Hello and thank you for being a DL contributor. We are changing the login scheme for contributors for simpler login and to better support using multiple devices. Please click here to update your account with a username and password.

Hello. Some features on this site require registration. Please click here to register for free.

Hello and thank you for registering. Please complete the process by verifying your email address. If you can't find the email you can resend it here.

Hello. Some features on this site require a subscription. Please click here to get full access and no ads for $1.99 or less per month.

King Charles New Portrait

Looks like Camilla painted it with her fag.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 77May 18, 2024 8:10 PM

I love the colors, but the hands are problematic. I know he has sausage fingers, but they look more like rotted ground beef.

by Anonymousreply 1May 15, 2024 2:42 AM

It’s getting dire reviews, I think, but I personally like it. He’s a calm figure emerging from chaos. There are worse ways for a monarch to be presented.

by Anonymousreply 2May 15, 2024 2:44 AM

I actually like it, but the intense red reminds me of a bleeding organ. Perhaps another color would have been more suitable and seemed less raw and urgent?

Or are things getting urgent with the monarch?

by Anonymousreply 3May 15, 2024 2:45 AM

What does the butterfly represent?

by Anonymousreply 4May 15, 2024 2:46 AM

The things these poor Royals have to put up with. Its atrocious, but of course Charles can't say so publicly. Never complain, never explain I guess.

by Anonymousreply 5May 15, 2024 2:47 AM

[quote]He’s a calm figure emerging from chaos.

Or Satan emerging from Hell.

by Anonymousreply 6May 15, 2024 2:47 AM

The message clearly is: he fades into the background.

I could have told you that seventy years ago.

by Anonymousreply 7May 15, 2024 2:47 AM

It looks like Charles is at war with symbolic blood dripping all around.

I know Harry and Markle are at war with Charles, but there hasn't been any blood spilled yet.

by Anonymousreply 8May 15, 2024 2:48 AM

A twentysomething painter made this commissioned portrait of Prince Philip (who sat for it fully covered) two decades ago. All he said when he saw it was (reportedly), "Gadzooks!", but it later came out he hated it.

It seemed like a nasty trick to play on him./

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 9May 15, 2024 2:50 AM

He's been sitting on that burning ring of fire too long.

by Anonymousreply 10May 15, 2024 2:50 AM

Many artists are mentally ill, keep that in mind.

by Anonymousreply 11May 15, 2024 2:53 AM

'Yet' r8

by Anonymousreply 12May 15, 2024 2:54 AM

"Is this how we dress for the office? You look like a blood clot!"

by Anonymousreply 13May 15, 2024 3:07 AM

The hands do look awful. His hands are NOT his best feature, so it's an odd thing to ... FEATURE in a painting that is sparse on human-looking details.

The face part is flattering. His eyes don't seem that close together and he looks very masculine.

I don't mind all the red, but I think the background should have been darker red than the outfit. The outfit would have popped more. I know that the point was to fade into the background, but it still could have been achieved.

by Anonymousreply 14May 15, 2024 3:13 AM

Typically butterfly = transformation.

All the red reminds me of this one.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 15May 15, 2024 3:21 AM

I think it's fine, though the red is a little odd to me. But the more diffuse an image of Charles, the better.

by Anonymousreply 16May 15, 2024 3:23 AM

What do you mean I'll have to fake cancer to get a bloody vacation? I'm not a slave!

by Anonymousreply 17May 15, 2024 3:23 AM

Considering what it is and what it’s for I think it’s pretty good. It’s really not anymore than just what it is.

by Anonymousreply 18May 15, 2024 3:31 AM

Or maybe this one.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 19May 15, 2024 4:30 AM

Lots of people here "seeing" the Emperor's new clothes, as it were.

This depiction is GROTESQUE! Like King Charles is the star of the movie "Carrie: Revenge of the Trans-Monarch."

Perhaps the artist sought to remind us of the fate of Charles I in tandem with the cancer diagnosis of Charles III: "Monarch and Mortality."

by Anonymousreply 20May 15, 2024 4:47 AM

It could have been worse...

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 21May 15, 2024 4:48 AM

Butterfly = Monarch, get it?

by Anonymousreply 22May 15, 2024 4:49 AM

It's kind of crazy that QE had Lucian Freud paint her portrait. I give her credit for doing that. It's hard to not know what kinds of paintings he's capable of.

by Anonymousreply 23May 15, 2024 4:55 AM

On the other hand, it could have been much better...

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 24May 15, 2024 4:57 AM

Oh it looks just awful. Look at all the other tastefully done portraits of historic figures. I don't think England should tolerate this and as for a remake. What a joke. The painter did not like him. Thumbs down.

by Anonymousreply 25May 15, 2024 4:57 AM

The weird thing is that Freud's is not the most unpopular portrait ever done of the late Queen. George Condo's in the Tate Modern is universally loathed.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 26May 15, 2024 5:00 AM

At R24, that looks Norman Rockwell-esque.

by Anonymousreply 27May 15, 2024 5:01 AM

I think it’s bloody fabulous!

by Anonymousreply 28May 15, 2024 5:05 AM


Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 29May 15, 2024 5:06 AM

The hands are definitely the travesty in this "portrait". Seasoned artists will agree that Hands are often the most difficult part of a portrait.

This guy blew it IN SPADES.

by Anonymousreply 30May 15, 2024 5:10 AM

Why is he floating in a vat of menstrual discharge?

by Anonymousreply 31May 15, 2024 5:13 AM

Looks like something from The Night Gallery

by Anonymousreply 32May 15, 2024 5:15 AM

I like the Freud portrait.

by Anonymousreply 33May 15, 2024 5:34 AM

Art major here, drawing and painting. For some reason, hands weren’t so hard for me. Faces were harder, specifically, the space or transition between the nose and the mouth.

by Anonymousreply 34May 15, 2024 6:10 AM

The head is accomplished enough to make all else look like an extensive error of judgement. So much lazy lurid background filler. The King deserved so much better.

Freud's portrait of The Queen is very small, and characteristically packs a punch. Uneasy sits the head who wears the crown, but nonetheless the iron will of the longest reign is conveyed.

by Anonymousreply 35May 15, 2024 6:34 AM

R31 Hope this helps.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 36May 15, 2024 8:05 AM

It looks like something from an episode of Night Gallery.

by Anonymousreply 37May 15, 2024 8:25 AM

It is an insult and probably worse in person. Charles should be depicted against nature, he likes gardening. And he is a painter himself! And a talented one, he should have a superb portrait. Instead it looks like a chimp rolled around in red paint and they stuck an AI handsome version of Charles' face on top. My first thought was he look like he's still in a womb, age 79. Mummy!!

by Anonymousreply 38May 15, 2024 10:51 AM

The head is very good. If the painting were cropped just below the medals to make it a horizontal format (see the Reuters 2nd photo), it would be fine.

by Anonymousreply 39May 15, 2024 12:07 PM

I really like it. It's blends tradition with modern. I think it's terrific.

by Anonymousreply 40May 15, 2024 12:09 PM

Me too. I think it’s great.

by Anonymousreply 41May 15, 2024 12:11 PM

It reminds me of Obama’s portrait where he’s emerging from what looks green foliage.

by Anonymousreply 42May 15, 2024 12:14 PM

Looks like a 60s paperback book cover. And yes, he does have McConnell hands.

by Anonymousreply 43May 15, 2024 12:23 PM

He's a tampon.

by Anonymousreply 44May 15, 2024 12:28 PM

R25 💯

by Anonymousreply 45May 15, 2024 12:37 PM

It looks like it was daubed on with one of those used tampons he so desperately wanted to be.

by Anonymousreply 46May 15, 2024 12:48 PM

It reminds me of Bram Stoker's Dracula. They should have Banksy paint it. At least it would come with its own shredder.

by Anonymousreply 47May 15, 2024 12:53 PM

"Yeo said: “One is the colour, obviously, which was inspired by the colour of the bright red tunic of the Welsh Guards. And that got me thinking it would be lovely to take the colour and spray it around the picture.

“The uniform and the medals are great references to historic royal portraits of the past but it felt like this one should have a bit more dynamic and contemporary feel."

“The other thing is the butterfly. I would love to take full credit for that but it was actually the subject’s idea.”

Charles laughed and asked: “Was it?”

Yeo said: “Yes. We had a conversation at the start about how it would be nice to have a narrative element which referenced his passion for nature and the environment and you said. ‘Why not have a butterfly on my shoulder, they often do that.’ I thought, ‘Oh that’s a good idea, I wish I had thought of that.’

When it was pointed out that the butterfly was, in fact, an endangered monarch butterfly, Yeo said: “Yes another bit of artistic licence. It was named after William of Orange, I think, originally. Because it was orange. They are the ones most in danger.”

The King replied: “I have seen them in that extraordinary part of Mexico in a remarkable forest. Thousands of them. But it is extraordinary how butterflies do come and land on your shoulder if you are in the garden or something. I think it’s lucky if they land on you, do you know what I mean?”

Yeo had four sittings with the King, beginning in June 2021 at Highgrove when Charles was still the Prince of Wales. Yeo took drawings and photographs to work on the portrait between sittings.

(Laura Freeman, chief art critic, writes): It’s a curiously unthrusting portrait. Traditionally, kings pushed themselves forward. Think of Hans Holbein’s Henry VIII, shoulders huge, codpiece colossal, legs bestriding his kingdom of carpet. Or Van Dyck’s Charles I on horseback, shining with knightly ardour while surveying his kingdom. Much good it did him. Our Charles quite literally fades into the background, his sleeves little distinguished from the scumbled ground. (It’s a polite trick, too, for diminishing the outline of those ears.)

Pomp? Circumstance? This is a king signalling that he is content to be a wallflower, albeit of the hothouse variety. Won’t impose, mustn’t meddle.

Whatever you make of the background — too disobedient for my loyalist tastes — the face is beautifully done. When sitting for a portrait, there’s generally an agreement that you won’t do anything too drastic with your appearance. No radical haircut, no extreme weight gain or loss. But you cannot plan for the gains and losses of life, and it is these that leave lasting traces.

When Yeo started this portrait in June 2021, his subject was still the Prince of Wales. The sittings continued after the death of Queen Elizabeth and the coronation last May. Sadness, self-possession and resolve each take their turn across a face that is subtly shifting. The hands are nervous and worn.

As for the butterfly, it feels almost Tudor. A symbol to be puzzled over and decoded. A nod to the King’s environmentalism? The transformation of a princely caterpillar into a kingly butterfly? A metaphor for the light touch of monarchy in the 21st century?

So, to honours. I award Yeo a knighthood for the face, an MBE for the hands, and off to the Tower with the background to await a grisly execution.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 48May 15, 2024 12:57 PM

The eyes look kind.

by Anonymousreply 49May 15, 2024 1:00 PM

Artistic license, r49.

by Anonymousreply 50May 15, 2024 1:01 PM
Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 51May 15, 2024 1:01 PM

The face is exceptionally accurate, without idealising. A huge success there.

by Anonymousreply 52May 15, 2024 1:01 PM
Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 53May 15, 2024 1:03 PM
Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 54May 15, 2024 1:04 PM

It's rather odd.

by Anonymousreply 55May 15, 2024 1:04 PM

he appears as if the emperor of Hell

by Anonymousreply 56May 15, 2024 1:28 PM
Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 57May 15, 2024 1:28 PM

R56 He is.

by Anonymousreply 58May 15, 2024 1:29 PM

Is that a thing?

by Anonymousreply 59May 15, 2024 2:50 PM

It’s very 60s!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 60May 15, 2024 3:05 PM

I like that it shows his scary sausage fingers.

by Anonymousreply 61May 15, 2024 3:07 PM

The palette is vomitous.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 62May 15, 2024 3:07 PM

It's a comment on Charles's responsibility for Diana's death. He is awash in her blood.

by Anonymousreply 63May 15, 2024 3:13 PM

The first time I saw it, I thought WTF? After viewing it several times again, I think it's compelling and well done.

by Anonymousreply 64May 15, 2024 3:20 PM

Oooh it's like the cover of a collection of short horror stories from ~1970.

by Anonymousreply 65May 15, 2024 3:32 PM

He could've danced all night!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 66May 15, 2024 3:40 PM


by Anonymousreply 67May 15, 2024 3:47 PM

R63 No silly, it's the blood of the colonizers' victims throughout history.

by Anonymousreply 68May 15, 2024 4:06 PM

The gold standard.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 69May 15, 2024 4:24 PM

Reminds me of the Jackie Kennedy portrait in that the clothing matches the background (colorwise).

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 70May 15, 2024 6:23 PM

[quote] The face is exceptionally accurate, without idealising. A huge success there.

Plays down the closeness of the eyes, IMO.

by Anonymousreply 71May 15, 2024 6:24 PM

It resembles, and would be entirely appropriate for, his uncle, Lord Mountbatten.

by Anonymousreply 72May 15, 2024 6:44 PM

I thought blue was the Royal color.

by Anonymousreply 73May 15, 2024 8:31 PM

It's very Francis Bacon. I like it.

by Anonymousreply 74May 15, 2024 8:35 PM

Francis Bologna

by Anonymousreply 75May 15, 2024 8:36 PM

Who is the idiot posted the silly gifs?

by Anonymousreply 76May 16, 2024 6:46 AM


Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 77May 18, 2024 8:10 PM
Need more help? Click Here.

Yes indeed, we too use "cookies." Take a look at our privacy/terms or if you just want to see the damn site without all this bureaucratic nonsense, click ACCEPT. Otherwise, you'll just have to find some other site for your pointless bitchery needs.


Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!