New Portrait of Queen Unveiled
Schlock Horror! Isobel Peachey, 31 may be the youngest Artist to paint an official portrait of the monarch but going by the middle age style in which she approaches the subject, she adds nothing original to Royal portraiture as a form. Trained at Wimbledon School of Art, Peachey is better known for her almost photographic portraits of contemporary subjects. Her other works seem minimalistic and monochromatic by comparison.
The portrait will go on display at National Portrait Gallery before finding it’s permanent home in the Grand Lobby of the latest Cunard cruise ship.
The Queen will see the finished work for the first time on 11 October, during an official visit to Southampton, in a naming ceremony for the new liner, Queen Elizabeth.
Dressed in blue and wearing the Queen Victoria necklace and earrings worn at her Coronation, the painting shows the Queen looking smoothed out, younger and elegantly distant. "It was painted in my mothers attic", Peachey stated, "At my interview with Cunard, I answered many questions about how I would approach an important commission - but it was only at the end of the interview that the subject was revealed as the Queen," Peachey also added that she was surprised to find out she would be painting the monarch. "This was both a shock and a marvellous surprise”.
Why does a Royal painting in 2010 have to adopt a 1930's style to get commissioned? Peachey's other work is quite contemporary, yet this painting looks like something out of the Bloomsbury period...sorry... not as good!!!! Maybe the next generation of Cunard cruise ships should commission Banksy to paint the Queen!
Now see the video
|" I suppose after Rolf Harris' effort in 2005 with the Queen brandishing an approachable social grin and attempting a more contemporary painting, the Queen wanted to put some of her heritage painting style back into the portrait. How dare she communicate with the current generation. God save the Queen because we are the modern contemporary generation! " - 22-09-2010|
|" I happen to be the artist's father which, by rights, should disqualify me from passing any comments on the puerile, pathetic, predictable, snotty-nosed article above. Moreover, I am not an artist. However, I am deeply involved in another branch of the arts and if there is one truism that should be staring everyone in the face, including the author of the article above, it is that originality is not just entirely relative and subjective, it has zero value. It is an antique obsession borne of the 19th century's focus on individuals and not their art and says far more about the author's narrow, immature horizons than about the royal portrait it purports to pass comment on. As for the recent attempts produced by Lucien Freud and Rolf Harris, they are supreme exercises in blatant self-promotion and anyone who takes them seriously either as portraits or works of art is gullible in the extreme. " - 10-10-2010|