AIBU to be shocked at Lucian Freud painting his teenage daughter naked with her legs open?

[NotSuchASmugMarriedNow1]

Well, am I? Am I horribly surburban to have felt utter disgust with one look at that painting?

I don't think it's off or taboo. It isn't in my house or my home growing up. I still see my parents naked and they still see me naked. We have a painting up which I painted at uni of my ex husband naked with his legs apart. My DH loves it. It's not sexual. In fact the painting of the sofa he's sitting on is the most admired bit, it has definitely been treated in exactly the same way.

It's a 14 year old girl painted in a vulnerable position that has been made public. Ds1 is 14. The equivalent is me photographing him in a similar position, calling it art and publishing it on Facebook. I'd be arrested for making and distributing pornographic images of a child. Just because the painter is a famous artist this image is suddenly okay? It's not. Yes art should push boundaries, but some boundaries aren't meant to be crossed.

I think it is extremely coy, even falsely naive, to pretend this is 'just' nakedness.

As another poster said, of course parents can see their children's nakedness with no sexual implication, eg. when you change a nappy. But this is a sexualised pose, and I think it is ridiculous to pretend we believe an artist didn't know that. You can't have it both ways. If he's an artist, and therefore he sees tones of flesh just as he would see shades on a flower, then he's also an artist who therefore knows perfectly well this is a sexualised pose.

MiceSqueakCatsMeow It's the painting of Rose that we are discussing and she was 18 not 14.

"Just because YOU attach incestuous feelings to* it doesn't mean Freud or his daughter did."

I didn't attach incestuous feelings to it - it was you who came up with that.

I really like the painting of Sue Tilley , she looks so abandoned in her sleep and untethered by her weight. I know all the Naked pictures and his own daughters picture but was it sexual on his part ? I don't know but my gut is telling me he didn't even think about it and he may not have even cared.

I don't kniw anything about lucian Freud but that picture is looks fine to me.

I really like the Sue Tilley painting as well.

This is the one he done of his 14 year old daughter, it's called "naked child laughing"

The whole family are fucking bizarre!

JinglingHellsBells
Not sure about being a pleb but maybe lacking in emotional insight and possibly education?

Or perhaps you're lacking in emotional insight, and not as familiar with artists as some other posters?

Well, it's not inherently sexual. Nakedness isn't necessarily. In the same way watching your daughter give birth or bathing your children isn't. And it is possible to deal a lot with nakedness by trade without finding it sexual. Do hcps find vaginal examinations sexual? Beauticians and intimate waxing?

Saying that, I don't like it and don't think he should have done it. I think painting his 14 year old was far worse as she was not old enough to consent AND I think I read that it was the first full nude he'd painted.

Yeah Emma Freud. Who was never painted naked
But who’s father was a genuine peodophile.

He was a cunt, don’t get me wrong. But fuck me ive known a lot of sexually abused people. And as much as this picture might make you feel uncomfortable, what really makes me feel uncomfortable is men fucking young children

I’d be interested to know what people’s thoughts would be if she had been painted by her mother

I'd feel the same if it had been her mother.

@limitedperiodonly are you confusing me with another poster? I’ve never advocated censoring Eric Gill’s work, much of which I like.

. I think people are often confused by the extent to which his daughters’ response to the abuse in adulthood — especially the daughter who was still alive when Fiona McCarthy’s biography came out in the 1980s — doesn’t fit the conventional narrative of abuse survivors.

I really wish we wouldn’t bring Eric gill into this debate.

But fuck me ive known a lot of sexually abused people. And as much as this picture might make you feel uncomfortable, what really makes me feel uncomfortable is men fucking young children

That's a peculiar chain of logic.

So you are upset by paedophiles. Yes. So are most of us. Clearly, you must know everyone who finds this picture uncomfortable would also find men fucking children 'uncomfortable' (or something stronger). So why try to claim the moral high ground by implying otherwise?

FWIW I have also known a lot of sexually abused people; indeed, many of us have.

@SarahAndQuack
Well that’s the point isn’t it really. Many people are sexually abused.
Yet we would rather be all shock horror about a painting, which is not done by a father who abused his child.

I’m just saying if there are things to get all up in arms about this isn’t it

Having read the Times article I feel more concerned.

Talking about the pose ....

“He thought it was spectacular, but showed some concern. I’m not sure whether he was worried about my ability to keep going until the end of the painting with so much tension in my body or if he was uneasy about the level of exposure I had unwittingly chosen to inflict on myself: I was unaware of how much he could see from his vantage point. I think I understand now he wanted my permission to use what he could see, to shift the responsibility on to me and take advantage of my generosity. Even if I didn’t know what I was doing, I didn’t know what he was asking for. I was shocked when I looked at the canvas and saw what he could see.

Those saying “she gave permisssion”, “he didn’t force her”, have you actually read what she has said?!

Yet we would rather be all shock horror about a painting, which is not done by a father who abused his child.

But that is such a lot of nonsense.

Who would 'rather' be 'all shock horror about a painting'?

How on earth do you know people aren't capable of being upset by a painting and upset about child abuse? Surely the vast majority, if not all, of those upset about this painting will also be upset and motivated to act against child abuse?

You are implying that people can only focus on one thing at a time - either a painting, or real sexual abuse. If you genuinely find it impossible to focus on more than one thing during your life - such that you must choose between condemning sexual abuse of children and any other concern - then I am sorry for you. But you're not representative. Very few people are so limited, and thank goodness.

Happy to omit Eric Gill, only another poster seemed to be suggesting I was advocating censorship of his work, which I’m not.

There is not the slightest evidence — in a well-documented life full of people who had ample cause to want smear him — that Lucian Freud was a paedophile. Or was anything to his daughters other than a father who was never going to win prizes for attachment parenting.

@limitedperiodonly are you confusing me with another poster? I’ve never advocated censoring Eric Gill’s work, much of which I like.

I didn't say anything of the sort Parthenope. I like Eric Gill's work too and don't think it should be decried or defaced despite his personal conduct. I don't understand why you thought I said that. I thought my post in support of yours was clear.

The PB pic is really, really odd. The posh Col looks like a meths-drinking fuckup, which is going it a bit. Both shagged for England, however, so it evidently takes one to know one.

On his deathbed Freud said 'I wish I hadn't been so selfish'. Convenient timing, no doubt, but I wonder what else.

LizzieSiddal
Those saying “she gave permisssion”, “he didn’t force her”, have you actually read what she has said?!

Agree - I quoted in a previous post where she said "I didn’t know how to make him stop, how to stick up for myself" but that's been skipped over as well.

To the delightful pp who said this: Agree with Single - he was utterly fucked up (the whole family are, probably ) so it's no shock.

I know a member of his family (another daughter) and she is a fabulous woman: clever, bright, well-adjusted, engaging, interesting, and definitely not fucked up, despite having LF as a father.

How bloody rude.