Duchess of Cornwall Jewellery 5: November 2007 - February 2008

[Lady Bluffton]

Originally Posted by Al_bina

“A double dose of the Queen Mother's Mrs. Greville legacy” (Lady Bluffton, 2007, post#16) looked way too heavy on her. I would not be surprised seeing such pileup of rocks on the Brunei royal ladies or the ladies of the Persian Gulf countries. In my personal opinion, a smaller necklace or less strands would have looked much better.

Al bina: I believe you and I agree on that issue...I am still recovering from the glare from the first photos I saw of Camilla's latest adventure in the Windsor vaults.

One of the photos that was posted -- maybe by our dear Warren -- looked like Camilla was wearing a bib o'diamonds. Funny, that thought.

What will we see next from her????!?!?

[noldorlord]

Originally Posted by btsnyder

Fantastic! Here's a full-length photo of the duchess in the Greville necklace.

Rebranded: How dazzling Camilla dumped her dowdy image | the Daily Mail

Perfect photo montage Thanks for the Link btsnyder

Lovely full length shot, scroll down and see the others as well.

[RubyPrincess168]

I feel that the heavy-looking necklace togethor with the pale blue dress and stooped posture gives an impression of weights used to help sink a person when scuba diving. The tiara adds to this effect by giving an impression of pushing downward whereas the necklace drags downward. The earrings are lost in it all, or perhaps aid in the downward feeling.

Originally Posted by GillW
I can't help imagining HM with a wry smile (smirk?), offering the gaudiest stuff from the vaults - "Here dear - you'll look LOVELY in this...."

Truely funny! I'd probably do it if I was in her place.....

[noldorlord]

[quote=RubyPrincess168;697576]I feel that the heavy-looking necklace togethor with the pale blue dress and stooped posture gives an impression of weights used to help sink a person when scuba diving. The tiara adds to this effect by giving an impression of pushing downward whereas the necklace drags downward. The earrings are lost in it all, or perhaps aid in the downward feeling.

Nothing that a good back brace wont fix.

[RubyPrincess168]

I'm not sure it can fix the drowning-queen look she's got going on. How old is too old to learn regal bearing/posture?

[ysbel]

I like the crown and the necklace but not both together. The Queen doesn't look like a person to set someone up. HM simply has too much dignity.

[Elly C]

I have been enjoying reading the posts under this thread for some time now & I have swung from side to side with regard to Camilla's taste in jewellery on the big occasions. I've come to the conclusion that Camilla is often reviled because her approach is so very different from the other senior royals. We are so used to the Queen & Princess Anne's less flamboyant approach that we criticise Camilla for adopting a different style. IMOP, Camilla really enjoys wearing her jewels - I don't see this as "showing off" but a real appreciation of all the wonderful treasures which she now has access to. What woman wouldn't experiment with so much to choose from? And who wouldn't get it quite right on every occasion? I can also believe that Prince Charles has a pretty strong input into the jewels Camilla wears, & would perhaps, be keen to see the historic pieces brought out of the safes & put to the use they were designed for - to enhance the monarchy at important state occasions.

[georgiea]

I saw a photo of Queen Mother and she had the diamond Greville necklace that Camilla wore. She also had on the tiarra. But the different was that the Queen Mother just wore the single, three strand not the five. In my opinion it looked better than way.

[jcbcode99]

Did the Queen Mother not wear this same combination in South Africa sixty years ago in a Post WWII world? I think she wore it again in 1951, and probably a few other times there weren't any cameras around.She was playing with and enjoying the wearing of her jewels, too, and I'm sure that this level of criticism was not leveled at her in so mean a manner as it is at Camilla. Also, even with the tiara, five strand necklace, earrings, and the engagement ring, Camilla still wouldn've barely glimmered next to Queen Mary or Alexandra.
I thought she looked wonderful, I'd love to have the chance to wear that necklace. I'm sure we'll see it in the future as the three stand and someone will complain about that, too.
And, wasn't Camilla's mother (Rosalind Cubitt) the goddaughter of Mrs. Greville? While these jewels may not have been left to her mother, there is a sentimental connection there, as well and I'm sure Camilla enjoys wearing them for a three fold purpose--1. Her family connection 2. Her husband's family connection 3. Who wouldn't love wearing those jewels????
As I've said before, I"m just happy to see the jewels again!

[Al_bina]

Originally Posted by Lady Bluffton

Al bina: I believe you and I agree on that issue...I am still recovering from the glare from the first photos I saw of Camilla's latest adventure in the Windsor vaults.

One of the photos that was posted -- maybe by our dear Warren -- looked like Camilla was wearing a bib o'diamonds. Funny, that thought.

What will we see next from her????!?!?

It has been kind of you to comment on my post.
Upon seeking professional advise from her inner circles (fashion advisers hired by the Clarence House) and getting a final approval from Prince Charles, Duchess of Cornwall may surprise us again. To show pieces from the Windsor vaults is a part of her job, I believe. It may safely be said that the Windsor vaults are leveraged to assist Duchess of Cornwall to reinforce her position within the British Royal Family.

[ysbel]

Originally Posted by Al_bina

It may safely be said that the Windsor vaults are leveraged to assist Duchess of Cornwall to reinforce her position within the British Royal Family.

The original use of diamonds was not as a fashion accessory but as a talisman or holy stone of power that kings revered for their magical presence against their enemies. So from the beginning, diamonds held a political purpose. Later royals began to wear diamonds but the purpose of wearing enormous royal jewels has historically been to solidy the king's position and that of his wife. Only in the last decades have the average man and woman been able to afford diamonds and therefore diamonds have taken on a new role of being fashion accessories to accentuate a woman's overall appearance.

However the use of diamonds and precious jewels as a fashion accessory is a relatively recent use of the jewels and so if the BRF is using the vaults to solidify Camilla's position as the wife to the heir to the throne, they are following the older and more traditional use of precious jewels.

[Al_bina]

Thanks for fully understanding the point I have made in regard to historical pieces of jewellery. When it comes to solidifying the position of Duchess of Cornwall by means of jewellery, I would not have used this way in this particular situation (the Uganda visit). Duchess of Cornwall will have her time to dazzle. This is my personal view, and I may fail to grasp the intricacies of the whole situation.

[georgiea]

Originally Posted by ysbel

However the use of diamonds and precious jewels as a fashion accessory is a relatively recent use of the jewels and so if the BRF is using the vaults to solidify Camilla's position as the wife to the heir to the throne, they are following the older and more traditional use of precious jewels.

That is an interesting point of view about Camilla and Charles using the older and more traditional use of precious jewels. Maybe that is why Camilla used the five strands instead of of three. I guess looking at it that way, she is making her role as a traditional queen consort.

But still I think three strands would have been more attractive and dazzling.

[ysbel]

Originally Posted by Al_bina

Thanks for fully understanding the point I have made in regard to historical pieces of jewellery. When it comes to solidying the position of Duchess of Cornwall by means of jewellery, I would not have used this way in this particular situation (the Uganda visit). Duchess of Cornwall will have her time to dazzle. This is my personal view, and I may fail to grasp the intricacies of the whole situation.

I don't know the intricacies of the present situation either but why do you think its inappropriate for the BRF to use jewels like this for Camilla for this visit in particular?

[ysbel]

Originally Posted by georgiea

That is an interesting point of view about Camilla and Charles using the older and more traditional use of precious jewels. Maybe that is why Camilla used the five strands instead of of three. I guess looking at it that way, she is making her role as a traditional queen consort.

But still I think three strands would have been more attractive and dazzling.

Since they are the Queen's jewels, I think the Queen would have to agree for her jewels to be used this way. But now that I look at the picture again, I think the crown and necklace combination could have worked with a simply cut high neck single color gown. The complicated neckline of the dress makes the necklace look awkward and I don't know if cutting down the necklace to three strands would have done any good.

[Al_bina]

Originally Posted by ysbel

I don't know the intricacies of the present situation either but why do you think its inappropriate for the BRF to use jewels like this for Camilla for this visit in particular?

There is nothing inappropriate in giving jewels to the wife of the Heir Apparent. Given the presence of Her Majesty, it would be deemed expedient for Duchess of Cornwall to slightly tone down her outfit by using less jewellery. As said earlier, Duchess of Cornwall will have her day to wear all the historical and modern pieces of jewellery she chooses. I may be wrong due to my ancient Asian perspective "the mother-in-law takes the centre stage" on the issue.

[auntie]

To me, Camilla's wearing these jewells is a (maybe subconscious) statement, as if to say: "I waited 35 freaking years to be here and wear this so there is no stopping me now! Hallelujah!!! "
Seriously speaking, whilst the jewells are grand, it is to al laccounts overdone, including the fluffy hairstyle.

[georgiea]

Originally Posted by ysbel

But now that I look at the picture again, I think the crown and necklace combination could have worked with a simply cut high neck single color gown. The complicated neckline of the dress makes the necklace look awkward and I don't know if cutting down the necklace to three strands would have done any good.

In my opinion, the dress's front was designed around the five strands. I think either wearing a simple high neck, single color gown or three strands would have made her look more elegant. I hope who ever Camilla is consulting with about her royal look has her best interest at heart.

[COUNTESS]

Camilla gets advice. Unfortunately, in this instance, it is not good advice. As some have stated he stooped posture makes it look as if she is being dragged down. The gown, itself, is fine. Just too much of a good thing, when it came to the jewelry. Her hair is fine. A darn site better than the stringy look some others in the family sport. The tiara looks very nice on her. She, unfortunately, looks older than her years. Smoking did not help. In her instance, less is more.

[Incas]

The five strand definitely made a huge statement, and wouldn't surprise me if that was the intention. Personally, a bit over the top. But, isn't the whole idea of Kings and Queens and etc. a bit over the top in 2007? The very titles convey by-gone eras. So one would hardly expect anything less than the full theatrics, during no less than a Commonwealth gala.