Prince Albert & Charlene Wittstock Current Events 2 : Oct.2007 - Jan.2008

[Jaya]

Just because she is in the presence of children is she supposed to drop to her knees and hug the children for the gratification of photographers and internet posters? Just because she is dating the Prince of Monaco is she even supposed to like other peoples children? If she were to eventually become Princess Consort it would still be possible for her to work on behalf of childrens charities even if she didn't like children (which we do not know to be true anyway). Princess Anne has never made any secret of not being especially fond of small children but that hasn't stopped her rather admirable work with Save The Children over the last 25+ yrs. Nor did it stop her from being a good mother to her own children who seem to have turned out rather well. Photographs reflect a second of a persons life and thats all, they do not give insights into a persons soul.

"Don't believe anything you read and only half of what you see" might be advisable before jumping to conclusions when reading Bunte and other gossip sheets.

Even Dickens spoke of small children and us doting on them.It appears you believe it appropraite not to dote on children then whether they are your own or others children they are what Dickens so profoundly wrote about.
But then who am I to say anything just an internet poster versed in Dickens as opposed to one not.alas!
AS for CW falling to her knees for children you have so wonderfully observed that hypothetically or otherwise she does not.Photographs reveal the soul.They are the indicator of the signifier of the soul. One thing they reveal is truth.They do give insights into the soul and the heart.. alas...That is why they are in fact studies of those transient moments and how the individual is wending through time.I have to disagree and say photographs are revelatory.....beyond the superficial......one has to be able to see and not merely look.

 

[sandsla]

First I don't believe anyone here takes a tabloid seriously but it would be better if she would stop blabbing or her camp would stop blabbing. My comments stand as is, you can tell if a person likes children or not. I find it interesting that she doesn't seem too. As for Princess Anne, you are correct she makes no bones about it and is what I call a straight shooter. Also what should be taken into consideration is that the British monarchy handles charities on a less personal level that is up until Princess Diana rewrote the procedures. That is not to say they haven't been stalwart in their support but it was Diana who added the human touch, the kindness, the ability to listen -one must give her credit regardless of what one thinks of the martial situation. Princess Grace, may she rest in peace, was the same way - in fact it was she who paved the way for Diana I truly believe. No one here is looking for a Grace replacement but it would be nice if the person had something going for them other than a make over and starring at cameras. With all due respect that is how it comes across.

Leonardo daVinci wrote that the eyes are a window to the soul and from the photos she doesn't look as though anyone is home most of the time. That is not to say there isn't, it just appears that way. Photos also don't lie because they catch us in un-guarded moments that can often be telling. Albert seems quite determined to promote this girl and of course that is his choice but the whole affair has been extremely mishandled which leads us to the present state of affairs.

Lastly,I look at her resume for the last seven years - what has she been doing with herself? Other athletes manage to fit in college degrees or obtain sponsorships or start charities what has she done? Actions speak louder than words, and sadly she comes across as empty. All best wishes to Prince Albert if he marries her I hope he understands that backlash that will be coming because Charlene gives all the appearance of lacking substance. If all this is untrue then would someone please correct all the misjudgements. I truly would like to hear the other side and not from a tabloid. Sorry mods for rattling on but I think these things need to be said in all fairness.

Great Post hibou! As well as Jaya's.

Ngalitzine, I was struck at your idea that any genuine interest or sincerity for the cause (especially one regarding the interest of children) is not required when involving oneself in a charity? especially someone that seems to be trying to position herself into a role where she might be expected to be shown as the public face of a cause. This board pretty much survives on speculation alone, as well as the drama soap opera tabloids so often featured and quoted on these boards? Where no one may be able to say for certain how altruistic Charlene is? She certainly has not made any great strides in either investing herself or even trying to feign interest for any cause or in the many events she attends (imo). I have to say before I came across these posts and was just viewing the photos, I couldn't help to notice that Charlene did not even try for a polite expression of interest in the event or the children as they came up to greet Albert and Stephanie -She was sitting close enough in proximity to both, and by now she knows she is being photographed, in what would seem to be, to her delight? (JMO) After two years in this environment especially, one might expect her to have a clue to act gracious in the company of Albert and of the event she has been invited to and that she has chosen to attend. ANYONE with an ounce of common sense and grace should be able to manage so little asked of her? It is not surprising to me that her interest would be limited, as she appears in her photos and quips in the press to be completely self absorbed with one single minded goal?(IMO) Personally, I believe she posts on this board, as well as the others, with the same one track goal of self promotion and her single minded cause? I'm sure anyone who might have an interest in her doing this or NOT? (I believe they check in from time to time) surely is able to recognize who she is? And the message she is so desperately trying to send? Although I believe she couldn't be more obvious, I'm sure in person this would be even less a mystery. The people on the rock don't seem to mind her now being part of the face that represents Monaco and they don't seem to mind her obvious extreme immaturity with all her provocations in the media and elsewhere? (JMO) I doubt what the consensus of people on these boards or the opinions of the public at large, is going to go a long way in convincing anyone in doing or behaving differently? Since all seems to be tolerated and Albert mentioned he wanted everything to be out in the open at one time, I believe unfortunately we are seeing it.

 

[hrhcp]

I must have missed something....

Could some-one direct me to the posting, which describes how it is that Charlene "caught" Albert's eye (more than any of the other ladies who have and are gracing HIS presence) ?

What was the monumentous occasion?

Thanks in advance.

 

[Bahamagirl]

Lck, Royal, Jaya Sandsla I totally agree with you guys. Hibou, I could not have said it better myself. I made my statement about Charlene because I observed the way she acted from the time I first saw a photograph of her in Turin. I think she brings out the worst in Albert. They were both acting like idiots, and she appeared to be drunk or high. (JMO).

She appears arrogant to me and I think she will ignore Albert's children especially little Alexander. I also do not trust her after knowing she grew up in aparthied in South Africa. She profited from the under priviledged lifestyle of people who look like me. I do not think problems in the world around her bothers her, because she is concentrating on herself. If you look at those pictures again you will see she is only interested in finding the camera and fnding Prince Albert.

I am disappointed in Albert beacause he can actually find an educated decent woman who will marry him. He seems shallow from the type women that he dates.

 

[goody7058]

You can't condemn Charlene from being bore in South Africa. She had nothing to do with it. For now Albert like being with her and as for Alex I don't think Albert will let him get close to Charlene they just friend. Hopefully Albert will find Mrs.Right.

 

[sandsla]

I must have missed something....

Could some-one direct me to the posting, which describes how it is that Charlene "caught" Albert's eye (more than any of the other ladies who have and are gracing HIS presence) ?

What was the monumentous occasion?

Thanks in advance.

Hi hrhcp,
Well originally he asked her out on a date when he saw her at the Mare Nostrum swimming event held in Monaco I think it was 2001? So Charlene was pretty young in my opinion for Albert to be asking her out at his age at the time? There is a 20 yr age difference (that might answer part of your question) So apparently since he had not really met her, he asked her out because he liked her looks? What else could it have been? Who knows? After the date she went home and blabbed to the SA press giving a detailed account of their date (?), odd after that, any normal man would have given her a second one (JMO). She mentioned in her interview that she lost his number that he gave her, she tried but couldn't find it? I'm just guessing (JMO), but it would make since that Rainier (a smart man), would not be impressed with the idea of Albert dating her? Not long after Rainier's death and a few months after Albert had to come clean with the children and worse (IMO) having to admit to relationships with these past women, he showed up at the 2006 Winter Olympics with Charlene! Go figure? (some say he was scouting for potential princess candidates or wanna-be princesses? That perhaps he was getting out his black book? Not sure how believable that could be, but you kinda have to wonder? Seemed to many it was much of the same and as you imply, not much different than the previous women (IMO)? Of course this lead many people who post on these boards to conclude that perhaps Albert enjoyed learning lessons the hard way? (JMO) Anyway, she did not make a favorable impression (to many) as she seemed to pose and preen for the camera and did all she could to attract it (IMO), there is even a photo of her where she lays down with her head back in Alberts lap and it appeared she was looking directly looking into the camera? She made a few remarks to the media at the time while in Turin (and after), one in reference to her and Albert being lovers if she had not already made that clear? (JMO & many others?). She showed up in Monaco at the Grand Prix with the family, her introduction to the people of Monaco (April? Sorry out of sequence here), with similar behaviour, she seems to have really liked the publicity from the beginning (Imo, as well as others?). Anyway backing up a bit, she appeared on the cover of Paris Match (Feb?) (copying poses from different photos of a young Grace Kelly), where she gave an interview? This was shortly after she was first (promoted IMO) seen in Turin with Albert. She appeared in photos again that were somewhat compromising? I would say imo, dumb & bad taste? I remembered reading I believe (?) on the official Monaco website that Albert would be spending his birthday in the Maldives with friends and family? After showing her off in Turin and having, letting her, or flat out not minding that she gave an interview in Paris Match? Her last real venture as a swimmer was at the 2000 Olympics where she placed fifth in a relay? Your guess as to why a French mag was now interested in an interview and cover featuring her, or why she felt she (alone?) was suddenly worthy of this in 2006, is as good as anyone else? So I think it was probabaly no surprise that after Albert announced his plans for his birthday (march), that he might expect that the media would be there and intereseted. They sued for photos published? Anyway people started to do a little research on Charlene and her quotes to the press from the beginning and that she continued to give? Along with observing the many photos of her that she seems to enjoy (JMO) Also she appeared in a fashion shoot (quite cheezy IMO) as a model in a publication "park Avenue" and on the cover not too very long ago? You can research way back (read her original interview) and draw your own conclusion? This is probably your best bet as to how they met as Charlene gives a detailed account - It's a SA press article that was also posted on the web, I don't know the name or where it's posted? - maybe someone else can jump in and provide a link if they know? Maybe you can just google Charlene in SA? Actually we are still wondering the same thing as you! Sorry for getting it a little out of order and all typos and spelling errors, or if I got anything wrong, I'm sure others will jump in and comment!

 

[Mandy]

It seems I've heard this song before. It's called bashing Charlene Wittstock, and it goes something like this:

Charlene is uneducated, extremely immature, selfish, arrogant, self promoter, inconsiderate...

Oh, there's a new refrain...

Charlene hates children...
Charlene has profited from the underprivileged and less fortunate people of Africa.

******

Now if you catch my drift, you will cease and desist or find another board to bash Charlene Wittstock.

Mandy
Royal Forums Administrator

 

[hibou]

It seems I've heard this song before. It's called bashing Charlene Wittstock, and it goes something like this:

Charlene is uneducated, extremely immature, selfish, arrogant, self promoter, inconsiderate...

Oh, there's a new refrain...

Charlene hates children...
Charlene has profited from the underprivileged and less fortunate people of Africa.

******

Now if you catch my drift, you will cease and desist or find another board to bash Charlene Wittstock.

Mandy
Royal Forums Administrator

I'm sorry but there is a huge difference between bashing and giving an opinion. The resulting posts above were the result of recent photos. I did not see any bashing but fair comments. If all we can do here is gush about someone rather than give an honest opinion then what's the point of posting one's thoughts. If the opinions seem like a merry go round that's because nothing has changed except new photos. It is your board and your right to edit, delete and ban posters. If all the royals want is star struck posters then so be it. I have met Albert and I liked him. My father's priest was Father Tucker. I care about the Grimaldi's for that reason. But then if I dare to voice my dislike of something. I can not. Fair enough and I get your drift. Charlene is charming beautiful and will make a perfect princess.

This being the Christmas season, I have no ill-will toward you all, and wish one and all the happiest of holidays!

 

[Jaya]

It seems I've heard this song before. It's called bashing Charlene Wittstock, and it goes something like this:

Charlene is uneducated, extremely immature, selfish, arrogant, self promoter, inconsiderate...

Oh, there's a new refrain...

Charlene hates children...
Charlene has profited from the underprivileged and less fortunate people of Africa.

******

Now if you catch my drift, you will cease and desist or find another board to bash Charlene Wittstock.

Mandy
Royal Forums Administrator

With all due respect when anyone is not "encomiast"regarding CW it is Charlene bashing?As if half of us had no mundane worries and the other no despair why would we bother and what psychological appeal does it hold verily I ask.
For Monaco we wish only the best and if that is the form of CW as the Princess to be so be it.God Bless us one and all.

 

[lilae]

I'm sorry but there is a huge difference between bashing and giving an opinion. The resulting posts above were the result of recent photos. I did not see any bashing but fair comments. If all we can do here is gush about someone rather than give an honest opinion then what's the point of posting one's thoughts. If the opinions seem like a merry go round that's because nothing has changed except new photos. It is your board and your right to edit, delete and ban posters. If all the royals want is star struck posters then so be it. I have met Albert and I liked him. My father's priest was Father Tucker. I care about the Grimaldi's for that reason. But then if I dare to voice my dislike of something. I can not. Fair enough and I get your drift. Charlene is charming beautiful and will make a perfect princess.
This being the Christmas season, I have no ill-will toward you all, and wish one and all the happiest of holidays!

I agree with you, hibou, lckc, sansdla, .... I was not on board since a few weeks and I noticed the same things when I saw pics. I have to say that Miss Wittstock is still around palace without clear status, so I guess that some people on forums or in Monaco are still going to comment.

 

[olga101]

Lck, Royal, Jaya Sandsla I totally agree with you guys. Hibou, I could not have said it better myself. I made my statement about Charlene because I observed the way she acted from the time I first saw a photograph of her in Turin. I think she brings out the worst in Albert. They were both acting like idiots, and she appeared to be drunk or high. (JMO).

She appears arrogant to me and I think she will ignore Albert's children especially little Alexander. I also do not trust her after knowing she grew up in aparthied in South Africa. She profited from the under priviledged lifestyle of people who look like me. I do not think problems in the world around her bothers her, because she is concentrating on herself. If you look at those pictures again you will see she is only interested in finding the camera and fnding Prince Albert.

I am disappointed in Albert beacause he can actually find an educated decent woman who will marry him. He seems shallow from the type women that he dates.

I seriously doubt there should be any concern about CW possibly even coming in contact wih Albert's children, unless its their own--certainly not any mistreatment.

Children would tell and besides I wouldn't lose any sleep over their being in their father's house big time. (There I've entered another poo poo topic)

 

[NGalitzine]

Hmmmm, my post yesterday seemed to have touched a nerve.

For the record I wasn't suggesting anything Dickensian about child care and welfare. I did not say that to work on behalf of a charity didn't require an interest in the charities goals. I was merely suggesting that big emotional gestures are not necessarily wanted or even helpful, and more specifically that a snapshot does not give an insight into a persons thoughts or soul. Indeed had Charlene made the big hugs and kisses gesture at this recent event she would undoubtably been accused of grandstanding or upstaging the prince or some other faux pas.

 

[Mandy]

I'm not asking anyone to eulogize Charlene Wittstock, however, I welcome all reasonable opinions. It would have been quite refreshing to read a fair-minded discussion concerning the events surrounding/photos of "the 10th birthday of the association, Frankie's Children." Like everyone else, I detest gushing posts. There is also a huge difference between expressing one's opinion and bringing up Charlene's past experiences and inadequacies just to bolster one's viewpoint. It becomes tiresome to read the same, repetitive comments especially when they have nothing to do with the event the couple is attending.

 

[Jaya]

The Byzantine icon

Hmmmm, my post yesterday seemed to have touched a nerve.

For the record I wasn't suggesting anything Dickensian about child care and welfare. I did not say that to work on behalf of a charity didn't require an interest in the charities goals. I was merely suggesting that big emotional gestures are not necessarily wanted or even helpful, and more specifically that a snapshot does not give an insight into a persons thoughts or soul. Indeed had Charlene made the big hugs and kisses gesture at this recent event she would undoubtably been accused of grandstanding or upstaging the prince or some other faux pas.

Snapshots are like Byzantine icons which are windows on eternity of the individual being photograped.Truly one would benefit greatly from having this knowledge of the Byzantine viewpoint regarding iconoclasts versus iconodules through the the writings of Photius, St.Theodore the Studite etc.In as much as we speak of the Byzantines I would like to add that Dickens was equally as spiritual in his perceptive writings.Today being world childrens day I have to doubt whether Charlene would have been accused of a faux pas or grandstading yet again had she made any gestures towards children at the recent event, the infirm etc. in future.......Your presumptions that are hypothetical as are mine about what might happen are tilted towards a negativism regarding Charlene that does not in fact exist here.Your comments are taken but they did not really hit a nerve as they do not contain the substance of the spiritual element which is evidently missing here from all exchanges regarding Miss Wittsock. JMO.

 

[royal pauper]

I did not say that to work on behalf of a charity didn't require an interest in the charities goals. I was merely suggesting that big emotional gestures are not necessarily wanted or even helpful, and more specifically that a snapshot does not give an insight into a persons thoughts or soul. Indeed had Charlene made the big hugs and kisses gesture at this recent event she would undoubtably been accused of grandstanding or upstaging the prince or some other faux pas.

Nobody expected Charlene to drop on her knees and huge children (after all she did nothing for that charity), but the absence of any warmth and interest towards them was noticable. Stephanie didn't touch any child either but you could see in her eyes and gestures/body language that she was focused on children and not posing for the camera. That is the difference that you apparantly missed to notice. When P. Diana (sorry Diana!) touched and hugged children no one thought that she was being pretentious, the same goes for Angelina Jolie. Why? Because it was/is real! JMO

 

[Mandy]

I almost lost sight of the photos you keep chattering about. Please have another look at them in this post and kindly point out where all these little children are. Unless you can provide other pictures on which we can form another opinion, there is only one picture of Charlene with two little children. If you look carefully, she is listening to Albert who is talking to her, and the children's attention is entirely focused elsewhere. It's beyond me how you can tell that Charlene is staring at the camera in the other photos when she is intently looking at Albert in most of them.

 

[LadyMacAlpine]

Mandy those aren't the photos they are talking about and she is looking directly at the camera in the last one. I hadn't noticed it myself until I went back and looked through the photos the girls kept talking about. She plays with the camera like models do. Personally I'd rather think her hormones have kicked in due to less training since she hurt her shoulder. Also less chlorine the better her skin will be with moisturizers.

 

[Mandy]

Enlighten me, what photos are you all referring to?

 

[Lady Jennifer]

Mandy those aren't the photos they are talking about and she is looking directly at the camera in the last one. I hadn't noticed it myself until I went back and looked through the photos the girls kept talking about. She plays with the camera like models do.

Maybe the photographer told her to look & smile for the camera? So he could get a nice shot of her.

 

[sandsla]

Maybe the photographer told her to look & smile for the camera? So he could get a nice shot of her.

I may be wrong, but I believe the photos, people are referring to are from a different event which is why there is some confusion, I personally was speaking of the pictures of Steph, Albert and Charlene at the 20th 'Premiere Rampe', the International Festival of Circus Schools organised by the Kiwanis
Club of Monaco, 8 December 2007

They are posted on another thread and links of various agencies. To be fair to Charlene, I have no idea why she appears to me as she does in these photos, perhaps she is just not feeling well? But she certainly does not look engaged or happy, she appears to me rather distracted and unhappy, or perhaps as I said she is just feeling unwell? Whatever the reason to me her appearance in mood seems to stand out or apart from the rest of the family and other people in attendance? Perhaps it is that she does not understand French, but she has been with Albert and living in this French speaking country and attending these events there by her own choice? And while I think it is not easy to always learn a language overnight, even I try to learn a little of the language of the country that I am just planning a very short visit to? I would think she has had the time and it would be something I'm sure Albert would help her to afford if she is interested in learning? Perhaps she is?

I was just trying to give different reasons for the apparent malaise on her face that is noticable enough for people to comment? I have seen Caroline attend events with the full blown flu, and you would never have known? Whatever the reason? I think there are some people that feel if she is choosing to attend these events with Albert and the family, where she knows she is being photographed, and she seems out of sorts for whatever reason, she has yet to learn to fake it? This is not the first time that she has not been able to hide whatever malaise that seems to effect her, whether it is physical or emotional or anything at all? Perhaps people are reading too much into it? But that is the honest effect and impression these pictures had on me? So it was curious that these pictures had the same effect on other people as well?

 

[Lady Jennifer]

I may be wrong, but I believe the photos, people are referring to are from a different event which is why there is some confusion, I personally was speaking of the pictures of Steph, Albert and Charlene at the 20th 'Premiere Rampe', the International Festival of Circus Schools organised by the Kiwanis
Club of Monaco, 8 December 2007

I was referring to the pictures that Mandy linked to & that LadyMacAlpine was talking about.

To be fair to Charlene, I have no idea why she appears to me as she does in these photos, perhaps she is just not feeling well? But she certainly does not look engaged or happy, she appears to me rather distracted and unhappy, or perhaps as I said she is just feeling unwell? Whatever the reason to me her appearance in mood seems to stand out or apart from the rest of the family and other people in attendance? Perhaps it is that she does not understand French, but she has been with Albert and living in this French speaking country and attending these events there by her own choice? And while I think it is not easy to always learn a language overnight, even I try to learn a little of the language of the country that I am just planning a very short visit to? I would think she has had the time and it would be something I'm sure Albert would help her to afford if she is interested in learning? Perhaps she is?

I was just trying to give different reasons for the apparent malaise on her face that is noticable enough for people to comment? I have seen Caroline attend events with the full blown flu, and you would never have known? Whatever the reason? I think there are some people that feel if she is choosing to attend these events with Albert and the family, where she knows she is being photographed, and she seems out of sorts for whatever reason, she has yet to learn to fake it? This is not the first time that she has not been able to hide whatever malaise that seems to effect her, whether it is physical or emotional or anything at all? Perhaps people are reading too much into it? But that is the honest effect and impression these pictures had on me? So it was curious that these pictures had the same effect on other people as well?

Honestly though some people can't hide their emotions on their faces (if they are happy, sad, pissed off, sick, etc.). I'm like that myself. You can tell when I'm mad or even sick, no matter how hard I try. I can never cover up my real feelings around my really good friends, one look & it says it all. It could be as you said....she might have been sick & maybe she didn't want to be around the children for fear of giving them her cold so therefore she tried to not avoid them per say but limit her interaction with them.

 

[sandsla]

I was referring to the pictures that Mandy linked to & that LadyMacAlpine was talking about.



Honestly though some people can't hide their emotions on their faces (if they are happy, sad, pissed off, sick, etc.). I'm like that myself. You can tell when I'm mad or even sick, no matter how hard I try. I can never cover up my real feelings around my really good friends, one look & it says it all. It could be as you said....she might have been sick & maybe she didn't want to be around the children for fear of giving them her cold so therefore she tried to not avoid them per say but limit her interaction with them.

Will then that's going to be a problem for her if that's the case? I think when people talk about qualities one needs for the environment she finds herself in? I believe you are explaining she lacks poise? She cannot afford to act pissed off or out of sorts, whatever her problem is, she needs to fix it, because she looks like she is out of her league if she can't manage to pull it off better than what she has managed so far - she never looks like she belongs, most of the time she seems like she is not on the same page.

I have to come in contact with a lot of people in my job and often work with people that I would rather not, I have to attend events when I am sick or would just rather not be there. But that is something I cannot afford in my own environment, nor would I choose to, it doesn't show much grace! I mentioned Caroline had a bad flu and you would have never known it, but then that is why she looks and conducts herself in the manner her role calls for? The second idea is an entertaining thought, but (IMO) unlikely? Perhaps everyone was speaking about the same photos as you, or perhaps I should have replied to someone else's post and we are talking about two different things?

 

[Moonmaiden23]

It seems I've heard this song before. It's called bashing Charlene Wittstock, and it goes something like this:

Charlene is uneducated, extremely immature, selfish, arrogant, self promoter, inconsiderate...

Oh, there's a new refrain...

Charlene hates children...
Charlene has profited from the underprivileged and less fortunate people of Africa.

******

Now if you catch my drift, you will cease and desist or find another board to bash Charlene Wittstock.

Mandy
Royal Forums Administrator

Mandy-

I would like to take this opportunity to commend you...because if it wasn't for you and a couple of other posters on this Forum I would begin to believe I
was Alice in Wonderland, through the looking glass as it were. I am not sure what it is about this young woman that releases so much venom. It's quite unbelievable, really, the lack of balance and any real dialogue here. Which is one of the reasons I don't come here and post any more.

I simply gave up. But I do pop in here from time to time to see if anything has changed. Hope springs eternal, I suppose.

Thanks again.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

Hmmmm, my post yesterday seemed to have touched a nerve.

For the record I wasn't suggesting anything Dickensian about child care and welfare. I did not say that to work on behalf of a charity didn't require an interest in the charities goals. I was merely suggesting that big emotional gestures are not necessarily wanted or even helpful, and more specifically that a snapshot does not give an insight into a persons thoughts or soul. Indeed had Charlene made the big hugs and kisses gesture at this recent event she would undoubtably been accused of grandstanding or upstaging the prince or some other faux pas.

NGalitzine, I for one need no further clarification on your opinion. I agree with it and I think it is an excellent, balanced and INTELLIGENT response.

You are quite correct, if Ms Wittstock had dropped to her knees and covered those youngsters with kisses, the air in this Forum would be redolent with the aroma of the smoke from burning her at the stake for grandstanding for the cameras! The idea that a snapshot is always a "window to the soul" makes me snicker among many other things. But I'll leave that alone.

We all remember former First Lady Jacqueline Kennedy? I am a great admirer of hers, but I am too young to remember her time as First Lady so I study photos of her. Other than her own, she was almost never photographed gushing over babies, but by all accounts she was passionate about children and young people. The same with the Princess Royal, Anne of Britain.

The late King Baudouin of Belgium was also a passionate lover of children and animals, but one would NEVER guess it from studying photos of this shy, retiring rather aloof looking man.

Again, I commend you for your post. It was a breath of much needed fresh air.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

With all due respect when anyone is not "encomiast"regarding CW it is Charlene bashing?As if half of us had no mundane worries and the other no despair why would we bother and what psychological appeal does it hold verily I ask.
For Monaco we wish only the best and if that is the form of CW as the Princess to be so be it.God Bless us one and all.

Jaya I mean no disrespect so please don't take it that way. But what on Earth is an "encomiast?" I keep a dictionary and a thesauras on hand at all times, and there is no such word in the English language.

As for your second sentence..."if half of us had no mundane worries and the other no despair why would we bother and what psychological appeal does it hold verily I ask??"" Could I ask you to please decipher this sentence for those among us-like myself-who don't have a clue what you are talking about, or who are wondering what this has to do with the subject at hand?

Again, thank you for your indulgence.

 

[olga101]

Mandy-

I would like to take this opportunity to commend you...because if it wasn't for you and a couple of other posters on this Forum I would begin to believe I
was Alice in Wonderland, through the looking glass as it were. I am not sure what it is about this young woman that releases so much venom. It's quite unbelievable, really, the lack of balance and any real dialogue here. Which is one of the reasons I don't come here and post any more.

I simply gave up. But I do pop in here from time to time to see if anything has changed. Hope springs eternal, I suppose.

Thanks again.

Hope springs eternal. For me, hoping there will be some resolution (marriage or dismissing or ignoring or whatever) with the women the Monarch has been/is associated with. It is constant and continued venom ad nauseum. So some posters say they don't like the Monarch's particular choice of women ,as gone by us to review.

Its depressing to see soooo much negative stuff. Forever and ev er it seems, with all of the involved women. And I don't understand what, honestly, they expect to happen. Albert has continued his own gait and intent, I guess But now that MANDY has spoken--hope springs eternal.

I think we need Dr. Sigmund Freud to weigh in here--seriously.

 

[smdouglas]

Jaya I mean no disrespect so please don't take it that way. But what on Earth is an "encomiast?" I keep a dictionary and a thesauras on hand at all times, and there is no such word in the English language.

As defined in Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary, an encomiast is one that praises.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

As defined in Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary, an encomiast is one that praises.

Aha...! Thank you smdouglas. I never use the online directory and a coworker and I could not locate the word in the good old-fashioned Webster's.

Thanks for your trouble-

 

[Moonmaiden23]

Hope springs eternal. For me, hoping there will be some resolution (marriage or dismissing or ignoring or whatever) with the women the Monarch has been/is associated with. It is constant and continued venom ad nauseum. So some posters say they don't like the Monarch's particular choice of women ,as gone by us to review.

Its depressing to see soooo much negative stuff. Forever and ev er it seems, with all of the involved women. And I don't understand what, honestly, they expect to happen. Albert has continued his own gait and intent, I guess But now that MANDY has spoken--hope springs eternal.

I think we need Dr. Sigmund Freud to weigh in here--seriously.

I agree...Freud would have field day here. But can I tell you something? I no longer care who, what and when Albert II marries. He has dragged this thing out so long I don't think very many people outside hardcore Royalty watchers care either.

It was all very novel and exciting a couple of years ago, now it has become tedious beyond belief.

If he doesn't marry Charlene, fine no loss. If he marries her, more power to both of them!

 

[NGalitzine]

"Snapshots are like Byzantine icons which are windows on eternity of the individual being photographed" , I must say that as a person of Russian Orthodox faith I find that comparison over the top to say the least.......but like everyone else I guess you are entitled to your opinion.

Anyway, happy holidays to all and maybe 2008 will bring happier and more positive events to discuss on these boards.