Diane Abbott's portrait

[ThisOneAndThatOne]

I think it is important to continue our historical record by having portraits made of politicians. So this is not a thread about the cost.

I am just really taken aback that the portrait of our most famous black female MP shows her without clothing (just head and shoulders).

What does everyone else think?

Will find a link and post in a sec.

[ThisOneAndThatOne]

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10568722/MPs-portraits-cost-taxpayer-250000.html

[NigellasDealer]

i think that is weird and she should not have agreed to it, she had her portrait done becasue she is an MP not a swimmer or a porn star

[SirChenjin]

Shouldn't that be most infamous, rather than famous

I think it presents her in a very informal light, and probably not appropriate as someone who holds the level of power she does - but then, Diane Abbott is not known for her appropriateness.

[Freyalright]

I can't stand Diane. Why not just have a photograph wearing her day to day clothes. Anyway, I hope they kept the receipt. Not a flattering portrait.

[ThisOneAndThatOne]

I am not a fan of Diane either.

But if we want our female representatives to be remembered as seriously as our male ones. Then surely a more serious setting would be more appropriate.

It looks like she is just off for a bath rather than giving an important speech in the house!

Would any of our male politicians agree to such a portrait?

[TiggyOBE]

I think the painting is crap. Her head goes onto her body, but the body doesn't look like it's got any shape to it, or even arms. And her face kind of looks unrealistic. Like somebody with lots of good quality prosthetics on to look like Dianne Abott.

I'm fine with paintings of MPs.

[Mitchy1nge]

black women pretty much have to be naked don't they, do you remember the M&S ads where it was always the woman-of-colour dancing around in her pants or Lily Allen's recent video

it's some sort of law of the memory of colonialism or something

[Back2Basics]

^ what mitchy said

[MomsStiffler]

That's £11k well spent then.....

She could have got 4 passport photos for a fiver....

I don't think any of them should have a portrait that they're not prepared to pay for & donate....

[MomsStiffler]

Sorry OP - just re-read & saw it's not about the cost.

To be fair - who decided the pose & clothing (or lack) - it may well have been her choice/suggestion. I'm fairly confident she wouldn't have done it if she didn't want to...

[Casmama]

Weird and doesn't really look like her either!

[SirChenjin]

Agree with Mom - can't imagine Diane not agreeing to this but being somehow forced to. Which again demonstrates her general lack of judgement.

[MomsStiffler]

I don't use Twatter myself, but surely someone that does could just ask her?

Would potentially save a few MN blood-vessels from prematurely bursting ....

[QueenThora]

Like somebody with lots of good quality prosthetics on to look like Dianne Abott.

That is such a great description! I was thinking the same (in not such perfect words) - her features look weird, fake and slightly exaggerated. It's awful and that's apart from the naked thing.

I don't have a problem with a clothes-free portrait if they all had the same treatment. When it's a woman, and a black woman, who is the only one that's naked it starts to look distinctly dodgy.

As an aside I LOVE the portrait of Tony Blair. I don't like him much, but I think the painting is amazing – sums up not just what he looks like but his slightly unsettling air. You look at it and you can't decide if that's an expression of moral fortitude or something more sinister. Brilliant.

[QueenThora]

And the general effect is just as dodgy even if she did contribute to the decision. As a feminist I would not be going there if I knew all the men were going to be clothed – even if I fancied being naked – because of the message it sends.

[woodrunner]

I've just had a look at that portrait and it looks to me as though she is wearing a neutral/flesh coloured round necked top. Take another look at the neck line. But it is ambiguous, and certainly doesn't give her much dignity.

[QueenThora]

I see what you mean but it's very vague and the colour of the top, if it's a top, varies a lot as skin would. So she's either naked or wearing a top that's designed to imitate nakedness, which is a bit weird.

OTOH maybe she was dressed but wearing a top like this

Still think the portrait looks dodgy in the context of the others, however.

[QueenThora]

I like Betty Boothroyd's - glam, but formal clothes and a "don't you dare mess with me" demeanour :o

[SabrinaMulhollandJjones]

I don't like it at all, it doesn't even look like her. Don't know why she has to appear naked. I really like the pic of her that Queenthora linked to, though.

I like Betty Boothroyd's, and Tony Blair's is v.v. flattering. I bet he was chuffed.

[Beachcomber]

What Mitchy said (hi mitchy!).

Black woman portrayed in her natural animalistic state.

I wonder if they would have tried it with a white woman. I doubt it.

[Mitchy1nge]

hi beach :) am waving excitedly and hoping you are well without in any way hijacking thread

[MadIsTheNewNormal]

I think having a bare top half is a very odd decision for the job she's in, but it doesn't offend me particularly. but God, what a bloody awful portrait that is.I can see that the painter is very skilled but it just doesn't look like her, and it's terribly unflattering. The top half of her head is disporportionately small, her nose is all wrong, her ears look too low, it's just wrong!