I’m a Telegraph subscriber myself, so–under current rules of political correctness which specify that only those “in group” should be allowed to speak about, and especially criticize, “group” matters, I’m golden.
Right now (about 3PM Eastern US on Tuesday May 14, 2024) there are no fewer than three posts about the unveiling of the first portrait of King Charles since the Coronation at the top of the Telegraph web page:
Here’s a full-length shot of the painting:
I don’t quite get the whole “Flames of Hell” motif, or why it’s so red. I do think the face captures him quite well. And I like the monarch butterfly. The artist has, clearly, spent quite a bit of time studying the patterning on the monarch’s wings, although the colors have been subsumed under the “Flames of Hell” rubric for reasons not clear to me.
What I find a bit odd, though, is Charles’s right hand. (To us, it presents on our left, since he’s facing us.)
It looks both oversized (I know Charles is famous for his “sausage” fingers, but, really?) and out of position.
And it reminds me of nothing so much as Princess Charlotte’s left hand in that Mother’s Day photograph that was photoshopped by the Princess of Wales for reasons of her own to such caterwauling on the part of those in the media who wished to invent a story. I’m not sure why someone who’s obviously a talented artist would include such a thing in his career-defining work.
Odd.
I like it! I don’t know about his right hand, and so much red, but I think the artist has captured something.
I like it too. I just think that one hand’s a bit awkward and clunky.
It’s a very different “look” for a royal portrait, both in terms of color and style. The benchmark for such things has long been the Annigoni portrait of Elizabeth II, than which anything more formal and regal can hardly be imagined:
This impressionistic, vivid, painting with the inclusion of a butterfly has certainly got people in the UK talking….
Royal portraits down the centuries have been fairly traditional and staid, so it’s welcome to see a break from tradition with this one being very modern and contemporary. Wouldn’t surprise me at all if that’s the impression Charles himself wished to convey.
Yes, I think that’s very likely true. It will certainly stand out in the gallery, or half-way up the staircase, or wherever it’s hung!
Still chuckling about Telegraph columnist Allison Pearson’s remark that the portrait looks as if it was painted in the aftermath of an “explosion at a summer pudding factory.”
For those not in the know, “summer pudding” is a peculiarly English dessert in which a combination of summer fruits (usually strawberries, raspberries and blackberries) is gently stewed in a little sugar and then used to fill a bowl which has been lined, and then covered when it’s full, with pieces of sliced white bread. You then chill it, with a plate and small weight–such as a tin of tomatoes–on top, until it sets somewhat (or, just leave it overnight, weighted, in the fridge). Upend it onto a pretty plate and serve with custard sauce or whipped cream. It sounds very odd, and very “frightful English cooking,” but is delicious. (Pro tip if you try such a thing: Use a fairly firm white bread, even one that’s slightly stale, with the crusts cut off. Fresh US Wonder Bread is not what you need; it will just turn to sludge.)
The BBC Good Food site has a good recipe for one, here: https://www.bbcgoodfood.com/recipes/summer-pudding.
It includes redcurrants, something you can’t readily get in the States, at least around here. Just make up the difference with something else. I don’t recommend blueberries as a substitute. They’re just too blue, whereas the summer pudding is best done in shades of red and purple. Just like the background to King Charles’s official portrait. LOL.
https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2024/05/14/20/84861963-13418141-Sci_Fi_fans_said_that_the_King_had_been_Hans_Solo_d_in_reference-a-2_1715714042996.jpg