King Charles portrait: 'mystique' or 'monstrosity'?

"Nothing quite divides opinion like a royal portrait", and the latest attempt to depict our reigning monarch King Charles III is "no exception".

The striking portrait was unveiled at Buckingham Palace yesterday, said The Art Newspaper, and shows Charles "bathed in red", and wearing the uniform of the Welsh Guards, sword in hand and with an "eco-friendly" Monarch butterfly landing on his shoulder – said to have been suggested by the King himself as a nod to his interest in conservation and the environment.

'Yes, you've got him'

The "vivid red work" is the first official portrait of the King since his coronation, and its creator, artist Jonathan Yeo, is no stranger to high-profile commissions, having painted Tony Blair, David Attenborough and Malala Yousafzai, said the BBC's culture editor Katie Razzall. Still, unveilings are "always a little nerve-wracking" for both the sitter and the artist. But this one appears to have had the royal seal of approval. Queen Camilla is said to have seen the painting before its unveiling and told Yeo: "Yes, you've got him."

Royal portraits have traditionally played an important role in "signifying power and projecting an image", said the broadcaster, with one of the most memorable being Henry VIII painted by Hans Holbein. But our relationship with royalty has shifted since the days of the Tudor dynasty, said Yeo.

"On the one hand, we know they're real people with quirks and personality traits. We've seen that much more of them. On the other hand, we still want to buy into the mysticism and the fairy tale that they're different from us, that there's a bit of magic there." This portrait was an attempt to "figure out how to do both at once", he told the broadcaster.

'One of the spookier paintings I have ever laid eyes on'

Despite the many "poignant" details of the royal portrait, some members of the public are "sceptical" said The Mirror. One social media user commented that the painting had a "sinister look" about it, while another wrote: "What in the fiery depths of hell is this monstrosity? Is #KingCharles announcing he's an Antichrist?"

"Is the likeness convincing?" wondered Alastair Sooke, The Telegraph's chief art critic. To me, the King resembles both his father, Prince Philip, and George W Bush in this painting. But Yeo's "faceted approach to rendering skin emphasises the King's furrows and wrinkles; he looks his age, and even slightly worried, as if he's just got dressed in his colonel's uniform following a long, dark night of the soul". His "apprehensive mien jars with the jaunty palette", and only reminds us of the "youthful beauty" portrait-painters could exploit in Queen Elizabeth II's early years as monarch. "And is that a ceremonial sword he's holding – or a stick?" added Sooke. "A millennium ago, Edward the Confessor ruled over us. Now, seemingly, it's the turn of Charles the Unsteady."

Art may be subjective, "but I am finding it hard to subject myself to this new portrait of King Charles," which is one of the "spookier paintings I have ever laid eyes on", said Danielle Cohen in The Cut. The image "does not exude the aura of calm and comfort one expects from a monarch who sells jam and sings to his plants" and instead resembles "a disembodied spectre of death floating between violent brushstrokes". In any case, with hit Netflix show "The Crown" still fresh in the public's mind, "does this guy really think now is a good time to remind us of our associations between himself and blood?"