r/therewasanattempt 10d ago

to act happy about your Royal portrait.

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

25.2k Upvotes

2.0k comments sorted by

u/AutoModerator 10d ago

Welcome to r/Therewasanattempt!

Consider visiting r/Worldnewsvideo for videos from around the world!

Please review our policy on bigotry and hate speech by clicking this link

In order to view our rules, you can type "!rules" in any comment, and automod will respond with the subreddit rules.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

19.2k

u/ConfuzzledFalcon 10d ago

In his defence, it does look like shit.

9.2k

u/welltherewasthisbear 10d ago

In the artist’s defense, the subject looks like shit.

2.3k

u/MagicLobsterAttorney 10d ago edited 9d ago

Hey, leave his subjects alone. Just because their King looks like shite, none of them deserve to be called that.

993

u/fatkiddown 10d ago

“Listen -- strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.”

245

u/beerme81 10d ago

Be quiet!

347

u/shawner47 10d ago

I mean, if I went 'round saying I was an emperor, just because some moistened bint had lobbed a scimitar at me, they'd put me away!

119

u/monkey_trumpets 10d ago

Haha, moistened bint.

184

u/King_Moonracer003 10d ago

Now we see the violence inherent in the system !

185

u/notanotherkrazychik 10d ago

HELP! HELP! I'm being repressed!

52

u/kobuu 9d ago

Bloody peasant!

→ More replies (0)
→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (5)

51

u/professorbuttnutter 10d ago

76

u/Ambitious_Drop_7152 10d ago

Was it unexpected, though? I mean, it's not like it's the Spanish inquisition or anything.

→ More replies (7)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

27

u/Wilburtus 10d ago

Help! Help! I'm being repressed!

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (9)

17

u/[deleted] 10d ago

[deleted]

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (5)

490

u/XinyanMayn 10d ago

Nothing wrong with the facial image but the colors are utter shit. Hope the "artist" gets sent to the dungeon

202

u/CressLevel 10d ago

I don't know anything about the artist so I can't be certain; but this feels like something you'd do intentionally.

80

u/PmUsYourDuckPics 10d ago

Yeah, you don’t do such a good job on the face and hands and flub the rest like that unless it’s intentional.

39

u/LessInThought 10d ago

He tripped while carrying some red paint. They didn't pay him enough to redo the whole thing.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (17)

180

u/Salty_McGillicutty 10d ago

Its giving kingdom awashed in blood vibes, pointing the finger right at the king.

43

u/ourlastchancefortea 9d ago

And by King you mean the free floating head enjoying the blood river below?

→ More replies (11)

43

u/outamyhead 10d ago

There hasn't been anyone in the tower for a while.

20

u/XinyanMayn 10d ago

He's about to break that streak

40

u/xikbdexhi6 10d ago

It looks like the king is trying to restore his youth by floating in the blood of his subjects

→ More replies (1)

27

u/Double_Distribution8 10d ago

In the UK we call them oubliettes but we can't remember why.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (11)

138

u/buckao 10d ago

The artist remembered that Charles wanted "to be a tampon" between Camilla's legs.

Edit to add context: Link to story about it

21

u/-ve_ 9d ago

wanted

He's talking about being reincarnated in her pants but says "god forbid, [as] a tampax... that would be just my [bad] luck". It's weird as fuck but he never wanted to be a tampon lol.

→ More replies (2)

118

u/Kaponeo360 10d ago

This looks like someone drew the face and told a 1st grader to color the background

→ More replies (1)

75

u/Comprehensive_Dog139 10d ago

He Bri'ish, it's pronounced shite.

61

u/cloudtrotter4 10d ago

I will say, the face is well done though. It’s red on red on red. On red.

→ More replies (2)

25

u/somerandomshmo 10d ago

In shit's defense, there is no family resemblance.

→ More replies (1)

20

u/[deleted] 10d ago

Glowing-up saggy old regents is literally the job. I've seen a lot better done with a lot more aggressively in-bred subjects

→ More replies (30)

553

u/RioRancher 10d ago

It’s like that Ghostbusters painting

107

u/ThompsonSMG0909 10d ago

I thought the same thing. The great and powerful Vigo.

50

u/TemporalGrid 10d ago

YOU ARE LIKE THE BUZZING OF FLIES TO HEEEEM!

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (2)

68

u/itsallgoodman2002 10d ago

So few Ghostbusters II references on the internet. Thank you.

→ More replies (6)

55

u/GetOutOfTheWhey 10d ago

"Ah shit, I am going to haunt this painting when I die, arent I?"

16

u/Fairchildx 10d ago

OMG IT DOES !!

12

u/CC713-LCTX 10d ago

I just told my girl the same damn thing hahahaha

14

u/jrb9249 10d ago

Are you referring to the Scourge of Carpathia?

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (8)

196

u/HuffyStriker 10d ago

It's so shit that the Just Stop Oil protesters didn't even need to step in and ruin the occasion

13

u/ThriceFive 10d ago

It is like the Just Stop Oil protesters had already come and splashed their red paint everywhere.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (2)

140

u/soulmagic123 10d ago

It's very abstract for an official portrait

37

u/Cerpin-Taxt 10d ago

It's not abstract at all, the word you're looking for is impressionistic.

58

u/soulmagic123 10d ago

You think "impressionistic" isn't "abstract at all" And you're willing to die on that hill? Like if you were in a high school art class and were asked to describe "impressionistic " you would use "not abstract at all" In your answer?

33

u/soulmagic123 10d ago

I just googled "is Impressionism " and the first autofill Was "abstract". lol.

42

u/LowBrowHighStandards 10d ago edited 10d ago

Impressionism has elements of abstract, but they aren’t the same. This painting is far more impressionist than it is abstract.

Edit: however, I don’t disagree with your original sentiment. This painting doesn’t seem inline with your average royal painting. Like at all.

→ More replies (5)

12

u/Cerpin-Taxt 10d ago

That's because abstract impressionism is it's own thing. The word abstract is in there to differentiate it from impressionism, which isn't abstract.

→ More replies (17)
→ More replies (28)
→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

105

u/nightpanda893 10d ago

Honestly I think it could look pretty cool if it was a different subject that was more in line with the tone of the painting. It just makes so little sense for a royal portrait. I feel like it’s actually a cool concept that was just kind of wasted on him.

→ More replies (6)

75

u/anehzat 10d ago

Clearly represents colonial genocide with blood on his hands 😂

→ More replies (9)

22

u/TheStegg 10d ago edited 9d ago

He looks like Vigo the Carpathian

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (48)

10.1k

u/Broote 10d ago

Wait, this whole time it was real? I thought that was just a meme! Holy shit

3.6k

u/ihateusernames999999 10d ago

So did I! That painting is so horrible. I thought it had to be fake.

1.7k

u/E-Pluribus-Tobin 10d ago edited 10d ago

I think it's cool. More interesting than a portrait that just looks like a photo of the man

1.0k

u/JUSTICE_SALTIE 10d ago

More interesting yes, but only because it sucks so much worse.

638

u/PhilipMewnan 10d ago

I don’t get this take at all. I think it’s really neat how they used subtly different shades of red to do the background, uniform, butterfly, and basically the whole painting besides the face. Doesn’t look great in this vid but high quality photographs or scans or whatever I think look pretty good! I think it’s a great re-imagining of the classic “king portrait”.

997

u/PersonalSycophant 10d ago edited 9d ago

As an art piece it's honestly cool. As a self portrait I think it's a bit self-defeating. It has a sinister air to it, with the red blending into the red. It feels critical of the subject. Again, good for an art gallery, but for your official portrait it feels villainous.

162

u/PhilipMewnan 10d ago

Well yeah, I think at first the red can feel a bit sinister, but after a moment it grew on me. It’s a self-limitation to only use one red like this, and I think it’s kind of incredible how this shock of red was actually kind of transformed into a delicate and fragile piece of art. That’s the vibe I get from the butterfly and the unexpectedly subtle shading and detailing on the uniform and medals anyway. The butterfly is also seemingly a focus of the artwork as well, which almost feels like it’s trying to portray a humility and an appreciation for nature . I don’t know if other portraits do things like that

Here’s the scan of the artwork

171

u/notfree25 10d ago

"Oh shit. It looks like he just butchered a peasant family and set the house afire. Oh, I know, I will add a butterfly to show how gentle this is"

36

u/TurquoiseLuck 9d ago

Seriously. He's on fire and/or covered in blood. This is a terrible look, unless it's an attempt at making some sort of statement about the history of the monarchy.

50

u/TheUnluckyBard 9d ago

Seriously. He's on fire and/or covered in blood. This is a terrible look, unless it's an attempt at making some sort of statement about the history of the monarchy.

There is just a fuckton of emotion in this portrait. Looking at the HD version makes me shudder. This was absolutely done intentionally. This is some kind of artist's version of a diss track. There's a fucking reason for this.

I just wish I knew what that reason was. It feels personal.

→ More replies (0)
→ More replies (1)

40

u/sm00thArsenal 10d ago

I like most of it, aside from the texturing on the uniform being too similar to the texturing on the background, particularly around the elbows and the waist.

→ More replies (3)

20

u/snailpubes 10d ago

Hes using kayo ken

21

u/[deleted] 10d ago

[deleted]

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (34)

53

u/Iboven 10d ago

As a self portrait

Self portraits are artists painting themselves.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (11)

75

u/AniNgAnnoys 10d ago

I agree. Aesthetically I like it.

I think symbolically it is really profound as well. You have the King of England in a field of red with his regalia fading into that very red background, leaving the only clear-vivid thing left are his face and hands. To me, it is showing the nature of him as a king. A man who is just a face (vivid), whose glorified history (regalia/uniform) is fading into the noise (literally noise) of its violent past (the field of red).

I think the vividness of his hands is also important, maybe even the most important. Firstly, to me, it is saying that there is a man under the costume. His face and hands are vivid and I assume they are connected by a body. In another world, where this painting was of the king naked, his body would not be painted in red as his uniform is. It would be vivid like his face and hands. I believe this is the artists way of showing is that it isn't the man that is fading from history, but the status and power of the British Empire that is.

We can go further as well with the hands. I believe they are also the artist showing us that he believes that the king still has the power to change the world. The king doesn't need to fade away. He exists now and has hands that can shape the world. Next though, we can look to what his hands are holding. It is a sword, a symbol of that past that he is clinging to. Is this the artist saying he doesn't think Charles is the man to step out of the shadow of the Empire's past? That he will cling to that sword until his death?

Then there is the butterfly. At first I thought it was just a smudge in the background. It is hard to make out the details of it in the images I have seen, but it looks like a Monarch. The symbolism there is pretty straight forward, but maybe it goes deeper? Butterflies in general are famous for one thing, their transition from caterpillar to cocoon to butterfly. This maybe represents his transformation into a king, but also is maybe showing that he is at the end. Butterflies do not transform into anything else. Perhaps, another symbol from that artist that he does not feel Charles will change further. He will fade into the background.

Monarch Butterflies are known for their long migrations. Butterflies also sometimes symbolize the souls of the dead. Dianna? Probably not.

Anyway, those are my thoughts after looking at it today.

38

u/jakethepeg1989 10d ago

It brings to mind when I dropped a tenner into a bowl of tomato soup.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (14)
→ More replies (24)
→ More replies (3)

77

u/Whyistheplatypus 10d ago

You know what purpose a portrait is meant to serve right?

75

u/Vecna_Is_My_Co-Pilot 10d ago edited 10d ago

Yes it’s fantastic! A truly evocative representation of the last cancerous heir to a dying blood soaked empire. It evokes an ancient tarnished nobility that is quickly fading from view. The work is absolutely moving in the way it represented the waning stature of a one-imposing figurehead. It instead shows how all indications of office, beyond the weathered man himself, are fading into the background. The medals, the regalia, are all being wallpapered over, old relics that has long since outlived their purpose but still are hauntingly, ominously present like an antique that nobody needs or uses but can’t be parted with.

25

u/SweatyAdhesive 10d ago

So you can see why Charles probably didn't like it that much right?

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (15)
→ More replies (9)

41

u/free_is_free76 10d ago

You're a fellow fan of portraits of Catholic Cardinals, I see.

Clearly, this artist hated the King. That's simply awful.

→ More replies (1)

43

u/illegalcheese 10d ago

I agree. I think it makes him look insanely evil, and old, and the red-on-red is a little awkward. But something about the art style and brush strokes and the bold color makes it seem really dramatic and bombastic. Not necessarily suitable for a royal portrait, but it's pretty cool looking in and of itself.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (32)

38

u/Parking_Train8423 10d ago

and in poor taste as well

13

u/[deleted] 10d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

79

u/CanaryJane42 10d ago

He's covered and surrounded in what looks like blood

44

u/Igennem 10d ago

Fittingly, perhaps, depending on your point of view.

→ More replies (1)

13

u/Dazzling-Research418 10d ago

Ah okay. I figured but I feel like it’s appropriate, not bad taste, given the history of colonization by the monarchy.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (4)

75

u/K1nd_1 10d ago

Life imitates art as they say

21

u/free_is_free76 10d ago

Yes, The King became a Cardinal after seeing this

→ More replies (2)

46

u/quyen83 10d ago edited 10d ago

OMG yes, I thought someone edited it to look like the Ghostbusters painting.

Just looked up the Ghostbusters painting, this is worse

Edit: extra word

→ More replies (2)

29

u/macca2000fox 10d ago

Mon can We have Homer Simpson Backs Into the Bushes.

We have Homer Simpson Backs Into the Bushes at home

Homer Simpson Backs Into the Bushes at home

20

u/red_sekhmet 10d ago

Me too. I didn't realize it was actually that red. Yikes....needs a new artist.

15

u/Unhappy_Concept237 10d ago

Me too! I saw it some other subreddit this morning and just thought it was a joke.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (12)

6.8k

u/ZRhoREDD 10d ago

Curious about the artist's intent here. Not a lot of GOOD ways to make an all red portrait. Are we burning? Is he bathed in blood? Is he Communist?

3.7k

u/NICEnEVILmike 10d ago

Red represents all the blood spilled in the name of the British empire. Idk if that's actually the artist's intention, but I'm sticking with it.

444

u/redsixthgun 10d ago

That had occurred to me too

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (24)

597

u/thetransportedman 10d ago edited 10d ago

Regardless of the bright color, making the foreground clothing pattern identical to the background is a terrible composition choice and a reason nobody does it. It just looks like an underpainting with the hands and face finished at the moment

And the background itself is strange. The general stroke patterns in each quadrant is different with the top left smears likely out of focus monarch butterflies since there’s a second half painted one in there. But the brush patterns match the curvature of his head which is awkward. And then the top right is horizontal strokes while the bottom half is vertical. All this to say a bunch of distracting inconsistencies bringing the viewers attention to everything but the subject of a royal portrait which is indeed an odd choice lol

181

u/PieS17 10d ago

the painting looks like an open casket funeral to me, with him drowned in blood instead of flowers

37

u/Bamith20 10d ago

Metal as fuck.

→ More replies (3)

108

u/DomitianusAugustus 10d ago

I think the intent is to obscure the usual elaborate costume and pageantry of a royal portrait and confront us with the subject.

I find it compelling, at least as a reflection of how Charles sees himself.

Either way, you’re not going to get any good discussion here outside of very art focused subreddits. Reddit is consistently anti-art.

50

u/FrenchFryCattaneo 10d ago

I agree the discourse surrounding art on reddit is awful. But this is one painting where I'm for once concerned with what laypeople think. Who else is this portrait for, if not the ordinary subject? Isn't it a problem when most people see the royal portrait and the first thing they think is, "BLOOD".

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (6)

31

u/doesntsmokecrack 10d ago

I’m sure the guy commissioned to paint a portrait of the King of England has some passing understanding of colour and composition, possibly even more than redditors.

23

u/littlebobbytables9 10d ago

That's 100% intentional

19

u/Fragrant-Ad-9732 10d ago

You know what, you saying this made me think that they could totally have gone with a different colour uniform (unless that's not a thing but I think it is) and kept the red background. This makes me think even more that the red on red is purposeful and it looks like there's a hidden meaning/message. 🤔

→ More replies (9)

177

u/i_dont_like_you_- 10d ago

Red was on sale

33

u/Unhappy_Concept237 10d ago

After the Barbie movie it’s still hard to get pink.

→ More replies (2)

171

u/[deleted] 10d ago

[deleted]

93

u/Fancy-Sector2963 10d ago edited 10d ago

Why the FUCK would they even think for one second that hiring this guy was a good idea?

Also, it's good to see another Volta fan in the wild.

28

u/salamipope 10d ago

Honestly its so stupid on their part but god damn it i love it so fucking much. thank jesus they screwed the pooch.

→ More replies (2)

28

u/AniNgAnnoys 10d ago

I didn't know that about the artist. That is really interesting. I will need to look at his other work. I also got hints that he was both trying to make an artistic point, but also some what hide it through symbolism. The bit about him previously being a worm is really interesting. I had not thought of that. Either a worm or a static cocoon which transformed into a thing that is brilliant, yet unchanging and soon to die. I wrote my thoughts down on the symbolism I see in the painting to another person as follows.

You have the King of England in a field of red with his regalia fading into that very red background, leaving the only clear-vivid thing left are his face and hands. To me, it is showing the nature of him as a king. A man who is just a face (vivid), whose glorified history (regalia/uniform) is fading into the noise (literally noise) of its violent past (the field of red).

I think the vividness of his hands is also important, maybe even the most important. Firstly, to me, it is saying that there is a man under the costume. His face and hands are vivid and I assume they are connected by a body. In another world, where this painting was of the king naked, his body would not be painted in red as his uniform is. It would be vivid like his face and hands. I believe this is the artists way of showing is that it isn't the man that is fading from history, but the status and power of the British Empire that is.

We can go further as well with the hands. I believe they are also the artist showing us that he believes that the king still has the power to change the world. The king doesn't need to fade away. He exists now and has hands that can shape the world. Next though, we can look to what his hands are holding. It is a sword, a symbol of that past that he is clinging to. Is this the artist saying he doesn't think Charles is the man to step out of the shadow of the Empire's past? That he will cling to that sword until his death?

Then there is the butterfly. At first I thought it was just a smudge in the background. It is hard to make out the details of it in the images I have seen, but it looks like a Monarch. The symbolism there is pretty straight forward, but maybe it goes deeper? Butterflies in general are famous for one thing, their transition from caterpillar to cocoon to butterfly. This maybe represents his transformation into a king, but also is maybe showing that he is at the end. Butterflies do not transform into anything else. Perhaps, another symbol from that artist that he does not feel Charles will change further. He will fade into the background.

Monarch Butterflies are known for their long migrations. Butterflies also sometimes symbolize the souls of the dead. Dianna? Probably not.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (7)

86

u/GetOutOfTheWhey 10d ago

Dude if you had a chance to paint a haunted portrait, you take that chance.

Future meme lore historians will talk about how this was the moment where we watched the king die inside when he saw the painting and it absorbed his soul.

49

u/GimmieGummies 10d ago

I too am curious about his vision

87

u/the-dude-version-576 10d ago edited 10d ago

Has to be some kind of protest right? There is no way you paint the king of England all in read and it has nothing to some issue of the monarchy.

56

u/tyme 10d ago

…all in read…

→ More replies (1)

22

u/GimmieGummies 10d ago

That's my feeling, but I don't want to project anything. Red being such a color of significance, for it to basically cover the entire portrait... well it definitely fills me with questions.

→ More replies (2)

34

u/GladZookeepergame775 10d ago

I was thinking the same thing. What’s with the over saturation of red/pink…

→ More replies (53)

2.9k

u/OGistorian 10d ago

The fact he hates it and all this unveiling makes it iconic. That’s how art works.

620

u/free_is_free76 10d ago edited 10d ago

God damn you, no. Sensationalism isn't art.

Edit to add: me masturbating and cumming all over a copy of the WJS is very sensational, bit nowhere near art

31

u/Ill-Librarian-6323 10d ago

Here's the art understander to give us safe conforming reassurance. 

→ More replies (2)

11

u/Soggy_Part7110 10d ago

Art is nothing and everything. There is no strict definition. You don't get to dictate what is and isn't art.

→ More replies (21)
→ More replies (9)

2.1k

u/UncleKrunkle44 10d ago

I'd really like to imagine this was the artists sneaky way of sticking it to the monarchy, because fuck that's ugly man.

513

u/dogfoodgangsta 10d ago

Especially with so much red. That can't be a good symbol.

57

u/CyanSaiyan 9d ago

England has used red to represent themselves for centuries. It's probably intended to symbolise the historical representation of the country not communism.

12

u/dogfoodgangsta 9d ago

I was thinking more blood or anger or something but that makes good sense too. Thanks for the insight.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

146

u/Book_talker_abouter 10d ago

I can’t tell from the comments here, but do people think that this was like a surprise? The media and king Charles himself would unveil a painting that no one on his team had ever seen?

87

u/VashPast 10d ago

He looked like he discovered a bomb when he saw it lol.

→ More replies (1)

29

u/8----B 10d ago

Yeah, why not? It’s absurd how often redditors assume the world is only people who are manipulative and double faced liars. He had a painting commissioned and wanted his reaction to be televised. It’s not a grand conspiracy, Jesus.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

19

u/LateRicin 10d ago

I don't think it's sneaky at all, and I for one am all for it. Loving the drenched in blood portrait.

→ More replies (4)

969

u/JordySkateboardy808 10d ago

He's wearing gaga's meat dress.

508

u/chopari 10d ago

Reminds me of Vigo the carpathian

36

u/Miggybear22 10d ago

First thought

26

u/KellentheGreat 10d ago

The scourge of Carpathia? The sorrow of Moldavia?

→ More replies (12)
→ More replies (1)

850

u/mr_snrub742 10d ago

That should be hanging in volcano Manor

115

u/WhateverRL 10d ago

Togezaaaaa

64

u/ParryHotter3000 10d ago

We will devowaaahh

45

u/tftookmyname 10d ago

Tha veryyy godss (weird rykard noises)

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

35

u/jesterthomas79 10d ago

literally the lake of rot with an aeonian butterfly down to the exact shade and color

13

u/960321203112293 10d ago

And let’s replace the king with Patches

11

u/DarkBum69 10d ago

Godeater Charles III goes kinda hard

→ More replies (6)

697

u/Hesick 10d ago

I don't get it...I actually like it.

277

u/Slartibartfast39 10d ago

Me too. Seems like we're in the minority.

173

u/Olama 10d ago

I think it's pretty iconic looking.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (4)

89

u/HeyRiley 10d ago

I like it too - the detail in his face is awesome and the colour makes the whole thing actually interesting, hence why it's been posted here I guess!

76

u/-Wonder-Bread- 10d ago

Also love it. It's so bizarre and striking for a portrait. Like, as much as people might think it "looks like shit" we sure as hell aren't going to forget about this one. It's a bold stylistic choice that makes it immensely memorable.

53

u/Ill-Librarian-6323 10d ago

It's really quite confrontational. Not your typical portrait in the slightest, which is probably why commenters are scrabbling around in the dirt trying to link it to something in pop culture.

37

u/UnexaminedLifeOfMine 10d ago

I love this painting. It’s so iconic. These people don’t understand art

20

u/OurSeepyD 9d ago

I also love it, but you're wrong. You can "understand" art and not like this. Taste is subjective.

→ More replies (3)

16

u/GGAllinsMicroPenis 10d ago

Thank god I found my people. I know most people are uncultured swine but 99+% of everyone who leaves a comment hates the painting? My word. I think it's gorgeous. All these dweebs have been staring at Pokemon cards and banal AI doodles for so long they can't even see when something is beautiful and challenging.

→ More replies (8)
→ More replies (6)

25

u/toasted_cracker 10d ago

I like it too, regardless of any symbolism, the art in and of itself is pretty cool.

20

u/Thecowpope 10d ago

Some dudes think anything that isn't hyper realistic is shit.

If you want hyper realistic take a picture.

20

u/merdadartista 10d ago

Count me in. Unconventional, but still aesthetically pleasing

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (40)

317

u/Blergsaucer 10d ago

The royals deserve the most shit portraits. Get fucked, Charles.

50

u/TheNerdNugget 10d ago

you mean "Get fucked, Chuck."

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (4)

239

u/Heroic-Forger 10d ago

He looks like a head and hands sprouting out of a vast, gruesome wall of visceral crimson flesh.

→ More replies (5)

207

u/JessicaF84 10d ago

Why is it so overly red?

501

u/HarEmiya 10d ago edited 10d ago

The artist is known for overusing a colour and muting/fading all others.

Here's one by the same artist, this time of Sir David Attenborough.

246

u/Jonpollon18 10d ago

If that’s what the artist does and since I assume he was hand-picked, why does he not like it now?

188

u/remotegrowthtb 10d ago

Maybe they were more expecting him to go with a purple or a blue instead of neon hot pink

70

u/ExpectoPerfecto 10d ago

I'm glad you're saying pink cause I felt like I was going crazy with everyone calling it red. It looks extremely pink + the butterflies (and the green/brown mixed in, honestly) makes me think flowers. I don't know anything about the royal family or England, really, but I assumed it was a color chosen from a flower that has some significance.

I like the portrait, though, so maybe I'm just grasping. I'm not an art critic I don't know. lol

→ More replies (7)
→ More replies (2)

35

u/ellemsea_echo 10d ago

When you slow it down and focus on Charles’s head, it looks like he’s flinching from the black tarp hitting him.

I wondered why he’d react like that too. But I think it’s a weird coincidence with the unveiling.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (5)

82

u/mikenasty 10d ago

😂 this is actually a great portrait! Making it the colors of the earth is very appropriate.

I am 75% convinced the artist painted the king in blood on purpose.

36

u/HarEmiya 10d ago

Oh yes, I don't think the artist is bad, just very stylish.

And for a royal portrait, artistic and stylish is a no-no, because the portraits are meant to remain on display for generations to come. Artistic sense and styles change rapidly, so what is "trendy" or "artsy" now will likely not be in 10 years, let alone in 100 or 1000 years. That's why such portraits tend to be realistic depictions.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (1)

24

u/dArsenval 10d ago

Ya know what? They should have expected this then lol.

43

u/HarEmiya 10d ago

"Just portray me as a dignified, intelligent king. Prepared for the throne."

"Sire?"

"Oh, you know, well-read, ready to rule."

"Well red and really reddy, understood yer Majesty."

→ More replies (1)

20

u/leopard_tights 10d ago

I'm ok with the style but he made Attenborough look like a grandma.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (1)

130

u/Pastmyprime58 10d ago

Off with the artists head!

→ More replies (2)

119

u/not_gonna_tell_no 10d ago

I don't give a shit about him... but I like it.

→ More replies (1)

112

u/Blue_Osiris1 10d ago

"Can you make it look like I'm burning in Hell? I want to get used to the idea."

→ More replies (1)

82

u/OpelousasBulletTime 10d ago

Looks like he's frozen in carbonite

13

u/LeftLanePasser 10d ago

I see that too. King Charles Solo.

60

u/aclinejr 10d ago

I have no idea why people hate the picture so much. I find it quite breathtaking. It is not just a portrait it's a story full of symbolism.

18

u/lvl12 10d ago

Honestly thank you I feel like I'm taking crazy pills. Much like obamas portrait. It's so unique! Picture a long hallway in a palace with all the monarchs portraits. This one stands out.

→ More replies (11)

54

u/SoloAquiParaHablar 10d ago edited 9d ago

There's zero chance the king didn’t see it prior. Unlikely this is the first time anyone in his circle is seeing it before it went public.

Secondly, look up the artist, this is his style, so whoever picked him knew what to expect.

50

u/NotADoctor108 10d ago

Looks like there was a sale on red paint.

53

u/RouxBearRoxx 10d ago

Reign in Blood

46

u/Narwhal_Defiant 10d ago

May as well be preemptive. Protesters can't smear it with blood if it looked like it has already been smeared with blood.

→ More replies (1)

37

u/AnthonyCantu 10d ago

What tones of red would you like, your majesty?

Yes.

28

u/Ultimate_Pants 10d ago

“Hey all our red paint is about to expire”

Artist: Don’t worry I got this.

26

u/AZ_Hawk 10d ago

I think this is actually friggin’ cool!

19

u/Clownheadwhale 10d ago

It's Bloody King Charles!

20

u/thefrogwhisperer341 10d ago

I think it's pretty cool

15

u/Samwill226 10d ago

He can't be happy. Thats awful

→ More replies (1)

18

u/CCbaxter90 10d ago

I love it

17

u/nunhgrader 10d ago

I think the portrait is magnificent

17

u/suddenly_mia 10d ago

I like it

14

u/Sudanniana 10d ago

Am I the only one that likes it?

14

u/No-Astronomer139 10d ago

Am I one of the few people who thinks this looks cool?

10

u/keyrites 10d ago

Jeez just putting all that wickedness out in the open now ehh? which I wouldn't particularly mind if it ya know looked good

11

u/GratefulPhish42024-7 10d ago

Surprised he didn't ask whether it was finished or not

11

u/A_Dehydrated_Walrus 10d ago

If the King could still sentence a man to death, that artist would be done for.

12

u/Grand-Ad-3177 10d ago

I love it ❤️

12

u/Fun_Bar5327 10d ago

I like it.

12

u/marvchuk 10d ago

To be fair. The face is amazingly done. But what the heck happened to the rest it looks like a carebear was murdered on It