Oh, I don't doubt that they were very close - I was more wondering about the familiarity, i.e. the way he acted towards George VI, like they were not only on an equal social level, but almost family.
The 'USA Today' article .. gave an example, when it pointed out that it would have been really unlikely for Logue to have called him 'Bertie', a family name.
And if they really were distant and formal in manner (even though close emotionally), it might have been hard for a modern audience to appreciate how that seeming contradiction could work?
I just ran across some interesting material that sheds some light on this issue: a story here
which includes a great deal of original documentation, including long excerpts from Logue's diary, letters back and forth between he and the King, etc.
Very interesting reading. There's no doubt they were very close, and that he was almost 'family' in some ways, but still there is that social distance (the King always addresses him as "Logue", and to Queen Elizabeth he uses the standard "Your Majesty" followed by "Ma'am").
PS: It turns out I was wrong; Logue really did
call him 'Bertie' initially, and for psychological reasons, as I had suspected
. According to this story
, "Another part of Logue's unconventional approach was to insist on addressing the Duke as Bertie, much to the Duke's initial discomfort. ... At the end of the [1939 Declaration of War] broadcast Logue finally called him 'Your Majesty'.