Portraits of the British Royals


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Re: the new portrait
I try to be as positive as possible about gestures of generosity and gratefulness. So. let me just say thanks to Australia and Ralph Heimans (the artist) for making the effort. Mr. Heimans said he wanted to show her vulnerability and be honest.

So he put her majesty in a gown that is highly fitted under the bodice, in her robes and jewels alone in Westminster Abbey at dusk. Honest? Ahem.

When was the last time we saw HM in an Empire waist gown? How often do we suppose her to take out the ermines and diamonds and run over to the Abbey to play dress up on the Cosmati pavement? If she is alone - who helped her with that coronation robe?

Yes - I get it that the artist was using the setting as metaphor for her reign. The rendering of her face is lovely. It is an excellent and lovely face in full reflection. I even like the idea that she is thoughtful, absorbed and full of many emotions. But in half full regalia (no crown) alone in an echoing church? Yech. It is a bit creepy. That's not how many of us think of Elizabeth II.

It's also an excellent portrait of the Abbey, a decent rendering of light and shadow, etc. But overall, the metaphor fails for me. Just my opinion.
 
What social grace you have. I mean that sincerely. Not many people could express such a critical opinion framed in a way that made the argument audible. I should be taking notes.

I also, overall, admire the portrait and, without any doubt respect the artist for a very rich piece of fine art and the subject for who she is.

That said, this is a well thought out opinion. And looking again at the portrait through these rational criticisms, I am mostly in agreement. The setting is less a bother to me. I understand and appreciate the metaphor at work and understand that such works often must tell a large story on a small canvas so ... I will say that it could be worse. Better maybe, but definitely worse.

What venue might you have chosen?

The comments as to the choices in adornment or lack thereof are extremely compelling and I am inclined to just say "as you say".

In particular the lack of a crown, either on her head, in her hands or hanging on a coat rack nearby is unsettling. The trappings he chose are not those one immediately associates with Sovereign or Monarch. She might well be a religious figure (which is another discussion, isn't it?) and the robes and dress make her look more matronly, in a dress-up kind of way, that I believe befits her station.

She *IS* the Queen of England. And she may indeed reflect and be reflective, lonely and a windowless monad, for all we know - but the Crown does not feel like a ceremonial trapping, as the robes do. The Crown is the symbol, in a literal, figurative and alliterative way, of her Sovereignty. It is NOT a trapping, it is the token or symbol of an entire way of life for an entire group of peoples. In Canada we swear allegiance to "The Crown". When we hunt we hunt on "Crown Land". When they take you to court, it is "The Crown" arresting you.

I understand the intent was casual - but the result is not, it is just crownless. There is nothing casual about it. Her facial pose does not count - she *has* no casual look that I have ever seen. Thank the gods. :) But it IS a very good likeness of her face and he has done a magnificent job of sharing her kindness and the even stare of the truly compassionate, so there is that :)

Again, thanks for the assessment.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Catherine J said:
...

I also, overall, admire the portrait and, without any doubt respect the artist for a very rich piece of fine art and the subject for who she is.

Again, thanks for the assessment.
Click to expand...

Thanks for listening - it is an underrated skill. :)

I thought more about my post after I let it go and decided that for me it would work perfectly as a posthumous portrait. (I don't even want to type that). It fails for me because all that metaphor reminds me of endings and death.

I still see HM as the vibrant, important, ruling woman she is. She may have aged, but she is still very active. Passing a milestone alone is not a reason to hang up one's spurs, even metaphorically.

I think the figure of the queen in crown in the Abbey with her figure filling the picture would be less unsettling for me. It would give a nod back to the road she has traveled since the Coronation. It would show her as she is. And I do think the figure as is succeeds as a lovely likeness.

And mine is an almost purely emotional reaction, I admit that fully. For me she is an active ruler, an aging ruler, but very alive to change and relevant in many ways. This week's example of her question about Hamza is an example. She is clearly still in the game and doing her duty for the Kingdom. Long live Her Majesty!
 
I'm no art buff by any stretch of the imagination; I like what I like and I don't like what I don't like. There have certainly been several very divisive portraits of HM over the years, some of which are positively ghastly.

My immediate impression of this one is positive. I think the light captured in the Abbey and on the Queen is very effective. Having HM standing on the spot where she was anointed in a solemn religious service which obviously meant a great deal to her really works for me. I'm actually surprised no-one's done it before. It's very evocative, to me, of Mr Shakespeare's Henry IV part II, "uneasy lies the head that wears the crown". It conveys the solitude and vulnerability of the role, its individual character but also its majesty.

The Queen doesn't need a crown to show she's a Queen; it's obvious within seconds of looking at this painting that this is a leader who has dedicated herself heart and soul to her coronation oath she made on that exact spot. For me, it's one of the best portraits of HM for many a year.

Plus, I always like seeing HM's snow-white hair ;).
 
I think it's a great reflection portrait of The Queen. I also like the gown she's wearing. She's in the same spot were she was crowned and it looks like she's refecting back to that day.

I think it would've been great if she was wearing her Diamond Diadem.
 
EIIR said:
The Queen doesn't need a crown to show she's a Queen; it's obvious within seconds of looking at this painting that this is a leader who has dedicated herself heart and soul to her coronation oath she made on that exact spot. For me, it's one of the best portraits of HM for many a year.
Click to expand...


Another good assessment. Interesting, isn't it, the various responses we have.

There's a way we look at things like this, applying metaphor from our own emotional and personal perspective. I really love that yours is "The Queen doesn't need a crown." Clearly this artist has rendered something that resonates within your heart ... not much more can be asked of a piece of portraiture.
 
It is very personal. In addition to what our feelings about the monarchy bring to the viewing, we also bring our ideas of aging, death, power, women, religion, etc.

I saw the "Queen without a crown" as a metaphor for a queen who is close to passing on the crown to the POW. But to see it is a queen without need for the symbols of leadership is just as valid. Well said!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The reaction I've seen across the British news sites has been almost universally glowing for Mr Heiman's portrait of HM, which is amazing when you think about it for a modern day portrait painter.

I wonder if this might do for Ralph Heiman's career what this famous, almost universally loved portrait of the Queen did for Pietro Annigoni? He went on to paint Popes and US Presidents among others.
 
My first response to it, before any *thought* was "wow". A positive "wow".

Heimans is one of my favourite artists. His site has an ability to zoom in and out to see details. Here is the Queen's portrait on his site. There are several very excellent portraits available for viewing.
 
Thanks for posting his website. His portraits are just amazing and I really like the ones of Crown Princess Mary. Now I want him to do my portrait, lol.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Portrait, and detail

 

Attachments

  • Portrait 2012.jpg
    Portrait 2012.jpg
    89.6 KB · Views: 363
  • Portrait detail.jpg
    Portrait detail.jpg
    73.4 KB · Views: 283
It certainly does HM justice. I hope I'll be able to pop over to London to see it when it's back in the UK next year.
 
the concept of portraitist Heimans reminds me of the scene in "The Queen" where Elizabeth is alone in the forest, while the men in her family are hunting, and she comes face to face with another "ruler", a stag alone. I think it's fitting to show here as a regal figure alone in the venerable abbey where is a symbol of the royal family's rule.
The rendering of the abbey seems a little photographic rather than expressive, but it also shows the solid reality of this amazing building, which most of us never see because it is full of people, who cover the space on the floor scene here, or the choir stalls in the background. I remember these stalls from the wedding of William and Catherine, and the exquisite music produced by the choir, and selected by the bride and groom, who have good and learned musical taste unappreciated, apparently, by those who think of Kate primarily as a wearer of stylish clothes.
The Queen in this portrait is NOT especially a wearer of anything. No crown, not much in the way of royal insignia. Just a human woman who became a symbol in herself.
 
Mariel1 said:
the concept of portraitist Heimans reminds me of the scene in "The Queen" where Elizabeth is alone in the forest, while the men in her family are hunting, and she comes face to face with another "ruler", a stag alone.
Click to expand...

Excellent analogy.

Also a good observation about the photo-realism of the architectural elements versus a more expressive human element. It creates a powerful contrast.

Good review, I enjoyed it.
 
selrahc4 said:
Portrait of HRH The Princess Royal by David Cobley
souce: David Cobley

ztempanne7bydavidcobleysep2001.jpg
Click to expand...

I hardly recognized Anne there! There's a lovely portrait of her at 1:17 in this video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XCaMbpMWApg&list=FLqLMwk4Y88qlq-M9IMs4d1w&index=16&feature=plpp_video
 
Last edited:
AdmirerUS said:
If this was shared earlier, I apologize - but I just saw this sketch of Her Majesty for the first time and I love it. It was done by Dame Laura Wright in 1950:

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/09/10/article-2201309-14E057AA000005DC-374_306x417.jpg

DM also did an article about its auction: Rare charcoal sketch of The Queen when she a 23-year-old princess to be sold at auction | Mail Online
Click to expand...

Thank you for the link, AdmirerUS, I hadn't seen this before. I think the sketch is beautiful, although, is it just me or has the artist given the young Princess Elizabeth a hint of a 5 o'clock shadow?
 
EIIR said:
Thank you for the link, AdmirerUS, I hadn't seen this before. I think the sketch is beautiful, although, is it just me or has the artist given the young Princess Elizabeth a hint of a 5 o'clock shadow?
Click to expand...

LOL - I had not noticed. I was struck by her eyes and lips. She was quite the dish in her youth!
 
It is easy to see the Duke has the blood of kings in his veins.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

AC21091968
The Queen: A Life in Pictures (by Victoria Murphy)
Replies
1
Views
977
An Ard Ri
An Ard Ri
muriel
Queen Elizabeth II's Platinum Jubilee Celebrations: 2022
26 27 28
Replies
822
Views
111K
yukari
Y
Iluvbertie
British Royal Family Engagements 2020
2 3
Replies
85
Views
16K
Iluvbertie
Iluvbertie
K
Queen Elizabeth II
Replies
0
Views
1K
Karina123
K
PetticoatLane
"The Crown" (2016-Present) - Netflix Drama Series on Queen Elizabeth II
47 48 49
Replies
1K
Views
198K
kalnel
K

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom