The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals > The Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall

Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #461  
Old 03-13-2008, 11:08 AM
Empress's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 3,123
Hello everyone -

Please remember that any personal exchanges need to be carried out via PM. The temperature in this thread seems to be rising, and the next outbreak of personal comments will close the thread for clean up.

I am sure you are all mature enough to have some restraint and not take exception at every possible turn.

Empress
__________________

__________________
  #462  
Old 03-13-2008, 01:03 PM
CasiraghiTrio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Burbank, United States
Posts: 6,413
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon View Post
The only friend who has spoken, was Jilly and that was with tacit approval and an agreement that she would be very careful in what she said, I understand.
Who is 'Jilly'?

It's an interesting discussion some of you have been having about loyalty.
I think the loyalty of Camilla's friends shows that she gives them strong reasons to be loyal. She is loyal to them, and so they return the favor. Like attracts like. Good friends have good friends.

I do not want to engage in yet more Diana/Camilla comparison, but comparisons are so useful for illustration. With Diana, she fluctuated in her alliances so much that her "friends" never knew what they would have any given day. Will it be 'sweet' Diana or 'sulky' Diana or whatever? So maybe Diana attracted the same to her, the fluctuating, the unstable, the non-loyal.
She was such a person, with such "friends". Maybe....
__________________

  #463  
Old 03-13-2008, 01:34 PM
Russophile's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Portland, United States
Posts: 4,071
CT, you can't get away from the comparisons, there will ALWAYS be comparisons. There is no doubt in my mind that Diana did a LOT of good in her short life. She brought a lot of attention to good causes and broke a lot of barriers. She most likely would have done that to the end of her days, were they not cut short. But I do have to tell you, I am enjoying Camilla and the way she's stepping into the spotlight. I like the way she's handling her duties and the way she's supporting Charles. She's coming into her own and I see a very confident, strong woman here that's a definite asset to the RF.
  #464  
Old 03-13-2008, 01:51 PM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,945
Quote:
Originally Posted by CasiraghiTrio View Post
Who is 'Jilly'?

It's an interesting discussion some of you have been having about loyalty.
I think the loyalty of Camilla's friends shows that she gives them strong reasons to be loyal. She is loyal to them, and so they return the favor. Like attracts like. Good friends have good friends.
Jilly is a friend of Camilla's and a writer of some steamy novels!
Jilly Cooper - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  #465  
Old 03-13-2008, 03:26 PM
Jo of Palatine's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 3,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russophile View Post
CT, you can't get away from the comparisons, there will ALWAYS be comparisons. There is no doubt in my mind that Diana did a LOT of good in her short life. She brought a lot of attention to good causes and broke a lot of barriers. She most likely would have done that to the end of her days, were they not cut short. But I do have to tell you, I am enjoying Camilla and the way she's stepping into the spotlight. I like the way she's handling her duties and the way she's supporting Charles. She's coming into her own and I see a very confident, strong woman here that's a definite asset to the RF.
I like that - breaking up that endless Diana-Camilla-circle.
__________________
'To dare is to lose one step for but a moment, not to dare is to lose oneself forever' - Crown Prince Frederick of Denmark in a letter to Miss Mary Donaldson as stated by them on their official engagement interview.
  #466  
Old 03-14-2008, 11:01 AM
Jo of Palatine's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 3,323
Sometimes I think that I found the reason why part of the media and some people are so emotionally opposed towards Charles and Camilla: because Charles is such a picture-perfect prince. He really is a gentleman as well as a nobleman, he keeps his faults (according to Dimbleby: he likes to complain and has a streal of self-pity) under wraps and he goes out of his way to make people comfortable, showing a caring side that people really enjoy. He gives a lot of thought and work to better the life of others, while his personal indulgences seem small compared to what he achieves for people not so lucky as him. He is a deep thinker but not arrogant about it, he never appeared a genius but he is an example of what even kids from a non-academic family could achieve if they got proper help ().

He is Mr. Nice Guy personified and after close to 60 years of public scrutiny, I guess we would know if he had a dark side to him (other than his marriage to Di, but I come to that ).

Enter Camilla: well, she is the idea of a British lady personified and if it wasn't for a certain princess and the media, nobody would have ever discussed her private life in public, much less seen her as the center of a scandal. And the really bad thing for the media is: she is obviously as genuine an article as her prince.

So - where is the reason for the obvious dislike of the prince and his second wife? I guess it has to do with shame that the media and a lot of people fell for Diana's spell. If this prince was so picture-perfect and if his princess was the fairytale come true: why did their marriage not work out? So in order to whiten the coat of the princess, they had to blacken the prince and find the witch who was responsible.

The media caters for the public - they try to anticipate the public's reaction and attune their stories according to it. So I have hope: once the Diana-inquest is finished, there will be silence, only occassionally disturbed by some reminiscences but never threatened by some real news about her.
She will fianlly rest in peace while Britain may be allowed to enjoy their perfect prince and his darling wife. Or so I hope.
__________________
'To dare is to lose one step for but a moment, not to dare is to lose oneself forever' - Crown Prince Frederick of Denmark in a letter to Miss Mary Donaldson as stated by them on their official engagement interview.
  #467  
Old 03-14-2008, 02:27 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Canada, Canada
Posts: 1,062
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine View Post
Sometimes I think that I found the reason why part of the media and some people are so emotionally opposed towards Charles and Camilla: because Charles is such a picture-perfect prince. He really is a gentleman as well as a nobleman, he keeps his faults (according to Dimbleby: he likes to complain and has a streal of self-pity) under wraps and he goes out of his way to make people comfortable, showing a caring side that people really enjoy. He gives a lot of thought and work to better the life of others, while his personal indulgences seem small compared to what he achieves for people not so lucky as him. He is a deep thinker but not arrogant about it, he never appeared a genius but he is an example of what even kids from a non-academic family could achieve if they got proper help ().

He is Mr. Nice Guy personified and after close to 60 years of public scrutiny, I guess we would know if he had a dark side to him (other than his marriage to Di, but I come to that ).

Enter Camilla: well, she is the idea of a British lady personified and if it wasn't for a certain princess and the media, nobody would have ever discussed her private life in public, much less seen her as the center of a scandal. And the really bad thing for the media is: she is obviously as genuine an article as her prince.

So - where is the reason for the obvious dislike of the prince and his second wife? I guess it has to do with shame that the media and a lot of people fell for Diana's spell. If this prince was so picture-perfect and if his princess was the fairytale come true: why did their marriage not work out? So in order to whiten the coat of the princess, they had to blacken the prince and find the witch who was responsible.

The media caters for the public - they try to anticipate the public's reaction and attune their stories according to it. So I have hope: once the Diana-inquest is finished, there will be silence, only occassionally disturbed by some reminiscences but never threatened by some real news about her.
She will fianlly rest in peace while Britain may be allowed to enjoy their perfect prince and his darling wife. Or so I hope.
Wow, I don't know that I would call Charles a perfect prince. A bad guy with a dark side? No, but I think there are reasons people don't see Charles as a perfect prince and Camilla as a perfect princess beyond simply Diana. There are definitely some irrational Diana fans out there who hate everything Charles and Camilla do. But you don't have to have listened to a word Diana said or care anything about her to have reasons for thinking Charles and Camilla aren't the epitome of perfect royalty. I think here Charles and Camilla seem to be getting points for not talking about their private lives, being discreet and doing their social duty, etc. Maybe other people don't care as much about that, still think about the affair. I had to listen to another rant from my professor today about the dreadfulness of the whole royal family, no exceptions included. Partly because he thinks they're a waste of space anyway, partly because he thinks their personal lives all left something to be desired.
  #468  
Old 03-14-2008, 08:07 PM
Russophile's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Portland, United States
Posts: 4,071
Quote:
Originally Posted by rmay286 View Post
I had to listen to another rant from my professor today about the dreadfulness of the whole royal family, no exceptions included. Partly because he thinks they're a waste of space anyway, partly because he thinks their personal lives all left something to be desired.
Partly because secretly he'd like to BE a member of the RF???
  #469  
Old 03-15-2008, 12:11 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Canada, Canada
Posts: 1,062
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russophile View Post
Partly because secretly he'd like to BE a member of the RF???
Who knows? I can't figure out actually why someone would have such a strong opinion against the royal family, but then I don't live in Britain. He said they should all get a "real job", he couldn't stand them.

Actually it's quite interesting having a professor from Britain. It's the first time I've ever encountered the subject of the royal family at university. He asked, "So do you guys think you should get rid of the Queen?" Everyone: "What's wrong with the queen? Getting rid of our ties to Britain would be too much work! Changing the constitution and all..." I think you can that tell the general Canadian population doesn't have strong feelings about the monarchy either way.

Even so, ideas trickle down. Someone did mention seeing a recent documentary asking whether the royal family still had a purpose--were they really good examples, what with Charles marrying his mistress "Carmilla" (sic)?

I guess the point I'm making from that is that not everyone has strong feelings about Diana, but are still picking up the message that Charles might be unfit as king/head of the Church of England because he had an affair and married his mistress. And that's a fact that has nothing to do with spin by Diana or Diana fans.
  #470  
Old 03-15-2008, 09:53 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,945
Quote:
Originally Posted by rmay286 View Post
Actually it's quite interesting having a professor from Britain. It's the first time I've ever encountered the subject of the royal family at university. He asked, "So do you guys think you should get rid of the Queen?" Everyone: "What's wrong with the queen? Getting rid of our ties to Britain would be too much work! Changing the constitution and all..." I think you can that tell the general Canadian population doesn't have strong feelings about the monarchy either way.
Just because the chap is a professor, does not mean he is not a republican. According to this huge () poll of 1032 people, the majority of Canadians want to drop the monarchy.
Majority of Canadians want to drop monarchy: poll | International | Reuters
  #471  
Old 03-15-2008, 10:34 AM
milla Ca's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hannover, Germany
Posts: 1,515
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine View Post
Sometimes I think that I found the reason why part of the media and some people are so emotionally opposed towards Charles and Camilla: because Charles is such a picture-perfect prince. He really is a gentleman as well as a nobleman, he keeps his faults (according to Dimbleby: he likes to complain and has a streal of self-pity) under wraps and he goes out of his way to make people comfortable, showing a caring side that people really enjoy. He gives a lot of thought and work to better the life of others, while his personal indulgences seem small compared to what he achieves for people not so lucky as him. He is a deep thinker but not arrogant about it, he never appeared a genius but he is an example of what even kids from a non-academic family could achieve if they got proper help ().

He is Mr. Nice Guy personified and after close to 60 years of public scrutiny, I guess we would know if he had a dark side to him (other than his marriage to Di, but I come to that ).

Enter Camilla: well, she is the idea of a British lady personified and if it wasn't for a certain princess and the media, nobody would have ever discussed her private life in public, much less seen her as the center of a scandal. And the really bad thing for the media is: she is obviously as genuine an article as her prince.

So - where is the reason for the obvious dislike of the prince and his second wife? I guess it has to do with shame that the media and a lot of people fell for Diana's spell. If this prince was so picture-perfect and if his princess was the fairytale come true: why did their marriage not work out? So in order to whiten the coat of the princess, they had to blacken the prince and find the witch who was responsible.

The media caters for the public - they try to anticipate the public's reaction and attune their stories according to it. So I have hope: once the Diana-inquest is finished, there will be silence, only occassionally disturbed by some reminiscences but never threatened by some real news about her.
She will fianlly rest in peace while Britain may be allowed to enjoy their perfect prince and his darling wife. Or so I hope.
Great post, Jo, thank you!

I wish i could share your optimsm that the press will no longer damage Charles and Camilla after the Diana inquest is finished.
__________________
´We will all have to account for our actions to our children and grand-children, and if we don´t get this right, how will they ever forgive us?´
Prince Charles in a speech, 6th December 2006
  #472  
Old 03-15-2008, 01:16 PM
Duke of Marmalade's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
TRF Author
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Frankfurt am Main, Germany
Posts: 11,557
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine View Post
Sometimes I think that I found the reason why part of the media and some people are so emotionally opposed towards Charles and Camilla: because Charles is such a picture-perfect prince. He really is a gentleman as well as a nobleman, he keeps his faults (according to Dimbleby: he likes to complain and has a streal of self-pity) under wraps and he goes out of his way to make people comfortable, showing a caring side that people really enjoy. He gives a lot of thought and work to better the life of others, while his personal indulgences seem small compared to what he achieves for people not so lucky as him. He is a deep thinker but not arrogant about it, he never appeared a genius but he is an example of what even kids from a non-academic family could achieve if they got proper help ().

He is Mr. Nice Guy personified and after close to 60 years of public scrutiny, I guess we would know if he had a dark side to him (other than his marriage to Di, but I come to that ).

Enter Camilla: well, she is the idea of a British lady personified and if it wasn't for a certain princess and the media, nobody would have ever discussed her private life in public, much less seen her as the center of a scandal. And the really bad thing for the media is: she is obviously as genuine an article as her prince.

So - where is the reason for the obvious dislike of the prince and his second wife? I guess it has to do with shame that the media and a lot of people fell for Diana's spell. If this prince was so picture-perfect and if his princess was the fairytale come true: why did their marriage not work out? So in order to whiten the coat of the princess, they had to blacken the prince and find the witch who was responsible.

The media caters for the public - they try to anticipate the public's reaction and attune their stories according to it. So I have hope: once the Diana-inquest is finished, there will be silence, only occassionally disturbed by some reminiscences but never threatened by some real news about her.
She will fianlly rest in peace while Britain may be allowed to enjoy their perfect prince and his darling wife. Or so I hope.
Good post Jo but I'd like to disagree. I don't think that Charles is seen as a picture perfect prince or Mr Nice Guy. I see his image more as Mr Forever-In-Waiting who has become a bid odd during this period (painting watercolours and talking to his plants) because after having given countless audiences or attended countless events and sparked interest in countless good causes (especially re environment or Prince's trust) he has clearly reached the point where he can't do more to raise his profile as heir; it's the top job that's missing to get any further. I don't see the Diana issue still being a major (negative) influence on his public image and I acutally think that getting married to Camilla was a step in the right direction. People (including me) were actually happy that he did what he should have done 30 years ago, finally!!! I think that Camilla is good for him and that they make a happy couple - he has finally made peace with himself. Having said that and I have said it before, I don't think that there is positive impact on the institution monarchy itself. I see Charles and Camilla more or less as an elderly couple, nice but a bit odd, same as HM & Prince Philip, but the difference is that those two are from a different generation and HM - due to her young age when taking over - has gained the respect of the public for the impact she has made as monarch. This is exactly what Charles and Camilla are missing - not their fault though - and the reason why people won't support a King Charles wholeheartly. There is nothing new about him, we've seen it all before, and all he will be is a King unable to leave the shadow of his mother. I see Camilla as neither loved or respected but nor hated; she might have a good impact on her husband in private life but won't have an impact for the better on the monarchy itself. It will be down to William to capture the young generation, re-raise interest in the institution and get the public to support him as King, both by working hard and getting married to a suitable wife who brings along some emotional intelligence, a "people's princess" (sadly the comparison to his mother will be inevitable). Good luck!
  #473  
Old 03-15-2008, 02:47 PM
milla Ca's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hannover, Germany
Posts: 1,515
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke of Marmalade View Post
Good post Jo but I'd like to disagree. I don't think that Charles is seen as a picture perfect prince or Mr Nice Guy. I see his image more as Mr Forever-In-Waiting who has become a bid odd during this period (painting watercolours and talking to his plants) because after having given countless audiences or attended countless events and sparked interest in countless good causes (especially re environment or Prince's trust) he has clearly reached the point where he can't do more to raise his profile as heir; it's the top job that's missing to get any further. I don't see the Diana issue still being a major (negative) influence on his public image and I acutally think that getting married to Camilla was a step in the right direction. People (including me) were actually happy that he did what he should have done 30 years ago, finally!!! I think that Camilla is good for him and that they make a happy couple - he has finally made peace with himself. Having said that and I have said it before, I don't think that there is positive impact on the institution monarchy itself. I see Charles and Camilla more or less as an elderly couple, nice but a bit odd, same as HM & Prince Philip, but the difference is that those two are from a different generation and HM - due to her young age when taking over - has gained the respect of the public for the impact she has made as monarch. This is exactly what Charles and Camilla are missing - not their fault though - and the reason why people won't support a King Charles wholeheartly. There is nothing new about him, we've seen it all before, and all he will be is a King unable to leave the shadow of his mother. I see Camilla as neither loved or respected but nor hated; she might have a good impact on her husband in private life but won't have an impact for the better on the monarchy itself. It will be down to William to capture the young generation, re-raise interest in the institution and get the public to support him as King, both by working hard and getting married to a suitable wife who brings along some emotional intelligence, a "people's princess" (sadly the comparison to his mother will be inevitable). Good luck!
Duke of Marmalade, i disagree with most of your statements.

Your describtion of Charles as a heir who only paints watercolours and talks to plants is only fit for an article in a tabloid but nothing more.
The Prince is a hard working man ( maybe you should have a look in his diary), who travels around the country to support different projects, to help people, to represent the crown. He is president of many many charities and the Prince´s Trust helps and supports young people in a very successful way. Other things are his organic farm and his engagement for the environment which is respected also abroad.

Together with his wife, who is president of many charities herself and who always supports her husband in a great way, the Prince and the Duchess are not an odd couple but the future of the monarchy. There was never a Princ e of Wales who was so well prepared to do the job as a King before.

I hope in many many years ( after the reign of his father) we can say the same about William and his wife. At the moment he his only a young man learning a job but not someone who could be a good King yet or in the near future.
__________________
´We will all have to account for our actions to our children and grand-children, and if we don´t get this right, how will they ever forgive us?´
Prince Charles in a speech, 6th December 2006
  #474  
Old 03-15-2008, 03:58 PM
Jo of Palatine's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 3,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke of Marmalade View Post
I don't think that Charles is seen as a picture perfect prince or Mr Nice Guy. I see his image more as Mr Forever-In-Waiting who has become a bid odd during this period (painting watercolours and talking to his plants) because after having given countless audiences or attended countless events and sparked interest in countless good causes (especially re environment or Prince's trust) he has clearly reached the point where he can't do more to raise his profile as heir; it's the top job that's missing to get any further.
Let's view the situation form a different angle: what would be if the Britons suddenly decide to get rid of their monarchy. What would the queen do, what would Charles do? Who do you think would have more impact without the position they now hold? For me the answer is clear: Charles would smoothly fit in with the republic, still enjoy the comfort he is used to as a very rich man and he would go on being an enormously sucessful CEO of the Duchy of Cornwall. Probably he would get voted into parliament for the Tetbury constituency.

But what would the queen do? I guess she would retire, dignified and silent. I don't see her as the fighter for the non-priviledged while I see Charles continuing his work.
__________________
'To dare is to lose one step for but a moment, not to dare is to lose oneself forever' - Crown Prince Frederick of Denmark in a letter to Miss Mary Donaldson as stated by them on their official engagement interview.
  #475  
Old 03-15-2008, 05:09 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 365
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon View Post
Just because the chap is a professor, does not mean he is not a republican. According to this huge () poll of 1032 people, the majority of Canadians want to drop the monarchy.
Majority of Canadians want to drop monarchy: poll | International | Reuters
It said it was an online poll, which I wouldn't put much faith in. Self-selecting polls aren't as accurate as random ones.

Getting rid of the monarchy in Canada is a very tall task. There has to be agreement between the federal and provincial governments. I don't see it being such a top of mind issue, that any government would start the fight.
  #476  
Old 03-15-2008, 05:28 PM
Duke of Marmalade's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
TRF Author
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Frankfurt am Main, Germany
Posts: 11,557
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine View Post
Let's view the situation form a different angle: what would be if the Britons suddenly decide to get rid of their monarchy. What would the queen do, what would Charles do? Who do you think would have more impact without the position they now hold? For me the answer is clear: Charles would smoothly fit in with the republic, still enjoy the comfort he is used to as a very rich man and he would go on being an enormously sucessful CEO of the Duchy of Cornwall. Probably he would get voted into parliament for the Tetbury constituency.

But what would the queen do? I guess she would retire, dignified and silent. I don't see her as the fighter for the non-priviledged while I see Charles continuing his work.
First of all, this is an interesting but hypothetical question - if the Britons would want to get rid of the monarchy they would do so after HM's death as it will mark the end of an era anyway. She is not only loved and respected for what she has achieved during her long reign but also because she is seen in line with those great (female) monarchs who had a huge impact on Britains history and present, such as Elizabeth I or Victoria.

For me there is only one answer to this question: the person QE II is not even conceivable without being the monarch. She is not and does not want to be seen as a private person but only as head of state serving her country. A Britain without the institution monarchy would not be HM's Britain - I am sure she would feel like ET coming to planet earth after all these years.

Charles however is from a different generation, has never been monarch and would be able to adapt to the situation, continuing with the work he has done so far, I completely agree with that, and this is what makes the situation so dangerous and leads to another question: Why would Britain need a monarch if the heir would do the same work anyway? Apart from hard work and service to the country, royals must stand out and have a special aura that makes people get attracted to them. Again, I like Charles & Camilla but I don't see anything special in them, no sparkle or inspiration and therefore I believe that there will be tough times ahead for the monarchy after HM's death.
  #477  
Old 03-15-2008, 05:41 PM
milla Ca's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hannover, Germany
Posts: 1,515
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke of Marmalade View Post
Again, I like Charles & Camilla but I don't see anything special in them, no sparkle or inspiration and therefore I believe that there will be tough times ahead for the monarchy after HM's death.
And why do you think that William can revive this ´sparkle of inspiration´, only because he is young and looks a bit like his mother?
When this is the qualification for a good King then i really fear for the future of the British monarchy...
__________________
´We will all have to account for our actions to our children and grand-children, and if we don´t get this right, how will they ever forgive us?´
Prince Charles in a speech, 6th December 2006
  #478  
Old 03-15-2008, 06:44 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,387
Actually the fights that members here are having about who was most at fault in Charles, Diana's and Camilla's situation sound very similar to the sides that friends take when their mutual friends get divorced. I still believe this is the fallout of Diana directly taking her case to the people. If she hadn't have done it, if she and Charles had gone the route of Joachim and Alexandra, I think the outcome for all three Diana, Charles, and Camilla, and all of their children would have been vastly different than what it turned out to be.

And I think that people's opinions of Charles and Camilla and William and Harry would be very different than what they are otherwise.

But the Duke of Marmalade made a very good point here in this post below.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke of Marmalade View Post
I see his image more as Mr Forever-In-Waiting who has become a bid odd during this period (painting watercolours and talking to his plants) because after having given countless audiences or attended countless events and sparked interest in countless good causes (especially re environment or Prince's trust) he has clearly reached the point where he can't do more to raise his profile as heir; it's the top job that's missing to get any further.
What it looks like is that Charles has overstayed his welcome in the role he has now and that is as the heir to the throne. I can see that. He's been the heir since he was three years old, for sake of novelty people would like to see another heir. The sole reason for this is that his mother has lived too long. That I can see so it really makes one wonder whether the Queen should abdicate - not for William - but for Charles. People can prepare all they want but at some point the only way to evaluate whether you ready for the top job is to give it to you.

And then William would have a new role as the dashing young heir. Actually I think the Queen out of duty would not want to abdicate but if she felt that in abdicating she was fulfilling her duty, then I think she would.

However, to effect that change both the Queen and the government would have to be comfortable that a monarchy with a King Charles would work now and be secure.

I was thinking that Charles and Camilla could settle back as the monarchs and let William take center stage as the dashing future of the monarchy without jeopardizing the hereditary succession of the throne which jumping over Charles would do.

The question is whether William is interested in being sparkling to the public and can he do it? The other question would be whether Charles and Camilla can assume the aura of aged respectability.

They had affairs so I think its a matter of whether people will always see them as permanently tainted by their original sin or whether people see them as survivors, those who made mistakes and learned from them.

In one sense, if someone has a reputation of having lessons learned from their mistakes, it can give them an added respectability.
__________________
"One thing we can do is make the choice to view the world in a healthy way. We can choose to see the world as safe with only moments of danger rather than seeing the world as dangerous with only moments of safety."
-- Deepak Chopra
  #479  
Old 03-15-2008, 06:46 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Canada, Canada
Posts: 1,062
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke of Marmalade View Post
Good post Jo but I'd like to disagree. I don't think that Charles is seen as a picture perfect prince or Mr Nice Guy. I see his image more as Mr Forever-In-Waiting who has become a bid odd during this period (painting watercolours and talking to his plants) because after having given countless audiences or attended countless events and sparked interest in countless good causes (especially re environment or Prince's trust) he has clearly reached the point where he can't do more to raise his profile as heir; it's the top job that's missing to get any further. I don't see the Diana issue still being a major (negative) influence on his public image and I acutally think that getting married to Camilla was a step in the right direction. People (including me) were actually happy that he did what he should have done 30 years ago, finally!!! I think that Camilla is good for him and that they make a happy couple - he has finally made peace with himself. Having said that and I have said it before, I don't think that there is positive impact on the institution monarchy itself. I see Charles and Camilla more or less as an elderly couple, nice but a bit odd, same as HM & Prince Philip, but the difference is that those two are from a different generation and HM - due to her young age when taking over - has gained the respect of the public for the impact she has made as monarch. This is exactly what Charles and Camilla are missing - not their fault though - and the reason why people won't support a King Charles wholeheartly. There is nothing new about him, we've seen it all before, and all he will be is a King unable to leave the shadow of his mother. I see Camilla as neither loved or respected but nor hated; she might have a good impact on her husband in private life but won't have an impact for the better on the monarchy itself. It will be down to William to capture the young generation, re-raise interest in the institution and get the public to support him as King, both by working hard and getting married to a suitable wife who brings along some emotional intelligence, a "people's princess" (sadly the comparison to his mother will be inevitable). Good luck!

I basically agree with this whole post. Jo of Palatine suggested that Charles could be very popular if people just forgot about Diana, or would have been popular had he not married Diana. I think not and for most of the reasons you suggested.

Firstly, the fact that Charles is dedicated to worthy causes, carries out many public engagements, and does so with good humour and discipline, only goes so far. I think if a monarch is going to become popular for their work ethic and sense of duty, these qualities have to be seen as exceptional--in other words, that the monarch isn't just fulfilling his/her duty but going above and beyond. The Queen is seen as going beyond the call of duty for three reasons: first, she became queen at a younger age than most and thus has reigned longer than most monarchs. Secondly, even though nowadays she's still just doing her duty as usual, this is now seen as exceptional because she's in her 80s, when what was routine at 40 starts to look impressive. Thirdly, the queen's reputation has remained impeccable all throughout her reign; you never hear of her making an inappropriate comment, let alone committing an indiscreet act. She really comes across as a faultless example of personal character.

Charles, on the other hand, might be dutiful, but he doesn't have any of the advantages his mother has, which make a monarch seem exceptional. He'll never reign as long (that's not his fault, but it's a fact). He's middle-aged; maybe he'll be more admired for working hard when he's in his 80s, but even then he'll only have been king for a few years as opposed to his mother's impressive 55+. He does have scandals in his past. And beyond that, Charles is eccentric or at least viewed as such. He makes comments on current affairs that some people might see as dubious, such as offering support for Muslims.

Of course a monarch can always become popular despite all kinds of flaws, provided they're charismatic or have that "sparkle" you talked about. Queen Elizabeth doesn't necessarily sparkle, but she doesn't need to because of her reputation. I don't personally believe Charles and Camilla have the charisma or the widespread appeal to ever catch the public's attention. The Canadian poll Skydragon brought over was interesting. Here's a quote:

Quote:
In a separate question, 35 percent of respondents said they wanted Prince William to succeed the queen, compared with 20 percent who favor Prince Charles.

Support for cutting ties to the monarchy increases to 55 percent if Prince Charles were to become king -- a common thread in Commonwealth countries, said Mario Cansenco, director of global studies at Angus Reid.
People for whatever reason (probably because he's young) think William is more energetic and appealing and can renew the monarchy. I have no idea if he can, in fact from what I've seen of him lately he doesn't seem very goal-driven and given the long wait he'll have to be king, why should he be?--but that poll kind of goes to show you that Charles doesn't quite capture the public imagination.
  #480  
Old 03-15-2008, 07:07 PM
randomlyKeira's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: London and New York, United Kingdom
Posts: 381
I haven't read through the entire thred, but I'm answering the question in the first post, so sorry if I'm a bit daft and might reiterate what others have said...

Charles and Camilla seem genuinely happy together. I was at their wedding, and even though it made me a little sick to my stomach because of Camilla's unequal comparison to Diana, you couldn't help but be happy for them. I'm not much of a Camilla fan, but I don't have an outright hatred for her either.
__________________

Closed Thread

Tags
camilla, duchess of cornwall, prince charles, prince of wales, relationships, royal duties


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall: Visit to Portugal - March 28-30, 2011 Princess Agnes The Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall 45 04-06-2011 08:24 PM
Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall Current Events 12: February-March 2006 Elspeth Current Events Archive 203 03-08-2006 12:30 PM




Popular Tags
ascot 2016 best gown best gown september 2016 best hat best outfit catherine middleton style coup d'etat crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mary fashion crown princess mette-marit current events diana duchess of cambridge duchess of cornwall eveningwear e-mail fashion poll grand duke jean greece kate middleton king abdullah ii king felipe king felipe vi king willem-alexander member introduction monarchy new zealand nobel gala norway november 2016 october 2016 opening of parliament picture of the week prince bernhard prince charles princess madeleine princess marie princess mary princess mary daytime fashion princess mary fashion princess mary hats princess victoria birthday princess victorias daytime fashion queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen letizia style queen mathilde queen mathildes outfits queen mathildes style queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania royal fashion september 2016 state visit state visit to denmark stewart succession sweden the duchess of cambridge the duchess of cambridge casual wear the duchess of cambridge daytime fashion the duchess of cambridge fashion the duchess of cambridge hats


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:00 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2016
Jelsoft Enterprises