Warhol was a curious character. On the one hand he was a member of the leftist republican establishment, deliberately provocative and sneering at the values of family and tradition. Yet he appears to have been deeply religious, attending mass every morning of his life, and on his death, his home in New York was revealled as a shrine to the very same classical arts which he had so publicly mocked. A mere hypocrite, perhaps? Or was there something deeper? I suspect that like so many others in the republican establishment, Warhol was a traditionalist, he yearned for order, valour, deference and honour, values which only a Monarchy can provide. Publicly, Warhol was forced to suppress this yearning, conforming to the counter values of the leftist system in which he was living. The series of " Reigning Queens " portraits were no doubt lauded at the time as a satirical and clever attack on the " archaic " concept of Monarchy, but Warhol of course, knew the real reason why he produced them. Looking at them now, particularly the portraits of my own Queen, Elizabeth II, i actually find them rather beautifull and would not find it in any way disrespectfull, to have one hanging on my wall.
He was an odd duck no doubt about it. I like his stuff on the royals because of how it takes something very traditional, very old and shows it in a popular, fashionable, even trendy, sort of way. The old problem of preserving tradition while staying modern and relatable is difficult, but not impossible (I think) and necessary.