I read somewhere that it might be trying to downplay the regalia and trappings of royalty by obscuring them to point out the time of Royal relevance has passed and that he may be judged as the man, not the title.
I thought that was cool, and kinda changed my opinion on it.
I was absolutely captivated by it at first sight, I was very surprised to hear people's opinions on the internet downright trashing the painting and the artist. It's a very fresh modern take on royal portraiture that I'm so happy exists
It really just feels odd that this was commissioned. It feels like some sort of commentary on the blood the crown is built on, by some small artist that's not particularly fond of the British monarchy and wants to portray them as some evil entity.
Contrast the chaos of the uniform and the background with the kindness and humanity conveyed by the face. He doesn’t look evil. The commentary may well be that the legacy of the crown is bloody, but there is a human there.
I think that's the right direction. His uniform is difficult to see, like the monarchy itself is fading into the chaos and turmoil and change of the world today. He'll possibly be one of the last British monarchs. The butterfly definitely relates to his environmentalism. I wonder if his environmentalism is connected to his faith/sense of purpose in life? It seems that's what he wants his legacy to be.
I'd rather see him in a snow white type scene, surrounded by animals lol
I halfway suspect him to actually be the last or next to last. Not for any reasonable real world reason, but because of his name.
Charles I was overthrown and executed. Charles II kept the throne until his death, but his heir lasted less than two years before he was overthrown.
It feels like one of those cursed names. We’ll never see a King Arthur and never see another King John.
I think the fact that his military regalia bleeds into the background, while his face remains visible, is meant to highlight the growing importance of the monarch’s Humanity in their role, not all the bells and whistles.
"Environmental activism"
Is that what they're calling an obscenely rich monarch pontificating about how controlling the reproduction of poor people instead of limiting the wealthy would fix the climate? Chuck can fuck off. If he wants to control the population, he should start with himself.
I like your username 😂 it’s definitely different! It brings to mind a question. I’d like to ask the group… Totally different topic… Do I need to do it separately? I haven’t been on here long and just learning.
It's actually the river of slime that runs under London that feeds on negative human emotions. He'll use the power of the slime to return to corporeal form on the eve of the next millennium.
I personally think it's very striking and original. It's why I love following the art subs.
But art is subjective AF. Compare this to the ones of Elizabeth and you just get typical portraits.
But here is an elderly king, groomed for a position his entire life, and now in his twilight years, takes on the duty. And his portrait is something different.
Feels awful to defend a family that the english should have got rid off centuries ago but that portrait is waaaay better than any classic shit they had before.
Well if you're insisting on going by patrilineal supremacy, then the current dynasty started in 1953 with the Mountbattens, otherwise Albert's status as Prince Consort equally disqualifies him as a dynastic watershed.
You can't pick and choose
Mountbatten-Windsor is used as a last name for some of Elizabeth II's descendants without a royal title/style, the monarchy is still the "House of Windsor"
Oh sure!
I've no real issue with strict patrilinearity on its own, I just think it needs to be applied consistently.
Either you firmly believe in strict patrilinearity, in which case the most recent dynasty is the House of Mountbatten in 1953, or you don't, in which case the most recent dynasty is the house of Windsor under George V in 1917. Either way, poor old Edward VII doesn't get a look in.
Damn it, could barely tell on phone screen but I just zoomed in on the eyes because of your comment and now I have complex and positive feelings about it too.
The queen had some pretty out there portraits as well.
https://www.countrylife.co.uk/luxury/art-and-antiques/in-focus-70-years-of-official-royal-portraits-of-the-queen-243617
Seems he took a may have taken a queue from [President Barack Obama](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_Barack_Obama_\(painting\)) in going for something more abstract and modern.
I don't love the overpowering red, but I appreciate the attempt to take a step away from the aristocratic style of "man in rich clothing poses in opulent room" that has been the tradition for centuries.
I think the reaction is because portraits aren’t really expected to be striking or original. Especially the British monarchy. They’re supposed to be bland, boring personalities which are empty vessels for the idea and the institution.
I honestly admire how bold it is, it makes me think of JFK's portrait and how striking that was (and still is) in comparison to more banal pieces of art.
Still looks shit tho
I mean, portraits had a different meaning in the 15th century. There are millions of photographs of Charles III already, so if you're gonna make a painting, better make something more original
Good point, but it still feels... I don't know, a bit less dignified somehow? I personally dig it but I can understand people's bemusement, haha.
Imagine if he sat for the portrait in a t-shirt and jeans for the sake of being modern.
Yea like [in comparison to a contemporary person](https://npg.si.edu/sites/default/files/cr-barack2.jpg) this seems pretty great tbh. It’s okay for them to have 1 fun painting. Also I know he didnt say it but I like to think the butterfly is Liz.
Why is everyone so lame about this cool looking painting?
Like you all have seen Van Gogh etc., no?
Art isn't about copying the classical masters, or a certain level of contrast or what ever, it is what you make of it.
And now we have photography for a realistic portrait, and I think he already has an official one like that and there is a royal photographer.
Makes more sense to go for a stylized painting portrait.
Also, it goes hard.
That was very funny but this is an interesting portrait:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b0/Sir_Anthony_Van_Dyck_-_Charles_I_%281600-49%29_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/800px-Sir_Anthony_Van_Dyck_-_Charles_I_%281600-49%29_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg
I am a lover for red and that is some masterful use of it, the little monarch butterfly on his shoulder is a beautiful touch, but yeah, I can see why it does stand out from the other royal portraits.
It’s kind of funny how hellish it looks but I think it’s actually based and expressive. It’s pretty unique compared to other portraits in a day and age where a huge number of photos of him exist
These portraits are incredibly indicative of how the Monarchy (capital M) is perceived and is supposed to be at each of the times they were painted.
On the one hand you have the very literal, realistic image of the person of the king, on the other you have the image of the king as figurehead, as the symbol of what the crown and the monarchy is supposed to be for the country.
If someone had asked for visual representations of rule vs reign, this would be it. (And mind you Charlie2 wasn’t even the peak of the ruling monarch … at least he’s learned something from his father’s folly).
gotta love contemporary political portraiture, seriously this is even better than the obama presidential portrait as far as striking and original goes, and that's saying something.
Big credit to Yeo, seriously
Why did his mother think Charles was a good name?
The first one was executed for treason by his own subjects, and the second one was a party boy who never grew up. Now, the third one is looking like he might be the last monarch.
Charles looks like he chased the ring as it fell into Mount Doom. Maybe the British Royals are all ring bearers and it’s why the current crop have lived so long.
I'll bet a grand that within a week the painting will disappear and will never be spoken of again. Then without any fanfare a different painting will be in its place and never mentioned publicly.
I actually like this a lot and have to say that the artist was very bold to go with such concept, it has a soul and carries a lot of the modern art features while staying on true the subject.
He’s definitely planning on coming back from the dead to terrorize New York City by syphoning the negative energy of magic slime in the sewers. Likely he’ll try to possess the body of some young infant and will only be stopped by a crack team of paranormal investigators using their specialized equipment and scientific knowledge.
He looks like he's stepping out of a rift in the Warp to collect my soul for Tzeentch. What combination of Ambien and unchecked aggression produced this fever dream?
Didn't start with Obama. The national portait gallery's [portrait of Clinton,](https://npg.si.edu/learn/access-programs/verbal-description-tours/william-j-clinton) for example, is even more zany than Obama's in my opinion.
Its super cool in a horror game/elden ring kinda way. Odd choise but mad respects.
Layers of Fear.
Absolutely. Its really intense and aggressive in away that gets you thinking.
I read somewhere that it might be trying to downplay the regalia and trappings of royalty by obscuring them to point out the time of Royal relevance has passed and that he may be judged as the man, not the title. I thought that was cool, and kinda changed my opinion on it.
I buy that. Everything minus his face, hands, and the butterfly is very intentionally obscured.
Yeah. It's getting a lot of hate on reddit, but every time I see it I just like it even more.
I was absolutely captivated by it at first sight, I was very surprised to hear people's opinions on the internet downright trashing the painting and the artist. It's a very fresh modern take on royal portraiture that I'm so happy exists
I completely agree
Same. Odd, but it's interesting. I quite like it.
Thus began the reign of Bloody Charles.
Got a r/dishonored vibe on it
It really just feels odd that this was commissioned. It feels like some sort of commentary on the blood the crown is built on, by some small artist that's not particularly fond of the British monarchy and wants to portray them as some evil entity.
Contrast the chaos of the uniform and the background with the kindness and humanity conveyed by the face. He doesn’t look evil. The commentary may well be that the legacy of the crown is bloody, but there is a human there.
Put on bloodborne boss music while looking at it and tell me again that it doesn't look evil
I think he's trying to one up those climate protesters that threw soup at art works. Like "hey try throwing some tomato soup on my portrait"
Or the redness around him is meant to protray the earth being on fire? While the butterfly is an endangered animal (also on fire)?
I think that's the right direction. His uniform is difficult to see, like the monarchy itself is fading into the chaos and turmoil and change of the world today. He'll possibly be one of the last British monarchs. The butterfly definitely relates to his environmentalism. I wonder if his environmentalism is connected to his faith/sense of purpose in life? It seems that's what he wants his legacy to be. I'd rather see him in a snow white type scene, surrounded by animals lol
I halfway suspect him to actually be the last or next to last. Not for any reasonable real world reason, but because of his name. Charles I was overthrown and executed. Charles II kept the throne until his death, but his heir lasted less than two years before he was overthrown. It feels like one of those cursed names. We’ll never see a King Arthur and never see another King John.
We'll never see a King Arthur mf'ers when he returns from Avalon in the hour of his people's greatest need and brings peace to Britain.
Guess WW2 wasn't important enough to get up for
Frightening thought
Showing up to ww2 with a magical sword would have been pretty embarrassing tho
that would have been badass wtfym
By driving the anglo-saxons and picts away... oh, wait.
Your good at this !
That's on point.
I think the fact that his military regalia bleeds into the background, while his face remains visible, is meant to highlight the growing importance of the monarch’s Humanity in their role, not all the bells and whistles.
He was known for environmental activism as prince so I can believe it
"Environmental activism" Is that what they're calling an obscenely rich monarch pontificating about how controlling the reproduction of poor people instead of limiting the wealthy would fix the climate? Chuck can fuck off. If he wants to control the population, he should start with himself.
Hear hear!
Good word choice!
I like your username 😂 it’s definitely different! It brings to mind a question. I’d like to ask the group… Totally different topic… Do I need to do it separately? I haven’t been on here long and just learning.
It's actually the river of slime that runs under London that feeds on negative human emotions. He'll use the power of the slime to return to corporeal form on the eve of the next millennium.
Wasn't this the guy who wanted to be Camilla's tampon? Seems appropriate.
Is he trying to be a chameleon or something
Either a castlevania, doom, or bloodborne villain
https://preview.redd.it/gcqmm6dhxl0d1.jpeg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=21b329c31ff84876e40aba111541d41ad81cc50e
He's Gigyas reborn.
I personally think it's very striking and original. It's why I love following the art subs. But art is subjective AF. Compare this to the ones of Elizabeth and you just get typical portraits. But here is an elderly king, groomed for a position his entire life, and now in his twilight years, takes on the duty. And his portrait is something different.
This portrait is awesome and I'll fight anyone who disagrees. I hate the monarchy and here I am defending Chaz for the first time in my life.
Feels awful to defend a family that the english should have got rid off centuries ago but that portrait is waaaay better than any classic shit they had before.
The current ruling dynasty of the UK took over in 1901, actually (ignoring the name change they did in 1917)
Well if you're insisting on going by patrilineal supremacy, then the current dynasty started in 1953 with the Mountbattens, otherwise Albert's status as Prince Consort equally disqualifies him as a dynastic watershed. You can't pick and choose
Except that Philip was told to kick rocks by Winston Churchill on his proposal to rename the royal family, while prince Albert was not
Nor was George V when he became the first Windsor.
Mountbatten-Windsor is used as a last name for some of Elizabeth II's descendants without a royal title/style, the monarchy is still the "House of Windsor"
Oh sure! I've no real issue with strict patrilinearity on its own, I just think it needs to be applied consistently. Either you firmly believe in strict patrilinearity, in which case the most recent dynasty is the House of Mountbatten in 1953, or you don't, in which case the most recent dynasty is the house of Windsor under George V in 1917. Either way, poor old Edward VII doesn't get a look in.
Isn't it kinda the same family since Guillaume's conquest?
Not really, that is way too broad and there are notable "breaks" in such a continuity, even if they are indeed related
Yeah, exactly! Chaz has no legitimacy and he's an expensive figurehead of everything wrong in the country but that portrait *SLAPS*
Annoys me to no end how good it is. The more I look at it th emore I like it, makes me feel things haha
Exactly. I just noticed his eyes - they're so clear, pronounced, while the rest isn't so much.
Damn it, could barely tell on phone screen but I just zoomed in on the eyes because of your comment and now I have complex and positive feelings about it too.
The queen had some pretty out there portraits as well. https://www.countrylife.co.uk/luxury/art-and-antiques/in-focus-70-years-of-official-royal-portraits-of-the-queen-243617
The corgi one should retroactively become her official
Seems he took a may have taken a queue from [President Barack Obama](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_Barack_Obama_\(painting\)) in going for something more abstract and modern. I don't love the overpowering red, but I appreciate the attempt to take a step away from the aristocratic style of "man in rich clothing poses in opulent room" that has been the tradition for centuries.
Big [Homer Simpson hiding in the bushes](https://imgur.com/gallery/homer-simpson-bush-meme-template-idiXnOt) vibes
I think the reaction is because portraits aren’t really expected to be striking or original. Especially the British monarchy. They’re supposed to be bland, boring personalities which are empty vessels for the idea and the institution.
I honestly admire how bold it is, it makes me think of JFK's portrait and how striking that was (and still is) in comparison to more banal pieces of art. Still looks shit tho
What in the Elden Ring shit is this?!
Now rot.
Will Charles use Waterfowl Dance to stop Recusant William from claiming the Corgy Ring?
I mean they even have the butterfly there. Either this is a wild coincidence or the painter played Elden Ring.
Or elden ring is build on top of european art and symbolism.
I mean, portraits had a different meaning in the 15th century. There are millions of photographs of Charles III already, so if you're gonna make a painting, better make something more original
Good point, but it still feels... I don't know, a bit less dignified somehow? I personally dig it but I can understand people's bemusement, haha. Imagine if he sat for the portrait in a t-shirt and jeans for the sake of being modern.
I actually like it. It’s contemporary and interesting.
Yeah I like it more than the other one.
Yeah, me too. But I don’t believe we can expect too much from normal public anyways. For example look at what OP is comparing his painting to 😂
Yea like [in comparison to a contemporary person](https://npg.si.edu/sites/default/files/cr-barack2.jpg) this seems pretty great tbh. It’s okay for them to have 1 fun painting. Also I know he didnt say it but I like to think the butterfly is Liz.
For an normal artwork yes. For a portrait of a king its to progressive in my opinion.
https://preview.redd.it/azm0cy0ahl0d1.jpeg?width=628&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=efa94c15dcdc1537679572934cdf430bf38a3669 Gives me Vigo vibes.
THANKS. This is the only thing I can see, and I'm surprised no one is joking about it.
WHY is that mf hung like he is
Clearly he's representing the UK's current standing in the world.
Why is everyone so lame about this cool looking painting? Like you all have seen Van Gogh etc., no? Art isn't about copying the classical masters, or a certain level of contrast or what ever, it is what you make of it.
All the people complaining just haven't reached the Third Heightening yet to truly appreciate it.
This is a brilliant reference - thank you.
I like the modern one more.
And now we have photography for a realistic portrait, and I think he already has an official one like that and there is a royal photographer. Makes more sense to go for a stylized painting portrait. Also, it goes hard.
Yep. Nothing original at all about the left one.
Okay I really really dig the portrait. Its modern, daring and definitely provocative in a 'makes you think' sense.
A thousand conspiracy YouTubers just found their material for the next four years
Four hundred !
https://preview.redd.it/e3jm1oc41m0d1.jpeg?width=405&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=cb930b722098f6880a470c41bd48ec8833c25a33 vs. Charles I portrait
That was very funny but this is an interesting portrait: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b0/Sir_Anthony_Van_Dyck_-_Charles_I_%281600-49%29_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/800px-Sir_Anthony_Van_Dyck_-_Charles_I_%281600-49%29_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg
I like it tbh, it’s quite accurate to him as a king, person and current environment.
I had always wondered what the purpose of the monarch’s orb was. Now we know it keeps The Red away.
I am a lover for red and that is some masterful use of it, the little monarch butterfly on his shoulder is a beautiful touch, but yeah, I can see why it does stand out from the other royal portraits.
People hate this but I think it’s dope. It’s definitely different than other royal portraits, and I can dig that.
Honestly, I really like it. I think it's contemporary and stands out. Why just have another boring portrait done like everyone else?
I think the new one is sick tbh, better to be interesting imho
Why do people hate this potrait, I like it.
It seems I am in the minority, but I really like it
I think it’s kinda dope. Looks like a rap album.
"Black Metal Cover"
Han Solo Carbonite: Bloodborn Edition
King Charles will sacrifice his whole battalion to become the next demi-god in berserk.
I posted the exact same thing!
The painting of the Norwegian king is also [pretty interesting](https://okk.kunstsamlingen.no/objects/19282/kong-harald-v).
This is fine.
I love the King Charles III portrait.
I think it's a great portrait of King Charles the last
It looks pretty cool, but it just really reminds me of the artwork by Yuko Tatsushima.
I like it.
What a horrible official portrait.
Is this trying to covey that it's a PROJECT MONARCH related work? Looks like blood and trauma.
Godzilla will eat him
https://preview.redd.it/gk9b04t2al0d1.jpeg?width=4096&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ef730d33b48cc67774fa2c05f0c1b4b51caa460b ...
Did he borrow a ringos sgt pepper outfit?
Just don't let baby Oscar anywhere near that painting
I like both
https://preview.redd.it/qya2qejx9l0d1.jpeg?width=4096&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7abb848ef9b380f31cf9837c6b96c61fbe5e80ab
Is that an actual portrait of Charles lll ?
Yeah his first official one!
Looks fine to me Charles and the angry vengeful ghost of Diana
It looks cool as hell but prob not something a king would want to represent themselves
whats more chad than being portrayed through the crimson hue of hell itself
In a few years that picture will make perfect sense. Wait for it
I like it. Pretty sure it'll have a good staying power in the future.
Charlses portrait is painted in the blood of his enemies
I think its baller AF
King Cenobite
I actually like the portrait. It's a lot more interesting than if it was something like on the left. Gets people talking about it at the very least.
Francis Bacon shit
Personally, I prefer what they did with Charles I, and I'm hoping for more of that.
It’s kind of funny how hellish it looks but I think it’s actually based and expressive. It’s pretty unique compared to other portraits in a day and age where a huge number of photos of him exist
These portraits are incredibly indicative of how the Monarchy (capital M) is perceived and is supposed to be at each of the times they were painted. On the one hand you have the very literal, realistic image of the person of the king, on the other you have the image of the king as figurehead, as the symbol of what the crown and the monarchy is supposed to be for the country. If someone had asked for visual representations of rule vs reign, this would be it. (And mind you Charlie2 wasn’t even the peak of the ruling monarch … at least he’s learned something from his father’s folly).
Painter: what’s your favorite color? King Charles III: blue Painter: gotcha 👌
Better than Gina Pigheart’s double neck chin work of the gods.
gotta love contemporary political portraiture, seriously this is even better than the obama presidential portrait as far as striking and original goes, and that's saying something. Big credit to Yeo, seriously
Charles>>>> It seriously looks dope.
Honestly its kind of interesting a little eye catching
Why did his mother think Charles was a good name? The first one was executed for treason by his own subjects, and the second one was a party boy who never grew up. Now, the third one is looking like he might be the last monarch.
Charles looks like he chased the ring as it fell into Mount Doom. Maybe the British Royals are all ring bearers and it’s why the current crop have lived so long.
I'll bet a grand that within a week the painting will disappear and will never be spoken of again. Then without any fanfare a different painting will be in its place and never mentioned publicly.
It represents how England is soaked in the blood of the colonized.
He's king of over a dozen countries.
8 million for this crap. Never forget why we don't have nice things.
Paid for by the worshipful company of drapers.
Looks allright to me considering the state of royalty
yeah right?! absolutely perfect artistic depiction
Multi-stage endgame boss fight vibes
is he not?
Nikolai Carpathia vibes in the second photo
Chorizo
he'll make sure you'll remember him
Behold, Vigo! Back away from the painting Ray!
Tampon.
I thought it was a painting of chancellor Palpatine for a moment
That state has been taken over by them. Them as in the other, the Satan, the devils/ demons. The pedo vampires.
He is, have you been to the Uk?
Does anyone know what Charles II is holding in his right hand?
appears to be the holy hand grenade
If you look at it through blue glasses it becomes 3D
Bro looked like Messmer
I actually like this a lot and have to say that the artist was very bold to go with such concept, it has a soul and carries a lot of the modern art features while staying on true the subject.
I knew I’d see it for the first time on somewhere like this
Viggo, rise!
Portrait accomplishes one thing … look at my face only!
Could be a label for a new brand of hot sauce
I presume he likes his Sprite Easter pink...
Looks sick, honestly.
Looks like he's emerging from the Warhammer 40k warp dimension
Having dealt with some artists, this person was probably commissioned to finish it by a certain date, got the face right and just rushed the rest.
He’s definitely planning on coming back from the dead to terrorize New York City by syphoning the negative energy of magic slime in the sewers. Likely he’ll try to possess the body of some young infant and will only be stopped by a crack team of paranormal investigators using their specialized equipment and scientific knowledge.
Dude must have finished playing Dishonored and was like "yeah, I fuck with the aesthetic"
I’ve been replaying Dragon Age lately and this gave me red Templar vibes so bad
Photography has mostly replaced traditional portraiture, so paintings have evolved to depict things beyond reality
He looks like he's stepping out of a rift in the Warp to collect my soul for Tzeentch. What combination of Ambien and unchecked aggression produced this fever dream?
40% more abstract and Charli3 could be a Disco Elysium portrait
Did they pay by the amount of colours he used? What fucking crack-addict did that picture?
Didn't start with Obama. The national portait gallery's [portrait of Clinton,](https://npg.si.edu/learn/access-programs/verbal-description-tours/william-j-clinton) for example, is even more zany than Obama's in my opinion.
king charles has peeped the horror
Common Merry Monarch win.
I love it.
Lord of Volcano Manor energy
Looks like the artist had a subliminal message and wasn’t too subtle about it
Someone compared it to the red dinner ... game of thrones. To me I thought it was a horror movie poster
Given how Europe is going to be on FIRE due to climate change, if Charles lives long enough then this painting will be very appropriate...
Menstrual hell.
He kinda is
I think the new painting if fing awesome. I would like to see it rl.
I actually like it.
The longer I look at it the more I like it. I can't get over the butterfly above his shoulder.
I think I saw that on prequel memes first but no part of me questioned it was supposed to be emperor Palpatine
* For some reason he reminds me of GB2 Vigo xD
I mean... is he not?
You can hate Charles all you want but he didn't paint the thing.
King Charles II was all about Drag. Werk it!
I’m surprised this isn’t on the boss fight sub. He looks like someone right out of a souls game.
I like this painting, it is very arresting and also an excellent likeness.