Kate Middleton, the Duchess of Cambridge and soon-to-be-mother of the next heir to the UK throne (eventually), is now on display in the British National Portrait Gallery and, well, not everyone is happy about it. Sure, Kate deserves to hang in the gallery but, well, her portrait leaves MUCH to be desired to anyone with eyes. Kate, many will agree, is a strikingly beautiful woman. Her portrait, at least IMHO, does not convey that … in fact, it doesn’t really convey much. Take a look at the portrait below and see what you think. Oh and by the way, this portrait is not a joke. I repeat, it’s not a joke.
Kate Middleton’s official portrait has been unveiled. Prince William’s wife’s likeness can now be seen in Britain’s National Portrait Gallery — but not everyone is in love with what they see. The painting, by Scottish artist Paul Emsley, who also painted South Africa’s Nelson Mandela in his photographic style, was commissioned by the National Portrait Gallery in London, where William and Kate saw the portrait for the first time on Friday before it was open to public viewing. The Duchess of Cambridge, 31, said that she wanted “to be portrayed naturally — her natural self — as opposed to her official self,” Emsley said in the New York Daily News. The frontal-view oil painting displays Kate’s flowing brunet locks on a dark background and lightens her green eyes. Emsley did that to match the dark blouse she was wearing, he said. But he also adds bags under and creases around her eyes. “When I work with a portrait, I push it beyond just Realism, so I always had faith that I would go beyond that and find something original, and I think the fact that we got a half smile, or we’ve got a smile with a closed mouth, does make it slightly unique in that sense,” he told the Associated Press. “She struck me as an enormously open and generous and a very warm person,” Emsley told ABC News. “After initially feeling it was going to be an unsmiling portrait, I think it was the right choice in the end to have her smiling — that is really who she is.” Kate sat twice for the portrait, which took 3½ months to create, once in May and then in June before she became pregnant. “It’s beautiful. It’s absolutely beautiful,” said William, the Duke of Cambridge.
Lies. What the eff else was he gonna say …?
But the portrait isn’t doing it for art critics, who have slammed Emsley’s work. A few of the critiques: The portrait looks nothing like her, ages her and makes her nose look big. “He made her look older than she is and her eyes don’t sparkle in the way that they do, and there’s something rather dour about the face,” the Sunday Times art critic Waldemar Januszczak told BBC News. Kate “transmits a sense of joie-de-vivre,” British Art Journal editor Robin Simon told the Associated Press. “This is dead, dead, dead.”
Yeah, “dead. dead. dead.” is about right …
“In my drawings I try to emphasize the singularity and silence of the form,” according to Emsley’s bio on his website. “By a careful balancing of tones I emphasise the way in which light and shade fall across the subject. By creating a settled half-light I try to transform the existence of the object from the ordinary to something more profound.” But apparently that light seems to make Kate’s beautiful brown hair grayer than it is in real life.
No … just no. This portrait is horrid … an insult, really. I cannot believe it was approved for public viewing. No offense to the artist, I’m sure he’s very talented but … no. This is terrible. I mean, right? Does this look like Kate Middleton to you? I mean, a living Kate Middleton and not a older version of Kate without a soul? This is … bad, right? Oy!
[Source]
Ugh. I want to like it so badly. But she looks so old and lifeless. :( It’s pretty hard to make someone as beautiful as her look like this… I mean, what?
Oh wow.
I thought that was Lindsay Lohan.. that’s how haggard this photo looks.
Am i the only person who loves this portrait?! I think it’s beautiful and very honest. Maybe I’m just seeing it differently somehow..definitely a fan!
what the hell….why did they make her look so old? good lord..
It’s a good look into the future of what Kate will look like at 45, I don’t see a problem with it…. Oh wait. It’s suppose to be present day Kate? ;)
Using hazy light should have actually diminished the lines and bags around her eyes. I am confused as to why he emphasized them, it doesn’t really match the way light would really play.
I think she is so beautiful and especially her hair…it glows. This is just wrong.
If I were her the first thing I would do once anointed Queen would be to have that “portrait” removed and off with the head of the artist that painted it LOL jk
But seriously that’s a pretty bad portrait. It’s as if the artist is a pissed of ex-lover and wanted to get back at her.
This portrait looks like the love child of Kate and Mona Lisa.
She looks like she could be her own mother in this one. I can’t believe she and William approved of it. Too bad because Kate is a beautiful woman and this portrait does not show off one of her best assets which is her gorgeous smile.
Okay, she does have creases under her eyes when she smiles, but not bags. And he gave her that misty, watery look that portrait painters do to be kind to people who look older than they’d like. It looks dour because in 95% of the pictures you see of her she is smiling so big you can see her teeth and her adorable dimples. And her cheeks & lips have a natural pink colour that is missing. Even heading into the hospital when she was so sick she didn’t look this gray & lifeless.
THANK YOU!!! I thought I was the only one who thinks that the painting was awful. The artist drew bags under her eyes! COME ON! No woman wants to see that she has bags under her eyes. Definitely painted by a man. :)
Is it just me but is there grey in her hair? More up in the front. But those eyes also look like Edward Cullen’s ..lol
Well we know now how she is gonna look when she is 55 years old.
Wow.. uhm. maybe it looks better in person???? eeps!
She looks like she’s about to burst out crying. You know that moment when you’re trying REALLYREALLYREALLY hard to keep it together but you’re just about to cry? This portrait looks like that very moment. I understanding a huge, beaming smile showing teeth is probably not very ‘royal-appropriate’ but, something’s definitely OFF with this portrait. The whole feel to it is very misty, dull and lifeless. Her natural glow is not represented at all and I think that’s what makes it feel not genuine. OH WELLS. The world moves on…
I think it makes her look like a man. There’s no sparkle to it whatsoever.
who ever said dead was right on… this is hideous… although i think the hair was drawn very well… not necessarily colored well, but drawn well…
Why, why, WHY???? There are so many glowing photographs of her – some taken candidly, (one as she is fighting the wind from lifting her hemline), and they show how “effortlessly” beautiful she really is. Then this??! Her facial expression looks like she is doing her royal best to not react to a “poof” of acrid air.
She looks awful. Just terrible.
Its looks like a casket photo. Eerie and lifeless
who gives a shit
do you know what this portrait reminds me of? ever seen that seinfeld episode where the woman he is dating is beautiful in some lights and totally unattractive in others? this is bad lighting kate!!
Well it’s a fine portrait, but it ages her about 20 or so years.