Frederik & Mary's Interview with German Vogue about Amalienborg: December 2010

[Muhler]

Why Vogue Germany??

Because it's a neighbouring country? Where there is a good deal of interest in royalty, including the DRF?

Incidentally, what does the article say?
Is it in the form of a general portrait? An interview about a specific topic? Or what?

Are the articles in Vogue serious?

 

[Naggi]

Because it's a neighbouring country? Where there is a good deal of interest in royalty, including the DRF?

Incidentally, what does the article say?
Is it in the form of a general portrait? An interview about a specific topic? Or what?

Are the articles in Vogue serious?

And you think that interest in Germany for Danish royalty will increase when they appear in over-eggaretated photos in a magazine on page X and that only a limited group of people is able to buy?? I doubt that.

Because Vogue germany asked if they would like to do a photoshoot?
Why is there a need for a purpose?

Because their boss is the taxpayer. And if they would be my royals I would at least want to know what they do with their time where they are supposed to work.

 

[Muhler]

And you think that interest in Germany for Danish royalty will increase when they appear in over-eggaretated photos in a magazine on page X and that only a limited group of people is able to buy?? I doubt that.

I don't know.
I have no idea how many readers Vogue has.

Which magazine would you have preferred M&F to appear in then?

Or is it the photoshoot itself that is the problem? How should they have posed in your opinion and how or where should it have been published?
I ask of course because there is a general interest in royalty, not least photoseries.

 

[Lumutqueen]

And you think that interest in Germany for Danish royalty will increase when they appear in over-eggaretated photos in a magazine on page X and that only a limited group of people is able to buy?? I doubt that.

Sorry but why does it have anything to do with creating German interest in the DRF?
Why can it not just be a simple photoshoot which the Vogue German editor has asked for?

Because their boss is the taxpayer. And if they would be my royals I would at least want to know what they do with their time where they are supposed to work.

Well Princess Mary is on maternity leave carrying twins, which is why she is not partaking in royal duties.
Prince Frederik has done some in the last week, but seeing as most royal families across europe are not doing many royal duties unless traditional ones, seeing as it's christmas time, I don't see the issue? He also has a pregnant wife to worry about and two young children.
These pictures were obviously taken at the weekend, or during the day when neither royal had any engagaments. What's wrong with having a photoshoot taken?

There boss, being the ordinary danish people don't seem to have a problem with the photoshoot, so why should anyone else?
I'm not a dane, but I am pleased to see them in the public eye rather than shying away and only coming out when asked.

 

[Naggi]

Sorry but why does it have anything to do with creating German interest in the DRF?
Why can it not just be a simple photoshoot which the Vogue German editor has asked for?

Lumutqueen, I was just trying to answer to Muhlers question on Germany "Where there is a good deal of interest in royalty, including the DRF?" I personally have no idea why it was Vogue Germany. I understood to a certain degree the photos taken 2004 for the Australian Vogue, as Mary was born in Tasmania. I found it quite nice and could see the connection. But with Vogue Germany I don't see any connections.

 

[Lumutqueen]

And i'm just asking, why does there have to be a specific reason as to why the photoshoot was taken?

 

[soapstar]

I do wish they would have positioned Isabella a little closer to the rest of the family because it looks a little off with her standing so far away. Other than that though, I actually really like the photos. Especially the one of just Mary and Isabella.

 

[Naggi]

Well Princess Mary is on maternity leave carrying twins, which is why she is not partaking in royal duties.
Prince Frederik has done some in the last week, but seeing as most royal families across europe are not doing many royal duties unless traditional ones, seeing as it's christmas time, I don't see the issue? He also has a pregnant wife to worry about and two young children.
These pictures were obviously taken at the weekend, or during the day when neither royal had any engagaments. What's wrong with having a photoshoot taken?

There boss, being the ordinary danish people don't seem to have a problem with the photoshoot, so why should anyone else?
I'm not a dane, but I am pleased to see them in the public eye rather than shying away and only coming out when asked.

My first thought on this comment of yours was, if she is able to do hour long shoots, to dress up several times with different hair syle and make-up and do one shot over and over again for don't know how many hours, than she may be able to partake her royal duties still. But this would be very mean towards a pregnant woman, so I respect that we should not regard this shooting time as working time.

I was just trying to find an answer to the question whether there should be a purpose given to justify this shooting.

 

[marfre]

#131post

If the taxpayers of Denmark have an issue about the couple taking a few hours for a photoshoot, then Iam at a loss as to what the taxpayers of Norway must be feeling their royal couple can up and take a couple of months break because they want to.

It is not that I think that they should not take a break, just trying to see how a few hours can equate to a few months and how the taxpayers need to get involved in a photoshoot.

 

[Tessa]

#131post

If the taxpayers of Denmark have an issue about the couple taking a few hours for a photoshoot, then Iam at a loss as to what the taxpayers of Norway must be feeling their royal couple can up and take a couple of months break because they want to.

It is not that I think that they should not take a break, just trying to see how a few hours can equate to a few months and how the taxpayers need to get involved in a photoshoot.

Exactly. A bit of objectivity would not hurt. And Mette-Marit and Hakoon also posed for magazines

 

[Naggi]

#131post

If the taxpayers of Denmark have an issue about the couple taking a few hours for a photoshoot, then Iam at a loss as to what the taxpayers of Norway must be feeling their royal couple can up and take a couple of months break because they want to.

It is not that I think that they should not take a break, just trying to see how a few hours can equate to a few months and how the taxpayers need to get involved in a photoshoot.

And I would support your point in all aspect! As far as I read the Norwegian CP couple pay privately for the trip, but I don't know for sure. As much as I like what they are doing, I can absoultely understand your point as a fair one and except the criticism. I personally would travel the world and hopefully try to understand more of the world instead of posing for magazines

 

[MissP]

I'm in two minds! I love some of the pics, and then change my mind.

I'm not a massive fan of the "bump-cradling" poses, but I think they look ridiculous whoever is doing them. I think the theme is tongue in cheek and some of the shots are beautiful. A few are a bit 'celeb' for me, and the pics are heavily retouched (not M&F's fault!)

I think I'll come to the conclusion that I like them, especially Isabella in the 'main' shot with the tutu.

 

[Dierna23]

Very well said, carlota. I completely agree with your comment. We should simply respect other peoples views regardless of whether they are the opposite of ours or not.

And I second that!

Indeed, the 'cosy' pictures are as staged as these ones (minus the elaborate use of airbrush) BUT my point was that they are useful in projecting a certain image of a princely family. These kind of pictures however are not useful at all, but instead show the bankrupcy of royalty. If the royals are nothing more than the Beckham family, why should we have them around at all?

I agree that for many these pictures will be nice to see, but I am just against the principle of these kind of shoots, which seems to me nothing more than dressing up to cover the emptiness.

I totally agree and the two sentences I marked in your post are the reason why I'm losing more and more my interest in some young royals. For me, there is a difference between royals and celebrities and there should be one, IMO.

I'm not against photo-shoots of royals in Vogue/Vanity Fair/Tatler. Actually, as a photographer, I'm always interested in the latest trends in photography and I like it to watch the artistic portraits of famous people of course. But I guess it all depends on the style of the pictures. I, for one, prefer them timeless & elegant or down to earth (like the new official pictures of the Belgian crown princely couple with their children). Those pictures of the Danish crown princely couple and their children aren't my cup of tea (I liked Mary's photoshooting for the Australian Vogue), the style of the pictures is too "celebrity" and "designed" for my taste.

The only picture I really liked is the one of Mary and Isabella on the floor. It is artistic, elegant and beautiful. As to the rest - I'm simply not fond of the photographer's style, how he presents them and I don't like it what they wear.

 

[Tessa]

And I would support your point in all aspect! As far as I read the Norwegian CP couple pay privately for the trip, but I don't know for sure. As much as I like what they are doing, I can absoultely understand your point as a fair one and except the criticism. I personally would travel the world and hopefully try to understand more of the world instead of posing for magazines

Does Mette-Marit posed for magazines? I remember some pics. So the norwegians apart of their extra holidays, also lost their time posing for magazines

 

[Madame Royale]

why don't we let people express themselves? can't we just accept it if someone doesn't think like we do and get over it? the poster expressed whether she felt this photoshoot or mary represented royalty, in his or her opinion. why the need to get so agressive? "proving her worth" is very much subjective and is not an opinion that HAS TO BE shared.

And no, you and I both know I'd endeavour to say that the issue here isn't having an opinion. it is the way in which it is expressed.

There was nothing constructively critical in their view whatsoever.

'Mary Donaldson' is not her style and is only ever used by people who wish to portray the Crown Princess in a negative light. A kind of wanting to demean her and the position she now holds, so much so that they refuse to refer to her by her title. Oh no, that's not petty is it...

Quite right that it's subjective, but Mary has proved her worth. Infact the Danes (personal observation) love her to bits so the proofs in the pudding I'm affraid.

I certainly wasn't aggressive but you certainly were, needing to shout part of your post at me

Enjoy your day.

You don't feel that you are putting a tiny, weeny bit too much into this??

I think that those who want to put too much into it are, because that kind of attitude feeds their resolve.

 

[4Pam]

It's great PR for Denmark. Fred and Mary are the future King and Queen with Christian as the heir's heir and the same goes for Isabella and the twins. Don't really mind the shoot at all. The pictures were beautiful.

 

[Zonk]

And no, you and I both know the issue here isn't having an opinion. it's the method in which it is expressed.

'Mary Donaldson' is not her style and is only ever used by people who wish to portray the Crown Princess in a negative light. A kind of wanting to demean the position she now holds. They can't seem to even stomach being able to refer to her by her title.

And Mary has proved her worth, infact the Danes love her to bits so the proofs in the pudding I'm affraid

I certainly I wasn't aggressive but you certainly were needing to shout part of your post at me

Enjoy your day.

In that respect I would agree Madame Royale.

If you don't care for Mary that is certainly your opinion but to me when someone refers to someone in their maiden name (and they know the name has changed) you are being rude plain and simple. Same thing Camilla Parker Bowles or the girl down the street you don't like. Refer to Mary as Mary Glucksburg whatever (like Camilla Windsor not Camilla Parker Bowles, etc.) Its rude.

Now back on topic...I certainly see the pros and cons of why people feel like the article blurs the line between royalty and celebrity.

What is the reaction in Denmark if any?

 

[Amelia]

Because their boss is the taxpayer. And if they would be my royals I would at least want to know what they do with their time where they are supposed to work.

What do you mean when they are supposed to be working? Did they cancel an engagement to do this photo-shoot and interview? I don't think the Danes expect them to work hours a day.

I was just trying to find an answer to the question whether there should be a purpose given to justify this shooting.

What exactly do you want them to justify? What have they done that is so wrong? It is just an interview with some photographs about the art work in their new home. People may like or dislike the photos but they need to stop over reacting and remember the couple have not committed some major offence that is going to bring down the Danish Royals. In fact it seems like, as with most thing when it comes to this couple, it is posters outside of Denmark on message boards that have issues with them and not the the Danish population.

And I would support your point in all aspect! As far as I read the Norwegian CP couple pay privately for the trip, but I don't know for sure. As much as I like what they are doing, I can absoultely understand your point as a fair one and except the criticism. I personally would travel the world and hopefully try to understand more of the world instead of posing for magazines

But as you said re:the Danish CP - the taxpayer is their boss. If the Danes can't take a few hours to do a photo-shoot surely the Norwegian CP shouldn't be taking a few months to go on holiday!

 

[mammacats]

OK, who put the liquid cranky on Marengo's breakfast today? Just kidding Marengo, I love your work here.

These photos of the DRF are great. Maybe because it is Vogue that the photos are a little avant garde for most tastes. However, the folks here that think M & F were wrong to do this because it overexposes the monarchy, need to review their histories of monarchy from, say, the 16th century era. The royals not only ate every meal in front of the public like monkeys in the zoo, they also had attendents in their most private areas (to be polite). Every day was like a circus. In other words, the exposure was far greater back then, than it is now. The royals doing a Vogue spread is a blip compared to that.

IMHO I also think the royals do more for their countries now than their ancestors ever did.

 

[UserDane]

And I would support your point in all aspect! As far as I read the Norwegian CP couple pay privately for the trip, but I don't know for sure.

I can't quite follow you here; didn't you raise the question of the Danish taxpayer's objection to the Danish Cp couple taking time to do a photo shoot; now you talk about the Norwegian CP couple paying privately. Whoever pays, they spend more time on travelling (not that I mind that they do!) than Mary and Frederik spent on the photo shoot.

But how can one CP couple pay 'privately' for what they are doing while another's CP couple's activity is a potential problem with the taxpayer? They both get their money from the state, eventually, don't they? If Norwegian taxpayers - who supposedly are behind the private funds the CP couple may be using - are not an issue in connection with a, what, two months long trip?, how in the whole wide world can the Danish taxpayers be an issue if the Danish CP couple spend one day on a photo shoot?

As to the taxpayer being the royals' boss: I simply see little red dots before my inner eyes whenever that reference pops up. The Danish CP couple get a fixed allowance from the state. In this way they resemble any employee who gets a salary (albeit on another scale, I agree). How would any employee react if he or she was asked to account to the boss what he or she spent their agreed wages on??? The reference to the taxpayer is and always has been a senseless argument IMO.

Sorry, I don't mean to sound too harsh but that taxpayer thing is one of my pet aversions around these boards

 

[CrownPrincessJava]

I have to say, I absolutely loved the photoshoot! The photographer was rather clever in their approach...old meets new, traditions meet modernisation. It's amazing how people in this thread did not get the gist of the shoot. It also showed their playful side, especially with Frederick and his falcon, and Christian and Isabella painting. What would have been even more artistic is if Mary showed she was barefoot under those gowns, i.e. pregnant and barefoot! The photo of Isabella touching Mary's stomach is not only beautiful, but was so natural!

People need to realise that, just like the British Royal Family, royalty is not what it was 50-100 years ago. They are a symbol; where the population have a say on the runnings of a country hence why we elect a government. When Frederick and Mary are King and Queen, they are merely symbols of a long history. They hold no power.

As for people who state that this is a waste of taxpayers money, pray tell me how? This is a photoshoot that is paid by Vogue, not the Danish population. In addition, the royal family receive a stipend from the government, in which the government may review at any time and either cut or increase their allowance without any justification.

Instead of criticising this family and the Crown Princely couple, people should be embracing their ability to actually connect with their people.

 

[UserDane]

What is the reaction in Denmark if any?

If any is the keyword There is none - I haven't seen these pictures anywhere else than here (don't know if other Danes have). Not even BilledBladet has shown them - they probably will in a couple of days. The media here are mostly interested in Nicklas Bendtner's newborn son and the Danish women's handball team.
I think it was Amelia who said that it seems as if it is mostly people outside Denmark who have very definite opinions about Mary and Frederik - and she is right!

Can anyone here remember pictures taken by Cecil Baton (Baeton?) of e.g. Marina of Kent and some of the other contemporary British duchesses? They were beautiful, extravagant!, didn't serve any other purpose than showing beautiful women wearing beautiful clothes and ditto jewellery. I still enjoy seeing these pictures now - how fortunate that there wasn't a whole brigade online then when the pictures were taken - analysing, questioning or making doomsday predictions about the downwards slide of royals - or we would never had the pleasure of these pictures today

 

[Zonk]

Very true.

Tons of these pictures are in the books I mentioned...Royalty in Vogue and The Royal Potraits by Cecil Beaton.

I am pretty sure the author took the photos and someone wrote an accompanying story. Of what, I don't know. Royalty was even more of mystery then.

So has anyone read the actual article? I have seen snippets of what it contains but no one to say they have read it and learned something new.

 

[JessRulz]

I think that people are having trouble getting ahold of the magazine, especially if they live outside of Germany. I'm going to head over to Borders a little later to see if they have it, but I have a sneaking suspicion they will be an issue or two behind.

 

[dee4855]

Thank you Zonk for the book titles. I just purchased The Royal Portraits for $.01 (penny) at Amazon. I cannot wait to get it!

 

[Zonk]

And its the German Vogue....interesting. I am always amazed (but I guess I shouldn't be) that the German magazines have a fascination for the Norwegian, Danish and Dutch royals when they have their own...yes, I know...wrong thread

Doesn't Vogue have an habit (if the interest is there) of sharing articles between the many Vogues. Like if an article appears in British Vogue and there is an audience for it in the US Vogue, the article might show up later?

 

[Emmily]

Because their boss is the taxpayer. And if they would be my royals I would at least want to know what they do with their time where they are supposed to work.

Do they need to account for every second, every hour of their day to the taxpayer?

And I would support your point in all aspect! As far as I read the Norwegian CP couple pay privately for the trip, but I don't know for sure. As much as I like what they are doing, I can absoultely understand your point as a fair one and except the criticism. I personally would travel the world and hopefully try to understand more of the world instead of posing for magazines

The CP couple of Norway posed for Vogue several years ago as well

 

[Zonk]

Thank you Zonk for the book titles. I just purchased The Royal Portraits for $.01 (penny) at Amazon. I cannot wait to get it!

You are welcome! You will love it!

Some of the earlier Kent pictures are also in the Royalty in Vogue book.

Its a shame that one doesn't find books like that on the Danish and Swedish Royals. A couple of months ago, I purchased Royal Weddings by Julie Melchior and Friederke Headecke, and its in German (??) and English.
I would love to get some pics of Margaret of Connaught (Fred's great grandmother) and her peers.

Are there any books like that about Mary? Its probably too soon.

 

[dee4855]

I did not see any. They had the two you listed. I am thrilled to get the portraits one and will buy the other one soon. I would love one on the DRF. For $4 with shipping and handling I did not think I could go wrong since this one was listed as very good condition.

Thanks again!

 

[Charlotte1]

The CP couple of Norway posed for Vogue several years ago as well

No they didn't, the Norwegian CP couple along with other young royals (Willem-Alexander and Maxima, Pavlos and Marie-Chantal) posed for Testino for an issue of Vanity Fair called "Young Hip and Royal". The British princes didn't pose but William's official 18th birthday photos were used, he was on the cover.

Mette-Marit has appeared in the Norwegian Elle, but she used her own clothes, she refused the designer labels.

Pavlos and Marie-Chantal have been the most media friendly and have done many glossy magazine shoots. Including Pavlos doing one for Italian Vogue Uomo.

Diana posed for Vogue at least twice, Cecil Beaton did take photos of Marina of Kent and she appeared in Vogue. Recently her great-grandchildren appeared in a fashion shoot for Tatler, with the Marina pictures appearing as well.

The pictures are nice, whether or not royals should be posing as celebrities and fashion models is a different debate. Are they royal or are they celebrities?