Too Red Too Vampiric

 

Pool photo by Aaron Chown

King Charles III’s red portrait

Royal portraits tend to be predictable affairs. But a new official portrait of King Charles III, painted by Jonathan Yeo, has surprised even its subject — and has created something of a controversy.

Some onlookers said the king looked as if he were “burning in hell” or “bathing in blood,” while others compared it to a possessed portrait in “Ghostbusters II.” A reference to “colonial bloodshed” rounded out the theme.

This is not the first polarizing royal portrait. Take a spin through some other surprising or contentious paintings of royals.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/15/world/europe/king-charles-royal-portraits.html?campaign_id=51&emc=edit_mbe_20240516&instance_id=123492&nl=morning-briefing%3A-europe-edition&regi_id=212456837&segment_id=166784&te=1&user_id=551c37974dfebd5e2b0fa3e6a8733435

Too Red, Too Vampiric, Too Sexy: A Brief History of Polarizing Royal Portraits

Jonathan Yeo’s painting of King Charles III has prompted both admiration and bemusement, but it’s far from the first royal portrait to divide opinion.

The artist Jonathan Yeo and King Charles III at the unveiling of Mr. Yeo’s portrait of the king at Buckingham Palace in London on Tuesday.Credit...Pool photo by Aaron Chown

By Emma Bubola

Reporting from London

May 15, 2024

Leer en español

Want to stay updated on what’s happening in the United Kingdom? , and we’ll send our latest coverage to your inbox.

Royal family members sit for portraits a lot. And even when they don’t, artists paint them anyway. Some of these portraits have drawn near-unanimous praise and stood the test of time, captivating viewers generations later. Others have attracted mixed reactions, scandal or controversy.

With some artworks, critics objected royals were too gloomy, too naked, or, in the case of King Charles III’s latest portrait, too red.

In the painting unveiled on Tuesday, Charles is enveloped in a cloud of crimson, hot pink and fuchsia.