Prince Charles and his paintings

I think his watercolours are perfectly competent and pleasing. OK he's not breaking any new ground, but id he's painting for his own pleasure why should he? I wouldn't be very pleased if someone came and looked through my paintings and told me I should change my whole way of working. Being very poor at landscapes myself I was impressed by the way he could work his little pen drawings up into such atmospheric paintings.

The thing that did surprise me was Prince Philip's painting of the Queen. I know he's a good photographer but I didn't know he painted and this one had such a light touch - not at all what I would have expected.

Very profound post Eloethan.

I guess. (shrug)

I rather like his paintings .

What made me smile though was the picture ,with the horse looking over his shoulder.

I like the way Prince Charles shares his passion for painting, gardening, organic farming and architecture. His opinions may not be to everyone's tastes but he is dedicated and eager to pass on his knowledge and enthusiasm.

Nothing unusual at all. I expect many gransnetters are interested in - and possibly experts in - certain areas, but they're unlikely to be called on to express their views on TV or in the papers.

Is there something unusual in someone being interested in the countryside, and liking to paint it?

Do you think he should sit on a throne, wearing his crown, all day? Or out on horseback wearing armour and fighting off the evil enemies of his kingdom?

#timehasrolledon

Countryfile, Paintings. Whatever next - Strictly Come Dancing?

A lot of the comments were from people who paint watercolours themselves. No-one was saying that Turner had better move over, but most thought he used a difficult medium very well. He is, after all, painting as an amateur for his own pleasure and displaying them because there is interest in them. If people want to buy an A G Garrick for their walls, that is their own choice. People pay enormous amounts for things that a pop celeb has just worn for a day.

I have not seen them so will wait to comment until I have something to base an opinion on.

I did not think much of the journalist's approach - and he does not seem to be highly rated either as an art critic or as a practising artist.

I think you've posted your Times crossroad puzzle clue by mistake.

A thousand lemmings can't be wrong…

"Uninformed" about what, anyway?

Paintings? Prince Charles? Health of British journalism?

I think it's good readers are slating the article. It's nasty.

His paintings have already made over a million pounds for charity. Can't be bad.

Not a very well written or perceptive article, stupid comments from the usual uninformed public and daubs the likes of which you can buy in department stores. No hope for any of them.

I did enjoy this programme. I got as much pleasure from looking at Prince Charles' watercolours as I do from looking at my BinL's pictures ,two of which I have hanging on my walls. Wouldn't mind a couple of Charles'!