King Charles and Queen Camilla were actually pretty “busy” yesterday, on Prince Archie’s sixth birthday. Because Charles scheduled his 2023 coronation on Archie’s birthday, Charles now gets to do special coronation-anniversary events every year while keeping publicly silent about his grandson. None of the Buckingham Palace accounts wished Archie a happy birthday, and obviously, no reporter dared ask the dogsh-t grandfather about Archie.
So on Tuesday, Charles and Camilla attended the unveiling of their coronation portraits at the National Gallery. I haven’t seen these paintings close-up, but from what I can see, Charles’s portrait is really bad! The proportions look seriously off. His portrait was done by Peter Kuhfield, who has known Charles for decades. When nepotism goes wrong. Camilla’s portrait, painted by Paul S. Benney is pretty good, although it definitely appears like two decades have been shaved off her face.
After the portrait unveiling, Camilla went solo to view the poppy installation at the Tower of London. Artists create ceramic poppies and you can walk through the installation and view the poppies close-up. The photos are always so striking and Camilla knew what she was doing when she wore the red dress. I still say that her ugly little cape makes her look like the Wicked Witch of Windsor though. Also: I remember when Prince Harry, William and Kate viewed the poppy installation in the before-times. I wonder why none of the younger royals viewed the installation this year?
Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.
-
- LONDON, ENGLAND – MAY 06: King Charles III and Queen Camilla pose with their official Coronation State Portraits during a visit to The National Gallery on May 06, 2025 in London, England. To mark the second anniversary of their Coronation, The King and Queen will unveil their official Coronation State Portraits by Peter Kuhfeld and Paul S. Benney, now part of The Royal Collection. The portraits will be revealed in the Central Hall, followed by the reopening of the refurbished Sainsbury Wing. Their Majesties will then tour the space and meet participants in the gallery’s outreach education programme.,Image: 995695940, License: Rights-managed, Restrictions: *** NO UK USE FOR 48 HRS ***, Model Release: no, Credit line: Chris Jackson/Avalon
-
- LONDON, ENGLAND – MAY 06: King Charles III and Queen Camilla unveil their official Coronation State Portraits during a visit to The National Gallery on May 06, 2025 in London, England. To mark the second anniversary of their Coronation, The King and Queen will unveil their official Coronation State Portraits by Peter Kuhfeld and Paul S. Benney, now part of The Royal Collection. The portraits will be revealed in the Central Hall, followed by the reopening of the refurbished Sainsbury Wing. Their Majesties will then tour the space and meet participants in the gallery’s outreach education programme.,Image: 995696000, License: Rights-managed, Restrictions: *** NO UK USE FOR 48 HRS ***, Model Release: no, Credit line: Chris Jackson/Avalon
-
- LONDON, ENGLAND – MAY 06: King Charles III and Queen Camilla unveil their official Coronation State Portraits during a visit to The National Gallery on May 06, 2025 in London, England. To mark the second anniversary of their Coronation, The King and Queen will unveil their official Coronation State Portraits by Peter Kuhfeld and Paul S. Benney, now part of The Royal Collection. The portraits will be revealed in the Central Hall, followed by the reopening of the refurbished Sainsbury Wing. Their Majesties will then tour the space and meet participants in the gallery’s outreach education programme.,Image: 995696049, License: Rights-managed, Restrictions: *** NO UK USE FOR 48 HRS ***, Model Release: no, Credit line: Chris Jackson/Avalon
-
- LONDON, ENGLAND – MAY 06: A general view of Queen Camilla’s Coronation State Portrait during a visit to The National Gallery on May 06, 2025 in London, England. To mark the second anniversary of their Coronation, The King and Queen will unveil their official Coronation State Portraits by Peter Kuhfeld and Paul S. Benney, now part of The Royal Collection. The portraits will be revealed in the Central Hall, followed by the reopening of the refurbished Sainsbury Wing. Their Majesties will then tour the space and meet participants in the gallery’s outreach education programme.,Image: 995696059, License: Rights-managed, Restrictions: *** NO UK USE FOR 48 HRS ***, Model Release: no, Credit line: Chris Jackson/Avalon
-
- London, UK, 06 May 2025: To mark the 80th anniversary of the end of the Second World War, Her Majesty Queen Camilla installs the final poppy in The Tower of London’s display of nearly 30,000 ceramic poppies from the 2014 commemorative art installation, Blood Swept Lands and Seas of Red with a display of nearly 30,000 ceramic poppies from the 2014 commemorative art installation, Blood Swept Lands and Seas of Red.,Image: 995731274, License: Rights-managed, Restrictions: , Model Release: no, Credit line: Photo by Amanda Rose/Avalon
-
- London, UK, 06 May 2025: Queen Camilla during a visit to view ‘The Tower Remembers’, the ceramic poppy installation marking the 80th anniversary of the end of the Second World War, at the Tower of London. Nearly 30,000 ceramic poppies from the 2014 commemorative art installation, Blood Swept Lands and Seas of Red have been loaned by the Imperial War Museum for a new VE Day design inside the inner walls of the Tower, resembling a ‘wound’ to reflect the long-lasting sacrifices made during the Second World War.,Image: 995763993, License: Rights-managed, Restrictions: *** NO UK USE FOR 48 HRS ***, Model Release: no, Credit line: Stefan Rousseau/Avalon
-
- London, UK, 06 May 2025: Queen Camilla views the display of ceramic poppies for the 80th anniversary of the end of the Second World War, at the Tower of London. Nearly 30,000 ceramic poppies from the 2014 commemorative art installation, Blood Swept Lands and Seas of Red have been loaned by the Imperial War Museum for a new VE Day design inside the inner walls of the Tower, resembling a ‘wound’ to reflect the long-lasting sacrifices made during the Second World War.,Image: 995764117, License: Rights-managed, Restrictions: *** NO UK USE FOR 48 HRS ***, Model Release: no, Credit line: Stefan Rousseau/Avalon
-
- London, UK, 06 May 2025: Queen Camilla walks with Constable of the Tower of London, General Sir Gordon Messenger, through a Guard of Honour formed of six Yeoman Warders during a visit to view ‘The Tower Remembers’, the ceramic poppy installation marking the 80th anniversary of the end of the Second World War, at the Tower of London. Nearly 30,000 ceramic poppies from the 2014 commemorative art installation, Blood Swept Lands and Seas of Red have been loaned by the Imperial War Museum for a new VE Day design inside the inner walls of the Tower, resembling a ‘wound’ to reflect the long-lasting sacrifices made during the Second World War.,Image: 995764141, License: Rights-managed, Restrictions: *** NO UK USE FOR 48 HRS ***, Model Release: no, Credit line: Stefan Rousseau/Avalon
Rottweiler’s portrait looks like a photo. Is that a fan or the Bible in her hand?
Surprised Chuck didn’t want the crown on his head. Must be too heavy and uneasy for him.
How much did these paintings cost?
Probably more than it would cost to provide security for the Sussex family.
But, reasons……
It’s a fan. The Telegraph has an amusing takedown of the portraits. When even the Tories are laughing at you…kinging, you’re not doing it right
WTF does she need a fan for? Send secret messages? Didn’t watch Chuck’s hat party – did she use the fan because it became too hot inside the abbey?
That is a rather bizarre item to be wielding for a portrait. A lot could be made of that…
I thought a whip would be more suitable, to keep Chuck into line.
She’s no Spanish noblewoman.
She was photographed drinking from a bottle of water during the VE celebration, so her holding a fan in her hand for a portrait is just another example of how she lacks class.
Wanna take bets it was gin and tonic in that bottle, and *not* water? 😄 Wouldn’t surprise me!
And what do we call this fan? The Fan of Desperation? The Royal Fan of Mistresses? The Right Regal Fan of Pettiness?
I see that Chuckles changed out of his purple coronation pajama top for this portrait…
Whatever made him think that purple silk pyjamas looked good on him. Ugh.
I would have LOVED for him to be painted for posterity in those purple PJs! Missed opportunity!
And everyone’s right–the proportions are off, they made his head too big, barely finished his face, and the table leg seems to have disappeared although at closer look it seems to be obscured by the robe? Except the robe is poorly defined over there. That bloody portrait was way better.
Rottweiler’s painter wanted to get paid so romanticized it to oblivion. Chucks style is more disheveled like his last bloodking portrait
How many portraits of one’s self, does one have to have?
Does one forget what they look like?
Ridiculous.
In the good old days of QE2, the portrait would be reproduced and placed in every public building throughout the UK and the Commonwealth.
For some reason, I don’t think there’ll be many takers for reproducing Chuck’s many portraits.
If he had to pay for them to be produced it’d be fun to see how many people in the Commonwealth could cost him money, but the cost will be born by the British taxpayer so I’ll pass.
I seem to recall nobody wanted his photograph although it was supposed to be installed in place of QEIIs in all government offices.
And not even the best artist in the world can make these two look anything but mediocre and pathetic people. I just see Diana’s mangled car when I see these portraits.
Gotta make them fast, we dont know how much time he’s got left
Chuck’s head looks cartoonish, and Cam looks 30 years younger. It’s too bad she wore a house dress, strange choice.
And that giant gold cipher front & center at the bottom just looks odd. Throws the whole thing off balance.
They’re both so unfortunate looking. Black hearted haters.
Photoshopped Camilla = lipstick on a Pig
They can air brush this woman into infinite, she has aged poorly. Has the manners of an uncouth harlot and is a disaster of a human, nothing redeemable about her.
The portrait of Camilla is actually quite flattering. The dress is captured well and is much prettier than I recall. Over all, a pretty good effort.
Knowing how jealous Chuckles is I’m surprised at how bad his portrait is but Horsillas looks pretty good but she looks photoshopped. Surprised he isn’t putting up a stink .
I don’t know if the proportions of the painting are off or if that’s just Charles’ oddly proportioned body and head.
Chuck the bobblehead.
I had to zoom in to see his sausage fingers and they looked ok. So are his ears. They don’t stick out much as they used to.
No hell fire for Charles this time, I see 😂😂 They are fine and perfectly boring, which I assume Charles prefers.
Although he still chooses blood red as a prominent colour to match the blood on his hands.
Is it their royal color or something? I am so ignorant at these things. Because I remember they also made Will wear red uniform at his wedding when he wanted to wear black one like Harry.
Purple is considered the royal colour , hence the purple pj coat the the fancy hat party. The brit royals typically used that or blue. Egg’s red uniform was because it’s fancier than the black one, more befitting for a future future.
Red for Chuck is a choice.
We know the dress was white, but it’s painted in green, which is appropriate, given her relationship with the Green Monster.
I thought that was odd. We all know her dress was white but it seems to have been infused by the background color, like it got color transfer in the wash.
For coronation portraits their heads are confusingly crown-less
QE2 carried hers with aplomb. Chuck looks so uncomfortable with it on. Like Cinderella – the right crown for the right head. If the crown fits…
No crowns is the best decision made for such portraits because those crowns make them look ridiculous! At the coronation, Chuck and Cam looked like something out of early-70s advertisement for Imperial Margarine.
AD captions for Imperial margarine over the years: Flavor fit for a King or Queen” and “I can’t believe it’s not butter!”.
Shouldn’t she have worn something other than the “housecoat dress” it is for a portrait. It does not really match the formality of what Charles wore. Why is the second anniversary celebrated?
Doesn’t it seem like all Camilla and Charles do is unveil portraits of themselves? Camilla is the patron, that’s why William and Kate weren’t there.
My first thought as well—they’re as bad as Mango Mussolini and his obsession with glamorized portraits of himself.
Appropriate that Charles’ crown is on a table, waiting for the next guy.
Unfortunately, the next guy is William.
#Abolishthemonarchy
Peg is next. What a dismal thought.
It wasn’t enough that he himself got everything he wanted, he had to force her on the whole country and the world as queen. His mother obviously didn’t want her to have the title. But they obviously forced Charles not to marry her from the start. Or should he have just abdicated? She is striking and very embellished in the picture. The man in the picture looks like he’s grown into the background.
Charles did not want to marry her when he first met her and before her first marriage. He said so to his biographer. It was not this great love like the Duke of Windsor wanting to marry Wallis and moving heaven and earth to do so. Charles used an aristo to have his children and continued seeing Camilla (and other women) Charles put himself first and did not imo want to risk marrying a divorcee and possibly having to step aside from line of succession. Charles could have given Camilla the title without going to his ill mother and telling her he needed her to make a statement. Charles was never forced, he did what was best for him. He did not want to sacrifice his place on the throne by marrying Camilla so he got the suitable girl. Charles does as he pleases and was never “forced.” Even if he were sent out to sea for months, he could have told Camilla to wait for him, or even wrote that to her.
Yes, he could have abdicated, which he obviously didn’t want to do. But the reality of the upbringing in this family and the whole system of the British monarchy doesn’t exactly strengthen the free decision to live one’s own life. We are seeing in real time how one’s own opinion and actions are penalised.
I think if Charles really had wanted to marry Camilla pre her marriage to Parker Bowles he could have. There could be “spin” about how she is from the country set and they have the same sense of humor and so on an so forth. Charles did not seem to want pursue her and said he did not want to marry her back then. He could have married her IMO but did not bother to push for the marriage. And perhaps she would have said no if he proposed, since she had pursued Andrew Parker Bowles since 1966
For a set of portraits that presumably are meant to hang next to each other, and depict the same event, the paintings have no similarities. If I was arranging a gallery I would not put these paintings near each other
From afar I thought they had painted giant feet on Camilla.
Camilla’s gown looks like a version of her wedding dress, which was robin’s egg blue, for the Church blessing portion. I thought it was lovely, and moved beautifully. Charles just looks little, diminished, and at the end of life. The portrait should at least project dignity, but it does not, nor does it project vigorous or any type of presence. I think the portrait portrays the little man that is Charles.
The portraits suffer in comparison with portraits of George VI and Queen Elizabeth., George V and Queen Mary and so on.
When you compare them to previous coronation portraits, they are pitiful.
Camilla’s portrait is nicer to look at, more flattering.
But that black cape makes her look like June Osbourn at Mrs. Lawrence’s funeral.
Abominations. Seriously. Burn them.
Camilla’s is ridiculous, as unsuited to the role as she could be imagined, her painting reflects her Elmer Fuddiness.
In fact it took a while to discern what was going on at the bottom of this warehouse-ready gem where I initially mistook ermine cape fripperies for big, long feet in sandals. As it was, Camilla’s big feet were hidden behind ermine.
With Charles’ another disaster and, sadly, not a masterpiece in execution like the first, the Monarch butterfly on red.
With a cliché setting and a crown that looked découpaged into place, we’ll await what will be his next and final portrait.
For a moment on first glance, the photo with the black cloth dropping away as the picture was revealed… the black cloth looked like the hooded figure of death walking in front of the picture!