Why a New Portrait of Catherine, Princess of Wales Is So Controversial?

A newly unveiled portrait of Catherine, Princess of Wales, has sparked significant online controversy, with many royal enthusiasts criticizing the depiction of the future British Queen. The artwork, created by British-Zambian artist Hannah Uzor, graces the cover of the July issue of Tatler magazine and aims to celebrate the “strength and dignity” of the princess, according to a statement from the publication released on Thursday.

The portrait portrays Catherine during her appearance at the first state banquet of King Charles III’s reign. Uzor, who based the piece on photographs of the princess, explained her creative process, noting the challenges of not being able to meet the sitter in person.

“When you can’t meet the sitter in person, you have to look at everything you can find and piece together the subtle human moments revealed in different photographs: do they have a particular way of standing or holding their head or hands? Do they have a recurrent gesture?” Uzor elaborated in the statement. She also mentioned that Kate’s recent video announcing a cancer diagnosis had informed the work.

“All my portraits are made up of layers of a personality, constructed from everything I can find about them,” Uzor added.

However, the portrait has not been well-received by everyone. Criticism abounds, particularly on social media.

The debate arrives just a week after Catherine’s father-in-law, Charles, revealed his own controversial portrait. (It’s worth noting that Charles’ likeness is an official portrait commissioned by the royal family, while Catherine’s is not.) Both depictions have garnered criticism, and both debuted at a time when their sitters are facing serious health issues. Charles was diagnosed with cancer earlier this year and stepped away from official duties in February.

Why has The portrait drawn criticism?

According to the netizens, Uzor’s painting falls flat, arguing that it bears little resemblance to the future queen of the United Kingdom.

Netizen’s Reacts

Kate Mansey, an assistant editor at the London Times, was also perplexed by the image. Writing on X, the social media platform previously known as Twitter, she said, “I’m not quite sure what to say about this one, except, hmm…”

“This is dreadful – somehow, I’m not sure the artist is a fan of the Princess – it looks like a bad GCSE project,” one user commented under a Tatler post on X.

“This looks nothing like the Princess of Wales. It’s so awful, it’s disrespectful,” another user chimed in. “I agree with the sentiments of strength and dignity but the portrait lacks any resemblance to the Princess of Wales,” a further critique read.

Despite the backlash, some have praised the piece, with one user calling it “beautiful” and another commenting, “Am I the only person who likes this? It’s art, not a photo.”

Not just social media users, but also critics have voiced their opinions. Alastair Sooke, chief art critic at The Daily Telegraph, deemed the painting “intolerably bad” and criticized it for bearing no resemblance to its subject.

“Has there been a flatter, more lifeless royal portrait in living memory?” Sooke wrote. “Beneath a Lego-like helmet of unmodulated, monotonously brown ‘hair,’ this Princess of Wales has as much charisma as a naff figurine atop a wedding cake.”

Kate Mansey, royal editor at The Times of London, was equally unimpressed. “I’m not quite sure what to say about this one, except, hmm…” she remarked on X.

Another royal controversy

The controversy surrounding this portrait follows a similar debate over the first official portrait of King Charles III since his coronation, which was unveiled earlier this month. The 8.5 by 6.5-foot painting by British artist Jonathan Yeo shows the monarch in the uniform of the Welsh Guards, holding a sword, against a fiery red background with a butterfly poised to land on his shoulder.

While the King reportedly approves of the portrait, others have criticized the bold red brushstrokes, with one person comparing it to a “poster for a horror film.”