King Charles portrait turned into Wallace and Gromit character by animal activistsWilshire@lemmy.world to World News@lemmy.world – 286 points – 3 weeks agoinews.co.uk35Post a CommentPreviewYou are viewing a single commentView all commentsShow the parent commentIt wouldn’t be a big loss. That painting is ugly as hell.I think it's a terrific representation of the horrifically bloody history of the British MonarchyYeah, I don't think it was meant to be pretty lolYeah, I know the artist said some other bullshit to justify this choice, but to me it just looks like the blood their wealth was built on.I like itI like it because it's hella odd as shit. King, embrace the fuck-my-shit-up results of this glorious piece.I can't stop thinking about how someone got paid to make this painting.He's pretty famous for making portraits. Here's his portrait of Idris Elba.See, that isn’t ugly. Which makes me think it was on purpose. Which makes me hate it a little less.He has a lot of upper class clients who he paints just as ... starkly as the king's portrait. It is very much on purpose.Now that is a gorgeous balance of color and brush strokes. So why did the artist choose that awful color theme for Charles?Right? Spit right in the royal families face and they pay you for the privilege. Priceless and hilariousPhilistine
It wouldn’t be a big loss. That painting is ugly as hell.I think it's a terrific representation of the horrifically bloody history of the British MonarchyYeah, I don't think it was meant to be pretty lolYeah, I know the artist said some other bullshit to justify this choice, but to me it just looks like the blood their wealth was built on.I like itI like it because it's hella odd as shit. King, embrace the fuck-my-shit-up results of this glorious piece.I can't stop thinking about how someone got paid to make this painting.He's pretty famous for making portraits. Here's his portrait of Idris Elba.See, that isn’t ugly. Which makes me think it was on purpose. Which makes me hate it a little less.He has a lot of upper class clients who he paints just as ... starkly as the king's portrait. It is very much on purpose.Now that is a gorgeous balance of color and brush strokes. So why did the artist choose that awful color theme for Charles?Right? Spit right in the royal families face and they pay you for the privilege. Priceless and hilariousPhilistine
I think it's a terrific representation of the horrifically bloody history of the British MonarchyYeah, I don't think it was meant to be pretty lolYeah, I know the artist said some other bullshit to justify this choice, but to me it just looks like the blood their wealth was built on.
Yeah, I know the artist said some other bullshit to justify this choice, but to me it just looks like the blood their wealth was built on.
I like itI like it because it's hella odd as shit. King, embrace the fuck-my-shit-up results of this glorious piece.
I like it because it's hella odd as shit. King, embrace the fuck-my-shit-up results of this glorious piece.
I can't stop thinking about how someone got paid to make this painting.He's pretty famous for making portraits. Here's his portrait of Idris Elba.See, that isn’t ugly. Which makes me think it was on purpose. Which makes me hate it a little less.He has a lot of upper class clients who he paints just as ... starkly as the king's portrait. It is very much on purpose.Now that is a gorgeous balance of color and brush strokes. So why did the artist choose that awful color theme for Charles?Right? Spit right in the royal families face and they pay you for the privilege. Priceless and hilarious
He's pretty famous for making portraits. Here's his portrait of Idris Elba.See, that isn’t ugly. Which makes me think it was on purpose. Which makes me hate it a little less.He has a lot of upper class clients who he paints just as ... starkly as the king's portrait. It is very much on purpose.Now that is a gorgeous balance of color and brush strokes. So why did the artist choose that awful color theme for Charles?
See, that isn’t ugly. Which makes me think it was on purpose. Which makes me hate it a little less.He has a lot of upper class clients who he paints just as ... starkly as the king's portrait. It is very much on purpose.
He has a lot of upper class clients who he paints just as ... starkly as the king's portrait. It is very much on purpose.
Now that is a gorgeous balance of color and brush strokes. So why did the artist choose that awful color theme for Charles?
Right? Spit right in the royal families face and they pay you for the privilege. Priceless and hilarious
It wouldn’t be a big loss. That painting is ugly as hell.
I think it's a terrific representation of the horrifically bloody history of the British Monarchy
Yeah, I don't think it was meant to be pretty lol
Yeah, I know the artist said some other bullshit to justify this choice, but to me it just looks like the blood their wealth was built on.
I like it
I like it because it's hella odd as shit. King, embrace the fuck-my-shit-up results of this glorious piece.
I can't stop thinking about how someone got paid to make this painting.
He's pretty famous for making portraits. Here's his portrait of Idris Elba.
See, that isn’t ugly.
Which makes me think it was on purpose. Which makes me hate it a little less.
He has a lot of upper class clients who he paints just as ... starkly as the king's portrait.
It is very much on purpose.
Now that is a gorgeous balance of color and brush strokes. So why did the artist choose that awful color theme for Charles?
Right? Spit right in the royal families face and they pay you for the privilege. Priceless and hilarious
Philistine