Tuesday, May 6, on the occasion of the second anniversary of their coronation, King Charles III and Queen Camilla unveiled their new portraits. Tables that are not unanimous.
King Charles III and Queen Camilla celebrate this two years of their coronation on Tuesday, May 6. For the occasion, the spouses have unveiled two new official portraits placed in the central hall of the National Gallery, London. “The portraits, which will be part of the royal collection, have been painted by two different artists chosen personally by the king and the queen,” it is written in legend of a video published by the Instagram account of sovereigns. Indeed, King Charles III chose the painter Peter Kuhfeld for his portrait, while Queen Camilla turned to Paul S. Benney. The two artists have already worked for the royal couple.
But barely revealed, these two works have already received their share of analysis and criticism. Indeed, as reported by the art critic Alastair Sooke in The TelegraphKing Charles III “appears to be shy” and infrequently of himself. “Blue eyes that are both piercing and close, and lips that seem to tremble,” analyzed the British journalist. “His physique, too, is somewhat crushed, which gives an involuntarily pathetic note, as if a large man had been reduced.” On Instagram, some Internet users are not convinced by this representation of their sovereign. “Unfortunately, the artist failed to grasp our king. King Charles is a warm, fun and thoughtful person, but I don’t like his mouth and his eyes, it is not him in my opinion, “wrote one of them in the comments of the Instagram publication. “For his part, Peter Kuhfled said in a press release that she” tried to produce both human and royal painting, perpetuating the tradition of the royal portrait “.
Read too
“A frightening experience”: Charles III entrusts his moods in the face of cancer and thanks the caregivers
”
data-script=”https://static.lefigaro.fr/widget-video/short-ttl/video/index.js”
>
Queen Camilla under light
While Queen Camilla has long struggled to shine in the British monarchy, it seems that this era is now over. Unlike the portrait of her husband, the sovereign imposes herself as a true confident queen and sure of herself. The Telegraph Remember in particular that this painting is inspired by the official portrait of the deceased queen Elizabeth II. “As an image, it is clearer and more coherent than the wobbly effort of Kuhfeld,” said Alastair Sooke. In a press release, Paul S. Benney said he wanted to show “humanity and empathy of such an extraordinary person assuming an extraordinary role”, through this portrait of Queen Camilla.
If, through this painting, the sovereign shines a little more, King Charles III therefore disturbs again because of his avant-garde desires, as evidenced by the article of Telegraph. Indeed, last year, the father of the princes Harry and William had unveiled his first official portrait as king of England. The work of art had caused a sensation since many Internet users had claimed that the fact that the king was surrounded by a red glow gave the impression that he was bathed in blood. Others had estimated that this portrait, directed by Jonathan Yeo, gave the impression that he was burning in hell. Proof that the artistic tastes of King Charles III cannot definitely please everyone.
