Iconic Photos

Famous, Infamous and Iconic Photos

Churchill and his portrait

with 8 comments

Winston Chruchill

“A remarkable example of modern art” growled Churchill when the grateful parliament presented him with a portrait for his 80th birthday in 1954. A painter himself, Churchill did not like the portrait by Graham Sutherland for it depicted him as a querulous old man instead of the bulldoggish statesman who had faced down Hitler.

Sutherland was commissioned by both Houses of Parliament to paint a full-length portrait of Churchill in 1954, for which only this study survives. The finished painting, presented to Churchill, was destroyed by his wife Clementine Churchill.

Written by Alex Selwyn-Holmes

June 3, 2009 at 8:25 am

8 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. My Great-Grandfather certainly had a way with words.

    The painting was without a doubt one of the greatest insults to an international hero who had, in his lifetime, saved the world from the worst kind of evil we have ever faced in our history.

    Any artist, no matter how amature, knows that you never paint a portrait depicting the truth. But even is Sutherland didn’t know this, he certainly knew you don’t paint a lie.

    The painting was destroyed, and rightly so. Sutherland should have been ashamed to have taken the money from the tax-payers for such a monstrous waste of expensive canvass and paints.

    Jonathan Sandys

    March 28, 2010 at 11:52 pm

    • It’s a shame it was destroyed although the fact that Clementine did so makes me smile. I think the painting was a testament to Sir Winston Churchill’s legacy of fearlessness and tenacity in the face of age, a wonderful reflection of a noble soul. It projected both complexity and immortality. It has the distinct air of “never despair” and “never give up”. The painting was unconventional but brilliant as was the man.

      Vincent Esposito

      July 16, 2011 at 4:43 pm

  2. i like both modern arts and classic arts because they both good `

    Kitchen Towels ·

    November 4, 2010 at 12:19 am

  3. you just have to get used to modern art to appreciate the beauty of it “‘”

    Hemorrhoid Treatment

    December 2, 2010 at 6:53 pm

  4. Neat blog! Is your theme custom made or did you download it from somewhere? A design like yours with a few simple adjustements would really make my blog jump out. Please let me know where you got your theme. Bless you

    android tablet 3g

    August 22, 2011 at 7:36 pm

  5. A truly dreadful portrait, that captured nothing of the greatness of this remarkable Englishman.

    Ken Hyde

    April 4, 2014 at 3:04 pm

  6. i liked it but I see their point it should have shown more of his heroic side but it wasn’t just him you know it was all of the allies pulling together to fight evil it was still good

    miss kitty

    November 5, 2016 at 3:21 am

  7. You paint what you see. That is how the artist saw him. If they wanted to make a lie they should have hired someone else. I admire the artist for being truthful to his craft. Churchill was a colonialist, imperialist demagogue. I guess he wanted to have a halo over his head in the painting.

    Perfidious Albion

    November 15, 2016 at 6:42 am

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: