Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2024/05/15/king-charles-new-official-portrait-looks-straight-out-of-the-shining-demonic.html
…
4 Likes
It kinda looks like someone used “AI” to generate it.
8 Likes
A re-Boing, but I still like it, subject matter aside.
6 Likes
Hey, at least it’s less dull than most royal portraits.
11 Likes
And there sat Charles, looking cool and calm,
in the heart of the furnace roar;
And he wore a smile you could see a mile,
and he said, “Please close that door.
It’s fine in here, but I greatly fear
you’ll let in the angry mob–
Since my mum (the Queen) stole every scene
it’s the first I’ve had a job”.
– Robert W. Service, The Cremation Of Charles The Third
16 Likes
As an attempt at charity I’m going to work on the assumption that those…choices in pink…are actually HRH taking a subtle anti-Anish Kapoor position; rather than attempting to fulfill an aesthetic goal.
1 Like
It does kind of look apocalyptic. Demonic? Maybe on the level of “Little Nicky.”
Right? 
7 Likes
I get more of a “Ghostbusters pink eco-slime” vibe from that color palette, and I’ve seen at least one edit of the king’s portrait cut into the scene of them inspecting the painting of Vigo the Carpathian.
4 Likes
If it was blue, everyone would think it was great. And no one catches the visual pun of the Monarch Butterfly.
5 Likes
Agreed. Personally I like it. I’ve always loved this style of portraiture with partially rendered features blended into and emerging from an abstract and gestural space.
I think most of this “backlash” is just motivated by anti-royal family kneejerk animus, which is fine (they deserve it) and to be expected in today’s ultra polarized cultural climate. If it was a portrait of a female civil rights activist it would be deemed strong and powerful yet warm and personal. Everyone weighing in on this now will be dead in fifty years or so, in the end none of the hemming, hawing and mockery matters. This piece will live on and be appreciated by calmer and more mature folks.
7 Likes
I’d still be unimpressed.
It’s not the color palette nor the subject which makes it “not good,” IMO.
It’s the soft, ‘sloppy’ style; as I said, it’s too reminiscent of “AI” generation for my personal tastes.
9 Likes
I don’t look at anything that’s AI generated, so possibly that distinction is lost on me.
1 Like
Given the prevalence of that crap being foisted onto the public and the fact that you are online right now, I find that statement a bit hard to believe.
Even BB uses it for article images sometimes more often than I personally care for.
That said, you are entitled to have your opinion, obviously.
Good day.
6 Likes
How can you possibly know this? It is absolutely everywhere, including on BB. I am as sure as I can be that you have looked at it, perhaps not realized what it is, but almost certainly, you have seen it. 
8 Likes
6 Likes
That’s exactly what an AI would say. Busted!
11 Likes
Sorry, my apologies, I should have said I don’t look at it intentionally, and I don’t think of it in the category of fine art. I did have an example on BB pointed out to me recently, in the article about the woman living in the sign. But to me it’s like atheism. I’d probably be an atheist, if I cared anything about religion.
4 Likes
Most folks who know anything about art or the creative process don’t.
Absorption & regurgitation of existing works ≠ ‘new creation.’
ETA:
6 Likes
That’s very true. But I wouldn’t seriously expect an official portrait of the King of England to introduce some new creative idiom. They got exactly what they paid for, no less and no more.
2 Likes
