Camilla & Charles: How has your opinion changed since the wedding? - Page 18

Roslyn · #**341** 03-09-2008, 09:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheTruth

To get back on-topic, my opinion did change about Camilla. When she married Charles, I thought she would have a hard time integrating the RF. Not that she didn't have the guts to face the whole world, but that she would be tired of the protocol stuff like changing 3 times of dress at Balmoral, the state visits, etc. I was very surprised to see that a woman who enjoys so much the country side and nature has managed to live with it and behave like a real HRH. My respects

I agree. I wasn't sure how Camilla, who disliked the limelight and had no desire to attract the attention of the media or public, would adapt. But she has done a sterling job, always appearing happy in her public role. I think she might have warmed to the idea since she has been so well received. I am enormously grateful to her for her effect on Charles.

lexi4 · #**342** 03-09-2008, 09:01 PM

I can't imagine how much lower one could stoop after using a child as a confessor. I think Charles, and not Charles and Camilla, provide more stability for William and Henry than Diana ever did.

ysbel · #**343** 03-09-2008, 09:03 PM

Well and keeping the conversation close to the original intent of Opinions about Camilla, I would say that wreaking revenge when you find you have been the victim of a cheating husband is only one response and it is not necessarily the most natural response one chooses when confronted with this situation.

It was not the response that Camilla chose when her husband cheated on her. Surely it is not right to take up with someone else's husband when your own has flown the coop but the fact that both Diana and Camilla chose this option tells me that this is by far the most natural option that occurs to people who have been cheated on. They look for someone else to provide them comfort.

I have seen the revenge option in a few couples and that was when there was more that broke up the marriage and the affair was only part of it. These relationships were a bit abusive and manipulative from the start. In an environment like that, revenge flourishes.

But it appears that Charles and Camilla are not serial cheaters. They seem to prefer a boring, sedentary, somewhat bookish, and perfectly pleasant lifestyle. That is the image that they most convincingly portray because I think it is what they truly are despite everything that has happened.

Roslyn · #**344** 03-09-2008, 09:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ysbel

However if Charles and Camilla are going to move on with the rest of the Royal Family, they must move out of this damaging realm of influence that Diana created.

Do you have any thoughts on how they might achieve this?

ysbel · #**345** 03-09-2008, 09:09 PM

Well I was thinking about that and while the cartoon of the Rottweiler dog sitting between Camilla and Charles in bed was just a funny idea, I think it would be great if they could take some of the most damaging words and phrases that Diana used against them and reclaim them again to put these same words and phrases in the people's minds but this time to their advantage.

Somewhat like women who got tired of being called a bitch by men as a putdown when the men thought they were being too aggressive. They took over the word and said, yes I'm a bitch and they made a joke about it. Now when someone calls a woman a bitch, it doesn't have the same devastating effect that it did when women first started in the workplace in the seventies and men were being threatened.

ysbel · #**346** 03-09-2008, 09:12 PM

For example what are some catchphrases of Diana: there were 3 in this marriage, or Rottweiler, etc. If Charles and Camilla could reclaim those hateful phrases and put it in the public's mind so that the first time someone hears them, they laugh, but not at Charles and Camilla, then they will have done a great deal towards minimizing the sting of those hurtful words.

lexi4 · #**347** 03-09-2008, 09:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ysbel

Well I was thinking about that and while the cartoon of the Rottweiler dog sitting between Camilla and Charles in bed was just a funny idea, I think it would be great if they could take some of the most damaging words and phrases that Diana used against them and reclaim them again to put these same words and phrases in the people's minds but this time to their advantage.

Somewhat like women who got tired of being called a bitch by men as a putdown when the men thought they were being too aggressive. They took over the word and said, yes I'm a bitch and they made a joke about it. Now when someone calls a woman a bitch, it doesn't have the same devastating effect that it did when women first started in the workplace in the seventies and men were being threatened.

Amen to that!

COUNTESS · #**348** 03-09-2008, 09:18 PM

So, let's see what we have here. The 19 year old genius ( whom some say was thick as a board), married a 30 year old prince, who was really frog. This prince needed heirs, so the genius provided them. Soon after her marriage, she discovered he could have cared less about her. But that is all lies and inuendo circulated by the genius. Then there is the poor suffering mistress, who had a husband and children, but still had time in her busy day to bed the frog/prince. She, as a friend, comforted him about his marriage, by saying things like, "your awfully good feeling your way around and I need you all week. All the time". What regular freinds say to each other to get their spirits up. The newspapers and media took the side of the genius only, because she had such incredible powers of persuasion and trashed this wonderful, loving family. None of these other people had her power. Then the genius made some very stupid decisions and her life was ended. And then the frog/prince and his mistress married. They did well together and 10 years later, for some reason they or their freinds need to be assured that they did all the right things and now they are really terriffic. Sorry, it cuts both ways, they were both fools, but Diana was a victim in the beginning. She wanted to beleive in fairytales, but got the witch and the ogre instead. So, unfortunately, she joined them. The sad part is that we even discuss this today. She is dead, he is happy, so what's the difference?

ysbel · #**349** 03-09-2008, 09:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by COUNTESS

but Diana was a victim in the beginning. She wanted to beleive in fairytales, but got the witch and the ogre instead. So, unfortunately, she joined them. The sad part is that we even discuss this today.

The sad part COUNTESS is that 20 years after the wedding and after all we know about the Spencers and Windsors, that still you sum up the whole tragedy with a breezy and confident, "Diana was the victim, wanted the fairytale but got the witch (Camilla) and the ogre (Charles) instead." If your beliefs and this statement aren't a testament to Diana's powers of persuasion I don't know what is. It is very easy for you to pour scorn and condescension to these people and in order to pour this scorn on them, you are using the images that Diana fed you. That proves my point. Diana didn't need to be an intellectual genius to know how to turn people against people, that was a different part of intelligence and you know it, you're just conveniently ignoring it for the sake of pouring scorn on Charles and Camilla.

So since you and people like you are the subject of what we are talking about, perhaps we should ask you this question: What could Charles and Camilla do to change your opinion of them? (and dont' say abdicate from the throne and leave your sight forever)

lexi4 · #**350** 03-09-2008, 09:59 PM

Question.
Why is it so important that anyone, whether it is Countess or me or anyone else, thinks of Charles, Camilla and Diana?
Why is the public image so important?
They are human beings, just like the rest of us, and are therefore subject to the same heartbreak, tremendous joy, mistakes etc. as the rest of us.

ysbel · #**351** 03-09-2008, 10:01 PM

Good question, Lexi. It matters because they are public people and Charles has a future public role as the monarch of the United Kingdom. Since he will be Head of State and he will be representing a nation, the general public opinion of him will affect how effectively he will be able to do his job and in turn how stable the British monarchy will be when the present Queen Elizabeth II dies.

COUNTESS, you and I are Americans and of course British opinions are more important but as Head of State and King of the United Kingdom, Charles will also be the public face that Great Britain shows the rest of the world so our opinions matter also. Britain nor any other country can afford to be an island and not be mindful of others opinions of her and the monarch who represents her.

lexi4 · #**352** 03-09-2008, 10:08 PM

Well, I don't think that what I think about Charles and Camilla will matter one whit. Charles will/or won't be King regardless of his public image. And he won't be the first King to have a less than perfect public image. I doubt he will be the last. From what little I know, it seems Charles has very little power anyway because his country is actually governed by Parliament. What matters most is, are Charles and Camilla happy? It would seem that they are. And at the end of the day, who started what, who lied etc. will matter very little. Barely a footnote in history.

ysbel · #**353** 03-09-2008, 10:14 PM

No he doesn't have power but the job of a figurehead monarch is to present an image to the world that reflects well on his country.

That's the role that his mother Elizabeth II plays, and it is the role that Queen Margrethe in Denmark plays and the role of King Harald of Norway, and King Carl Gustav of Sweden. Their public image can have faults and people will still accept them but if the image of Charles and Camilla is for a lot of people the witch and the ogre in the fairytale as COUNTESS so blithely called them, then I'm afraid that Charles will not be able to be effective in his role of representing his country.

When you're a figurehead monarch, your public image is your only source of power. Does that make sense?

lexi4 · #**354** 03-09-2008, 10:22 PM

I understand what you are saying, I just see it differently. The struggles of Diana, Charles and Camilla seem to make the more human. More accessible. He cheated, she cheated...etc. there are experiences people have all the time. Why would the royalty be exempt? They haven't in the past. Their history is full of infidelity, among other foibles that plague us mere humans. I doubt that the vast majority of people care. It's fun for discussion, but all of the countries you mentioned would survive without a monarchy. And the monarch in England will not fall because Charles cheated on his first wife. It's just stuff that happens. What he will be measured by it the good that he does for others.

COUNTESS · #**355** 03-09-2008, 10:24 PM

You are abosolutely right.

ysbel · #**356** 03-09-2008, 10:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lexi4

I understand what you are saying, I just see it differently. The struggles of Diana, Charles and Camilla seem to make the more human. More accessible. He cheated, she cheated...etc. there are experiences people have all the time. Why would the royalty be exempt? They haven't in the past. Their history is full of infidelity, among other foibles that plague us mere humans. I doubt that the vast majority of people care. It's fun for discussion, but all of the countries you mentioned would survive without a monarchy. And the monarch in England will not fall because Charles cheated on his first wife. It's just stuff that happens. What he will be measured by it the good that he does for others.

Well if most people judge Charles and Camilla by what you say here, lexi, then I agree that the British monarchy will have no reason to worry.

You are right, Kings and Queens cheated on each other before and the monarchy was left securely in place.

However I am concerned with the negative spin that Diana put on the situation that made her look good and Charles and Camilla looked like the witch and the ogre (to quote COUNTESS)

Who wants a witch and a ogre for a King and Queen? Nobody. And so if a lot of people see Charles and Camilla in the same way that COUNTESS sees them, then Charles and Camilla will have a very difficult time fulfilling their purpose on the British throne.

But if everybody thinks like you do, then Charles and Camilla will be successful. The key is what the majority of people think.

lexi4 · #**357** 03-09-2008, 10:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ysbel

Well if most people judge Charles and Camilla by what you say here, lexi, then I agree that the British monarchy will have no reason to worry.

You are right, Kings and Queens cheated on each other before and the monarchy was left securely in place.

However I am concerned with the negative spin that Diana put on the situation that made her look good and Charles and Camilla looked like the witch and the ogre (to quote COUNTESS)

Who wants a witch and a ogre for a King and Queen? Nobody. And so if a lot of people see Charles and Camilla in the same way that COUNTESS sees them, then Charles and Camilla will have a very difficult time fulfilling their purpose on the British throne.

But if everybody thinks like you do, then Charles and Camilla will be successful. The key is what the majority of people think.

Ysbel,
I have learned to accept what I cannot change.