The year 1934 saw the
commencement of a
curious psychological contest between Stanley and Patricia. His male
creative instinct demanded that in order to transform her into an
emblem of his
longed-for creative feelings, he needed to absorb her personality into
his
metaphysical outlook, in the way his Hilda had been so willingly
subsumed. There would need to be affinity between them, a unity,
comparable to that between himself and Hilda.
But Patricia had no intention of allowing herself to be subsumed, and
certainly not by Stanley. She was secular
in outlook, self-centredly
pragmatic, and scornful
of Stanley's visionary ideas on art, most of which she saw as
outlandish.
In other circumstances, their relationship might have withered into the
straightforward acquaintance with which it began. But Patricia needed
money,
and decided that Stanley might be
induced to provide it. To keep his interest in her, she
adopted a
policy of exciting the sexual fantasies she
found she held for him, while teasingly diverting his attempts at mythologising
her.
So their strange contest began.
During the long spells when Hilda was away in Hampstead, the pair
frequently
met for lunch at Lindworth
or, when Patricia was not
well,
at Moor Thatch. Stanley's
1934 daybook
(a
Boots' annual foolscap desk diary given to
him as a Christmas gift from Patricia) frequently
records his
frustration when his earnest attempts to rate her, as he put it,
continually ended in bafflement.
His entry
for Wednesday January 3rd. for example,
reads
P comes with fresh chop for lunch.
Cannot fathom her system [of
thought.]
.
The intriguing chop and leg of lamb which Stanley
incorporated as detail in his 1936
Double
Nude of himself and
Patricia,
sometimes called The Leg of Mutton Nude (Tate
Gallery), must play a significant part in an interpretation
of the painting, the foreground
meat perhaps representing memory-feelings which
associated their lunch sessions with
his
vain attempts at absorbing Patricia's system into
his own. The isolation
of the two figures in the painting (they were no
doubt drawn separately, an oil stove
lit to keep her warm, and later
coalesced into a
single composition) suggests that
by 1936 Stanley had
been forced to recognise their incompatibility on
the up-in-heaven level he
had hoped for.Yet the almost
clinical content of the imagery surely indicates
that her
sexual invitation remained strong enough to excite him
to continue a
relationship with her which, although not leading to new
Cookham-feelings as he had hoped, offered pictorial
possibilities he had not foreseen.
At the same time as Stanley was paintings these nudes, he was also
producing works in a series on the up-in-heaven-love aspects of
marriage, incorporating memories of boyhood
Fernlea in The Marriage at Cana series and
of his life wth Hilda as the Domestic
Series. It seems at first sight odd that
while producing the latter, he was actively persuading Hilda to divorce
him so that he could marry Patricia. But we should bear in mind that
his up-in-heaven aspirations always took precedence over his down-to
earth life (my
behaviour [as seen by others]
is quite difficult) and that in fact
he was engaged on
the strange and complex plan to coalesce them described in the next
webpage.