Thomas Kluge's Painting of the Danish Royal Family (2013)


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
He's painting fate - rather than reality. He is chasing the future while tipping his hat at the past. I agree that it is unsettling and creepy - but that's what he does.

You can say you do not like it. But you cannot say that he has not successfully executed his vision. That's what great painters do. IMHO

Oh, and BTW - I would not hang it in my living room either. But I respect what he has done.
 
Well, I think we had more fun flexing our comedic muscle with Royal Family of the Corn than we did with Kate's portrait last year.
 
:eek:
Originally Posted by BrazilianEmpire
For God's sake, what is this? The Danish version of "The Addams Family"?

Thank you for a loud chuckle. This is the worst painting that I have ever seen, my goodness what are they thinking? Who is doing what to approve this? It's worst then the Addams Family in every way.

It looks like the second generation of the Addams family - with Morticia and Gomez (QM and PH) and their children... The lighting on poor Christian's face makes him look like he is deformed! I certainly hope they do not let the little ones see it... it will be one they hide from, for sure!

I wonder what the Danish Royal Family thinks of it? Or, if QM likes it, everyone rolls their eyes when she's not looking? :whistling:
 
Lumutqueen:
There is no personality in the picture, there is no happiness.

Lumutqueen:

I was trying to figure out why I really didn't like this portrait and your comment helped me see why, There is no joy, no love, no happiness nor laughter, in fact they appear as dead.

For me a family portrait should show some love or joy in each other, here there is none and it makes me wonder, does this family get along with each other? This shows a very unstable family and lots of tension among each other.

Thanks for your comment, it dotted the I for me.
 
Not a fan of the colours and light. The lighting on Christian...seriously? Frederick's colouring makes him look rather old and, quite frankly, unhealthy. Poor Isabella looks quite leery and almost afraid of her big brother. It's not all terrible, but for me it is hard to see past those things. There is little warmth or joy. The artist only wanted to be talked about, how else can you explain this??. I feel so bad for the family. This could have really been something.
 
Last edited:
I think that the last few posts have hit the nail on the head. This is not a "family portrait." It's some sort of caricature, as some have accused Goya of back in the day, only this is more overtly garish.
 
:previous: Oh, yes, poor Isabella. I hadn't looked closely at her, but her depiction reminds me of Linda Blair in "The Exorcist".

Roslyn . . .

Truer words were never spoken!

Dead on TARGET!

Well, I think we had more fun flexing our comedic muscle with Royal Family of the Corn than we did with Kate's portrait last year.


ABSOLUTELY agreed!

:lol:

:previous: Yeah, okay.

Well, I can imagine that the DRF are just as divided as everybody else.

The Regent Couple themselves are pretty formidable in regards to their knowledge of art and Frederik himself is very interested in modern art. Don't know about the rest.

The public here in DK are certainly divided! Going from hating it, finding it hideous, spooky and so on.
To loving it, finding it fascinating and eager to see it in real life at Amalienborg.
The reviews from art critics in DK appear to be fairly positive.

Anyway, as long as it doen's depict my familt and don't hang on my wall I find it pretty interesting too and might actually go see it, if I happen to drop by Copenhagen in the next few months.

Muhler . . .

If it were me, I wouldn't even hang this thing :)eek:) on a tree in my front OR back yard!

The FRONT yard, ESPECIALLY!!!!!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I kind of like the painting, except for Christian in the front with the shadows and light. He looks creepy!
 
I think that the last few posts have hit the nail on the head. This is not a "family portrait." It's some sort of caricature, as some have accused Goya of back in the day, only this is more overtly garish.

I think the adults, and Joachim's older children, have been depicted too realistically for me to call it a caricature. There's a real problem with Fred & Mary's children though. Maybe the artist found them hard to capture, but they all look a bit "off". I'm not at all sure about the entire composition, but I do agree it is not a "family portrait"; there's something else going on but I'm not sure what it is. It's unnerving though, whatever it is.
 
Here is a picture of Margrethe posing for the artist and watching him work
http://i643.photobucket.com/albums/uu152/thygechristian/ThomasKluge-Kongehusetfoto12012.jpg

The painting might be a bit too dark but I love that the painting was done with all 14 members of the DRF.
I wish more royal families had one too of their current members.
I love the symbolism of the legos and Nikolai and Felix "rebuilding" it.

I would love to see it in person. I guess I'll add this to my growing list of reasons to visit Denmark ;)
 
IMO some faces look well done: Margrethe and Joachim's sons.
But others look horrible: Henrik and Athena.
Frederik & Mary look 10 years older.

I always find it weird to see a painting of someone who is still alive.
 
Well, I think we had more fun flexing our comedic muscle with Royal Family of the Corn than we did with Kate's portrait last year.
HA! That was a good one Gracie, good thing I wasn't drinking at the time or my screen would have been wet. This portrait is not my taste at all. A bit dark, a bit creepy. To each his own.
 
I would love it if this would be the 'Halloween' (or dark) version of the family-portrait and there would be a second (light) portrait with the entire family where the show their usual liveliness and joy for life.
Of all the european royal families they for me often seem the most joyeus and fun; for me this joy is completely missing in the dark picture, but if this would be a set of two, this could be a unique and fabulous set.
 
I hope they don't hang that thing in Vincent and Josie's room. Poor darlings will have nightmares.

And with Mary and Frederik living so close to where the painting is currently exhibited, I can only imagine they have visited it with their children. Or at least with Christian and Bella. I wonder what Christian and Bella have thought about it if they have seen it. I would even in my adult age be a bit shocked to see myself in this quite spooky way ;)
 
:previous: Don't say that.

In my experience children see art in a completely different light from adults.
I would certainly be very interested in learning Bella and Christian's opinion!
They are still so young that their minds haven't been "boxed in" yet.

In my cynical opinion people start to loose their marbles from around age fifteen and then it gets gradually worse. There are some lucky few who start to come to their senses again around 75 or so. :p
 
Last edited:
It is an immensely interesting painting so far as I can tell and one which will engender a lot of debate. However, I've learnt over the years (and often the hard way) that it's best to see an original work of art before commenting on it: there is frequently a vast chasm between responses to a reproduction and those prompted by an original. It is very different from a photograph, no matter how stylistically or innovative the photograph might be - a single photographic image only conveys a moment in a person's emotional life. A personal case in point is the much-discussed portrait of the Duchess of Cambridge which many criticized on the grounds that it didn't look 'enough like her'. However, I saw the portrait this year and appreciated it a lot more; moving around it, I could see slightly different nuances of the Duchess' usual expressions which were remarkably realistic, in my opinion. And, of course, the Duchess, educated to a high level in fine arts, gave it her stamp of approval - she, obviously, understood the difference between a painted and a photographic portrait.

With the Kluge, it's pertinent to remember that the Royal Family knew his work and his style well, so they cannot have been too surprised by the finished product. We also know that Frederik has a modernist, avant-garde taste in art because Mary has said so, attributing responsibility for the refurbishment of their home primarily to him. Kluge's baroque style and chiaroscuro technique would have been quite familiar to him and his artist mother and the painting, therefore, in no way unexpected. Here, it appears to used to evoke tension between the spiritual and physical elements of the human condition, never more stressed, I believe, than in those surrounding the power and authority of the throne.

Our post-modern age challenges traditional cultural norms declaring that nothing is sacred, not even the idea of god or god's word is universally accepted any more without question. Over the last few decades the Danish Royal Family has shown its ability to steer a course through the ever changing modern world of conflicting ideas, public scrutiny and mass communication and we see its considered response in enabling this modern portrait to express the human over the usual divine, unapproachable image of the monarchy. The traditional purpose of the royal portrait, of course, is to declare the immortality of the regime and the relevant social and class structures. Reverential appearance loaded with symbols of power and deference to position becomes the cultural norm. In the Kluge, it's different, but in no way devoid of them. They are there but need to be found and evaluated in a completely new context.

When all's said and done, it's the artist's interpretation of the current monarchy and how he sees it and the individual members of the family, or rather, what they represent. In any event, the artist has succeeded: he's executed a work which invites and encourages modern interpretation, challenges orthodoxy, arouses strong responses, and is offering comparisons and suggesting understandings with the past, the present and the future. The composition itself is excellent, in my opinion, with the Queen and her immediate heir looking in Christian's direction, but further outwards towards the viewer. To this viewer (remembering that I haven't seen the original) it conveys something true and tangible about this monarchy's long service, experience and devotion to duty. Perhaps it's severe in its naturalism in its effort, I take it, to convey Kluge's intended psychological reality by stripping the monarchy of anything that's elegant or romantic or pretty. No less a valid and meaningful portrait for that, but.

I've lost count of the number of artistic expressions in all of painting, writing and music which were hated, reviled and panned by contemporary critics (generally because they were non-traditional and innovative) but which today are hailed as 'great' and amongst civilization's most prized treasures. This is C21 and any artistic flourish which is going to survive and be honoured in any historical sense will have to reflect that rather than merely mimicking past styles, values and attitudes.

I sincerely hope that I'll have the opportunity of seeing this remarkable portrait one day
 
The painting might be a bit too dark but I love that the painting was done with all 14 members of the DRF.
I wish more royal families had one too of their current members.

Didn't Prince Edward order one of his wedding with members of the Royal Family? I remember reading about it several times, years ago; but have never seen anything.

The Danish painting is well executed and designed, but i agree with those who said there was no joy...
 
It is an immensely interesting painting so far as I can tell and one which will engender a lot of debate.
I sincerely hope that I'll have the opportunity of seeing this remarkable portrait one day

Maybe you can study this high res. pic in the meantime. The details are incredible.

http://www.b.dk/sites/default/files-dk/node-images/970/6/6970457-kluge2.jpg

This painting is not meant for our living rooms or to our taste. It is a present for a queen and for the history. It is for a large wall in a palace or a museum. I also believe that the royal family likes Kluges work and did expect something like this.

I myself would have choosen a different painter and would prever a different painting but thats just me. I'm neither an artist nor a queen.

This post is quite interessting as well.

Glittering Royal Events Message Board: Thomas Kluge: "Kongehuset"

Among other things he writes:
Kluge is a great illusionistic painter, but he does not use this talent to beautify the objects, but to create a surreal world, that looks 'real' at first glance but which reveals many unconscious layers when one study the paintings for a longer time. This is his trademark, and this is one of the reasons why the members of the royal family like his oeuvre.

 
:previous: Thanks, Binz.

In one of the pics in the link we can see the "artwork" by one of Kluge's children in the lower right corner of the canvas.
 
Wow! That high res. pic is amazing! Thanks so much, Binz. Seeing it in so much detail makes a big difference. I'd love to see the painting.
 
The background reminds me of Thomas Cole's 'Desolation' in the set of the paintings of 'The
Course of Empire'. It is rather dark, and esp. Christian and Isabella look as if they belong into another world. It may have artistic value, but it is all rather dark, gloomy and quite frankly creepy. But I find the work far more interesting than most recent paintings of royals, and certainly preferable over this one, which I find rather kitch: http://www.royalty-postcards.com/images/sale/Denmark sale/slides/exc_den-(517).html
 
Last edited:
In my humble opinion, it is the dark background that spoilt my impression of this artwork. Perhaps a just usual room in a royal residence would have changed perceptions of the portrait.
 
Last edited:
Having looked at the painting again, to me the almost apprehensive look on Bella's face towards her brother leave a feeling of: Well, I'm next to shoulder the burden if anything should happen to Christian... let's hope nothing does!

Can't say of course if that was Kluge's intention.

Christian's posture reminds me a bit of the cartoon character Charlie Brown, going: "good greif"! :p
 
The high res image is worth a look. Kluge's detail is exceptional. Every face is beautiful, when you view it closely. The detail in the Queen's face/hair is breathtaking and her expression is gorgeous.
This was a commissioned portrait - so the family knew what it was going to get (dark and psychological theme) when it hired him. We may not all like it - but there is a reason he was hired.
I adore the Lego blocks. They make me chuckle each time I see the painting.
This is just my opinion, but it's more appropriate to say "I don't like it," than to say "It's terrible." The latter judges art while the former shares a POV.
 
Thank you, Binz, for the links and references - they are much appreciated. Truly, the more I see of this work in detail the more I admire it.

I find myself regretting that I know so relatively little about Denmark's history (before Mary's arrival, I only knew about Denmark's great influence on and in the United Kingdom, the true elegance of Danish design and a few great Danes - Bering, Bohr, Kierkegaard, Hans Christian Anderson, etc) and thus can only try and guess what some of the symbols in the painting represent (slabs from the foundations and steps of the ruin scattered on the ground; the obelisks, all askew; the background figures - not those of the artist and his wife; the cavalry officer(?), etc.

It was interesting, too, to see his original sketch and to realise that Kluge had to change it to accommodate the twins' arrival and that of the new little princess. That he didn't alter the ages of the older children from the time when he first painted them is fair enough in my view: in a project which took some years to accomplish, he'd be forever altering it as children grow and change so rapidly. And the faces of the subjects, in close-up, are beautifully executed. The Queen, especially, is wonderfully captured: in it, I can see much of what I admire about her - her strong sense of individuality (tall and elegant, she wears what she likes with insouciance and pursues her interests and intellectual pre-occupations as duties permit); her warmth and approachability as a woman, not 'merely' a Queen.....everything which I imagine is character-driven about her is here in this portrait. Such a clever artist!

AdmirerUS is absolutely right, too, when he/she points out the big difference between saying 'I don't like it' and 'it's terrible'. Everyone's entitled to an opinion whether they're suitably qualified to judge or not.
 
You would not be the only one thinking Halloween is back when looking at this creepy gathering of demon-children, a possessed little girl and adults with vacant stares.
However, this is not a an Addams holiday snap, but the official portrait of three generations of the Danish royal family.
The painting of Queen Margrethe II, her two sons and their families has been accused of bearing a closer resemblance to a horror film poster than a royal portrait.
Read more: Danish royal family look more like the Addams family in creepy official portrait | Mail Online
 
BB is packed with DRF stuff this week, so it'll take a couple of days to go through it, but let's start with the painting.

BB has compiled a lot of trivia partly from the artist and partly from the book about the painting.

When Kluge started the painting, there were eleven members of the DRF to be included. Then all of a sudden there were fourteen.
And this is the initial draft of the painting, before Kluge had to modify it to accomodate Vincent, Josephine and Athena. https://app.box.com/s/n7mkwhzvvoqzqeplvjck

Even though his style is very realistic the DRF were never meant to be depicted as they look in real life, but rather as Kluge percieved them. "And they have allowed me to get close".

Christian is standing next to a figure, which symbolise Gorm the Old, the first official king of Denmark, and Christian's direct ancestor. "The painting depicts the DRF as a symbol, as it has been, as it is, and as it will be.
Christian is placed in the centre because it will be about him in the future. The repsonsibillity he carry can be seen on him, perhaps he is already weighed down by it. And his toy, a mounted king depicts Gorm the Old. In that way the history stretches back to the old king 1.100 years ago and all the way until today".

Another merciless detail Kluge has included in his painting is QMII's hands. Her red nailpolish has started to peel off a little. Her engagement ring which she always wear is there, as well as her Rolex watch, which she (according to herself) always wear loose.

Kluge first made a draft which was approved by QMII and then got to work, with the odd modifications and added children duting the process.

I think I can sense between the lines that Kluge isn't entirely pleased with Isabella. She's a lively girl and he explains: "In the final painting Isabella is sitting with a ragdoll. That's because I started to paint her, when she was a little girl. If I were to paint her today, it would be with something else than a doll".

In the background of the painting Kluge has included himself and his wife, wearing their wedding clothes, and also what they wore at a dinner at Christiansborg in 2008. Mrs. Kluge is seen in the painting as being heavily pregnant.

About the models, Kluge explains: "Frederik and Mary have each been to my studio in Korsør (a town) twice and so have Joachim and Marie and also Prince Henrik. But I have also met the royals at Amalienborg and at Fredensborg where I had an atelier and where I painted the Queen's face while she was posing. The children have not posed for me but I have been with Christian and Isabella and played with them in order to get an impression of how they are as children. The same thing applies to little Henrik. Only Felix and Nikolai have been painted after photographs".

There have also been a number of modifications in regards to what the DRF wore.
QMII selected the red suit she wearing (and apparantly he didn't argue) and from that the outfits worn by the rest were adjusted/alligned.
Prince Henrik's jacket was initially purple, but was changed to green.
Christian wore a striped shirt initially but that was changed to white and a jacket was added.

Nikolai and Felix were directed in how to pose with the LEGO bricks and photographs were taken to be worked from. The bricks are red to match QMII's outfit.
They were initially to have been playing with a broken LEGO figure, but then Kluge heard his step daughter exclaim to a younger halfsister: "You are lucky you haven't been taken apart". Kluge: "That remark went straight to the heart and indeed because the boys come from a divorced family I didn't want them to occupy themselves with something that was broken. Instead they are now building something together, a tower". The reason why they are both wearing blue shirts is due to the light.

BB checked with an auction expert and according to him, the painting would fetch some 1-2 million DKK today at an auction. 1 $ = 5.5 DKK, 1 € = 7.5 DKK, 1 £ = 9 DKK.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom