The Danish Monarchy: Is it worth it? Nationalism or a National Waste?

[Emmily]

Originally Posted by Villemann

As for Mary's designer dresses and bags. She NEVER pays full price for any of her stuff, so don't worry, she is not going to bankrupt the Danish monarchy - at least not financially!

You are implying Mary is going to bankrupt the Danish Monarchy? Wow.

[Villemann]

Originally Posted by Emmily

You are implying Mary is going to bankrupt the Danish Monarchy? Wow.

No implying here. I am saying, unless CP Mary gets her act together and her husband sorted out, her son will never be king of Denmark. That is my personal opinion, of course.

[Binz]

Originally Posted by Villemann

yes, why is it we discuss mary's latest Prada bag and not her work? perhaps becaus ethe way mary carries out these official engagements is by the book, but rather irrelevant to modern society. A photo-op i sno longer enough to put an issue on the top op today's agenda - a fact the royals have to adapt to.

Miss Hauens comments are really old news. The idea of the royals not wanting us was aired years ago by Danish royal author Annelise Bidstrup. If they don't want the job, let them go! We have successions as long as the credits to Star Wars, so we can easily do without one or two of them! In some European monarchies, you will actually find the quality of the royal improves as you go down the list of succession!

The irrelevance to modern society? Please, please inform us what could be relevant! Please nothing about freebies and nothing about succession, this has nothing to do with RELEVANZ. Yes, maybe it should be changed, though it has nothing do to with the relevanz that something the royals do could have. What is it they could do without beeing ripped to pieces by exactly the same media that are asking for more relevanz?

Nice try to bring Diana along with the picture of her holding the hand of an aids patient. What is the difference to a photo op of CP Mary speaking, laughing with a dissabled person? Please explain the difference and no please don't tell us that Mary tries to hard. Why are you so sure that Diana was so sincere and Mary isn't? What is the proof? Maybe you could have mentioned in your book Marys involvment with her patronages that tackle some quite serious problems of people suffering with psychic problems or who are dissabled and so on (the list of her patronage is easily available, it doesn't matter if people think it's nothing else than a case for photo ops, if yes what is the difference between Mary and for example Princess Alexandra or Princess Diana?) instead of focusing on a alledgedly teary outburst of Mary because Frederik danced with an old flame?

I know that Miss Hauens comments are really old news. Whats with your book that you promote at this board? Isn't it mostly a collection of rumours and gossip sometimes half a century old? Partly backed up by interviews that are nearly as old as this gossips and rumours?

For example Frederiks "terrible" childhood. How old are this reports 30 - 35 years? Yes he himself has stated that his childhood wasn't a bed of roses, how old was he when he did so? My childhood wasn't a bed of roses too. Sometimes I've criticised my parents too, quite harshly, bid deal! Yes I'm still somewhat suffering. Though I'm still able to have a successful life and no I don't hate my parents and no my family isn't disfunctional, it's simple part of a non perfect life. Show me someone perfect and I show you a complete hypocrite. So, what does it say about Frederik and the royal family? A more or less honest outburst, exactly what the media asking for. And what are the media doing with something like this? Dekades later?

Frederiks many friends who told you something! Hm, how many are many? What kind of friends are this and more important; how old are this informations? And why have "they" given this informations to you? Frederik should have married Katja Storkholm? If he would have done so, maybe he would also have to face a divorce, like his younger brother who was married with the perfect princess for Denmark? Katja is history and nothing else, it doesn't have any purpose to bring her up. Sadly this isn't the only thing that should have been left in the past, unmentioned.

Ah ja and at the end of the day everything is Marys fault! If someone is searching of a quilty one, I think the blame have to be laid down in front of Margrethe who wasn't/isn't able to provide Denmark with a suitable heir, or has to be laid down in front of Frederik who wasn't/isn't able to get his act together, have given in and thrown everything away. Of course if Frederik would have done so, there wouldn't have been a divorce between Joachim and Alexandra, at least thats my opinion. How would the Dane have reactede to something like this? The opinion of quite a few Danes willed to express them at message boards isn't very flattering toward Joachim. Again different people have different opinions. Which part is the majority?

At least, I'm very well aware of the the fact that the danish royals aren't perfect. Nonetheless nothing I read in this thread can convince me that there is anything really usefull coming out of a certain book or this discussion.

[GlitteringTiaras]

Knock of the snark, jabs, and overall intolerant tone in some of these recent posts. Is it really that hard to have a mature civil discourse between to opposing sides?!!

I'll answer for some of you: No. No, it is not.

If you cannot handle this type of this discourse then do not post in this topic. It is that simple.

[Elspeth]

Originally Posted by Villemann

I - respectfully - disagree. It is so easy to always blame the media, but history has given us examples of royals, who managed to put their causes in the spotlight instead of their designer handbags! Who can forget Diana, Princess of Wales, when she shook that AIDS patients hand in 1987?

Actually, you'd be surprised how many. She herself, according to Patrick Jephson's book and other sources, was upset when she was trying to publicise landmine issues and the media only wanted to talk about her latest boyfriend. It was sort of ironic, given how she'd previously used her high media profile to wear a spectacular dress to some event or other and thereby ensure that a major speech of Charles's about an important social issue was comprehensively ignored by the media.

Given the choice of highlighting some worthy cause or fanning the flames of a real or manufactured scandal, it seems that significant elements of the press will do the latter in a heartbeat. Which is probably why Mary's charity activities get less column inches than her designer frocks or Fred's sailing. And if she stopped wearing designer frocks, no doubt those same elements of the media would be far more interested in that than in the causes she was championing.

[Lilla]

Originally Posted by Villemann

No implying here. I am saying, unless CP Mary gets her act together and her husband sorted out, her son will never be king of Denmark. That is my personal opinion, of course.

Of cause you are intitled to have an opinion like that. But I do think you are seeing ghosts where there is non. In my opinion it will take a lot more to put an end to the danish monarcy then Mary wearing desinger-cloth. A nation just dosn't throw 1000 years of history aside because of a handbag

And when it comes to Frederik, I can't find any reason why he should be sorted out in any way - not by him self - and certainly not by his wife. In my opinion this is not the business of a wife - regardless if one is marryed to a crownprince or not.

[Aurora810]

I have always had the impression that the Danish royals are rather popular with the Danes. I think it's easy to pick out things that the Danes don't do well or to criticize their work schedule. I suppose that is easy no matter what the monarchy. But the fact remains that only Denmark needs to be happy with the Queen and her descendents.

Personally, if I'm being completely honest when I venture into the Danish threads it's most likely to see what they are wearing. They really don't interest me beyond their clothes/style. And I certainly don't even need an endless amount of pictures just a few is enough for me! I don't know why but I have a hard time connecting with them. I would prefer to see them doing some different types of things(I prefer to be vague so as not to offend anyone). But they are Denmark's monarchy and if Denmark tolerates them that hey who am I to say anything. After all, I'm an American, my opinion means squat to the Danes.

Bottomline, we all connect with different royals on different levels. They don't seem to do things and be involved with things that really capture my attention so I tend to keep some distance. That and the fact that I find the Danish threads hard to communicate in.

However, I'm thinking that the Danes are one of the more solid monarchy's out there. I really would not think of them as a national waste. I'm actually surprised by some of the things said in this thread.

[grevinnan]

Frederik does not want to be King. He has never wanted to be the Crown Prince ( at least not the part that means he'll take over after mom). He has never made any secret of how he feels about his role. Unfortunately, the danish royal family does not have a back-up plan in case the firstborn son does not like his destiny. The Danes will some day have to decide if they want a King that does want the job and is also ill prepared for it. Frederik has a very large responsibility on his shoulders - either grow up, get prepared and accept fate or possibly be the final straw that ends monarchy in Denmark.

[Mandy]

Please back up your opinions with links to reliable published reports or your post will be deleted. Thanks!

Mandy
Danish Forum Moderators

[Madame Royale]

Its also been said for many years that Queen Elizabeth would have rather lived the country life of a county Duchess, but the fact remains that that wasn't meant to be and she is Queen. You can only face the task before you when your time beckons.

Frederik has a very large responsibility on his shoulders

And there would bo no one who knows this better than Frederik.

either grow up, get prepared and accept fate or possibly be the final straw that ends monarchy in Denmark.

I do have a chuckle when I see statements like this because how any of us can even imagine the responsibility or burden of hereditary monarchy, and further give instruction as to how someone should feel about their succession, and how they should deal with it, is incredibly...well, pompous.

How can we say he hasn't accepted his fate? We can't. How can we say he isn't preparing? We can't. And how does one prepare for one's parent to die?

I'd have thought his focuss should be on his current position, and not that of his mothers, as some would here propose. You cross that bridge when you come to it.

Denmark is no better or worse off, than any other constitutional monarchy. They all face various accusations and are from time to time, seen as pointless.

"Frederik can't talk properly and likes boating", "Charles is an eccentric gentleman who enjoys building villages and buying rare sheep, "Felipe is as interesting as a cardboard box" and "Philippe is politically outspoken and arrogant".

Goes on and on...

[Villemann]

Originally Posted by Elspeth

Actually, you'd be surprised how many. She herself, according to Patrick Jephson's book and other sources, was upset when she was trying to publicise landmine issues and the media only wanted to talk about her latest boyfriend. It was sort of ironic, given how she'd previously used her high media profile to wear a spectacular dress to some event or other and thereby ensure that a major speech of Charles's about an important social issue was comprehensively ignored by the media.

Given the choice of highlighting some worthy cause or fanning the flames of a real or manufactured scandal, it seems that significant elements of the press will do the latter in a heartbeat. Which is probably why Mary's charity activities get less column inches than her designer frocks or Fred's sailing. And if she stopped wearing designer frocks, no doubt those same elements of the media would be far more interested in that than in the causes she was championing.

But Diana persisted! Today, when you mention landmines, AIDS care, leprocosy, Diana's name springs up immediately. She made a difference. CP Mary is trying to do the same - using the exact same words "Making a difference! in a speech recently - but the spotlight is still on Frederik's intimate chat with a young woman the other night, Mary's clothes style during the recent trip to Miami etc. etc. It is not all the medias fault. If the royals gave us - I include myself here, because I am a journalist albeit not working for a publication - something worthwhile, something out-of-the-box, something surprising, unexpected, whatever, maybe we would pay a bit more attention to their causes instead of always focusing on their looks and private lives. But why do we a write about Mary's hair style? Because people want to read about it! There is nothing wrong in that, but is that all there is to the Danish monarchy these days. Has it become a beauty contest?

[ricarda]

So, it's all about giving the media some extraordinary stories?
worthwhile = out-of-the-box = surprising = unexpected?

Please Mary play the same media game Diana played! Give the journalists some secret informations! Produce as many scandals as you can! And then, please let yourself be killed in a car-crash, so the media can start idolizing you! Please, please, please, please, please....Apparently that's the only way you can make the Danish monarchy worth it.

(Seriously: I didn't dislike Diana, in fact I was completely uninterested in her and only took notice when she died, but the first 2 things that come to my mind when I hear her name is scandal and self-promotion. I think she seriously damaged the monarchy and would have damaged it even more if she hadn't died. Besides, I find the media disgustingly hypocritical when it comes to Diana.)

[Madame Royale]

So, it's all about giving the media some extraordinary stories?
worthwhile = out-of-the-box = surprising = unexpected?

It would appear so. Seems some wish to turn the institution into a celebrity circus. How shameful.

[biboquinhas]

Well I think nowadays living monarchy only exists because it is a very good way to divulge a Contry life and to captivate more people to visit and to live in that place! Only because of this. Royal family is kind of celebrity and is treated like so, they don't have legal power they don't rule a country, they are just nice and beautiful figures who help a country to become more known. They need to give the media some beautiful pictures because that is what people like and that helps to divulge a country.

[Amelia]

But Diana persisted!

And she failed, when she died the press cared more about where she was going with her boyfriend than what she had being trying to do with landmines. The attention that she was trying to bring to landmines was being totally overshadowed by her personal life.

Today, when you mention landmines, AIDS care, leprocosy, Diana's name springs up immediately. She made a difference

No she didn't. She made peple feal like soemone cared at the time but there is no after effect felt today to the work Diana did when she was alive in the general public. Sure those who she worked with probably have fond memories of it, but the same could be said for those who work with Mary. And as for her name springing up immediately, hardly and when it does usually it is as a result of those who have an agenda - it is used against Camilla, it is used against Charles, it is used to prop up her sons when they make stupid mistakes, it is used when a prince somewhere marries, when another princess carries out charity work but very rarely is her name used as a standalone tribute to charity work she carried out when alive.

It is not all the medias fault.

Of course it is all the medias fault, you write the articles - it is your choice what you put in them. People want to read about Mary's hairstyle, then write about it but it doesn't have to be the main focus of the article. Write about the cause too, about what the point of the visit, the people they meet. Find a balance between the two.

[Madame Royale]

Well I think nowadays living monarchy only exists because it is a very good way to divulge a Contry life and to captivate more people to visit and to live in that place! Only because of this. Royal family is kind of celebrity and is treated like so, they don't have legal power they don't rule a country, they are just nice and beautiful figures who help a country to become more known. They need to give the media some beautiful pictures because that is what people like and that helps to divulge a country.

I believe the interest a royal family generates, is reflective of the fact they are a link between the past and the present. The foremost symbol of a Kingdom or Grand Duchy which remains, the essence of that nation's societal hierarchy and the embodiment of political grandeur. The inherent representatives of an institution which is unmatched by any other.

Their stateliness, an aphrodisiac for the ever inquisitive and captivated public. It is pathetic, however, that it is all too often written about like it were a 'tinsel town' amusement.

[biboquinhas]

I think it is almoust a beauty contest yes!!! Just scroll down the Royal house of fashion and read it!! But if it wasn't like that people wouldn't care for the Royal family at all and would't speak about it!

[Madame Royale]

Has it become a beauty contest?

It largely becomes what the media makes it, regrettably. Media is the sensationalist perpetrator.

[Villemann]

Well, like it or not, the media is the tool with which the royal house communicates with its subjects. Without the media, today's royals would be nothing. The palace uses the media just as much as the media uses the palace!
I disagree completely in regard to the impact Diana had. She DID make a difference. Her legacy is not just about the car crash and the dodgy lover. She was - and still is - a princess, who mattered to people.

[Elspeth]

Yes, but she didn't matter to people because of the causes she espoused - Princess Anne has a far longer record of charitable activities and so does Prince Charles - she mattered to people because of the emotional connection and the image. The causes were much farther down the list, and as Amelia said, the media weren't wildly interested in them except to (a) upstage Prince Charles and (b) lend some weight to Diana's image.

These days when people talk about AIDS, Diana is hardly ever mentioned. Yes, she's still identified with landmines, but again at the time she was trying to publicise the landmine problem, the people around her were saying how frustrating it was that the accompanying media folk only wanted to talk about her relationship with Dodi.