Her Majesty The French Lieutenant’s Woman
Using digital technology to place the Queen against a moody backdrop of Buckingham Palace lake, Anne Leibovitz has produced another atmospheric photograph of the Monarch to celebrate her 81st birthday.
The picture has elicited a lot of unfavourable comments, including that it’s too contrived and theatrical for a lady not known for her thespian ways — not in public anyway.
It could be seen as HM’s Wuthering Heights moment, or even her appearance as the French Lieutenant’s Woman.
I suppose since the world’s rediscovery of Her Majesty following Helen Mirren’s striking portrayal of her in The Queen, for which she won an Oscar as best actress, something of this nature might be thought appropriate.
For myself, although I liked the first portrait, also published on Royal Anecdotes, I think this one may be just a little over the top.
Helen Mirren
Helen Mirren is reported to have turned down a personal invitation to dine with the Queen on May 1st because she is currently filming in America. It may have been wiser of the Palace to check on her availability first, rather than forcing her to cancel such an important engagement.
I agree, I prefer the other photo. This one makes me think of Batman. And it seems that her feet don’t touch the ground.
By Lilyfromfrance on May 11th, 2007 at 3:25 pm
We never know what the Queen thinks of these portraits, Lily, but I’m guessing she thinks it’s rather batty too.
By John on May 11th, 2007 at 3:51 pm
I don’t like this photo either. For one thing, the Queen is a star personage in her own right and needs no theatrical backdrop to dramatize her personna. For another thing, there is nothing dark and mysterious about the Queen, so the tragedian backdrop is inappropriate.
Regarding Helen Mirren, she could have asked the film producer to shoot around her for a day or two so she could jet to London to meet with the Queen. Such things have been done before in the American film colony, and for far less auspicious events than dining with Queen Elizabeth II. The mistake was made by Helen, not the Palace.
By Gigi on May 11th, 2007 at 3:57 pm
Gigi, you may well be right. We don’t know the full details. I imagine, though, that even the great Helen may have quailed at the thought of meeting the Queen and having to demonstrate the part at the dinner table at Buckingham Palace.
By John on May 11th, 2007 at 4:04 pm
I for one like this latest picture. The admiral’s cloak has been worn by her in several past portraits ie: Karsh, Beaton, and others. The “classic” Annigoni painting of the early 50’s is clearly referenced in the photo as evidenced by by wooded backdrop.
By williams kenneth on May 11th, 2007 at 4:35 pm
Given all the nice comments Helen Mirren said about the Queen, I would think she would understand what an honor meeting her would be. I think if she could have gotten away she would have tried.
By Bex on May 11th, 2007 at 5:30 pm
Your point is well taken, John.
For my own part, I find it incredible that anyone would be so rude as to decline a kind and gracious invitation from the Queen. Most of the world’s inhabitants would leap at the chance to meet Queen Elizabeth II, including persons far more famous and infinitely more worthy than Helen Mirren.
By Gigi on May 11th, 2007 at 5:31 pm
Give the Dame a break. The Queen declines many more invitations than she accepts so I think she appreciates Ms. Mirren’s situation.
By williams kenneth on May 11th, 2007 at 10:09 pm
PORTRAIT
I’m now wowed by this pic either. The dark background doesn’t seem right for the queen, and the shadows on her head make her look like she’s wearing earmuffs. One of the key reasons why Beaton’s cape photos worked was the stark white background.
MIRREN
One of Dame Helen’s notable lines in the movie was “Duty first; self second.” Clearly, she thought her duty lay in honoring her contractual obligations to her producers, and I respect her for doing what she thought right, even at the cost of the pleasure of meeting the queen. Viewing it as a snub to HM seems a bit self-absorbed on the part of palace courtiers, especially since Mirren’s statements made her regret very clear. I hope the queen has the good sense to find a date that works for both of them.
By Aunt Pierre on May 11th, 2007 at 10:24 pm
I’m not so crazy about this picture either. I think it is rather severe photo and not flattering to HM at all.
By Trudie on May 12th, 2007 at 2:33 am
Ok, this is kind of random, but I had a dream last night that I met the Queen in a Barnes & Noble! I think I’ve been reading too many stories of her visit to the US!
By Bex on May 12th, 2007 at 2:12 pm
Aunt Pierre, the Queen doesn’t chose the people she meet, nor the dates. She is given a list of names, then she put a cross near the name for yes or no. She even doesn’t know 60% of the names she meet. Like Eric Clapton. It was very funny by the way.
By Lilyfromfrance on May 12th, 2007 at 5:02 pm
Drudge Report has an article that says the MoD is sending a film crew to document Prince Harry during his tour of duty in Iraq. I cannot believe that this is a good idea. I feel that this will make the Prince more vulnerable. Who in the world has made such an ill-advised decision as this? I do believe that the High Command at the MoD has lost their minds!
John, what do you say to this?
By Gigi on May 13th, 2007 at 12:46 pm
I’ve seen that report too, Gigi. At first it does seem counter-productive. However, with civilians to protect as well, it means they can place extra forces around him without it appearing as a personal bodyguard.
Harry was involved in a march today which William was also part of. It seems the MoD is delaying his departure even now. Maybe he’ll go for a few weeks to make the film and then return to Britain. We’ll get footage of him in Iraq, but he won’t be there for long.
We’ll see.
By John on May 13th, 2007 at 12:59 pm
That is certainly true, John, about being able to place extra forces around the Prince. What march was held today?
By Gigi on May 13th, 2007 at 1:52 pm
Gigi, here’s what I wrote about the same event last year :
Unembarrassed by his less than trendy headgear, and in a City suit complete with umbrella, the Prince strutted his stuff at a parade commemorating veterans of World War One. He was making his first appearance at the annual Combined Cavalry Old Comrades Association Parade in Hyde Park, London.
A wreath was laid in memory of fallen members of the Cavalry before a memorial service was held.
Bowlers and suits are worn to reflect the “proper order of dress†which applied before World War One.
Link to post.
By John on May 13th, 2007 at 2:20 pm
Thanks, John!
By Gigi on May 13th, 2007 at 5:19 pm
I actually like it. Is as if she is enjoying it..I don’t know… but I like it.
By Ziny on May 13th, 2007 at 5:24 pm
John, remember that story in the print media not so long ago, stating that the Queen was troubled because Charles’ obsession with environmental issues was causing a rift within the Royal Family? The Mirror has a story that Charles and Camilla are bickering because he didn’t want her to go on holiday using a private jet and she went without him. There apparently is also an issue because she just barely got back to her duties for the Crown and now she is off on holiday. This does not sound as if Charles and Camilla are very harmonious as a couple.
By Gigi on May 15th, 2007 at 2:59 pm
Everybody has little spats from time to time, Gigi. But if you’re Royal they get blown up out of all proportion.
She probably thinks she deserves a holiday after what she’s been through, and he’s trying to rebuild his green credentials after flying around a lot.
I’m sure it will all blow over and paradise will return.
By John on May 15th, 2007 at 3:20 pm
Who are these people who are leaking these things to the print media? Is it normal practice for employees of the Royal family to give tips to the media? Whatever happened to the loyal Royal retainers who could be trusted to keep silent?
By Gigi on May 15th, 2007 at 7:21 pm
I really don’t believe this composition has any merit. Ms. Leibovitz is on record as stating:
“I use tools to do my job and digital is just another tool, although a fascinating one. People who don’t get it just aren’t smart enough. When something new comes along it is overused, abused and misused until you figure out how to use it. That’s what happened with digital and it doesn’t interest me. Now, though, I shoot digitally for layout and it’s really valuable, but I think, at least I hope, that photography will always be chemical. Work that is manipulated looks a little boring to me and life is pretty strange anyway, don’t you think?” (Anne Leibovitz, 2005)
I do not assert that the studio shot of The Queen lacks competence. It is indeed a fine portrait. The background too is has merit, it reminds me, somewhat, of Edward Steichen’s photograph: Moonrise, Marmaroneck, New York, 1904.
Unfortunately the marriage of the two images isn’t really credible, yet is too conservative to be fantastic.
What a pity.
Stephen
By Stephen Bray on June 2nd, 2007 at 9:47 pm
Stephen, that’s an interesting website you’ve got there.
By John on June 3rd, 2007 at 11:27 am
John, truly kind of you to comment about my journal. But my little web site is but one bland flavour, your web sites however are each a confection, and severally provide so much variety.
I am delighted to have found them.
Stephen
By Stephen Bray on June 3rd, 2007 at 6:44 pm
[...] Previous photographs of the Queen by American photographer Annie Leibovitz have not met with critical acclaim. I have commented upon these images elsewhere. [...]
By Pebbles From Paradise » Blog Archive » Photography: Leibovitz In Royal Photoshoot Controversy on July 12th, 2007 at 9:06 pm