Recently, the first official portrait oil painting after the coronation of King Charles III of the United Kingdom was released, which attracted widespread attention and heated discussions from all walks of life. The work by a well-known painter, which was supposed to be an important work of art to show the majesty and dignity of the king, was unexpectedly criticized by some viewers as a "monster", and the comments quickly fermented on social media, sparking heated discussions about the differences between art standards and public aesthetics.
Charles unveiled his portrait
On May 14, local time, the first portrait of King Charles III after the coronation of the United Kingdom was revealed by the 75-year-old Charles himself.
Charles walked to the painting expectantly, reaching out, carefully untying the ribbon, and slowly lifting the curtain that covered the painting. However, this time, the atmosphere of the audience instantly froze.
After a moment of silence, the sparse applause struggled between embarrassment and politeness, and finally barely rang out.
The painting was created by renowned artist Jonathan Yeo, 53, who was commissioned by the royal family in 2020 to paint a portrait of Charles, then Prince of Wales, to commemorate the momentous occasion of his 50th anniversary as a member of the "Drapers Company".
However, with the death of the queen and the accession to the throne as king, the meaning of the painting changed dramatically, and it was no longer just a portrait of a prince, but a portrait of a king with a new symbolic meaning.
Portrait of Charles
The 2.3m x 1.66m portrait was placed in Buckingham Palace. We can see that Charles is wearing a Welsh Guards uniform, with a calm face, calm eyes, his hands clenched to the hilt of his sword, the whole person is immersed in a blood-red background, and a monarch butterfly is flying on his shoulders - according to British media reports, it is said that this was proposed by the king himself to show his passion for environmental protection.
However, what is going on with this big red background?!!
The lines and color treatment of this painting is different from that of common portraiture, and it adopts a more abstract and distorted expression, which is an avant-garde art style that is clearly beyond the aesthetic scope of some viewers.
It is said that Charles and Queen Camilla were quite pleased with the portrait. It is said that Charles saw it once when he was two-thirds of the way through the painting. (I don't know if I saw it when I finished painting the characters without painting the background), and when the king himself unveiled it, he was obviously a little surprised, and was a little surprised by the strong colors of this work.
查尔斯（右）与画作创作者Jonathan Yeo
Experts in the art world spoke highly of this work, believing that it was an innovation and breakthrough in traditional portraiture, reflecting the artist's exploration and practice of modern art style. Experts point out that art is not only imitation and reproduction, but also a unique interpretation and creative expression of the real world. It is with its unique artistic language that this portrait shows another side of the king, which may not conform to traditional aesthetic standards, but is full of artistic power and charm.
It's just that for this unusual flame painting style, the general public in the UK is really difficult to accept, and they are directly fried on the Internet. They generally said that the image of the king in the painting was far from the image of the king in their minds, and some even bluntly called it a "monster". Therefore, the avant-garde style of this painting undoubtedly challenges their aesthetic bottom line.
查尔斯（右）与画作创作者Jonathan Yeo
After the painting was unveiled, not only netizens from other countries collectively watched it for fun, but even many British people felt embarrassed. Some people ridiculed that the image burned in the fire of hell and exuded an evil aura. Some people are even more reminiscent of Camilla's tampons.
Some people feel that it looks like Charles is going to hell......
Others say that it looks like the ruler of hell......
Others say that the British royal family's rule is in dire straits......
The British royal family has had portraits throughout the ages, and royal portraits play an important role in symbolizing power and projecting images, and are a tool to establish the authority of the monarch and consolidate his rule.
Previous portraits of monarchs have looked like this:
Despite the controversy, it is important that the world have the opportunity to see it. In the face of such controversy, we can't help but wonder: what is going on in the art world? Why is a portrait questioned and criticized by ordinary people?
Behind this is actually the difference in communication and perception between the art world and the public. The art world pursues innovation and breakthroughs, and they hope to challenge traditional aesthetic concepts through new art forms and expressions; The public, on the other hand, pays more attention to the intuitive feeling and emotional resonance of the work, and they are more inclined to accept the work that conforms to their aesthetic habits.
Therefore, we should be open and inclusive about this controversial portrait. Art is pluralistic, and it allows for different voices and perspectives to exist. We should respect the creative freedom and spirit of exploration of artists, and at the same time, we should understand and accept the aesthetic differences of the public. Only in this way can we better appreciate and understand works of art and make art truly a part of our lives.