Introduction usician, psychedelic explorer, eccentric, cult icon – Roger “Syd” Barrett was many things to many people. Created in conjunction with the Barrett family and The Estate of Roger Barrett, who have provided unprece- dented access to family photographs, artworks, and mem- Mories, Barrett offers an intimate portrait of the Syd known only to his family and closest friends. Previously unseen photographs taken on seaside holidays and other family occasions show us a happy and loving young man, smiling energetically in images that map his early life, from childhood through his teenage years. Along with newly available photos from the album cover shoots for The Madcap Laughs and Barrett (taken by Storm Thorgerson and Mick Rock) they reveal the positive energy of a grinning Syd as he fools about in front of the camera. We are offered a rare glimpse of one who was immensely popular among friends and contemporaries. Also contained within these pages are recently unearthed images of Pink Floyd in which we see Syd practising handstands, making muscle-man poses, and having fun. The other members of Floyd lark about too – a fledgling young band enjoying itself with a sense of real camaraderie. The images transport one back in time to 1966–67: the London Free School gigs, the launch of International Times at the Roundhouse, the UFO club, the band’s first European dates. There are photos of Syd and Floyd at numerous locations and events, giving a real sense of what it must have been like to be there as the infant light shows, experimentation, and collective spirit of the time emerged, grew, and flourished in the psychedelic hothouse that was the late 1960s. Where possible, we have restored the images to show them in their best light. The technical quality of some of the images is not great, but I hope you will agree that they bear inclusion. The illustrated letters that Syd wrote to girlfriends Libby Gausden and Jenny Spires, reproduced in this book, are of key interest, as they detail, among other

Spring 1964, 183 Hills Road, Cambridge Syd and Rosemary, family holiday, Hunstanton, Norfolk, c.1949–50

 Barrett Introduction  things, his early days with Pink Floyd, and reveal his eccentric wit in full flow. on Syd. Several, though not all, have left fans feeling rather short-changed, recy- They also contain sketches of ideas that would later come to fruition in his artwork. cling as they do the same old sensationalist stories. Very little authoritative work These letters are just one example of the volume and range of art-related content, has been produced on Syd the creator. That, after all, is at the heart of the pub- spanning from 1961 until his death, discovered in the course of researching this lic’s interest in him. The need for a well-researched, intelligent, and well-thought- book. through account of Syd’s life and work was fulfilled with the publication of Rob My co-author Will Shutes has carried out some extraordinary research over the Chapman’s excellent An Irregular Head, in 2010. last few years on Syd’s art. Will’s engagement with Syd’s work not only allows for An Irregular Head is the definitive textual work on Syd. What you now hold is an appreciation of the breadth and sheer eclecticism of the art, but also of Syd’s the definitive visual work on Syd’s artistic life. The two books complement one dedication. Examining his myriad approaches and artistic methods one cannot another. They seek to debunk as much of the myth surrounding Syd as possible, but be impressed by the continuing, exploratory artistic attitude he maintained leaving the reader to draw their own conclusions on the basis of what lies before throughout his life, almost always with interesting and idiosyncratic results. them. Both show Syd as the creative force he undoubtedly was. It is worth mentioning here that I generally refer to him as “Syd” while Will The research for this book has been arduous and sometimes maddening. refers to him as “Barrett”. This is in keeping with Syd’s life. To the musical world Fading whispers, half-recalled suggestions, numerous red herrings, and mistaken he was known as “Syd” while to his family he was known as “Roger”. He signed recollections have added intrigue to the quest for materials – occasionally to the all of his art as “Roger Barrett” or using variants upon this. point of near despair. Some of the images that people have said they own, but Our search for Syd’s paintings and related information took us around the UK, Rosemary and Syd, 183 Hills Road, cannot remember where, would fill books in their own right. One old friend of and to parts of the USA, Scandinavia, Spain, Holland, and Italy. The most inter- Cambridge, c.1961 Syd’s said he had a reel of images of them punting down the River Cam with esting and revealing of the discoveries, however, came from perhaps the most some girlfriends, plus another reel of the two of them larking around London’s obvious loation: his home town of Cambridge. Just as we were completing the West End in the early 1960s. The films, he believed, were in a suitcase in his loft. photography of the family’s collection of his paintings, a couple of photo albums After I’d waited a few weeks, he let me know that he had finally brought the case were discovered by Syd’s sister Rosemary. These contained photos Syd had taken Syd and Rosemary with Alan Barrett (left) and down – but there was nothing in it. Frustrating for me, even sadder for him. of artworks that he would later destroy, for reasons known only to himself. Don Barrett (right) in the background, family When hunting buried treasure, one has to remember that, while we fans wish There were also photos that he had taken of outdoor scenes and sketches he holiday, Heacham, Norfolk, c.1950–51 to see these pictures of our hero, so too do old friends and family, for whom Syd had made from those photographs. In some instances, the finished paintings wasn’t the so-called rock star lost, but an uncle, friend, boyfriend, colleague, and resulting from this careful preparation feature in these photographs, too. Then brother. In the course of making this book we interviewed many of those friends, there are the photos he took of his working area, his tools and brushes, and other girlfriends, and family members, and one of the questions asked of them was how artistic paraphernalia. Wonderfully, we see in these newly discovered images how much family influence there had been on Syd’s artistic development. Another Syd worked, where he worked, and what he worked on. They reveal a dedicated question enquired after the impact of Cambridge on his creative output. The practising artist employing thorough artistic methods right up until the end of his answers provide fascinating insights. life. They also prompt a pertinent question: why take a photograph of something you didn’t wish to be reminded of? It suggests that the destruction of his paintings wasn’t born of some rage or wild artistic temperament. It was perhaps more a case of once it was done, for the artist it was time to move on to something new. That is how it always had been with Syd, as Rosemary recalls: “All of his life, acquiring things was quite fun but the moment was gone as soon as he’d got them.” Researching and working on this book has helped me appreciate Syd’s art and music anew. At the age of fourteen I was drawn to Syd’s music by the sonically arresting and menacing opening chord progression of “Interstellar Overdrive”. Having been lucky enough to be given the complete Pink Floyd catalogue on vinyl by a friend, who had replaced his vinyl collection with compact discs, I had heard Libby and Syd at Butlins, Skegness, June 1962 and enjoyed The Dark Side of the Moon and Wish You Were Here before I discov- ered the Barrett-peppered compilation, Relics. That was a profound moment. It threw up all manner of questions in my adolescent mind: who was this Syd Barrett credited with writing such strange songs? Were there two Pink Floyds? How did a bike become a Lear jet?! The other Barrett-era Floyd albums and the odd article here and there filled in a few of the gaps for me, but in those pre-internet days the Syd and Rosemary in fancy dress at the Morley pickings were slim. Only with Mike Watkinson and Pete Anderson’s 1991 book fête, Cambridge, c.1955 Crazy Diamond would I finally discover more about the mercurial Syd. Since then, there have of course been many books, articles, and opinion pieces Syd, Libby, Rosemary, and Win Barrett at Butlins, Skegness, June 1962

 Barrett Introduction  from about 18 months”, and that by the time he was 5 years old he was attending weekend art classes at nearby Homerton College where “everybody made a big fuss about him, which he loved. He absolutely loved it because at the age of about 5 he was given a lot of attention and acclaim and that was great by him”. As well as an aptitude for music, Max Barrett also displayed artistic abilities. Rosemary recalls that, “Because he was a pathologist he was very good at detail. Some of his illustrations were amazing in the detail”. Alan concurs: “Our father was indeed a skilled watercolourist . . . Roger could well have inherited some of those artistic skills.” What of the environment: how did Syd’s life in Cambridge and his friends at the time influence his artistic viewpoint? When asked if Cambridge had an impact on her brother’s creativity, Rosemary suggests that the town was just home to Syd, and that its importance simply lay in the fact that his family lived there. “He was very much a family person, and this is where family was. It wasn’t actually Cambridge.” Jenny Spires agrees: “It was convenient for him. His family was here.” Syd and Frisky the cat, 183 Hills Road, It is hard to believe, however, that Cambridge at that time, and especially Syd’s Cambridge, c.1964 friends, had no influence on his way of thinking and creating. From his early childhood Syd had no trouble making friends. Rosemary states: “He was so attractive and full of life and very witty even from very early on. He was a clown and therefore very popular.” Ruth remembers him as being “always Syd (far right), helping friends decorate their house, Cambridge, August 1964 different – a real character! If Rog was about, you were always aware of the fact!” For sisters to think fondly of their brother is not unusual, but their feelings

Interviews with his siblings helped shed considerable light on his younger days, the role of music and art in the Barrett family, and, especially, on Syd’s nature. When asked if the family was particularly “arty”, older brother Don thought not, although he did say that the children had been offered the chance, and encour- aged, to play musical instruments. He himself “was given piano lessons but didn’t continue after Stage 1”. Their sister Ruth added, “We were all expected to learn to play the piano which our father played well” and that she “enjoyed the piano and also played the recorder and the violin, which our parents encouraged. Alan played the saxophone”. Syd’s father Max had been a classical music enthusiast. This interest certainly had an impact on the family. As Alan confirms, “Our father was very committed to classical music – he played the piano a lot. Beethoven, Debussy, Bax, Vaughan Williams are amongst the composers I remember. He was also an active member and Secretary of the Cambridge Philharmonic Society”. When asked if Max’s musical leanings were an early influence on the young Syd, Rosemary replied, “My father was a very good pianist who loved classical music so Roger [Syd] took a lot from that”. Ruth, however, says that “Rog must have had piano lessons, but I don’t know how long they continued for, I don’t remember him playing much”. As he grew older Syd’s interest in music wid- ened. According to Rosemary, “The first musical instrument he had as a 6- or 7-year-old was a Jew’s harp. He then experimented with a ukulele when he was 10 or 11 and then, of course, gradually got into playing the guitar”. Ruth recol- lects: “he started playing the guitar as a teenager, and my husband remembers him playing at Scout campfires. I think he taught himself to play.” By the time Syd had acquired his Jew’s harp and begun his musical journey, he was already quite the artist. Rosemary explains that “he was absolutely brilliant From left: Possibly Storm Thorgerson or Pip Carter, unknown, Russell Page, Ian Moore, unknown, Syd, c.1965

 Barrett Introduction  were echoed in the sentiments of almost all of the people that came into contact was learning guitar and he was a painter. He was a really rounded artist who could with Syd. In time, he would impress his intellectual counterparts in Cambridge. turn his hand to all kinds of art forms, and he did become influenced by us.” Old friend Anthony Stern recalls, “His outgoing personality and natural joie de Another Cambridge comrade of Syd’s – who would later go on to become a vivre made him welcome at any gathering. He was an eccentric personality”. lecturer, professor, and author – was Andrew Rawlinson, for whom Syd made the With friends like Anthony Stern, Storm Thorgerson, Andrew Rawlinson, Nigel book, Fart Enjoy. Andrew believes that the group as a collective was an important Lesmoir-Gordon, David Gale, Dave Henderson, David Gilmour, Russell Page, part of Syd’s growth: “Syd, who was capable of taking things in and transforming Roger Waters, and many others besides, it would have been nigh-on impossible for them very quickly, who was instinctive in that respect, was getting most of it from Syd not to have found some creative energy and artistic sustenance in Cambridge. the group. We didn’t feel like we had to go out and find the stuff, we actually felt Between them they soaked up and shared ideas on art, music, poetry, drugs, lit- like it was coming to us.” erature, and just about anything else that came their way. Kerouac, Burroughs, Andrew also suggests that Syd thrived more in a group as he “wasn’t an organ- Gysin, Ginsberg, Ornette Coleman, Bo Diddley, Snooks Eaglin, marijuana, LSD, izer. He was a reactor. He was a fast worker”, and that he “has the reputation as Alan Watts, Jackson Pollock – the list goes on. the great inventor, which I am quite happy to accord him, but it would have been The cultural and sensory interests devoured by Syd and the group that he different if Syd had only known just 2 or 3 people. He was a member of a group of hung out with during those key years will no doubt have played an enduring role 10 or 12”. All of which leads us to conclude that participation, shared ideas, and in his musical and artistic pursuits. Although a couple of years younger than many From left: Possibly Dave Henderson (standing), discussion of different theories were influential in helping to shape Syd’s art and, of the people he associated with, Syd was well respected by older boys, who con- David Gale (seated), Syd with Libby Gausden by extension, his music and writing, too. sidered him a peer. The Cambridge friends who were interviewed for this book on his lap, Cambridge, c.1965 The testimonies of family and friends make clear that Syd was both naturally believe that Syd’s links with groups slightly older than himself, all with intelligent inclined toward being creative, and helped in that by his friends and surroundings. and inquisitive minds, must have played a vital role in his art, writing, music, and He was also influenced by the attitudes and social changes taking place during the general outlook on life. Poet, film-maker, author, and old Cambridge friend Nigel Cambridge, Christmas 1967 era in which he grew up. It all contributed toward making Syd Barrett the unique Lesmoir-Gordon states: “He had many strings to his bow, of course, because he artistic force whose like we shall not see or hear again. It has been an honour working on this book and – via conversations with Syd’s friends and family, as well as viewing the many unseen photos, letters, and paint- ings – getting to know him a bit better. I hope that the humour, wit, eccentricity, energy, and originality of the man comes through on these pages. I also hope that, after viewing his art, which this book collates for the first time, and reading the accompanying commentary, you too will feel that you know a little more about the creative life of a true English original.

Russell Beecher Rosemary and Syd with mother Win, London Essex, 1981 December 2010

Syd visits Rosemary in Bournemouth, 1965

 Barrett Introduction  Photographs Pink Floyd Performing as “The Tea Set” From left: Syd, Bob Klose, Chris Dennis, Roger Waters House party High Pines, Oxshott, Surrey Autumn 1964

“These pictures were taken at a private house party in Oxshott, Surrey, organized by some rich school friends of my sister in 1964. It must be amongst the first few gigs that Syd Barrett played with other Floyd members, possibly the first” Sebastian Jenkins Photographer

 Barrett The Tea Set House party High Pines, Oxshott, Surrey Autumn 1964

 Barrett Photographs – Pink Floyd  The Pink Floyd Sound: looking more mod than hippie Syd points his Fender From left: Roger Waters, Nick Mason, Syd, Bob Klose, Esquire at Mississippi Rick Wright Blues behemoth, 9 Stanhope Gardens, Highgate, London Howlin’ Wolf 965 9 Stanhope Gardens, Highgate, London “When he came up to London he moved into the apartment 965 at Mike Leonard’s house that we were already sharing – Nick and Rick and I – and went off to Camberwell every day, to start with anyway, to paint” Roger Waters

 Barrett Photographs – Pink Floyd  From left: Nick Mason, Roger Waters, Syd, Bob Klose, Rick Wright 39 Stanhope Gardens, Highgate, London 1965

 Barrett Photographs – Pink Floyd  London Free School Benefit Concert “At the first London Free School event in the [All Saints Church All Saints Church Hall Hall] not that many people were there. In fact, very few, I Notting Hill, London think, only about 17 or something. Pink Floyd took questions 14 October 1966 afterwards and it was all very serious, light-and-sound kind of mix and everything” “There was a lot of freedom from the organizers for the audience, Barry Miles you could bring along your own lighting! One night a friend and Author I brought along an 8-ft fluorescent tube and some electronics to strobe it; this was a very early high-power strobe source for the first time in the UK” Steve Wilkins Photographer

 Barrett Photographs – Pink Floyd  International Times launch The Roundhouse Chalk Farm, London 15 October 1966

“The Roundhouse was enormous and decrepit. Packed with people in weird costumes looning about. There was an amazing feeling of a new community. Suddenly the audience was part of the show and they knew it. The music was now their music. The light show was extraordinary; something that most people had never seen before. It all came together at the IT launch: the music, the lightshows, the place, and the audience. It felt like the beginning of something that had never happened before” Adam Ritchie Photographer

 Barrett Photographs – Pink Floyd  International Times launch The Roundhouse Chalk Farm, London 15 October 1966

“We all came to support IT and feel free of the previous culture sets. Syd and the Floyd were a symbol of our music and us. We were there for them” Adam Ritchie

 Barrett Photographs – Pink Floyd  London Free School Benefit Concert All Saints Church Hall Notting Hill, London 21 October 1966

“It was one of the first light shows and so was a bit experimental. My main concern was getting a good shot in decent light” Graham Keen Photographer

 Barrett Photographs – Pink Floyd  London Free School Benefit Concert All Saints Church Hall Notting Hill, London 21 October 1966

Photographs – Pink Floyd  London Free School Benefit Concert All Saints Church Hall Notting Hill, London 21 October 1966

 Barrett PR shots October 1966

 Barrett Photographs – Pink Floyd  Philadelic Music for Simian Hominids Hornsey College of Art Crouch End, London 18 November 1966

 Barrett  Hornsey College of Art Crouch End, London 18 November 1966

 Barrett Photographs – Pink Floyd  Hornsey College of Art Crouch End, London 18 November 1966

 Barrett Photographs – Pink Floyd  The Architectural Association Christmas Ball Bedford Square, London 16 December 1966

 Barrett Photographs – Pink Floyd  The Architectural Association Christmas Ball Bedford Square, London 16 December 1966

“The light show was great, though I don’t remember who did it. The loose polythene sheeting tacked here and there to the ceiling added to it, as a film with colours and lights on it and going through it at the same time” Adam Ritchie

 Barrett The Architectural Association Christmas Ball Bedford Square, London 16 December 1966

 Barrett Photographs – Pink Floyd  The Architectural Association Christmas Ball Bedford Square, London 16 December 1966

“Syd didn’t pose and push himself at the audience but was clearly central to the music and at the heart of Floyd. It was hard to photograph Syd. He managed to get the microphone between his face and the camera every time so you couldn’t photograph his face clearly” Adam Ritchie

 Barrett Photographs – Pink Floyd  UFO Tottenham Court Road, London December 1966 / January 1967

“I had to go there to hear the music and photograph what was happening. It was a very important part of the excitement of the time. People were making new music, writing new things, dressing differently, squatting, fighting for their communities, taking drugs, believing that they could change the world. They did until they got too smug. Hoppy and Joe Boyd, who started UFO, never got smug” Adam Ritchie

 Barrett UFO Tottenham Court Road, London December 1966 / January 1967

“The stage was really tiny – the ceiling was very low, the platform was very low – only a foot or two above the floor. A 4-piece could barely squeeze onto the stage” Joe Boyd Producer

 Barrett Photographs – Pink Floyd  UFO Tottenham Court Road, London December 1966 / January 1967

 Barrett Photographs – Pink Floyd  UFO Tottenham Court Road, London December 1966 / January 1967

“They were covered by the light show, shadowy figures behind the pulsing lights. ‘Interstellar Overdrive’ in Tonite Let’s All Make Love in London is the closest a recording has come to what the band sounded like live in those days” Joe Boyd

Photographs – Pink Floyd  UFO “When I think about Syd it’s a liberating sensation of Tottenham Court Road, London doing what you want to do; acting without constraint” 1966 / 1967 Anthony Stern

“I think Syd didn’t really happen as a musician until he got involved with Pink Floyd. Seeing him performing at the UFO club – that’s when I perceived there was something really exceptional about him” Anthony Stern Artist

 Barrett Photographs – Pink Floyd  Pink Floyd rehearsing at the beginning of a crucial 41 Edbrooke Road, Maida Vale, London year that would see them find fame, but lose Syd 24 January 1967 41 Edbrooke Road, Maida Vale, London 22 January 1967

 Barrett Photographs – Pink Floyd  PR shots commissioned by EMI London c.February 1967

 Barrett Photographs – Pink Floyd  The band with photographer Colin Prime’s assistant (right) Ruskin Park, Camberwell, London c.April 1967

“Everybody paints exactly the same picture of Syd. He had an extraordinary bounce in his step, and the way he walked was sort of the way he lived. It was all a bit sort of bouncy. He was very Tigger-like if one could borrow from A.A. Milne. Obviously a lot brighter than Tigger, but nevertheless he had that kind of boing to him. And he brought that to the forefront in not just his songwriting but in his general attitude towards pop groups in general, and our pop group in particular” Roger Waters

March 1967

 Barrett Photographs – Pink Floyd  Ruskin Park, Camberwell, London The band’s popularity was stretching beyond the UK by this c.April 1967 point. Their first performance outside Great Britain was for Dutch TV show Fan Club Amsterdam, Holland 29 April 1967

 Barrett Photographs – Pink Floyd  Amsterdam, Holland 29 April 1967

 As soon as they had finishedFan Club the boys had to hotfoot it back to London for the counter-culture swan song event that was the legendary 14 Hour Technicolor Dream. They arrived in time to play as first light streamed in through the rose window of Alexandra Palace, bouncing and shimmering off Syd’s mirror- disc Esquire Fan Club – Dutch TV show Amsterdam, Holland 29 April 1967

 Barrett 14 Hour Technicolor Dream Alexandra Palace London 30 April 1967

“The thing I remember most about it, which probably has a lot to do with what was happening with the chemicals, was the light coming up. There was the night time and then it was the dawn, and it was as the dawn came up that Floyd played. And that somehow was very sort of crucial, literally a very psychedelic experience” Peter Jenner Manager

“The legendary event of course is the Pink Floyd coming on as dawn came through the rose window. The actual effect of the sun just breaking, and coming in through the window, and shining off of Syd’s guitar which had a Melinex silver front on it so there would be beams of light going everywhere, was literally quite magical. And the stage was quite high, it was about six or seven feet high. So you had to look up. And behind them was the rose window. And it was all very moving” Barry Miles

 Barrett Games for May rehearsal Queen Elizabeth Hall South Bank, London 12 May 1967

“He was the guy who was doing all the creative work of writing the songs and fronting the thing and being the guitar player. And actually was really easy to work with. When one looks back on it there was never any sense of Syd directing the band. He would provide the songs and more or less everyone played what they thought was right for the piece” Nick Mason

Photographs – Pink Floyd  Games for May rehearsal Queen Elizabeth Hall South Bank, London 12 May 1967

 Barrett Photographs – Pink Floyd  Games for May rehearsal Queen Elizabeth Hall South Bank, London 12 May 1967

 Photographs – Pink Floyd  Games for May rehearsal Queen Elizabeth Hall South Bank, London 12 May 1967

 Barrett Photographs – Pink Floyd  Games for May rehearsal Queen Elizabeth Hall South Bank, London 12 May 1967

 Barrett Games for May rehearsal Queen Elizabeth Hall South Bank, London 12 May 1967

“There was a new consciousness and the feeling of a new community, a new generation. We were all trying out new things, new ways of feeling, communicating, acting, being. Syd’s music was very important in it all. It backed up the new confidence and energy for which the Sixties are famous. If you wanted to change things, you got up and changed them” Adam Ritchie

 Barrett Photographs – Pink Floyd  Games for May rehearsal Queen Elizabeth Hall South Bank, London 12 May 1967

 Barrett  Games for May rehearsal Queen Elizabeth Hall South Bank, London 12 May 1967

 Barrett Photographs – Pink Floyd  Piccadilly Circus, London “They gave us the soundtrack to the Sixties in many ways. June / July 1967 They were very revolutionary. Floyd were like freaks really” Anthony Stern

 Barrett Photographs – Pink Floyd  Nick Mason catches Syd and Roger discovering the delights of Carlsberg Taken on a ferry during their mini-tour of Scandinavia, where they played gigs in Denmark and Sweden 9–14 September 1967

 Barrett Photographs – Pink Floyd  Boom Dancing Center Aarhus, Denmark 9 September 1967

“The band were virtually lost in the light show. Pink Floyd were not a band that put their faces forward. They were anonymous makers of sound” Nigel Lesmoir-Gordon Film-maker

 Barrett Photographs – Pink Floyd  Boom Dancing Center Aarhus, Denmark 9 September 1967

“In 1967 I had just started my education as a professional photographer. On the weekends I’d go to the Boom discotheque and always had my camera with me to take pictures of the bands. Some of the bands came from England so we were used to English bands, but on that evening we saw and heard something new. The DJ was playing when Pink Floyd suddenly came on stage and started to play but their microphones did not work so there was no vocals for the whole concert. It didn’t make a difference because what we saw and heard was marvellous. I was standing at the front but couldn’t move so could only take pictures of Syd Barrett and Nick Mason. After the concert Syd Barrett said ‘Why do the audience scream so much? Why don’t they clap?’” Nils Aarestrup Røddik Photographer

 Barrett Photographs – Pink Floyd  Before their gig at Gyllene Cirkeln Stockholm, Sweden 10 September 1967

 Barrett Photographs – Pink Floyd  Photo thought to be of the band listening to the playback of their 25 September 1967 BBC session at the Playhouse Theatre Northumberland Avenue, London

 Barrett Photographs – Pink Floyd  Saville Theatre Shaftesbury Avenue, London 1 October 1967

“Syd gave the whole scene a focus and an importance. Without his brilliant songs, it would have been a far less vibrant scene. He made us all believe what we were doing was important. Not because he stated that, but just through listening to his great music” 2 October 1967 Joe Boyd

 Barrett Photographs – Pink Floyd  c.December 1967 / January 1968

 Barrett Photographs – Pink Floyd  This page David Gilmour joins the Floyd c.December 1967 / January 1968

Opposite page Syd in April 1968, just around the time it was officially announced he had left Pink Floyd

 Barrett Photographs – Pink Floyd  Photographs Solo Storm Thorgerson and Mick Rock shot images simultaneously at Syd’s Earls Court flat for use onThe Madcap Laughs album cover. Many of the resulting pictures, lost over the years, have recently resurfaced. Given the neglect of time, the quality of the images is variable. They are included here nevertheless for their rarity and significance. The interior shots were taken by Storm while the exterior images showing Syd’s car were taken by Mick Wetherby Mansions, Earls Court Square, London Autumn 1969

 Barrett Photographs – Solo  The Madcap Laughs album cover shoot Wetherby Mansions, Earls Court Square, London Autumn 1969

 Barrett Photographs – Solo  Storm shot another session with Syd at Wetherby Mansions during this period, images from which can be seen on the inside cover of the 1974 Harvest reissue of The Madcap Laughs and Barrett. In these pictures Syd’s flat – strewn with canvases and artistic paraphernalia – looks very painterly Wetherby Mansions, Earls Court Square, London c.1969 / 1970

The Madcap Laughs album cover shoot Wetherby Mansions, Earls Court Square, London Autumn 1969

 Barrett Photographs – Solo  The Madcap Laughs album cover shoot Earls Court Square, London Autumn 1969

 Barrett Photographs – Solo  Outtakes from the PR photoshoot for the Barrett album release EMI House, Manchester Square, London October 1969

 Barrett Photographs – Solo  Syd pictured at music publisher Bryan Morrison’s office Mayfair, London 1970

 Barrett Photographs – Solo  Syd’s last Syd at music publisher London gig Bryan Morrison’s office Olympia Mayfair, London Exhibition Hall, 1971 London 6 June 1970

 Barrett Photographs – Solo  Letters In addition to his music and art, Syd was an avid writer. As Nigel Lesmoir-Gordon puts it: “One of his great loves was writing; writing poetry, letters, and lyrics”. The two main beneficiaries of Syd’s voracious letter- writing were his girlfriends Libby Gausden and Jenny Spires.

This section features Syd’s letters to Libby and Jenny, and closes with a poem he wrote for Viv Brans – his girlfriend in the summer of 1965.

Libby remembers: “The first time I saw Syd I was sitting on a see-saw outside Jesus Green outdoor swimming pool where I had been swimming with David Gilmour; it will have been 1961. I started going out with him on 2 June 1961 and had an on / off fantastic relationship with him until 1965. He loved writing. It was a joy for him to write letters and it was very easy for him.”

Letter to Libby 962

This page Syd details his sailing trip with school friend Albert “Alby” Prior Letter to Libby 962

 Barrett Letters  “The drawings are always funny; they were never serious. He was a funny guy” Libby

This page and opposite Letters to Libby 96

2 Barrett Letters  Opposite, this page, and overleaf Letters to Libby 96

 Barrett Letters  6 Barrett Letters  Opposite page Syd mentions a “Man swimming” and “At Jesus Green”, both relevant to his first meeting with Libby, coincidental though this may be. Another point of interest here is his drawing of a “Victorian Lady” – he would go on to make a collage, c.96, very similar to this drawing (see p. 29) 96

 Barrett Letters 9 This page and next four pages 96

 Barrett Letters  Above “Back again, now, where were we – ah yes, a drawing” Syd

Opposite page “My favourite is the letter when he writes as a -year-old: ‘Once there was girl called Elisabeth who lived in a House and had two sisters. a budgey and then a cat . . .’ Then he draws an absolutely perfectly detailed floorplan of my house with all the measurements to scale – typical of him” Libby

2 Barrett Letters  Letters to Libby 96

 Barrett Letters  Letter bearing Syd’s matchstick illustrations of what Libby describes as their “on / off” relationship

This page and opposite Letters to Libby 96

6 Barrett Letters  Letters to Jenny 1964–5

During one of the “off” periods of his relationship with Libby, Syd started going out with Jenny Spires. Before long, he was writing to her. As Jenny puts it,“Syd and I met up in the week following a gig at the CSU, between Christmas 1964 and the New Year, and he started writing to me on his return to London at the beginning of term”

Right “When Syd and I first met he did a sketch of me leaning on the bar in the CSU Cellars. I didn’t know at the time. The sketch was in his room at home and he gave it to me a few weeks later when I thanked him for the beautiful letters he’d sent me. Syd transferred the sketch to another sheet and drew in a little hedgerow with songbirds, covered it with pink tissue paper, and wrote on it in black ink” Jenny

Opposite Letter to Jenny December 1964

 Barrett Letters  This page and opposite Letters to Jenny 1965

Above Upon his return to London, Syd found the band’s van had been painted. This mention of “our name on it” is the first reference in his letters to Jenny to what was soon to become Pink Floyd. His closing line is typical Syd: “You can’t see the name because it is too small. You can’t see me because I’m in the back.”

Opposite page Syd would soon write to Jenny about Chris Dennis leaving the band. Chris’s departure from the group led to Syd assuming frontman duties for the first time. It was around this time that he christened the band “The Pink Floyd Sound”. The news about Chris Dennis came with a sketch in response to a letter Jenny had written him. As she puts it, “I had mentioned Twinkle’s record, ‘Terry.’ And that I’d hitched a lift on a friend’s motorbike, a guy called Mugsy, and fallen off it. The road was wet, the bike spun away from us, but we were fine. We just got back on again and continued our journey. Syd has drawn Twinkle and Mugsy and a lovely bike (Ariel 1000). He’s put in some Mods and a ‘Drummer Street’ Teddy Boy. In Cambridge at that time, Teds from the outlying villages used to hang out at Drummer Street Bus Station. I’d see them when coming out of school to get the bus home. It’s an interesting comment on the times!” Jenny

 Barrett Letters  In another letter, Syd describes the band’s foray into a West Hampstead recording studio: “I’ll tell you everything that happened at the recording. We took all the gear into the studio which was lit by horrid white lights, and covered with wires and microphones. Rog had his amp behind a screen and Nicki was also screened off, and after a little bit of chat we tested everything for balance, and then recorded five numbers more or less straight off; but only the guitars and drums. We’re going to add all the singing and piano etc. next Wednesday. The tracks sound terrific so far, especially ‘King Bee’. When I sing I have to stand in the middle of the studio with earphones on, and everyone else watches from the other room, and I can’t see them at all but they can all see me. Also I can only just hear what I’m singing” Syd to Jenny Late January / early February 1965

 Barrett Letters  Above This letter to Jenny comes with Syd’s drawings of The Trident’s drummer Ray Cook and guitarist Jeff Beck who played with the band shortly before joining The Yardbirds. Interestingly enough, The Tridents also played “I’m a King Bee” in their live sets May 1965

Opposite page “Little Twig” poem for Viv Brans. She says: “I started going out with Roger (I never called him Syd) in the summer of 1965, possibly from June to August. He was a lovely, kind, and generous boy and very handsome. I remember going to parties with him in Cambridge and thinking how lucky I was to be with him. He made me laugh a lot and I have very happy memories of our time together” Viv Brans

 Barrett Letters  Art s a musician, Roger “Syd” Barrett tired of having to play the same tunes over and over again, and often changed them at will. Although this was at odds with record producers, it was an aesthetic ingrained in Barrett. “Freedom is what I’m after”, he said in 1967.1 AHis sister Rosemary says that “everything [in his house] got painted, hun- dreds of times”, yet, as she told Barrett’s biographer Rob Chapman, “every wall would be painted a different colour”.2 Similarly, Barrett’s well-known though mis- understood practice of destroying the majority of his artwork may be seen not so much as a purgative act as another instance of that desire not to play the same song twice, or paint two walls the same colour. As Rosemary said of her brother upon his death in 2006, “Once something was over, it was over. He felt no need to revisit it”.3 Barrett’s nephew Ian even went so far as to add, “Rog doesn’t care one little bit about the past”.4 The originality which in the 1960s had made Barrett a prominent avant-garde musician accompanied him throughout his life as he pursued his primary interest – painting. Friends from the 1960s believe he was “a better painter than a musi- cian”,5 and perhaps “should have stuck to” his art.6 But the case need not be as clear-cut as this, given that art and music were not separate entities in his youth of multimedia events and “Happenings”. As Barry Miles says, Barrett “was a painter and he brought an artist’s visual approach to his solos”.7 Until now, his artworks have featured in most cases as mere description. But here, for the first time, the wholeoeuvre is presented – that is, every image known to exist. By presenting his work within the context of his extensive writings on art and related subjects, the book allows Barrett room to speak, replacing speculative opinion with Barrett’s creative life itself. It is often said that Roger Barrett – the name he used for much of his life and indeed as an artist – presumed he would be a painter, the implication being this status was not achieved. Although there were periods when he “spent a little less time painting than [he] might’ve done”, as he admitted, Barrett was in fact prolific. In 1971 he said, “I’m a painter, I was trained as a painter . . . I think of me being a painter eventually”.8 According to Rosemary, from the age of eighteen months he “couldn’t live without his art. He just had that perspective. He could just draw automatically. He needed to draw all through his life” .This strong impression of the man can be made to stand at last. Finally, we can think of Barrett as a painter.

Note: It is important to state that the identification system used in this book for works without titles (Untitled 1, Untitled 2, etc.) was not used by Barrett. He rarely titled his works. He did not actively deny them a title – they were simply left unti- tled. However, to present his works here and to create the catalogue raisonné, they need to be distinguished from each other (several date from the same year) and The young Roger Barrett and unknown boy, Homerton Painting Club, Cambridge, February 1960 they have therefore been given numbers. As Rosemary says, “to him that’s all they were. They were only as important as a number”.

 Barrett Art  At the Cambridgeshire High School for Boys – “the County School” – which head of painting, Camberwell was one of the few colleges that still encouraged fig- he joined after passing his eleven-plus exam in 1957, Barrett was a favourite of art urative painting.18 Providing evidence, perhaps, that one had to do “certain things teacher G.A.C. Harden, or “Gach”. He would display his pupil’s work in oils, at on certain days”,19 Untitled 13 (cat. 18), which was painted during his first year a time when many were not even allowed to use oils.9 Barrett had a striking disci- at Camberwell, demonstrates Barrett’s ability as a figurative painter. Nonetheless, pline for art from a young age, diverting his school cross-country route to return while there, he brought his own artistic sensibility to bear on his work. swiftly to work in his bedroom–studio at home in Hills Road.10 It is clear that Barrett thrived throughout his art education. Accounts sug- Starting in the 1950s Barrett attended a children’s painting class at Homerton gest that he made a lasting impression on his peers. That he was not in regular College (located opposite his home), during which “all the teachers made a big attendance at Camberwell would not surprise anyone who has travelled the long fuss about him”, says Rosemary. He would go on to enrol for a Saturday morning distance there from Highgate,20 where Barrett then lived in a flat in Stanhope art class at the College in 1961. Supervised, in the words of classmate Stephen Gardens. Thinking of transferring to Hornsey, Barrett wrote in a letter to Libby, Pyle, “by a fairly serious middle-aged lady”, Barrett’s two-hour Saturday morning Untitled 13 (cat. 18), 1964, oil on board, “When I went to Camberwell this morning they said run away because they said 11 classes “just involved plant drawing and still life studies”. Nonetheless, “he never 50 × 74 cm. Known to exist I went to Hornsey, but Hornsey said I didn’t yet, but I have got an interview missed a lesson”.12 tomorrow or Wednesday, so I only hope they [Hornsey] accept me”. Barrett had his sights set, however, on the foundation course at the Cambridge As Barrett remained at Camberwell, it is not clear what came of this planned School of Art, part of the Cambridgeshire College of Arts and Technology, whose transfer. His landlord from Stanhope Gardens, Mike Leonard, was then a teacher teachers included artists Jasper Rose and Paul Hogarth. With this in mind, along- at the Hornsey College of Art – a venue for the development of Leonard’s light side enrolling at Homerton in late 1961, he also enrolled for evening classes in life shows which would in time be integral to Pink Floyd. After all, as Rosemary says, drawing at the School of Art. Life drawing was risqué for a sixteen-year-old in music was the sole reason behind Barrett’s dropping out of Camberwell – which early 1962, although Pyle recalls that “the model for [their] very first session was had come as a surprise to his friends, who suggest he went through agonies as a an elderly lady, so [their] fears of erotic arousal were thankfully unfounded”. Nor result.21 would this have fazed Barrett. At junior school, when a Miss Smith had asked her Rob Chapman says Camberwell wished its students to leave with “the present class to make a picture of a hot day, he had depicted with powder paints a vivid of their personality . . . as a painter or sculptor”22 – the implication being that, had sun melting an ice lolly onto a bikini-clad woman on a beach. As his classmate Still life scene in a slide made by Barrett, Barrett not left, his life and art might have taken a different course. This is almost Alison Barraclough recalls, Barrett was then only eleven.13 c.2004–6 The lost painting Untitled 65 (cat.72), c.2004–6, undeniably true. Yet, Barrett’s art from the time reveals that he was working on his Invited to attend the School of Art in September 1962, Barrett undertook a in a slide made by Barrett own terms, and Camberwell had not been time wasted. The idea that he subse- wide curriculum that included drawing, painting, sculpture, and History of Art, quently tried to return to art school, in the sense of taking up where he had left off, as well as extras such as sign-writing and calligraphy. Like Pyle, he sat A level Art is largely untrue. While Barrett’s art school education may have been disrupted, at GCE in his first year, aged seventeen, during which time he producedUntitled there remains evidence of his success there and its lasting influence on his subse- 7 (cat. 9, see p. 192). Barrett achieved a distinction, falling short of an additional quent development. S level “due to a weak History of Art paper”. This could be put down to his ten- Rodney Wilson, who left Camberwell the summer before Barrett joined, sums dency during Jasper Rose’s “art history slide shows in this large dark room . . . up the atmosphere of the painting department as being “[s]chool of Euan Uglow” [to] get everybody to go out the back window, through the drapes, and back in and “tail end of Bloomsbury perhaps”. Uglow had trained at Camberwell, was through the door”.14 In Rosemary’s words, “Sitting down and listening to some- influenced by William Coldstream, and was known for his mathematically derived body else was never his thing”.15 Barrett entered his second year at the School of proportions – an approach to realism associated with the painters of the Euston Art as a National Diploma in Design student, going on to become a Diploma of Road School. This may have been familiar ground to Barrett who, as Cambridge Art and Design foundation student. friend Anthony Stern recalls, was interested in the wood-engraver Gwen Raverat His time at the School of Art was followed by a projected three-year course at – though Barrett’s desire for something more modern would not go unanswered. London’s Camberwell School of Arts and Crafts. Barrett was initially “very disap- As Geoff Hassell writes, the appointment of abstract painter Robert Medley as pointed to be going to Camberwell”, according to girlfriend Libby Gausden. With head of painting in 1958, and his subsequent appointment of Frank Auerbach, the Slade School of Fine Art his first choice, Chelsea College of Art and Design helped facilitate a departure from the influence of Coldstream and the Euston his second, and possibly the Royal College of Art as his third – and wearing a pair Road School.23 of brogues specially borrowed from Libby’s father for the interviews – Barrett According to Stern, with whom Barrett had held a joint exhibition, at art col- failed to be accepted by them, to his “surprise and disappointment”. Yet, “people lege Barrett enjoyed learning how to use materials, rather than being taught art. had told him he was good”. He missed a Beatles gig in Cambridge for his inter- His work showed a “consistency in randomness”, each piece being experimental view at Camberwell on 26 November 1963.16 As Libby puts it: “I don’t think he in its own right. However, Barrett may not have found the freedom he was after. knew anything about Camberwell . . . [but] as soon as he was there he knew it was Invitation to a farewell party on the occasion As he put it in 1967, “I made a painting the other day . . . and . . . I could . . . see the right place for him.” of Barrett’s leaving the band “Those Without” and hear very clearly . . . different instructions and different criticisms going in to It was the first year of a new system at Camberwell, where the teachers were to start college in London. Designed by Stephen the picture which were in fact criticisms that I could relate back to art schools and practising artists.17 With Robert Medley as the principal and Philip Matthews as Pyle in 1964, this copy was presented to Barrett teachers and various things that’d come at that time”.24 In 1971 he would reflect:

 Barrett Art  “The fine arts thing at college was always too much for me to think about. What I girlfriend, around the summer of 1965. Jenny Spires remembers the works well, was more involved in was being successful at arts school.”25 suggesting they may have been from “early Camberwell”, perhaps his first term in As Rosemary says, “Roger was only influenced by Roger. He loved the oppor- 1964. Untitled 16 can be seen to reflect several influences: Hamilton’s designs; the tunities at Camberwell, but only took on board what he wanted to”. Referring in Abstract Expressionism of Adolph Gottlieb’s Frozen Sounds II (1952), Circular 1971 to his art education, Barrett remembered the “rate of work” and “learning (1959), Rolling (1961), or Brink (1959); and, with its repetition of circular forms, to work hard”.26 Evidently he loved it, and he came to regret ending it, saying, “it Robert Motherwell’s At Five in the Afternoon (1949) may also have been in mind. might have been a tremendous release getting absorbed in painting”. Critics sug- Untitled 15 is evidence of the popularity of Paul Klee at the time – he had had a gest that by cutting short his art education Barrett never found his own language large show at the Tate in the early 1960s – and of the influence ofLes Toits (1952) or style.27 Yet, although he had not fully transformed his influences into a distinct by Nicolas de Staël, whose thick impasto and use of a palette knife Chapman iden- visual voice, Barrett’s painting did develop into something quite assured, and he tifies as bearing upon Barrett’s other work.32 Ad Reinhardt and Hans Hofmann, would for many years enjoy the release allowed him by an absorption in his art. using shapes more angular than Motherwell’s, may also have fed into Barrett’s While it is true that Barrett’s work lacked “consistency”,28 the variety this implies geometrical abstraction. The mid-1960s would have introduced Barrett to Color is at the core of his originality. Field and other styles employed by the American Abstract Expressionists. Miles has commented on Barrett’s familiarity with “De Kooning and Rothko and all the stuff that was being shown at the Whitechapel Gallery” at the time.33 Another pop- According to Rodney Wilson, Camberwell had a reputation for being “painterly”. ular location was the American Embassy in London’s Grosvenor Square, where In support of this, Barrett’s friend David Henderson recalls that when he was the Information Services held large retrospectives of the likes of Franz Kline and there, his work became “very Soutine-ish”, with “very thick broad paint, very Philip Guston. Galleries such as Tooth’s and The Redfern Gallery on Cork Street, adept”.29 Barry Miles observes that British Pop Art, which also helped the break on the other hand, exhibited French Tachisme – including the work of Georges from the influence of the Euston Road School, was painterly too, as in the work Mathieu, as well as Frank Auerbach and Jean-Paul Riopelle. Auerbach’s friend of Peter Blake, in whom Libby recalls Barrett to have been interested, and David Leon Kossoff, a painter whose work Stern rightly identifies as bearing strong sim- Hockney, whose surface drawing and textural work would have appealed. ilarities to Barrett’s, was also exhibiting at the time. As Rosemary says, from a young age Barrett would slap paint on thickly before It seems both Little Red Rooster and Untitled 12 (cat. 16, p. 196) were painted drawing designs into it. Barrett’s scorings in his earlier Self-Portrait (cat. 2, p. 187) nearer the start of Barrett’s time at Camberwell, says Jenny – maybe even towards and Untitled 3 (cat. 4, p. 189) through the rips in Little Red Rooster (cat. 17, p. the close of his years in Cambridge. The Rolling Stones’ version of the song “Little 197) to late works such as Untitled 85 (cat. 92, p. 183) show a sustained use of Red Rooster” was released on 13 November 1964, so it is likely that the painting this technique. It is likely Barrett would have appreciated the arrival of Auerbach, (or at least the naming of it) derives from that period. Despite being more accom- with whom “The studio soon became deep in charcoal, heavily worked paper, and plished, Little Red Rooster has technical similarities to work dating from the spring paint scrapings”, as Medley puts it.30 of 1964 when, according to Stern, Barrett was experimenting increasingly with In 1959 English painter and print-maker Richard Hamilton had brought out abstraction. Little Red Rooster is the only surviving example of Barrett “applying his book The Developing Process, demonstrating his new approach to basic design crumpled fabric to the canvas and working it in”,34 a technique which reminded – a shift from traditional skills to pure visual observation and process, according his friend David Gale of the work of Jim Dine.35 As his peer at the Cambridge to Miles. To Barrett, also, art was as much about the process of creation as it was School of Art, John Gordon, says, Barrett “would do something . . . like a large about the finished product, and it was transitory. Engagement with the pop cul- bit of hardboard with maybe a shirt dipped in paint, and slapped on it, really big ture of Hamilton, and the experimental cinema of Jeff Keen, is cited by Andrew three-dimensional Jackson Pollock kind of stuff,” so that “it became difficult to tell Rawlinson as an influence on the group of Cambridge friends,31 although Barrett, if [the picture] was a painting or sculpture”.36 On the surface of Little Red Rooster, like Hamilton, was never fully Pop. As Miles points out, three Barrett pieces from Libby observes that “where the green paint looks thicker” than elsewhere on the 1964 to 1965 could almost have come from Hamilton’s book. In Untitled 14 (cat. canvas, Barrett “has cut out canvas from another painting and stuck it on”. 19, p. 198) and Untitled 15 (cat. 20, p. 199) – the latter comprising six panels – With other materials worked in across the picture, and with Barrett’s own rips Barrett is manipulating an image in series, replicating it with adjustments. and tears through the canvas, Little Red Rooster is a rare surviving example of the To work in series like this, repeating images, has a Pop element, although the freedom Barrett enjoyed when experimenting with the surfaces and textures of images themselves do not. As Andrew Rawlinson says, Barrett “was capable of his paintings. A large-scale work, it is probably the piece closest to his mid-1960s taking things in and transforming them very quickly” – a process he exploits in style. Areas of thick paint, together with the layering of appliqué, point again to the Untitled 16 (cat. 21, p. 200). Furthermore, the replication of images is a reminder influence of de Staël, while the colour scheme may owe something to Color Field of Barrett’s use of motifs across his oeuvre. The spider-like images in Untitled A lost painting, Untitled 28 (cat. 35), painting. In fact, within the build-up of paint and material, and beneath the varia- 14 are not unlike the insects adorning the cover of his LP, Barrett (1970), while c.1993–4. This photograph, taken by Barrett, tions upon red, is a more traditional image of a Madonna, Child, and shepherds, to a letter to Jenny Spires – his girlfriend from December 1964 to summer 1965 – Sleeve of Barrett’s eponymous second solo album, was reproduced in Luca Ferrari’s book Syd please Libby’s parents with its religious sentiment at Christmas. This image seems depicts a spider called Terry the Terror. released in 1970. The design has always been Barrett: A Fish Out of Water (1996). It was to reappear, again partly concealed by colour, in Untitled 28 (cat. 35). Barrett gave both Untitled 15 and Untitled 16 to Viv Brans when she was his said to be by Barrett subsequently destroyed Jenny suggests that Little Red Rooster may have been used towards his course

 Barrett Art  at Camberwell. During his first year there in 1965, he wrote to her, saying, “Very year – a comic strip depicts the superhero Jon’s flight to Zepkon. Barrett writes soon at school we are having an assesment [sic] of our work, and then they say that Jon’s “one human companion”, Julie, “worshipped J”, the appearance of whether they might throw you out in the summer. I think I’ll be O.K. providing I which letter resembles the “J” on the page of “diddlty dumpty” Jack in Fart Enjoy can do two more good, large paintings. I’m thinking very hard”. Saying he wanted (see p. 212). Likewise, an illustration of Julie naked bears an obvious similarity to to do a picture of Jenny, he continues: “Last year I did a self portrait with an old a page of the booklet (p. 217), whose accompanying “BOYS FUCK GIRL” text is shirt stuck onto the board which they raved about, so I want to do something reminiscent of repetitions of the words “BOYGIRLSEX” in a letter to Jenny from similarly kinky. But about you.” Jenny says, “I didn’t hear anymore about it, but as early as January 1965. In a sketch on the reverse of the comic strip in the letter, he did ask for some photos of me [from which to work] which I sent and he said the word “HALLO” – called from amidst a mêlée – echoes in its font and speech were ‘terrific’”. bubble the speech of Gene Pitney in Fart Enjoy (p. 207).42 A letter purportedly Jenny confirms that this self-portrait is the painting photographed byJohn from his mother, and various literary sources which Chapman has examined, sug- Gordon in 1964. Libby concurs, saying the painting was made when he was at the The lost Untitled 46 (cat. 53) from c.2004. gest Barrett is recycling his own and others’ writings in the booklet – a process Cambridge School of Art (whose teachers were presumably the ones who “raved Although this image is from a contact sheet, the which, by revealing a consistency across Barrett’s creativity, helps date his work. about” it). Gordon says that “both the central and the right part [of the painting] collage exists in full photographic form Indeed he uses similar imagery in pictures made across a span of many years. were fabric . . . with paint . . . worked into the canvas”, the former area possibly As Rawlinson argues, the notion of influence in the context of Fart Enjoy is white, and the latter a terracotta colour. He adds, “it was the first I ever saw of “extremely ambiguous”, given that it thrives upon the multiplicity and variety of [Barrett’s use of] the technique” of applying material into the surface – and the its sources. Commenting likewise on Barrett’s influences, Miles says that he “was only example he would see, too. He suggests, though, that Barrett “perhaps . . . just absorbing all the visual stimulus of the period” – from fine art and advertising had a phase [when he was] doing this”.37 As we have seen, Little Red Rooster, to graphic art in magazines such as Nova and the German Twen, popular with art which came slightly later, would have a similar thick mixed media texture. students at the time. The work of Eduardo Paolozzi was itself concerned with, and In 1965 Barrett showed Viv a piece, “an artwork as opposed to a painting . . . representative of, the proliferation of the image – as evident in Paolozzi’s collages, [with] pieces of material on it which were to represent [her] dress dancing”. Viv Barrett standing with his lost painting Untitled screen prints, and machines. The actual composition and colours of Barrett’s col- recalls, “we went . . . into his room and he said, ‘That’s you’”. But she never saw 10 (cat. 14) in the garden of 183 Hills Road, lages in Fart Enjoy, though, owe more to Kurt Schwitters, or to Brion Gysin, who the painting again, said to be quite large, after that day. “I don’t know what he did 1964. Photograph taken by John Gordon with William Burroughs was noted for his cut-up technique. Chapman goes fur- with it”, she says, echoing Libby’s query about his work from his School of Art ther, implying Barrett appears to have had a peculiar attitude to the relationship days. Perhaps Barrett was destroying work even then, as “he didn’t say, ‘Would Barrett’s lost collage Untitled 58 (cat. 65), from between his work and that of others – in 1970 he said, with reference to Duggie you like it?’ It just wasn’t there any more”. a contact sheet of 29 March 2005 Fields: “The guy who lives next door to me paints, and he’s doing it well, so I don’t really feel the need.”43 At one point in Fart Enjoy, in colours similar to those of Academic Scene Barrett’s booklet Fart Enjoy (cat. 25, pp. 204–18) owes the circumstances of its (cat. 13, p. 195) and of the terracotta remembered by John Gordon, Barrett dis- creation, as well as some of its content, to the element of “participation” current in torts an architectural drawing of the new, nearby Post Office Tower, separating 1960s art and to “what was going on in America.”38 In 1960 Jasper Johns – a pos- the uppermost restaurant and cocktail departments from the observation galleries sible influence onUntitled 16 – had painted over a map of the USA, which he had below (p. 213). He then overlays it all with text which asks, “Why so tall?” and been sent by Robert Rauschenberg. Although Rauschenberg had held an impor- “microwaves?” Elsewhere on the page, beneath and around typewritten words tant exhibition at the Whitechapel Gallery in 1964, Miles remembers that his large about wavelengths and frequency, Barrett has cut up images of wheels, engines, assemblages were less interesting to British artists than was pure colour, and that and pipes, perhaps from a technical manual. In his later years, he made notes he and Jasper Johns were known in the UK primarily for “Happenings”. In the about radio frequency, owned a book about electronics,44 and was aesthetically same vein as Johns, Andrew Rawlinson “took a map of the world and traced out interested in the reproduction of his notes and paintings – photocopying and con- all the countries”, sending the shapes to participants to fill in.39 Barrett sent back tinually photographing his work. In Fart Enjoy, Barrett’s style clearly exploits his his shape of Russia painted light blue. Rawlinson returned a collage of Marvel enquiry into the effect and application of technology. comics. Barrett sent twelve A4 sides of art attached to card. The voyeuristic theme evident in Fart Enjoy relates to the omnipresence of the This then was the template for Fart Enjoy. A mixture of painting, typescript, sexualized image, and is humorous in its deliberate childishness. In Barrett’s most and collage, Fart Enjoy is “uneven”,40 – but wilfully and idiosyncratically so, com- prominent foray into Pop Art, he illustrates the anatomy of an anonymous topless bining high and low art, with Barrett and friends not concerned about “doing Letter from Barrett to Jenny Spires, written in model with tears and glasses, snot, spiders, a cyclist ascending her left breast, and things properly”.41 The Cambridge crowd were, in Rawlinson’s phrase, “our own 1965, in which he describes Untitled 10 some sort of discharge from her “NIPL” (p. 217). Barrett’s graffiti has her saying audience”. Rawlinson recalls that Barrett lived in Tottenham Street, where he was “FUK SUK AND LIK”, while next to her picture he types variants upon the let- resident for his second year at Camberwell, before moving to Earlham Street in ters “BOYS FUCK GIRL” in the shape of two tip-to-toe penises, as if in keeping spring or summer 1966, when he made Fart Enjoy. with the plural “BOYS”. A less distinct penis with a red arrowhead points between Illustrations in letters that Barrett sent to Jenny Spires support the dating of and up her breasts in an overtly fantasized image. As well as being enormously Fart Enjoy to 1965 or 1966. For instance, in one letter – potentially from either fun, by imposing a series of desires upon the girl the chauvinism of the page

 Barrett Art  seems to be a knowing response to the invitations implied by soft core. It conveys canvas much earlier, he did not do so in his later years. Not one of his surviving the ability of the printed or televised image to tease out its viewers’ desires and late works is on canvas. Nor, for that matter, are the destroyed works recorded in responses – commercial or merely voyeuristic. his photographs. Another arrow, in a shape similar to those in the letters to Jenny, provides Fart Since the 1996 publication of Luca Ferrari’s Syd Barrett: A Fish Out of Water, it Enjoy with its bold cover (p. 205). Cut out, and with the lettering of the title also has been officially known that he destroyed much of his work after photographing cut out and layered on top of it, the arrow is reminiscent of Jasper Johns, perhaps, it. It is not true, however, that Barrett disposed of those works “that he didn’t con- or of Scheidung Abends (1922) by Paul Klee. Pointing to the right-hand edge of the sider perfect”.48 Rather, once “they were finished and his head was free of them”, page, the arrow simply means “go this way” or “open me”. However, when read he burnt them or threw them away.49 As Libby says, “I don’t think it mattered to in the context of the arrows that direct the viewer’s gaze across the two panels of him . . . I think once it was done, people had looked at it . . . That seemed to be Rauschenberg’s Stripper (1962), it opens Fart Enjoy out to intertextual echoes. the end of it”. And yet, Barrett’s art was crucial to him, if not for the purposes of Fart Enjoy is best experienced through a sustained engagement, but the ele- possession then for the exercise of constant creation. Furthermore, he may actu- ments which are all but hidden need identifying. Each of the 14 sheets of the ally have started destroying his works from a young age. Libby suggests that he booklet are made of cardboard. Taped back to back, they make up seven pages. might have got the idea from Dave Gilbert, a student at Chelsea with whom he On the surface of the fifth cardboard sheet, Barrett lightly sketches a Dick Tracy lived in Highgate. type in a detective hat, and cuts and pastes the face of a man. The seventh sheet While there seems to be no recollection of actual destruction, many recall pic- has the Superman logo, the figure of the Flash, and a witch flying over the moon. tures simply not being there anymore. What is certain is that Barrett did destroy Over these, Barrett pastes a piece of tan paper, painting in the gaps between its Barrett’s design for the reverse of Pink Floyd’s works done at the end of the 1960s and the beginning of the 1970s, be it for prac- cuts. This tan surface bears a cut-out of Frankenstein’s monster with its orig- debut album, The Piper at the Gates of Dawn tical, habitual, or symbolic reasons. The pieces from this time which survive do inal outline, alongside some typed lettering. For the eleventh sheet, Barrett paints (released August 1967). The silhouette is from so either because his mother Win looked after them, or because they were given over newspaper and magazine clippings. These, similar to the strip of newspaper a photograph by Colin Prime of the band in away. Jenny, on the other hand, believes Barrett did not actually destroy paintings alongside the Gene Pitney speech bubble, show a man holding a woman, a woman Ruskin Park, Camberwell, London from that early period, but may have “had to clear them out” when his mother with her eyes closed, and a man smiling. Above: two views of Barrett’s desk, from a moved to a smaller house, and that he “carried on getting rid of them” thereafter. For all its cut-ups, overlayering, and cut-outs – briefly revisited on the back of contact sheet of 5 June 2004 Irrespective of the impulse, this much is clear: Barrett was never possessive of the cover of The Piper at the Gates of Dawn (1967) – Fart Enjoy enjoys a unified style. his art. Barrett’s fractured shapes and pared-down lines, such as on the “ADD a MARK” Even if his art was transitory, its erasure was not immediate. Little Red Rooster, page (with its resemblance to the early style of Self-Portrait, as well as to the brush- for example, existed for over a year before being given to Libby. Rosemary has strokes in Untitled 2 and Untitled 3, and in lettering similar to that in a letter to said that in later years he would occasionally “show [her a picture], or just have it Libby), comprise the quick, gestural style that characterizes much of his work. in the house for a couple of days”.50 A photograph by Barrett of his work station in his house in St Margaret’s Square, Cambridge, shows Untitled 56 (cat. 63, p. 225) hanging on the wall. Similarly, Barrett’s photographs of the late pieces show Evidence of Barrett’s fluid approach is everywhere – told that his title for Piper that some survived for many months. A hundred-plus pages of Barrett’s notes on had “nothing really to do with the LP”, he replied, “Well that doesn’t matter! It’s the history of art (see the Appendices of this book) have survived, and even if the something new!”45 Likewise, on an unannounced visit to his old band’s recording late paintings survived perhaps by virtue of being completed quite late on, Barrett studio in 1975, Barrett questioned the value of listening again to a song about him, Barrett’s photograph of his front room, where must have had them for a certain length of time. Several of Barrett’s works have saying, “You’ve listened to it once, why listen to it again?”46 he worked – c.2005. Untitled 56 (cat. 63) is in survived, not just those given to Rosemary (Untitled 31, cat. 38, p. 222; Untitled 38, Libby was often “called into the art school [in Cambridge] to look at what he’d the background cat. 45, p. 223; Untitled 55, cat. 62, p. 224; Untitled 64, cat. 71, p. 226). But many done”. Barrett was “very, very proud of it, but then again”, she continues, “[she] only exist in photographs. never saw any of it again, so [she didn’t] know what he did with it”. Libby doesn’t With a few exceptions, the works that have survived from his final years are remember Barrett destroying his art, but it “didn’t surprise her to hear” that he all paintings. Unlike his lost florals, for example, his paintings of other subjects did so subsequently, recognizing that when a piece was completed, it was a “job are undated, except for Untitled 90 (cat. 97, p. 179), and Untitled 72 (cat. 79, p. done”. She supposes he “must have left them” at college, since she does not recall 230), Untitled 73 (cat. 80, p. 231), and Untitled 74 (cat. 81, p. 232) which were all the “hundreds of things he had to produce there . . . ever coming home”. on one sheet, dated together. This is curious because, as Miles points out, a sig- At one point, during later years, Barrett was to paint ten pictures a day.47 The nature would indicate an act of acknowledgement, that a picture would not be dates of the works that survive, or that survive as photographs taken by him, sug- destroyed afterwards. Not so with Barrett, as quite a number of his destroyed gest he worked swiftly. Therefore, if one considers the volume of art he is likely pictures were dated. Barrett’s destruction, through its consistency, takes a stance to have created in his lifetime, then, as has been widely reported, he must indeed against the institutionalization of art – albeit an indirect stance, unlike the polit- have destroyed most of it. Nevertheless, the suggestion that he destroyed most of Clockwise from bottom left: Untitled 72 (cat. 79), ical aesthetics of Gustav Metzger, or of John Latham with whom Pink Floyd once his later “canvases” must be corrected, unless the term “canvas” is being used in Untitled 73 (cat. 80), and Untitled 74 (cat. 81), worked. Although a kind of performance art in itself, as Stern suggests, it is simply a generic sense to mean “painting”. For, as Rosemary says, although he did use before they were separated. Sheet dated “12/05” part of the process of Barrett’s whole art practice.

 Barrett Art  Taken in London in c.2003–4, the photograph on the left was the source image for the lost Untitled 52 (cat. 59), seen above

Photograph, from c.2005, alongside Barrett’s Untitled 73 (cat. 80), for which it was the source image

Source photograph, c.2005, used for Barrett’ s painting Untitled 74 (cat. 81), seen here, and also probably for Untitled 78 From top to bottom: photograph taken in London c.2003–4 which Photograph taken c.2002–3, the source of Barrett’s (cat. 85) was used for the lost Untitled 50 (cat. 57) and Untitled 51 (cat. 58) destroyed painting Untitled 37 (cat. 44), below

 Barrett Art  Contact sheet image of 5 December 2005 showing Untitled 71 (cat. 78) before it was completed (see right for final work)

Taken c.2005, the photograph on the left inspired Barrett’s Untitled 72 (cat. 79), above

now lost, was painted after a photograph of a presumably local landscape. Barrett did not destroy every painting made in this manner. The landscapes Untitled 72, Untitled 73, and Untitled 74 clearly derive from three photographs, of which Untitled 78 might be a variation. According to Rosemary, Barrett very occa- sionally sketched, though never painted, outdoors, preferring to remain inconspic- uous. In fact, what look like preparatory sketches for these landscape paintings – Untitled 68 (cat. 75, p. 228) and Untitled 71 (cat. 78, above) – were made at home from photographs, according to the dates on contact sheets. The frames Barrett has drawn around the image are probably not something one would do if working en plein air. In support of this, a photograph by Barrett shows one of the sketches This 2002 photograph by Barrett of Southwold might have been the source of his painting Untitled 56 (cat. 63), above (Untitled 71) being revised and documented indoors. It is conceivable that, where Barrett has noticeably re-sized the artificial frame in Untitled 68, he was aiming for a specific shape and size (as one might not in a Like Rauschenberg’s erasure of a drawing by de Kooning in 1953, Barrett’s act preparatory sketch) and had the proportions of a photograph in mind. Similarly, of destruction is not a negation – it achieves something new. Barrett is doing some- on a large yellow sheet of paper he mounted a much smaller watercolour of the thing when he destroys what he has done, not merely erasing it. sea. This painting (Untitled 56, cat. 63) appears to represent the scene labelled As Rosemary puts it: “You could say he came up with his own type of concep- “NORWICH. 02”, shown in a photograph by Barrett of Southwold, and which tual art. He would photograph a particular flower and paint a large canvas from itself bears resemblance to a photograph Barrett took of Libby in the 1960s. In the photograph. Then he would make a photographic record of the picture before the photo, Barrett’s interest in shapes and geometries is evident, as is his love of destroying the canvas.”51 the sea and groynes. Libby could not keep the resulting painting, as in it her bikini Although he painted Untitled 38 (cat. 45, p. 223) and Untitled 55 (cat. 62, p. 224) had been removed. from memory shortly after taking drives through Cambridgeshire with Rosemary, Barrett often photocopied his late notes – before presumably discarding the and although there are photographs showing him working directly from plants, originals. He gathered together photocopies, originals, typed originals, and pho- Rosemary describes how a large number of Barrett’s late works came about using tocopies of typed pages. To him, there seems to have been little difference between photographs as the source. an original and a copy. Often, both forms co-exist. The destroyed drawings Untitled 50 (cat. 57, p. 168) and Untitled 52 (cat. 59, p. In some cases, he photographed the same paintings many times. Behind pho- 169), dated June 2004, as well as the painting Untitled 51 (cat. 58, p. 168), derive Libby in Skegness, 1962. Barrett’s painting after tographs of surviving pictures is the assumption that the originals would eventu- from photographs Barrett took in London. Similarly, Untitled 37 (cat. 44, p. 168), this photograph, which he took, is now lost ally have been destroyed. Yet in the same way that Barrett liked maps (a large one

 Barrett Art  of Great Britain hung in the room where he painted) but never travelled, he seems to have been interested in imagery and its reproduction. He took photographs of open books, made a pie chart of the summer and winter solstices (Untitled 67, cat. 74, p. 227), and stuck together seed packs in a collage which he then photo- graphed repeatedly (Untitled 45, cat. 52, p. 247), raising questions about his con- ception of art and about the authenticity of an image. In either form – photograph or painting – his pictures represent a conspicuous absence, a fragmentariness somehow complete. Barrett’s own documentation of his work, and thus of his life, in its constant process of creation and erasure defies the ability to tell a full story. Yet Barrett was committed to his art, creating then Anthony Stern, Embryo, dated erasing evidence in a way that is at once the denial of a narrative and the narra- The lost work Untitled 66 (cat. 73), c.2004–6, 2/1/64, oil on paper, 52 × 61 cm tive itself. His art, in substance telling us quite little, tells us everything. Even as in a slide made by Barrett interest in Barrett’s art grew, he was destroying much of the evidence. Attempts to collate it have, until now, been in vain. For instance, two of his photographs doc- ument his careful creation of two similar geometrical works (Untitled 48, cat. 55, p. 247, and Untitled 49, cat. 56, p. 247). Yet, although the documentation remains, the objects themselves do not. And yet, it was not always thus. According to Libby, Barrett “loved it when his work was exhibited at Camberwell or the School of Art”. In his youth, he had no qualms about displaying his paintings and he distributed his art, like his letters, liberally and enthusiastically. In later years, though, he would show some pieces to Rosemary reluctantly, laughingly pointing to anything he thought not quite right. Anthony Stern, Collision, dated Anthony Stern, On the Gogs, 1964, oil on hardboard, 53 × 71 cm She believes her brother “would be pleased to think that somebody may be inter- 2/1/64, oil on paper, 52 × 61 cm ested in his art”,52 although he himself would never have attended a show. Very few of Barrett’s paintings, Rob Chapman notes, “were seen by the general An invitation card to Barrett’s joint exhibition public during his lifetime”.53 With the exception of a joint exhibition and college with Anthony Stern, 1964. The designer is degree shows, one of which we will come to, the only other occasions would have unknown been auctions. Despite an exhibition entitled “The Other Room: Syd Barrett’s Art and Life” at Anglia Ruskin University from 24 October to 2 November 2008, many works continued to remain unseen until now.

From 29 May to 25 June 1964, Barrett and his friend Anthony Stern held a joint exhibition at the Lion & Lamb pub in Milton, Cambridgeshire, entitled “Two Young Painters”. Barrett was in his second year at the School of Art, and, coming to the end of his course, he displayed work described by friend and classmate Stephen Pyle as “typical of his approach at [the] time”. Stern was a student at St John’s College, Cambridge, and had been given the key to a room in King’s Anthony Stern, Companions, Anthony Stern, Buried Giant, Anthony Stern, Mandrakes, Anthony Stern, Leaves, dated College by its Provost, Noel Annan, who invited him to paint there. Encouraged dated 10/3/64, oil on paper, dated 13/5/64, oil on paper, dated 4/5/64, oil on paper, 2/5/64, oil on paper, 61 × 52 cm by their friend David Gale, at the end of 1963, to exhibit together, Barrett and 61 × 52 cm 61 × 52 cm 61 × 52 cm Stern planned their display in this room and at Barrett’s home in Hills Road. This would imply that all the pieces were done between this date (Barrett’s Tortoise, for idea did not appeal to established artists – Barrett was then only aged eighteen – example, is dated 1963) and early 1964, with the exhibition in mind. Indeed, all of Day arranged cheap printing for exhibitors, provided that they paid for it through Stern’s exhibits, reproduced on the following page, are dated 1964. Patterson. As Stern had the “Two Young Painters” ticket and posters printed him- Writer and painter of the Fens, Anthony Day was “involved from the start with self, Day might be referring to the printing of artworks. Stern remembers family arranging exhibitions” that ran monthly for about two years at the Lion & Lamb. and friends at the show, but according to Day private views were nonetheless gen- The pub was “simply a port of call for a group of local artist friends”.54 After erally “lively” and “there were reasonable sales”. Barrett is thought by Bob Klose landlady Barbara Patterson mentioned she would like art for the pub’s walls, “pic- to have sold a picture.55 tures were distributed round the bars” as there was no separate gallery. Since the Anthony Stern in 1964 In addition to his curatorial position, Anthony Day reviewed the show for the

 Barrett Art  – the sensitive handling of oils to which Day refers. That his prints Untitled 9 and Untitled 14 are also from 1964 (though the latter might stylistically seem to be from later in the year), would support Stern’s notion – more clearly than do the still lifes – that Barrett was using art for self-expression. As John Gordon says, at the time Barrett “changed styles on a weekly basis”.57 The still lifes being little more than student exercises, Barrett used the exhibition as a chance to experiment with the materials and techniques he had learnt at the School of Art. A lost painting (Untitled 11, cat. 15), seen in a photograph from c.1964, also missing, is evidence of more experimental work from the time. Indeed Jenny recalls that the painting – “all pinks and purples” – dates from when Barrett was still at the Cambridge School of Art, as does the photograph of Untitled 10. The only image of Barrett’s landscape from the time is the abstract painting Untitled 5 (cat. 6, p. 174). In its resemblance to Untitled 92 (cat. 99, p. 241), Untitled 5 quite possibly depicts the Gog Magog Hills, to which he and Libby would drive Untitled 4 (cat. 5), c.1962–4, and Untitled 5 (cat. 6), c.1963–5, both now lost, photographed outside Barrett’s house in St Margaret’s Square, from 1963 onwards, and to which he would return towards the end of his life. Cambridge. The photos were probably taken by Bernard White in the early to mid-1980s Libby identified “the Gogs” in Untitled 92 according to paintings made just over forty years previously, also comparing it with paintings “of the area which looks down on Fulbourn Hospital.” Cambridge News, to which he contributed from 1964 to 1978. He wrote: The seven works displayed by Stern at the exhibition (shown on p. 173) com- bine clean shapes and colours, isolated on the canvas like ideas against a barren Barrett’s work shows some of the advantages of an art school training. His landscape. The two that were pictured in the Cambridge News – entitled Buried prints, monotypes and drawings are slight but necessary student exercises Giant and Mandrakes – are stylistically consistent, as is Leaves. In another work but in two still-lives, a landscape and two convincing portraits, he is already comprising shapes, a Paul Nash-like landscape, and two Hartung-like abstracts, showing himself a sensitive handler of oil paint who wisely limits his palette Stern was experimenting with like motifs. to gain richness and density.56

Stern comments that Barrett used “blocks of colour”, influenced by Abstract A recently unearthed print supports Bob Klose’s notion that bicycles formed part Expressionism. Furthermore, the two studied the stained glass in King’s College of the display.58 Dated 1964, Barrett’s Academic Scene was sold at the end-of-year Chapel, and were also interested in two light machines made by Reg Gadney Barrett’s flyer for the March 1967 release of show at the Cambridge School of Art, which took place around the same time as in his college rooms. With its cellophane, Barrett’s Untitled 9 (cat. 12, p. 194) of Pink Floyd’s first single, “Arnold Layne” “Two Young Painters”.59 Stern identifies the bicycle with the Cambridge eccentrics 1964 uses materials similar to those of a light box, and achieves much of its effect he and Barrett admired, such as Barrett’s lecturer the artist Jasper Rose and the through the resulting chiaroscuro (interplay of light and shade). With the basic wood-engraver Gwen Raverat (related both to Charles Darwin and their friend image printed on card, overlaid by cellophane with a further design on it, the pic- Portrait of a Girl (cat. 11), thought to be 1964, William Pryor). Barrett “did like bikes” says Libby, and had “a variety . . . of very ture is part of what Stern calls their “mixed and multimedia experiences”. In this oil on board, 61 × 61 cm. Sold in auction in unusual ones”. Printing the image twice on the page, Barrett develops his art of way, if dating from spring of that year, Untitled 9 marks a step towards Barrett’s 1994, this painting has not been seen since working in multiples and series, which would continue into the following year. impending application of fabric into his canvas. Alongside Academic Scene, Barrett also sold Untitled 8 (cat. 10, p. 193) at the Reproduced in Anthony Day’s Cambridge News review (on its side), Barrett’s end-of-year show. Both works were bought by Maggy and Adrian Taylor, a couple monotype Tortoise (cat. 8, p. 191) seems to be a reworking of the basic image whose home he had helped paint, and for whom he and Libby had babysat soon of Untitled 6 (cat. 7, p. 190) and of a mosaic with “the same design” given to after Barrett met them in 1963. Untitled 8 has Barrett working in an expressionist Libby Chisman, for whom he wrote his song “Terrapin.” While there are rumours mode. An oil on board, it is one of his larger surviving works, depicting in the of further tortoises, a coloured mosaic which has survived – Untitled 1 (cat. 1, foreground a mother and two children surrounded by lions in a coliseum. One p. 186)– is, with its glass augmented by underpainting similar to the composition might see in this painting a hint of the “naif . . . charm . . . with a broader sense of of Untitled 9, a fine example of Barrett’s work in this form. foreboding” that Rob Chapman identifies in Barrett’s work,60 but generally this It cannot be conjectured as to what else Barrett exhibited in 1964. Of the sur- judgement is inapplicable to the art. Said to depict Christians being fed to lions,61 viving images, Untitled 2 (cat. 3, p. 188), Untitled 3 (cat. 4, p. 189), Untitled 4 (cat. Untitled 8 was not his only engagement with religious imagery. The mask-like leers 5), and Untitled 7 (cat. 9, p. 192) may also be seen as evidence of “an art school Barrett holding Untitled 11 (cat. 15), outside of the crowd, especially within a religious context, derive from his interest in the training” – even “necessary student exercises” perhaps. His Portrait of a Girl, sold 183 Hills Road, Cambridge, c.1964. Once Sleeve for the promotional copy of Pink Floyd’s work of James Ensor, whom classmate Stephen Pyle identifies as one of Barrett’s in auction in 1994 but not seen since since its reproduction in Record Collector, owned by Libby Chisman, the photograph, like June 1967 single, “See Emily Play.” Said to be influences alongside Chaim Soutine.62 With their mouths like those in Untitled 11, November 1994, p. 121, reveals to an extent – despite the poor image available the painting, is now lost. Photographer unknown designed by Barrett the lions are urged on by the grotesque, baying crowd, to which a distant doomed

 Barrett Art  figure appeals. The disorientating twin-headedness of the lost Untitled 11 is sim- image” of Libby, as she herself recalls, and “could be a photograph . . . and then ilar to that of the lions, and also to that of the coliseum arch. he would do something absolutely abstract and something very childish”. Barrett, Untitled 8 shares some of its imagery with other work by Barrett. The faces she says, “saw so many things in so many different ways. His sculpture was the of women in a letter to Jenny are clearly by the same hand, as are the faces in his same. It was either very abstract or it was a perfect duck”. flyer for the release of “Arnold Layne” in March 1967. Much later, in Untitled Even when sketching less rigorously, as in a drawing of Ponji Robinson in a 28 (cat. 35), a mask-like face suggests Ensor’s lasting influence. In it the central Kaleidoscope from Heal’s given to Libby with letter to Libby, Barrett would arrive at the right image. Libby says, “I think at that figure, standing in a violent black and enflamed scene with other, faceless gath- Self-Portrait (cat. 2) for Christmas 1963 time I could have taken [the letter] to anyone in Cambridge and said, ‘Who’s that?’ erers, looms over the apparent Madonna and Child, again combining innocence and they would have all said, ‘Ponji Robinson’”. with something more ominous. Maggy Taylor describes how Barrett used a dis- used, damp, oily gasket (which he had found on his way to babysit at her house in Christmas 1963), to achieve the effect of the arches in Untitled 8.63 His engage- Despite his evident desire to display, and a not very strong desire to sell his work, ment in this painting with a found object – similar to the possible use of stencils in Barrett is said never to have carried out a commission.67 Although impossible to late abstract work – prefigures the incorporation of mixed media into his canvas confirm, this is undoubtedly true of his later years, when he worked without any from 1964 onwards, as does his spraying of coffee onto Untitled 8, which Maggy direct outside influence. In Rosemary’s words, “he never ever wanted anybody to recalls. say anything he did was good”,68 and did not expect a comment when he showed Works such as Noctes Ambrosianae (1906) by Walter Sickert, whom Miles iden- her his work. Even when young, she says that he: tifies as a key influence in the early 1960s, may also have informed the faces of Barrett’s onlookers. More than the “thick broad brushstrokes” that Barrett is said Barrett’s Untitled 17 (cat. 22), 1964, clay, did it all for himself, for his needs . . . My mother’s friends used to say, ‘Oh, 64 to have developed at Camberwell, Untitled 8 hints, albeit in a gently foreboding 15 × 23 cm. Given to Libby with Untitled 9 (cat. would Roger do me a picture of so and so?’ He wouldn’t. He just didn’t way, at the violence in the work of the expressionist Soutine. 12), Christmas 1964 understand why anybody would want that. Because to him it wasn’t like The painting shows – as do Self-Portrait and his still lifes – that Barrett had doing something to show somebody, like you and I would do. For him it a feel for both expressionism and abstraction from a young age. Yet, except per- was just in his head, he got it out on paper, and then it was finished. He haps for a period between the mid-1960s to at least the early 1970s during which didn’t need anybody to say it was good, or admire it. He probably didn’t his work seems to have been resolutely abstract, he never “dropped figurative for even go back to it. That was how his art was.69 abstract art” completely,65 and remained capable with either approach. This might explain some of his later destruction of his art, as Rosemary agrees. It might also explain his generous distribution of his art among his friends. The In 1965, as a student at Camberwell, Barrett painted two portraits of Philip James primary recipient of Barrett’s art for a number of years was Libby, to whom in (Untitled 18, cat. 23, p. 202; Untitled 19, cat. 24, p. 203), the six-year-old nephew person “every year he delivered . . . a painting on Christmas morning”: the Self- of his then-girlfriend Viv Brans. He painted both “on the same day”, she says. It Portrait in 1963; Untitled 9 in 1964; in 1965 a blue abstract on board (Untitled was a rare example of him drawing from life. Philip recalls “being told to sit still This glass ball was given with Untitled 12 (cat. 12); and in 1966 Little Red Rooster. Only in the instance of Untitled 9 does a pic- and . . . [remembers Barrett] was tall and dark, and gave [him] a pen which didn’t 16) to Libby for Christmas 1965 ture seem to have been composed in the year of its donation. His gifts to Libby work”.66 Viv says the pictures were painted quickly, “because you wouldn’t have were chosen for their relationship to his art. Each picture, Libby says, “came with got a little boy to stand still for very long”, but they resemble Philip “exactly” as something he loved”: Self-Portrait came with a kaleidoscope from Heal’s “with the he then was. If the two pictures portray two slightly different images, it is because same colouring as the painting” (although the colouring is missing now); Untitled in one Philip is trying on green-tinted sunglasses which Barrett had given Viv, and 9 with an example of Barrett’s sculpture; Untitled 12 with “a large glass ball . . . in which he has her wearing in the sketch accompanying his “Little Twig” poem. the same blue”; and Little Red Rooster with “a giant red candle”, unusual at the Barrett seems to have done the portraits either for a lark or for practice. Viv time, and a stone – both “with the same yellow markings . . . as his painting”. recalls, “He’d decided that the next time he came down [to Cambridge] he was In a letter to Jenny, Barrett sketches a rather simple ashtray he has made at going to do some pictures . . . [and] had come . . . armed with pen and ink and Camberwell – “black and brown with a blue stripe,” and “quite nice”. Many years paper”, knowing Philip would be there. Barrett “just left [the two portraits]” in later, he would make small wooden sculptures from his DIY offcuts (Untitled 35, her house. Viv insists, “I didn’t ask him to do them . . . he wouldn’t do it if you cat. 42, p. 244; Untitled 36, cat. 43, p. 244), as well as papier mâché items from asked him”. The two portraits bear a combination of ink blotches and fine lines which he might have painted (Untitled 33, cat. 40, p. 244; Untitled 34, cat. 41, similar to those seen in two small ink drawings done many years later – Untitled p. 244). The object and the idea of art as object are central to Barrett’s work. Later 68 (cat. 75, p. 228) and Untitled 71 (cat. 78, p. 229) – although the latter were not (admittedly upon her request), he would give his sister Rosemary a painting of a done directly from a sitting. Viv recalls Barrett would “get quite excited by the hollyhock which she had given him, dated “8.01” (Untitled 31, cat. 38, p. 222). In pens” in a shop on Regent Street, choosing fine, black, and scratchy ones. Libby, 2005 he would paint for her some flowers which she had bought for him to have too, “spent quite a lot of time buying artists’ materials”, which were used on an ink Photograph by Barrett of Libby Gausden in Libby’s Christmas present from Barrett in 1966, at home (Untitled 64, cat. 71, p. 226). drawing of her, done from a photograph and now missing. It was “the absolute 1964. His corresponding ink sketch is lost along with Little Red Rooster (cat. 17) That Barrett saw his work as object does not suggest an indifference towards

 Barrett Art  it, however. Despite apparently leaving work behind at the Cambridge School of Cambridge, Barrett was “surrounded by paintings”.72 Art, he remained proud of it. Barrett painted to varying degrees throughout his life and, although most of Early in the spring term of 1965, Barrett wrote to Jenny: “When we come the 1970s through to the mid-1980s were less productive where art is concerned, up [to London] on Saturday we will bring some pictures up here as well.” She he was prolific either side of those dates. But by April 1966, following the period believes “he needed them for college or he wanted to hang them in his room”, and in which Barrett had created the works seen thus far, music seems to have become that one of them may have been Little Red Rooster, which she remembers hanging his priority. Jenny recalls: “I don’t remember him talking about painting or col- in Highgate. Untitled 12 (cat. 16, p. 196), which she does not recall, may have been lege at this time. It was mostly about the band.” While Stern recalls talking to him painted before they met in December 1964, perhaps in the spring or summer, and about abstraction in art during 1967, he admits they were referring mostly to film remained in Cambridge for just over a year. Barrett kept Little Red Rooster with and to James Joyce. Nonetheless, despite there being no visual evidence of his him, probably until he moved to a small flat in Tottenham Street, where there was work between this time and 1971 – other than Untitled 20, record sleeves, a flyer “no room for any pictures”, in her words. for Pink Floyd, and in the backgrounds of photographs – oral evidence suggests Whether his other paintings were destroyed for symbolic reasons or because Barrett posing in 1969 in front of Untitled a degree of progression. Barrett simply had a tendency to dispose of his work, Untitled 24 (cat. 30, p. 220) 23 (cat. 29), one of three lost works seen in As Rob Chapman writes, in 1970 Barrett ceased applying the teachings of art from 1971 appears to be the only piece to survive from the years spanning his photographs from his flat in Wetherby Mansions. school to his music, “equating . . . [it] with discipline rather than philosophy or musical career, with the exception of a piece from occupational therapy (Untitled The painting can also be seen on p. 119 ideology.”73 As a result, although “his passion was his painting”, as his sister has 20, cat. 26). Given that his mother would downsize to a house in St Margaret’s emphasized,74 the art itself came to be referred to only in vague terms, its details Square during the following decade, in which Barrett would later spend the rest mostly confused, perhaps due to the inaccurate assumption that too many art- of his life, it is possible a certain amount of decluttering had to take place. Details works had been destroyed. While it is arguable that Barrett never truly “found a about the years following are scant indeed, especially where they relate to his art. direction in painting”, as his erstwhile flatmate Duggie Fields has said,75 Fields’s Although he gave away many works, Jenny says he “didn’t paint pictures with a suggestion that Barrett did not produce enough “for people to say what he would view to giving [them] to someone or not . . . Instead he gave [pictures] away as and have been” is incorrect.76 Barrett’s capability, productivity, and commitment as a when he didn’t need or want them anymore”. Libby also remembers Barrett had painter are evident in his lifelong consistency and development. Self-Portrait in his possession “for a long time” after painting it at Homerton in Fellow painter David Henderson suggests that Barrett’s development may have 1961 or 1962, before he gave it to her in 1963. Moreover, Barrett may have started been hampered by his leaving art school77 – but not irreconcilably so. That Barrett “decluttering’ as Pink Floyd’s popularity increased. was, in his own words, “treading the backward path” in 1971,78 does not mean his art was doing the same, as has been suggested.79 Between the end of the 1960s and 1971 he was producing large, almost entirely black canvases in the basement By the time Barrett was interviewed by American journalist Meatball Fulton in of Hills Road, with a corner of about an inch in red or yellow, pink or green, as August 1967, probably around two-thirds of a year had elapsed since his drop- Rosemary recalls. “Black on black to varying degrees”, to use Jenny’s words, these ping out of art school to pursue music. Barrett told Fulton it “would be very val- paintings may well indicate what Rosemary describes as “the way he saw life”, but uable . . . to . . . try painting again after a break of going in to pop music” which they are also a natural development from earlier inroads into Color Field. They might allow for more “basic freedom”. It is not clear from this if Barrett is still Untitled 21 (cat. 27), on the wall (obscuring Many of Barrettt’s photographs show extant look, for example, to Barnett Newman and Rothko, to Reinhardt’s “black” paint- thinking of “trying to generate further interaction between his fine art studies and other work), and Untitled 22 (cat. 28), hanging paintings, such as Untitled 86 (cat. 93) above. ings, to Rauschenberg’s Black Paintings series (1951–3), Kasimir Malevich’s Black his music”, says Rob Chapman, but what is clear is that he is reflecting upon the to the top right. In Barrett’s flat, 1969. Not every extant late work has a corresponding Square (1913), or Piet Mondrian’s squares of colour. Barrett’s minimalism was not balance between the two. As Chapman puts it: “Syd [had] been thinking about his Photograph from the back of the album cover for photograph exclusively dark in either a literal or a metaphorical sense. In 1971 his favourite art school training and [was] now wondering how he [could] apply that concep- The Madcap Laughs (released 1970) among his own paintings was reported by Mick Rock to be “a white semi-circle tual grounding further to the next stage of his creative development”.70 on a white canvas”,80 influenced by Rauschenberg’sWhite Paintings series (1951) Music had no doubt restricted Barrett’s painting, and his experiences whilst a and perhaps also Malevich’s White on White (1918) or the 1930s white reliefs of musician would directly or indirectly affect the course of his life and thus of his Ben Nicholson, a lasting influence on Barrett. Although Chapman says it is not art. Yet, the suggestion that Barrett stopped painting to pursue music is simplistic, clear if the piece was new,81 Barrett’s destructiveness at this time probably means even untrue. For example, in the August 1967 interview with Meatball Fulton, the that it was at least fairly fresh. year of The Piper at the Gates of Dawn, Barrett describes having recently completed In 1971 Mick Rock also identified some Barrett pictures as “crazy jungles of work on a painting. And while Duggie Fields reports that his flatmate only had thick blobs”, an example of which, if this description is applicable, further proves “watery” ideas,71 with most of his canvases blank, photographic evidence supports Barrett was not working in black alone. The black works, then, were part of a sty- some artistic activity, namely a few paintings and a mobile. Jenny remembers listic rather than an emotional development. one of these (Untitled 23, cat. 29), which Barrett is seen posing with in a pho- Towards the end of 1971, Jenny visited him in his basement in Hills Road with tograph. It bears a strong resemblance to de Kooning’s Untitled paintings from Barrett’s photograph of Untitled 90 (cat. 97), her husband Jack Monck and Twink (who would form the band Stars with Barrett 1948 to 1950. She says Barrett’s canvases did tend to be “turned to the wall”, but dated “1. 06.”, mixed media on paper, the following year). Jenny recalls “canvases stacked round the cellar”. She was adds that “this wasn’t unusual” in her experience, and soon after in 1971, back in 30 × 42 cm. The painting is known to exist “pleased that he was painting”. Barrett said she should choose one. She remembers

 Barrett Art  his delight with her choice of Untitled 24. Asking “which way up [she] wanted it,’ was originally attached to Untitled 27, from which Barrett’s friend separated it. he accepted the decision, signing and dating the painting accordingly. In his pho- He had lost interest in the piece, apparently quite a common attitude at the time. tographs, Barrett’s late paintings appear in a variety of ways up, including their Together the two pictures show the shed at Greenwoods and a van which was out- correct ones (where signatures and internal evidence act as confirmation). side the mission. In 1994 the collector Bernard White showed Luca Ferrari pho- This sense of ease about a picture’s appearance once the process of creating it tographs of five pictures owned by a fan who had visited Barrett at Greenwoods. was over is of a piece with Barrett’s liberal distribution of his art. Miles observes The original composition of Design for a Mural for the Blue Trailer suggests it is that Untitled 24 does indeed work well from any angle, although its resemblance in the painting described by Ferrari as “A typical English house with its large green its chosen format to the colours and shapes of Gauguin’s Vision After the Sermon garden”, from which “a block band . . . crosses the two sheets” to form “a severe (1888) might act as an indicator of the correct way up, or at least of a correct way concentric spiral of [triangular] shape”.86 Describing the other four pictures as up. It is possible that Barrett was subconsciously informed – and no more – by this using “simple coloured pencils and if [available] water colours and tempera” famous picture, and had absorbed such imagery as part of his increasing visual to create “mixed lines belonging to an improbable geometry”,87 it would seem vocabulary. And yet, it is Barrett’s movement away from his sources that marks Ferrari is describing the pictures being discussed here – although, in correspond- his progression. As Miles points out, the painting is part of a strongly established Untitled 25 (cat. 31), 1979 (20 / 2 / 79), crayon ence with this author, he disagrees with this suggestion. western tradition, yet cannot be mistaken for the work of anyone else. It is evi- on paper, dimensions unknown. Known to exist Bernard White owned Untitled 25 for a while before returning it to Barrett’s dence of Barrett’s unique vision. Dutch friend.88 Selling Design for a Mural for the Blue Trailer at auction in 1999, he In support of this, Jenny identifies the “large, yellow ‘L’ shape in the bottom wrote to the buyer: “In 1975 I visited Mrs [Win] Barrett in Cambridge to ask for left hand corner” as a “very characteristic signature” of Barrett’s style. Although a painting by Syd. She gave a girlfriend of mine his address in the hospital where evidence of such a calling card is now all but lost, a relic exists in the late land- he was staying.” White adds, “To my knowledge it was the last painting he ever let scape Untitled 92 (cat. 99, p. 241) in the bottom half of which dark colours, like go”.89 White had bought the painting from a mutual friend of his and the Dutch two facing “L” shapes, define and structure the Gog Magog Hills. Another idi- fan. White and Barrett’s Dutch friend had in fact visited his house in St Margaret’s osyncrasy in Untitled 24 is its dripping of coffee onto the surface, as Barrett had Square in 1978, only to find no one home. (White seems to date this wrongly as done to Untitled 8. 1975, presumably after a letter sent him from that address by Win in 1975, in According to his nephew Ian, Barrett began to paint again around 1986 after which she says, “I cannot give you Syd’s paintings – only he can do that”.) The a break,82 while his brother-in-law Paul Breen commented in 1988 that Barrett Dutch fan returned to the house in 1979, and met Barrett’s mother, who upon had “started to develop an interest, yet again, in painting”.83 What is crucial is that her leaving asked her to post a letter. Seeing Barrett’s name and Greenwoods he painted prolifically in the years that followed. The fact that he apparently pro- address on this tacit invitation, she visited him two days later. Over the course of duced little art between the early to mid- 1970s and the mid- to late 1980s makes Untitled 26 (cat. 32), 1979, crayon on paper, the 15 years that she knew Barrett, she found in him a man who, although not the evidence which does exist from the time all the more fascinating. dimensions unknown. Known to exist always wishing to be visited, was invariably kind and had a notably English sense of humour. One who, interestingly, was intrigued by the Television Personalities’ single “I Know Where Syd Barrett Lives” (1981). While Barrett was at the Greenwoods mission in Essex, where he was to stay for After leaving the Greenwoods mission in Essex, Barrett returned briefly to his two or three years, a Dutch fan, then in her mid-teens, visited on 20 February flat in Chelsea Cloisters in London, before walking home to St Margaret’s Square 1979. (She wishes to remain anonymous.)84 As she approached, she saw a few in Cambridge.90 men outside by a fire, chopping wood. One of them was Barrett who, satisfied that What is clear is that Barrett was not inactive during this period, as is usually she was not a member of the press, allowed her to visit. Travelling from London assumed. This work has a place in his artistic development. Although Untitled 25 to Essex while he remained there, and then to Cambridge after his return home, and Untitled 26 were swiftly made and are fairly undeveloped, the comparable col- over the next 15 years she would visit Barrett at weekends around four times a ouration and the way in which they use the page are appealing. Design for a Mural year. They were to become friends. for the Blue Trailer, too, is more thoughtfully structured than one might initially On the day of their first meeting, Barrett producedUntitled 25 (cat. 31, p. 181) think. With the two triangles originally all black before being overpainted, and as part of occupational therapy. In this manner he had also created Untitled 20 with thick red paint seemingly left squeezed straight onto the lower chassis of the (cat. 26, p. 219) shortly after leaving Pink Floyd in 1968,85 and would go on to trailer, his style combines his earlier use of thickly applied paints with an ongoing make other pieces given to his Dutch friend in 1979 – namely Design for a Mural interest in geometrical shapes. Similarly, Untitled 25 shows some remaining influ- for the Blue Trailer (cat. 33, p. 221), Untitled 26 (cat. 32), and Untitled 27 (cat. 34). ence of the Abstract Expressionists as well as of their artistic forebears. As Miles The name and date on Untitled 25 (“R. Barratt 20.2.79”) – in addition to Barrett’s points out, there is a limited number of ways to work with squares and other own signature – and the title and date (“11.9.79”) of the Design for a Mural for the shapes. Yet, a few pieces suggest that, although created in a mission during what Blue Trailer, were written, she recalls, by a member of staff working at Greenwoods. Untitled 27 (cat. 34), 1979, watercolour on is thought to be his least prolific period, his work continued to obtain a certain The specificity of the latter’s title suggests it was almost certainly not one given paper, dimensions unknown. Originally attached consistency. by Barrett himself. to Design for a Mural for the Blue Trailer (cat. Untitled 25 points to the continuing influence on Barrett of de Kooning, the Comprising two joined sheets of paper, Design for a Mural for the Blue Trailer 33), this painting is known to exist colour schemes and layouts of whose Still Life (1945) – reproduced in Barbara

 Barrett Art  Hess’s book De Kooning which Barrett later owned – or Untitled Painting (c.1942) are not far from Barrett’s here. Miles suggests he had accumulated “a vocabulary of shapes and colours and techniques”. At the end of the 1970s, as at the start of the decade, he was finding new paths after the minimalism of previous black paintings. Miles locates Untitled 25 on the side of de Kooning most influenced by Arshile Gorky, and notes further similarities with Paul Klee’s way of smudging his colours and with the work of Richard Diebenkorn. Untitled 26 is a rare example of Barrett focusing on a figure, albeit an outline as in Untitled 28. It stands in front of a house, solitary, on a kind of border like Caspar David Friedrich’s Wanderer Above the Sea of Fog (1818), although Barrett’s figure seems to be facing the viewer. InDe Kooning, Hess compares Rothko’s and Barrett’s lost work Untitled 85 (cat. 92), in a Image from a contact sheet of 5 June 2004 The lost painting Untitled 83 (cat. 90), in a Newman’s Color Fields to Romantic works by J.M.W. Turner (Barrett later owned contact sheet from 9 January 2006 contact sheet of 17 January 2006 a postcard of Ulysses deriding Polyphemus – Homer’s Odyssey) and Friedrich’s The Monk by the Sea (1808-10).91 Though his colours in Untitled 26 are closer to those of late Edvard Munch, Barrett’s own late work does indeed show a combination of interests in landscape and abstraction. In these works Barrett is still pursuing an abstract influence, but more within a tradition preceding the Expressionists, using shapes – as in Untitled 15 (cat. 20, p. 199), Untitled 29 (cat. 36) or, later still, Untitled 49 (cat. 56, p. 247) – in rigorously geometrical ways. Apparently unwittingly on Barrett’s part, and decidedly unde- veloped, the ideas in these pictures nonetheless show him moving away from ini- tial interests and into his own style, picking up from the originality of Untitled 24 at the start of the decade. This image, from a contact sheet of 17 Barrett’s lost painting Untitled 75 (cat. 82), Untitled 79 (cat. 86), in a contact sheet of January 2006, shows Untitled 77 (cat. 84) in a contact sheet of 17 January 2006 9 January 2006 None of Barrett’s work from the 1990s survives, but three photographs taken differently from in its full photographic form by him, now destroyed, are said to show the kind of art he was producing. Ian Barrett commented just after the time of these pictures that his uncle was “very are clearly from the same hand as his landscapes, including the early Untitled 5. interested in geometric patterns and repeated shapes” as one might see “in tiles According to Rosemary, his paintings emerged from within. Yet what came from and weaving”.92 More refined than the pieces from the late19 70s, the three 1990s within also came to bear upon the way he interpreted the world without. photographs reveal an ongoing experimentation with shapes, their textures and Stern says that, like Paul Nash, Barrett was an artist “embedded in the English combinations, and with colour. Untitled 30 (cat. 37) bears some resemblance to landscape and embedded in English culture”. Indeed, Nash’s photographs of Untitled 16, while Untitled 29 is not dissimilar to the work of Hans Hofmann, or to “Old Harry Rock, Ballard Head, Dorset”, a “Stone Gate Post”, a “Monolith in the designs of Edward Wadsworth for the Omega Workshops, who strove to close Arcadia”, and Stonehenge are not dissimilar to Barrett’s imagery in his purely the division between decorative and fine arts.93 As is suggested by the colours in abstract paintings Untitled 80, Untitled 81, Untitled 82, and Untitled 85 (cat. 92).94 these works, and in those in Untitled 28 (cat. 35), Barrett would occasionally paint Nash used his photographs of an “Avebury Sentinel” and a “Stone Personage, detailed geometrical works at the same time as his abstract work. Rosemary recalls Avebury” for his paintings Landscape of the Megaliths (1933–4) and Equivalents for that one day he made Untitled 48 (cat. 55) and Untitled 49 “with a ruler [taking] the Megaliths (1935), both of which were reproduced in a book Barrett owned.95 In hours over it”, and the following day did “something abstract”. While the former Nash’s paintings, the stones become “personages” in their own right, a reminder of was a design for a rug that Barrett never made, it is not clear if his design for a Matisse’s landscapes taking on surprising forms. The genesis of Barrett’s abstracts mural for a blue trailer was ever used. Painting his house and all of its often home- Untitled 80 and Untitled 86 (cat. 93, p. 237) might have a similar background. made contents, he was interested in the position of art in the living environment. Untitled 29 (cat. 36), c.1993–4, and Untitled Despite owning maps and atlases, Barrett travelled rarely. Likewise, although 30 (cat. 37), c.1993–4. Neither Barrett’s seldom sketching outdoors, he took photographs from which to work, as he did ear- originals nor the photographs of them survive lier in his life. The combination of these methods – painting from photographs but Miles observes that, structurally, Barrett’s late abstract Untitled 80 (cat. 87, p. 234) also from his own head – helps explain the style of late landscapes such as Untitled – like Untitled 81 (cat. 88, p. 251) and Untitled 82 (cat. 89, p. 235) – is much like a 91 (cat. 98, p. 240) and Untitled 92 (cat. 99, p. 241). He would never spend more Matisse, with its definition of a shape through the use of a shadow on one side and than a day on the same work, as Rosemary has said, which makes the consistency white on the other. Although Matisse never painted a full abstraction, he produced The lost Untitled 57 (cat. 64), from a contact of his late abstracts all the more striking, and suggests that his variety was actively landscapes that achieved the effect. In his late period, Barrett’s pure abstracts sheet of 29 March 2005 chosen – an act of agency – and not the outcome of any hampered development.

 Barrett Art  Unfortunately, none of these works – Untitled 69 (cat. 76, p. 250), Untitled 70 Tortoise and therefore does not share its name.) Similarly, the title Academic Scene (cat. 77, p. 250), Untitled 75 (cat. 82), Untitled 76 (cat. 83, p. 251), Untitled 77 (cat. 84, seems rather formal for Barrett but, remembered by Maggy Taylor as accom- p. 251), and Untitled 79 (cat. 86) – exists other than in Barrett’s photographs. panying the piece when it was displayed at his college’s end-of-year show, and According to Rosemary, he would coat the page in wax, adding paint and then embodying the centrality of bikes in Cambridge, it is justified. (Maggy does not crayon over it to make the paper bubble, and allow the colours and the materials recall Untitled 8, sold at the same exhibition, as having had a name.) Said to be to interact. Similar to his use of wax in works such as Untitled 80 and to his ear- from the same year as Academic Scene, the name “Portrait of a Girl”, as used as a lier experiments with surface texture, the effect can be seen in his photograph of description at the time of the painting’s sale in 1994, might have had a similar gen- Untitled 69. According to Miles, the pieces are reminiscent of the work of Abstract esis to that of the print, if indeed the title is genuine. With the painting untraced, Expressionists such as James Brooks or Franz Kline, or even Hans Hartung, with its name and its dating hold. The title of Design for a Mural for the Blue Trailer, some colours similar to Philip Guston. De Kooning is in there, as is Pollock with though attributed to somebody working with Barrett, has survived by virtue of its works such as Gothic (1944) and Cathedral (1947) – although, as Miles points out, being on the picture. Barrett’s long lines are not like Pollock’s in Blue Poles (1952), for example. Barrett Photograph by Barrett, c.2002–3 Given the rarity of its undisputed title, Little Red Rooster, Rosemary believes, is working on a much smaller scale, without dripping the paint on. His brush- “was probably something to do with what [Barrett and Libby] were talking about work is expressive, and structure is added at the end, although in fact these works or was happening at the time”, such as the release of the song of this name. Libby are probably less gestural than they might appear. Not dissimilar from using a agrees, saying the title was “just a phrase that was very much in parlance with the ruler towards geometrical shapes in, say, Untitled 70, Untitled 76, and Untitled 79, word red in it, and his painting was red”. As a joke, Barrett had also asked her to the consistency of the dominant lines is surprising considering their shapes, and call the painting Red Nativity, as her parents were likely to appreciate the religious seems to have been achieved using some kind of stencil, in the same way that sentiment of this, given the painting’s Madonna and Child. Barrett used a gasket as a device for Untitled 8. Conjecturing about his title Self-Portrait, Libby suggests that names given by Although Barrett’s late work does not always show a “preponderance of Barrett were more the result of “[what] he called them rather than the title of the landscapes”,96 of those examples which do exist, his Untitled 72, Untitled 73, painting”, adding, “I think it’s how he knew what they were”. Would it be fair to Untitled 74, and Untitled 78 convey his sense of English nature, which in Untitled say, then, that although some names must hold, none of Barrett’s works has a con- 91 and Untitled 92 is combined with his tendency towards abstraction. clusive, individual title? From the age of 17, when he and Libby used to drive there, Barrett absorbed and subsequently painted the Gog Magog Hills, a location whose brooding power Untitled 59 (cat. 66) before it was completed. would have been visceral to a Cambridge artist, as Anthony Stern remarks. His Images taken from a contact sheet of 23 May In total, as it stands at present, 49 artworks by Roger Barrett are known to exist. broad brushstrokes in Untitled 92 structure the image of the hills as his crayons 2005. The finished picture exists as a photograph Given Barrett’s habit of giving works away – and given the rumours encountered shape his abstracts, while his use of light conveys a sense of drama in the hills’ during the course of this book’s production of as many as five unseen pieces – it is relief. The painting bears some similarity to the colours of Ivon Hitchens who, like highly likely that others exist, especially his Portrait of a Girl. Of the destroyed art- de Staël, painted landscapes in an abstract way. There might also be a lasting influ- works, 31 are recorded in Barrett’s surviving photographs, 3 in photographs pub- ence of Peter Lanyon, who was important in the early 1960s, and who took a ges- lished in 1996 but since destroyed, 8 in contact sheets, and 2 in slides. Another 7 tural approach to landscape painting. Finally, in a late collage (Untitled 32, cat. 39, artworks can be seen in photographs taken by other people. Then there are dia- p. 244), he is possibly looking to further his abstraction of the local countryside. grams and a small number of paintings in his notebooks, as well as artwork in his letters, poetry, and designs for record sleeves and a flyer. Photographs by Barrett, c.2005 Barrett’s art, one might say, captures that ineffable absence which character- As leader of the band touted by EMI as “spokesmen for a new movement which izes his life. involves experimentation in all the arts”, Barrett was keen to reject labels applied to Pink Floyd’s music. “People can call it anything they like”, he said in an August 1967 interview, adding, “we don’t like labels to be stuck on things”.97 Libby The lost works Untitled 40 (cat. 47) and says that as an artist, too, “it wasn’t important to him what things were called”. Untitled 41 (cat. 48), from a contact sheet of Rosemary concurs: “It wasn’t him to [give] names . . . he never did it and he never 5 June 2004 wanted it.” Many of the titles used for Barrett works hitherto have been projec- tions by people other than him. Since the auction of his effects in November 2006, many pictures have accumulated three or four names. In many cases, the titles (which, excruciatingly, have been subjected to critical analysis) invest the works with a significance Barrett did not intend. He did, however, title some pictures. It can be assumed that he gave Tortoise its name, if not voluntarily then at least for the review in the Cambridge News. (Despite probably using the same basic image, Untitled 6 is not an edition of

 Barrett Art  Untitled 1 Self-Portrait Cat. 1 Cat. 2 c.1961–3 c.1961–2 Hand-cut glass Oil on board tesserae on 31 × 23 cm painted plaster 52 × 42 cm

 Barrett Art  Left Untitled 2 Cat. 3 c.1962–4 Acrylic on board 68 × 53 cm

Right Untitled 3 Cat. 4 c.1962–4 Acrylic on board 60 × 29.5 cm

Following page left Untitled 6 Cat. 7 c.1963 Soft ground etching on paper 48 × 38 cm

Following page right Tortoise Cat. 8 1963 Monotype on paper 41 × 30 cm

 Barrett Art   Barrett Art  Untitled 7 Untitled 8 Cat. 9 Cat. 10 1963 1963 Ink, pastel, and watercolour on paper Pencil, oil, and coffee on board 55 × 68 cm 59.7 × 69.2 cm

 Barrett Art  Untitled 9 Academic Scene Cat. 12 Cat. 13 1964 1964 Lino print on card, Two lino prints on paper covered in cellophane 51.2 × 39 cm 43 × 26 cm

 Barrett Art  Untitled 12 Little Red Rooster Cat. 16 Cat. 17 c.1964–5 c.1964–5 Oil on board Oil, canvas, and plastic on canvas 63 × 83 cm 94 × 125 cm

 Barrett Art  Above Untitled 14 Cat. 19 1964 Six lino prints on paper 39 × 49 cm

Right Untitled 15 Cat. 20 c.1964–5 Six panels of lino print on paper 23 × 11.5 cm each The whole 58 × 48 cm

 Barrett Art  Untitled 16 Cat. 21 c.1964–5 Eight lino prints on paper 43.5 × 33.5 cm

Untitled 17 Cat. 22 1964 Clay 15 × 23 cm

 Barrett Art  Untitled 18 Untitled 19 Cat. 23 Cat. 24 1965 1965 Ink on paper Ink on paper 44 × 29.5 cm 47 × 21 cm

 Barrett Art  Fart Enjoy Cat. 25 c.95– Ink, pencil, watercolour, acrylic, typescript, paper, and collage on fourteen sheets of cardboard, every two sheets taped back-to-back to create a seven- page booklet of which only the second and third pages are still attached Each page 25.4 × 20.3 cm

204 Barrett Art 205  Barrett Art   Barrett Art   Barrett Art   Barrett Art   Barrett Art   Barrett Art  Untitled 20 Cat. 26 c.1968 Strings, twine, and shells on cork 28 × 19 cm

 Barrett Art  Left Untitled 24 Cat. 30 1971 Oil and coffee on canvas 77 × 67 cm

Above Design for a Mural for the Blue Trailer Cat. 33 1979 Watercolour on two joined sheets of paper 40 × 79 cm

 Barrett Art  Untitled 31 Cat. 38 2001 Watercolour and pencil on paper 28.5 × 20 cm

Untitled 38 Cat. 45 2004 Watercolour on paper 20 × 27.5 cm

 Barrett Art  Left Untitled 55 Cat. 62 2005 Watercolour and crayon on paper 22 × 19 cm

Above Untitled 56 Cat. 63 c.2002–5 Watercolour on paper 9 × 15.5 cm

 Barrett Art  Untitled 64 Cat. 71 c.2005 Acrylic on paper 42 × 29.5 cm

Untitled 67 Cat. 74 c.2005 Pencil and watercolour on paper 24.3 × 34 cm

 Barrett Art  Untitled 68 Untitled 71 Cat. 75 Cat. 78 c.2005 c.2005 Ink on paper Ink on paper 15 × 18 cm 16 × 23 cm

 Barrett Art  Untitled 72 Untitled 73 Cat. 79 Cat. 80 2005 2005 Watercolour on paper Acrylic on paper 11 × 15.5 cm 16 × 19 cm

 Barrett Art  Untitled 74 Untitled 78 Cat. 81 Cat. 85 2005 c.2005–6 Watercolour and acrylic on paper Oil on board 17.8 × 20.3 cm 35 × 61 cm

 Barrett Art  Untitled 80 Untitled 82 Cat. 87 Cat. 89 c.2005–6 c.2005–6 Pencil, watercolour, and wax on paper Pencil, watercolour, and wax on paper 30 × 42 cm 21.5 × 29.5 cm

 Barrett Art  Untitled 84 Untitled 86 Cat. 91 Cat. 93 c.2005–6 c.2005–6 Watercolour and wax on paper Pencil, watercolour, and wax on paper 20 × 28 cm 30 × 42 cm

 Barrett Art  Untitled 88 Cat. 95 c.2006 Acrylic on paper 27.9 × 20.3 cm

Untitled 87 Cat. 94 c.2006 Pencil, watercolour, and wax on paper 18.5 × 18.5 cm

 Barrett Art  Untitled 91 Cat. 98 c.2006 Watercolour and acrylic on paper 55 × 37 cm

Untitled 92 Cat. 99 c.2006 Watercolour and acrylic on paper 29.5 × 41.5 cm

 Barrett Art  Untitled 94 Cat. 101 c.2004–6 Pencil on paper 29.7 × 21 cm

Untitled 93 Cat. 100 c.2004–6 Pencil on paper 11 × 10 cm

 Barrett Art  The following photographs, taken by Barrett between 2002 Top and 2006, are from two albums kept by him until his death. Untitled 36 Cat. 43 c.2002–3 One album contains 45 photographs and 11 sets of contact Second sheets. The photographs are organized in loose chronological Untitled 35 order, and in two instances are placed next to source images Cat. 42 c.2002–3 for his art.

The second album, with 132 photographs and two strips of negatives, is an assortment of images of paintings and source material, and is in places organized with labels of dates and locations.

Barrett photographed his art continually, as his contact sheets attest. His albums display the majority of his work – destroyed or otherwise – without repetition.

With the exception of the images shown elsewhere in this book, here are all the lost works photographed by their artist.

Top Untitled 32 Cat. 39 c.2002–3

Second (work on left) Left Untitled 33 Untitled 37 Cat. 40 Cat. 44 c.2002–3 c.2002–3 Second (work on right) Right Untitled 34 Untitled 39 Cat. 41 Cat. 46 c.2002–3 2004 Third (work on left) Untitled 36 Cat. 43 c.2002–3

Third (work on right) Untitled 35 Cat. 42 c.2002–3

Bottom Untitled 35 Cat. 42 c.2002–3

 Barrett Art  Top Left Untitled 42 Untitled 45 Cat. 49 Cat. 52 c.2004 c.2004

Middle Right Untitled 43 Untitled 47 Cat. 50 Cat. 54 c.2004 c.2004

Bottom Untitled 44 Cat. 51 2004

Top Untitled 48 Cat. 55 2004

Bottom Untitled 49 Cat. 56 2004

 Barrett Art  Top Top Untitled 50 Untitled 54 Cat. 57 Cat. 61 2004 2004

Second Second Untitled 51 Untitled 59 Cat. 58 Cat. 66 c.2004 2005

Third Third Untitled 52 Untitled 60 Cat. 59 Cat. 67 2004 2005

Bottom Bottom Untitled 53 Untitled 61 Cat. 60 Cat. 68 2004 2005

 Barrett Art  Top Top Untitled 62 Untitled 76 Cat. 69 Cat. 83 c.2005 c.2005

Second Second Untitled 63 Untitled 77 Cat. 70 Cat. 84 c.2005 c.2005

Left Left Untitled 69 Untitled 81 Cat. 76 Cat. 88 c.2005 c.2005–6

Right Right Untitled 70 Untitled 89 Cat. 77 Cat. 96 c.2005 c.2006

 Barrett Art  Notes Catalogue Raisonné 11 Portrait of a Girl, 196. Oil on board, 3 Untitled 18, 196. Ink on paper,  × 9. cm 3 Untitled 27, 1979. Watercolour on paper, 61 × 61 cm dimensions unknown Where an artwork is described as being “no later than” a certain date, this is according to the earliest contact sheet on which it appears. Barrett’s precise dates on his work are also given, where available. 1 Untitled 9, 196. Lino print on card, covered in  Untitled 19, 196. Ink on paper, 7 × 1 cm 3 Untitled 28, c.1993– cellophane, 3 × 6 cm

1 Untitled 1, c.1961–3. Hand-cut glass tesserae on painted plaster,  ×  cm 13 Academic Scene, 196. Two lino prints on paper,  Fart Enjoy, c.196–6. Ink, pencil, watercolour, 36 Untitled 29, c.1993– 1. × 39 cm acrylic, typescript, paper, and collage on fourteen sheets of cardboard, every two  Self-Portrait, c.1961–. Oil on board, 31 × 3 cm sheets taped back-to-back to create a 1 Untitled 10, 196 seven-page booklet of which only the second 37 Untitled 30, c.1993– and third pages are still attached; each page . × 0.3 cm 3 Untitled 2, c.196–. Acrylic on board, 68 × 3 cm 1 Untitled 11, c.196 6 Untitled 20, c.1968. Strings, twine, and shells on 38 Untitled 31, 001 (8 / 01). Watercolour and cork, 8 × 19 cm pencil on paper, 8. × 0 cm

 Untitled 3, c.196–. Acrylic on board, 60 × 9. cm 16 Untitled 12, c.196–. Oil on board, 7 Untitled 21, c.1969 39 Untitled 32, c.00–3 63 × 83 cm

 Untitled 4, c.196– 17 Little Red Rooster, c.196–. Oil, canvas, 8 Untitled 22, c.1969 0 Untitled 33, c.00–3 and plastic on canvas, 9 × 1 cm

6 Untitled 5, c.1963– 18 Untitled 13, 196. Oil on board, 9 Untitled 23, c.1969 1 Untitled 34, c.00–3 0 × 7 cm

7 Untitled 6, c.1963. Soft ground etching on paper, 8 × 38 cm 19 Untitled 14, 196. Six lino prints on paper, 30 Untitled 24, 1971. Oil and coffee on canvas,  Untitled 35, c.00–3 39 × 9 cm 77 × 67 cm

8 Tortoise, 1963. Monotype on paper, 1 × 30 cm 0 Untitled 15, c.196–. Six panels of lino 31 Untitled 25, 1979 (0 /  / 79). Crayon on 3 Untitled 36, c.00–3 print on paper, 3 × 11. cm each, the paper, dimensions unknown whole 8 × 8 cm 9 Untitled 7, 1963. Ink, pastel, and watercolour on paper,  × 68 cm 1 Untitled 16, c.196–. Eight lino prints on paper, 3 Untitled 26, 1979. Crayon on paper,  Untitled 37, c.00–3 3. × 33. cm dimensions unknown

10 Untitled 8, 1963. Pencil, oil, and coffee on board, 9.7 × 69. cm  Untitled 17, 196. Clay, 1 × 3 cm 33 Design for a Mural for the Blue  Untitled 38, 00. Watercolour on paper, Trailer, 1979 (11 / 9 / 79). 0 × 7. cm Watercolour on two joined sheets of paper, 0 × 79 cm

 Barrett Catalogue Raisonné  46 Untitled 39, 2004 (7 / 5 / 04) 58 Untitled 51, c.2004 70 Untitled 63, c.2005 (no later than 82 Untitled 75, c.2005 (no later than 2 / 8 / 05) 5 / 12 / 05)

47 Untitled 40, c.2004 (no later than 59 Untitled 52, 2004 (20 / 6 / 04) 71 Untitled 64, c.2005 (no later than 3 / 10 / 05). 83 Untitled 76, c.2005 (no later than 5 / 6 / 04) Acrylic on paper, 42 × 29.5 cm 5 / 12 / 05)

48 Untitled 41, c.2004 (no later than 60 Untitled 53, 2004 (23 / 7 / 04) 72 Untitled 65, c.2004–6 84 Untitled 77, c.2005 (no later than 5 / 6 / 04) 5 / 12 / 05)

49 Untitled 42, c.2004 (no later than 61 Untitled 54, 2004 (29 / 8 / 04) 73 Untitled 66, c.2004–6 85 Untitled 78, c.2005–6 (no later than 5 / 6 / 04) 9 / 1 / 06). Oil on board, 35 × 61 cm

50 Untitled 43, c.2004 (no later than 62 Untitled 55, 2005. Watercolour and 74 Untitled 67, c.2005. Pencil and 86 Untitled 79, c.2005–6 (no later than 5 / 6 / 04) crayon on paper, 22 × 19 cm watercolour on paper, 24.3 × 34 cm 9 / 1 / 06)

51 Untitled 44, 2004 (signed 04: no later than 63 Untitled 56, c.2002–5 (no later than 75 Untitled 68, c.2005 (no later than 87 Untitled 80, c.2005–6 (no later than 5 / 6 / 04) 25 / 1 / 05). Watercolour on paper, 5 / 12 / 05). Ink on paper, 15 × 18 cm 9 / 1 / 06). Pencil, watercolour, and wax 9 × 15.5 cm on paper, 30 × 42 cm

52 Untitled 45, c.2004 (no later than 5 / 6 / 04) 64 Untitled 57, c.2005 (no later than 76 Untitled 69, c.2005 (no later than 5 / 12 / 05) 88 Untitled 81, c.2005–6 29 / 3 / 05)

53 Untitled 46, c.2004 (no later than 65 Untitled 58, c.2005 (no later than 77 Untitled 70, c.2005 (no later than 5 / 12 / 05) 89 Untitled 82, c.2005–6. Pencil, 5 / 6 / 04) 29 / 3 / 05) watercolour, and wax on paper, 21.5 × 29.5 cm

54 Untitled 47, c.2004 66 Untitled 59, 2005 (25 / 4 / 05) 78 Untitled 71, c.2005 (no later than 90 Untitled 83, c.2005–6 (no later than 5 / 12 / 05). Ink on paper, 16 × 23 cm 9 / 1 / 06)

55 Untitled 48, 2004 (6 / 04) 67 Untitled 60, 2005 (5 / 7 / 05) 79 Untitled 72, 2005 (12 / 05– no later than 91 Untitled 84, c.2005–6. Watercolour and 5th). Watercolour on paper, 11 × 15.5 cm wax on paper, 20 × 28 cm

56 Untitled 49, 2004 (15 / 6 / 04) 68 Untitled 61, 2005 (29 / 7 / 05) 80 Untitled 73, 2005 (12 / 05– no later than 92 Untitled 85, c.2005–6 (no later than 5th). Acrylic on paper, 16 × 19 cm 9 / 1 / 06)

57 Untitled 50, 2004 (19 / 6 / 04) 69 Untitled 62, c.2005 (no later than 81 Untitled 74, 2005 (12 / 05– no later than 93 Untitled 86, c.2005–6 (no later than 2 / 8 / 05) 5th). Watercolour and acrylic on paper, 9 / 1 / 06). Pencil, watercolour, and wax 17.8 × 20.3 cm on paper, 30 × 42 cm

 Barrett Catalogue Raisonné  94 Untitled 87, c.2006. Pencil, watercolour, and wax on paper, 18.5 × 18.5 cm

95 Untitled 88, c.2006. Acrylic on paper, 27.9 × 20.3 cm

96 Untitled 89, c.2006

97 Untitled 90, 2006 (1 / 06– no later than 17th). Mixed media on paper, 30 × 42 cm

98 Untitled 91, c.2006 (no later than 17 / 3 / 06). Watercolour and acrylic on paper, 55 × 37 cm

99 Untitled 92, c.2006 (no later than 17 / 3 / 06). Watercolour and acrylic on paper, 29.5 × 41.5 cm

100 Untitled 93, c.2004–6. Pencil on paper, 11 × 10 cm

101 Untitled 94, c.2004–6. Pencil on paper, 29.7 × 21 cm

 Barrett Endnotes 20 Chapman, Irregular Head, p. 59 65 Willis, Madcap, p. 47 21 Chapman, Irregular Head, p. 137 66 Andrew Male, “The lost art of a lost artist”, 22 Chapman, Irregular Head, p.137 MOJO, February 2000, p. 19 Except where stated, information and 23 Geoff Hassell, Camberwell School of Arts and Crafts: 67 Chapman, Irregular Head, p. 8 quotations from Barrett’s friends and family its students and teachers, 1943–1960 (Woodbridge: 68 Chapman, Irregular Head, p. 8 Antique Collectors’ Club, 1995), p. 20 69 Chapman, Irregular Head, p. 8 are taken from the following sources: 24 “Rob Chapman On Meatball Fulton On Syd”, 70 “Rob Chapman On Meatball Fulton On Syd” available via {www.sydbarrett.com}. Accessed 71 Paul Drummond, “In My Room”, MOJO, 2 June 2010 March 2010, p. 82 Viv Brans: Interviews and correspondence 25 Watts, “The madcap laughs”, p. 15 72 Mick Rock, “The madcap who named Pink between 19 August and 30 November 2010 26 Watts, “The madcap laughs”, p. 15 Floyd”, Rolling Stone, 23 December 1971, p. 18 27 Chapman, Irregular Head, p. 232 73 Chapman, Irregular Head, p. 311 Rosemary Breen (neé Barrett): Interview 28 Chapman, Irregular Head, p. 232 74 Willis, “My lovably ordinary brother Syd” on 13 October 2010 and correspondence in 29 Chapman, Irregular Head, p. 49 75 Drummond, “In My Room”, p. 82 30 Hassell, Camberwell, p. 20 76 Chapman, Irregular Head, p. 232 October 2009 31 Interview with Andrew Rawlinson, 77 Chapman, Irregular Head, p. 232 Libby Chisman (neé Gausden): Interviews 18 October 2010 78 Mick Rock, “The madcap”, p. 18 32 Chapman, Irregular Head, p. 49 79 Chapman, Irregular Head, p. 325 and correspondence between 1 October 2009 33 Chapman, Irregular Head, p. 127 80 Mick Rock, “The madcap”, p. 18 and 14 December 2010 34 Palacios, Dark Globe, p. 56 81 Chapman, Irregular Head, p. 325 35 David Gale to WS, 24 October 2010 82 Chapman, Irregular Head, p. 372 Barry Miles: Interview on 18 October 2010 36 John Gordon, “Portrait of the Artist as a Young 83 Watkinson and Anderson, Crazy Diamond, p.136 Jenny Spires: Interviews and correspondence Man”, MOJO, September 2006, p. 52, and 84 The information which follows was supplied Watkinson and Anderson, Crazy Diamond, p. 28 by the fan over a phone conversation of between 30 September 2009 and 4 December 37 John Gordon to WS, 1 December 2010 14 December 2010 2010 38 Chapman, Irregular Head, p. 127 85 It is interesting to note the striking connection 39 Chapman, Irregular Head, p. 62 between Untitled 20 and a Victorian lady sketched Anthony Stern: Interviews and 40 Chapman, Irregular Head, p. 62 in a letter sent to Libby earlier in the 1960s. correspondence between 23 October and 41 Interview with Andrew Rawlinson, 18 October Libby recalls that Barrett taught her how to draw 2010 Victorian ladies’ bonnets for a school project 10 December 2010 42 Palacios, in Dark Globe, p. 92, identifies the face as 86 A version of the painting is reproduced on pages Pitney’s 90–1 of A Fish Out of Water 43 Chapman, Irregular Head, p. 260 87 Ferrari, Fish Out of Water, pp. 87–9 44 The book was Keith Brindley’s Starting Electronics 88 White is described as having “a rough picture, 1 “They’re all in the PINK!” Disc & Music Echo, (probably 3rd edition, Newnes, 2004), and was drawn in colour pencil with sinewy lines all over it, 8 April 1967, p. 10 signed and dated by Barrett “RB. 8.April.05”. just like a bunch of naïve approximations of geo- 2 Rob Chapman, Syd Barrett: A Very Irregular Head Thank you to Kieran Short for his assistance metrical patterns”, in Michka Assayas and James (London: Faber and Faber, 2010), p. 374 45 David Parker, Random Precision: Recording the Johnson, originally in Actuel (September 1982). A 3 Tim Willis, “My lovably ordinary brother Syd”, Music of Syd Barrett 1965–1974 (London: Cherry translation, by Jaak Geerts, is available at {www. The Times, 16 July 2006 Red Books, 2001), p. 77 brain-damage.co.uk/syd-barrett-interviews/1982- 4 Julian Palacios, Syd Barrett & Pink Floyd: Dark 46 Chapman, Irregular Head, p. 342 actuel-magazine-2.html}. Accessed 31 October Globe (London: Plexus, 2010), p. 425 47 Luca Ferrari, Syd Barrett: A Fish Out of Water 2010 5 Julian Palacios, Lost in the Woods: Syd Barrett and (Rome: Stampa Alternativa, 1996), p. 31 89 Information about the sale and documentation the Pink Floyd (London: Boxtree, 1998), p. 12 48 Willis, Madcap, p. 142 have been supplied by the buyer, who wishes to 6 Mike Watkinson and Pete Anderson, Crazy 49 Chapman, Irregular Head, p. 398 remain anonymous Diamond: Syd Barrett & the Dawn of Pink Floyd 50 Chapman, Irregular Head, p. 398 90 Chapman, Irregular Head, p. 354. That the walk is (London: Omnibus Press, 2001), p. 33 51 Willis, “My lovably ordinary brother Syd” often held up as an example of Barrett’s mental 7 Rob Chapman et al., “Seer. Painter. Piper. 52 Ferrari, Fish Out of Water, p. 39 state might be justified, but he had made that Prisoner . . .”, MOJO, September 2006, p. 54 53 Chapman, Irregular Head, p. 373 journey once before in 1965, on that occasion by 8 Michael Watts, “The madcap laughs”, Melody 54 Information from Anthony Day is based upon bicycle, in order to visit Viv Maker, 27 March 1971, p. 15 two letters from him, undated but October and 91 Barbara Hess, De Kooning (Cologne: Taschen, 9 Chapman, Irregular Head, p. 13 November 2009 2007), p. 51. Barrett owned the 2004 edition 10 Tim Willis, Madcap: The Half-life of Syd Barrett, 55 Willis, Madcap, p. 51 92 Willis, Madcap, p. 144 Pink Floyd’s Lost Genius (London: Short Books, 56 A.D., “Milton art display”, Cambridge News, 93 At his death Barrett owned Harold Osborne 2002), p. 31 30 May 1964, p. 7 (ed.), The Oxford Companion to the Decorative Arts 11 Stephen Pyle suggests that he and Barrett enrolled 57 John Gordon to WS, 23 November 2010 (Oxford: OUP, reprint 1986). In a late notebook, on these courses in late 1961 or early 1962. (All 58 Willis, Madcap, p. 51 Barrett refers to “the art critic R. Fry, founder of information from Stephen Pyle taken from cor- 59 The buyer has confirmed to me, in a conversa- the Omega workshop”. respondence of 4 October 2009). Since Libby tion of 28 August 2010, that the picture was not 94 The photographs are reproduced in Paul Nash, recalls Barrett to have been fifteen at the time, late bought at “Two Young Painters” Fertile Image, ed. Margaret Nash (London: Faber, 1961 seems right 60 Chapman, “Seer. Painter. Piper. Prisoner . . .”, 1951) 12 Chapman, Irregular Head, p. 36 p. 50 95 Charles Harrison, English Art and Modernism 13 Alison Barraclough to Will Shutes, 30 September 61 Maggy Taylor to WS, 28 August 2010. This view is 1900–1939 (2nd edition, London: Yale UP, 1994), 2010 shared by Libby and Rosemary pp. 296 and 297. Barrett signed and dated his 14 Chapman, “Seer. Painter. Piper. Prisoner...”, p. 54 62 Libby has also mentioned that Barrett admired copy “R Barrett 2005” 15 Chapman, Irregular Head, p. 39 Soutine, as has David Henderson (in Chapman, 96 Chapman, Irregular Head, p. 373 16 Chapman, Irregular Head, p. 45 Irregular Head, p. 49) 97 Palacios, Lost in the Woods, p. 133 17 Rodney Wilson to WS. Except where stated, infor- 63 Maggy Taylor to WS, 28 August 2010 and mation about Camberwell supplied by Rodney 2 November 2010. Roger Waters, who also knew Wilson in correspondence of 29 April 2010 and the Taylors at the time, describes the making of 14 June 2010 the painting in the DVD The Pink Floyd & Syd 18 Chapman, Irregular Head, p. 48 Barrett Story 19 Chapman, Irregular Head, p. 48 64 Chapman, Irregular Head, p. 49

Endnotes  Appendix I books, then what remains are more fragmented – though not Appendix III book covers in the Victoria and Albert Museum. In the “Books” The History of Art much shorter – versions. It is likely that Barrett wrote, photo- Notebooks section he lists “Tate, Courtauld. V+A, and Yale”. From these copied, and destroyed his notes as part of a constant process, in and other such instances, it is clear that to Barrett, writing is For the last decade or two of his life, Barrett was known to have much the same way as he created his art. Notes written by Barrett that appear to bear no relevance to art strongly associated with art. He wrapped many of his own books been writing a book about the history of art. Considering the are similar to his scrapbooks – miscellaneous collections of appro- in home-made covers, including an abstract collage for his copy theme of destruction surrounding his art, and the mythology priated image and text. His A4 ring binder, on whose spine he has of The Compact Oxford English Dictionary of Current English.17 around his life, it is appropriate that the contents, and indeed the Appendix II written “TEXTS”,13 contains lists of cloud types; “Major Cities His notes about history in his main notebook run concurrently book’s existence, remain unclear. Scrapbooks in Great Britain” with their demographics and some historical with his art notes, so that to him “history of art” seems, literally, The rumour of the book began, says Rob Chapman, in the characteristics; a cutting from the Guardian concerning British to be history and art. mid-1980s,1 when Barrett resumed his painting and started a Of the scrapbooks auctioned, a red Silvine one contains, among cathedrals;14 pages from the electronics magazine Elektor.15 The historical notes in TEXTS cover subjects such as “War considerable collection of books on art.2 By 1990 he was writing other things: an article on the environment;8 university reviews; a A page in TEXTS entitled “Slides” might refer to some that Between France and England” and “The Hundred Years War”, what his brother-in-law identified as a History of Art. Covering piece on African trade; two pasted pictures of beaches; an article Rosemary says he made, possibly from photographs taken at while a small notebook carries passages on “Ten Centuries of “all aspects of the subject”,3 by August 1995 it was complete.4 about beach tents; a piece on the Tour de France (with its echoes the Victoria and Albert Museum (to which he refers). Listings Anglo Saxons” and “The Philosophy of Priests”. On reason According to these and associated reports, it would seem that of Academic Scene);9 an image of 9 Volkswagen badges which acts such as “Single pot”, “Indian miniature”, “Islamic boxes”, and and faith he writes: “Mediaeval pictures were usually religeous, Barrett’s History of Art was written between the late 1980s and as reminder of his 1964–5 work in series; and an illustrated clip- “Mughal miniature painting” would support this, and show that and the reigning monarch portrayed in the classica[l] manner the mid-1990s. ping on the De Beers Millennium Star Diamond, which may Barrett is thinking visually, as does a “shoulder clasp” from of a Roman god is more in evidence in England; following the Rosemary’s comment in February 1994 that the book had have influenced the abstract shapes in Untitled 80, Untitled 81, Sutton Hoo that he mentions here. Elsewhere in his principal Rennaissence”. On the reverse of a page on cathedrals, he notes: “engaged him in the last two years” is therefore perplexing, as is and Untitled 82.10 Barrett was to write about geology and jewel- notebooks, he would make a watercolour copy of another item her qualification in 2010 – made in the context of his late note- lery elsewhere. from Sutton Hoo. The Uffizi. Florence. books – that “Roger did write a much more comprehensive very It is impossible to say whether such images were used towards The combination of image and text, as well as of cut-outs Madonna and Child by Cimabue. short book about [the] history of art in the year or two before he his art, though a small cutting referring to Camberwell is the only and photocopies, contributes to a sense of the notes – even those died” which remains unseen.5 Although seemingly contradictory, unambiguous link. which are written – being as visual as they are textual. Often, we This rare reference to a picture – presumably the Santa Trinita these dates suggest in fact that Barrett’s various writings are all A red WH Smith scrapbook is more revealing, even though are looking at photocopied images of notes as much as at the Madonna painted for the high altar of the church of Santa Trinita part of one continuous project concerning the history of art. only five of its fifty pages have been used. A clipping from notes themselves, just as when viewing Barrett’s art we often see (c.1280) – is repeated in the page of “Slides”. This is the only Reports about the content of the project have been consistent, December 2005 illustrates the work of four Turner Prize nominees: a photographic image rather than an original, even where the artwork Barrett refers to more than once in his writings. The however, amounting to “more than one hundred pages, typed in Simon Starling’s shed; Jim Lambie’s Kinks; Darren Almond’s If original might exist. picture itself is similar to The Virgin and Child (c.1260, probably A4 format, on both sides. One hundred pages . . . going back to I Had You; and Gillian Carnegie’s Lola.11 Evidence that Barrett’s For instance Barrett’s notes among his “Slides”, on certain Umbrian) in London’s National Gallery, a postcard of which the drawings of the caves and . . . [coming up to] our days, cen- interest in art was not restricted to old artists, this, however, is a English cathedrals and their architectural styles, probably refers Barrett mounts in his main notebook with the label “Icon. 12th tury after century” – a personal project for Barrett himself, “just rare reference to specific artists and their works. So are two cut- to corresponding images. In his pages on “Cathedrals” he focuses C.” Clearly it was an image he appreciated. It was partly the sub- to put in the book-case”.6 An impressive amount, two hundred tings from an article about the artist Ding Yi.12 From the same on the architectural and archival aspects of the buildings: ject matter of Little Red Rooster many years earlier. sides could nonetheless be called a “very short book”. source as the piece on the Turner Prize, the article reproduces The one page that makes up the Garden notebook would sum- After Barrett’s death, the following items were sold at auc- two works from Ding Yi’s Appearance of Crosses series that, like The gothic arch, and vaulted walls support ornamental marize the mode of Barrett’s notes. A keen gardener, he owned tion: a scrapbook with five pages used; a larger scrapbook; a Barrett’s work, are distinguished by date and number. The red in roofs, elaborate wood carving, and molded stone sculp- four books on the subject from the “Expert” series, apparently set of two notebooks labelled “Garden” and “Art”; a set of two Ding Yi’s work resembles Barrett’s Little Red Rooster, while the ture. High ceilings, incorporate fresco pictures, and large including The Garden Expert and The Tree & Shrub Expert,18 both notebooks of a few pages each; a ring binder with around 30 square panels are reminiscent of Untitled 15. stained glass windows are always a major part of a cathe- by Dr. D.G. Hessayon. The list of roses, in the form, “Handel. pages; and two, more substantial ring binders mostly on art. Barrett displays clippings in his scrapbooks in a manner dral. Libraries of treasures and books have been kept for Pink. 2000”, is of a piece with his notes on art. Where the notebooks are dated, or the cuttings within can be similar to his paintings, by mounting them on white sheets of centuries in the vaults open to visitors. In the notebook entitled Art, the notes follow the format: dated, they range from between 2004 and 2006. Some undated paper. The organization is peculiarly his, depicting aspects of his “Orphism. Braque. 1908”, or else a page will read: pages may be older, many being photocopies of originals of internal artistic landscape. The clipping from the Turner Prize is Barrett’s notes seem, at first glance, to be copied from a pamphlet, which Barrett subsequently disposed. The available notebooks cut up and rearranged so that it fits on the scrapbook page, while book, or manual. On closer reading, their characteristic tautol- 15. are a mixture of handwritten and typed notes, and of photo- the article about Ding Yi has been trimmed into shapes at the ogies and misplaced commas show they have been mediated Angelico. Botticelli. Da Vinci. copied pages of each format. expense of some content. through their writer, if not necessarily originated from him.16 Michelangelo. Perugino. Raphael. The notes dating from the last two years of Barrett’s life – when The cluster of clippings, covering a short period of time – According to Rosemary, Barrett’s poor eyesight may have 1455. he probably did write a History of Art – are most likely an indi- December 2005 to the Winter Olympics of February 2006, for hampered his enjoyment of his own library. As such, books came 445–1510. 1452–1519. cator of its content, if not identical. Rosemary’s comment about example – shows Barrett gathering images quickly, as he had to have both a visual and a textual impact upon him, which will the History from the 1990s being “an endless list of names and done in Fart Enjoy. It also speaks of his creative curiosity in his be best seen in his photographs of pages from one of his books. 1473–1564. 1450–1523. 1483–1520. dates” would apply to the notes available and apparently to those later years. The incongruous subject matter is consistent with Among his “Slides” is a “Carolingian book cover” from the fifth which are unseen.7 Barrett, she says, was always writing, and it Barrett’s methodology as an artist. century as well as Italian and German ninth-century “Cloisonné Barrett presumably used his reference books to make notes on seems that if at any point he put together unified, substantial book cover[s]”. In his notes, Barrett refers to the Carolingian art. Nonetheless, this list of fifteenth-century artists is a fair

 Barrett Appendices  indication of his general accuracy. Irrespective of whether he was fragments from a larger project, such as the so-called History of 2600 BC”;36 and “Temple of pyramid of Khafre. 2500 BC”.37 paintings Ulysses deriding Polyphemus – Homer’s Odyssey, labelling working directly from books or from memory, his notes remain Art, gathered here into a new book generally about art. As with the top of one of Ding Yi’s pictures (see Appendix II), it “18th C. Turner” (actually 1829); the “19th C Pissarro” Fox an impressive indicator of his knowledge of art through the ages. These notebooks are less visual than those described elsewhere. Barrett has cut rather a large amount out of one of the two images Hill, Upper Norwood; the “Icon. 12th C.” of The Virgin and Child; Although notes like this tell us little about Barrett’s art and his However, there are maps of “Iraq + Arabia”, “The Middle East,” to which the final caption applies. The result is that the temple is a “16th C. Brueghel”, The Adoration of the Kings [by Jan Brueghel opinions, they are remarkable for the clarity, conciseness, and of North and South America (entitled “Pre classic, Classic and seen through a focus on an aisle within it. Indeed, Barrett linked the Elder]; and Farms near Auvers, a “19th C. Van Gogh”. precision both of their content and of their presentation – espe- Post classic”), of Great Britain with Anglo Saxon sites of interest, image with label eccentrically – his photo of Southwold is called Although Rosemary has said that Barrett, in later years, would cially as Barrett had lost fingers to diabetes. a world map with Africa highlighted, and two maps of Great “Norwich”, while his photographs of Cambridge’s Folk Festival spend only a short time in galleries, despite travelling to them, his Were Barrett’s notebooks and scrapbooks “insights into his Britain and one of the Americas coloured and shaded according are of the fence around the venue. interest was not fleeting. His dating of the icon, not mentioned methodology” – something that has been said not to exist19 – or to relief and rock types. All of the maps seem to be photocopies The photographs of the book, too, are similar in appearance on the postcard, has clearly been researched if not from the real examples of “obsessive-compulsive behaviour”, a private “Open of the same original drawn by him, with annotations photocopied and style to those he took of his own art, while his captions for thing, then from a book. Although the picture is from around University degree”?20 With the songs from his early music career with the occasional addition in pen or pencil.24 them are in the same format as those accompanying his water- 1260, in Barrett’s case 12 could mean either twelfth century or a “represented by paintings with different coloured circles”21 – Barrett’s geology notes in AB CD also contain a few small colours. It is admittedly odd to photograph the contents of books, dating of 1200-plus (as his dating of Turner’s picture shows). “like Venn diagrams”,22 and like Barrett’s painted patterns and watercolours. Taken from his copy of Gardner’s Art Through the but Barrett’s treatment of imagery here is not unlike his pho- The dates he appends to artists’ names could not have been pie chart much later – Barrett’s musical and visual art were never Ages,25 annotated pictures reveal how Barrett engaged with his tographic replication and subsequent destruction of his notes copied from books, given his dates are erratic and vary in their far from his writing. As Mick Rock wrote in 1971, in what Barrett sourcebooks. He labels these pictures “Ur. Lyre Box 2600 BC and art – although he did not destroy his copy of Gardner’s. The signification. In the list of dates forming part of the initial index, described as “a book of all my songs” the words would “stand Wood and gold”, “Akkadian ruler 2200 B[C] Nineveh”, “Susa. inclusion of shots of clippings in his album, together with his a single number suggests variously the artist’s century of birth alone”.23 Perhaps his late notes, too, are something more than Persia. 575 BC. Bull column”, and “Sutton Hoo jewellery. Gold own originals, suggests Barrett was indifferent to the originality (“Duchamp, 19”) or the century in which an artist worked methodology, with some inherent, “standalone” value in them- and enamel 655 AD”. or authenticity of a work. All images were recorded for their aes- (“Hitchens, 20”). Furthermore, the books Barrett may have used selves. The list here works visually, the relationship between Pictorially, the watercolours are fairly accurate, considering thetic appeal. Barrett’s notebooks are a revelation of his tastes, are suggested by dates such as “Vasarely. 1908–”. The idea seems names and dates expressed not prosaically but diagrammatically. their small scale, and their colouring shows attention to detail. and of the way he worked. They give us little insight into his to have been to give a sense of whole centuries, to include what Barrett paints the lyre box – from which he has selected one panel methodology, but display it in action. came before and after, as befits his keenness to map movements. – and the bull column in brown, his version of what in Gardner’s Elsewhere in AB CD, there are reproductions, in poor quality Barrett refers in AB CD to only one artwork, Goya’s “The Appendix IV is in black and white. His unfinished brown Akkadian ruler is the black-and-white, and with a mixture of typed and (photocopied Horrors of War” (The Disasters of War). This follows some text AB CD colour it is in the book. In Barrett’s detail from a larger image the and original) handwritten labels, of “The Haga Sophia. (532–537). about Napoleon seizing power, while a rare illegible quotation red, gold, and blue jewellery becomes an attractive red and green. Constantinople. Ummayad dynasty”.; “San Apollinaire in Classe, attached to the name Perugino could be a title. In his Art folder Two notebooks, labelled on one spine “AB CD”, collect notes, Linear outlines around the images suggest that these are in fact Ravenna. (533–549)”; “The Dome of the Rock of Jerusalem. (687 Barrett refers to Martini’s “Pisa polyptich” (the Polyptych of lists, and images, all intricately organized. They contain: photocopies of paintings, partially painted over. A.D.). Abbasid dynasty”.; “The Palatine Chapel, Aachen, (805). Santa Caterina), although his descriptions of actual works remain “12–16 C. Florence. Venice. Bergundy. Flemish. H. Ren. [House In his labels accompanying artworks Barrett removes details Carolingian. Anglo Saxon”.; “The Mosque, Cordova. (961–965). vague, as evident in the following: Duccio’s “depict[ions of] the of Orange, perhaps]. Utrecht.”; “17–21 C. Baroque. Classical. of the items’ sizes and locations. His annotations are variations Spain”; and ‘Speyer Cathedral, Germany. (1030). Anglo Saxon”. New Testament” in Art; and in AB CD the “great frescoes by the The Impressionists.”; “18.”, “19.”, and “20.” (Part A) upon the following from Gardner’s: “Sound box of a royal lyre Since these are fairly accurate, with exceptions, Barrett seems to Venetians Cairacci [Carracci] and Caravaggio”, David’s painting “Geological eras and ages.” and “American art.” (Part B) from the tomb of Queen Puabi, Ur, c.2600 B.C. Wood with be writing from memory. In any case, the focus is on the images. of “the Napoleonic wars”, horses by Gericault, the “squares and “Byzantine. Islamic. Ottoman” ; “Anglo Saxon. Romanesque. inlaid gold, lapis lazuli, and shell”;26 “Head of an Akkadian In January 2006 Barrett reproduced 74 images of coins with primary colours of Miro” and Paul Nash’s “paintings of warfare”. Frankish.”; “English kings.” (Part C) Ruler, from Nineveh, c.2200 B.C. Bronze”;27 “Bull capital from annotations, adding his own dating and identifications. He Alongside the picture of Huntsmen Halted, Barrett handwrites: “Ceramics.”; “Jewellry.”; “Coinage.” (Part D) the royal audience hall of the palace or Artaxerxes II, from Susa, owned Denis R. Cooper’s Coins and Minting (Shire Publications, At 81 pages, Barrett’s pagination in two of three indexes Persia, c.375 B.C. Gray marble”;28 and “Purse cover from the reprint 1996) and Philip de Jersey’s Celtic Coinage in Britain Aelbert Cuyp. 1620–91, was at first influenced by Van underestimates the page total of 108 quite considerably. The def- Sutton Hoo ship burial, from Suffolk, England, c.655. Gold and (Shire, reprint 2001). The coins range from Anglo-Saxon sceats Goyen, and Ruysdael, and was distinctive for sea scapes icit probably owes to the addition of pages later as, once photo- enamel”.29 In the cases of the paintings and their tags, Barrett’s and stycas through those of English monarchs up to George V. and portraits- versatility unlike the Dutch school. The tra- copied, the page numbers and the book’s three corresponding level of accuracy suggests he was not working directly from his He photocopied the pictures, then cut and pasted the reproduc- dition of aristocratic portraiture made famous in northern indexes could not be tidily co-ordinated. One suspects a “HELP book at all times – a reflection not so much of his ability to copy tions on to new pages, which he copied. He also enlarged some Europe by Rubens and van Eyck is shown with the class LIST”, apparently from Barrett’s photocopier, is probably not as of his creative approach. of the images into very poor reproductions. His accompanying less nobility of Holland, who recieved no titles. meant to be in there, even if it did contribute to the product. Such Barrett painted details of his sources in the same way he photo- notes on “Coinage,” done in the subsequent month, show him The use of light, typical of the follower[s] of Claude, instances indicate that the page numbers, and thus the books, are graphed details of his own art. He also took photographs of illus- examining the “texture”, “decoration”, “patterns and symbols”, can be seen in Cuyp’s work. in a continuous process of formation, being added to and taken trated pages from Gardner’s, open on his workbench. His labels as artists do with objects of study they engage with creatively. from as part of a constant act of composition and revision. for his photographs include “Babylon. Ur Sound box. Lapis Barrett includes at the very end of the books colour reproduc- Barrett combines details from the source article – such as, “The As part of the initial index, there is a typed list of artists – lazuli. 2500 BC” (as seen alongside one of his watercolours); tions of the paintings Romulus and Remus by Charles de Lafosse Dutch Republic did not grant titles” – with his own opinion of the a number denoting each artist’s century – from Auerbach to “Kuler. Elam. The Sele of Naram. Sus[a] 2000 BC Sandstone”;30 and Huntsmen Halted by Aelbert Cuyp, preceded by a page with picture’s “golden glow”.39 This, though, is the peak in Barrett’s Velasquez, Brancusi to Titian. Not referring to specific pages, “Winged Ibex. Persia. 400 BC”;31 “Luristan cauldron 8th c. the date “15.2.05” and the titles “The Guardian” and “Sunday notes of engagement with actual artworks, since to reproduce or this index presides over AB CD, linking its diverse contents. The BC”;32 “Tut[a]nkhamen 1350 BC 18th Dynasty”;33 “Amphora. Telegraph”, his sources for these images.38 He also mounts, at simply name a piece of work, although an indicator of interest, book’s meticulous structure suggests the various notes may be 7 BC”;34 “Geometric krater 8 BC”;35 “Zosers pyramid Saqqara. the end of his book, postcards from The National Gallery of the tells little. It may be this lack of specificity which has led some to

 Barrett Appendices  think that Barrett “copied” lists from his art books, which, being Barrett himself, of course, was a noted lover of “freedom” and painted horses for Louis XVIII. He was an influence to Codex, and a Gospel in Rheims, amongst others. reference books more often than monographs, give overviews the “diversity” of his own artwork bears witness to this. In this Delacroix just before the start of romanticism, at the end Barrett has been called a detached bystander at his own crea- rather than detail – as do Barrett’s own notes. Rosemary con- way, his notes speak of his own interests and approaches. of the eighteenth century. Ingres was the most famous tivity, the “methodology” of whose painting we have “no insights” firms that Barrett did not talk about specific artists. Some phrases suggest a hint of opinion. Barrett describes portrait painter in France, and he opposed Delacroix. into. “One could argue”, writes Rob Chapman, “that this is It is said that soon after his mother died on 30 September “mannerist ideas” as “idealistic”; refers to Delacroix as “the great artistic purity of a kind, but it’s a kind which excludes the viewer 1991, Barrett had “another of his periodic purges”, burning innovator of the Romantics” whose work he considers “dramatic It is notable that in pages concerning art as it relates to other almost completely”.47 Yet, as Barrett himself wrote, he admired “many of his possessions, including paintings, and a considerable and theatrical”; while Henry Moore’s sculpture is recognized subjects, Barrett’s notes use the same tone, discussing art along- “dignity between the observer, and the work”. collection of art literature”.40 This is likely, although it is worth as “modern”. In a two-page essay on “Neo-classic Victorian art” side other points of historical interest with a similar level of spe- In an especially evocative passage on “Constructivism (and remembering that Barrett is known to have often burnt paint- dated “6.1.06” Barrett writes: cificity. For example, in his section on “American art”, under the architecture)”, Barrett says: “The surrealist movement ... offered ings. It seems less likely that the literature he burnt was restricted heading “The Gulf of Mexico and the Andes”, he writes that an international alternative, but with anarchist ideas, and a mood to art. In any case, he kept many of his books, including a few Renaissence paintings were simple, but great detail of ges- “The pre classic Olmec created jade figures, and large sculp- of dreams. It was not the end of life, and presented from the on art. Of the 46 books sold after his death, Barrett had bought tures with careful painting provided dignity between the tural stone heads up to the sixth century B.C”. In the entry on beginning a true freedom of expression”. Barrett has in the past some before 1991: his copy of The Penguin Concise Columbia observer, and the work, and led to a great sense of expres- “Ceramics”, he refers to Coptic art and Henge and Izmic pot- been quoted as desiring his songs to be like “moods”. Here, his Encyclopedia is signed “Roger Barrett 7th January 1988”,41 while sion of the subject. The classical style in fine art is derived tery, while his pages on the Anglo Saxons note “Textiles were notes themselves have “a mood of dreams” which makes them, Irving Sandler’s The Triumph of American Painting is signed “R. from the time of the Latin poets, and led to skillful imita- developed in St Neots and Thetford” before focusing on the if not obviously applicable to his own art, standalone pieces in K Barrett 1987”.42 tion, rather than originality. “Manuscript Art” of The Durham Psalter, an eighth-century which he finds “a true freedom of expression”. Of his library, it would seem to be the reference books that inform the style and content of AB CD. Barrett’s prose in his Whatever the relationship between AB CD and the History of 1 Chapman, Irregular Head, p. 400 2005), Great Britain (Lonely Planet), North Wales, 40 Chapman, Irregular Head, p. 371 notes is concise, and to some extent an elaboration of his lists. It Art, the latter is said by Rosemary to be a “list of names and 2 Chapman, Irregular Head, pp. 372–3 Snowdon and Offa’s Dyke Walks (Ordnance Survey, 41 Judith S. Levey and Agnes Greenhall (eds.), The is, however, uniquely his – his notes convey a real sense of his works he has taken from other books”, containing “very little of 3 Watkinson and Anderson, Crazy Diamond, p. 154. Jarrold), Handy Road Atlas: Britain & Ireland Penguin Concise Columbia Encyclopedia (Penguin The interviews with Paul Breen for Watkinson and (Collins, dated by Barrett 2003), and an A to Z of Reference Books, 1987) voice. Each topic often consists of some short prose followed by himself” other than “Some comments here and there”.43 This Anderson’s book were conducted between 1985 Cambridge among them. He also had from June 42 Other books owned by Barrett at the time of his a corresponding list of artists. For example, on a page headed has led to suggestions that Barrett’s Art folder was “copied from and 1989 (Pete Anderson to WS, 7 July 2010) 2004 The New Penguin History of the World by J. M. death, not mentioned elsewhere, include: Ian 4 Ferrari, Fish Out of Water, p. 42 and p. 52 Roberts. Chilvers (ed.), The Concise Oxford Dictionary of “15. 16th C.” we have: “Pontormo. 16 following the reforma- one of Syd’s art reference books”,44 and that the History, “with 5 “Rob Chapman Answers Your Questions”, {www. 25 Gardner’s Art Through the Ages. Barrett owned the Art and Artists (3rd edition, OUP, 2003, dated by tion in Europe, appreciated the increasingly sophisticated Dutch extensive cross-referencing of his art books,” had “scant com- sydbarrett.com}. Accessed 11 June 2010 ninth edition of this title, revised by Horst de la Barrett “Thurs 2. March. ‘06’”); Martin Kemp 6 Ferrari, Fish Out of Water, pp, 42–3. See also Willis, Croix, Diane Kirkpatrick, and Richard G. Tansey (ed.), The Oxford History of Western Art (reprint painting done by Honthorst 16. Hals 16 and Terbruggen 16.” Or, mentary”.45 It is true that the notes consulted here have little Madcap, pp. 144–5, and Watkinson and Anderson, (Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1987). It is signed 2002, OUP); Paul Bahn (ed.), The New Penguin in a three-page essay on “The Baroque era,” dated “10.1.06”: explicit commentary. The lack of Syd in them is, if anything, a Crazy Diamond, p. 154 “RB. 93” Dictionary of Archaeology (Penguin Reference, 7 Ferrari, Fish Out of Water, p. 52 26 Gardner’s, p. 54 dated by Barrett “Nov 5. 05.”); W. R. Hamilton, subtle but sure indicator of his voice, and suggest – in the same 8 The cutting is Richard Savill, “Pollution kills 27 Gardner’s, p. 55 A.R. Woolley and A.C. Bishop, Minerals, Rocks and Figure compositions were produced along with land- way his unpopulated photographs of the Folk Festival do – that hundreds of young salmon and trout”, Daily 28 Gardner’s, p. 67 Fossils (Philip’s and the Natural History Museum, Telegraph, 9 September 2005, p. 11 29 Gardner’s, p. 323 reprint 2001); Belinda Thomson, Impressionism: scapes for the first time, and Dutch interior painting he was interested in facts and not in subjective opinion. He can 9 From The Times, 2 July 2005, Sport, p. 99 30 “Victory Stele of Naram-Sin, from Susa, c. 2300– Origins, Practice, Reception (London: Thames and began. Academical English painting, by Gainsbrough and be detected by his own absence. Rosemary suggests that Barrett 10 The clipping is from Kate Reardon’s “Natural 2000 B.C. Pink sandstone”, Gardner’s, p. 56 Hudson, 2000; signed “RB. 06”); Harold Osborne Start”, The Times, 2 July 2005, Magazine, p.57 31 “Jar handle in the form of a winged ibex, from (ed.), The Oxford Companion to Twentieth-Century Reynolds survived the French revolution of 1789, and the loved facts over opinions, like their studious father, who, their 11 Taken from Ben Lewis, “Turner Prize”, The Persia, 400–300 B.C. Silver inlaid with gold”, Art (Oxford: OUP, 1988); Christine Woodward beginning of the Romantics. The Utrecht was part of the brother Alan says, was a “skilled watercolourist”. Alan’s com- Sunday Telegraph, 4 December 2005, Seven, p. 23 Gardner’s, p. 70 and Roger Harding, Gemstones (London: British 12 From Andrew Graham-Dixon on Ding Yi and 32 “Ceremonial cauldron, from Luristan, eighth Museum, 1987); May H. Beattie, Carpets of era of Dutch painting emerging from the sixteenth to the ment that his father’s paintings “were used in his own record- Mike Marshall, The Sunday Telegraph, 4 December century B.C. Bronze”, Gardner’s, p. 70 Central Persia – with special reference to rugs of seventeenth centuries. Greatly influenced by Caravaggio, keeping”, and never published, is similar to the way in which 2005, Seven, pp. 22–23 33 “Death Mask of Tutankhamen, found in Kirman (World of Islam Festival, 1976); Warwick 13 This is not a title, but as a label it provides a innermost coffin. Gold with inlay of semiprecious Bray and David Trump, The Penguin Dictionary early exponents lived in Rome, and then returned to the Roger Barrett wrote and painted for his own entertainment. As convenient way of referring to the book, as do the stones”, Gardner’s, p. 100 of Archaeology (2nd edition, 1982, dated by Utrecht. Seriously religous catholics at first, they learnt to Alan says, “Roger could well have inherited some of [his father’s] labels Garden, Art and AB CD for their contents. 34 “The Blinding of Polyphemus and Gorgons (proto- Barrett 1998); Peter and Linda Murray, The The others do not have such tags. Attic amphora), from Eleusis, c.675–650 B.C.”, Penguin Dictionary of Art and Artists (Penguin portray people like themselves in a realistic way, in formal- artistic skills”.46 14 The Guardian, 15 December 2004, p. 6, although Gardner’s, p. 130. Barrett owned a copy of Reference, 7th edition, 1997); Alan Bowness, ised studies. Barrett’s vocabulary and syntax are peculiarly his, even when Barrett dates the page as 12 December Homer’s Odyssey Modern European Art (Thames and Hudson, 15 Thank you to Kieran Short for this information 35 “Geometric krater, from the Dipylon cemetery, reprint 1997); Peter and Linda Murray, The Art borrowing the neutral, learned tone of art reference. In a page 16 For the sake of accuracy and to convey his voice, eighth century B.C.”, Gardner’s, p. 130 of the Renaissance (Thames and Hudson, reprint In notes on “15–18th C.,” Barrett describes how Poussin, on “Neo and Post Impressionists of the twentieth century”, he Barrett’s syntax is preserved, as is his occasionally 36 “IMHOTEP, Stepped Pyramid of King Zoser, 2004, signed “R.B. Feb 2006”); David Watkin, incorrect spelling Saqqara, c.2650 B.C.”, Gardner’s, p.79 English Architecture: A Concise History (Thames Boucher, and Watteau – artists from different generations – devel- writes of how “The Impressionists and the Symbolists of the late 17 Barrett owned the second edition, edited by 37 “The Great Sphinx (with Pyramid of Khafre in and Hudson, reprint 2005, signed “R Barrett. oped the Romantic movement before, and elsewhere that: nineteenth century, reacted to the realist style of Courbet and Catherine Soanes left background), Gizeh, c.2530 B.C. Sandstone”, Nov. 2005”); Gillian Neale, Blue and White Pottery: 18 I have not seen clear evidence for these two and “Middle aisle of the hall of pillars, valley A Collector’s Guide (Miller’s, 2000); Margaret Manet”. And in a piece on the “The Eighteenth Century”, one specific identifications, but it is well possible they temple of the Pyramid of Khafre, Gizeh, c.2500 Sargeant, Royal Crown Derby (Shire, reprint Architectural and decorative art of the Rococo, was devel- encounters the more idiosyncratic term: are correct B.C.”, Gardner’s, p.83 2005); and Herbert Read, A Concise History of 19 Chapman, Irregular Head, p. 373 38 Romulus and Remus is included in Sophie Arie, Modern Painting (Thames and Hudson, reprint oped into society portraiture, by Watteau, Poussin and 20 Chapman, Irregular Head, p. 402 “Backing for myth of Rome’s beginning”, The 1997). My thanks to the buyer of these books for Boucher in art combined with music, to produce a diver- In England, Constable (1770–1857) and Gainsborough 21 Palacios, Lost in the Woods, p. 77 Guardian, 15 February 2005, p. 12, Huntsmen this information 22 Willis, Madcap, p. 21 Halted in Andrew Graham-Dixon, “In the 43 Ferrari, Fish Out of Water, p. 52 sity of invention and freedom; but after the war with Spain were content with landscape painting, and opposed Joshua 23 Rock, “The madcap”, p. 18 picture”, The Sunday Telegraph, 13 February 2005, 44 Chapman, Irregular Head, p. 400 and Bourbon rule, Napoleon seized power in 1869. Reynolds of the Royal Academy . . . 24 At his death Barrett owned eight maps and Magazine, p. 73 45 Palacios, Dark Globe, p. 425 travel-related books (often signed and dated): 39 Elsewhere in AB CD Barrett adds Claude’s name 46 Alan Barrett to Russell Beecher, October 2010 . . . Gericault (1791–1824) was born in Rouen, and Family World Atlas (Philip’s, dated by Barrett in pencil to a typed list of 17th-century artists 47 Chapman, Irregular Head, p. 373

 Barrett Appendices  The Roll of Honour Sue Byard William Fowler Dr. Michael Jäger Iain Roy McHenry Steve Pittis Elena Stepanova Stephen, Alice, Ava, Bob Cairns John Funk and son Jonathan Mick McMillan Don Pogue Michael Sterling & Albie Wood The publishers Carol Michael Gabriel E.M.Syd Tony McNamara Douglas G. Polly Christopher Steyer Paul Wootley gratefully acknowledge Eric C Cassidy Kevin Gallacher Kyle Jarger Marco Menchi Virginie Porte Craig Stivers Sean Wylie the contribution of the Sharlene Celeskey Dan Gardiner Matt Johns Bruce Meske Kevan Porter Stratty Jerry & Karen xxx following patrons whose John Clinton David Gaskill Henry Johnson Nowe Miasto David Poudrier Mark Poul Stubbs Syd Young generous support has Chambers Hans Gerritsen Chris Jones Jimmie James Gary Povey Kelly Sudbeck Jon Zgoda helped bring this project Dave Chiz Oskar Giovanelli Clive Jones Mickelson James Putnam Tone Supplee to fruition. Richard Michael Roberto Giuntini Mark Jones Joshua Zane Mikaloff Jason Pyke Ian Tandy Clews Finn Glover Emily Sara Kadwell John Miller Lucas Quijada Terje Ternström Bernd Ahlgrim Tim Coles Robin Glover Steve Kanaras Andrew Mills Jim Quirke Borge Thomsen Rune Ahlström Adam Collins Christopher Lenox & Martin Kane Wesley Adrian Miner Qaisar Rana Bruce Tippen Marsha Allen Jeff Collins Michelle Gomez Matthew Karas Keki Mingus Jeroen Ras Neycho Todorov Maximilian Joel Confino Tom Gorman Jean Claude Karle Kenichi Mishima Trelawney Robert Torbica Almeida (UY) Gavin Costar Nick Graff Mike Kavanagh Brian Mitchell Rastosovich David Town Chase Altizer Nick Craske Mike Gravis Gerry Kelly Judi Molinari Jerome Ravon Dimitris Tsiantis John Amirkhan Kevin Crisp Jim Green Michael Kemp Anthony C. Montes Tracy D. Reimund Peter Tucker Olli Andersen Gary Crofts Thomas Griesser Robin Klarzynski Jason Moody Heloisa Reitenbach Nicholas Turner Daylen Anderson Steven Davis Kym Daniel Kline Reefus Moons Cyrus Resur James Tweedie Ulrich Angersbach Paul Dawson Mike Griffiths Jochen Klug Jakob Mühlbauer Matthew Richardson Denise Vacca Javier Aránega Wim de Leeuw Matthew Grogan Claudio David Knaup Dominic Murphy Sue Robinson Hedzer Veenstra Felix Atagong Flávio José de Vegard Sæter Grytting Ole Knudsen Robert C Murray Stephane Rochette Symon Vegro Faris Badwan Moura Farias Ingrid Haaland Richard Kovac Giuliano Navarro Emily Roebuck Jim Veltri Mikolaj Barczynski Robby de Smet Hannah Sophia Haid Stephen Jerome Bob Mac Neill Joshua Roeke Alex Verstegen Keith Barnett Dominique Decoster Werner Haider ‘Syd’ Kracht David Nelson Rog Daniel Guerrero Vidal Frederic Barres Brad Deston Thomas Hallstein Rick Krewson Hans Newbould Bernard Rose John Vik Maria Jose Gomez Rui Dias Jim Hamilton Jake LaManna Joe Nicholson James Rotondi Ken Viola Bayancela Rob Diestler Nikolas Harbord Davey Lane Kees Nijpels Danny Rowton Pekka Virtanen Adam Beaumont The Doctor Daniel Hart Jørn-Terje Larsen Fredrik Nilsson Paul Saiya Greg Waldron Marc-Olivier Becks Jim Dowman Philip Haynes Ron Leicht Mark Owen Nutto Andy Saltiel Amanda Walker Nathan Beehag Paul Drummond Jonathan Hemington Mike Whitey Lewis Stein Arne Olstad Lucio Salvucci Monika Wallin Paul Belbin Alberto Durgante Barrett Hext Marco Locatelli Tormod Opedal Ory Sandel Bryan Ward Siemen Ynse Betzema Frits Donker Duyvis Jesse & Hayden Hock Rene A. Lopez Takuya Orikoshi Noora Sarenius Brendan Waterfield David Bishop Tk Dyce Frank Holdman R. D. Lucki Ossi Don Scaife Paddy Watters Moray Black Michiel Eijkhout Mike Holmstrom Elaine Lupo Arttu Paajanen Leo Schmidt Mark Webb Liesbeth Bliek Mayra Elias Stephen Holt Nathan Lyzen Mary Pablo Adam Schwartz George N. Weinisch Edward Bliss Patrice Elziere Alan Holverson Anne & Helen Annika Pablo-Cowen Mathieu Séguin Josh Wendt Arno Blokland Michael Emering Graham Hornsby Marchant Ernest Padgett Angus Self Brian Wernham Fabrizio Bono Carmelo Eramo Mathieu Houdain Michael and Pamela Rosario Paolillo Kenneth G. Shea Graham Wessel Martin Booth Roy Alan Ethridge Dave Houston Marshall Jocelyn Paquette Karen Sherman David West André Borgdorff Mauro Fagnani Kerry M Howard Liam Martin Ed Paule Danny Short William Weterings Emanuele Boschini Scott Faine Stephen Hullock Paul Martin Paul Peet Graham & Laurie Adam Wheway Avril ‘Birdiehop’ Alexander Faisst Gaz Hunter Martine Ramsay Pennypacker Small Leanne Whitby Bradshaw Luca Ferrari Sheldon Inkol Luigi Martinuz Martin Peraus Tony Smith Eva Wijkniet Eric Brandebura Arthur Figura Douglas & Laurel Bernard Masson Antonio Pereira Scott & Jessie Mik Williamson Rob Branigin Violetta Filippova Isaac Ted Mast Bede Perham Smith-Larson Jerry Wilson Fabia Brown Gary Floyd Liliya Ivanov Supriya Mathur Roy Petticrew Gian Luigi Soldi Mark Winterford Dave Burrows Gary A. Ford Christian Jacquemet Mark McCann John Pickford Chad Melvin Stanko Jaroslaw Wolodko James Butters Luca Fossati Gints Jacuks George D McGibbon Andrea Pinto Mark Stay Klaus Wolter

 Barrett The Roll of Honour  Picture credits

8 John Gordon 121 Mick Rock / Spencer Kelly Collection 199 Roger Barrett / Courtesy of Mark Benton 9, 10, 11 Top Courtesy of the Estate of Roger Keith Barrett 122–23 Courtesy of EMI 200 Roger Barrett / Courtesy of Viv Brans aka Syd Barrett 124 Barrie Wentzel 201 Roger Barrett / Courtesy of Libby Gausden-Chisman 11 Middle & Bottom Courtesy of Libby Gausden-Chisman 126 Ray Stevenson / Rex Features 202–03 Roger Barrett / Courtesy of Viv Brans 12 Maggy Taylor 127 Barrie Wentzel 205–18 Roger Barrett / Courtesy of Giuliano Navarro Collection 13 Top Courtesy of the Estate of Roger Keith Barrett 130–47 Roger Barrett / Courtesy of Libby Gausden-Chisman 219 Roger Barrett / Courtesy of the Brian Wernham Collection aka Syd Barrett 148–54 Roger Barrett / Courtesy of Jenny Spires 220 Roger Barrett / Courtesy of Jenny Spires 13 Bottom, 14 Top The Mark & Colleen Hayward Archive 155 Roger Barrett / Courtesy of the Brian Wernham Collection 221 Roger Barrett 14 Bottom, 15 Courtesy of the Estate of Roger Keith Barrett 158 Ramsey & Muspratt Portrait Collection, Cambridgeshire 222–26 Roger Barrett / Courtesy of the Barrett Family aka Syd Barrett Collection, Cambridge Central Library 227 Roger Barrett / Courtesy of Gary A. Ford 18, 20, 21 Sebastian Jenkins 160 Top Roger Barrett / Courtesy of the Barrett Family 228–29 Roger Barrett / Courtesy of One Fifteen 22 Courtesy of Libby Gausden-Chisman 160 Bottom Stephen Pyle / Courtesy of the Collection of 230–33 Roger Barrett / Courtesy of the Barrett Family 23–4 Courtesy of Pink Floyd Music Ltd Archive Glenn Povey 234 Roger Barrett / Courtesy of the Brian Wernham Collection 26–7 Steve Wilkins 161 Top Roger Barrett 235–36 Roger Barrett / Courtesy of the Barrett Family 28 Adam Ritchie Photography 161 Bottom Roger Barrett / Courtesy of the Barrett Family 237 Roger Barrett / Courtesy of the Brian Wernham Collection 30–31 Steve Wilkins 162 Courtesy of EMI 238–39 Roger Barrett / Courtesy of the Barrett Family 32, 34, 36 Graham Keen 163 Roger Barrett 240 Roger Barrett / Courtesy of the Ian Tandy Collection 38–9 The Mark & Colleen Hayward Archive 164 Top Courtesy of John Gordon 241 Roger Barrett 40 Spencer Kelly Collection 164 Bottom Courtesy of Jenny Spires 242–56 Roger Barrett / Courtesy of the Barrett Family 42–3 The Mark & Colleen Hayward Archive 165 Roger Barrett / Courtesy of the Barrett Family 44 Collection of Glenn Povey 166 Courtesy of EMI 45 Graham Keen 167–71 Top Left Roger Barrett / Courtesy of the Barrett Family 46, 48 Adam Ritchie Photography 171 Top Right Roger Barrett / Courtesy of One Fifteen 50 Spencer Kelly Collection 171 Bottom Roger Barrett / Courtesy of Libby Gausden- 52, 54, 56, 58, 60 Adam Ritchie Photography Chisman 62–3 Anthony Stern www.anthonysternglass.com 172 Top Roger Barrett / Courtesy of the Barrett Family 64–5 Irene Winsby / The Mark & Colleen Hayward Archive 172 Middle & Bottom Courtesy of Anthony Stern 66–7 Bo Arrhed / Premium Rockshot 173 Anthony Stern www.anthonysternglass.com 68 Charles Beterams 174 Top Left & Right Courtesy of Pete Anderson 69–70 Colin Prime www.colinprime.com 174 Middle Roger Barrett 71–2, 74 Nico van der Stam / MAI 175 Courtesy of EMI 76 Michael Putland / Retna UK 176–77 Roger Barrett / Courtesy of Libby Gausden-Chisman 78, 80, 82, 84, 86, 88, 90, 92 Getty Images 178 Top Courtesy of Storm Thorgerson 94–5 Nico van der Stam / MAI 178 Bottom Courtesy of EMI 96 Courtesy of Pink Floyd Music Ltd Archive 179 Roger Barrett / Courtesy of the Barrett Family 98–101 Nils Aarestrup Røddik 180–82 Roger Barrett 102–03 Lars Groth / Scanpix / Press Association Images 183–85 Roger Barrett / Courtesy of the Barrett Family 104, 107 The Mark & Colleen Hayward Archive 186 Roger Barrett / Courtesy of the Brian Wernham Collection 108, 110, 111 Courtesy of Pink Floyd Music Ltd Archive 187 Roger Barrett / Courtesy of Libby Gausden-Chisman 114 Storm Thorgerson / The Mark & Colleen Hayward Archive 188–90 Roger Barrett / Courtesy of the Barrett Family 115 Storm Thorgerson / Kieran Short 191 Roger Barrett / Courtesy of Andrew Heeps 116–17 Storm Thorgerson / The Mark & Colleen Hayward 192 Roger Barrett / Courtesy of the Brian Wernham Collection Archive 193 Roger Barrett / Courtesy of the Ian Tandy Collection 118 Top Storm Thorgerson / Kieran Short 194 Roger Barrett / Courtesy of Libby Gausden-Chisman 118 Bottom Storm Thorgerson / Spencer Kelly Collection 195 Roger Barrett / Courtesy of Maggy Taylor 119 Storm Thorgerson / Spencer Kelly Collection 196–97 Roger Barrett / Courtesy of Libby Gausden-Chisman 120 Mick Rock / The Mark & Colleen Hayward Archive 198 Roger Barrett / Courtesy of the Barrett Family

 Barrett Catalogue  Acknowledgements

Russell Beecher would like to thank the following for their help and assistance: Chris Barnett, Alan Barrett, Don Barrett, Ian Barrett, Mark Barrett, Paul & Melly Barrett, Peter Barrett, Jon Beecher, Melodia Bell, Elena Bello, Andrew Benton, Mark Benton, Mark Blake, Joe Boyd, Viv Brans, Rosemary Breen, Ruth Brown, Libby Chisman, Warren Dosanjh, Gary A. Ford, Stephen Gammond, Olivia Gibson, John Gordon, Steve Gravenor, Andrew Heeps, Matt Johns, Mark Jones, Keith Jordan, Graham Keen, Spencer Kelly, Nigel Lesmoir-Gordon, Paul Loasby, Sue Martin, Nick Mason, Miles, Andy Murray, Giuliano Navarro, Jon Newey, Glenn Povey, Lars Ramslie, Andrew Rawlinson, Adam Ritchie, Mick Rock, Eloise Rowley, Kieran Short, Jenny Spires, Peter Stansill, Anthony Stern, Carl Stickley, Ginny Swepson, Ian Tandy, Maggy Taylor, Storm Thorgerson, Col Turner, Simon Webb, Brian Wernham, Steve Wilkins, Irene Winsby

Will Shutes would like to thank the following for their help and assistance: Alan Akeroyd, Pete Anderson, Sophie Bambage, Nick and Alison Barraclough, Russell Beecher, Rosemary Breen, Natalie Brett, Erin Butcher, John Conway, Eleanor Curzon, Anthony Day, Luca Ferrari, David Gale, John Gordon, Michael Gray, Chris Jakes, Kim Kowalewski LaBagh, Nigel Lesmoir-Gordon, Sue Martin, Miles, Chris Moise, Giuliano Navarro, Stephen Pyle, Lars Ramslie, Andrew Rawlinson, Roger Ryan, Dipli Saikia, Matthew Scurfield, Kieran Short, Bex Singleton, Anthony Stern, Maggy Taylor, Matthew Taylor and Escape Artists, Peter Tucker, Simon Webb, Brian Wernham, Rodney Wilson, Irene Winsby. Thank you to all those who wish to remain anonymous, and to the other owners of Roger’s art. Special thanks to Viv Brans, Libby Chisman, and Jenny Spires, and most of all to my parents

 Barrett Catalogue 