- cross-posted to:
- worldnewsnonus@lemy.lol
- cross-posted to:
- worldnewsnonus@lemy.lol
You must log in or # to comment.
The painting is protected by glass, so no damage was done to the painting.
I read through way too many articles that failed to mention this important detail.
It wouldn’t be a big loss. That painting is ugly as hell.
I think it’s a terrific representation of the horrifically bloody history of the British Monarchy
I can’t stop thinking about how someone got paid to make this painting.
Right? Spit right in the royal families face and they pay you for the privilege. Priceless and hilarious
He’s pretty famous for making portraits. Here’s his portrait of Idris Elba.
See, that isn’t ugly.
Which makes me think it was on purpose. Which makes me hate it a little less.
He has a lot of upper class clients who he paints just as … starkly as the king’s portrait.
It is very much on purpose.
Now that is a gorgeous balance of color and brush strokes. So why did the artist choose that awful color theme for Charles?
~~If it were something that could easily be removed I’d laugh
Since it appears to be a lot more permanent. Hopeful they do jail time for vandalism.don’t destroy artwork.~~
Edit : I’ve been told it its over glass. So in that case. Then it’s good for a laugh.
It’s over glass and ummm… I think it’s more important to first stop torturing animals and worry about the well being of inanimate objects later.
Is it? Ah in that case I’ll amend my comment.
