Camilla And The Public - Page 3

Idriel · #41 09-28-2005, 12:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alicky

LOL! I don't mean any one story or occasion, but I was referring to Diana's lack of cohesion, continuity and loyalty with her charities. Her "reactiveness."

IMO, Diana's lack of cohesion with her charities reflected the lack of cohesion in her personal and emotional life. She did found herself really late. But there were some continuity though. Her fight against AIDS was continuous and genuine. And there's of course the Landmine Fight, with the results we all know.
Also, I think it's unjust to criticize her for quiting many charities after her divorce. She was stripped of her HRH style, so she had no more official capacity. I think that was the right thing to do. Beside, she did considered leaving the public life (how seriously, I don't know), so that was a logical first step.

Anyway, all that charity stuff is most of the time a game of ego, whether it's royals or celebrities implied. What does matter is the media exposure the causes receive. In that matter, I don't think any causes Di was ever involved with have anything to complain about.
Similarly, Camilla will be an asset to any causes she choose to join, regardless of her true motivations. After all, these forums are the proof there are actually people who likes her.

**Zonk** · #42 09-29-2005, 12:38 AM

Idriel..I totally agree with your assessment that Diana's resigning her patronages after her divorce was more in step with her desire for a private life. She decided to focus on the charities that were more in step with her desire to make an impact. Also, if you recall...she also removed the royal protection guards unless she was with her kids.

I realize that Diana was not perfect but I really wish people would give her break! She married Prince Charles when she was 20 and was 36 when she died. That's 16 years of emotional growth. I don't about you guys...but the person I was at 20 is not the person I am at 36!

Reina · #43 09-29-2005, 12:53 AM

Don't alot of royals have alot of patronages under their belts? After the divorce doesn't it seem logical that Diana would have to drop most of those patronages to get her life in order? WHat is wrong with some of you? Use soem common sense and stop conjuring up these crass conspiracy theories. The fact of the matter is that eventually Diana did take up a few patronages that were close to her heart. Even I do this by staying in organizations that I can put the little extra time I have into. Gosh...

ysbel · #44 09-29-2005, 02:30 AM

I must say I am getting tired of discusions about Diana's life hijacking every single Camilla thread here. I fail to see how Diana's lack of cohesion has anything to do with her charity work or whether Camilla should take up some of Diana's charities.

It goes without saying that Camilla is a very different person and she would have had a very different relationship with the public regardless of whether Charles had married her when they first dated.

She has a simpler, more grounded approach to life and it is reflected in her public persona. If she tries to do anything to counteract this basic nature, it would look false and not work. I don't think she's looking to try it. If she does click with some of Diana's old charities and can make a difference then all well and good but it would have to be something that she and the charity were comfortable with.

iowabelle · #45 09-29-2005, 10:50 AM

She seems to have made some interesting choices for organizations to patronize (good ones, I think). Like osteoporosis, "self-harm" and animal groups (I never remember Diana being the patron of any animal groups at all).

Perhaps some animosity might be avoided if the boys were offered the opportunity to choose among Diana's favorite organizations. But there's plenty of good organizations for Camilla and other royals to adopt if they wish.

ysbel · #46 09-29-2005, 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iowabelle

Perhaps some animosity might be avoided if the boys were offered the opportunity to choose among Diana's favorite organizations. But there's plenty of good organizations for Camilla and other royals to adopt if they wish.

Good point iowabelle. I think William has already taken over one of Diana's charities.

michelleq · #47 10-02-2005, 07:44 PM

I don't think that she will be as visible in the Charities as Diana was. But whatever she choses, she will be effective.

Harry's polo shirt · #48 10-07-2005, 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ysbel

It goes without saying that Camilla is a very different person and she would have had a very different relationship with the public regardless of whether Charles had married her when they first dated.

She has a simpler, more grounded approach to life and it is reflected in her public persona. If she tries to do anything to counteract this basic nature, it would look false and not work. I don't think she's looking to try it. If she does click with some of Diana's old charities and can make a difference then all well and good but it would have to be something that she and the charity were comfortable with.

Camilla has a more simpler and grounded approach to life because she had time to find herself and figure out who she is. Diana had to do that as future queen which is nearly impossible considering she was so young and was tossed into the role without knowing what to expect. As Diana got older she grew as an individual-she stopped being bitter and forgave Charles and Camilla.

I am sure Camilla will do great with her charities, I do not think the public, particularly the american public, is ready for Camilla to take over Diana's charities..Camilla would look like an evil stepmother, trying to take the mothers place.

Alicky · #49 10-07-2005, 08:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Idriel

Also, I think it's unjust to criticize her for quiting many charities after her divorce. She was stripped of her HRH style, so she had no more official capacity. I think that was the right thing to do.

Yet she kept some. Jane Atkinson even said that the move didn't make sense and that the charities' interests were not at heart when the cuts were made. :(

Princejohnny25 · #50 10-07-2005, 08:18 PM

Of course it doesnt make sense. She was still stlyed Princess of Wales and was a huge celebrity. Many celebrities are patrons and they are not Royal. I understand she did not have the means or money to carry on supporting the charities but she did not need to drop them completely. O well, all the help she did give was really good.

Incas · #51 10-07-2005, 10:48 PM

Few, if any, patrons empties out their own trust funds to support the charities they champion. Most of them just tries to talk other people into giving money or time. The bigger their names, the more attention the charity gets. Having a royal patron, Camilla or Sophie, have a bigger cache than celebrities. However, fund raising events often costs more money than an everage person can earn in a lifetime. For most of the super-rich crowd who could afford to wine and dine with royalty, chatting about this cause or that, this is their way of writing off taxes and get their pictures in Hello or OK or whatever society must-be-seen magazines. This is not to say all those celebrities/royals' involvements are insincere, but it isn't always only out of the goodness of their heart.

Princejohnny25 · #52 10-12-2005, 12:35 PM

I am going to try and get this thread back on topic. From what I see Camilla has been well recieved by the public. When the Prince and Duchess go out on official duties they can draw a crowd. From what Ive heard the Duchess has been well recieved. Comments come from the crowd like " O doesnt she look lovely" and other nice comments are heard. It isnt histeria and rather a nice reception. I read that Camilla has a huge fear of not being liked. So far everything is going good and I would love for her to take on a more invovled and solo role.

caroline mathilda · #53 10-13-2005, 08:37 AM

I think, Princejonnhy, that Camilla is sensibly taking things very slowly and deliberately. She of all people knows the passion that much of the public held/holds for Princess Diana (Remember Camilla was the one who was pelted with breadrolls at the supermarket).

Camilla's slow, careful evolution into her Royal role is probably by Clarence House PR design and her own finely tuned instinct for reading the public mood correctly.

However one feels about the Charles/ Diana/ Camilla saga, one has to admit that the Camilla metamorphisis is being conducted brilliantly.

Caroline Mathilda

BeatrixFan · #54 10-13-2005, 09:12 AM

She's pretty amazing.

I was present at Sir Angus Ogilvy's Memorial Service at Westminster Abbey earlier this year and Camilla was present, still as Mrs P-B. There was no mention of a wedding at all. I was very lucky, because I arrived about 2 minutes late and I was hurried in and sat in a row of about 5 seats by the doors. Damn I thought - in actual fact, this was the Abbey staff line. A Lady next to me who turned out to be the Dean of Westminster's wife said, "Sit there and you'll meet them".
Beautiful service. The RF passed us at the start and we all bowed etc. On the way back, they all stopped and shook hands with us. I got to meet most of the Kents/Gloucesters that day. Anywho, Camilla walked past chatting to Margaret Thatcher. The Dean's wife whispered, "Does one curtsey or not?".
I thought there was something quite spooky about that. But she could well have been a member of the RF. Black hat and gloves, smart handbag - chatting to a former PM.
I think that she's being natural but it seems that she's made the effort because it's new to most people.

P.S - I didn't curtsey. Not until I met her as Duchess of Cornwall anyway :p

**Warren** · #55 10-13-2005, 09:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeatrixFan

P.S - I didn't curtsey. Not until I met her as Duchess of Cornwall anyway :p

But you're a man! Or are we both confused? :)

ps thanks for the anecdote - much appreciated.

W

**Elspeth** · #56 10-13-2005, 11:06 AM

Well, in this equal-opporunity world, a man can curtsey if he wants to. Come on, Warren, do arrive in the 21st century like the rest of us.

Princejohnny25 · #57 10-13-2005, 01:25 PM

Quote:

Well, in this equal-opporunity world, a man can curtsey if he wants to. Come on, Warren, do arrive in the 21st century like the rest of us.

Funniest post I read in a while. Beatrix fan, how did you get invited to the rememberence service and when did you meet the duchess.

BeatrixFan · #58 10-13-2005, 03:16 PM

Beatrix fan, how did you get invited to the rememberence service and when did you meet the duchess.

Anyone can attend memorial services held at Westminster Abbey. You have to write to the Dean of Westminster when the date for the service is announced. Then you are chosen from a ballot. I was extremely lucky and managed to go along. I was very suprised to see so many people there including Timothy West and Pru Scales and Penelope Keith (I walked into Penelope at the door!)

It was a lovely service and James Ogilvy stood at the Great West Door shaking hands with us all, and a specially composed tune was played by a piper. The Earl of Airlie was there too - lovely man.

Warren - I was being sarcastic although I hear a few men do get confused and curtsey to Royalty!

The Duchess of Cornwall and The Prince of Wales attended a charity dinner that I was at recently and met them both - I won't go into mass detail but she was amazing and he was extremely charming.