The Most Ideal Royal Family

[Moonmaiden23]

I forgot about her, and yes I agree. Princess Astrid and her husband Archduke Lorenz are an ideal Royal Family.

Actually what fascintates me about the Belgian RF is how extraordinarily happy their marriages tend to be. Paola and Albert had some rocky years but are now an extremely close and loving couple, then there is bad sheep Laurent who found the lovely Claire and seems to be quite content with her, there is Mathilde and Philippe who seem to be soul mates, and of course the most beautiful couple of them all, King Baudouin and Queen Fabiola.

Leopold III, despite his tendency to chase skirts was reportedly deeply devoted to his first Queen Astrid, and to his second wife the Princess de Rethy.

 

[Turkish Delight]

I think the most ideal Royal Family is Spain!

 

[ZUBIAUR]

In my opinion ,Princess Mathilde of Belgium and Prince Philip ,and their children

 

[MelinaB.]

Nice question.I would say the Danish RF.They seem happy with how things are and they are all lovely people.

 

[lazuli]

The spanish royal family is, imo, the most professional one..you really can learn a lot about protocol just by watch them . But i must confess that, to me, the ideal royal family is the monesgasque one. They have everything: money, beauty, style, dreammy moments, dark tragic moments, scandals... they're a neverending source of dream and enchantment

 

[yoyo1987]

I think the Royal Family of Uk is the most ideal family. I love them

 

[CyrilVladisla]

Luxembourg Royal Family

 

[Moonmaiden23]

This is kind of confusing to answer. How are we defining "ideal"...in what area?

Looks and lifestyle? Grimaldis of Monaco

Dignity(lack of scandal) and public comportment? Belgium, Luxembourg and Japan

Education and accomplishment? The Netherlands and Luxembourg

JMHO

 

[Denville]

I assumed it was most "family like" ie happy family who get on well. No scandals or divorces or wild children...

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

There is no ideal royal family. Any country has a different culture, the monarchies amongst them will differ in character, style, approach, appeal. What is ideal in the one country is maybe not so ideal at all in the other country. Some would even say: the ideal royal family is no royal family at all. With other words: it is impossible to reach an agreement about this.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

I admire the Spanish Royal Family the most. Almost no hint of scandal. No divorces. Everyone behaves with dignity and they have the most adorable children. (In all fairness, I think the press does not have a lot of freedom to report trash on their royals?)

Now the one I ENJOY the most is the Grimaldi's of Monaco. No question about it. They are glamorous, over-sexed and beautiful to look at. They combine a fascinating traditional Catholic piety with almost defiant hedonism.

They are the worst behaved, and I can't get enough of them!

That was in 2007...

 

[Countessmeout]

This is kind of confusing to answer. How are we defining "ideal"...in what area?

Looks and lifestyle? Grimaldis of Monaco

Dignity(lack of scandal) and public comportment? Belgium, Luxembourg and Japan

Education and accomplishment? The Netherlands and Luxembourg

JMHO

Education I would add Japan. Besides some of the middle eastern royals, the Japanese definitely have some of the most educated members.

 

[Denville]

A discussion does not have to reach agreement...

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

A discussion does not have to reach agreement...

Let us then agree to disagree. I stated that it is impossible on agrreeing what the most ideal royal family is. Look at the post above of posters praising the scandal-free, excellent-behaving Spanish royal family as an example of the most ideal royal family. I have the feeling opinions might differ a bit on that, now we are a few years furtherer... With other words: it is an impossible question to answer.

 

[Curryong]

Yes, I think if you scratch the surface of most royal families you would find undercurrents, old quarrels, stresses and strains, wherever they are from. If I had to blindly pick, I think the RF of Bhutan appears to be a very loving and closeknit clan, but really what do we know of any of their lives. The Japanese Royal family seems to be a very well behaved and disciplined group, but whether other royal families would want to live in such a constrained way is another matter.

 

[Denville]

Yes, I think if you scratch the surface of most royal families you would find undercurrents, old quarrels, stresses and strains, wherever they are from. If I had to blindly pick, I think the RF of Bhutan appears to be a very loving and closeknit clan, but really what do we know of any of their lives. The Japanese Royal family seems to be a very well behaved and disciplined group, but whether other royal families would want to live in such a constrained way is another matter.

I think that over time, one will get an idea of what a particular set of royals are like.. But usualy that means that one may not have a very good picture of one of the modern current families. The British RF was pretty united and fairly scandal free for a long time. after the Abdication.
But in the 90s, it had the Diana and Sarah days which showed up cracks and rows and divisions and showed the queen's sister and 3 of her children as divorcing, with a fair bit of bad feeling in one or 2 of the splits.

 

[Osipi]

When it comes to an ideal royal family, I'd like to think that the perfect one would be one that takes one of Shakespeare's pearls of wisdom to heart.

"This above all: to thine own self be true."

 

[Denville]

When it comes to an ideal royal family, I'd like to think that the perfect one would be one that takes one of Shakespeare's pearls of wisdom to heart.

"This above all: to thine own self be true."

I'd say taht's about the last thing that a royal family can be. They have to adapt their real selves to what the public wants

 

[Osipi]

I disagree. If a member of a royal family puts aside his/her own inner self because its what the public wants, you're going to have a very grouchy, glum and dispassionate royal.

No one should ever bow to the wishes of the masses whatever position they are in.

 

[Denville]

Sorry but IMO that's totally not the case. Royals are just people doing a job. they have to, like we all do, adapt themselves to the demands of that job, which means putting on a happy face a lto of the time

 

[Lumutqueen]

I agree with Osipi if you can't be happy with your "job" regardless of what it is why do it?

It's so evident that some royals hate what they do and it does them no favours.

 

[Denville]

they do the job partly out of a sense of duty and partly because they get paid.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

I'd say taht's about the last thing that a royal family can be. They have to adapt their real selves to what the public wants

I totally agree.

Those closest to George VI(father of the current queen) believe he would have been content to have been a gentleman farmer with his beloved family around him. In fact it's because his brother David refused to adapt his real self- a party loving, self-centered socialite-to what the public wanted and demanded, that "Bertie" became King of England in the first place.

The Duke of Edinburgh has seemed to struggle throughout his Royal life with reigning himself in and being a diplomatic consort who walks two steps behind his wife and sovereign. He barely manages it. Ditto with Prince Henrik of Denmark who struggled with reconciling his role and his true self.

Diana Princess of Wales said she felt compelled to project the image of a happily married radiant wife and mother to the public in the early years of her marriage because she knew it was what they wanted and needed from her and she didn't want to let anyone down.

I have changed my mind from what I posted a few years ago about who I felt were the "ideal Royal families". I don't think such a thing exists now.

I think many-if not most of the modern Royals-are playing a role. Some are better actors than others.

 

[Osipi]

Like everyone else on the planet, when it comes down to doing a job or a duty, there will always be times that you have to do things you might not ordinarily want to do. You put your best foot forward and do it. Grin and bear it. Put your game face on. That kind of thing. You do what is expected of you.

The "job" though isn't the have all and be all part of one's existence. That's only looking at the public life aspect of a royal family and I have to agree with Moonmaiden23 that a lot of times it is totally putting a game face on and being an actor/actress and having to sometimes feign interest in something where you'd rather be having a root canal done somewhere.

I still stand by my statement that the perfect family is one that that to themselves remain true. The happiest royals, to me, are the ones that have been true to their own inner nature and have found ways to express themselves as individuals.

One example which is a very blatant one, I think, is the Prince of Wales. He bowed down to convention and duty in his first marriage although I do believe that his intentions to make the marriage work was there at the beginning. It wasn't until his second marriage that I think he was truly fulfilled in his private life.

Another good example is Queen Margrethe of Denmark. This woman is a true artist and its been expressed in so many ways around her from use of color in the rooms of palaces, to her flamboyant use of color in her attire and her expressive love of the arts as the theater or music or Henri's exotic statues. She is just a pure joy to watch.

Victoria and Daniel are a love story for the ages. It wasn't an easy road to the altar for this couple but they endured it all and the emotions expressed as they married were a pure joy to watch. That honeymoon never ended either. As each child arrived, the glue that keeps this family centered is pure love.

Its not the job or the duty or the tiaras and the galas that make or break a royal. Some even find ways to express their passions through their roles. That is being true to oneself.

 

[Mbruno]

I agree with Osipi if you can't be happy with your "job" regardless of what it is why do it?

It's so evident that some royals hate what they do and it does them no favours.

Royals don't actually get to "choose" their job. They are born into it.

In a way, it is a contract a family has with a country/State that is binding on all successive generations of the family in the main (ie firstborn) line. Someone in the collateral lines may opt out (or be naturally opted out after one or two generations), but, in the main line, opting out is not really a realistic option.

 

[Frelinghighness]

Like everyone else on the planet, when it comes down to doing a job or a duty, there will always be times that you have to do things you might not ordinarily want to do. You put your best foot forward and do it. Grin and bear it. Put your game face on. That kind of thing. You do what is expected of you.

The "job" though isn't the have all and be all part of one's existence. That's only looking at the public life aspect of a royal family and I have to agree with Moonmaiden23 that a lot of times it is totally putting a game face on and being an actor/actress and having to sometimes feign interest in something where you'd rather be having a root canal done somewhere.

I still stand by my statement that the perfect family is one that that to themselves remain true. The happiest royals, to me, are the ones that have been true to their own inner nature and have found ways to express themselves as individuals.

One example which is a very blatant one, I think, is the Prince of Wales. He bowed down to convention and duty in his first marriage although I do believe that his intentions to make the marriage work was there at the beginning. It wasn't until his second marriage that I think he was truly fulfilled in his private life.

Another good example is Queen Margrethe of Denmark. This woman is a true artist and its been expressed in so many ways around her from use of color in the rooms of palaces, to her flamboyant use of color in her attire and her expressive love of the arts as the theater or music or Henri's exotic statues. She is just a pure joy to watch.

Victoria and Daniel are a love story for the ages. It wasn't an easy road to the altar for this couple but they endured it all and the emotions expressed as they married were a pure joy to watch. That honeymoon never ended either. As each child arrived, the glue that keeps this family centered is pure love.

Its not the job or the duty or the tiaras and the galas that make or break a royal. Some even find ways to express their passions through their roles. That is being true to oneself.

what a lovely post, you are very wise

 

[Denville]

I totally agree.

The Duke of Edinburgh has seemed to struggle throughout his Royal life with reigning himself in and being a diplomatic consort who walks two steps behind his wife and sovereign. He barely manages it. Ditto with Prince Henrik of Denmark who struggled with reconciling his role and his true self.

Diana Princess of Wales said she felt compelled to project the image of a happily married radiant wife and mother to the public in the early years of her marriage because she knew it was what they wanted and needed from her and she didn't want to let anyone down.

I have changed my mind from what I posted a few years ago about who I felt were the "ideal Royal families". I don't think such a thing exists now.

I think many-if not most of the modern Royals-are playing a role. Some are better actors than others.

They are just doing their jobs. Unlike most of us, they don't have much choice in what they do, (then again I didn't chose MY job, I have to earn a living and its case of what you can get paid for).
but they have more money and leisure time and are able to spepnt that free time doing things they enjoy, more than most.
And we all have to put a happy face on at work, even if we feel bored, fed up, tired, even sick. The queen mother was well able to do this, as she said "we are the Royal family and we LOVE hospitals". So was Diana a lot of the time but she too I think felt angry at times that she was trapped in a role and wanted out of it...
Charles would problaby love to be a gentleman farmer but he does the next best thing and does it as part of his role as POW.. and whatever his faults I don't think anyone could say he doesn't wrok hard as Prince and care a lot about the job and the people he wroks for.

 

[Curryong]

In a way, everyone who deals regularly with the public, from sales staff to dentists to waiters, waitress, air stewards and stewardesses to PR people, etc, are doing the same thing. They have to be pleasant, put up a front, indulge in some smalltalk with strangers, look happy, even if they are quarrelling with their spouses, feeling lousy, would much rather be somewhere else.

Royals are much better paid, lead immensely privileged lives, but it's the same thing. For them though, it's a way of life which they were born into or married into, presumably for love. Their dynasty matters, their way of life matters, so they do their job.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

Royals don't actually get to "choose" their job. They are born into it.

[...]

Most royals, even born into reigning royal families, simply have to work for living anyway. Only a very small group are "fulltime royals".

 

[Furienna]

We should remember also that royals have to deal with something, that 95 % of the rest of us don't have to: They have to always live their lives in the public eye, some times even hunted by the paparazzi. And in the end, what seems to be a priviledged life might become no more than a golden cage.