Do You Think Kate Middleton Cried After Seeing Her First Official Portrait?

This morning, Kate and Prince William both visited the National Portrait Gallery for the unveiling of her first official portrait as part of the royal family. It’s kind of a big deal, with the press and the artist there. When everyone finally saw it there was a silent but collective, “Yikes!” when instead of a vibrant reflection of the 31 year old Duchess of Cambridge, a tired-looking, jowled older woman was looking back at them.

Amazingly, it took artist Paul Emsley just three and a half months to age Kate about 35 years. He should think about using his talents for generating those police sketches of how missing children would look later in life. Kate kept a a smile on her face when confronted with the horror of the portrait, reportedly saying it was “brilliant,” probably in the same polite way that you compliment a hairdresser before quickly paying so that you can make it outside of the salon before you start crying. Seriously, though, the poor girl is pregnant and hormonal right now. She must’ve been broken up when she saw the bags under eyes.

While I like the painting’s eerie ’70s vibe that’s reminiscent of the keyhole portrait covers of V.C. Andrews’ paperbacks, it’s confusing as to why Emsley went for photo realism solely under Kate’s eyes, when the rest of it looks like it’s in the blurry, soft-focus, flattering lighting of a Barbara Walters interview.

Additionally, Emsley took liberties in other areas, changing her eye color to match her blouse. He changed her eye color! Clearly he wasn’t married to the idea of historical accuracy. He couldn’t paint on some concealer?

World Reacts to Kate Middleton Portrait: ‘Lifeless,’ ‘Dull,’ ‘Ghastly’ [ABC News]