King Charles portrait turned into Wallace and Gromit character by animal activistsWilshire@lemmy.world to World News@lemmy.world – 286 points – 4 months agoinews.co.uk34Post a CommentPreviewHotTopNewOldThe painting is protected by glass, so no damage was done to the painting. I read through way too many articles that failed to mention this important detail. http://bbc.com/news/articles/cydd9ye77rmoIt 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 hilariousPhilistineSame shit that happens with every climate protest. "Climate protestors deface painting" etc.It's much less engaging this way.I wouldn't anger Count Vigo of Carpathia like that. Remember what happened the last time?He got turned into Wallace. The titular character.You really have to hand it to the British. They're great at stuff like this. Nice bit of Wensleydale with a protest, eh?Improved it tbh."Fancy some cheese?" turned into wallace and gromit so where's the change?He's smarter and less evil now.Oh no! Some rich person's pretty garbage was ridiculed!? Heck off. I have real problems."Give them a hefty jail sentence!!" - Conservative PartyIt still looks like him, except happier.I remember when you could go to an art museum and see pictures and sculptures of stuff. That was kinda nice.~~If it were something that could easily be removed I'd laugh Since it appears to be a lot more permanent. Hopeful they do jail time for vandalism.don't destroy artwork.~~ Edit : I've been told it its over glass. So in that case. Then it's good for a laugh.It’s over glass and ummm… I think it’s more important to first stop torturing animals and worry about the well being of inanimate objects later.Is it? Ah in that case I'll amend my comment.Jail time for nonviolent activism is excessive, and will probably motivate, not deter, more people to do the same.Hmm nah. I am less likely to do something if I know it will result in me going to jail.Does "don't destroy artwork" apply to people whi tear down statues of like Saddam or Mussolini? Or what about confederates or slave owner statues?They used stickers. I doubt it's super permanent by intention
The painting is protected by glass, so no damage was done to the painting. I read through way too many articles that failed to mention this important detail. http://bbc.com/news/articles/cydd9ye77rmoIt 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 hilariousPhilistineSame shit that happens with every climate protest. "Climate protestors deface painting" etc.It's much less engaging this way.
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
You really have to hand it to the British. They're great at stuff like this. Nice bit of Wensleydale with a protest, eh?
I remember when you could go to an art museum and see pictures and sculptures of stuff. That was kinda nice.
~~If it were something that could easily be removed I'd laugh Since it appears to be a lot more permanent. Hopeful they do jail time for vandalism.don't destroy artwork.~~ Edit : I've been told it its over glass. So in that case. Then it's good for a laugh.It’s over glass and ummm… I think it’s more important to first stop torturing animals and worry about the well being of inanimate objects later.Is it? Ah in that case I'll amend my comment.Jail time for nonviolent activism is excessive, and will probably motivate, not deter, more people to do the same.Hmm nah. I am less likely to do something if I know it will result in me going to jail.Does "don't destroy artwork" apply to people whi tear down statues of like Saddam or Mussolini? Or what about confederates or slave owner statues?They used stickers. I doubt it's super permanent by intention
It’s over glass and ummm… I think it’s more important to first stop torturing animals and worry about the well being of inanimate objects later.Is it? Ah in that case I'll amend my comment.
Jail time for nonviolent activism is excessive, and will probably motivate, not deter, more people to do the same.Hmm nah. I am less likely to do something if I know it will result in me going to jail.
Does "don't destroy artwork" apply to people whi tear down statues of like Saddam or Mussolini? Or what about confederates or slave owner statues?
The painting is protected by glass, so no damage was done to the painting.
I read through way too many articles that failed to mention this important detail.
http://bbc.com/news/articles/cydd9ye77rmo
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
Same shit that happens with every climate protest. "Climate protestors deface painting" etc.
It's much less engaging this way.
I wouldn't anger Count Vigo of Carpathia like that. Remember what happened the last time?
He got turned into Wallace. The titular character.
You really have to hand it to the British. They're great at stuff like this.
Nice bit of Wensleydale with a protest, eh?
Improved it tbh.
"Fancy some cheese?"
so where's the change?
He's smarter and less evil now.
Oh no! Some rich person's pretty garbage was ridiculed!?
Heck off. I have real problems.
"Give them a hefty jail sentence!!" - Conservative Party
It still looks like him, except happier.
I remember when you could go to an art museum and see pictures and sculptures of stuff. That was kinda nice.
~~If it were something that could easily be removed I'd laugh
Since it appears to be a lot more permanent. Hopeful they do jail time for vandalism.don't destroy artwork.~~
Edit : I've been told it its over glass. So in that case. Then it's good for a laugh.
It’s over glass and ummm… I think it’s more important to first stop torturing animals and worry about the well being of inanimate objects later.
Is it? Ah in that case I'll amend my comment.
Jail time for nonviolent activism is excessive, and will probably motivate, not deter, more people to do the same.
Hmm nah. I am less likely to do something if I know it will result in me going to jail.
Does "don't destroy artwork" apply to people whi tear down statues of like Saddam or Mussolini? Or what about confederates or slave owner statues?
They used stickers. I doubt it's super permanent by intention