Old Charlie should’ve commissioned an anime painting of himself. That would’ve resonated with the youths.

@cronchyskull

Ай бұрын

He should have commissioned an anime short to be played on a loop on the walls of the National Portrait Gallery for all time.

@segamai

Ай бұрын

A body pillow likeness with the finest brocade and embroidery

@cronchyskull

Ай бұрын

@@segamai matching set with Camilla (made in not as posh fabric)

@Nilmand

Ай бұрын

The Weeb King

@cronchyskull

Ай бұрын

@@Nilmand the Waifu Consort.

I just assumed it showed King Charles in Hell.

@mariasundin9332

Ай бұрын

I had the same impression

@user-bl5yi4uw6j

Ай бұрын

Ja, ich auch. It's a good likeness, though. Was it a joke he googled King George? I would expect someone in the US might do that but someone in Canada?

@monkeytennis7477

Ай бұрын

Me Too 😳🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥

@strikerorwell9232

Ай бұрын

The old portrait of the Queen was painted by Jimmy Saviles buddy Rolf Harris who now is in jail for pedophilia.

@strikerorwell9232

Ай бұрын

@@user-bl5yi4uw6j The old portrait of the Queen was painted by Jimmy Saviles buddy Rolf Harris who now is in jail for pedophilia.

I love how this painting genuinely holds a ton of symbolic meaning and purpose, but I can still look at it and predominately see a decaying man looming over me covered in and surrounded by blood. Probably the most honest portrait of the British monarchy we are ever likely to get with their approval.

@carissaf6909

Ай бұрын

How ageist.

@charondesousa8868

Ай бұрын

​@@carissaf6909 fuck old people especially the royal family

@pan0ramian

Күн бұрын

@@carissaf6909 how accurate indeed.

"A painting on its own can't be cool" You clearly never saw a painting of a sick fucking skeleton on a burning motorcycle with chains and a leather jacket

@thewizard1

Ай бұрын

Based.

@gokulg9474

25 күн бұрын

"TUCK ME IN AND GIVE ME FOREHEAD KISSES💀🔥🏍"

@FleshWizard69420

19 күн бұрын

Bad to the Bone 🔥💀🔥

@johniversen7067

15 күн бұрын

Ghostwriter is cool.

@andreabeian3492

Күн бұрын

😂

As an old guy, I remember when Charles was still married to Diana and having an affair with his now wife Camilla, he was recorded on a phone call where he told Camilla he would like to be her Tampon so he could be close to her all the time. I don’t see how this painting isn’t a nod to #Tampongate as it was called back then. King Tampon.

@joeboyle5864

Ай бұрын

Talk about NO privacy!?! Who hasn’t said things they wouldn’t want publicized?

@MailaDR

Ай бұрын

😂😂😂 King Tampon

@maryknauss9776

Ай бұрын

Exactly

@lisascorp

Ай бұрын

Ok. Thanks. Now I'm getting the tampax comments. I'm old enough to remember him with Diana but somehow forgot about that remark.

@cookiebombay2683

Ай бұрын

Also my first thought. He finally got his wish to be a tampon. I love it.

Tbh i love the painting, but my first impression was that it meant that the british monarchy is still surrounded by blood, gore and violence.

@Silentkittey

Ай бұрын

Exactly what I was going to comment! This is an outstanding self portrait painting but no matter the style the royal family has to realize they're fucked and they for some reason allowed a man child to represent them... It was a grain of hope I really wanted them to surprise us all and reveal that they were going to do some big changes in order for Charles not to take over but again I wasn't holding my breath.

@itaomahony502

Ай бұрын

They are surrounded by blood. Soaked in it and they revel in it.

@catregime

Ай бұрын

Same

@kiranjadhav1606

Ай бұрын

That's the meaning of this portrait, creepy.

@sonjamae

Ай бұрын

Exactly my impression as well. And it just makes it work even better when you consider how butterflies are known to drink blood from decomposing animals

All this portrait needs is crime scene tape around it.

The first thing I thought of was the The Picture of Dorian Grey .

All kings are biodegradable

@InVinoVeratas

Ай бұрын

It's time to recycle the Monarchy ♻️

@swamianandtesla2347

Ай бұрын

"At the end of the game, the king and the pawn go back in the same box." Italian Proverb

@Mahawww

Ай бұрын

That goes hard

@joeboyle5864

Ай бұрын

@@swamianandtesla2347True- but the king who “wins” goes last.

@seasidesandles

Ай бұрын

We all are so why pick out the king?

If I saw that painting on the wall of a vampire's mansion, I would pass on by without thinking about it twice.

@kingkapybara9964

Ай бұрын

It's also quite fitting since Charles visited and spent a lot of time in Romania, the Transylvanian region of Romania, to be precise.

@vincentcabezas7147

Ай бұрын

first thing I thought when I saw it. it's like the painting of Dorian Gray

@L0rdOfThePies

Ай бұрын

If you go past it when lightning flashes something scary happens to the picture i guess

@rodpanhard

Ай бұрын

The demonic head hidden in it is not mentioned.

@robwhite461

Ай бұрын

Well he dose claim lineage from Vlad the empaler.

This could be the portrait of a boss in a video game : "The Vampire Lord".

@biafranowandforever.7161

Ай бұрын

They are vampire. Once you produce their heirs, they do away with you.

Very much a demonic/Vigo/Ghostbusters II type painting. "On a mountain of skulls, in the castle of pain, I sat on a throne of blood!" The red without a doubt is symbolizing Charles being bathed in blood. The monarch butterfly over his right shoulder has two meanings and the bathing in blood is the outcome of one of these of meanings. Just a thought!

A lot of people have not done much research into who commissioned this portrait or why. The press has often described it as an "official" portrait, but that's a meaningless adjective. It was not a portrait commissioned by the British government, or the royal family, or Buckingham Palace. It was commissioned by a private banquet hall in London that rents itself out for parties and weddings. So it's really just a piece of art that exists for a mostly decorative purpose, and a lot of the high-minded political analysis misses that critical context. Few have likewise bothered to look into Jonathan Yeo's body of work, and his distinctive portrait style, which Charles is hardly the first to be subjected to.

@TheCanvasArtHistory

Ай бұрын

Thank you for the context! Though I I don’t think the source of the commission really changes the message sent (and received by the public). The propagandistic elements of the painting, which is the subject of this video, still have their effect.

@JJMcCullough

Ай бұрын

@@TheCanvasArtHistory well you spoke as if the painting was being self-evidently created for a political purpose, and implied the monarchy itself was behind its creation.

@TheCanvasArtHistory

Ай бұрын

You’re right! I don’t think they commissioned the painting (and it was commissioned before he was king anyway, hence the monarch butterfly embodying that transformation ) but it does serve their political purpose and is being spun, I believe, to legitimize the monarchy. Therefore, I really see this as propaganda, commissioned by them or not.

@BradleyJSeattle

Ай бұрын

Oops, I just commented on the portrait -- and did not realize any of that. I hope we get to see your (J.J.'s) take on this on your channel soon. OK, now I'm off to go learn about Canadian money!

@MatimoreAgain

Ай бұрын

Lol, that's what they agreed to say in the event the castle folk ended up not liking it.

No heavy crown on his head, only a bloody shroud.

@thirdcoinedge

Ай бұрын

A true portrait of the monarchy's very soul: The Picture of King Charles.

@mattdragon333

Ай бұрын

Tbh this feels like a critique of many things he represents during his life before the crown, he went completely against lowering carbon emissions in buildings, modern art and architecture, moving away from petrol, and now he has blood all over him

@InVinoVeratas

Ай бұрын

Pretty accurate.

@eldritchbeauty

Ай бұрын

@@mattdragon333 Him and his ancestors have the blood of hundreds of millions over them.

@PVMAS07

Ай бұрын

the blood of millions of lives explored and killed by the British Empire

This portrait is not about art. It is an easter egg planted right in front of our faces. They laugh at our nativity. This is a spiritual war my friends

@rolandmeyer3729

29 күн бұрын

Friend, do not confuse naïvité with nativity.

@hellybelle5

6 күн бұрын

​@@rolandmeyer3729autocorrect alters my spellings all the time, so I usually ignore anything that is incorrect, unless the person is bashing other people for their grammar and punctuation etc... whilst making a mistake on their own 😄

I would like to mention that this portrait isn't actually "official" in the sense that it was commissioned by the UK government, the Royal Family, or any one else of note in that way. It was commissioned by a third party for display at their premises. It is in no way an official portrait of His Majesty. For this reason it isn't propoganda from the Monarchy.

@Mrspeedwell

22 күн бұрын

True , but it got blanket coverage, that is no accident.

@FLSonshine

13 күн бұрын

Oh ......OK....depending on "The Reviews"... not official . Painting is perfect for the perversely perverted monarchy lineage.

@benstanden69

8 күн бұрын

f u c k up

@rustymaples6986

7 күн бұрын

Your volunteer propogandist ... No?

@jamesgould3263

7 күн бұрын

@@rustymaples6986 No, just an Australian that wanted to clear up that little misconception about a portrait of His Majesty, The King of Australia.

He is not fading away, he is actually coming out of the shadows to haunt your nightmares like Freddy Krueger

love how the old man is covered in ground beef

@ginevragali2981

Ай бұрын

Don’t forget the tomato sauce!🍅

@randalalansmith9883

Ай бұрын

I thought it was the blood of the colonies.

@applepretz5368

Ай бұрын

​@@randalalansmith9883I literally thought the same thing about this piece. Did the artist even think about that about the king?

@Melodymist

Ай бұрын

@@applepretz5368 apparently the artist also made a (unauthorized) portrait of George W. Bush out of porn magazine clippings. I'd say no matter the interpretation he publicly offered, that doesn't mean he might not have some private thoughts he left unsaid...👀

@aisforapple2494

Ай бұрын

It's an homage to the Lady Gaga meat dress. 🤣

Charles simply enjoyed Elden Ring and commissioned a portrait of himself as Rykard.

@Walleyedwosaik

Ай бұрын

Bro I think we might be nerds

@thewizard1

Ай бұрын

Wtf, king Charles is awesome??

The painting looks like something out of "Night Gallery."

Should be said, Jonathan Yeo infamously tried to sell the Bush family a collage portrait of George W made from clippings of ~naughty~ magazines... So I wouldn't necessarily be surprised if there were some double meanings to this piece.

@zenaclarkson-rk8wh

Ай бұрын

😮

@SRVaintme

Ай бұрын

He made that after his commission was cancelled. I don't think he tried to sell it to Bush, it was more of a 'fuck you'.

@alexanderfinegan1506

Ай бұрын

Oh, well in that case my King Tampax theory is all but confirmed.

@ironickrempt

Ай бұрын

@@SRVaintme from what I read the commission was canceled after the contents of the piece were leaked, I could be mistaken though

@MrMjp58

Ай бұрын

Just another reasonably competent, conventional painter, trying to inject a bit of pretentious 'edge' into his work. It'll all be forgotten in a week.

"a carbon- neutral biodegradable king " is the best haha

The fact that this painting is being talked about so much and Yeo is a household name now must surely count as a win for the artist.

@rustymaples6986

7 күн бұрын

Who?

I thought he was going for the "Han Solo encased in carbonite" look...

Monarch butterflies, like actual monarchs, are also deeply toxic

@WeeWeeJumbo

Ай бұрын

only if you eat the brain. don’t eat human brains, you get kuru that way

@lionelladvelino4795

Ай бұрын

Monarch butterflies are also disappearing, like actual monarchs

@annettespradlin4945

Ай бұрын

Please don't insult the Monarch butterflies. Thank you.

@SueLeo1

Ай бұрын

That Monarch butterfly is also the symbol of MK ULTRA.. (population reduction) and he is a WEF devotee. So no, I am not impressed and the sooner the monarchy is gone the better!

@bradyjohnson7705

Ай бұрын

its satanic

Charles, the Lord of Blood

@JasonCan-wp2fu

Ай бұрын

I don’t think he killed that many people, But I’m 100% sure that he killed Diana

@arturonavarro5744

Ай бұрын

it would be pretty fitting for the royal family if he had a miquella by his side if you know what i mean

@sashasun1402

Ай бұрын

(King Charles is a valid kid name)

@bencesarvari2235

Ай бұрын

Dark Souls music starts playing.

@AK-lg8fj

Ай бұрын

They called Charles I the Man of Blood back during the English revolution, no real tie aside from the name between I and III but still pretty good

I love how you visually linked yourself with the subject. That's the best use of green screen I've ever seen 👏🏻👏🏻

I like the painting. I’m Dutch, so it’s not my king. I like how the face of an old man is coming out of that vibrant red. The uniform and the butterfly gave it life.

I absolutely love how the background you use blends in with your shirt. It’s just like the portrait.

@MurderBong

Ай бұрын

EVERYONE WANTS THE POWER OF THE GREAT SORCERER VIGO THE CARPATHIAN.

@daltonbedore8396

Ай бұрын

nothing gets by you!

@kerryalfaro9437

25 күн бұрын

I'm pretty sure that's what it was supposed to look like they're Captain obvious😂😂😂😂

I think it just shows how out of touch the royals are, that they ok-d this painting quite happily, without realizing the obvious meaning behind it. They are beyond parody.

@j.elizabeth4621

Ай бұрын

Johnathan Yeo is one of the most prolific modern portrait painters. This isn’t out of the norm for him. They knew what they were getting into

@derrickkinney5399

Ай бұрын

They can easily sell it later when they need to.

@YOUPIMatin123

Ай бұрын

Just shows your lack of education

@ronniemolina3254

Ай бұрын

@@YOUPIMatin123 you dont need education to feel the basic meaning of colours. If you need education to love a painting, then the painter failed miserably.

@phubblewubbphubblewubb

Ай бұрын

How naive!!

An article said that it was Charles who suggested the monarch butterfly... and the artist said that the red was to be suggestive of the prominence of red in previous royal paintings and of their usual red capes n' such, but in a manner which, he said, would break from the past and be contemporary... I myself think that the butterfly is Princess Diana.. While the red spurs a diabolical feeling for me... I take the artist at his word. But, I think you nailed it in saying it is overall a gesture to youth.

It would really fit in children’s hospital, just sayin’.

It's like a heavy metal album cover, it's so raw and I love it

Gonna be honest, it's weird but I kinda love it? It looks like a picture from an old haunted mansion in a horror movie, right before the blood starts dripping out from it. There's no way I'm going in lmao.

@jackCollin403

Ай бұрын

I love it for a different reason.

It is a remarkable piece of art. Forget the Royalty bit. It is simply a beautiful portrayal of a man of a certain age - but it also recordes his features in a way that you can see him at almost any age. It has been painted by a significant artist who understands people's personalities and records them imaginatively. It has movement, yet is still. The many who politicise it because he is royal and draw so many conclusions because of the main colour do, I think, miss the point. It is a magnificent portrait of a person wearing clothing appropriate to his job. It is interesting the way people don't see it as an artwork - but enjoy telling WHAT it represents about royalty and the Royal families use, or worthiness in today's world.

Yeo painted Charles dad, Prince Phillip, and aldo painted Camilla, Charles wife. Charlie didn't look thrilled with the portrait when he unveiled it himself - but Camilla commented to the press that Yeo had "got" him, i.e. captured him, in tbe portrait. So it's likely Charles picked Yeo as the artist to make his wife happy, because Yeo had paibted his loved ones, and because he is a popular artist amongst celebrities seeking portraits.

It’s been a while since a portrait painting has everyone talking which means it has served (one of) its purpose

@meade2072

Ай бұрын

Indeed.

@danas3765

Ай бұрын

The purpose of royals' portraits is to attract attention? I don't think this is an official portrait anyway.

Standing within 10 feet of the physical portrait causes Scarlet rot build up

@MurderBong

Ай бұрын

ALL HAIL VIGO

@thewizard1

Ай бұрын

Elden Ring is real

I’ve seen other work by this artist, he shouldn’t paint hands. Other portrait artists in the past hid hands in the shadows, or had a student paint the hands. Rubens couldn’t paint a good hand. These draw attention away from the face, and are a larger scale than his head. I like closeups of the head. Great half-smile. The painting style makes me think of the 1970s, I wish it were a more contemporary watercolor.

@lawrencerutherford4260

26 күн бұрын

it reminds me a bit of fauvism from the 1910s combined with modern impressionism honestly

The butterfly is giving "a moth to a flame"

Best JOHN CONSTANTINE: HELLBLAZER cover in a long time.

@didierrodriguez8778

Ай бұрын

I love this comment

@MrTeaBaggins

Ай бұрын

Best. Comment. Ever.

@SilentAssasinLOL

Ай бұрын

legit

@justinadams7824

Ай бұрын

Charles has appeared in Hellblazer lol

@HQMan2008

Ай бұрын

Well, someone actually did it! cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:punhfmpogezgazwz6vvt3pja/bafkreibxy3ztthqtalkz45drmyt2iu7fhnvp3zwvxd64vmwdakuwihkege@jpeg

Nothing says “I’m a 21st century king” like a portrait that looks like it’s from a 1960s Poe-inspired Roger Corman (RIP) horror movie. This would fit right in on a wall engulfed by flames, with the late, great Vincent Price laughing maniacally as his cursed ancestral castle comes crashing down around him. It could be called “The Fall of the House of Windsor.” 🏰

@SueLeo1

Ай бұрын

I love that! The fall of the House of Windsor.. except they are not Windsors they are Germans.

@pcdm43145

Ай бұрын

This... this is why I love reading the comments section on KZread. Thank you.

@akaLaBrujaRoja

Ай бұрын

@@SueLeo1 Windsor has been the official name of the current ruling dynasty since they changed it in 1917 to distance themselves from their German ancestry during WWI, and the name comes from one of the royal castles, it’s not an ethnicity. After centuries of countless invasions and marriages between the powerful families all over Europe, they’re probably just as much French, Scottish, and Nordic as German. And “Windsor” sounds more like “Usher” than “Saxe-Coburg and Gotha.” 😁

@juniorjames7076

Ай бұрын

Loved those HAMMER films! When will we get one for Count Charles?

@anneteller3128

Ай бұрын

OR, hanging in the famous gathering room shown in Eyes Wide Shut and how Stanley Kubrick played with color in that movie.

This is by far the best outlook and critique of this portrait. I've never looked at the idea behind this unconventional art piece. 👏🏾 👏🏾 👏🏾 👏🏾 👏🏾

We're having that children's hospital discussion again.

I think it looks like the last scene from a Hammer film where the horrible supernatural villain dies and then rapidly decays before our eyes.

@MurderBong

Ай бұрын

You have clearly never seen Ghostbusters II 😂

The red symbolizes the King's love for Transylvania and his supposed blood connection to Vlad the III Dracula. The king is here portrayed as a vampire lord bathing in the bood of his subjects. It's beautiful! :)

@everdinestenger1548

Ай бұрын

At least Vlad fought FOR his country and his people. Would Charles III?

@lrsco

Ай бұрын

I forgot about that! Perfect! 😆

@NurmaBP

Ай бұрын

I read somewhere that Vlad is cousin of Elizabeth Bathory. Blood cult?

@janebaker966

27 күн бұрын

And Katherine is his first victim.

@MrStosh12345

19 күн бұрын

@@janebaker966 Catherine; not Kate; fun fact. but why?

This video has been by far the greatest breakdown I've seen yet of this video. Fantastic job!

I thought you'll talk about conspiracy theories of the portrait

The butterfly in Japan, China and somewhat, but not always in Korea is a symbol of fleeting things and death since they don't last that long. So... ummm... I kinda saw it as The King of Colonialism and Death... and I was like, OK, acknowledging the history of the terrible things the British Monarchy did worldwide, say the introduction of institutionalized military r*pe to East and South Asia? Might not be the intention, but for me, that's the impact.

@kaitar0

Ай бұрын

Actually, in Mexico monarch butterflies are very connected with the Day of the Dead as the spirits of the deceased returning to visit. Which makes sense since, unlike Britain, monarch butterflies are native to Mexico.

@krunkle5136

Ай бұрын

Hey, but they got you speaking their language. The still lord over much pf the world, and those former colonies are powerless in escaping the frame. They can't.

@kimyoonmisurnamefirst7061

Ай бұрын

@@krunkle5136 Not really. The UK and US together did a lot to destabilize China, but China still owns the languages it speaks. To be that mad over black tea should confound anyone. As for Japan, there are a sort of double damage done as treaties forced women workers to serve men, but also that lead later to the Japanese turning it and using it on Koreans and other Asians/Pacific Islanders, forever cementing it as one of the most hated countries in Asia. Using the Opium addiction trade from the UK did a lot. But the majority of Japanese do not speak English, if at all. As for Korea. Korea finally ended the trade and enforcement in 2014 and sued the US government for damages, but if you combine it with Japanese occupation (who were inspired by US and UK expansionism) of Korea, what is about 100 years of slavery at the behest of "making men behave". Korean, despite the best efforts of Japanese still survives as a language North and South. Most people over the age of 18 do not speak Korean. Basically what the legacy is for the area is increased cancer rates and a whole lot of resentment, so I think it is quite fitting that it is such a bloody picture. It's quite a thing from the US insisting on opening Japan to the timeline to bombing it because they needed an excuse to join the war. Which, BTW, doesn't exonerate Japan's misdeeds, but sometimes it feels very much like foreign policy of the place is that the tail wags the dog, especially after you look at the timeline of the Korean War and the terrible things the US did to Korea during it in the name of "taking out communism." which really translates to, "protect US interests." which BTW, the UK cooperated with quite a bit.

@olwenturns

Ай бұрын

The Monarch Butterfly can live up to 9 months, usually the last generation of that season, this is so they can migrate. The Brimstone Butterfly lives up to a year.

Perhaps not the smartest idea to commission a painting which looks like it is covered in blood when there’s a growing awareness of Britain’s colonial past (at least in the Western world anyway) and the many atrocities that resulted from it in the name of the monarchy

@4651adri

Ай бұрын

Do people need to be reminded of that?

@YoshiMario69

Ай бұрын

@@4651adri People need to forget that?

@Joseph-cq3ij

Ай бұрын

If anything there's an overemphasis of Britain's colonial past in order to obfuscate the other European powers that also have a colonial past. There's not much of a discussion of the specifics of colonial history. Just a vague gesturing of "Britain bad."

@tlv8555

Ай бұрын

Leftist crybabies aren't the majority here 😊

@RamonQueso

Ай бұрын

@@Joseph-cq3ijYeah but I think a big reason for the emphasis on the British Empire in particular is because it was the largest/most significant colonizer of them all. Plus obviously a lot of English speakers come from countries that have a history tied to Britain also so that's probably why we hear about them more.

The monarchy have been interested in the environment for years since Prince Phillip. He actually helped save a bird sanctuary near me in Australia.

Hey I'm old, so not flying around on a skateboard. My first reaction to this painting was "look at me, look at me" and I think that is exactly what he got. I'm also not a fan of red personally and do dabble in textiles and paint, but by no means an artist, but I do like the lighter tones of pink in the painting, and the depth he has in the background, where there is a painting of the devil, if you duplicate it and join it upside down, but I thought it looked more like a Golden Retriever. However I love the technique the Artist has used and would loved to see it using that technique without looking like a blood bath. My go to would always be blue, but it would have looked really cool in lighter neutrals with earthy colours. But then I guess it would suit my purpose and not fulfil it's purpose of shocking people so much.

@7piecebucket

26 күн бұрын

Check out Jonathan Yeo's portraits of Tony Blair, (then Duchess) Camilla, or Damien Hirst. Also Kevin Spacey as Richard III. They seem a lot closer to what you have in mind.

No way did Charles ask to be a face in a pool of Diana's blood when they commissioned this thing lol

@caulkins69

Ай бұрын

It's Camilla's menstrual blood. He did say he wanted to be her tampon.

@rolandmeyer3729

29 күн бұрын

❤❤❤👏👏👏

@janebaker966

27 күн бұрын

Didn't he pay for it? Who did?

I see him coming out of the painting, not fading into the background. Maybe coming out from behind his mother's long reign.

@user-lk6oj4bu1k

Ай бұрын

Lovely ❤

Weirdly insulting and profoundly immediately historical AND great art at the same time.

Great critique! I'm an American so there's so much about British culture I don't understand BUT as an painter of 45 years - I love this! Interesting how so many see the red as blood as bloodshed not the blood that runs through everyone's veins and heart. Yes Britain does have a bloody history. I can look at this purely as a painting without history or emotion and the thing that freaks me out is the severe edema in his hands... this is a dead man walking and he's only 75. rip

you look like the right hemisphere dominant version of Magnus Carlsen

@robbiehugg2409

Ай бұрын

Accurate

@huxlee3947

Ай бұрын

Lol

@jessnomaybe

Ай бұрын

this is the craziest comment i've seen in a minute. you are not wrong though. i hope i grow my yt to a point i can receive niche insults like this

He turn into pajama

@everia_games

Ай бұрын

Comfy

@angelnauseous

Ай бұрын

He turn into pajama!

@alizaaa1761

Ай бұрын

Pajama man

@samdal420

Ай бұрын

Yeah

Me and my friends were debating about how much human blood was in this portrait

We need a part two with more details!

It's also the bathomet if you mirror it and flip it upside-down.

@eldiabloblanco3167

Ай бұрын

You don't even have to flip it, just mirror, and you get a horned-beast. You can also flip it to see Baphomet.

@brendahedden2683

Ай бұрын

​@@eldiabloblanco3167 oh ...l thought it was Camilla 😅

@underarmbowlingincidentof1981

Ай бұрын

I mean I can do the same with my wooden floorboards and get grotesque demonic faces out of it lol human pattern recognization ftw

@Rynewulf

Ай бұрын

Ah yes I can already see the arms pointing in different directions, the fur, the animal head, the wings, and the ... wait no... its just King Charles upside down. Look I think Baphomet is awesome too, but do what I did and get an eye check the painting is squiggly but not that much

@seriousros7280

Ай бұрын

check your spelling before trying to be clever

I love the portrait - it gets his face very well and I love the vibrant red colour - but of course because of the red colour the memes connecting it to blood and hell were going to be inevitable but for me this is a great piece of art and is one of the most memorable portraits of a King ever made.

@CharlieQuartz

Ай бұрын

+

@osborn.illustration

Ай бұрын

Indeed. It's actually kinda badass. If it were a traditional portrait, people would be complaining about how boring it is. This is way more interesting.

@jo-annetscharke

Ай бұрын

I agree. And its certainly been a source of mixed commentary, and wont be forgotten easily,

If you mirror the image of the portrait, there were two kings portrayed… and I don’t mean two of Charles

All the bright red is a little shocking at first, but the more I look at it the more I like it. Paintings like these have to be seen in person to truly appreciate.

Ok, second comment, for the algorithm. Also for another thought entirely. Yeo made a statement to the Independent, wherein he said that the king came for his sitting dressed in the Welsh Red uniform that all Kings must wear. Red has long been the color of British troops, in particular the higher brass. It used to be a very expensive color to make and also made Commanders visible on the battlefield so the troops knew where the orders were coming from. Yeo bathed the portrait in red so that the militaristic function of the monarch literally fades out and you can see the person. Choosing Yeo is also intentional. He’s a self-taught portraitist. He’s not from a rarefied art academy. He’s known for focusing on natural facial features but abstracting it away from the photo realistic, using contrast to highlight the contours and planes and folds of the face. This portrait ages Charles considerably, which flies directly in the face of overly filtered selfies. I think that was intentional. Lastly, Charles has made environmentalism his pet project for decades. He’s directed money towards environmental organizations and spoke out on the need for more radical climate policies. People make fun of him for it: so in this instance, the media emphasis on it isn’t actually Greenwashing. But choosing red as opposite on the color wheel is perhaps an attempt to bring out the man separate from his political and personal ideologies.

@tricksor6589

Ай бұрын

Yeah see that's cool and all but this is only something that really art connosieurs are going to pick up on. Majority of people are stupid and will take this at face-value and go "umm blood.. ugly painting."

@lobstermash

Ай бұрын

The proverbial man in the street doesn't see red and think "Aha! Opposite to green on the colour wheel!" He thinks blood and fire. You point out that Yeo is not from an art academy background, but he might as well be so for this basic failure to communicate. Basic primitive shared signals cannot be over-written by private conceits.

@CharlieQuartz

Ай бұрын

I greatly appreciate this interpretation. This creator’s takes often come from a place of ignoring any context they haven’t directly associated with.

@gusalistar2522

Ай бұрын

@@CharlieQuartzI want to agree with you but tbh I’m not sure and I don’t feel like rewatching a bunch of his videos to check, could you give me more examples?

@SeaBreeze2247

Ай бұрын

After all the hoohaa about it being “bathed in blood” and people turning it upside down and mirroring it just to find devilish faces, I was prepared to not like it. Quite the opposite, I didn’t read anything into it or try to analyze what all that red was about. I just studied it, then saw its beauty and loved it for the brilliant work of art that it is. I wish I could see it in person.

4:44 is the stupidest take I've ever heard. A painting can ABSOLUTELY be cool on its own. Sure, it might only be cool to my eyes, but if it looks cool it is cool. On it's own. Without any message behind it.

@DarkwaveMistress

Ай бұрын

Nothing exists without meaning or message.

@Albinojackrussel

Ай бұрын

If this painting existed on its own out of the context of being a British monarch you would never have heard of it or seen it. The fact is that it doesn't exist on its own

@AidanStrickland

Ай бұрын

​@@Albinojackrussel Well, I wasnt commenting on THIS painting specifically - I just mean generally, a piece of art can look cool on its own without knowing what the meaning is. Aesthetic beauty is just as valid a reason for creating AND enjoying art as the message behind it. and the message and the aesthetic value can be disconnected. It's possible for a beautiful painting with wonderful technique to exist that was made for some heinous propaganda or something. It's possible for a breathtaking portrait to be painted even though the subject was an opressive tyrant or perhaps an abused slave or something. In this way, a painting CAN be beautiful on it's own. Regardless and disconnected from the message. Perhaps even more so if you disconnect it from the message

@kerryalfaro9437

25 күн бұрын

Anyone else notice that the timestamp is the numbers 444?!!!!!!

Getting swallowed up by Hellfire .

I love the painting as well. Very interesting departure from the past.

I love the painting because it tried to be cool, but the overwhelming cadmium red can only make me think about the blood which was shed to build the British Empire through colonialism. Even my country's gold is in their vaults (i'm brazilian).

@matthewcerutti9047

Ай бұрын

That was Portugal

@lr980

Ай бұрын

@@matthewcerutti9047Portugal used Brazilian gold to pay their debts to England.

@matthewcerutti9047

Ай бұрын

@@lr980 I guess but that doesn’t have anything to do with us. I’m half Brazilian myself but I don’t think I’m even qualified to speak on these issues but personally I don’t really care about Portugals or Englands colonial past.

@jotbe99

Ай бұрын

Red is first and foremost colour of Royalty, it's divinity and glory. No sane person cares about some randoms killed in conquest made by superior civilization.

@nsmn5086

Ай бұрын

@@matthewcerutti9047 It has been well documented how much England affected the politics of Portugal (and, by extension, Brazil) in that period. England benefited from the Portuguese colonial robbery, I think it's fair.

Minor note: King Charles's interest in environmentalism is 100% legit. He has been campaigning on the issue for over 50 years and has run an organic food brand since 1990. He has consistently been way ahead of the curve in seriously addressing climate change and biodiversity loss.

@PeppermintPatties

Ай бұрын

He has been running Duchy Original Foods since he was the Duke of Cornwall, and the foods are indeed delicious, and sold in one of Britain's top supermarket chains, Waitrose. Now his son William is the duke. They make a lot of money from owning Cornwall (and also Lancashire, where there's another royal dukedom). However, let Cornwall belong to the Cornish, not the Crown.

@anneteller3128

Ай бұрын

King Charles is also involved in the WEF as one of the leaders, and this unelected organization's pretense in climate change is for power grabbing and not about clear air and water or biodiversity loss. They support spraying the skies with ionized aluminum and other heavy metals which are toxic to humans, animals, and plants, actually creating biodiversity loss. Even Harvard has now admitted they have an entire department devoted to this type of sky cover engineering. I can't write its true name without censorship. If it's supposed to be such a good thing, why censorship? They should be shouting it loud and proud. Maybe they don't talk about it because a scientist at Stanford University in California has been supporting this and admitted in a documentary that they know it will cause the demise to so many humans, but they plan to continue it. Bill Hates is said to be the sugar daddy of the whole sky cover agenda. They say they are trying to block the sun to decrease climate change. Several US States either have recently outlawed this spraying or are in the middle of outlawing it. Planting trees and greening the planet with plant life is what reduces carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, not spraying toxic heavy metals to cover the skies and sun. Trees breathe in carbon dioxide and breathe out lifesaving and life preserving oxygen. Now, that's real environmentalism. They also want people to only have access to solar panels for energy which depends on the sun they are blocking to work. That and wind energy. They want to be carbon neutral, but humans are organic and made of carbon and they also purport that there are too many humans on the planet, and they want to depopulate. Are we the carbon they wish to get rid of? Of course, all the rules only apply to thee and not to the WEFer leadership elites who are frequent flyers on their private jets and helicopters. Two major proponents of the climate change movement are David Blood, and Al Gore, or Blood and Gore. Maybe the artist had these two WEFer leaders in mind along with Charles when he painted the portrait. The documentarian of the documentary Planet of the Humans looked at Al Gore's Security and Exchange Commission filings and discovered he had big banks and big oil as two of the major funders of his Green Energy Movement. Who's surprised??? Raise your hands. So, you do the math. Since the WEF has made no secret that their goal is one world governance, this is the company the King is keeping, along with Blood and Gore. So, the artist may have caught the true intention of the green energy claptrap.

@user-lk6oj4bu1k

Ай бұрын

He is a very special person..

@janebaker966

27 күн бұрын

​@@PeppermintPattiestheyre not delicious,they're stodgy and horrible.

@janebaker966

27 күн бұрын

​@@user-lk6oj4bu1kyou can say that again.

Son, you forgot to drop a mic at the end, you offer the clearest analysis I have heard. Thanks for sharing.

My first impression of this obscenity is that it's ugly and somewhat macabre. I think that the painter is sending a double entendre message. Charles looks creepy.

@user-is7xs1mr9y

Ай бұрын

Yeah that's what I thought the first time I saw it: It's either the King's own blood and the painting is a threat, or he's covered in someone else's blood and it's an accusation. Or the artist trolled Charles and it's a reference to the tampon incident.

When I initially saw his portrait I thought it looked incomplete, as though the artist stopped at the underpainting. Then I realized that perhaps that’s one way to interpret it; the painting, much like the British monarchy, is deliberately not yet finished, defiantly refusing to have others put a definitive end to it.

@MurderBong

Ай бұрын

WHEN I FIRST SAW THIS PORTRAIT, I CALLED GHOSTBUSTERS . .. .

@bruisedviolets

Ай бұрын

Let’s hope not

@mr_selfdestruct

29 күн бұрын

I hate to do this but its 'definitely' not 'defiantly' in this context.

@bennyboiart7781

29 күн бұрын

@@mr_selfdestruct thanks for the critique; I re-worded my comment a bit to better convey my intended meaning.

Ah, a predictable reading, post-colonial. It’s a portrait, not an essay on the history and dubious legitimacy of the monarchy. I think it’s a very successful portrait of a modern royal too. All that pentimenti is a physical, material display of virtues we might hope a ‘modern’ Monarch embodies, transparency, progressive struggle (you can actually see where the artist has drawn and redrawn the figure of Charles), work. The man himself is seen as more substantial than all the trappings of his power, or to be wearing them lightly, effortlessly. And yes, the butterfly emphasises how fleeting power can be in the hands of a mortal, but the English Monarchy is in no danger of being declared illegitimate, or of being disbanded by the Brits. Not saying I agree with the continued existence of a Monarch (esp given that I’m Australian, and Charles III is actually now our head of State) but thinking that this painting is a sign that the Monarchy is in crisis is a facile reading of it, IMHO.

Thoughtful analysis. Personally, I think it's a Magic Eye picture, and nobody's twigged yet!

Love the parallel of blending into the background like the painting.

I mean, he's been called Charles for 75 years. It's his name. It's not that hard.

@lagautmd

Ай бұрын

That sequence was making a key point. "The King is dead, long live the King!" as they say. He is "The King" in the same way the series is named "The Crown" even though entirely about Elizabeth II. The Monarchy is an institution and he's just the current occupant out of many before of many names. He never names Elizabeth. He needs to be legitimatized as the occupant of the Monarchy, the Crown. And, with 70 years of occupying the Monarchy, Elizabeth was defining of the institution for entire generations. He has to project himself in a way to show he is every bit as much King as she was Queen. Her personal popularity was what kept the Monarchy afloat and relevant. He has to be popular enough to pass it on to his son, William who will have the same job to prepare the way for George.

@huangec

Ай бұрын

I think he was just trying in vain to be cheeky. Either that or he is truly ignorant, which would invalidate the whole point of this video.

@rathersane

Ай бұрын

Rumors abounded about a decade ago that he would take on the regnal name George VII in honor of his grandfather, George VI.

@dannacollins2520

Ай бұрын

Might have facts before starting

i think it would be interested to go a bit more in to Jonathan Yeo's work and history as something to understand a bit more this specific piece

I was searching for the portrait yesterday and I too googled "King George" 😂

Best review I’ve seen yet. Thank you!

They should have painted him standing in front of a Gundam.

They aren't losing power, money is power now not armies.

It looks very unfinished but it also looks like a metal album cover.

A very good description and analysis, thanks!

Charles III has been an advocate for environmentalism since de 80s

I love it. Don’t care what anyone says, I love the color and I find this to actually be an interesting piece of art unlike all other royal portraits. It looks like him, so the most important part was a success. There are plenty of “normal” portraits of every royal, and that’s what photography is for tbh. If you are going to paint a painting, make it a work of art.

@osborn.illustration

Ай бұрын

I agree. I'm surprised at how strange it is. I like it. It's kinda metal.

@huangec

Ай бұрын

I'm 62 and I love it. I don't see the aspects mentioned in the video myself but simply that this is Charles' own artistic preference. From the rather weak attempt of this KZreadr's at humour with not getting his name at the beginning of the video, you can already tell he's prejudiced against the King. This is merely his interpretation, and certainly not a neutral one.

@Terri_MacKay

Ай бұрын

I'm a 61 year old Canadian who isn't much of a fan of figurative painting, preferring abstract art. But I love this painting simply because it is something entirely different, and not at all what I'd expect a portrait of the reigning monarch to look like.

What’s you motivation of making your background a stitched up version of your shirt?

While the critics and the audience argue over King Charles III's portrait, for me, I just like the rich colors and straight face. And that's just it.

King Vigo the Carpathian vibes.

@andydavies5879

Ай бұрын

The scourge of Carpathia, the plague of Moldavia…

@Momma_Gee

Ай бұрын

The first thing i heard in my head when i saw this masterpiece; "Where in the hell are you from anyway, Johnny?" "The upper vest side." 😂

@forcelightningcable9639

Ай бұрын

My buddy literally said that to me lol

@NopeUghUghAbsolutelyNot

Ай бұрын

Exactly he looking for a new body

@MurderBong

Ай бұрын

RULER, SORCERER, NOT A KING. ALL HAIL VIGO.

I was expected Rod Serling to enter stage left and say...."Good evening ladies and gentlemen, this is the Night Gallery." Full tilt horror. 🤣🤣🤣

@krunkle5136

Ай бұрын

Lol. Good reference

I saw a really good analysis of this painting based on the artists other work, and theorizing it actually was secretly supposed to be a critique, I recommend you guys to look at that too since it’s super interesting fr

Jonathan Yeo pulled the red-background stunt with his study of Giancarlo Esposito in 2023. Can't say I'm impressed. Reminds me of the tale of the Emperor without His Clothes.

@Lotusmama100

27 күн бұрын

My thoughts precisely!

I think this Jonathan Yeo guy absolutely knew what he was doing and I applaud it.

I don't mind it. I think it shows a healthy irreverence to the monarchy in the present day. It's not disrespectful, nor is it fawningly obsequious.

@osborn.illustration

Ай бұрын

That is a good way to put it. It suggests the violent history of the institution yet includes a nod to his nature conservation. I'm surprised that it's actually a pretty cool painting.

I really enjoyed your presentation and insight on this painting.

There's so much you need to learn about the monarch butterfly...

Very good! I was wondering about that butterfly. There's also the "Leviathan" element of the monarch being allegedly the face of the people. And then there is not only, as you mentioned, the bloodstained history of monarchy, but also the fact that his bloodline is his only claim to legitimacy.

Red is traditionally the colour of royalty. King Charles uniform, medals, sword being one with red symbolises all his attributes being part of Divine Spirit of Kingship. Very powerful symbolism. His face and hands are beyond that colour, that obviously means his persona is transcending even his own identity and controlling it form detached position. This painting symbolically present us the ideal of Arya Kingship.

@pattydouglas8012

Ай бұрын

I 🎉 love it.

THERE SEEMS TO BE A CURSE ON THE BRITISH MONARCHY- AND KING CHARLES PORTRAIT PERSONIFIES THIS IN "BLOODY RED!"

I really enjoyed this video! I´m not british so I haven´t seen this painting yet, so thanks for introducing it in such a great way. What I love especially about this portrait is the self critiquing that´s only there to give one self legitimacy, while that is exactly the thing that needs critiquing in the first place. Basically undermining one´s status to be abled to uphold it. Something that can not only be said about kings and queens but also about cooperations. Generally it shows people trying to keep their privilege by acknowleging it while not trying to actively creating a materially better world.