A Very Private Celebrity Read Online Free Page A

House ledger of Westminster School for 1932–33 (now open to researchers) gave me the first insight into the private world of John Freeman.
    What is more personal and unique than handwriting? Freeman’schanged little over seventy years and it is instantly distinctive. It is firm, fluent, but notably unformed, as though he was not interested in what it looked like, only in what he wrote. It is self-confident and regular, more administrative than creative. Seeking to open up this most private of individuals, I sent samples of his handwriting from different eras to a professional graphologist for her interpretation. She knew nothing about John Freeman, other than his autograph, so her analysis was perceptive. In summary:
    A love of adventure, particularly in the sphere of competitive achievement. His constant need to be active, though, could cause him to feel restless. Kind and friendly with family and close friends, but with acquaintances and business colleagues unlikely to reveal feelings. Sensitive to criticism but unlikely to express emotion.
    A compulsive need to achieve but an absence of warmth. Dispassionate, he experiences life as an onlooker. Socially likes to be correct, has charm at his disposal but is not pliable. Thinks for himself and takes a stand on principles. Egotistical, he feels himself to be special – above others. Strong leadership qualities, works well under pressure and appears not to suffer from stress. Works systematically, a good organiser, thrives on difficult assignments and is easily bored. An intelligent person with sharpness and speed of thought, keen perception that enables him to arrive at solutions quickly.
    The overall tone of Freeman’s ledger entries is one of authority. Freeman could have been the housemaster of Busby’s – not that he had any time for Busby’s actual housemaster: ‘Hilary is the worst housemaster I ever came across or heard of and his wife in my opinion is an unpleasant, snobbish and silly woman.’ He dismissed the outgoing matron as ‘an inefficient old bitch’, thus showing an earthy expressionthat did not desert him with the years. No one could accuse him of misogyny, however: ‘The new woman is a perfect jewel. I hope future generations of Busbyites will value her as highly as we do.’ Bearing in mind his affair with the under-matron, I wonder whether the value he placed was more personal.
    Freeman’s intentions as head of house were to implement the philosophy of the headmaster. His approach was almost paternal:
    I have done as much as I can to stimulate interest in the debating society and the League of Nations union. Intelligent opinion is more important than achievement at games … I am convinced that the Corps (the OTC) is a bad and unnecessary institution. I have decided to abolish personal fagging, which I consider to be an idiocy. Fags should be treated like decent human beings and if this had happened before then the house would have been much happier.
    Reading this, I had to remind myself that Freeman was still a boy at school, very much a teenager. Little wonder his girlfriends at Oxford said he was a grown-up among students, self-possessed and quietly arrogant.
    In later years, Freeman said that abolishing personal fagging (the allocation of junior boys as virtual servants to their seniors) was his legacy to Westminster. He wrote the next term (Lent, 1933):
    As indicated, I have abolished fagging and no harm has been done. There is no sign of juniors becoming uppish. Whether fagging implants a respect for authority I am doubtful! People in the Under report that life is more peaceful and pleasant and the standard of work and discipline is better than before. Incessant and useless petty punishments are futile for monitors and fags.
    Freeman’s most prominent entry in the ledger concerns an event that ‘although it has no direct connection with the history of the house, may be worth recording’. History has proven him right:
    On the evening