I must begin by saying I have not been one to object to Sofia because of her past career. In many ways an actress is pre-eminently suited to take on the 'role' of a royal: they will not suffer complexes because they are being looked at, jibed at or photographed endlessly. That's a big plus. As an actress Sofia Helqvist may have made more daring choices than Grace Kelly (say) but both had pretty similar racy personal pasts (though, in fact, we don't really know much about Sofia's personal past in the way we do about Grace's). In fact, in that regard, Sofia may be more 'innocent' than Grace ever was in that way. So it goes.
I have always had reservations about Sofia for other reasons (than career choices). Those reservations still stand but that doesn't mean I can't share in her joy on such a special day for her, or wish her well. I do. She won. Well done.
No, the wedding was no disappointment, the Scandinavians can display some serious royal grandeur. But in another debate on this forum a poster wrote "The monarchy is tradition, honor, exemplariness, gestures ...". Then seeing Ms Hellqvist -pardon, Princess Sofia of Sweden- splashed out in bikini, on the internet, in internatonial magazines and being described as "Real Life Soap Star and Bikini Model", that makes my loyal royal heart cringe. I am often slashed on this board for being oldfashioned in my desire that royals should go for the longer term interests of their monarchy and marry "suitable" partners.
I am nonplussed.
I hardly know where to begin. Any sense of history should wash away any notion that royalty has been a bastion of 'honor and exemplariness'. It's only as royalty has ceased to have power (and been dependent on the good graces of the populace) that such notions have taken hold. (Perhaps since the French Revolution?) Basically royals behave themselves to avoid being toppled, but historically they have been the most riotous of the riotous generally. Their misdeeds more-or-less kept carefully hidden from public view in puritanical times.
Anyone, from the man in the street to the lady behind her laptop somewhere in Australia sees that it does not matter at all. You were the personal sports instructor of the Crown Princess? Welcome His Royal Highness Prince Daniel of Sweden! You were a bikini model and real life soap actress? Welcome Her Royal Highness Princess Sofia of Sweden! You were an unwed mother with a son from a guy somewhere? Welcome Her Royal Highness Princess Mette-Marit of Norway! You were splashed out on the Spanish TV-screens, day in, day out, reading the news? Welcome Her Majesty The Queen of Spain... suddenly you are no longer a journalist, a sports instructor, a bikini model or a waitress in a bar but a "Royal Highness"....
This clearly offends you. As an American it all seems quite natural. As the saying goes here, 'anyone can be president'. In theory they can. There are no genetic demarcations, except where racism and such still breed ancient hatreds.
People start to see that it is all just theatre and that apparently the standards of what was once seen as "an acceptable choice" have immensely lowered. It is clear that the monarchies, delivering heads-of-states some of the world's most developed and modern countries has become more and more a vaudeville, a real life soap opera avant la lettre.
History would help you here. It has always been a 'soap opera', and worse. The Spanish Royal Family's history rivals that of England. The only difference is that Spain did not have a Shakespeare to enshrine the drama in verse. Standards 'immensely lowered'? I am speechless.
The people you have mentioned have been ambitious, intelligent and survivors of a rough-and-tumble world. They are about as equivalent to a knight who in past centuries was able to slay his way to a dukedom, but was 'just barely' able to make his mark on a written document, and certainly could never have read the document. You fail to distinguish between avenues of achievement. Bloodline seems to be the sole criteria (for you) cum a certain (very recent) code of restricted behavior.
Popularity? Queen Mathilde of the Belgians, her mother a Countess Komorowska, her sister a Marchioness Pallavicini, her another sister a Baroness Janssen and her brother a Count d'Udekem d'Acoz, all firmly rooted in the aristocracy, hits all popularity polls as the most beloved royal in Belgium. So being from a traditonal backgroud is not at all a hindrance. Look at Lady Diana Spencer, a deeply blue-blooded lady dubbed "The People's Princess". I think people somehow deep inside will see a Lady Spencer, a Countess d'Udekem d'Acoz or a Countess de Lannoy as more "suitable material", but tja... we are "democratic" and "politic correct" aren't we? Who claims that a daughter of one of the Grandes, of a Duque there or a Conde there would never be "popular". I bet she could easily outpower the bleak and uninspiring Letizia Ortiz.
This paragraph speaks for itself and is an example of why royalty (in the end) must be done away with in total one day. Even it's vestiges promote this kind of thinking. Not good. That you place Lady Diana Spencer as 'suitable material' because you think she was 'blue-blooded' sadly reveals how tortured this thinking is.
Queen Máxima was the star of the day, in a fantastic dress and sporting great Jewels from the Orange-Nassau collection. Still, every time I see her, I can not suppress a feeling: "Girl, you are no royal... you
play, you
pretend that you are royal." I have exactly the same feeling with Sophia Hellqvist: "Girl, you are standing next to the wrong dude, you can
not stand in the shadow of a Sybilla von Sachsen-Coburg, of a Margaret Connaught, of a Victoria von Baden!"
They won a lottery, in a sense, and I can be happy for them. (I myself would never want a royal life, though). The structure of my social/cultural world does not rise or fall on whether a Swedish prince marries an actress or the daughter of an old aristocratic family, thankfully. Better they are marrying who has shown moxie in the world, because that's what it all was about anyway in the past. Daniel Westling is the knight who won glory in a war, except his glory was in the war of financial success. Same for Letizia and Maxima. (I have to disagree about Maxima. I have a suspicion she could have risen to be a CFO on her own steam had she not met the Prince. Letizia, too, is a woman of accomplishment, whose own 'bloodline' can only benefit her royal children).
