Charles On Fire

The New King's Portrait is "Bathed in Symbolism"

Royal portraits typically follow a predictable formula, steeped in traditional symbolism that highlights state, office, pomp, and lineage. However, the new official portrait of King Charles III by Jonathan Yeo has shattered this convention, stirring significant controversy.

WHAT WITH ALL THE RED?

Unveiled as the first portrait since King Charles's coronation, Yeo's larger-than-life canvas (7.5 feet by 5.5 feet) depicts the monarch in his Welsh Guards uniform, hands resting on the hilt of his sword, a half-smile on his face, and a butterfly hovering over his right shoulder. The entire portrait is awash in crimson, making the king's face appear to float in a sea of red.

(I see blood and foreboding demise — not exactly the picture of health.)

“The red shades are meant to “echo the uniform's bright red tunic, not only resonating with the royal heritage found in many historical portraits but also injecting a dynamic, contemporary jolt into the genre with its uniformly powerful hue,” Jonathan Yeo explains.

The butterfly, according to Yeo in his BBC interview, symbolizes Charles's transformation from prince to sovereign and his enduring passion for the environment. Yet, it was the overwhelming use of red that quickly sparked intense public debate and criticism. The color red, it seems, was practically begging for interpretation.

(Jen Carmody reminded me of the MK Ultra symbolism connected to monarch butterflies.)

“The monarch butterfly usually represents transformation. But in the conspiracy world it's connected to MK ultra. Like we talked about on the podcast, the Monarch Programming is a believed to be part of MK ultra... and that's the part that is specifically connected to celebrities... and the reason it got so widely popular is because every pop star does a photo shoot with a monarch butterfly.”

The artist, Jonathan Yeo is known for this kind of work though he rarely uses red like this. Using one color and only painting the face and hands is his thing tho.

“To me it gives the message the monarchy is going up in flames or the king is burning in hell,” commented one Instagram user under the royal family’s post of the portrait. Others remarked that it appeared as if the king were bathing in blood, invoking imagery of colonial bloodshed and even drawing comparisons to the devil. The uproar also included references to the "Tampax affair," a scandal from Charles's past involving an infamous phone conversation during his marriage to Diana, Princess of Wales.

Yeo explained that King Charles was "initially mildly surprised by the strong color," a reaction that might be understated. Yeo aimed to create a modern royal portrait, mirroring Charles's vision of a more contemporary monarchy, which includes reducing the number of working royals and scaling back the coronation pageantry.

The timing and tone of the portrait are particularly striking, given the various controversies that have beset King Charles since his accession to the throne. These include ongoing tensions with his son, Prince Harry, who has made allegations of royal racism in his memoir, calls for the abolition of the monarchy, and Charles's own cancer diagnosis. Moreover, there was public outcry surrounding the mysterious disappearance and subsequent cancer diagnosis of Catherine, Princess of Wales. (More on that soon)

Queen Camilla, who has faced her own share of public scrutiny, reportedly praised Yeo, saying, “You’ve got him.” It suggests that the portrait captures something essential about the king, despite—or perhaps because of—its departure from traditional royal portraiture.

---

---

Yeo's Work

Follows a lineage of controversial royal portraits. Notably, Justin Mortimer's 1998 abstract portrait of Queen Elizabeth II, which depicted her against a neon yellow background with a slash of yellow across her neck, provoked similar public outrage. The Daily Mail accused Mortimer of metaphorically decapitating the queen.

Currently displayed at the Philip Mould Gallery, Yeo's portrait of King Charles will move to Drapers’ Hall in London mid-June. Commissioned by the Worshipful Company of Drapers, a medieval guild turned philanthropic organization, the portrait will join a collection of more orthodox royal depictions. In this context, Yeo's work stands out, reflecting not just the monarch but also the evolving nature of the role and the controversies surrounding it. Ultimately, the portrait captures King Charles in what appears to be a hot seat, symbolically and literally awash in red.

Past Portraits:

Queen Camilla, Sienna Miller, Cara Delevingne, Nicole Kidman, Tony Blair

---

ONLINE COMMENTARY

• I like that people are talking about painting, and I like that they chose something contemporary vs traditional for the official portrait. Doesn’t look like PR was involved… but oh well. King George’s reign may be unremarkable and short, but this for good or bad will probably always get a mention in the history books.

• Damn, dude finally got immortalised as Camilla's tampon, just like he always wanted. Happy endings are possible

• Besides, the biggest insult to an artist is not hate, but indifference. Nobody seems indifferent about this work that’s for sure.

• It's funny cause the Guardian reviewed it very harshly claiming it was "bland" and "too kind" to Charles, the irony being most of the internet says it looks like Charles is in hell, covered in blood and that it's some kind of commentary on imperialism. "Bland, kind and too flattering" are not what I'd call it.

• I like it, it’s left-field and powerful. There is keen likeness and honest bodily deterioration, but also stylishness and an almost revelling embrace of the reddened history of British royal might and violence.

• The first portrait of a british monarch to accurately portray the amount of blood they bathe in

• Reminds me of a faded Turkish rug. His features and regalia are identifiable. I like it. Almost like the King's presence floods/inflitrates into the background and vise versa.

• Most other portraits are artistically uninteresting and might as well, as you say, be photographs. This uses the medium artistically without being tasteless or excessively abstract. I love it.