Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall Current Events 6: October 4-16, 2005

[ysbel]

Those protesters need a life.

I agree, although I haven't heard of any C&C protests planned that caroline mathilda is referring to.

But it seems that Camilla has a very strong sense of who she is regardless of what other people think of her.

While I don't like everything that she has done, I do admire that. Its very rare to have such a strong self-identity that you are unaffected by other's perceptions of you. In fact I wish I had that.

 

[Warren]

...I haven't heard of any C&C protests planned that caroline mathilda is referring to.

What exactly would they be protesting about? That Camilla is not Diana? Surely that's self-evident?
.

 

[BeatrixFan]

Re:

Exactly Warren!

Bawling at Camilla won't ressurect St Diana - it will show that those who protest will worship any temporary Gods that enter the world stage without having a clue what the person is really like.

I'm sure that Her Royal Highness will be extremely popular in America - she's elegant, charming, attractive, sweet natured and she'll be Queen one day.

What gets my goat is that these Diana fanatics have taken it upon themselves to spout utter rubbish in an attempt to 'keep her memory alive'. As unpopular as this will sound, why are we keeping her memory alive? Do we do the same for Queen Mary or Queen Alexandra, who in my humble opinion did a damn sight more for the monarchy than Diana ever did. Why can't she fade into the history books which will eventually happen whether people like it or not.

The only people who should be concerned with remembering her and 'keeping her memory' is her close family and of course, her sons. The rest of the world needs to move on and stop worshipping a woman who was no Saint. She was a temporary God in a world obsessed by fame and fortune.
The Duchess of Cornwall is Princess of Wales and will be Queen. They can stage all the protests they like, but the Monarchy is not run by commitee and nor should it be.

What makes certain sectors of the community believe that it is anything to do with them to criticise the relationship of a future King and a dead ex-wife? If Prince Charles and the Duchess are carrying out their official duties well then they are doing their jobs properly - the affairs of their marriage bed are private and have nothing to do with anyone but themselves.

 

[Alicky]

I just can't believe how personally these people are taking the whole thing. What are they like in person I wonder?

 

[Alicky]

What gets my goat is that these Diana fanatics have taken it upon themselves to spout utter rubbish in an attempt to 'keep her memory alive'. As unpopular as this will sound, why are we keeping her memory alive?

Not only why, but how do they think that bawling at Camilla will do so?

 

[Eilish]

BeatrixFan,

You took the words right out of my mouth. Excellent and eloquent post!

 

[Lady Marmalade]

I think part of the reason why people have talked about protesting is because Diana was hugely popular in the U.S. and Charles was not. For the most part he was seen as the bad guy who was first to cheat in his marriage and then added insult to injury by marrying his mistress.

While many in the U.S. are fascintated by royalty in general, it is the British Royal Family who always gets the most press coverage here for anything they do.

If I said the Queen....people would respond...oh you mean Queen Elizabeth...never thinking there are other queens.

I think the view here in may respects is Diana was beloved greatly for her modern approach to royalty and for her glamour and youth.

In the U.S. as well, and this just maybe my view, so please forgive, marrying the woman who broke up your marriage is still not viewed as socially acceptable no matter the circumstances.

But, I along with all of you, CANNOT WAIT, to see them here.

Another tidbit is Charles has been openly critical of President Bush at times so that relationship will be interesting to see.

 

[BeatrixFan]

Re:

You took the words right out of my mouth. Excellent and eloquent post

Thanks!!

If I said the Queen....people would respond...oh you mean Queen Elizabeth...never thinking there are other queens

I've noticed that alot too! Sometimes I hear American TV Presenters talk about the Queen as if Elizabeth II was still the USA's Head of State and not Bush.

In the U.S. as well, and this just maybe my view, so please forgive, marrying the woman who broke up your marriage is still not viewed as socially acceptable no matter the circumstances

I think we British are a bit strange. Years ago, Divorcees were the scum of society - now the children of the Queen are all divorcees apart from Prince Edward. America isn't as progressive in its attitudes to sex and relationships as we are I think. But I may be wrong. The whole Janet Jackson nipple thing - over here nobody would have flinched. In Britain, two people can lay on the floor and indulge in passionate love-making and nobody would look up from their newspaper but jump the queue and there's outrage.

Another tidbit is Charles has been openly critical of President Bush at times so that relationship will be interesting to see

Joan Rivers was on a radio station here and said how suprised she was as to how anti-Bush Britain is. She said that in the USA, its the general idea that we love Bush and that Britain and the USA are the strongest of allies. Sadly, not true at all. If that is true, Prince Charles is sharing the opinions of many.

 

[caroline mathilda]

What exactly would they be protesting about? That Camilla is not Diana? Surely that's self-evident?
.

The "protests" I was referring to were found when I was reading through some of the online US newspapers. Nothing huge or organized; probably all talk. The articles were just saying how some folks still are not happy with the C&C marriage and are still Diana supporters in this "post-Diana" era.

As an American, my read on the "mood" here towards C&C will either be indifference or mild curiosity. IMO, in most quarters there is not enough interest to generate outright hostility. William and Harry are actually the favourite British Royals and generate the greatest buzz right now.

Caroline Mathilda

 

[ysbel]

I think part of the reason why people have talked about protesting is because Diana was hugely popular in the U.S. and Charles was not. For the most part he was seen as the bad guy who was first to cheat in his marriage and then added insult to injury by marrying his mistress.

I think you have a point, iowabelle. I continue though to be amazed at the hypocrisy of people's attitudes. Charles' and Diana's marriage is not the first to be affected by an affair. Several marriages in the papers have broken up that are far worse. Just take the Brad Pitt/Jennifer Aniston/Angelina Jolie scenario. Even among royal watchers, the same people who condemned Charles and Camilla have glossed over Fergie's dalliances with that Texan. And Prince Andrew was really and seriously hurt by that infidelity. But I guess Andrew's hurt isn't real or at least important to some.

This is just my opinion only, but I see a degree of selfishness with the idolization of Diana. Somebody here once mentioned that she would have been better off if she hadn't married Charles and someone else responded that if she hadn't married Charles we wouldn't have had her to love. That is extremely selfish I think.

People identified with her and felt sorry for her but if she hadn't had so many troubles and she hadn't been so beautiful, she wouldn't have been in the papers so much for people to read about. The tabloids fed off her troubles. And if there hadn't been so many people willing to shell out money for the latest magazine with her picture on the cover and latest personal crises, she wouldn't have been chased by a posse of photographers into that Paris tunnel which killed her.

It was as if people needed an idol to identify and feel sorry for to project their own fantasies about without any regard of how that idolization would affect the object of their adoration. Basically the idolization ended up killing her.

 

[Lindy80]

I think part of the reason why people have talked about protesting is because Diana was hugely popular in the U.S. and Charles was not.
I think the view here in may respects is Diana was beloved greatly for her modern approach to royalty and for her glamour and youth.

In the U.S. as well, and this just maybe my view, so please forgive, marrying the woman who broke up your marriage is still not viewed as socially acceptable no matter the circumstances.


Another tidbit is Charles has been openly critical of President Bush at times so that relationship will be interesting to see.

People marry the person who broke up their marriage and it doesn't hurt them--see Anna Wintour, Woody Allen, Brad Pitt, among others.
I don't know about "beloved" but Diana had her fans here.
I agree re the Charles/Bush opinions, but I think Charles knows that for protocol reasons he has to keep his mouth shut.

Thanks for posting the Post articles--that Kinsley one was excellent, and true! How many men would do that!

 

[ysbel]

The "protests" I was referring to were found when I was reading through some of the online US newspapers. Nothing huge or organized; probably all talk. The articles were just saying how some folks still are not happy with the C&C marriage and are still Diana supporters in this "post-Diana" era.

I read the online papers too but they all quoted the same story. Basically that Charles and Camilla's wedding was controversial in Britain and some in Britain still opposed it. They also referred to Charles' advisors who apparently thought America was Diana-land which was a reason the papers speculated that he hadn't made a public visit in awhile. The British royal family doesn't make official visits to the U.S. often so I doubt that's the reason Charles hasn't come. I think an advisor or two probably said at some point that America was Diana-land but just because one of Charles' advisors said at some point back in history it doesn't make it true today.

 

[Lady Marmalade]

You took the words right out of my mouth. Excellent and eloquent post.
Thanks!!

Thank you.

I know we can be a bit more prudish in this country regarding such things, but while divorce is accepted, the idea of marrying the other woman and living like nothing has happened is not.

I think many Americans still lay a lot of the blame on Charles and then also, and this is the cruel part, loved and adored Diana because she was beautiful, wore clothes well, showed the human side of the monarchy and was a thoroughly modern woman who refused to share her husband...not that she was perfect either.

I think we are still strong allies and of course we will disagree about certain issues, but that is expected.

With that said, it will be great to see them here and hopefully we will FINALLY see Camilla in a tiara!!!!!!!
.

 

[Warren]

This is just my opinion only, but I see a degree of selfishness with the idolization of Diana...

Ysbel, wasn't it just the other day someone was complaining that yet another Camilla thread had been taken over by Diana discussions?

Off-topic for the moment, but in terms of hypocrisy with selective condemnation, I've always been puzzled why Princess Caroline of Hanover has been left untouched by the moralists. Is there a scale for the volume of moral outrage dependent upon the attractiveness and style of the female protagonists? Was it simply a case of Chantal losing out in the glamour-stakes and therefore not worthy of a prolonged campaign of support? Has anyone accused the two Hanoverian princelings of giving a "slap in the face" to their mother by admitting to liking Caroline? Did anyone constantly ask "what must the boys think?" I suppose not. There are some interesting parallels in the two stories, but it just shows that moral indignation and self-righteousness can at times be very selectively applied.
.

 

[Lady Marmalade]

Ysbel, wasn't it just the other day someone was complaining that yet another Camilla thread had been taken over by Diana discussions?

Off-topic for the moment, but in terms of hypocrisy with selective condemnation, I've always been puzzled why Princess Caroline of Hanover has been left untouched by the moralists. Is there a scale for the volume of moral outrage dependent upon the attractiveness and style of the female protagonists? Was it simply a case of Chantal losing out in the glamour-stakes and therefore not worthy of a prolonged campaign of support? Has anyone accused the two Hanoverian princelings of giving a "slap in the face" to their mother by admitting to liking Caroline? Did anyone constantly ask "what must the boys think?" I suppose not. There are some interesting parallels in the two stories, but it just shows that moral indignation and self-righteousness can at times be very selectively applied.
.

Hi Warren,

I know....off topic...

I think because of the deaths of Princess Grace, her second husband Srefano, and when she seemed to spend much of the early 90's in mourning people just figured she was a hands-off situation....

 

[iowabelle]

I think that Caroline has gotten a break in public opinion because she is an attractive woman, whereas Camilla was "The Rottweiler."

 

[caroline mathilda]

I find this discussion interesting and am glad that we are exchanging views without rancour.

I always enjoyed following Princess Diana's story from begining to end. I have to admit that I am not as interested in C&C as I was her. Perhaps for many of the reasons cited by Lady Marmalade. I also think Lady Marmalade very articulately summarized the "average" American's view of the Diana-Charles-Camilla situation.

I have followed C&C since they were engaged, including getting up early to watch their wedding on TV, and will continue to watch with interest their visit to the States. As I said earlier, I think most Americans will either be indifferent or curious. I also think Americans will receive them with courtesy.

Whether it is odd or not, Americans still see the British Royal Family as "ours....sort of." There is always some degree of excitement when a British Royal comes calling on these shores.

Caroline Mathilda

 

[ysbel]

There are some interesting parallels in the two stories, but it just shows that moral indignation and self-righteousness can at times be very selectively applied.

Hey Warren, that's what I meant to say.

I agree with iowabelle, I think physical appearance drives our opinions of people more than we're willing to admit.

 

[Saragli]

I also think america will be more curious than anything. Americans do think of the British Royal Family as ours almost. When we say Queen everone thinks of Lizzy. We have a strange connection with them. Diana's outside beauty and genius PR sense helped her win the obsessive support and idolization. She is forgivin for having affairs with numerous men and breaking up marriages but charles is damned to hell for having an affair with his soul mate. I love to read about Diana's PR stragies. She was a genius, the royal family could learn something from Diana.

 

[tiaraprin]

Excuse me for admiring Diana. Also, Diana "fanatics" are not selfish either. We see something that others do not. While she was not blameless, Diana was used by Charles and his family to produce the next heirs to the House of Windsor. That is being treated pretty shabbily in my opinion and makes me understand why she did what she did. Charles needed that virgin bride and that is the only reason he married Diana.

By the way, I was the one who wished she hadn't married him so she would have had a much better chance at a happier life.

A note to Beatrix Fan: Camilla is not a saint either. She was sinning before Diana was born!

Also, contrary to popular belief, I do have a life outside of "Diana worship".

 

[Saragli]

Yes tiarapin but you had no mention of why people kept bawling at Camilla in your post. Diana knew very well why the Royal Family wanted her. She grew up in with the aristos. She was not that stupid. I admired Diana for her style and charitiy work too. Diana also used her Royal status to get what she wanted. Diana forgave and acknoledged C&C why cant others. Looking only at Dianas misery is very one sided. You cant change the past but you can try to make the future better.

 

[tiaraprin]

Yes tiarapin but you had no mention of why people kept bawling at Camilla in your post. Diana knew very well why the Royal Family wanted her. She grew up in with the aristos. She was not that stupid. I admired Diana for her style and charitiy work too. Diana also used her Royal status to get what she wanted. Diana forgave and acknoledged C&C why cant others. Looking only at Dianas misery is very one sided. You cant change the past but you can try to make the future better.

I won't stand to one side and let people bash her and make Camilla out to be a good person. I just can't. It makes me sick to my stomach.

 

[Saragli]

News

http://people.monstersandcritics.com/royalwatch/article_1053185.php/Camilla_Parker_Bowles_meets_Jude_Law

Duchess Meets Jude Law

Just felt like posting it.

If there is a terroist attack within the next few days will the royal or state visit be canceled.

Forgive me for being a bit random. I am very used to just jotting down a bunch of thoughts.

 

[caroline mathilda]

I won't stand to one side and let people bash her and make Camilla out to be a good person. I just can't.

Tiaraprin, as I understand your feelings, I actually don't think this will happen in the US. Diana will always be the epitome of what Americans see as a fairy princess.

I think the best C&C can hope for in America this time is that the public will give them (ie her) a neutral and pleasant audience. IMO Camilla will never exceed Diana in the American mind; perhaps in time, Camilla can look forward to a level of acceptance with less harsh comparision.

Caroline Matilda

 

[BeatrixFan]

Re:

Camilla is not a saint either. She was sinning before Diana was born!



I do apologise. Here was I thinking that it was Our Lady who was born via the Immaculate Conception - not Diana Spencer.

And I don't think we can really judge can we? What has it got to do with us? When did Diana Spencer ask you to defend her?

 

[Saragli]

Thank you for changing your icon Tiarapin. I did not think your last icon did Dianas beauty justice. This one does. It is very nice. Of course Diana and her marriage and the good times of her being in the Royal Family will be the epitome of a fairytale princess to americans. But there is no need for fairytales anymore. We need real people.

 

[ysbel]

I won't stand to one side and let people bash her and make Camilla out to be a good person. I just can't. It makes me sick to my stomach.

No one was bashing Diana here, tiaraprin. I may have been bashing the Diana-lovers but not Diana herself.

Camilla is not a saint but she does have one trait I admire and that she is unswayed by the opinions of others. That shows a strong sense of her own identity and is a pretty good and healthy outlook on life. Not very many people have that, so when I see someone that does, I admire their strength and wish I had it. I wish for Diana's sake that she had had some of that strength because if she had she may have been alive and happily married today.

Now this thread is veering into going way offtopic but I will say that the fairytale princess myth is a very destructive myth for women to buy into. It disempowers them and puts them at the mercy of the handsome prince (who may turn out to be a jerk) or anybody else in a powerful position. I would hope that women in this day and age don't expect a prince to come by and suddenly make everything better. Men are human too and they have their own problems.

A far better role model is a woman who can take care of herself and does but as an adult is willing to make some sacrifices to share her life with someone she loves.

Now does this mean I approve of the affair? No, but overall I think Camilla has a very healthy and strong outlook on life which a lot of women could use.

 

[caroline mathilda]

http://people.monstersandcritics.com/royalwatch/article_1053185.php/Camilla_Parker_Bowles_meets_Jude_Law

If there is a terroist attack within the next few days will the royal or state visit be canceled.

Princejonnhy 25, if there is a terrorist attack, God forbid, we will have much more important things to deal with than royal visits. Hopefully you know that.

Caroline Mathilda

 

[Saragli]

I dont know what I was thinking. God forbid, I hope we dont have one. I had forgoten for a second the real world that we live in. I guess I got caught up in something fun happening. Sad world we live in. I dont think I could handle another blow to my favorite city.

 

[Incas]

I just checked the Prince of Wales website to see when C&C will make the next joint appearance. Looks like nothing is scheduled until the US visit next month. Camilla doesn't have anything at all the rest of October. Does royals often taken time off before a major trip? I thought the visit will only be a few days. Didn't seem like they need a whole month to prepare.