this post was submitted on 11 Jun 2024
0 points (NaN% liked)

World News

39142 readers
2614 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 12 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] NotAnotherLemmyUser@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The painting is protected by glass, so no damage was done to the painting.

I read through way too many articles that failed to mention this important detail.

http://bbc.com/news/articles/cydd9ye77rmo

[–] argh_another_username@lemmy.ca 0 points 5 months ago (2 children)

It wouldn’t be a big loss. That painting is ugly as hell.

[–] Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 months ago

I think it's a terrific representation of the horrifically bloody history of the British Monarchy

[–] Aviandelight@lemmy.world -1 points 5 months ago (2 children)

I can't stop thinking about how someone got paid to make this painting.

[–] RizzRustbolt@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago (2 children)

He's pretty famous for making portraits. Here's his portrait of Idris Elba.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

See, that isn’t ugly.

Which makes me think it was on purpose. Which makes me hate it a little less.

[–] RizzRustbolt@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

He has a lot of upper class clients who he paints just as ... starkly as the king's portrait.

It is very much on purpose.

[–] Aviandelight@lemmy.world -1 points 5 months ago

Now that is a gorgeous balance of color and brush strokes. So why did the artist choose that awful color theme for Charles?

[–] chuckleslord@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

Right? Spit right in the royal families face and they pay you for the privilege. Priceless and hilarious

[–] andrewta@lemmy.world -1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

~~If it were something that could easily be removed I'd laugh

Since it appears to be a lot more permanent. Hopeful they do jail time for vandalism.don't destroy artwork.~~

Edit : I've been told it its over glass. So in that case. Then it's good for a laugh.

[–] riodoro1@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

It’s over glass and ummm… I think it’s more important to first stop torturing animals and worry about the well being of inanimate objects later.

[–] andrewta@lemmy.world -1 points 5 months ago

Is it? Ah in that case I'll amend my comment.