Portraits of Crown Princess Mary

[Margrethe II]

Originally Posted by Anita

Totally agree with you ! Poor little Mary who has to become a queen ...

No different from "Poor" little Maxima or "Poor" little Mathilda or "Poor" little Mette-Marit or "Poor" little letizia....all who are to become Queen Consorts!

Your sounding like an 18th century revolutionary Except they exclaimed Poor Little Marie ...Oh, and what would you know, same name different spelling

princess olga
yes, the sombreness of the new portrait conveys the seriousness of mary's life and the hardships she has to endure as crown princess: after all, think about it: this poor girl, having to go and dress up to unveil yet again an official portrait of herself, it's a tough life isn't it, to unveil portraits of oneself and be admired for it...but someone has got to do it..

Oh come on now. Mary's got it made. She has an easier life than zillions of us. But what's with yet again an official portrait? Why? THe girl isn't queen yet, after all. Maxima and Letizia don't yet have one, as far as I know. No wonder with all these portraits Mary must think she's god's gift to denmark.

Bad form "PO", bad form!

"MII"

[Victoriys]

Mary's hat is lovely!!!:p

[keira_jeanne]

Did the Prince cut his hair? He looks good and young. And about the painting I think it looks nice it's totally different from her other paintings. And she always looks good on whatever she wears.

[highpriestess]

Originally Posted by Margrethe II

Somehow, I dont think the artist said as he was getting ready to sketch... "Now Ma'am, if you could could seem aloof for me, arrogant, someone who doesn't really care or have the time... maybe point your chin up perh.... thats it, keep it there."

As for the first portrait, you are correct, it was a gift and so wont be classified as anything official or commissioned. Therefore there are only two.

"MII"

No, but a good artist would capture the spirit of the subject s/he's painting. The tilted head and the in-the-air chin are very much how Mary held herself in public. It gives out the air of haultiness and arrogance. The artist didn't direct how she posed. Mary posed that way because that's the way she usually carried herself.

Even though that first portrait wasn't an "official" one. It's a portrait of her nonetheless. Mary accepted it by the way. It doesn't matter whether it's official or not, it's interesting that three different artists all capture a haughty, distant, aloof woman in their portrait. Coincidence or that's exactly how Mary carries herself?

[Pansy]

I like the painting.
It shows CP Mary reflecting her past, present and future as she ponders,
while putting on her glove facing the window.Wondering how she will
handle her future life now as a royal and the challenges she has to
confront as she leaves the room within the Palace walls.

[Pansy]

Has any media ask CP Frederik what he thinks of the portrait,
or the DRF for that matter.
Is it normally done to ask their views.

[princess olga]

Originally Posted by Margrethe II

No different from "Poor" little Maxima or "Poor" little Mathilda or "Poor" little Mette-Marit or "Poor" little letizia....all who are to become Queen Consorts!

Your sounding like an 18th century revolutionary Except they exclaimed Poor Little Marie ...Oh, and what would you know, same name different spelling



Bad form "PO", bad form!

"MII"

All right, all right, my comment might have come across as a bit harsh. My piont really is this: nothing against Mary, she is after all doing a fine job within the confines of royal consort and figure head of a small country. Nothing wrong with that.

And no, Mary herself never stated she was God's gift to Denmark. (Joachim did) Although she did say she thought her meeting Fred was fate, so therefore pre-destined, which in my opinion sounds a bit smug, but she gave the quote when she was just engaged, so one can understand such an expression I take it.

But I honest to goodness think that comments such as Linda's that state that the lives of (any of the respective crown princesses) are, to use Linda's words, "very tough" are getting a bit, well, worn.

Reading over and over how crown princess x, y or z is so very admirable for the very tough path she's taking, doesn't, if anything, make for very intersting discussion.

And second, let's get an ounce of reality into the fold here.

Whatever path these crown princesses are on might be a challenge, but 'very tough' it really ain't. Let's face it: If these ladies have it tough, how on earth would you describe the lives lead by the rest of us?! ('Very tough' in my opinion are the lives of the billions of people who, to name but one obvious example, struggle every day to make ends meet & feed their families.)

As for the portrait: I like it actually. It has an inexplicable timelessnes to it that I like. The colors are a bit dark, but why shouldn't they be, the whole thing looks cohesive and seems to tell a story of a woman's journey. Mary is recognizable as herself (seems like a huge dhoh! but not all portraits do their subject matter justice imo), yet there's something left for the imagination of the viewer. And her chin--well, yes, it is a bit up-in-the-air, but people in pensive moods often do that, so perhaps it's a reflection of that.

[Christo's Girl]

Mary's shoes did not look good with the outfit, but the hat was very nice.

[bebe_ocho]

Hi! I'm new here and I would just like to comment on Mary's portrait.... I think the portrait is good in a way that it's not too severe to look at. It's not like what you expected from a royal portrait... like those we see on TV... wearing jewels, standing still and a little Monalisa smile. Mary's was more of informal and somewhat intellectual... you'd wonder what she was thinking with that pose. :)

However, despite the informality of the portrait... the background seemed a bit too overwhelming, like what was previously said... it was too dark. At first glance of the portrait... your eye is drawn not on Mary but on the images surrounding Mary's figure. Add to that... the color chosen for Mary's outfit was neutral... losing to the darkness of the background. It would have been better if the background was a little lighter, giving emphasis on Mary. (Although... there's a part of me that says that the artist IS aiming for Mary's subtlety in the portrait). :)

Anyway, just my opinion. :)

[soCal girl]

I was out of town for the weekend and I come back to see this thread fill six pages with this portrait! :) I like the portrait because it steps away from the traditional royal portrait. Mary is shown in modern dress, in boots not dainty heels, looking to the side, she is off-centered, and her hair is natural. Her other portrait was more traditional so I liked how this stepped away from that. I wish she wasn't putting on gloves though, to me it just seems kind of awkward. But Mary and Frederick looked lovely as always!

[Lady Bluffton]

Seems like the artist looked at the same video I have watched of Mary -- has always seemed to me that she regularly holds her head and chin up and at an angle that suggests a superiority and aloofness. I think he nailed Mary's posture very well.

[Australian]

Well, personally, i think that if Mary holds her head up high, then it shows confidence and determination. Would you prefer a princess who has her head down and looking timid and scared and looking as if she couldnt care less? Good on you Mary, for a good posture! :)

[Linda Hsu]

Originally Posted by Australian

Well, personally, i think that if Mary holds her head up high, then it shows confidence and determination. Would you prefer a princess who has her head down and looking timid and scared and looking as if she couldnt care less? Good on you Mary, for a good posture! :)

Very well said. I wouldn't agree more. :)

Amen

[Margrethe II]

Originally Posted by princess olga

All right, all right, my comment might have come across as a bit harsh.

Its all cool..I know you dont really have anything personal against the Crown Princess "PO"

it's interesting that three different artists all capture a haughty, distant, aloof woman in their portrait. Coincidence or that's exactly how Mary carries herself?

Thats the way you percieve her and fair enough..I could'nt disagree more!

"MII"

[pdas1201]

Since the Current Events thread was filling up rather fast owing to Mary's Portrait. The other moderators and I thought it best to have another thread dedicated solely to the discussion on the portrait by Ralph Heimans.

No 'Bashing' will tolerated. Here is what we mean by bashing (taken from TRF Rules and Guildelines)

• Be respectful. It’s perfectly fine to disagree with others as long as it is done respectfully and civilly, but do not attack other members in your posts or comments.
• Name calling is strictly prohibited. It is absolutely unnecessary in any discussion at this forum to call another member anything other than their member name.
• Name calling of a royal or other public figures is strictly prohibited.
• While there is no requirement that you should like all royal persons or public persons discussed at TRF, there is no need to attack them or call them names. There are ways to express your dislike or criticism of another individual than to resort to calling them names. It is childish behaviour that is not tolerated here.

It is your responsibility as a TRF member to adhere to its rules and guidelines. If we find any individual posting without any regards to the above mentioned rules, not only will be their posts be deleted but they may also be suspended or permanently banned from the Forums.

pdas1201
Danish Family Supermoderator

[sm1939]

Must admit I really like it , its diffrent, instead of the norm where they are standing in or sitting in a fancy dress, looking all lady like etc .
its diffrent . thumbs up from me!!!

[Lauritas138]

Yes, princess Letizia had a portrait no official but she wore a wedding dress.

[Paty]

From Getty Images

[machievelli]

Thanks for the getty images pix. That's quite a potrait.

[Sira]

The portrait is beautiful. It changes from what we use to see: the subject wearing an informal dress. The only drawback of the painting is the darkness. But I guess, the painter wanted to enhance the private aspect of CP Mary.