King Charles' First Official Portrait Deemed Inappropriate

4 weeks ago

In a dramatic unveiling that has left the public and critics buzzing, King Charles III revealed his first official portrait since ascending to the throne, and reactions have been anything but tepid. As debates rage on social media and in art circles, it is clear that King Charles’ portrait is destined to be one of the most talked-about royal artworks in recent history.

The unveiling

Kin Cheung / Associated Press / East News

Recently, King Charles III personally unveiled a new portrait of himself at Buckingham Palace, the first such portrait since his coronation. The Royal Family’s Instagram account shared an exclusive video of the unveiling, featuring the king himself presenting the artwork.

This significant new work will ultimately be displayed in Drapers’ Hall in London, adding to its historical art collection and offering the public a glimpse of the monarch’s regal presence.

There was an ongoing debate in the comments.

The unveiling sparked a heated debate in the comments section on the Royal Family’s Instagram post and other social media sites. Opinions were sharply divided, with some users harshly criticizing the artwork. Comments ranged from “That is hideous” and “Without sounding rude, this is the worst royal portrait I’ve ever seen” to “100% thought this was satire.”

One critic remarked, “The face is good, the rest is appalling,” while another noted, “I would have loved this if it was any other color than red. He really captured the essence of him in the face, but the harshness of the red doesn’t match the softness of his expression.”

Despite the criticism, there were also voices of appreciation, such as “A lovely portrait of King Charles! I love the way the muted background draws attention to his face!” The mixed reactions highlight the polarizing nature of the portrait and the strong emotions it has evoked among the public.

The artist

Jonathan Yeo, a prominent figure in the world of figurative painting, has earned widespread acclaim for his unique blend of traditional and experimental portraiture. Yeo’s distinctive approach involves a deep engagement with his subjects, allowing him to capture their essence beyond mere physical appearance.

His recent portrait of King Charles III epitomizes this philosophy. Yeo explained, “As a portrait artist, you get this unique opportunity to spend time with and get to know a subject, so I wanted to minimize the visual distractions and allow people to connect with the human being underneath.”

The meaning of the portrait.

A particularly striking element of Yeo’s portrait is the inclusion of a butterfly. This detail serves multiple purposes, both symbolic and compositional. Yeo elaborated, “Primarily a symbol of the beauty and precariousness of nature, it highlights the environmental causes the King has championed most of his life and certainly long before they became a mainstream conversation.”

The butterfly also provides a visual contrast to the uniform, softening the portrayal and adding layers of meaning. “In the context of art history, a butterfly often symbolizes metamorphosis and rebirth, paralleling the King’s transition from Prince to monarch during the period the portrait was created,” Yeo noted, further emphasizing the transformative phase in King Charles’s life.

Yeo expressed his gratitude and honor for being commissioned to create such a significant portrait. “It was a privilege and pleasure to have been commissioned by The Drapers’ Company to paint this portrait of His Majesty The King, the first to be unveiled since his Coronation.”

Yeo’s approach to portraiture aims to encapsulate the life experiences and humanity etched into his subjects’ faces. “I do my best to capture the life experiences and humanity etched into any individual sitter’s face, and I hope that is what I have achieved in this portrait,” he explained.

The challenge of portraying a figure as complex and significant as King Charles III was substantial, but one that Yeo found immensely rewarding. “To try and capture that for His Majesty The King, who occupies such a unique role, was both a tremendous professional challenge, and one which I thoroughly enjoyed and am immensely grateful for,” he concluded. The portrait, destined for Drapers’ Hall in London, stands as a testament to both the artist’s skill and the monarch’s enduring legacy.

Discover the lesser-known facets of King Charles III’s life in our compelling article, “8 Things About King Charles III That Will Allow Us to Know Him More Closely.” Dive beyond the regal exterior to uncover intimate details about his passions, personal experiences, and unique quirks.

Preview photo credit Kin Cheung / Associated Press / East News, theroyalfamily / Instagram, jonathanyeo / Instagram


Get notifications

There is a disturbing "tradition" since the botched "official portrait" of Churchill to do a nasty caricature of the Royals, this "painting" of Charles must be not paid for, the "artist" tries to spin his true intentions with many words, however he either spilled a can of tomatoes on his own "work" in some intellectual protest , or he has portrayed the King (the main spokesperson for England!) as a devil with brownish spots on horrid red and a suggestion of him passing soon with this nonsensical "monarch" butterfly. Likewise, the latest "portrait" of the Princess is totally botched: her dignified posture and her striking appearance on her actual photo is a sharp contrast with the corresponding caricature on the magazine cover, with a submissive and muted female depicted by another "artist". Stop paying ill-meaning people for these "portraits", stop pretending they are any good! If the contemporary art conspires with nastiness to do so, turn back to classics. What a waste of taxpayers money these "portraits" are and what a slander of the Royals! Btw, both "portraits" obscure the uniform and the crown of the King and the Princess, with a particular hatred to the symbols of the State and the Crown. No words they try to spin could possibly hide it. Who specifically was responsible for commissioning and funding and monitoring the progress of these revolting exercises of caricatures?!


I saw the picture of the Princess yesterday and I was like why did they do her face like that??? That's not how she looks. I even asked myself was the art work possibly donated by some young inexperienced artist.


Related Reads