RED

As Royal portraits go, or should that be Royal portents, the first official painting of King Charles III since his coronation seems to actively invite symbolic interpretations from conspiracy theorists, ranging from satanic illuminati vibes to a metaphor of the king's recent illness overwhelming his reign as monarch.

Of course, it's more likely to be something far less sinister than all those paranoid conjectures but it's sort of fun (and quite childish) to assume the worst intention of the artist, Jonathan Yeo, as the painting itself seems (at least on first impressions) somewhat red.

Red as a colour can symbolise all sorts of things from danger, sacrifice and courage. It can also represent love, passion and sexuality and is, of course, the first primary colour that babies can distinguish during the first weeks of life as well as being the last ebbing colour of a diminishing sunset at night.

My first impression of Yeo's portrait of King Charles III is of him standing proudly, sword at his side, in some sort of giant amniotic sac. At the age of 75, is the artist possibly suggesting The King is now closer to being re-born like a butterfly out of its chrysalis in his next life than as a statement about the longevity of his current reign. I sincerely hope not. We should also leave out any speculation about the subtext of tampons aside for now as it might result in me being sent to the tower.

Yeo has himself said that he was keen to 'break with the past' and yet still include staples of Royal portraiture with the inclusion of the sword and the military outfit (here, the red uniform of the Welsh Guards of which King Charles was made Regimental Colonel of in 1975). As for the butterfly, he explains : "in history of art, the butterfly symbolises metamorphosis and rebirth." What Yeo failed to mention is that the butterfly can also symbolise deceased spirits (could that be Queen Elizabeth II fluttering just above her son's shoulder?). I mean, is that such a far fetched hypothesis? The Aztecs believed that butterflies were responsible for taking warriors souls' who died in battle. Given the sword at the King's side in this portrait in red, I'm wondering if Yeo has had some premonition of some future battle where our Monarch will take to the field in a Henry V, type of way due to some geomagnetic storm that's destroyed our modern infrastructure and returned us to the old ways of war. If so, this portrait should be declared as a masterpiece of prophesy.

Personally, I would change very little about the painting myself, except I would swap the red for green and have the King emerging (Dr. Livingstone-like) from a hexagonal, dome-shaped Greenhouse along the lines of the Eden Project in Cornwall. Instead of butterflies I would have a Doctor Doolittle-sized pink Sea Snail slithering alongside him and for the conspiracy theorists I would include a Diana monkey (named so due to its white brow that supposedly resembles the bow of the Roman goddess, Diana) and have it sticking its tongue out from the green vegetation its surrounded by. It would be nothing if not subversive.

As for Yeo, I tip my imaginary royal crown to him for getting tongues clucking and fingers wagging. You know you've done something right when you get a reaction. A stony silence of indifference is death to an artist.

Believe me, I know. ^^