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

[Tyger]

Hi , I am new to the Board and there is tons of stuff to read! This thread in particular is interesting but it is hard to stay on the straight and narrow with the topic, isn't it? Because how one thinks about Camilla (and Charles and Camilla together) depends on how one thinks about Diana - and one's thoughts about Diana must undergo change if one is to be 'okay' with Charles making Camilla his Queen. Its all one ball - inevitably.

Anyway, I realized that I had not answered the thread's question and I want to.

Initially, before I really got into the details, all I really 'knew' about Camilla was what Diana said about her. It was always one-sided. Diana did a pretty thorough 'job' on Camilla - the 'rotweiler' comment and all. The bias Diana created against Camilla was pretty complete - and then I realized one day that Camilla never once defended herself or spoke ill of Diana. Nothing. Silence. It was then I realized how successful Diana's 'campaign' had been.

Particularly, I was touched to see how nervous Camilla was on her wedding day - happy, yes, all smiles, but talk about 'going the mile' for the guy. She didn't have to do this - and she did - and it was then I started to be aware in a conscious way that Camilla is not the person Diana painted - could not be - especially when one saw William and Harry. It was then that I began to realize that a grave injustice had been done to this woman and that the step she had agreed to - to marry Charles - was courageous in a way we will never fully appreciate.

So since the marriage my opinion of Camilla has only grown in respect. Every news story that attempts to denigrate her, I look twice and thrice at. Every denigration of her looks I wince. I cannot fault her. Charles could not have made a better second marriage. She deserves to be Queen. (And I think it was this aspect that Lucien may have been referencing in what became a controversial post - that lauding Diana who was so flawed as wife and princess at the expense of Camilla who is so perfect in both her roles makes no sense. It is also interesting that a male says it so clearly - as they will).

I think King Charles and Queen Camilla will be a credit to Britain.

By the way, could not Charles choose one of his other names to be King? That said, couldn't Camilla choose another name when she is Queen?

 

[Iluvbertie]

I think you have said everything beautifully.

As for Charles regnal name - yes he can choose one of his other names or any name he likes. It has been rumoured that he is, or at least has, considered George VII but we will simply have to wait and see when he becomes King.

As for Camilla - same thing. She can choose any name she likes as well.

 

[MrsHolmes]

I agree with what Tyger has said as well.

I love seeing photos of Camilla and Charles together as they get older - their love for each other and their like of each other (which is not always there in all couples as they get older) shines through ... and is very touching.

 

[patricia114]

I liked them both as a couple before the marriage and still have the same opinion. No-one knew what reactions would be like after the marriage but i am pleased at how well they both are settling into married life. Certainly Camilla is playing her role as the supportive wife and step-mother perfectly and there is no doubt that Charles is far happier now that they are married, it was especially noticable how at ease he is during interviews now than how uncomfortable he was during the Diana years. Another thing that i am pleased about is how the press for the most part are leaving both Charles and Camilla alone, Camilla has none of the mania with the newspapers that Diana had which is completely refreshing for both us and them.

I am very happy for them both. Whether Charles ever ascends to the throne he is with the woman he loves.He may have a little trouble ascending if he makes Camilla his Queen Consort but she has ever right to the title. He was bullied by his father into marring a woman he had no interest in or love for. She is technicality the Princess of Wales, but he knows had he passed tht title to Camilla there would have been an uproar in Brittan.Whether she becomes Queen Camilla remains to be seen.

 

[Iluvbertie]

I don't understand why you think he will have trouble ascending the throne. To ascend the throne all he has to do is be alive when his mother dies - simple.
It makes no difference what title he wants for Camilla - it won't affect his right to ascent the throne. That fact is automatic - Mum dies - he is instantly King.

 

[ARTHUR43]

Charles and camilla

I think I felt that they deserved happiness but since the marriage I think they messed up too many lives and I am pleased the Princes are showing such loyalty to their mother, Princess Di

 

[Tyger]

I think I felt that they deserved happiness but since the marriage I think they messed up too many lives and I am pleased the Princes are showing such loyalty to their mother, Princess Di

The 'loyalty' to their mother is most likely due to the good parenting of their father. I find it curious the degree to which Charles is made extraneous by some even still - a continuing denigration of Charles that would perhaps please Diana were she still alive but which I don't understand what it serves now. The two sons are as they are because of Charles - they honor her because of the influence of their father - and as much as they honor their mother, they are clearly devoted to their father.

Curiuos: How have Charles and Camilla 'messed up too many lives' since their marriage? I am unaware of this.

I don't understand why you think he will have trouble ascending the throne. To ascend the throne all he has to do is be alive when his mother dies - simple.

It makes no difference what title he wants for Camilla - it won't affect his right to ascent the throne. That fact is automatic - Mum dies - he is instantly King.

I agree. I have not been understanding what people believe would cause Charles not to be king - besides dying before his mother. The suggestion that William would willingly become king over his father I find inexplicable.

The suggestion that William should - and would do so willingly - step over his father to the king-ship is a particularly heartless suggestion - requiring William to participate in an act of savagery towards his father that I don't think that young man could stomach - why would he? To put William under that kind of expectation is cruel to William, not to mention Charles who has been the dutiful servant, performing as he was told. How could anyone believe that such an action would be healthy in any personal way for William to agree to? It is highly unlikely that William has that kind of 'ambition' in him, either. He, in fact, presents as very shy and very unsettled by his public role. He is far from ready for such a step, and certainly not at the price of his father's right.

William has a long ways to go to be settled and mature enough to be in that position. He doesn't have a life yet. Charles, on the other hand, very much has a life, and - who knows from where - he has a significant intelligence with considerable capacities to work in the world. More, a King Charles is going to be tons of fun - the guy has a mind and opinions - its Charles and not William who has the ability to change things. Charles has got moxie.

 

[Iluvbertie]

I like that 'moxie'.

You say what I have been trying to say here for years but never seem to get across properly.

One thing I do remember reading was that both Diana and Charles acknowledged the role the other played in parenting the boys, and, with the exceptions of the times when Diana would deliberately sabotage Charles' access times with William, did so very well.

Charles has always been a hands-on Dad and he was there to pick up the pieces after Diana died. Richard Kay, Diana's great supporter, was one who wrote positively about Charles' as a parent in the week after Diana died describing Harry running up to his father at a dinner and cuddling his father. I also remember the image of Harry putting his hand up behind him and Charles was there when they were looking at the cards outside Balmoral. That doesn't happen when there is no positive relationship there.

I also agree that William probably wouldn't want to step into his father's shoes and become King before his time - 30 - 40 years time would be ideal I think.

 

[sirhon11234]

The 'loyalty' to their mother is most likely due to the good parenting of their father. I find it curious the degree to which Charles is made extraneous by some even still - a continuing denigration of Charles that would perhaps please Diana were she still alive but which I don't understand what it serves now. The two sons are as they are because of Charles - they honor her because of the influence of their father - and as much as they honor their mother, they are clearly devoted to their father.

Well said they're devoted to both of their parents. Its sad that some people accuse Charles and Diana of being unfit parents, with no substance to their arguments except for personal bias. Will and Harry turned out fine thanks to their parents and family.

 

[AnnEliza]

Osipi, you have said it perfectly. I see exactly the same thing. Beautifully summarized.

Diana was jealous of a seasoned friendship. She was too young and inexperienced to comprehend it. What is surprising is that she should have not understood the nature of Charles' life prior to her arrival on the scene - but I am of the opinion she did and then very wrongly assumed that her presence meant that she 'owned' Charles and could dictate to him. A mistake for anyone to make regarding a spouse but in particular for her with this particular man. Too many 'notions' in Diana's head, I think, as a too young woman in so many ways. It is a tragedy that she could not have accepted Camilla's friendship - what a different story it all would have been.

i find Camilla's story fascinating. What I wouldn't give to read her memoirs - but it will never be - she is too discreet, and in the end she knows it isn't about her, its about Charles. However, such a memoir would be a gift - and a much needed balance to 'set the record straight' from her end.

I think they make a wonderfully settled and mature older couple - and this marriage has likely meant a far more normal and healthier home-life for Charles and for his sons when his sons visit them on holidays and at family gatherings. I think Camilla deserves to be acknowledged as Queen one day, very much so.

http://i252.photobucket.com/albums/...icle-1337639-0C5FC993000005DC-220_634x624.jpg

I find YOUR post beautifully summarized -- it very much sums up my feelings.

 

[Thena]

I think you have said everything beautifully.

As for Charles regnal name - yes he can choose one of his other names or any name he likes. It has been rumoured that he is, or at least has, considered George VII but we will simply have to wait and see when he becomes King.

As for Camilla - same thing. She can choose any name she likes as well.

There's certainly precedent for it. When George V ascended the throne, he asked his wife, who was styled as Victoria Mary, to choose which name she wanted as her regnal name and she chose to be Queen Mary.

However, Camilla's middle name is Rosemary, and I do prefer the sound of Queen Camilla to Queen Rosemary.

 

[Iluvbertie]

There's certainly precedent for it. When George V ascended the throne, he asked his wife, who was styled as Victoria Mary, to choose which name she wanted as her regnal name and she chose to be Queen Mary.

However, Camilla's middle name is Rosemary, and I do prefer the sound of Queen Camilla to Queen Rosemary.

She could however chose any name so she could decide to go with say Queen Susan - totally different to her present name.

 

[Tyger]

Thank you for the kind comments, Iluvbertie and AnnEliza. It has felt very welcoming, too.

Regarding the names, I personally think King Charles sounds classy and makes sense since he has such an established public persona with it as Prince. In a sense its been his 'working name' or 'career name' and it would make sense for it to follow him into his King-ship. I think King George sounds fuddy-duddy. (Should I duck behind the couch with that?) King Philip cannot be because of his father - and King Arthur is well, too - you know!

As for Camilla - its a hard one. I think she for sure needs to transition to another name when she becomes queen, to establish herself in the role. Queen Rose? No. But Queen Mary would be nice, plenty of those, very traditional. Though it might be odd for Charles having his wife with his great-grandmother's name, ya think? I like Queen Rosemary - sounds very medieval - Queen of the May and all that. Just looked up the name Camilla - has a relationship to the name Marguerite - Queen Marguerite? Though Queen Camilla has a noble lineage with Virgil - According to tradition, recorded by the Roman poet Virgil, Camilla was the name of a warrior maiden, Queen of the Volscians, who fought in the army of Aeneas. So it's a name with noble antecedents. Queen Camilla might be just the ticket - unique, an individual, of the times!

 

[Madame Royale]

I cannot see the sense in Camilla being known by any other name which is not her given name. Establishing herself in her role as consort has little to do with her name and changing it will not benefit her role or her public image at all. In the 21st century, how could it be expected that it should? People are not so feeble minded.

It doesn't change a thing except that a woman who has her entire life been known as Camilla should then, for no logical reason, be known as something else.

 

[AnnEliza]

I cannot see the sense in Camilla being known by any other name which is not her given name. Establishing herself in her role as consort has little to do with her name and changing it will not benefit her role or her public image at all. In the 21st century, how could it be expected that it should? People are not so feeble minded.

It doesn't change a thing except that a woman who has her entire life been known as Camilla should then, for no logical reason, be known as something else.

I agree -- I hope they will be known as King Charles and Queen Camilla.

 

[muriel]

I agree -- I hope they will be known as King Charles and Queen Camilla.

I am very happy to second that.

Camilla has done a wonderful job as a royal consort.

As regards Camilla's title following Charles' accession to the throne, there is a simple principle at play: if Camilla is good enough to be Charles' wife, she is good enough to the Queen.

 

[AnnEliza]

I am very happy to second that.

Camilla has done a wonderful job as a royal consort.

As regards Camilla's title following Charles' accession to the throne, there is a simple principle at play: if Camilla is good enough to be Charles' wife, she is good enough to the Queen.

Yes, I agree with that, and besides, it's completely unprecedented for the wife of the King to be a Princess Consort. I think it's rather weird that it's stated on the website that she will be known as that. I hope that statement just quietly disappears one day off the website.

 

[Al_bina]

No, it is not unprecedented. By law, Crown Princess Maxima of Netherlands will be Princess Consort, but not Queen Maxima. The Clarence House appears to be clumsy playing the court games and wording the situations.

 

[AnnEliza]

No, it is not unprecedented. By law, Crown Princess Maxima of Netherlands will be Princess Consort, but not Queen Maxima. The Clarence House appears to be clumsy playing the court games and wording the situations.

I'm sorry, I should have been more specific. I meant it was unprecedented in the British Royal Family.

 

[jemagre]

No, it is not unprecedented. By law, Crown Princess Maxima of Netherlands will be Princess Consort, but not Queen Maxima. The Clarence House appears to be clumsy playing the court games and wording the situations.

I agree. If they would have been honest from the start this would not happened, but I think they feared that if they had told the truth then the public would not have approved. Personally speaking I think those that like them will continue to do so regardless of the titles and those that don't well...you get the point.

 

[Iluvbertie]

I agree. If they would have been honest from the start this would not happened, but I think they feared that if they had told the truth then the public would not have approved. Personally speaking I think those that like them will continue to do so regardless of the titles and those that don't well...you get the point.

I think they have been honest. The intention then, as it still is, is that she will be known as Princess Consort.

However, that intention may change in the future to be that she will be known as Queen Consort.

To say they weren't honest from the start is simply unfair, unless you have concrete evidence that all along the intention was that she would be Queen.

There is a difference between what the official intention is and what Charles would like as well. It would be right to say that all along Charles has wanted Camilla to be his Queen but that is normal for any man who loves his wife - that she would take his titles in full. However Charles, more than anyone, knows the way the public took to his first wife and that Camilla wouldn't be accepted that way and thus realises that the time isn't right for a change in the stated intention.

If the Queen died tomorrow I think Camilla would be Princess Consort but if the Queen survives another 10 years then she could become Queen.

 

[Roslyn]

If the Queen died tomorrow I think Camilla would be Princess Consort but if the Queen survives another 10 years then she could become Queen.

Hmmm. If the Queen died tomorrow, Camilla would be Queen Consort, and King Charles would have to sign off on legislation demoting his beloved wife. It would have to be rushed through Parliament with unseemly haste before everyone got used to her being Queen. Is that likely to happen? Maybe, but I tend to think not.

Of course maybe that legislation has been drafted already and is waiting the fateful monent, but if it's drafted wouldn't it just be put through now? What are they waiting for?

 

[AnnEliza]

Hmmm. If the Queen died tomorrow, Camilla would be Queen Consort, and King Charles would have to sign off on legislation demoting his beloved wife. It would have to be rushed through Parliament with unseemly haste before everyone got used to her being Queen. Is that likely to happen? Maybe, but I tend to think not.

Of course maybe that legislation has been drafted already and is waiting the fateful monent, but if it's drafted wouldn't it just be put through now? What are they waiting for?

I really wonder if they just would quietly remove that statement from the web page and in the all the events of the Queen's funeral and the new King's accession and planning of the coronation, they would just call Camilla the Queen and trust that most would accept it. I agree that I can't see them rushing through legislation at the last minute to demote her.

 

[scooter]

I really wonder if they just would quietly remove that statement from the web page and in the all the events of the Queen's funeral and the new King's accession and planning of the coronation, they would just call Camilla the Queen and trust that most would accept it. I agree that I can't see them rushing through legislation at the last minute to demote her.

I feel sure that there would be quite a large group that would not accept it. If that time were to coincide with a moment like the other night with the rioters there might be a serious problem on a number of levels. I also think that Charles was being very disingenuous with the whole 'it is intended' bit, as evidenced by not following up with the legislation and his recent interview. May QEII live to be 200.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Hmmm. If the Queen died tomorrow, Camilla would be Queen Consort, and King Charles would have to sign off on legislation demoting his beloved wife. It would have to be rushed through Parliament with unseemly haste before everyone got used to her being Queen. Is that likely to happen? Maybe, but I tend to think not.

Of course maybe that legislation has been drafted already and is waiting the fateful monent, but if it's drafted wouldn't it just be put through now? What are they waiting for?

No one has ever suggested that she wouldn't be Queen Consort in fact, just as she is Princess of Wales. This was confirmed in parliament in the week leading up to the wedding.

The necessity for legislation has been mentioned but not confirmed.

It could very simply be that on the day in question the Princess Consort title starts being used with no announcement etc being made.

We will simply have to wait and see what happens.

Charles has always made it known that he wants her crowned beside him as his Queen but that doesn't change the official line from CH and BP is still that she will be Princess Consort - so Charles has a personal preference and an official line and he will wait and see when the time comes.

 

[Roslyn]

You're right in that we will just have to wait and see, however the difference is that Charles' wife is Duchess as Cornwall as well as being Princess of Wales, so being known by one of the lesser titles does not require any positive steps. The difference with Princess Consort is that once Charles is King, Camilla will be Queen, and there will be no secondary titles for her to use. Princess Consort is a fictional title at this stage; there is no legal foundation for it. I don't know whether it can be done by Letters Patent or requires legislation, but it does require some active step to formalise the title.

Of course anyone can call themselves whatever name they like as long as it's not done to defraud, etc., and there's nothing to stop Camilla calling herself Princess Consort, if she wants it and Charles agrees. The difficulty I foresee is that those who are vehmently opposed to Camilla being Queen would jump up and down and make a fuss and make things difficult for Charles and Camilla and the government.

ETA Scooter has a point when she says a large group would not be happy about it, and if it all occurred in at a time like when there were protests such as occurred the other night, things could escalate and get quite nasty.

 

[MARG]

I feel sure that there would be quite a large group that would not accept it. If that time were to coincide with a moment like the other night with the rioters there might be a serious problem on a number of levels. I also think that Charles was being very disingenuous with the whole 'it is intended' bit, as evidenced by not following up with the legislation and his recent interview. May QEII live to be 200.

As per usual you have tried to rewrite history. The riots of last week had nothing to do with any member of the BRF but rather with Parliament for raising University fees or, as has become apparent, an opportunity for yobs and professional agitators to fuel violence. For you to imply that it did is to be disengenuous in the extreme. It is a total canard as is your statement, that you only thought Charles was being disingenuous "with the whole 'it is intended' bit", as you feel the need to cite evidence to support your "thought".

I hate to break it to you Scooter, but your education is a little deficient when it comes to a Constitutional Monarchy. Kings, Queens, Princes and Princesses do not make legislation. It is Parliament which drafts, debates, passes or loses legislation. The Monarch merely signs it into law.

 

[Iluvbertie]

You're right in that we will just have to wait and see, however the difference is that Charles' wife is Duchess as Cornwall as well as being Princess of Wales, so being known by one of the lesser titles does not require any positive steps. The difference with Princess Consort is that once Charles is King, Camilla will be Queen, and there will be no secondary titles for her to use. Princess Consort is a fictional title at this stage; there is no legal foundation for it. I don't know whether it can be done by Letters Patent or requires legislation, but it does require some active step to formalise the title.

Of course anyone can call themselves whatever name they like as long as it's not done to defraud, etc., and there's nothing to stop Camilla calling herself Princess Consort, if she wants it and Charles agrees. The difficulty I foresee is that those who are vehmently opposed to Camilla being Queen would jump up and down and make a fuss and make things difficult for Charles and Camilla and the government.

ETA Scooter has a point when she says a large group would not be happy about it, and if it all occurred in at a time like when there were protests such as occurred the other night, things could escalate and get quite nasty.

All these arguments have been discussed over and over again and all we can really say is that officially the line is still that the intention is that she will be known as the Princess Consort and that everyone, including the government acknowledge that legally she will be Queen Consort the instant the Queen dies.

We will simply have to wait and see what the circumstances are at the time.

 

[scooter]

As per usual you have tried to rewrite history. The riots of last week had nothing to do with any member of the BRF but rather with Parliament for raising University fees or, as has become apparent, an opportunity for yobs and professional agitators to fuel violence. For you to imply that it did is to be disengenuous in the extreme. It is a total canard as is your statement, that you only thought Charles was being disingenuous "with the whole 'it is intended' bit", as you feel the need to cite evidence to support your "thought".

I hate to break it to you Scooter, but your education is a little deficient when it comes to a Constitutional Monarchy. Kings, Queens, Princes and Princesses do not make legislation. It is Parliament which drafts, debates, passes or loses legislation. The Monarch merely signs it into law.

You missed my point entirely. If the moment in time that Charles announces 'Queen Camilla' happens to coincide with a moment of serious unrest for whatever reson there could easily be a perfect storm of unhappiness leading to a shedding of the monarchy all together. Last time in history the words 'off with their heads' were chanted at a royal it didnt end well. And thank you for your thoughts on my education, MARG. I shall be sure to ask for the tuition back from Harvard as it was apparently a complete waste.

 

[MARG]

Camilla will be Queen the moment our beloved Soveriegn draws her last breath. I think a nation and Commonwealth in mourning are hardly going to be in the mood to riot about anything at all let alone the immediate members of Her Majesty's family.