Engagement of Prince William to Catherine Middleton: November 16, 2010


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
Why are they telling us they won't have servants? I don't care one way or the other who has servants, nannies, cooks and candlestick makers. It just sounds disingenuious, to the point of laughter really! If William does not want to be royal, he should, as someone earlier said, give it up and become common.

angieuk said:
Talbot Church: 'Mini-wedding' sets royal cat among pigeons - Commentators, Opinion - The Independent
Click to expand...

My gosh, what a snarly article. Perhaps they will have a long engagement, taking them into 2013...sure, it would break another royal "rule" of engagement length, but so what!
 
Last edited:
KittyAtlanta said:
Why are they telling us they won't have servants? I don't care one way or the other who has servants, nannies, cooks and candlestick makers. It just sounds disingenuious, to the point of laughter really! If William does not want to be royal, he should, as someone earlier said, give it up and become common.
Click to expand...

Because most people would expect them to have servants due to their royal status?
Besides, who says that William does not want to be royal?
 
That article is ridiculous. It looks very much like they are the ones trying to stir the manure. They have hardly left anyone out of that article .... tomorrow's installment will include Andrew, Beatrice, Eugenie etc., and I'm sure Prince Philip must have something to say on all those subjects as well.
 
3 important dates to note :
- the ceremony of the BAFTA (Prince william is Patron and present it) due on 13 february (sure Kate will be there and it will be her first gala show, like the one where Diana with princess Grace made her first glorious apparance)
- Trooping the colour : on 11 June
- Ceremony of the Garter : 13 June
 
:previous:

Yes, and Easter at Windsor Castle is just days before and would be a good opportunity for Kate to appear with William ahead of the festivities!
 
Iluvbertie said:
This is more evidence, to me, that William simply doesn't want to be royal.
Click to expand...

I really don't think that living without servants really has anything to do with wanting to be royal. Take for example one of my favorite actors.. Alan Alda. One thing that really impressed me about him was the fact that even though at the peak of his "celebrity" this man was never in the tabloids, was not part of the Hollywood party set, and when not working, flew home to be with his wife and family. It didn't make him any less of a good actor. This is the same I think with William and Kate. Living on their own while in Wales will not in any way impede on what duties and roles William and Kate do perform as royals. This situation is also very much probably just a temporary thing. If I remember the picture of Harewood right (the estate that is supposedly being built for William and Kate), its huge and there's no way they'd be able to live there without a full staff on board.

It impresses me that in these depressed economic times to see royals that are self sufficient and don't expect everything handed to them on a silver platter.. literally. Doing this at the beginning of their marriage also gives a clear concise message to the world around them that when they are on their own time, its private.
 
It's not definite that Kate will attend the BAFTA ceremony. And seeing as she'll be married by the time of the Trooping of the colour, Garter ceremony and don't forget Ascot those will be he first real events.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
KittyAtlanta said:
Why are they telling us they won't have servants?
Click to expand...
It wasn't an announcement from Clarence House or from William and Kate directly, therefore it is mostly likely someone with inside knowledge that leaked this information to the press or it's speculation based on their current lifestyle. Who knows? I believe it's true based on their current living situation and their enjoyment of looking after themselves as much as possible. There is nothing disingenuous about that.

What does not needing live in servants have to do with not wanting to be Royal? He doesn't have a choice of being Royal since he was born to it and he is second in line to the throne. However, while he is serving in the RAF he does have the choice to enjoy a sense of normalcy, which is what he is doing. Since they do not live in a style or home that requires a full time staff, why waste the money? Again, I really don't understand the criticism.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think a lot of what is written these days is literally just imagined, pulled out of the behinds of various journalists desperate for a story who want something/anything to write that may sound vaguely plausible yet has no basis in fact but gives them a potential point of interest/conflict between people or some sort of controversy.

I mean with William specifically he's had a few stories over the years paint him as the reluctant Royal, a guy who just wants the normal life in the country or working in the military & just be left alone, not bothered with having servants etc, no title, no protocol, no media obligations etc etc. And then recently there have been stories that say he wants to keep his "Prince William" title after marriage & is adament that he wants normal protocol thrown out the window so his wife gets her own Princess title. At the same time also supposedly this laid-back, reluctant Royal is determined that his wife will have proper order of precedence within the family & the right people will curtsey etc etc. I mean those sound like 2 different people right there, 1 with little interest in Royal-ness & the other consumed with the nitty-gritty of it & fussy about whether his new wife will get the right recognition of her Royal status & all that jazz. I mean it just doesn't go together in the slightest & just stinks of some writers out there basically just making it up to suit whatever angle they are going for in their story/depiction of people.

Also I think we have to keep in mind that when Charles/Diana got married, Charles was the heir to the throne, he had been the heir since like the age of 3, grew up being the next in line & so had his entire life as the direct heir to the throne. William has spent his life as the heir to the heir, totally different in terms of what is expected between an heir & an heir to an heir. I mean William could quite easily be waiting almost another 20 years til he's the heir & even then another 20 years on top of that til he actually ascends to the throne. Charles/Diana circumstances are different to William/Kate & so expectations to what an heir to the throne & his wife do & what an heir to an heir & his wife do are different in my opinion.
 
Iluvbertie said:
This is more evidence, to me, that William simply doesn't want to be royal.
Click to expand...
You hit the nail on the head...I totally agree.
Sometimes I think he doesn't take his position seriously. If he wants to be normal he should give his title to Harry and move somewhere and live like a normal person. I don't care how much menial work they do they'll never be normal, they need to just get over it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Again - how and when does he give the impression that he doesn't take his position serious and - who says that he wants to be normal/doesn't want to be a royal?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
:previous: Seems to me people come to their conclusions on whether or not they believe certain tabloid articles about the BRF on whether or not they care for them.

If you don't care for William or Camilla than every negative article written in the Daily Mail, the Sunday Express is true. And the source is always reliable Palace sources. But no one who ever goes on record with a name. And suddenly every thing that Richard Kay and Katie Nicholls says is the truth. Unless its not.

Let's see now William doesn't want to be royal, Snoop Dogg is not performing at the Wedding (after it was printed that he would), Earl Spencer will speak at the wedding, the list goes on and on.

How many times in the past where we told that Kate had met the Queen(several times) and it turns out they met for the first time at Peter Phillips wedding?
 
Skippy said:
Again - how and when does he give the impression that he doesn't take his position serious and - who says that he wants to be normal/doesn't want to be a royal?
Click to expand...

If you look at my post above you'll see that I said I "think" he doesn't take his position seriously. That's just my opinion. I'm just on the outside looking in and that's how I feel about him at times, not all the time, but at times.
 
Skippy said:
Again - how and when does he give the impression that he doesn't take his position serious and - who says that he wants to be normal/doesn't want to be a royal?
Click to expand...


I get the impression from his actions. When on show he looks like he wants to be anywhere else and he isn't as good at acting as his mother was from Day 1 or genuine like his father has been all his life.

It is an impression from watching him, listening to him in interviews etc. He doesn't want to do it and would walk away if he could.

Harry gives the impression that he understands what it means and embraces the role far better.
 
Could that not just be symptomatic of their roles & the different pressures upon them. William KNOWS his role & the unique pressure & seriousness that comes with that, he knows what his life will eventually become & has people around him preparing him for that role & cannot avoid it. Harry whilst also having some similar pressure in the sense of being a senior royal, has much more freedom as he almost can choose what he does in his role as a Royal. He can be very active or maybe more private/reclusive if he wanted, he can properly pursue his career in the military & can almost choose for himself what he does with his life & when, William doesn't have that choice & freedom in the same way. I think that's maybe why Harry seems more relaxed & at ease as he's doing what he wants to do & when he wants to do it whilst with William whether he does or doesn't want to do it, he HAS to do it. I personally think William does accept his role but sees it as something he has plenty of time to grow into & develop, especially as he isn't yet the heir, & I think he wants to take any time he can, whilst he can, to have a bit of a life as free from the restraints of his future role as possible. I think he'll slowly increase his Royal Duties in the coming years & take on a more active Royal role, especially once his time with the Search & Rescue is done.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I find William to be quite engaging during his interviews/public appearances, and I have never gotten the impression that he doesn't understand or take his duties seriously.
 
William does have some say in his life after all he picks the charities he chooses to support. I think that he does seem reluctant in his role which is something I believe he has acknowledged in the past. By now he should be coming to terms with who he is. The palace certainly seems to regard him as the star of the show and would probably bend over backwards to please him if he would speak-up about anything that bothers him. In that sense it would be incredibly easy to be him because he would never be in a situation where he would just have to get on with it.

I may be in the minority here but I feel Harry has the more difficult role because he actually has to define who he is while being ever ready to take over if his brother steps down despite that he does not appear to receive the same training as William does. Although Harry is luckier because he seems to have inherited his mother's personality when it comes to greeting the public. I read in an article, written by Robert Jobson for Majesty magazine, that Diana used to call him GKH for Good King Harry because she thought his personality was more suited for the top job. Then again can you ever really trust a journalist. :lol:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
As far as media interviews go, I don't think he enjoys interviews in general unless it's about the charities he is supporting. You can't really blame him if he doesn't care for prying questions on his personal life, which most interviewers tend to target. I think he does a pretty good job of swatting the questions away with fairly good humor from the interviews I have seen. The media interest comes with his position and is intense because of who he is, but it doesn't mean he has to enjoy it.

I also don't get the impression that he wants to walk away from his duty and obligations. Like his father, his destiny is sealed and he will meet it when the time comes. However, that is many years off yet and at this point in his life, he is entitled to enjoy what freedom and privacy he can, while he can. He is still only 28 years old and has quite a few years to grow into his future role.

I don't get the sense that it's easier to be in William's position at all. He hold the future of the monarchy in his hands and therefore the expectations from the RF and the public are much higher. He may be allowed a certain latitude at the moment while he is serving in the RAF, however when his time is up there, he will be expected to get on with it and start taking on much more responsibilities in preparing for his future role.

Harry on the other hand will never be expected to take Williams place unless William were to die before he produces an heir. Harry is free to make his life what he wants to make of it. IMO, Harry is more wild and carefree than William, but I don't see that this is a personality that fits well into the role of a Monarch. William is more serious and reserved, but he has a fun sense of humor as well. He reminds me very much of the Queen in that respect. When William's time comes to ascend the throne, I think he will do the job very very well.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I have to wonder if the difference we see in the two is just a case of natural personalties. If you think back to seeing early video of the two, Harry was more rough and tumble and William was quietly curious. IMO, they have the stereotypic "first child", "second child" behaviors. William is more reserved, and quiet and Harry is more "out there" and more forthcoming.
 
William has embraced his role with enthusiasm these past few years and I don't see any fear that he will ever step aside. Albeit Harry has expressed his dislike of England and his preference for other occupations not suitable for a royal. At one time during his gap year he said he wanted to be a professional polo player.

Prince Harry Has Surfer Dreams - Good Deeds, Prince Harry, Prince William : People.com

Then too I believe William is marrying a woman he deems perfect for the role of his Queen by his side.
 
Princess of Durham said:
I have to wonder if the difference we see in the two is just a case of natural personalties. If you think back to seeing early video of the two, Harry was more rough and tumble and William was quietly curious. IMO, they have the stereotypic "first child", "second child" behaviors. William is more reserved, and quiet and Harry is more "out there" and more forthcoming.
Click to expand...


I have to say that in my own family, there is myself and my sister and we are very similar in that respect to William and Harry. I am the oldest and she's the youngest, and I've always been very introverted, very shy, and very to myself whereas my sister has always been very boisterous, very extroverted and very exuberant. With my parents, they are both the younger of their families' two children and it's the same thing. My uncles are both very moody and can be withdrawn, while my parents are the exact opposite.
 
I don't know that William has done enough to say that he will make a good king.

As for their personalities we only know what the media gives us and they seem awfully keen to portray William as the "perfect" one and Harry as the "awful" one. I remember watching a documentary on Princess Margaret and they said that she once mentioned that if the Queen was everything good then she was everything bad. That still goes on today. For example: William was drinking at that same club that Harry was drinking at but you only ever heard about the naughty things Harry was doing.
(referring to Harry's scandal) Although, I think that Harry's ability to stand up to the controversy he has caused in his life has served him better than William because the day that William does something wrong he will really have the media raining down on him.

Interesting side note I don't think that William certainly has put a foot wrong too often publicly. Does he have that good of judgement? Does the media or his family cover up for him? I don't think anyone can say for certain on that topic.

Harry also isn't all that carefree. He certainly doesn't seem that way when he is in the military or doing charity events. I get the perception that he isn't valued for the stuff he tries to do because he is the one doing them.

William also isn't the only one who holds the royal family in his hands. Harry also has duties in that respect given his popularity and his ranking in the family. I understand that while some people think William has it tougher I disagree. I think the royal family holds him in higher esteem because he is the "heir." The Queen Mother reportedly used to ignore Harry in favor of William when they were both in the same room together. Harry also doesn't appear to be receiving the same training as William is receiving to take over the top job. Leaving him significantly impaired if he were forced to takeover. I only hope that the royal family has learned their lesson from when Prince Albert, the future King George VI, had to takeover and I don't believe that he had the training for it prior to the day he got the job. Then again you could probably argue that all the role really needs is media training and Harry has that in spades.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't see that William gets a pass on anything from the press. Why would he? They don't care if he is the heir to the heir anymore than they cared that Charles is THE heir. If they slip up, then they are fair game and what juicier morsel than the future King? William is well aware of that having seen what his parents went through. Harry has made some poor choices that have put him front and center in the media's bulls eye.

I didn't say that When holds the Royal family in his hands, I said he holds the future of the Monarchy in his hands as 2ND in line to the throne. Harry is 3rd, but only until William has an heir. Prince Charles is not going to step down in favor of William and William is not going to step down in favor of Harry. Only the death will shift the current positions where training may be necessary. I think William has been groomed since childhood in preparation for his future role as King, but I don't know how much official training he has been given as 2ND in line and not the current heir. I don't see that Harry is a factor at this point.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Both William and Harry have had enough training to do the job as they are both now eligible, and William certainly has served, as Counsellors of State - the people who actually do the job whenever the Queen is out of the country.
 
Royal Wedding street parties could be shelved as million plan exodus abroad - Telegraph

It had been billed as a chance to recapture the magic of wedding of the Prince Charles and Lady Diana, with thousands of street parties up and down the country.

But so many Britons are intending to take advantage of the extra royal wedding bank holiday by taking trips abroad that many communities are shelving plans for outdoor get-togethers because of fears of low turnouts.
 
wbenson said:
Royal Wedding street parties could be shelved as million plan exodus abroad - Telegraph

It had been billed as a chance to recapture the magic of wedding of the Prince Charles and Lady Diana, with thousands of street parties up and down the country.

But so many Britons are intending to take advantage of the extra royal wedding bank holiday by taking trips abroad that many communities are shelving plans for outdoor get-togethers because of fears of low turnouts.
Click to expand...

Ah but can you see the aftermath? In 20 years how many folks will be able to say "I was a Wills and Kate's wedding baby" :D

I really don't think that there will be that much of a mass exodus away from the goings on as much as there will be a swarm of folks heading to London for the wedding.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
New Person Here
Replies
4
Views
500
doro
doro
Blog Real
Education and Career of the Princess of Wales
Replies
1
Views
806
victor1319
V
LadyFinn
Crown Princess Victoria & Prince Daniel's Official Visit to UK: Nov 29-Dec 1, 2023
Replies
17
Views
3K
LadyFinn
LadyFinn
M
Laws of the House of Grimaldi
Replies
3
Views
458
Tatiana Maria
T
iceflower
Official Visit from Norway to Denmark: June 15 - 16, 2023
2
Replies
35
Views
6K
polyesco
P

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom