"Ordinary," "dull" and "old" were some of the kinder words used to describe the first official portraitof Duchess of Cambridge Kate Middleton when it was unveiled to the public earlier this month.

"Lifeless," "ghastly" and "disappointing" were also adjectives thrown out to describe the work by Paul Emsley, an award-winning artist who painted Middleton, 31, against his trademark black background with a slight smile, or smirk, and lines visible around her face.

Click Here to See More Photos of Kate Middleton Through the Years

Now Emsley, who said at the time he wanted to capture Middleton's natural beauty, is fighting back against the harsh critiques that caused the portrait to become an online sensation, for all the wrong reasons.

(AP)"At first the attacks were so vicious that there was a point where I myself doubted that the portrait of the duchess was any good," Emsley, 75, told Hello magazine. "But now I've had time to reflect, I am still happy with it and am getting on with my life. There is nothing I would have changed."

After devoting nearly four months of his life to the painting, Emsley says the criticisms that he describes as a "witch hunt" and a "circus" were "destructive" to him and his wife and two daughters.

"Some of the words written about it were so personal. I'd be inhuman if I said it didn't affect me," he said. "When you take on commissions like this it is hazardous and you expect a bit of flak, but I expected nothing like the criticism I have received. I didn't expect it to go to the levels it did."

"It really wasn't pleasant and I stopped reading what had been written," Emsley said of the conversation that exploded online and in the worldwide press. "I have coped with the criticism by going back into my studio and getting on with it."

Emsley was on hand at the National Portrait Gallery in London Jan. 11 as Middleton, whom helped select Emsley as the artist, and her husband, Prince William, saw the portrait unveiled for the first time.

Middleton, who sat for the portrait in May and again in June, reportedly described the work as "amazing" and "brilliant," while William called it "beautiful."

Emsley now says that if everyone could see the portrait in person, they too would agree with the royals.

"I believe half the problem is the portrait doesn't photograph well and I would encourage people to go and see it [at the National Portrait Gallery]," he told Hello.

He also had high praise for his subject, Middleton, who made a rare public appearance to see the portrait after her hospitalization in December for hyperemesis gravidarum, severe morning sickness associated with her first pregnancy.

"She struck me as enormously open and generous and a very warm person," Emsley said. "After initially feeling it was going to be an unsmiling portrait I think it was the right choice in the end to have her smiling. That is really who she is."

Also Read

Hi Miguel,

I am so happy that you brought this in. When Shirley and I watched this on T.V., I could not understand why no one could see the true genius of this painter. Shirley pointed out the smirk on her face and the lines as well. I asked her if she could also see the twinkle in Kate's eyes. Great artists are usually not recognized until after they pass away, however with a twist of fate, this artist is already recognized. Most artists paint a portrait of famous living people the way that the general public want them to look, not the way they really look. You can almost tell, just by looking at this one picture, what Kate is really all about. Fun loving, mischievous, and loving life to the fullest. In my opinion, this will be a Hallmark of excellence in the years to come, because more so then a lot of pictures of famous people in the past, this one shows what the person really looks like rather than how you or I would like to see them look like.

GOD BLESS YOU

~Mike~

http://www.countryvalues65.com

I personally don't like the portrait very much, but as has been said, best seen in the flesh before making a final decision.

The observation is good. The detail is good.

The dark background brings the image into relief, but, to me, it has aged her by twenty years.

My opinion.

I don't think that the artist had many hours of sitting.

I, of course, I speak as an observer and not an artist. If I could paint half as well I would be doing Texas Whooops all over the place. (believe it, I'm a Brit but I can do it)

Roger

Hi Roger - I like the picture of the portrait! I agree with all the points made by Michael and Shirley and I do agree that it looks older than she is (she will however-grow into it!)
Funny how the loudest critics have likely never picked up a paint brush or a camera for that matter.
Compliments and niceties don't get press-so if you want your name mentioned it seems you have to say something nasty.
Bah humbug:)

Hello friends,

Thank you all for showing up. I of course agree with everyone of you. I am inclined to line up with Joyce and Mike in their praise of the painting. I really like it, though with Roger, I am not so sure about its quality as a portrait because as he and Joyce (and a lot other people) have said, it adds years to the now Duchess.

And as Joyce says, it's so funny how the loudest critics have probably never picked up a paint brush or a camera! It is the ignorant who will always be the loudest in critizising others.

I just found this excellent photo featuring both Kate and the artist. She really looks in it "fun loving, mischievous and loving life to the fullest" as Mike says. And as I just read elsewhere, "a picture is worth a thousand words." Wow.