Christian's Birthday Photos - Are Members' Expectations Realistic?

[Royal Darkness]

I read this (at Danish Royal Watchers Blog):

"It was their wish all along that Prince Christian's birthday was to be celebrated completely privately this year," the court's information manager Lis M. Frederiksen told Billed Bladet.

I understand it this way: No pictures this year!
So I stopped my expectations. It is their decision to celebrate the birthday privately and it is their decision not to present some pictures... So - I think - we must accept it. But we can be very happy, that we got pictures from Prince Christian's first day in "Kindergarten" and pictures from his first visit at Legoland, etc...

 

[grevinnan]

To celebrate a birthday in private and releasing photos of the little prince are two very different issues. The little prince is second in line to the throne and is not just your next door kid. Being royal brings lots of privilege and entitlements. It is not unrealistic to expect photos of the little birthday boy - they could have been taken anytime around the time of the birthday. The royal families will only be able to stay in their privileged position as long as people are interested in them and they are perceived as being useful for something. If they stay out of sight and mind there will be no reason for royals at all - they do not fill any critical roles . The roles they play today can easily be done by elected officials or done away with. The royals privacy needs to be protected but they also need to realize that they are "public" persons and must satisfy their countrymens curiosity as to what is going on. Today's royals are at the mercy of the voting public.

 

[UserDane]

To celebrate a birthday in private and releasing photos of the little prince are two very different issues. The little prince is second in line to the throne and is not just your next door kid. Being royal brings lots of privilege and entitlements. It is not unrealistic to expect photos of the little birthday boy - they could have been taken anytime around the time of the birthday. The royal families will only be able to stay in their privileged position as long as people are interested in them and they are perceived as being useful for something. If they stay out of sight and mind there will be no reason for royals at all - they do not fill any critical roles . The roles they play today can easily be done by elected officials or done away with. The royals privacy needs to be protected but they also need to realize that they are "public" persons and must satisfy their countrymens curiosity as to what is going on. Today's royals are at the mercy of the voting public.

But as various posters have already long ago in this thread pointed out: Pictures of Christian are fairly often released - more of him than of some of his 'collegues' in other countries. The fact that no pictures were released from the 15th October will in no way diminish public interest in them and thus pose no threat to their privileged position. The family do not stay out of sight and mind - we see lots of pictures of them on a regular basis. And I do not agree that the role they play can be done by elected officals - at least not the symbolic role they play in Denmark - that is closely related to the very tradition of a royal family. And they do realise that the public have a certain curiosity - which the various photo sessions during the past months clearly show.

I have to agree with the poster who said that this is a non-issue. If we hadn't seen pictures of Christian since the ones which were released on his 1st birthday, some of the above considerations might be valid. But that is not the case - far from it.

 

[Lilla]

To celebrate a birthday in private and releasing photos of the little prince are two very different issues. The little prince is second in line to the throne and is not just your next door kid. Being royal brings lots of privilege and entitlements. It is not unrealistic to expect photos of the little birthday boy - they could have been taken anytime around the time of the birthday. The royal families will only be able to stay in their privileged position as long as people are interested in them and they are perceived as being useful for something. If they stay out of sight and mind there will be no reason for royals at all - they do not fill any critical roles . The roles they play today can easily be done by elected officials or done away with. The royals privacy needs to be protected but they also need to realize that they are "public" persons and must satisfy their countrymens curiosity as to what is going on. Today's royals are at the mercy of the voting public.

Reading through the posts here on this thread gives a quit interesting pictures. Among those posters who can't se any issue in not releasing birthday pictures are alle the postes made by danes. There isn't a single post made by a dane which expresses disapointment. Those posts are made by posters from other countryes than Denmark. As longe as the danes are satisfyed - the DRF are doing what is expected.

 

[biboquinhas]

I miss seeing photos of this young little one!! Buaaaaaaaa

 

[Sister Morphine]

I honestly can't believe this thread is 5 pages long.


If the DRF do not want to release photos of Christian.....then they don't have to. It's as simple as that. They are not required to provide every Sally, Sue and Tom in the world a photo of their children. There will be plenty of opportunities in his coming years for photos of him to be released and fawned over by the general public. We should respect Fred and Mary's decision to keep some things in their family private instead of bemoaning their decision to do so. That's what it all boils down to -- respect. As Lilla pointed out above, the Danish members of this forum (so far) haven't expressed displeasure with this, so as long as the people that Fred and Mary will one day represent don't have an issue.....I don't see why anyone else should.

 

[acdc1]

I didn't know this thread could go on for this long. It's pretty simple: Mary and Frederik decided not to release photos this year. They had a private party, away from the glare of the cameras and just in a nice, comfortable family way. Those of you who have small children of your own, or know a small child, what would they do if, on their special day, they were made to pose in front of cameras, and maybe be frightened, all because you made them do it because someone from the internet would complain. And all you wanted was a small party. And you're followed around by cameras all the time, anyway. How would you and your child feel?

 

[GlitteringTiaras]

I don't have kids, but to answer your statement, "I didn't know this thread could go on for this long."

Simple: Members are expressing their varying opinions. As a result, this topic has reached five pages.




Would you rather have topic filled with ooing and aweing and thousands of empty posts? Or would you rather members have a good debate as well as varying opinions within a forum? I believe many would choose the latter.

 

[acdc1]

I don't have kids, but to answer your statement, "I didn't know this thread could go on for this long."

Simple: Members are expressing their varying opinions. As a result, this topic has reached five pages.




Would you rather have topic filled with ooing and aweing and thousands of empty posts? Or would you rather members have a good debate as well as varying opinions within a forum? I believe many would choose the latter.

I wasn't meaning it as "Oh gosh, I didn't know people would want to waste this much time on this". I was surprised, yes, but I didn't know that this many people cared. I've stated my opinion, just as many others have stated theirs. I didn't mean to sound offensive in any way. I probably needed to word my post better.

 

[GlitteringTiaras]

Your post was far from being offensive, acdc1. I knew exactly what you meant the first time around.

However, some may believe the main discussion is essentially pointless. That's why I made my earlier comment, again. Having a thoughtful, yet sometimes heated as long as it is contained debate, is far more interesting to read than the oooing and aweing as well as empty posts.


That was main point.

 

[CasiraghiTrio]

Mary looks mad in this photos, she should be used to being photographed by now. I think that they have plenty of private moments that they enjoy without the media intruding. Also, she is lucky that they get to take vacation whenever they want and money is not a problem.

Nah, she doesn't look mad, in my humble opinion. I think if she looks a bit stressed, it's probably because she is having to hold Christian to keep him happy while getting things organized for the trip. you know when you're trying to concentrate on remembering things and doing this and that, and you have a two year old on your hip yapping about and pointing at nonsense....

 

[crisscross1]

Being photographed comes with the territory, the same way it is for a politician, an actress, etc. I think that they have enough privacy, a few photographs when they are on private events is a small price to pay for the life of privilege that they lead. I am not saying that they don't work, they do work, but people are interested in what goes on with their lifes without the public facade. And you are right, most of us don't want to spend our lives being photographed, but then most of us are not princesses who live in a castle.

This comment always interests me. I don't think that being photographed comes with the territory at all. I think it is the media that has made it that way and it really all started with Diana. Before Diana the royals, certainly the British royals, kept their private lives very private only being photographed at certain events. The papparazzi, over the years, have became a nuisance. They are now (IMO) in royals, celebrities, polititians faces constantly and no matter how often they are asked to back off they just keep coming back. Unfortunately I don't think the papparazzi are in it for the right reasons any more. They aren't there to give the public a brief insight into the lives of the rich and famous they are there to sell their pictures to the highest bidder. As for the Christian's birthday photo subject, I personally don't mind that they didn't release photo's. I find it far more exciting when I open the forums and find pictures that I hadn't been expecting. These are my personal thoughts.

 

[CasiraghiTrio]

Well, the paparazzi actually pre-dates the Diana years, although I suppose you're partially right in the sense that the Diana years saw escalation of the paparazzi problem. Princess Margaret was one of the earliest paparazzi targets in the 60s and 70s. Although paparazzi pics back then were nothing like today's HiRes quality, the same stalking principle applied: Catch them off guard, track their movements, rent overlooking balconies into their back yards, that sort of thing.

 

[biboquinhas]

People are always very interested in royals because they have such a different life from us, apparently, but real life is very similiar than ours. We know almoust everything regarding their public life and public events so we are fascinating about their private life and we are more fascinating in knowing how their private life could be similar than ours!

 

[Lilla]

People are always very interested in royals because they have such a different life from us, apparently, but real life is very similiar than ours. We know almoust everything regarding their public life and public events so we are fascinating about their private life and we are more fascinating in knowing how their private life could be similar than ours!

And this is why the papparaziaes are overstepping the lines between public life and private life of royalty. There is a market for these photos, which the sense of entitlement expressed by some posters on this thread, verify.

I am pleased that this entitlement isn't expresses by the danish posters - as I firmly belive that the ralationship, between the DRF and the people of Denmark, has to be based on mutual respect.

Of course the DRF have to show themselves to the public - with the media in the role as go-between. But we have to respect thire privacy. If we don't they might one day consider there role as to demanding - especially if the privacy of the royal children isn't respected. This could result in abdication, which is a right they have. As they are pritty wealthy and well-educated they can easely make themselves a new life outside the royal role. Just look at Countess Alexandra.

IMO overstepping the line is intruding upon the lives of the royal children. This includes Christians second birthday party.

 

[biboquinhas]

And this is why the papparaziaes are overstepping the lines between public life and private life of royalty. There is a market for these photos, which the sense of entitlement expressed by some posters on this thread, verify.

I am pleased that this entitlement isn't expresses by the danish posters - as I firmly belive that the ralationship, between the DRF and the people of Denmark, has to be based on mutual respect.

Of course the DRF have to show themselves to the public - with the media in the role as go-between. But we have to respect thire privacy. If we don't they might one day consider there role as to demanding - especially if the privacy of the royal children isn't respected. This could result in abdication, which is a right they have. As they are pritty wealthy and well-educated they can easely make themselves a new life outside the royal role. Just look at Countess Alexandra.

IMO overstepping the line is intruding upon the lives of the royal children. This includes Christians second birthday party.

I think that even if that happens Mary and Frederick will still be public figures and still be in the public eye for ever!There is no escape now

 

[Saphire]

Well, gotta say this, I respect everybody's opinion because everybody has a valid point. Having said that, I feel that the media and the royals need each other. The media to make money and "keep the public informed" and the royals to promote their causes and show the world (and their own country) "hey, I am working". If there are no pictures, and I am not talking about this particular instance, people will start wondering if they are on vacation yet again. Now, in this particular instance they could've released a couple of their own private pictures to the public. No need to have a photographer following the family around. Anyways, hopefully they will release some for Christmas, unless Fred and Mary once again decide that its a private holiday and no pictures will be released.

 

[biboquinhas]

I think that there should be a standard decidions each year. If they release photos during Christmas they should release all Christmas! Even if we are talking about only one photo. Although I think Christimas is time for a formal photocall so there will be plenty of photos and not only of Christian has we expected to see this year from his birthday! Well we only had Christian first birthday and now the second so we cannot find a pattern here yet, but IMO maybe now we can expect not to see photos next year again too!

 

[grevinnan]

The question about birthday photos or not may appear a silly or insignificant question but in reality it may be quite important in the bigger context of keeping the monarchy or not. The monarchy is unique in that it passes down generation to generation and is not open to peoples vote unless it is to keep or abolish. Unless the population in general - and not just a few participating on a website - feel connected and part of the cultural and historical significance of the monarchy will it be able to remain. Being in peoples lives then becomes important - as in celebrating Prince Christian's birthday with pictures and thereby keeping the interest in the continuation of the royal family alive. The issue of privacy and personal choice for royals is very different from the rest of us - just as our lives and privileges are very different. It should be in the interest of the royal family to publish photos of the little prince - after all most people respond to cute kids and look forward to seeing them grow up. So perhaps Prince Christian's birthday is a bigger to-do than just someone's two-year old party.