The horse's mouth
Sir: Regarding his review of Lucian Freud's show at the Whitechapel Art Gallery (Arts, 18 September), it would surely have been in bad form for me to name Giles Auty as one of 'the new reactionaries in art journalism' whose praise (in the Independent Sunday Review) I reported Lucian Freud as spurn- ing. Of course he was one of them, as well as Peter Fuller — though I'm sure that Freud appreciates encouragement from Robert Hughes. If you know a painter at all well, you know his likes and dislikes regard- ing other painters, as well as art critics, from very early on. It is quite reasonable, I submit, to report his attitudes in this case, and entirely unsolicited by him, in order to make them clear to readers who might easi- ly assume that he shares most of the opin- ions of an art preacher who has consistently used him as a symbol of shining virtue. Surely nothing could be much more irritat- ing than being sanctified by the wrong church (even for a saint).
I can understand Mr Auty feeling offend- ed or hurt, but I also think that in his piece he wrongly allowed pique to affect his judg- ment and tone of voice both about the artist and the Leigh Bowery pictures, at least one of which he would have shown some respect for had he not read my article.
Bruce Bernard
44 Frederick Street, London WC1
Previous page
