BgArt News Blog
Monday, February 20, 2006
  Lucian Freud +Kate Moss
lucian freuds kate moss paintingEarlier I posted about Lucian Freud's Kate Moss painting, and the image used (shown on the left) probably wasn't very flattering, or maybe people just genuinely don't like Freud. I was just under the impression that everyone loved Freud, and that there was nothing to criticize about the man's work.
But some of the comments were a bit harsh, so I've gone for a browse around the web to see if I can find some images that might do the work a little more justice (and perhaps show that Lucian Freud isn't a "hack"). Or at least show that the Internet is not the place to be an art critic.
Some of the comments from visitors on the image shown above included..
"That is one ugly picture.. poor use of color, and light.. look at those strokes.. it seems empty, as though it was generated on a computer...oh...where are the real artists"
Which is probably fine for the reproduction of the painting above, but here's some different versions..

lucian freud's kate moss painting
The painting above seems to show the work in a more natural setting. The color isn't as extreme and "computer generated" looking as the first image used on buygazette. Found here.

lucian freud's kate moss painting
This version (above) of Kate Moss is less than flattering, probably doing the original painting no justice at all. Found here.

lucian freud's kate moss painting
This version of the painting above looks like Kate Moss after being out in the sun for too long.

lucian freud's kate moss painting
This Kate Moss picture (above) is probably one of the better reproductions, found here.
Basically, the moral of this little Lucian Freud / Kate Moss rant is that the computer is no place to be judging the quality of a painting, especially if it's a really small, low resolution image of the work.
>> Lucian Freud News
BgArt News Blog Comments:
Not sure what the corners are meant to do on the painting? They really take away from the work. It looks like its about to lean over.
The leaning painting of Kate Moss!
Lucian Freud does rock though..
This work probably got the recognition it did because of Kate Moss, rather than the merits of the work.
It's beautiful!
Lucian paintings are general known for their unflattering qualities. Remember what he did to the Queen?
Yeah, I must admit that the painting of the queen by Freud was ugly. Do a search on Google.
almost did a better job of painting the queen.
Some of Freud's work is amazing but it is always very uncomfortable to be in a room with more then two or three of them - a whole exhibition is like being in a slaughterhouse.
Freud really doesn't paint very well. His Technique is mannered, nerotic and and way too laborsome to be concidered, " good painting". He also butcher's the figure instead of painting in any sort of aesthetic manner. Thamas Kinkade and Lucian Freud have alot in common...One paints for the masses and one paints for the Elite. They both cater to their audience very nicely, but they both suck.
I completely understand, "reality painting", and the sort, but... haven't we had enough of the pretentious angst of the Elite. There are so many painters that are so much better. .....and by the by....Why do we even let the Elite represent who we are as a culture. They might move and shake, but, we decide who we follow. Have you even looked at the Elite lately. They suck..

Don't get me started about corporations and Politions in their back pockets. OOOOOOOhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!
( ( The Movie: The Corporation))

Freud represents them, not me.
Don't let this Fraud represent us and go down in history as who we were, when there are so many awesome painters out there that can paint that ameture under the table any day of the week. Don't let the SYSTEM make up your mind for you. JUST remember..they are all in bed together.....The Gallleries pay off the Critcs....and the Museums and the Magazines. Look with your own 2 eyes. The Emperor has no clothes and Freud the Fraud sucks!!!!!
I'm far from "elite" but I love Freud's painting. He may or may not paint for the elite, but I still think he paints well.
I would of thought that a painterly painter like you would appreciate Freud a bit more Rob.
That was my first blog ever.

My cherry is popped now.:)
Really, he paints pretty mediocer. So does Kinkade. (who is a contemporary, corporate, rightious, saccarine sicko. Niether are masterly in
Draftmanship or Painting. Monet and bunch of English cottage painters did what Kinkade did 100 yrs before him. ..... Kokoschka, Nolde, Kolwitz, and dozens of others communicated demented angnst way better than Fraud 100 years ago.
I think Warhol is a peculiariarity, and no painter, but at least he moved things forward and showed how mass marketing is who we are. Fraud is a over publisized amature. ....Even Hockney,(who is better, but still over publisized and mediocer), admits Freud was excruciating and took weeks to paint his portrait....( which should have taken hours.
I hope your first time was good for you Rob ;-)

I'm not sure I would put Kinkade on the same bookshelf as Monet, but yeah they obviously both paint/ed for their audience.

Kinkade's paintings almost make me vomit, but I appreciate his marketing skills.

I think it's one of the biggest struggles we have as artists; to make something so intimate into a marketable product.

Marketing is my worst subject. But I'm learning. I've been doing Design and commisions for 25yrs, so, all my business has been word of mouth.

I think Artists ought to major in Partying, Socializing, and Self promotion....then slip in a little something stylish. ( Sorry if I sound bitter. I probably am. I'm softening up as I mature.) What kinda stuff do you do , Dion??
I do this kind of stuff Rob. I havnt had a studio all this year though, which frustrates the hell out of me! So I've been spending more time online than I do holding a paint brush.
Lucian Freud is a painter with tremendous expression.
IMO, comparing the two ( Kinkaide and Freud) is ridiculous. T
The cropped version change the composition dramatically. The full length painting is masterful. i love his work.
You know I think that Freud is a good painter who seems to run into problems with composition. Perhaps that is the may be intuitive way he works leading to this really dumb idea of the Kate Moss' diagonal blank spaces. Then there's the really bizarre piece he sold to the National Gallery in Canberra for an obcene amount of money. He seems to have finished the painting and then found one of the figures in the upper half of the painting had been placed so as to be showing only the lower legs. What did Freud do?. He just added a little bit off centre quare of canvas to the top of the painting making the work into an L shape for Pete's sake! The NGA paid Freud a fortune. for an ddu that even a student would be failed for
I think I agree John, but I forgive him because he such a great painter.

I don't know if Freud is trying to be clever or he really doesnt give much thought to composition.

I would rather a good painting with bad composition, than a bad painting with good composition.

Would be nice to have both though.
I think Freud's sincere look at the human animal is generally successful both in creating a beautiful object (the painting) & often, in capturing something of the psychology or nature of his sitters. I consider him one of the 10 foremost figurative painters working today (not including myself, of course!)
I think just by looking at these reproductions you can see Freud has an excellent ability to create the illusion of space on a canvas. This to me is the great challenge of painting. Before you start worrying about message, politics, who you're painting for, what you're painting about, anything else, you need to be able to master line and form. I don't think it is worth looking at a painting until the artist can do this. Freud can, and that much is obvious, even, as was said, from poor quality internet reporductions.

I find his work striking, and though it is often uncomfortable, I find beauty in it. I love how he presents the figure, I love how he uses his colours and brushstrokes. Having been to his exhibition a few years back in Venice, and studied a larger range of his work than I had before, I could really appreciate his versatility, which although he has a very distinct style, he certainly does have versatility.

As an Englishman, I feel he represents art from our island much better than some other artists on the world stage. We cna be thankful for painters like Lucian Freud. If I was going to compare him to anyone, I would pick Sir Stanley Spencer. I love them both.
All you people miss the point of the painting its a clear statement... Kate Moss is always shown as most models are as perfect, this painting shows her human side. Even super models look like ordinary women without the smoke and mirrors. As for "butchering the subject" i totally disagree. What he has managed to do is leave the subject totally exposed to the viewer. This effects the observer to really feel as if your seeing more than you're suppose to, you feel uncomfortable because your not used to this sort of shock, but it is beautiful. it shows human form in a very raw and real manner. It proves the human body can be beautiful in its natural state, which is important in the age of the airbrush. Sure Kate Moss might of got this painting some attention but only such a person would achieve such a statement.
she was also pregnant by a few months. also you cannot judge a portrait online with a crap pixellated version with the light of the computer behind it.
This painting is bad as the spelling of so many of your contributors
I think that people didn't like the painting simply because Kate Mosses name was one it and.... that doesn't exactly put her body in the best light lol.

I must admit that I didn't think much of Lucian Freud before I chose to study him in my art class and have to recreate some of his work, now I find his work quite lovely. Though I still think the things or maybe the way he chooses to paint look quite ugly
Hey, hey, hey guys. None of that. Freud is absolutely amazing and he deserves every bit of recognition he gets.
Who says that paintings need to be beautiful? He paints to put paint on the canvas! He is a remarkable painter and has been an inspiration to my work as a painter. Nothing about this man is mediocre.
Post a Comment

See our comments policy Comment spam will be deleted

<< Art News Home
BgArt News Blog - gallery reviews and art news
BgArt News Blog is a selection of visual art news, art reviews and art related stories online. We search the web for some of the more interesting art news stories published each day.
BgArt News Blog on Twitter BgArt News Blog on Facebook Subscribe to RSS Feed

Art Auctions / Art Competitions / Art Exhibitions / Art Museums / Books / Famous Artists / General Arts / Internet News / All Art News Archives / BgArt News Blog Home

August 2004 / September 2004 / October 2004 / November 2004 / December 2004 / January 2005 / February 2005 / March 2005 / April 2005 / May 2005 / June 2005 / July 2005 / August 2005 / September 2005 / October 2005 / November 2005 / December 2005 / January 2006 / February 2006 / March 2006 / April 2006 / May 2006 / June 2006 / July 2006 / August 2006 / September 2006 / October 2006 / November 2006 / December 2006 / January 2007 / February 2007 / March 2007 / April 2007 / May 2007 / June 2007 / July 2007 / August 2007 / September 2007 / October 2007 / November 2007 / December 2007 / January 2008 / February 2008 / March 2008 / April 2008 / May 2008 / June 2008 / July 2008 / August 2008 / September 2008 / October 2008 / November 2008 / December 2008 / January 2009 / February 2009 / March 2009 / April 2009 / May 2009 / June 2009 / July 2009 / August 2009 / September 2009 / October 2009 / November 2009 / December 2009 / February 2010 /

List of Art Scammers
List of Artist Studios
Most Expensive Living Artist
Who is Banksy?

BgArt News Blog INFO
SEARCH BgArt News Blog
Art Resources Online
About BgArt News Blog

Add to Google Reader or Homepage
Subscribe in NewsGator Online
Add to My AOL
Subscribe in Bloglines
Powered by Blogger