In a dramatic unveiling that has left the public and critics buzzing, King Charles III revealed his first official portrait since ascending to the throne, and reactions have been anything but tepid. As debates rage on social media and in art circles, it is clear that King Charles’ portrait is destined to be one of the most talked-about royal artworks in recent history.
The unveiling
Recently, King Charles III personally unveiled a new portrait of himself at Buckingham Palace, the first such portrait since his coronation. The Royal Family’s Instagram account shared an exclusive video of the unveiling, featuring the king himself presenting the artwork.
This significant new work will ultimately be displayed in Drapers’ Hall in London, adding to its historical art collection and offering the public a glimpse of the monarch’s regal presence.
There was an ongoing debate in the comments.
The unveiling sparked a heated debate in the comments section on the Royal Family’s Instagram post and other social media sites. Opinions were sharply divided, with some users harshly criticizing the artwork. Comments ranged from “That is hideous” and “Without sounding rude, this is the worst royal portrait I’ve ever seen” to “100% thought this was satire.”
One critic remarked, “The face is good, the rest is appalling,” while another noted, “I would have loved this if it was any other color than red. He really captured the essence of him in the face, but the harshness of the red doesn’t match the softness of his expression.”
Despite the criticism, there were also voices of appreciation, such as “A lovely portrait of King Charles! I love the way the muted background draws attention to his face!” The mixed reactions highlight the polarizing nature of the portrait and the strong emotions it has evoked among the public.
The artist
Jonathan Yeo, a prominent figure in the world of figurative painting, has earned widespread acclaim for his unique blend of traditional and experimental portraiture. Yeo’s distinctive approach involves a deep engagement with his subjects, allowing him to capture their essence beyond mere physical appearance.
His recent portrait of King Charles III epitomizes this philosophy. Yeo explained, “As a portrait artist, you get this unique opportunity to spend time with and get to know a subject, so I wanted to minimize the visual distractions and allow people to connect with the human being underneath.”
The meaning of the portrait.
A particularly striking element of Yeo’s portrait is the inclusion of a butterfly. This detail serves multiple purposes, both symbolic and compositional. Yeo elaborated, “Primarily a symbol of the beauty and precariousness of nature, it highlights the environmental causes the King has championed most of his life and certainly long before they became a mainstream conversation.”
The butterfly also provides a visual contrast to the uniform, softening the portrayal and adding layers of meaning. “In the context of art history, a butterfly often symbolizes metamorphosis and rebirth, paralleling the King’s transition from Prince to monarch during the period the portrait was created,” Yeo noted, further emphasizing the transformative phase in King Charles’s life.
Yeo expressed his gratitude and honor for being commissioned to create such a significant portrait. “It was a privilege and pleasure to have been commissioned by The Drapers’ Company to paint this portrait of His Majesty The King, the first to be unveiled since his Coronation.”
Yeo’s approach to portraiture aims to encapsulate the life experiences and humanity etched into his subjects’ faces. “I do my best to capture the life experiences and humanity etched into any individual sitter’s face, and I hope that is what I have achieved in this portrait,” he explained.
The challenge of portraying a figure as complex and significant as King Charles III was substantial, but one that Yeo found immensely rewarding. “To try and capture that for His Majesty The King, who occupies such a unique role, was both a tremendous professional challenge, and one which I thoroughly enjoyed and am immensely grateful for,” he concluded. The portrait, destined for Drapers’ Hall in London, stands as a testament to both the artist’s skill and the monarch’s enduring legacy.
Discover the lesser-known facets of King Charles III’s life in our compelling article, “8 Things About King Charles III That Will Allow Us to Know Him More Closely.” Dive beyond the regal exterior to uncover intimate details about his passions, personal experiences, and unique quirks.
Preview photo credit Kin Cheung / Associated Press / East News, theroyalfamily / Instagram, jonathanyeo / Instagram
Child star Mara Wilson, 37, left Hollywood after ‘Matilda’ as she was ‘not cute anymore’
The world first fell in love with the endearing Mara Wilson in the early 1990s. She was a child actor best remembered for her roles as the bright young girl in beloved family films like Miracle on 34th Street and Mrs. Doubtfire.
The rising actress, who turned 37 on July 24, looked like she was ready for big things, but as she got older, she lost her “cute” factor and vanished from the big screen.
She continues, “If you’re not cute anymore, if you’re not beautiful, then you are worthless. Hollywood was burned out on me.”
To find out what happened to Wilson, continue reading!
When five-year-old Mara Wilson played Robin Williams’ youngest kid in Mrs. Doubtfire in 1993, she won over millions of fans’ hearts.
When the California native was invited to feature in one of the highest-grossing comedies in Hollywood history, she had already made appearances in advertisements.
“My parents grounded me even though they were proud of me.” My mother would always tell me that I’m just an actor if I ever stated something like, “I’m the greatest!” Wilson, who is now 37, remarked, “You’re just a kid.”
Following her big screen premiere, she was cast in 1994’s Miracle on 34th Street as Susan Walker, the same character Natalie Wood had performed in 1947.
Wilson describes her audition as follows: “I read my lines for the production team and told them I didn’t believe in Santa Claus” in an essay for the Guardian. “But I did believe in the tooth fairy and had named mine after Sally Field,” she writes, referring to the Oscar-winning performer who portrayed her mother in Mrs. Doubtfire.
“Very unhappy”
Next, Wilson starred with Danny DeVito and his real-life wife Rhea Perlman in the 1996 film Matilda as the magical girl.
Additionally, Suzie, her mother, lost her fight against breast cancer in that same year.
“I wasn’t really sure of my identity.I was two different people before and after that. Regarding her profound grief following her mother’s passing, Wilson explains, “She was like this omnipresent thing in my life.””I found it kind of overwhelming,” she continues. I mostly just wanted to be a typical child, especially in the wake of my mother’s passing.
The young girl claims that she was “the most unhappy” and that she was fatigued when she became “very famous.”
She reluctantly took on her final significant role in the 2000 fantasy adventure movie Thomas and the Magic Railroad at the age of 11. “The characters had too little age. I reacted viscerally to [the] writing at 11 years old.I thought, ugh. I love it, she says to the Guardian.
“Destroyed”
Her decision to leave Hollywood wasn’t the only one, though.
Wilson was going through puberty and growing out of the “cute” position as a young teenager, so the roles weren’t coming in for him.
“Just another weird, nerdy, loud girl with bad hair and teeth, whose bra strap was always showing,” was how she was described.
“When I was thirteen, no one had complimented me on my appearance or called me cute—at least not in a flattering way.”
Wilson had to cope with the demands of celebrity and the difficulties of becoming an adult in the public glare. It had a great influence on her, her shifting image.
“I had this Hollywood notion that you are worthless if you are not attractive or cute anymore. Because I connected that directly to my career’s downfall. Rejection still hurts, even if I was kind of burned out on it and Hollywood was burned out on me.
Mara in the role of author
Wilson wrote her first book, “Where Am I Now?,” before becoming a writer. “Ancidental Fame and True Tales of Childhood,” published in 2016.
The book explores “her journey from accidental fame to relative (but happy) obscurity, covering everything from what she learned about sex on the set of Melrose Place, to discovering in adolescence that she was no longer ‘cute’ enough for Hollywood.”
In addition, she penned the memoir “Good Girls Don’t,” which explores her experiences living up to expectations as a young performer.
In her Guardian column, she states, “Being cute just made me miserable.” It was always my expectation that I would give up acting, not the other way around.
How do you feel about Mara Wilson? Kindly share this story so that others can also comment and let us know what you think!
Leave a Reply