Getty Images
Artist Jonathan Yeo and Charles III, Official Portrait of Charles.
Editor's note: Holly Thomas is a writer and editor based in London. She is morning editor for her Katie Couric Media.she tweets @holster. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author. Read more opinions on CNN.
CNN —
The first official portrait of King Charles III was unveiled this week, and we're sure His Majesty would agree that it's a moving sight. The larger-than-life painting by Jonathan Yeo depicts Charles from mid-thigh to above. He wears a crimson Welsh Guards uniform and holds the hilt of his sword with both hands. Almost the entire canvas, except for his hands and head, is flooded with fiery red. He is staring straight ahead, a wry smile on his lips. A butterfly hovers over his right shoulder.
holly thomas
holly thomas
Yeoh offered a partial explanation for his artistic decision. He said the butterfly represented Charles' “how our role in public life has changed.” Apparently this was Charles' idea, an impressive reverse engineering feat in which Yeo chose the king's brain as a visual cue for future schoolchildren to analyze the portrait's meaning. “He said, 'What would you do if a butterfly landed on my shoulder?'” Yeo recalled.
Unfortunately for Yeo, Charles, and the butterfly, nothing about this portrait garnered as many comments as its primary color. One commentator on the royal family's official Instagram feed said the king looked like he was “burning in hell,” while another said it looked like he had “a lot of blood on his hands.” He said it gave a great impression. One less keen observer wrote, “Tampax III,” perhaps referring to one of the king's more embarrassing appearances in the British press.
While these insights are interesting, the first thing I noticed about this painting was not the resonance of menstruation, but what it obscured. The king's body is almost completely opaque. He fades into the background, the outline of his ceremonial uniform blurring out of focus. This is a good illustration of a man who was once known for his flamboyant asides, but whose exalted role now obligates him to keep his personal feelings private. He is withdrawn, but the aristocratic silhouette remains.
Like most Brits, I knew Charles as Prince for most of my life. His reputation as a frustrated samurai king was further exacerbated by his tendency to speak his mind on subjects close to his heart. He made pleas to the highest levels of government ministers in his infamous secret “Black Spider Memo”, setting out his views on issues ranging from the Iraq war to the environment. In the months before Queen Elizabeth died, he was heard denouncing the government's “horrible” Rwanda policy.
Charles, now bound by the monarch's constitutional obligation to remain politically neutral, restrained such impulses and carried out the motion in place. Addressing Parliament for the first time as head of state last November, he added to Chancellor Rishi Sunak's promise to grant oil and gas exploration permits in the North Sea every year, as well as environmental regulations the government sees as penalizing motorists. was obliged to announce a bill prohibiting Congress from passing. Those words must not have sat well with the man who in 2021 described COP26 as a “bar of last chance” to fight climate change.
Beyond these weddings and funerals, Prince Charles has been less visible in British public life in recent years, particularly since announcing his cancer diagnosis in February. Since then, he has understandably kept a low profile, blending into the background like an artistic avatar. But while his public persona has definitely evolved, his private demeanor seems less flexible.
Prince Charles has long made clear that he intends to introduce a more streamlined and cost-effective monarchy that is less reliant on taxpayer-funded handouts. But as Tina Brown points out in her excellent book The Palace Papers, this is not a huge sacrifice for the late Queen's eldest son.
Charles' personal wealth dwarfs that of other members of his family. His income as Prince of Wales was generated primarily by the Duchy of Cornwall, which owns 52,449 hectares (more than 200 square miles) of land, including vast tracts of farmland, housing and commercial sites. Last November, The Guardian revealed that another of his patrimonial estates, the Duchy of Lancaster, was profiting from the deaths of thousands of lords by collecting financial assets owned by people who died without a will or next of kin. Buckingham Palace did not comment to the Guardian. A representative for the Duchy of Lancaster said that after his mother's death, the king supported the extension of a policy to use “Bona Vacantia” funds for “the restoration and repair of eligible buildings to protect and preserve them for future generations.”
Get our free weekly newsletter
Over the past decade alone, the system has reportedly made King Charles richer by more than 60 million pounds ($76 million). Last year, The Guardian estimated his total net worth at around 1.8 billion pounds (about $2.3 billion). Because of this, Prince Charles' financial situation stands in stark contrast to those in large families who have historically relied on the monarch's generosity to make a living. Becoming a millionaire makes it significantly easier to pay his way.
Considering Charles has no intention of splitting his inheritance with his siblings (or anyone else), it would be safe to assume that his private views haven't evolved along with his public persona. I think this is the contrast that Yoh best captures in his new work. Charles' body is camouflaged and slightly withdrawn, but his gaze is clear and his expression is instantly recognizable. As soon as it was announced, Queen Camilla apparently said, “Yes, we got him.”
