Wedding of William and Catherine: Suggestions and Musings

[claudia singer]

Help commemorate the Royal Wedding!

Hello everybody

I am a documentary and portrait photographer currently shooting a photo-story on the upcoming Royal Wedding of Prince William and Kate Middleton. I am looking to take portraits of ardent followers of the Royal Family for my photo-story which has interest from magazines in Switzerland, Germany and Brazil.
As a Swiss living in England, I am fascinated at how significant a social and cultural event this wedding will be for Britain and the wider world and would love to commemorate the occasion with photographs of people planning to join in the celebration.
If you are interested in participating, or would like any more information, please contact me by email: claudia@singer-leisinger.com.
Many thanks,
Claudia Singer

 

[KittyAtlanta]

I do think however as the world watches William and Catherine marry and gradually make their own mark in the world's view that they will be honored, respected and even loved for exactly who they are... themselves.

Osipi, I agree with the above paragraph extracted from your last post. However, I also believe that if the late PoW had NOT been William's mother, I believe this wedding would be a mere blip on the general radar; not on this forum, of course, which is an entirely different story.

-----------------------------------

Royal Wedding: Camilla talks publicly about stepdaughter-in-law to be Kate Middleton for the first time | Mail Online

Part of the article states "Camilla joined Kate and her parents, who are believed to be looking at moving into the Duchess's former home", the name of the farm I can't remember.

Since the article was simply a rehash of last month's news, this news caught my eye.

-----------------------------------------
As for where Diana would sit if she had been alive. Who knows? If she were alive, William might not be getting married. Who knows.

 

[Saragli]

Do we have any info on the events happening during the 3 day wedding celebration?

 

[muriel]

Wondered if you thought it the royal family will have a private dinner the evening before the wedding, at BP or CH - just the BRF and the gathered European royals

 

[melissaadrian]

Wondered if you thought it the royal family will have a private dinner the evening before the wedding, at BP or CH - just the BRF and the gathered European royals

If it is said to be a three day event, I'd assume so. All we have heard is about the three events happening in one day. The ceremony, the some what smaller reception held by the queen and then the much smaller dance held by Prince Charles, all on the same day.

 

[ghost_night554]

This is probably a particularly dumb question but to those of you who were around for Diana and Charles' wedding or even Andrew and Fergie were press details announced ahead of time? Like for example how much coverage is allowed and so on. I know so far we know who has the rights for the footage inside the Abbey and we know a rival network is trying to get exclusive coverage of the balcony appearance but do we get like a press release explaining all that in due time or is it more like a slow and gradual process of details leaking out.

 

[KittyAtlanta]

I was around for C & D and A & S, but I was oblivious to anything from the run-up. So I can't help.

 

[Osipi]

Osipi, I agree with the above paragraph extracted from your last post. However, I also believe that if the late PoW had NOT been William's mother, I believe this wedding would be a mere blip on the general radar; not on this forum, of course, which is an entirely different story.

I have to respectfully disagree with you here Kitty. The world loves a royal wedding and especially British ones. I'm tending to believe that this wedding would generate the same pandemonium no matter who William's mother happened to be. The only thing that would be missing is the comparisons with the late PoW.

 

[Sister Morphine]

Without Diana, there was no reason for Americans especially, to really give two figs about the BRF. She was young, she was pretty, she was personable, she was the media's dream. Her and her children were what people fixated on, not other members of the family. So if William's mother had been some other woman, I don't think that Americans (or anyone else, really) would be interested in his marriage, unless they were royal watchers or otherwise interested in royalty. It would in essence, be viewed the same as a royal marriage from nearly every other royal house in Europe.

 

[Marie of The Sea]

Looking back, rather far back, the wedding of Princess Elizabeth and Prince Philip was widely celebrated and got loads of coverage in America. The British Royals were popular in America for several reasons, their visits to the White House and of course the marriage between American Wallis Simpson and the Duke of Windsor, formerly King Edward VII.

Diana did draw universal interest to the British Royals and at the time, a new era in Royal reporting was slowly but surely emerging, styled after glam celebrity reporting. It had had been initiated by Lord Snowdon's flambouyant choreography of Prince Charles' Prince of Wales investiture rites at Caernarfon Castle in 1964.

True that William is popular for being Diana's son and Grandson of HM, as well as son of his father but he has carved out his own niche on the world stage and has masses of fans who don't recall his mother because they are quite young. His demeanor when going about his tasks has endeared him to those who were there or watched the videos. He has a magnetism, a humility and a warmth that lead to devotion to his causes and admiration for his selfless career.

 

[Zonk]

I respectfully disagree.

Americans have always had a fascination for royalty. That goes back to Edward VIII, the tour made by the new King George VI and Queen Elizabeth after the Abdication, Queen Elizabeth II, the Prince of Wales and Diana. Always. Now it does waver time to time in regards to interest but the interest is always there. If that wasnt' the case, why would the American television networks cover the weddings of Edward/Sophie and Charles/Camilla.

Not to mention the press coverage. Yes, William being the son of Diana AND Charles is a biggie....but the American press is about the dollar. If Kate and William weren't sellers....they wouldn't keep putting them on the covers. There is a company that does a study of the popular magazines during the Year.....when People realizes for example that a certain subject is not a best seller...they are usually not on the cover anymore (i.e. Nicole Richie).

Now there is a certain segment of the American population that doesn't care and frankly probably wishes this wedding was over already, but I think that is the same for any country (England, Sweden during Victoria's wedding, the Netherlands, etc.). But that's the norm for any subject IMO.

And frankly talking about if anyone would care about this wedding if William wasn't Diana's son is a moot point. He is her son (and that of Charles as well).

But like everything, the level of interest is subjective.

 

[KittyAtlanta]

Glad to have served as the Devil's Advocate.

 

[Lady Ann]

Without Diana, there was no reason for Americans especially, to really give two figs about the BRF. She was young, she was pretty, she was personable, she was the media's dream. Her and her children were what people fixated on, not other members of the family. So if William's mother had been some other woman, I don't think that Americans (or anyone else, really) would be interested in his marriage, unless they were royal watchers or otherwise interested in royalty. It would in essence, be viewed the same as a royal marriage from nearly every other royal house in Europe.

Well I have to say this is th frist time in a long time that I don't agree with you..although I respect your opinion. the Prince of Wales at the time was a very popular single man, and eveyone wanted to know who he would marry... if he had picked Jane Smith, she would have created just as much media attention IMO... Even with out Diana Charles in his day was not like any other royal and his marrage no matter to whom it was with would have been on the same level..they would have made whom ever he married just as popular..

Also I have to agree with Zonk, The Duchess of Windsor was an earlier look into the BRF for alot of people over on this side of the pound.. she was the frist woman on the cover of Time magazine.... and soo on. I was taken with the history of Henry VIII and his six wives before I got into the later royals

 

[Jacknch]

I'm a little shocked at some of the statements coming out here and feel abit saddened at the thought that with the exception of William, Harry and their dead mother, Americans wouldn't give a care for the British royal family.

Oh well, are we ever going to discuss floral decorations for Westminster Abbey?!

 

[melissaadrian]

I respectfully disagree.

Americans have always had a fascination for royalty. That goes back to Edward VIII, the tour made by the new King George VI and Queen Elizabeth after the Abdication, Queen Elizabeth II, the Prince of Wales and Diana. Always. Now it does waver time to time in regards to interest but the interest is always there. If that wasnt' the case, why would the American television networks cover the weddings of Edward/Sophie and Charles/Camilla.

Not to mention the press coverage. Yes, William being the son of Diana AND Charles is a biggie....but the American press is about the dollar. If Kate and William weren't sellers....they wouldn't keep putting them on the covers. There is a company that does a study of the popular magazines during the Year.....when People realizes for example that a certain subject is not a best seller...they are usually not on the cover anymore (i.e. Nicole Richie).

Now there is a certain segment of the American population that doesn't care and frankly probably wishes this wedding was over already, but I think that is the same for any country (England, Sweden during Victoria's wedding, the Netherlands, etc.). But that's the norm for any subject IMO.

And frankly talking about if anyone would care about this wedding if William wasn't Diana's son is a moot point. He is her son (and that of Charles as well).

But like everything, the level of interest is subjective.

But why are they big money? Because he is Princess Diana's son. Because we all watched him growing up with his mum. Because we all watched as he and Harry walked behind her coffin on the way to the funeral, and saw the card with the word mummy written on it, so unroyal like, on her coffin. Americans have liked the scandal, the events that make the royals looks less prim and proper. Yes they show out for when royals are on state visits, to see the parade or such. But they tune in for the affairs, and the scandals, and all the drama. It is like a soap opera or a celebrity. The coverage for Sophie/Edward was not very big at all in North America. And Charles and Camilla is again Diana. Camilla is the villinous pug who stole prince charming away from the princess of hearts, or so the media made her out to be. Another scandal, which was played off, to boost ratings.

Diana made the royal family accessible. We watched her go to hospitals and play with children, and go to Disney land with her sons. The people didn't think her some formal prim and proper princess who just waves and looks pretty. She felt approachable, and like we could relate some how. And that has passed on to her sons. It is why so many people, even those who usually never care a damn about royal events and some might not even be able to name another monarchy out there, will tune in.

 

[Jacknch]

How about wedding rings? Any thoughts on whether William will wear a wedding ring?

 

[melissaadrian]

I'm a little shocked at some of the statements coming out here and feel abit saddened at the thought that with the exception of William, Harry and their dead mother, Americans wouldn't give a care for the British royal family.

Oh well, are we ever going to discuss floral decorations for Westminster Abbey?!

I'm sorry but why should they? Americans are not commonwealth citizens, they have no link to the royal family, since their war for independence. Some likely could not name anyone but the queen, they have trouble naming our prime minister and we live north of them. To a lot of Americans, not all Americans as there are obviously a number on this site, royalty are just celebrities nothing else.

 

[melissaadrian]

How about wedding rings? Any thoughts on whether William will wear a wedding ring?

Why wouldn't he wear a wedding ring? Men wear wedding rings, they are in fact part of a wedding ceremony. There was the whole article about how they were looking to use fair trade gold, instead of the traditional gold the royal family normally uses for their bands.

 

[Jacknch]

Why wouldn't he wear a wedding ring? Men wear wedding rings, they are in fact part of a wedding ceremony. There was the whole article about how they were looking to use fair trade gold, instead of the traditional gold the royal family normally uses for their bands.

I didn't see that article. I'd be impressed if they used fairtade gold. Maybe a mix of fairtrade and Welsh gold would be nice.

 

[MRSJ]

Why wouldn't he wear a wedding ring?

I know some men who don't wear a wedding ring purely because they know people know they 're married and don't want to wear the ring- wedding rings while encouraged are not manadatory becauses a ring is not s marriage .... I personally believe plp should as a sign of respect to their spouse if nothing else wear their rings but some plp don't....I am sure William will ....

 

[Jacknch]

I'm sorry but why should they? Americans are not commonwealth citizens, they have no link to the royal family, since their war for independence. Some likely could not name anyone but the queen, they have trouble naming our prime minister and we live north of them. To a lot of Americans, not all Americans as there are obviously a number on this site, royalty are just celebrities nothing else.

Sorry, my post was abit over dramatic wasn't it, and my shock is somewhat lessened now! I can see what Sister Morphine was getting at and I do generally agree with it. Except to say that in America and some European countries, far more programmes about royalty are aired than here in Britain. There must be more interest abroad in the BRF than at home.

 

[Jacknch]

This is probably a particularly dumb question but to those of you who were around for Diana and Charles' wedding or even Andrew and Fergie were press details announced ahead of time? Like for example how much coverage is allowed and so on. I know so far we know who has the rights for the footage inside the Abbey and we know a rival network is trying to get exclusive coverage of the balcony appearance but do we get like a press release explaining all that in due time or is it more like a slow and gradual process of details leaking out.

I thought the BBC was doing all the filming inside the Abbey and outside too but I don't recall this kind of thing being very much announced beforehand. I know that with previous televised royal weddings it's been shown on both BBC and ITV but I'm pretty sure it's all the same footage, just different presenters.

 

[melissaadrian]

I know some men who don't wear a wedding ring purely because they know people know they 're married and don't want to wear the ring- wedding rings while encouraged are not manadatory becauses a ring is not s marriage .... I personally believe plp should as a sign of respect to their spouse if nothing else wear their rings but some plp don't....I am sure William will ....

Most men who don't wear a ring, are either insecure about men wearing jewelry, or they want to flirt with women in bars and not be known as married. The excuse 'people know I'm married' one strangers don't and 2 do women not wear rings because people know they are married?

Grooms have wedding rings, it is part of the ceremony, a required part. I am pretty sure considering how formal the royal family is, and the fact he couldn't flirt in a bar if he tried, William will wear one.

 

[melissaadrian]

Sorry, my post was abit over dramatic wasn't it, and my shock is somewhat lessened now! I can see what Sister Morphine was getting at and I do generally agree with it. Except to say that in America and some European countries, far more programmes about royalty are aired than here in Britain. There must be more interest abroad in the BRF than at home.

Other than Tudors, which is a British/Canadian show, there aren't programs. yes they appear on things like entertainment tonight and such, and the rare documentry when some big event happens, like this wedding. And its because they are considered celebrities, not royalty. People like the juicy scandals, like they do with Brad Pitt or Tom cruise.

 

[abcdxyz]

How about wedding rings? Any thoughts on whether William will wear a wedding ring?

Don't the men of the BRF wear their wedding rings on their little finger under (behind?) their signet rings? I'm sure that I have seen Charles's ring there. But I don't know if William wears a signet ring?

See item #44:
60 things one must know about Prince Charles from 14 Nov 2008 - mirror.co.uk

 

[Hissy]

OK- a totally silly question, but as a wise man once said: If you're going to be a fanatic, you might as well make a good job of it!

When Diana married in St. Paul's, she walked down a red carpet.
Sarah Ferguson had a blue one in the Abbey.

Does the bride get to select the carpet, or does each church have a special color-coded carpet?
Or is it all a matter of chance?

(I can't believe I'm asking this!)

Hi Mirabel, I don't think that's a silly question. Sorry I haven't been on the forum for some days or I would have replied sooner! This was quite a while ago, and I was very little, but in an interview with Sarah and Andrew she said that the carpet was chosen to be blue I believe to be "naval" blue (for Andrew), and to be different than red because she has red hair, and the ring Andrew gave her was a ruby, so enough with the red, in other words. That's my memory of it. Sarah addressed it then so other people have wondered the same thing about the carpet obviously. I think the usual color is red for most churches, so unless William chooses differently, red it will probably be (just the floor is probably amazing too). Not sure if the Abbey had the blue carpet as a back up color, or if this was an added cost thing.

As a little kid I couldn't understand why the carpet wouldn't be purple (I equated royal with purple)!

 

[texankitcat]

Without Diana, there was no reason for Americans especially, to really give two figs about the BRF. She was young, she was pretty, she was personable, she was the media's dream. Her and her children were what people fixated on, not other members of the family. So if William's mother had been some other woman, I don't think that Americans (or anyone else, really) would be interested in his marriage, unless they were royal watchers or otherwise interested in royalty. It would in essence, be viewed the same as a royal marriage from nearly every other royal house in Europe.

Osipi, I agree with the above paragraph extracted from your last post. However, I also believe that if the late PoW had NOT been William's mother, I believe this wedding would be a mere blip on the general radar; not on this forum, of course, which is an entirely different story..

I have to disagree with both of you. The British Royal family has always been famous in the US and around the world. Millions watched when she married Prince Charles because the heir to the throne was getting married...not because he was marrying Diana, the most famous woman on the planet. The world....and I might add, the GROOM barely knew her. It wasn't Diana that made the Royal family famous. The Royal family made HER famous when she married the heir to the throne.

William getting married IS a big deal because he IS 2nd in line to the throne. Not because he is Diana's son. Diana doesn't factor into any part of my interest in this wedding other than sadness for him that his mother isn't there to share this special time. I remember when William was born, and I have watched with interest as both of these boys have survived the loss and grown up to become exceptional men. I am thrilled to be able to witness William marry such a lovely young woman who doesn't have a title and who he obviously respects and adores.

 

[Duchessmary]

Since William is a search and rescue pilot, he may choose not to wear a wedding band when he's working. Otherwise, I hope he does.

 

[Hissy]

Don't the men of the BRF wear their wedding rings on their little finger under (behind?) their signet rings? I'm sure that I have seen Charles's ring there. But I don't know if William wears a signet ring?

See item #44:
60 things one must know about Prince Charles from 14 Nov 2008 - mirror.co.uk

That was interesting to read about Charles. Did he really start wearing the ring Diana gave him again? Surprisingly nostalgic of him and nice.

Prince William has no signet ring on in the engagement photo at least. Prince Edward on his wedding photo just has the ring/rings on his little finger. Did the Queen give her children their signet rings? That was my understanding. So I assume William will wear at least the little finger style ring from Kate, or perhaps on his ring finger since he doesn't seem to already wear a signet ring?

 

[texankitcat]

Since William is a search and rescue pilot, he may choose not to wear a wedding band when he's working. Otherwise, I hope he does.

Not sure what being a search and rescue pilot would have to do with wearing a ring. His job is piloting the helicopter so that the crew can reach the person(s) needing assistance. A ring wouldn't interfere with handling a joystick and checking instruments.