Prince and Princess Michael of Kent Current Events 1: May 2003-October 2005


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
The second part of the story, regarding the sale of the house, baffled me. I still don't know what the reporter's point was. She was conducting the sale of her house (or so she thought) something which millions of people do every day. Reading the report one would have thought she was trying to broker a drug deal or something. Whatever terms are agreed between herself and the eventual buyer is purley a matter for them. When I bought my apartment the previous owner left some furniture. How is that an issue?
 
I still don't understand what did Princess Micahel mean about The Queen?Can anyone please explain for me?
Thanks.
 
HMQueenElizabethII said:
I still don't understand what did Princess Micahel mean about The Queen?Can anyone please explain for me?
Thanks.

What particular thing? You mean about the Queen's mental state? I think the problem there was that the paper was trying to make it sound as though she was saying that the Queen had age-related mental problems when in fact, if I'm reading it right, she said nothing of the sort.

I did find it amusing that she was criticising Camilla for being nice. Wonder what she'd have said if Camilla had been a strident harpy?
 
So what is new about the Princess? She is an loudmouth who is not very discreet. She knew better and still talked out. Anything that she has said is not new!! She wants to have her 15 minutes of fame lengthed.

have a good night/day Linda 85
 
Elspeth said:
What particular thing? You mean about the Queen's mental state? I think the problem there was that the paper was trying to make it sound as though she was saying that the Queen had age-related mental problems when in fact, if I'm reading it right, she said nothing of the sort.

I did find it amusing that she was criticising Camilla for being nice. Wonder what she'd have said if Camilla had been a strident harpy?

From reading the comments Princess Michael is attributed to have made in relation to Camilla, I took her to mean that Camilla was being "fake" nice. That is just my interpretation of what I thought she was saying. Whether that is what she meant, I do not know.
 
Elspeth said:
What particular thing? You mean about the Queen's mental state? I think the problem there was that the paper was trying to make it sound as though she was saying that the Queen had age-related mental problems when in fact, if I'm reading it right, she said nothing of the sort.

I did find it amusing that she was criticising Camilla for being nice. Wonder what she'd have said if Camilla had been a strident harpy?

poor camilla. she really must be tired after only 5 months from her marriage of being a member of the royal family...
 
The Duchess of Cornwall, for me, i think she seems getting used to The Royal family now, by her attendance at Royal great Events like Trooping the Colour, Garter Service, Willism's Graduation, Trafalgar's Anniversary,...It seems she doing well outside, but inside i'm not sure about the relationship of her with other members of The Royal Family, maybe still have some distance.
Thanks you, Elspeth for explaining that, because actually i'm not an English myself, i'm just an Asian so it's hard for me to understand all what Western talking about.First, i thought that Princess Michael means The Queen is getting some mental sicknesses or getting mad or something like that, i did not understand much, but now i have got that.
 
james said:
The second part of the story, regarding the sale of the house, baffled me. I still don't know what the reporter's point was. She was conducting the sale of her house (or so she thought) something which millions of people do every day. Reading the report one would have thought she was trying to broker a drug deal or something. Whatever terms are agreed between herself and the eventual buyer is purley a matter for them. When I bought my apartment the previous owner left some furniture. How is that an issue?

I agree. she's not doing anything illegal. Selling something that belongs to her doesnt make her greedy. the article claims the price of the house is inflated but I'd like to hear a real estate expert's take on that.

I had a guilty sort of excitement when i heard that her "inside" comments would be made public. but she really didnt say anything even remotely interesting or new. anyone with even a passing interest in royalty knows this stuff.

it's ridiculous that she claims to be commenting on William and Kate's relationship. all she said was that they're too young to marry.

these newspapers are only out to make a profit.
 
Princess Michael is a highly intelligent woman who should have known better than to open her mouth (again!) and comment to a stranger on such personal matters. But once again, she has managed to offend the Queen (who is well known to dislike her with a passion) and everyone else in the family.

Hopefully, she has learned her lesson!
 
Although I think she should have been more wary we must remember that she wasn't saying these things to any old stranger. The reporter would have been deliberatley behaving in a way that would have encouraged the Princess to feel he was someone she could trust. A real Sheik is not the sort of person who runs to the newspapers with stories and that is why Sophie also felt she could be open with the same reporter under the same circumstances. A senior courtier was quoted in The Daily Mail newspaper as saying that the Queen is sympathetic towards Princess Michael for this reason and is just relieved that nothing more serious was said. He added that the Queen's wish is, "for the whole thing to be forgotten about as soon as possible".
 
Last edited:
Princess Michael should have stated " NO COMMENT!"

She will do anything to get press time.
 
Well, I don't think she knew she was talking to the press this time.
 
I agree...but....you have to love the fact when she opens her mouth, she does not lets it go full force... just like Prince Philip...I like the fact that neither of them are shy and both refuse to be put into a corner..like some statue.
 
I concur. You definitely must applaud her bravado!

You never have to wonder where you stand with her or Prince Philip. Whether you agree with them, I appreciate their honesty.
 
oh, the report is so mean, full of subjective comments
wonder why she hasn't learn from Sophie's experience with a so-called 'sheik'
 
florawindsor said:
oh, the report is so mean, full of subjective comments
wonder why she hasn't learn from Sophie's experience with a so-called 'sheik'


because she just doesnt care , ( except for money)
 
Princess in Madrid, presenting her book

From imagine
 

Attachments

  • 3.jpeg
    3.jpeg
    34.7 KB · Views: 201
Last edited by a moderator:
To quote Lou Grant on the Mary Tyler Moore Show: "I hate spunk."

I don't hate Princess Michael, she puzzles me. You'd think after all this time she would have learned some discretion (especially after the Sophie incident).

I've also been very curious about her relationship with Prince Michael. I get the impression she's the dominant partner. Maybe I'm wrong.
 
Well, I did read somewhere that many of the Windsor men are rather weak and need strong women to bring out the best in them - the Duke of Windsor and George VI being the most obvious examples, and Prince Charles being another - so maybe this is another instance of that dynamic.
 
Interesting point, Elspeth. When you look down the family bloodline, it does seem that the strong wives of the previous Kings, Princes of Wales, etc. are a much needed necessity by them. Queen Mary really set a lot of precedence for that.
 
The Queen mother, a very strong lady and really brought out the best in her hubby. A ver strong wife and much needed during a time of war.
 
Lady Marmalade said:
Interesting point, Elspeth. When you look down the family bloodline, it does seem that the strong wives of the previous Kings, Princes of Wales, etc. are a much needed necessity by them. Queen Mary really set a lot of precedence for that.
Off the general topic of Prince Michael, but in relation to Queen Mary and her backbone of steel when it came to the dynasty, have a look at "Matriarch: Queen Mary & The House of Windsor" by Anne Edwards. Queen Victoria chose well.
.
 
Thank you Warren. :)

Anne Edwards is an excellent biographer.

I will take a look on the Borders website and see if I can find it there.

I think part of why Princess Michael behaves the way she does is because she feels that she can only go so far within the Royal Family and then a wall is put up to prevent her from really feeling accepted. They way she talks sometimes it seems she feels she has never been wholeheartedly accepted.

But..she and her husband are an elegant and regal looking pair...and personify in pictures what it means to look royal in every sense of the word.
 
iowabelle said:
To quote Lou Grant on the Mary Tyler Moore Show: "I hate spunk."

I don't hate Princess Michael, she puzzles me. You'd think after all this time she would have learned some discretion (especially after the Sophie incident).

I've also been very curious about her relationship with Prince Michael. I get the impression she's the dominant partner. Maybe I'm wrong.

Ahhh, your funny! I had to chuckle at your response to my post.
Some spunk is good, to much spunk is no good, IMO of course!
I think the Princess Michael is misrepresented & very misunderstood.
She does seem to be the dominant partner doesn't she; she certainly seems to have the dominant personality! She is very intriguing, I don't think anyone will ever figure her out except maybe her mother, husband & children. She reminds me sometimes of Prince Ernst of Hannover.
 
lashinka2002 said:
The Queen mother, a very strong lady and really brought out the best in her hubby. A ver strong wife and much needed during a time of war.

Yes, if the young Duke of York had had a flakey wife, that would have been a disaster for him. And the same for the Duke of Gloucester -- it's been so long we forget that he was the next available male heir to the throne. I think it was set up so that he would have been regent for Elizabeth had something happened to George VI.

And the same for Princess Marina. She must have been a very strong-willed and clever woman to manage after her husband's death. It's too bad that the Royal Family didn't make her financial situation easier.

That was a generation of royal men who lucked out in their choice of wives.
 
I read somewhere that Princess Marina actually looked down on Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother (as well as the Princess Alice, Duchess of Gloucester)..she called them the Scottish girls. And whether you agreed with it or not...the Queen Mother could hold a grudge. Not sure if that is the reason for not helping out Princess Marina after her husband died..but just a guess. But I think that the Queen has made up for it...she has supplemented their living arrangements.
 
I do not understand :confused: there are 2 marina's, the very well dressed one who was about the same age as the queen mum or older and I can not believe she is still alive and the marina who was a bit wild and might be about 35?

Zonk1189 said:
I read somewhere that Princess Marina actually looked down on Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother (as well as the Princess Alice, Duchess of Gloucester)..she called them the Scottish girls. And whether you agreed with it or not...the Queen Mother could hold a grudge. Not sure if that is the reason for not helping out Princess Marina after her husband died..but just a guess. But I think that the Queen has made up for it...she has supplemented their living arrangements.
 
I think she means Princess Marina the Duchess of Kent, born a princess of Greece, and not Princess Alexandra's daughter Marina Mowatt.....her granddaughter.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom