Duke and Duchess of Windsor (1894-1972) and (1895-1986) - Page 10

anglophilelady · #**181** 09-07-2007, 08:36 AM

I have been interested in the Duchess and the Duke's story for awhile and particularly since I watched the mini seris Edward and Mrs Simpson and have read a few books about the love affair marriage etc. I understand the Royal family's attitude in general about the romance they seem to be very much supportive of those who are within their circles but very opposed to anyone who comes in from the outside and marries into the family. Wallis was not in the aristocracy so the fact that a commoner could win the heart of the heir was somehow laughable and how dare she have two divorces and both husbands still living and that type of conceited attitude that in some small ways still prevails today why eles would Prince Charles and Camilla have had to wait so long to marry?!

BeatrixFan · #**182** 09-07-2007, 10:37 AM

Quote:

Wallis was not in the aristocracy so the fact that a commoner could win the heart of the heir was somehow laughable and how dare she have two divorces and both husbands still living and that type of conceited attitude that in some small ways still prevails today why eles would Prince Charles and Camilla have had to wait so long to marry?!

Well this is the glorious thing of course, all these nutjobs saying Charles should do what his Uncle did and give up all rights to the throne and go and live in exile with his wife don't realise what a huge contradiction they're guilty of. Their basis for anti-Charles and Camilla sentiment is that Diana was a "People's Princess" who brought the monarchy closer to the people. However, when Charles comes closer to the people and actually does what alot of his future subjects do relationship-wise, they resurrect the same archaic lunacy that drove a perfectly good King from the throne. In other words, they want picking up babies when it's suits them and "Damn thee to hell" moral highgrounding when it doesn't.

branchg · #**183** 09-07-2007, 03:07 PM

Well, it was 1936 and two divorces was unacceptable, not to mention the fact that the second one was at the behest of The King.

Diana was anything but the "People's Princess", that was a media creation, not reality.

Russophile · #**184** 09-07-2007, 08:23 PM

In regards to Wallis, I believe she was enjoying the ride for as long as it lasted. I don't think she ever really thought that it would go on to marriage. David "arranged" for her husband to be "caught" having an affair in a hotel room with another woman so there would be cause on Wallis' side and so as to make her "look" more acceptable.

I don't doubt for a minute that she entertained the idea of being Queen. Not realizing just how silly--not to mention impossible it would be. I'm sure she was shoved into the marriage (not the right word I'd use but I can't find a suitable one right now), because the public would really have a fit if she didn't marry the man who gave up his crown and kingdom for her. What a load on your shoulders!! You're not really in love with this guy and he throws it all away for you because he doesn't really want to be King and I'm sure there was a lot of deals made by his advisors, remember King George said David would ruin the Kingdom in 6 months! And no, I don't believe she was "in love" but she loved him in her way.

Yes, Jimmy Donohoe was a hanger on with them. He was a cousin of Barbara Hutton and a Woolworth heir and notoriously rich and gay. There was a rumor that David found Wallis and Jimmy together and she said something to the effect of "Look David, I'm Queen of the Fairies!"

As regards to any issue of their relationship, I had read that David had mumps and was sterile. Anybody else have any info. on that?

Princess Michael did visit Wallis after David died and got some earrings out of it, telling Her Majesty "These came from Aunty Wallis." Which didn't sit well with Her Majesty. (And personally, I thought that rather rude of Marie-Christine myself, but that's just me!) Though I'm not sure what other treasurers Princess Michael got.

I think frustration played a major role in David and Wallis' life. A former King without a country. A wife with no real role except to be thin and look exceptionally stylish (Aline, Countess Romanoes said she never seemed to see Wallis actually eat ANYTHING except those thin mints. . .) and she was a handsome woman. And awfully clever. She told Aline that the key on how to get a man's attention was to tell his friend that he looked very handsome and watch him come right over!

Wallis and David made some very stupid mistakes in their life but they really hadn't a purpose. The trip to Germany. The Govenorship of the Bahamas. Finally landing in France. I think if they had some sort of project or something like how Diana filled the remainder of her days with they might have been happier. But they didn't, preferring to live an empty, sad, vaccuus life of jet setting. . . .

Whew! Okay, I'll breathe now. . . .

COUNTESS · #**185** 09-07-2007, 08:37 PM

I think you are pretty much right on. Wallis and David had no real focus for their lives. They were, obviously, ahead of the times. Today, I should imagine it would be okay. Since it is. Or, perhaps, having two living husbands instead of one was the downfall. Her being American didn't help. I really don't know if Edward VIII would have been a better king than his brother. He was driven from the throne, his life was one that lead to nothing, but he might have been great with a purpose. As for the "People's Princess", that was Tony Blair's quick thought and it stuck. She was and is loved by many, because she was accessible and beautiful. Beauty attracts. Her children, obviously, loved her a great deal. Charles is not a bad person, he will make an able king. He may be quite old, but that's life.

BeatrixFan · #**186** 09-08-2007, 04:36 AM

Quote:

The trip to Germany. The Govenorship of the Bahamas. Finally landing in France.

In all fairness, the Duke and Duchess did have a real role in both going to Germany and in taking the Govenorship of the Bahamas, whether that job was something worth doing or not is another question.

Quote:

As for the "People's Princess", that was Tony Blair's quick thought and it stuck.

Actually, it was Alistair Campbell who ressurected the title that had originally been given to Queen Mary's mother.

Russophile · #**187** 09-08-2007, 06:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeatrixFan

In all fairness, the Duke and Duchess did have a real role in both going to Germany and in taking the Govenorship of the Bahamas, whether that job was something worth doing or not is another question.

Well the Royal Family had to do something with them, didn't they? By moving them out to the Bahamas, they put them out of harms way as a pawn to be used by the Axis and tried to do damage control from the Germany trip. And everybody else was invovled in the war effort. It would look good to the public if David and Wallis weren't.

BeatrixFan · #**188** 09-08-2007, 06:23 PM

Well yes. Letters show that there were concerns over the Windsors pro-Nazi feeling and it was suggested to Churchill that they'd be much better out of the way. I do wonder though, whether it might have been a chance for them to redeem themselves by staying in Britain and helping with the war effort on the home front thus giving them the Queen Mother effect.

Russophile · #**189** 09-09-2007, 07:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeatrixFan

I do wonder though, whether it might have been a chance for them to redeem themselves by staying in Britain and helping with the war effort on the home front thus giving them the Queen Mother effect.

Interesting thought. IMHO, the Queen Mum wanted them as far away as possible. What do you think?

COUNTESS · #**190** 09-09-2007, 08:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeatrixFan

Well yes. Letters show that there were concerns over the Windsors pro-Nazi feeling and it was suggested to Churchill that they'd be much better out of the way. I do wonder though, whether it might have been a chance for them to redeem themselves by staying in Britain and helping with the war effort on the home front thus giving them the Queen Mother effect.

You might be quite right, but the Queen Mother would have opposed their return, as she did at every turn. They would never be given the chance to redeem themselves. There would never be a denoument. Maybe they couldn't. Were they really pro-Nazi or pro-stupid. Hitler fooled a lot of folks at first. Chamberlain comes to mind.

Russophile · #**191** 09-09-2007, 08:48 PM

I don't necessarily think that Hitler "fooled" anybody. Remember they just got out of a world war and nobody really was wanted to go back into that scenario right away so I think there was a lot of "looking the other direction" at Hitler and what he was doing instead of addressing him.
I think they (David and Wallis) made a mistake never fully understanding what actually was going on.

MARG · #**192** 09-09-2007, 10:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeatrixFan

Well yes. Letters show that there were concerns over the Windsors pro-Nazi feeling and it was suggested to Churchill that they'd be much better out of the way.

That is something of an understatement! Neville Chamberlain was seen as dangerously gullible on a good day and criminally naive on a bad day. And he only went to try to broker a peace!

The Duke and Duchess were not only overtly pro-Nazi, they socialized extensively with others of like mind. That, in they eyes of a nation at war, made them not just unpatriotic but traitorous.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeatrixFan

I do wonder though, whether it might have been a chance for them to redeem themselves by staying in Britain and helping with the war effort on the home front thus giving them the Queen Mother effect.

Returning to Britain was never an option, war or no war. In the event they were given the option to redeem themselves.... out of harms way, in the Bahama's.

In those dark days the King and Queen had to be the rallying point of a nation. Staunchly backing the government and the Prime Minister. A pro-Nazi ex King could have divided the nation. It could even have lost Britain the war. (A house divided against itself cannot stand! Not exactly the "Queen Mother effect!").

branchg · #**193** 09-10-2007, 08:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russophile

Interesting thought. IMHO, the Queen Mum wanted them as far away as possible. What do you think?

Definitely true. The Queen Mother felt allowing The Duke to remain in England would have created a problem for The King in trying to establish his reign and standing with the British public.

Of course, both she and Queen Mary also refused to receive The Duchess, which made it even harder for The Duke to contemplate returning to Britain.

BeatrixFan · #**194** 09-10-2007, 09:41 AM

Quote:

Returning to Britain was never an option, war or no war. In the event they were given the option to redeem themselves.... out of harms way, in the Bahama's.

I disagree. Most of the public were supportive of the Duke and I believe would have been happy to let them reside in England as long as they lived as peers rather than Royals. The Duke must have had the right to sit in the Lords but they could have made special provision to deny him that. What harm could it do to have the Windsors living a private life on a private estate? I think if they'd have gone down that route then the Windsors would have had a much nicer life. And then, when the war came along, they could have done their bit and redeemed their reputation a little - I'm sure it could have been done and it was a viable option but one that was never looked into. If they were good enough to act as British diplomats, they were good enough to reside on British soil.

Quote:

In those dark days the King and Queen had to be the rallying point of a nation. Staunchly backing the government and the Prime Minister. A pro-Nazi ex King could have divided the nation. It could even have lost Britain the war. (A house divided against itself cannot stand! Not exactly the "Queen Mother effect!").

I don't believe David could ever have been King but we had plenty of pro-Nazis in Britain, Sir Oswald Mosely and his wife Diana to name but two. I fail to see why in a democratic country, we can't have private citizens who hold extreme right views. If the majority want to follow those views then they will but that didn't happen and I can't see why the Duke and Duchess of Windsor in their private status couldn't have returned to England and live a private existance. Personally I think any political affiliation would have been a mistake but if they did, they'd be doing so as private citizens and I don't see that as a problem or divisive to the nation unless you're suggesting there was possible mandate for a Nazi majority in Britain. But politics aside, and if they had remained totally apolitical, I don't see why they couldn't have visited the bombed out East End just as the Queen Mother did (as Queen) - after all, the Duke was popular there, more popular than the Queen Mother when she first visited. And if that had have happened, I'm sure that it would have been very different after the war with the Windsors held in a very different regard.

CasiraghiTrio · #**195** 09-15-2007, 12:08 PM

David was a good person. He made some questionable or downright idiotic judgements (or possibly didn't use any judgement at all) at many times of his life, but imho they were all honest mistakes on his part. I don't believe he ever meant harm, though I won't delude myself into thinking he was an angel either. He was just a person.
The fact that he Abdicated makes me respect him. It required tremendous courage, especially for a proud man who was raised & taught to be borderline superman, for him to admit his inability to carry out the requirements kingship. It's sad, of course, because "Bertie" didn't want the position anymore than "David" did. But Bertie accepted it, and he made do. They both made a choice. David said no. Bertie said yes. Neither choice was wrong because both choices were personal.

lilibet80 · #**196** 09-15-2007, 12:35 PM

David was absolutely obsessed with having Wallis as his wife. Nothing, not even his country and family came before Wallis. Bertie loved Elizabeth as much as David loved Wallis. Had Bertie been in the same position as David, although it might have ruined his life and broken his heart he would have given her up and remained on the throne. An abdication would probably never have occurred to him. He had character and loyalty.

branchg · #**197** 09-15-2007, 01:27 PM

The Duke abdicated the throne to marry a twice-divorced woman who was rejected by the Government and the Dominions as suitable to become Queen Consort or a member of the royal family. He paid the price for his decision.

CasiraghiTrio · #**198** 09-15-2007, 04:15 PM

To me, it shows more character for David that he stepped down, rather than pretend, or settle for something that would make him miserable. How can someone be a good king if they are personally miserable? Bertie hated to take on the job, but at least he had the love of his life at his side. It made it so much easier for him to have Elizabeth with him. The Queen Mother was really the reason he was able to do it. David did the same thing which Bertie would have done, imho, because both men had honor. They would not try to have both worlds, but would make a choice.

Duchess · #**199** 09-16-2007, 05:21 PM

i think they both paid a huge price. david gave up the throne for her and i think she married him out of devotion, not love, knowing that she would have to remain at his side forever. i think their story was fascinating and i love reading about them. it almost reminds me of charles and camilla in that she is the love of his life but he's not the love hers but they'll be together forever.

CasiraghiTrio · #**200** 09-17-2007, 08:55 AM

I know what you mean, Duchess. There are more parallels between Charles and his uncle besides Camilla, all of which are incredibly fascinating. Both had strict navy-obsessed fathers.

Both had strict schooling programs. Although of course Charles's formal education began much earlier and was more demanding from its start, David's education at Osbourne was very rough, and he went on to serve in the First World War. Then they were both so popular with the public, so quickly.
There were differences in their personality, but I think the similarities were strong enough that when they finally met they bonded quickly. I'm always so glad that Mountbatten pushed Charles to meet David.

I love this picture of young David. It was taken by Walter Pannell in 1911 and belongs to the V&A Museum.
Cadet Prince Edward