Amazing or catastrophic? First official portrait of Duchess Kate divides critics
One compared the portrait to 'something unpleasant from the Twilight franchise'
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Kate Middleton may have thought it “amazing” but her portrait sparked a backlash among art critics when it was unveiled at the National Portrait Gallery yesterday.
Sandy Nairnie, director of the National Portrait Gallery, said it was a “captivating contemporary image.” The Independent’s art critic called it “catastrophic”.
He was not alone, one critic called the photo-realistic portrait of the Duchess of Cambridge “rotten,” another said the face was “dour” and a third that the Duchess had been transformed into “something unpleasant from the Twilight franchise”.
The gallery commissioned Paul Emsley, the winner of its BP Portrait Award in 2007, to carry out the first official painted portrait of the Duchess of Cambridge.
The Duchess, who attended a private viewing alongside her husband Prince William in the morning, sat twice for Elmsley last year. He also worked from photographs. She said yesterday: “It’s just amazing, I thought it was brilliant.”
Art historian Ben Street was less enamoured with the final picture: “I don’t think it is particularly successful, it’s quite middle of the road. It has a very soft focus, 70s porn look, which isn’t great.”
Emsley, who has also painted portraits of VS Naipaul and Nelson Mandela, said the Duchess wanted to be portrayed “naturally, her natural self, as opposed to her official self.”
The portrait was initially going to be unsmiling, but the artists changed his mind. “I think it was the right choice in the end to have her smiling; that is really who she is.”
Some thought the facial expression was not particularly successful. Mr Street said: “It looks like she’s smirking, like she’s pleased with herself. She looks like the cat who’s got the cream; which probably wasn’t the look the artist was going for.”
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments