Camilla & Charles: How has your opinion changed since the wedding?

[tinkerbell1948]

My opinion is the same now as it has always been.......they were meant to be together from the start. They are so happy and relaxed in each other's company, Charles is once again the happy laughing Prince I remember from years ago ( I am the same age, in fact 11 months older lol)

The Duchess carries herself with poise and is a perfect Consort, William and Harry seem happy and comfortable with both their father and stepmother. I wish them all the very best

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by tinkerbell1948

My opinion is the same now as it has always been.......they were meant to be together from the start. They are so happy and relaxed in each other's company, Charles is once again the happy laughing Prince I remember from years ago ( I am the same age, in fact 11 months older lol)

The Duchess carries herself with poise and is a perfect Consort, William and Harry seem happy and comfortable with both their father and stepmother. I wish them all the very best

What a lovely post!

[Al_bina]

Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine

But it's often useful to look up all meanings in a dictionary of a certain word, because it gives a clearer view on what is additionally implied with the word.
Plain for example can mean genuine, but genuine rather in the sense that it's simply so, other explanations of plain are: it is simple, flat, frugal or even ordinary, trivial or vulgar (that's what my dictionary has to say to it).

It seems to me that I excel at stirring up word-related controversies. In efforts to avoid these controversies in the future, I shall consult Longman English dictionary.

[ysbel]

Originally Posted by Al_bina

I apologise for not sharing you adoration of Duchess of Cornwall.

Al_Bina, why are you apologizing for not adoring the Duchess of Cornwall?

You've already said that you prefer more ethereal ladies which makes it totally understandable why Diana is the type of woman you admire and Camilla is not. There is nothing wrong in that.

[tinkerbell1948]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

What a lovely post!

Thank you It is so nice to be able to express how I feel. From letters to the Editor in Australian papers Camilla is still "that woman" by and large unless staff are very selective in what they print (which I wouldn't doubt) Not turning this into a Camilla vs Diana debate just stating things how I see it here

[jcbcode99]

I prefer to think of it as an ongoing discussion rather than a debate :)

Al bina, never apologize for what you think--and I always enjoy your posts tremendously, regardless of whether we do or do not share an opinion. I think most posters would agree with me......

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by Al_bina

It seems to me that I excel at stirring up word-related controversies. In efforts to avoid these controversies in the future, I shall consult Longman English dictionary.

Maybe the problem is that you are often using very distinct words to transmit your very distinct opinions. When your are working with very pointed remarks you must be aware that these remarks transmit the meaning in a much stronger way. And I use "pointed" well aware of the fact that a "point" (from French "la pointe") could mean the top of a dagger or sword and thus the meanings of "pointed" include being a sucessful hit and being hurtful. So you're in for applause (because of the sucessful strike) as well as an equally "cutting" response.

[Chimene]

Originally Posted by Al_bina

It seems to me that I excel at stirring up word-related controversies. In efforts to avoid these controversies in the future, I shall consult Longman English dictionary.

I think both Charles and Camilla are ugly. That has nothing to do with their characters, but in my opinion they are in fact unattractive. English is your second tongue so you're doing just fine, and just as long as your intent was not malicious, then you have nothing to fear. If you make a statement that a reader deemed inaccurate, it's the responsibility of that reader to request clarification when there is disagreement. In conversations, often times words can be misinterpreted (MEA CULPA). Keep your chin up.

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by Chimene

I think both Charles and Camilla are ugly. That has nothing to do with their characters, but in my opinion they are in fact unattractive.

Just to highlight what has been said: of course you have every right to think Charles and Camilla are ugly. beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. But you didn't imply that the typical "English lady" is plain (aka "ugly" in the understanding of the speakers of English as their mother tongue) because that's what the English produce as "The English lady". That I believe was the reason for the somewhat stormy remarks.

[Chimene]

Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine

Just to highlight what has been said: of course you have every right to think Charles and Camilla are ugly. beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. But you didn't imply that the typical "English lady" is plain (aka "ugly" in the understanding of the speakers of English as their mother tongue) because that's what the English produce as "The English lady". That I believe was the reason for the somewhat stormy remarks.

Oh, I understand that, but perhaps she should have been asked to clarify her statement rather than scare her half to death. She kept apologizing over and over so I felt bad for her.

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by Chimene

Oh, I understand that, but perhaps she should have been asked to clarify her statement rather than scare her half to death. She kept apologizing over and over so I felt bad for her.

I think you are right. At least, you are right in general. But I'm afraid we have had that kind of discussion with Al Bina already and so some sort of, hmmmm, let's call it automatic reaction started which is, of course, not really the thing to do. But maybe this time all sides will find your post as the incentive to try to be more polite with each other.

[Chimene]

Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine

I think you are right. At least, you are right in general. But I'm afraid we have had that kind of discussion with Al Bina already and so some sort of, hmmmm, let's call it automatic reaction started which is, of course, not really the thing to do. But maybe this time all sides will find your post as the incentive to try to be more polite with each other.

I don't share Al Bina's dislike of Camilla, but the discussion is a lot more interesting when we are not afraid to express our opinion. I sent you a pm so I could keep on topic.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by Al_bina

It seems to me that I excel at stirring up word-related controversies. In efforts to avoid these controversies in the future, I shall consult Longman English dictionary.

Al bina, the problem is that your command of English is very good and so when there is a little difference in the meaning of the word, I forget that your native tongue is not English, therefore it is I who owe you an apology. Don't feel that you can't say what you think or feel, it is nice chatting to you, even though we rarely agree.

[ysbel]

I'm glad we are all bonding as a community but do you think we can we go back to discussing Camilla at least in this thread?

Thanks for taking the other discussion to pm.

[anbrida]

first I have have to admit I am Diana's friend. But I am not a Camilla hater. I don't have too much thoughts on her from the beginning. The same as now. Hence I can't say my opinion to Camilla has changed since the wedding. I am not so impressed by those good qualities of Camilla in her admirers eyes. I think Camilla is a figure what an old society would prefer: being 99% obedient to her men, trying the best to appeal to her men's needs and desires, even building the whole morality based on her men. If one thing can make her man happy then it is right, if not then it's wrong. She lacks her own opinions.

Of course there is some exceptions, the episode of Diana's memorial service was one of them. But I didn't think she really had any her own opinion on whether she should attend or not. At first she would attend because it was her man's desire, so she should attend. And then the opposed voice came, and when it was louder than her man's, she was forced out. Other people's opinions dominated the whole incident. I really wonder, what was Camilla's true thought on it? If it were Diana, I think from the very beginning, she would not aggree to attend no matter how Charles would insist. And if she'd decided to attend, she would not yield to other people's desire.

It's said that Charles and Camilla shared the same hobits, the same interests and even the same opinions on every issues. So they were perfect couple. However it's exactly this extreme harmony which made me frown. I don't think two people with independent minds would have such similar thoughts on everything. To me this harmony came from the sacrifice of personality from one part. This is not easy. And it's amirable in some way. But it's not my ideal
love. I will let my man know, "I disaggree , or argue with you doesn't mean I don't love you. We will argue because by nature we all have our own minds."

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by Chimene

If you make a statement that a reader deemed inaccurate, it's the responsibility of that reader to request clarification when words have several meanings. That’s the rule of engagement in conversations, as I understand it.

Unfortunately English being my native tongue, there was nothing to clarify. The various meanings of plain are - clear, evident, uncomplcated, not elaborate, without a decorative pattern, ugly, outspoken, straightforward, unsophisticated, homely, not coloured, not in code, unequivocally, simply, a level tract, a basic knitting stitch, plain flour, plain chocolate etc, etc. As we were talking about women, English women at that, the only version that would fit would be the one I took Al_Bina to mean. Knowing Al_bina is not keen on Camilla, it was a basic assumption to make and one that we were able to sort out without any lasting harm done on either side. To suggest that we clarify what every poster means by the use of one word or another, would as you can see, have taken up the whole thread. I would add that we are not at war with one another, so I don't think that there are any 'rules of engagement', just a simple (plain, unadorned) effort to remain courteous and not resort to personal remarks or condemnation.