The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Royal Highlights > General Royal Discussion

Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #81  
Old 06-20-2012, 07:19 AM
RoyalistRiley's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 502
Quote:
Originally Posted by lucien View Post
They are not more popular,they are just known more as the world at large is "anglofile" by lack of better knowledge,one reason,the other being plain old ignorance,people haven't got a clue on what's what and where let alone who why and what for.Omnipotent backwardness it's called.Ce'st ca..Ce'st tout..
I think that saying "people haven't got a clue on what''s what" due to "omnipotent backwardness" is hardly a legitimate complaint. The simple fact is that the House of Windsor and their predecessors reigned over a quarter of the world's surface at one time and befitting the great power status that Britain held (whether it still does is a debate for another time) it is natural that more people would know about their royal family as opposed to somewhere like Luxembourg or Denmark and the general anglo-centric nature of popular culture today that you alluded to, especially in the case of the United States which seems to be unhealthily fascinated with royals seeing as they fought a war to get rid of them. Others are also right when they say that the British do pomp and ceremony better than anyone and that in turn attracts more attention. That's just how history has unfolded.
__________________

__________________
God Save the Queen! Advance Australia Fair!
"Life is a game in which the player must appear ridiculous" - The Dowager Countess of Grantham, Downton Abbey
http://twitter.com/FutureSirRiley
  #82  
Old 06-20-2012, 07:28 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: blackpool, United Kingdom
Posts: 2
british royal

the main reason why the English monarchy is more popular in the world as a whole is simple its nothing to do with the late princess Diana or William and Kate or anything else. it is that its one the longest reigning monarchy in the world full of tradition which other lesser European monarchs have let go over the years none of them even have coronations anymore. no one can do pomp like the English can so you see its simple where simply the best thats all there is to it.
saying if the USA had a monarchy they would be popular is simply silly they share ours always have done not in a legal form but in a spiritlule form dont forget George the 111 was once king of the USA way back they cant forget that and hopefully never will
__________________

__________________
  #83  
Old 06-20-2012, 07:38 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,105
The USA don't 'share' our monarchy, they like their celebrities more than they like our monarchy. Other than Diana, William and Catherine and of course HM nobody knows the rest of the royal family, Edward and Sophie barely get any coverage when they go to Canada let alone the USA.

We do pomp and pageantry very well, it's been highlighted thanks to the Jubilee. But on a normal year the only events we have are the Trooping and the opening of parliament, and those events are only followed by royal watchers abroad.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
  #84  
Old 06-20-2012, 09:02 AM
EIIR's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Somewhere, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,624
Actually, Trooping the Colour is broadcast live in several countries, and others show delayed highlights. I believe that Germany is one of the countries where it's shown live.

There is a unique bond between the Anglo-sphere countries which is hard to explain. The family ties are so deep that a lot of people here don't look at people from Australia, NZ or Canada as 'foreigners', but as kind of distant cousins (whom we like to beat at sporting events ). You'll struggle to find a family in the UK that doesn't have a family link to those countries. The link is probably not so deep with the US, but even even there estimates suggest that up to a quarter of Americans have some British ancestry. In the 1980 US census, over 32% of Americans claimed British ancestry, which would be the biggest single ethnic group in the US.

There's also the fact that after their neighbours in Canada and Mexico, the UK is the most popular destination for Americans travelling abroad. QEII has an approval rating of over 80% among citizens of the US. She, Charles, William, Kate and Harry would be quite well-known there.

All of this, I think, fosters a certain curiosity which goes both ways. The lack of a language barrier makes that curiosity fairly easy to satisfy.

What I don't understand is countries with their own monarchies being interested in ours. I mean, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, the Netherlands, Spain etc. all showed William and Kate's wedding live from what I remember. All have had their own big royal weddings, wouldn't that make them much less interested in another monarchy's activities than republics who don't have their own royal occasions?
__________________
  #85  
Old 06-20-2012, 09:21 AM
Duke of Marmalade's Avatar
Majesty
TRF Author
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Frankfurt am Main, Germany
Posts: 8,511
Why they are popular? As Bruce Darnell would put it, Drama, Baby, Drama!
__________________
  #86  
Old 06-20-2012, 09:33 AM
miche's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: N/A, United States
Posts: 525
^Why isn't Spain (Juan Carlos), Monaco (Albert, Caroline, Stephanie) and Sweden (Carl Gustav) more popular?
__________________
  #87  
Old 06-20-2012, 09:49 AM
KittyAtlanta's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: KittyLand Junction, United States
Posts: 2,826
I think it is similarities in language and culture that the BRF is more popular.If one does not speak a foreign language, it is too much work to follow.
__________________
  #88  
Old 06-20-2012, 11:27 AM
Grandduchess24's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Cambridge, United States
Posts: 1,318
I guess because of HM is a widely known image as monarch and also because of the Royal wedding, and William, Harry and the late princess Diana are popular and well known just like the duchess of Cambridge Is now with the rest of the BRF, or could it just be because we have a long history with the British and the monarchy?
__________________
" An ugly baby is a very nasty object, and the prettiest is frightful when undressed."
- Queen Victoria
  #89  
Old 06-20-2012, 11:40 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 2,147
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
The USA don't 'share' our monarchy, they like their celebrities more than they like our monarchy. Other than Diana, William and Catherine and of course HM nobody knows the rest of the royal family, Edward and Sophie barely get any coverage when they go to Canada let alone the USA.

I don't believe that (lack of coverage) means much; the Wessexes are simply too far down the line of succession to attract much attention anywhere, imo. (I think this is true even in the UK, where they are sent to less-important venues).


I do think many in the US share the monarchy; or at least they think they do.
(There were giant TV screens in Times Square to show the Royal Wedding; that doesn't happen for anyone else, not even the daughter of any president).
__________________
  #90  
Old 06-20-2012, 12:04 PM
dbarn67's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: BROOKLYN, United States
Posts: 3,610
The British Empire compassed large portions of the planet for a long long time. The culture, mores and arts of most of the world, for good and for bad, has been led by the British.
__________________
  #91  
Old 07-07-2012, 04:28 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,105
Maybe they're not that popular;
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-Republic.html
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
  #92  
Old 07-09-2012, 07:54 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: adelaide, Australia
Posts: 1
In my opinion it is because they seem far more aloof and not as approachable as the lesser European royal houses. Gilded birds in a cage I guess.
__________________
  #93  
Old 07-09-2012, 08:21 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Spring Hill, United States
Posts: 2,468
Most European Monarchies don't waste time nor money on the "Show". Americans love "Show". They could care less who is in it. Most Americans don't know who any royal is, British or otherwise, except for Elizabeth, Philip and Charles. And Charles, because of Diana, otherwise, he'd be another stuffy nobody. Camilla who destroyed the "perfect" picture. Kate and William are "stars" here, too. She is lovely and he is Diana's son.
__________________
  #94  
Old 07-09-2012, 08:42 PM
miche's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: N/A, United States
Posts: 525
Charles was well known by Americans or the Americans network before Diana came along
__________________
  #95  
Old 07-09-2012, 09:07 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: City on islands, Sweden
Posts: 1,086
The question is are the Windsors more popular than the other royal families, or is it that they are more well-known/more familiar to people outside their own country than the other royals? Today English is the "lingua franca" for most people and if you do a search for "royal family" the number one hit is the homepage for the British royal family, and there are a lot of information, news and gossip that people can find easily about them, so why should people who are not very interested in royals "bother" trying to find information about other royal families when they have easy access to the Windsors.
__________________
  #96  
Old 07-09-2012, 09:49 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Los Angeles CA, United States
Posts: 1,075
Quote:
Originally Posted by COUNTESS View Post
Most European Monarchies don't waste time nor money on the "Show". Americans love "Show". They could care less who is in it. Most Americans don't know who any royal is, British or otherwise, except for Elizabeth, Philip and Charles. And Charles, because of Diana, otherwise, he'd be another stuffy nobody. Camilla destroyed the "perfect" picture. Kate and William are "stars" here, too. She is lovely and he is Diana's son.
Maybe in your neck of the woods - not in mine. People are a little more savvy and worldly wise than to have 'fallen' for that picture. I live in a micro-culture of little Diana's in some respect. Trust me, very few were fooled by any of it.

I do agree that Americans are woefully fuzzy about who is exactly in the Royal Family - but they have an idea. PBS is airing a whole bunch of British documentaries on the BRF these days. I think because of the Jubilee. People generally do know about the Queen, Philip, Charles, Diana (of course), Camilla (of course), William and Harry. They probably also know about Princess Anne. Anyone else they are a little more challenged.

Americans also know about the Royal Family of Monaco - because of Grace Kelly. They for sure are aware of Prince Albert - and they know about Princess Charlene, now.

One more leap, Americans will know about the Swedish Royal Family, too. They know about the King recently because of his troubles but more particularly generally because of the Nobel Prize - and as a result they are familiar with Queen Sylvia, CP Victoria, Prince Daniel and now Princess Estelle.

Quote:
Originally Posted by miche View Post
Charles was well known by Americans or the Americans network before Diana came along
Absolutely. In fact, Diana was who she was to anyone globally because of Charles. Charles was as much tabloid fodder in the 1970's as Prince William was before his marriage and Prince Harry is now - even more so, because he was the heir.
__________________
  #97  
Old 07-09-2012, 10:36 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Spring Hill, United States
Posts: 2,468
Charles was well know as the heir to the throne and an a good marriage catch. Many thought they could marry a prince. Yes, when Diana married into the family, it was because she married the heir that she became overtly popular. But as time wained on, she was the tabloid fodder. Albert is known because of Grace, yes and is very American. The Swedish royal family, although, delightful, I can bet that almost no one knows two of their names, including that adorbale Princess Estelle. And my neck of the woods may look provincial to you in LA, but it is not where I am from and I will bet you, across this nation, including the large cities, very few people care about any of them.
__________________
  #98  
Old 07-10-2012, 12:00 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Los Angeles CA, United States
Posts: 1,075
Quote:
Originally Posted by COUNTESS View Post
And my neck of the woods may look provincial to you in LA, but it is not where I am from and I will bet you, across this nation, including the large cities, very few people care about any of them.
My meaning was never about provincialism. I don't know where you hail from, Countess. Your location is unknown to me. My reference was to the sentence in your text that I bolded in which you used a word to describe Camilla - which I see has been deleted, both from your post and from my 'quote' of your post, so I assume the deletion was done by a moderator.

I am on TRF because I do not find anyone in my milieu who would want to discuss royalty. It's not a burning issue - and while my people would be fine with me mentioning them, they would be humoring me rather than really participating if I insisted on discussing them. They are unlikely to 'care' about them, its true, I agree - but they would know about them. They'd also know the names of the main players but with no particular emotion or judgment attached - and as I said, most of them would know about the Swedish Royal family because of the Nobel Prize - the awarding of which is followed with interest.

Just as it's hard not to know about certain celebrities in this celebrity driven media world even if you have no interest - I will bet that many people do know who the BRF are - though I agree that few 'care' about them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by COUNTESS View Post
And Charles, because of Diana, otherwise, he'd be another stuffy nobody.
Like it or not, Charles was never and will never be a 'nobody' - he's the heir to the British throne. He was born into a role that makes him somebody. Whether he is stuffy is your opinion. In point of fact - you know about Diana because of Charles - because he chose her - because she stood by his side as his wife. Once she was separated and then divorced from him, interest in her began to wane.
__________________
  #99  
Old 07-12-2012, 09:54 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: New Orleans, United States
Posts: 997
Sorry, Tyger, but I have to disagree as well. Most Americans don't know many royals. They know the BRF, they know Monaco (to a limited extent), they know there are other kings and queens, but that's about it. When significant numbers of people polled can't even identify their own elected leaders, I doubt they know foreign dignitaries.

The US and Britain share a "special relationship." I think that accounts for more interest in the BRF, in large measure.
__________________
  #100  
Old 07-12-2012, 12:52 PM
KittyAtlanta's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: KittyLand Junction, United States
Posts: 2,826
That's why we love the Forums so much. It was set up for people who "know" or want to know about royalty, worldwide.

This place is basically educational. There are some people who use the Forums for "gentle" bullying of others, but all in all, it is adjunct to the vague history we all learned in school (as least I did). If people don't want to be interested in royalty outside the BRF, that's OK with me. My world would be poorer if I didn't know about the royals of Tonga, Japan, etc. and the currently deposed royal families.
__________________

__________________
Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





Additional Links
Popular Tags
abdication birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events diana duchess of cambridge dutch royal history fashion grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri habsburg hohenzollern infanta sofia jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg ottoman palace poland pom president hollande president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince felix prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess mary queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden wedding william



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:58 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]