Discussion of weird goings-on
I’m just curious if anyone understands the symbolism of King Charles latest portrait. I am a noob with regards to this sort of stuff. If anyone can enlighten me on the meaning of all the “red”, I’d appreciate it. I’m aware the obvious meaning is blood. But in what context?
Vigo the Carpathian. I for one, am a fan
its all the blood spilled throughout history in service of this single family. that spilled blood stains his entire lineage.
That's the pretty obvious interpretation, regardless of what the official explanation might be.
It's really not fair. Nobody is cut from a different cloth. We all would have done what they did. The reason we think we wouldn't is because we take for granted what we know. Even then, we take for granted we think we know better, but they have to deal with poisoned fruit and there's no legal system above them to protect them.
King Charles of the Scarlet Rot innit.
Man if I was a monarch descended from a long lineage of blood spilling lunatics, and I ordered a nice portrait, I'd be super pissed.
I'm personally hesitant to just give answers. The best way to learn is to look clearly and see what you can already tell. I think you are going down the wrong path if you simply read blood is red, therefore red is blood.
Consider both the artist and the subject. What did the artist see to compel this creation, why did the subject agree to make such a portrait public. What do you see aside from simply red?
I see a tired old man who is content to live out the rest of his life without using his 'new' power to rock the boat too much. I also get a sense of superiority in his face; not quite a smirk, more like he KNOWS he's removed from the rest of us and he's fine with it. Something more tangible, his hands are definitely bigger in the painting than in real life (look closely at their size relative to their heads). Notably, while the rest of the painting is shades of red, his hands seem to be the only 'clean' part of the piece (other than his face for obvious reasons). Also, the coloring of his uniform(?) and the background are practically identical and, in my opinion, clearly meant to blend into each other; almost like he's trying to disappear into the background himself, which ties back to my first point.
In all honesty, I think the complete domination and blending of red throughout, the slightly enlarged hands that remain entirely clean, and the look of self-satisfaction make a pretty strong argument for representing the blood that was spilt to allow him to become king at all (even if not by his own doing). As for why Charles would allow the creation/public revelation, perhaps he's simply acknowledging that legacy, even if he's probably not willing or able to DO anything substantial to make amends ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
That is the blood of his victims.
The King once wished to be Camilla's tampon, the red represents not only the blood of Camila but all women he has had relations with.
Maybe the artist just intentionally went full on evil vibe for the painting to age appropriately, surely this is one of the least monarchs, right?
Clearly every grain of red pigment in the painting represents a life of torture caused.
The monarchy is full of evil, that is it
It's about washing his clothes in the strewn blood and guts of his enemies.