In the event, Sutherland did produce a relatively complete study for such a portrait, having another sitter model the Garter robes. He suggested posing in his Garter robes, but the Gift Committee instructions precluded that. Papa has given him 3 sittings & no one has seen the beginnings of the portrait except Papa & he is much struck by the power of his drawing.” 2 The Garter-robed Sutherland study on the jacket of “Churchill: The End of Glory,” 1993 (Amazon UK)Ĭhurchill enjoyed Sutherland’s company, suggesting they paint each other and take a sketching trip together in the south of France. Graham Sutherland is a ‘Wow’… can hardly believe that the savage cruel designs which he exhibits come from his brush. On 1 September Clementine Churchill wrote her daughter Mary: “Mr. The Gift Committee laid down the strict requirement that Churchill appear in normal parliamentary dress. Sutherland, with some trepidation, accepted the commission, and a fee of 1,000 guineas (£33,000 in today’s money). Cynics might think the recommendation, by one of Churchill’s greatest political enemies, something of a preemptive strike on WSC’s legacy. Sutherland who had already painted Churchill’s long-time friend and sometime goad, Lord Beaverbrook. Jennie Lee, wife of Churchill’s long-time adversary Aneurin Bevan, then suggested Graham Sutherland, who was establishing a reputation as a portraitist. Gunn’s portrait of King George VI suggests a work by him would have been more conventional, and flattering. Their first choice of Sir Herbert Gunn was rejected because he was too expensive.

In June 1954 the cumbersomely named “Churchill Joint Houses of Parliament Gift Committee” decided on the presentation of a portrait and who should receive the commission. At the ceremony he displayed the attributes of a consummate politician and gentleman, covering his distaste with humour rather than invective. It was, as Mary Soames later wrote, “a great and emotional upset behind the scenes in the days prior to the presentation.”įinally, under pressure, Churchill conceded. He almost refused to attend the presentation, and had written to tell the artist it would not feature in the ceremony. Sir Winston had seen a photograph of the portrait privately a week before-and hated it. These are qualities which no active Member of either House can do without or should fear to meet.” 1

They intend it to remain with him for his lifetime, and then to hang in the Palace of Westminster.Ĭhurchill looks at the portrait and remarks, with a combination of presence, timing and a successful masking of emotion: “The portrait is a remarkable example of modern art. They present him with the gift of a portrait, paid for by parliamentary subscription. In London, both Houses of Parliament have assembled in Westminster Hall to celebrate the occasion. The scene is familiar to students of Churchill’s life. The short-lived Sutherland portrait, 1954.

Winston churchill 80th portrait