<% ballot="47234" ' Check nothing is broken broken = 0 if ballot = "" then broken = 1 end if set vt = Server.Createobject("mps.Vote") openresult = vt.Open("Vote", "sa", "") ' Created object? if IsObject(vt) = TRUE then ' Opened db? if openresult = True AND broken = 0 then ballotresult = vt.SetBallotName(ballot) ' read the vote votetotal=(vt.GetVoteCount(ballot, "yes")+vt.GetVoteCount(ballot, "no")) if votetotal <> 0 then ' there are votes in the database numberyes = vt.GetVoteCount(ballot, "yes") numberno = vt.GetVoteCount(ballot, "no") percentyes = Int((numberyes/votetotal)*100) percentno = 100 - percentyes ' fix graph so funny graph heights dont appear 'if percentyes = 0 then ' percentyes = 1 'end if 'if percentno = 0 then ' percentno = 1 'end if else ' summut went wrong frig it numberyes = 0 numberno = 0 percentyes = 50 percentno = 50 end if end if end if %> Votes so far:

100% 0%			>		>
			Yes: <% =percentyes %>%		No: <% =percentno %>%

A trendy queen? Our monarchy is our tradition. Therefore it's image should remain to be old fashioned too. Where will the history of tomorrow go to, if the traditional style of painting the royal family fades out?
Natasha Sims, UK

Photo-realism in portraits has had its day. If we want to see a photographic image of the Queen or any other Royal, we can get one from a thousand sources anywhere in the world. With such familiarity of the actual image, any artist attempting to reproduce an exact likeness is on a hiding-to-nothing, as we can all identify 'sausage fingers', 'double chins' etc. The new portrait is a brave and effective way of representing the Queen in a modern and Dynamic way, and should be applauded. It has nothing to do with improving the Queen's image.
Guy Lachlan, UK

Portraits of the Queen are portraits, not advertisements for her. The kind of pictures that people paint of her don't affect her image one way or the other. As art, it's quite fun; as an attempt to get notoriety for the artist, it's bound to succeed. The only thing more annoying than artists who use icons like the Queen for cheap notoriety is people who rise to the bait.
William Whyte, Ireland

A very bad computer graphic. Every primary school pupil would be able to produce better.
Janice Sorrell, Scotland

What "artists" will do to get publicity. It is unflattering to say the least.
Susan Vlasic, Canada

All this is contrived nonsense - just more packaging and spin. Prince Charles meets the spice girls, now this. Do we really expect peoples opinion of the monarchy to change in response to one picture or staged event?
Adenike Forbes, UK

Her Majesty is a lady of grace and dignity and this portrait does nothing to convey either of these attributes - let the artist stick to cartoons as that is what I consider this "portrait" to be!
Mollie Jones, Australia

This may not improve the image of the Queen, but sure has distorted it in many places! I'd say the artists are tending to the abstract to hide their lack of talent...
Sulove Bothra, India

Modern art is game to get people to believe that anything is art. This "portrait" is another example of the sham that so-called modern art has become.
Chet S. Cutick, USA

It may be true that the monarchy needs to "modernize" its politics, but this should not include the disembodiment of its leader, from her own self or from England. Critics may pan recent portrayals as attractively illustrating "sausage fingers, blotched skin, and double chins," but those same critics must realize that these are purely human traits that we all may experience in our life times. This portrait does nothing but illustrate the artist's own unattachment from, and disrespect for, the history of England. I am appalled.
Susan Killam, USA

"Fresh and funky"?? I believe the portrait of the Queen should reflect her Regalty, her poise and her dignity. This portrait does none of these. HRH Queen Elizabeth has more than "paid her dues" and deserves more respect.
Lynda Wright Love, USA

Can the Brit's really HATE the concept of the Monarchy so much? If so, it's a pity that they didn't get their 1990's Act together back in 1775'ish, and join us in being revolting. Perhaps, the best solution would be to have the U.K., as it has done in the Sunset of the British Empire, now capitulate totally, and dissolve Parliament, remove the Crown, Separate into individual Fifedoms, let go of Ireland, allow Bobby the Bruce to once again control things his way, and allow the Welsh people to "do their own thing".
Fred Collins, USA

The portrait lacks any specific symbol of monarchy, and could pass as a first "draft" by a student artist in a class on the painting of portraits. An artist is free to give his or her impression of the person, but that impression must have some likeness to the actual individual. One must actually make an effort to see the image as that of Her Majesty The Queen.
Ernest Dobbs, USA

Beautiful piece of work- congratulations to the Artist.
T Farrell, USA

As a devout Anglophile the portrait engenders two closely associated questions that are too frequently asked and make me uncomfortable; "What is art?" and "What is a Queen? And therein lies the problem with the portrait, it answers neither!
George Stonikinis, USA

Of course the painting is not the fault of HM the Queen but it is indicative of the contradictory fickleness of the British people and the press. We need a majestic and exhalted Queen to look up to. I do not know what sort of people this will pander to. We don't care about these people. The Queen, until recently, was representative of the mass of people in this country. Ma'am, I implore you, return to the friends who respect you.
James T Ramsay, Great Britain

Crass and feeble attempt to give a fossilised system of government a "new look". Total rubbish.
William Easson, UK

If this were meant to appeal to those who say "If the artist says it's art, it's art" crowd, then I suppose it is acceptable. As for improving her image, definitely not. She IS a person and should APPEAR as a person. Merely presenting the people with a `modernized' likeness is no way to improve your image.
Charles Hoffman, USA

Absolutely awful. I think it's a case of "being taken to the cleaners" by those who profess to know "art" when they see it!
Bob Tanner, USA

It makes her look stupid, and that makes Britain and the royalty look stupid. What were the Royal Society of Arts thinking of? You can't take a national icon, nevermind the monarch, and play around with it like this - she's a lady of a certain age and should be treated with more respect. What next? a dummy of Prince Charles pickled in formaldehide?
Jan Sleemings, London, UK

Her face looks totally out of place in the modern painting. It takes away from her royal status and puts her in the same catagory as any other person. Not to mention the fact that she just plain doesn't look good.
Linda, USA

This unflattering piece of expensive ugliness does nothing positive for the Queen's image or for the artist's reputation. A black box on a chartreuse background is supposed to be regal? I wouldn't pay the artist to paint my house.
James Castro, USA

What , April Fool's Day already?
Alan Bonnell, Waldemar , Canada

Looks ugly...
Kalle Tuulos, Finland

I don't understand how this pathetic effort is supposed to make the Queen seem any more approachable. This goes to show that the Monarchy are not only out of date, but they have absolutely no idea.
Michael Reeve, United Kingdom

The only thing this "portrait" does is catapult an unknown "artist" into the headlines. Off with his head.
James Curran, UK

A portrait like this takes time to study, to determine what it says about the Queen. I haven't come to a conclusion about it yet and I wonder whether or not others could offer a quick answer to the question. This question you pose illustrates a strength of the internet: instant access to information worldwide and a limitation: this medium has encouraged people to seek answers quickly even though answers to some questions can't just be looked up but found only after serious reflection over a period of time. Interesting!
Gary Kunkel, USA

Back to top | BBC News Home | BBC Homepage	©