Mystery of the Lost Paintings ep. 1 - Mystery of the Lost Churchill
This documentary series tells the stories of a host of historic paintings that have been tragically lost, stolen or destroyed over the decades and centuries. This series kicks off with Graham Sutherland's controversial portrait of Winston Churchill.
In 1954 the English artist Graham Sutherland was commissioned to paint a full-length portrait of Sir Winston Churchill. The 1,000 guinea fee for the painting was funded by donations from members of the House of Commons and House of Lords. The painting was presented to Churchill by both Houses of Parliament at a public ceremony in Westminster Hall on his 80th birthday on 30 November 1954.
Churchill hated the portrait. After the public presentation, the painting was taken to his country home at Chartwell but was not put on display. After the death of Lady Churchill in 1977, it became clear that she had the painting destroyed some months after it was delivered.
Churchill's wife viewed the completed portrait on 20 November 1954 and took a photograph back to her husband. It was his first view of the work, and he was deeply upset. He described it to Lord Moran as "filthy" and "malignant", and complained that it made him “look like a down-and-out drunk who has been picked out of the gutter in the Strand”. With only 10 days to go, he sent a note to Sutherland stating that "the painting, however masterly in execution, is not suitable" and declaring that the ceremony would go ahead without it. Sutherland maintained that he honestly painted what he saw. MP Charles Doughty persuaded Churchill that the presentation had to go ahead, to avoid offending the donors.
The presentation ceremony at Westminster Hall was recorded by the BBC. In his acceptance speech, Churchill remarked on the unprecedented honour shown to him and described the painting (in a remark often considered a backhanded compliment) as "a remarkable example of modern art", combining "force and candour". Other reactions were mixed; some critics praised the strength of its likeness, but others condemned it as a disgrace. While Aneurin Bevan, a Labour MP and one of Churchill's critics, called it, "A beautiful work", Lord Hailsham, one of Churchill's Conservative colleagues and a friend, called it "disgusting"
Mystery of the Lost Paintings ep. 1 - Sutherland's Portrait of Winston Churchill
In 1954 the English artist Graham Sutherland was commissioned to paint a full-length portrait of Sir Winston Churchill. The 1,000 guinea fee for the painting was funded by donations from members of the House of Commons and House of Lords. The painting was presented to Churchill by both Houses of Parliament at a public ceremony in Westminster Hall on his 80th birthday on 30 November 1954.
Churchill hated the portrait. After the public presentation, the painting was taken to his country home at Chartwell but was not put on display. After the death of Lady Churchill in 1977, it became clear that she had the painting destroyed some months after it was delivered.
Churchill's wife viewed the completed portrait on 20 November 1954 and took a photograph back to her husband. It was his first view of the work, and he was deeply upset. He described it to Lord Moran as "filthy" and "malignant", and complained that it made him “look like a down-and-out drunk who has been picked out of the gutter in the Strand”. With only 10 days to go, he sent a note to Sutherland stating that "the painting, however masterly in execution, is not suitable" and declaring that the ceremony would go ahead without it. Sutherland maintained that he honestly painted what he saw. MP Charles Doughty persuaded Churchill that the presentation had to go ahead, to avoid offending the donors.
Reception
The presentation ceremony at Westminster Hall was recorded by the BBC. In his acceptance speech, Churchill remarked on the unprecedented honour shown to him and described the painting (in a remark often considered a backhanded compliment) as "a remarkable example of modern art", combining "force and candour". Other reactions were mixed; some critics praised the strength of its likeness, but others condemned it as a disgrace. While Aneurin Bevan, a Labour MP and one of Churchill's critics, called it, "A beautiful work", Lord Hailsham, one of Churchill's Conservative colleagues and a friend, called it "disgusting"
