth of his talent, the exhibition highlights a collection of works that, for the most part, lack the brilliance found in his celebrated canvases.
A Lacklustre Exploration of an Artist’s Early Work
The exhibition presents a cavalcade of Freud’s sketches and etchings, including some of his childhood works, which feel more like a tedious bus ride than an exhilarating journey through art. The contrast between his celebrated paintings and these etchings is jarring. While his portraits, such as the striking “Benefits Supervisor” Sue Tilley, radiate vitality and nuance, the drawings are often marked by heavy shading and lack the vibrancy that characterises his best work.
Freud’s etchings seem to occupy a liminal space, teetering between the banal and the pitiful. The lack of the characteristic boldness and daring that defined his painting career leaves one questioning the curators’ intentions in elevating these mediocrities to a position of prominence. One cannot help but feel that the selection reflects a desperation to find merit where little exists.
The Artist’s Struggles with Etching
As I roamed through the galleries, I encountered pieces like “Man Posing,” a 1985 etching that attempts to capture the human form in all its nudity. Instead of evoking intrigue, the piece falls flat—its subject’s oversized head and uninspired expression invite derision rather than admiration. In stark contrast, a nearby painting of the same model captures the essence of Freud’s genius, illustrating the stark divide between his drawn and painted works.
The exhibition curators attempt to suggest that these drawings reveal Freud’s evolution as an artist. However, it appears that as he transitioned from a meticulous draughtsman to a painter of extraordinary depth, he left behind a collection of works that lack the same emotional resonance. The curators’ decision to spotlight these less successful pieces ultimately diminishes Freud’s legacy rather than enhancing it.
A Dissonance in the Curatorial Vision
Freud’s early works, showcased through crayon and chalk drawings, reveal a softer side to the artist, one that clashes with the brutal realism that characterises his mature paintings. This juxtaposition creates a sense of confusion: is this the same man who once rendered his subjects with such striking honesty? The sentimental quality of these early drawings warps the perception of Freud as an artist of stark truths.
Moreover, the exhibition falters as it attempts to present Freud as a historical figure rather than a living artist. This disconnect is palpable, leading to a mischaracterisation of his achievements. Instead of being celebrated as one of the great modern painters, he risks being relegated to the status of a minor artist, producing competent but uninspiring drawings.
Why it Matters
The failure of “Drawing into Painting” to successfully bridge the gap between Freud’s illustrious paintings and his mediocre drawings is alarming. As art enthusiasts and collectors witness such missteps, the risk grows that the perception of Freud’s legacy may suffer. With many of his masterpieces locked away in private collections, exhibitions like this one may inadvertently lower the esteem and market value of his works. In an era where the artist’s reputation is continually scrutinised, it is imperative to present a cohesive and compelling narrative that celebrates his true brilliance.
