Freud Exhibition
February 10, 2012 § 30 Comments
I went to see the Freud exhibition; press viewing no less crowded than I expect the normal days will be. But I still came out trembling in the face of his genius and the truth made manifest. I haven’t seen so much exposed flesh since, well, since his last big exhibition at the Hayward some years ago.
I bumped into a few old friends. One man, whom I had not seen for ever, said I hadn’t changed in thirty years. Why is it, in the face of such bollocks flattery, one always believes it? It seemed fitting that I should see someone, there, of all places, from the distant past, our very flesh – despite his compliments – transformed.
I simpered a bit, and returned to the fleshly extravaganza on show, gasping anew in the face of the mortal coils so blatantly gashed across the walls. A complete absence of flattery, life in all its forensic ugliness, and beauty, is there; and sex and death, too, hover, brilliantly.
The Plankton 
Any flattery is good; take it in the spirit it’s given 😉 x (I’m looking forward to seeing this exhibition!)
I highly recommend it, obviously! xx
Looking forward to seeing this in the next week or so.
Have tickets for the Hockney tomorrow.
Ooh hark at me. All this cultchaa!!
Flattery gets lots of people a long way. Lucy Kellaway in the FT tried it for a week, seeing how over the top she could go with colleagues and others and no flattery was too much. I use it a lot as a tool. It works and it work on me when men choose to do it. It’s fun.
Freud was good with women although Caroline Blackwood one of his wives had it right when she determined not to have her children with him as he was not someone with whom to be a parent.
They say women marry dull stable men who will look after their children and have sex with and procreate in secrete with exciting men who make useless fathers hence 30% of children may not be their father’s child.
If you’ve had your babies the equation is do you want the fun man who probably cheats on you or indeed an agreement with him that you can both have whom you choose or do you want less potential for emotional heart ache and then you pick the man who has never cheated ,. Sometimes there are exciting good men who are faithful of course and ditto women. it’s a fairly gender neutral issue.
What we do need though is to ensure any of our daughters have the same chances as Freud to paint – men perhaps several who will care for them and their children for 70 years whilst daughters if they choose can devote themselves to painting.
What what what is lydia saying here in this incoherent ramble? Flattery is good, freud was a crap father, women shag around, men should look after children ramble ramble ramble….
Thank you P! the fact that there was a Freud exhibition in town had completely passed me by, so glad you flagged it, what a fantastic artist, the casual intimacy in the Leigh Bowery and Nicola portraits fascinates me. I shall hot foot it up there as soon as I am back from my work travel.
Oh, good. And do let us know what you think of it. Px
Thank you for letting me know about this exhibition P….I have just booked the very last ticket for 1pm entry on Saturday 17th March… I would not leave it too late to book Jane… Although there seems to be plenty of availability at the end of *May*!
Wow! I realise how lucky I was to get in.
Oh god, Leigh Bowery… google ‘Leigh Bowery gives birth’ and see what happens. Not for the faint hearted!
I did as you said and googled that… all I can say is there really is nowt as queer as folk.
hahaha!! yep, they are totally barking! I just like the paintings, can’t say I begin to understand the ‘performance art’ side of said Mr Bowery.
How on earth did you discover that little gem Rosie?
As an aside P. you were pondering the suitablilty of art galleries as places to meet men, apart from someone you already know, how did you rate your visit as a potential meeting place? realise it may be a tad different if it’s an invited audience, but last time I went to a Freud exhibition, everyone was so jam packed in the gallery, the only thing I felt was claustrophobia, more concerned with not stepping on someones feet or jabbing them in the ribs than scanning for potential luuuurve interests.
There was rather an attractive fellow with dark curls (and he had a beard, even, but I chose to ignore that!). He looked at me a bit. Then I noticed the wedding ring. Ah well. x
It strikes me reading this vignette how fortunate we would be if you one day wrote a memoir of your life amid the London literati, with names named, if you see what I mean. Stylistic elegance, psychological penetration, and first-hand gossip about famous and interesting people: it would be a real contribution. Sadly I suspect that the paradox identified by Dr Johnson holds true: precisely because you are so in with these people you need to be discreet.
Well, thank you. And you are right. I do need to be very discreet. I was thinking what fun it would be to name everyone who appears in the blog, make it a lot more interesting I am sure, but I can’t, alas, and never will. Discretion is my first, middle and last name. Px
As discreet as you are Ms P you have given away many clues, it all adds to this very interesting, thought provoking and entertaining blog. And whilst some of us may know your identity it really doesn’t matter. What you are saying is current and engaging with many of us being able to relate to what it is to be a plankton.
Thank you, Nutkin, very much. Kind words indeed. Px
Flattery at any age can be a winner. About once a month I visit a 91 year old aunt with advanced Alzheimers, in bed for the last year or so, and hardly speaks. But I always tell her how lovely her hair is looking – true, too – and am rewarded with a dazzling smile…
Great exhibit! Wish I didn’t live half a world away, then again, a crowded exhibit is worse than none at all.
My humble gallery is having its monthly opening tomorrow night. I’ll never rate so much as a footnote in art history, but I have met a few nice guys at these functions. I mentioned the opening to my now former ex bf (with a little luck, I’ll soon just refer to him as my bf, but I am still wary, don’t want to jinx it) on the phone this AM, and he said he’d be sure to be back from the city in time to be there.
GOOD! Fingers crossed for you with him, EmGee. Px
Hi P, sorry to change the subject, but there’s an lovely article in The Times today about internet dating:
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/life/article3315321.ece
Thank you for flagging it up. I shall read it now. Px
@ Ms. Plankton- If you’ve not already seen these- From today’s Times, here’s the link to an article which is directly relevant to the subjust of your newest blogpost from today:
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/arts/visualarts/article3316786.ece
and you just might find this one interesting, too:
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/life/article3315321.ece
Thanks, Scott. X
Ah, life is strange sometimes- Sarah sends you a link to a Times article and her comment is appropriate and non- offensive- I send you the exact same link to the same article and my comment is potentially offensive?
Who said yours was offensive?
There was a lengthy delay from the time that I wrote my comment last night until six hours later when I saw it appear on your blogpage this morning, hence leading me to believe that for some reason you were reluctant to upload it- Perhaps it just got delayed somewhere in cyberspace though….
It’s weird but they are all automatically approved these days, but for some reason your’s had to be manually approved by this this morning. It must have slipped through the cyber-net. No intentions intended!
To Scott, re your post not appearing: I’ve had the same experience in the past and also puzzled over what I had said to offend. It turned out the auto-approver didn’t let through anything with multiple links. Presumably the programme thinks one is selling something. So I guess that is what happened here.
Good links, thanks!
I am so sorry. I have no power over this! Apologies. x