Charles and Camilla current events 20: March-April 2008

[Nico]

We have plenty of photographic evidence of what Charles looks like when he is not happy in his marriage, and that is not the Charles I see in the photos with Camilla.

Can't agree more:

1992:
http://cache3.asset-cache.net/xc/761...1E7EC1A351FC8B

2008:

http://cache4.asset-cache.net/xc/801...AAE4E13EDE9114

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by Al_bina

Well, I dare to assume that Prince Charles and Duchess of Cornwall have to look happy in public, even if they are somewhat unhappy with each other in private.

Noone is always happy, even in a loving marriage. Living together needs some sort of adaption and once you reached a certain age you're quite set in your own ways, so there are bound to be some problems. But even if they have a row once in a while, it doesn't meant they are not happy with each other, it just means that from time to time they have differing opinions. So what? Any reason why spouses should be the clone of the other?

Plus I don't think anyone takes these articles seriously. Because what they do is casting doubts on Charles' personality. If there was any truth behind it, it would be a case for the political editor, as the Duke of Edinburgh's stay at the hospital must have alerted all that the queen and her husband are old people now and that the future lies firmly with Charles.

It's probably only the case of editors getting bored with so much marital bliss. To quote the king of Sweden who answered the question why there are no scandalous reports about him and his queen: "It's because we're happily married and that is sooo boring for others. We are sooo boring."

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by Al_bina

Why should anyone care whether or not Prince Charles and Duchess of Cornwall are happy?

I think it is called being human! I feel sorry for the people who have posted nasty comments regarding Camilla, there is something seriously lacking in them, to rejoice at the perceived misfortune of others. Perhaps they too should remember, 'what goes around comes around'.

Perhaps the Mail should try to find someone other than a Kay clone to guide it's youngsters.

[MARG]

Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine

To quote the king of Sweden who answered the question why there are no scandalous reports about him and his queen: "It's because we're happily married and that is sooo boring for others. We are sooo boring."

Obviously a severe case of marital blues here. As with Charles and Camilla, the king (and presumeably the Queen) of Sweden are in total denial.

Who do they think they are fooling with their loving looks, laughter, joy and overwhelming contentment? These people are obviously deeply disturbed, showing a distinct failure to face the truth of their tragic plight.

As with Sweden, the prospect of royal marital disharmony and imminent divorce (or spousal homicide if you prefer) looms large on the horizon of the BRF. Can the D**** Mail save them? Can the give a blow by blow account? Tune in (or buy your next D**** Mail) for the next thrilling installment.

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by MARG

Tune in (or buy your next D**** Mail) for the next thrilling installment.

I highly doubt anyone here has ever bought that piece of rubbish - except for using it at the bottom of their garbage bin...

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine

I highly doubt anyone here has ever bought that piece of rubbish - except for using it at the bottom of their garbage bin...

Good grief, I would rather use The Telegraph for that, much better quality for the bottom of the bin!

[magnik]

Not exactly on the topic but during my today way to work I read in one of local yellow paper that C and C going divorce. First I thought that today is 1 April but not...

[Al_bina]

Why do followers of Prince Charles and Duchess of Cornwall bother to post articles from Daily Mail? Would be it easier to ignore this new paper instead of fulminating about these inaccurate articles?
To moderators:
If the questions are out of place, please, delete them.

[sthreats]

Albina--I am not sure what you mean by "followers". I think everyone on this site follows the various royal families out of general interest or just for history and general learning. And of course we all have our favorites. I think positive and negative articles should be looked at and yes some things should be taken with a grain of salt.

That being said, even a tabloid writer can't just pull a lie out of his or her head (or behind) and call it a fact. These stories are coming from someone. I know that Camilla's friends don't talk to the press but someone is. Maybe a former friend or someone with an ax to grind. The word friend can be used very loosely. The same is true for the statements that are coming from staff.

My advice for the couple is to clean house. I have a feeling that Camilla is down to earth enough to realize this.

[Al_bina]

It has been most kind of you to provide your perspective on the questions I have asked. I fully agree with your opinion expressed in the second paragraph. Under such circumstances, I deem it impolite to refer to Daily Mail in derogatory terms. Well, Daily Mail may be found guilty of overdramatising relationships between Prince Charles and Duchess of Cornwall. As for friends, money tends to fatally attract even the most loyal friends.

[Russophile]

I highly doubt Camilla's friends are talking. I think the Daily Mail has to come up with something now that the Diana inquest is dying down. (No pun intended! )

[MARG]

Originally Posted by Jo of Palentine

I highly doubt anyone here has ever bought that piece of rubbish - except for using it at the bottom of their garbage bin...

Originally Posted by Skydragon

Good grief, I would rather use The Telegraph for that, much better quality for the bottom of the bin!

Jo. Skydragon, what can I say. How terribly gauche, how absolutely tackless of me to even hint that anyone of discernment might actual buy that rag. So, maybe get trapped in a supermarket checkout surrounded by hoardings, unable to make a break for it and wondering if the body would actually allow you to vault the barrier and escape?

Failing that, it would have to be the chip wrapping from that illicit Fish & Chip lunch you scoffed hoping noone would ever find out!

[milla Ca]

Royals visit shortbread bakery
April 8

Charles and Camilla will officially open the new head office of a renowned bakery in Moray.

The Press Association: Royals visit shortbread bakery

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by MARG

Jo. Skydragon, what can I say. How terribly gauche, how absolutely tackless of me to even hint that anyone of discernment might actual buy that rag. So, maybe get trapped in a supermarket checkout surrounded by hoardings, unable to make a break for it and wondering if the body would actually allow you to vault the barrier and escape?

Failing that, it would have to be the chip wrapping from that illicit Fish & Chip lunch you scoffed hoping noone would ever find out!

Dearest, all that would imply that we actually touch that rag with our aristocratic hand or smell the odour of cheap paper and even cheaper printer's ink with out fine-tuned nose.... Tssss.... Of course we only ever read it on the web, where the dirtyness of this tabloid's reality is covered up by the elegantly designed high-tech display of our computer - and one click and it's gone. No need to ask housekeeping for removal to whatever purpose staff deems appropriate.

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by sthreats

That being said, even a tabloid writer can't just pull a lie out of his or her head (or behind) and call it a fact.

Of course they can. They can be realistically sure that as long as they don't say anything too tough (like Charles killed his grandmother to inherit Birkhall and Mey) nothing will happen. So of course they "invent" stories. And I put "Invent" in these inverted commas because they don't invent the script of the story - it's simply based on the structure of successful soap operas. Just wait till Harry or William take a bride - you'll then learn all about the bitchy side of Camilla as mother-in-law....

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by Al_bina

Why do followers of Prince Charles and Duchess of Cornwall bother to post articles from Daily Mail? Would be it easier to ignore this new paper instead of fulminating about these inaccurate articles?

Personally, I believe in posting the good and the bad about any of our past and present royals, normally with my opinion as an aside. What would be the point of only posting the good, someone, somewhere would most certainly post a negative article to follow.

Originally Posted by MARG

Jo. Skydragon, what can I say. How terribly gauche, how absolutely tackless of me to even hint that anyone of discernment might actual buy that rag. So, maybe get trapped in a supermarket checkout surrounded by hoardings, unable to make a break for it and wondering if the body would actually allow you to vault the barrier and escape?

Failing that, it would have to be the chip wrapping from that illicit Fish & Chip lunch you scoffed hoping noone would ever find out!

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by sthreats

That being said, even a tabloid writer can't just pull a lie out of his or her head (or behind) and call it a fact. These stories are coming from someone. I know that Camilla's friends don't talk to the press but someone is. Maybe a former friend or someone with an ax to grind. The word friend can be used very loosely. The same is true for the statements that are coming from staff.

My advice for the couple is to clean house. I have a feeling that Camilla is down to earth enough to realize this.

They do 'invent' stories and the ubiquitous unnamed friend is always a good 'get out'.

I very much doubt that any of Charles and Camilla's friends would consider discussing their marriage, vague friends wouldn't know anything about it and I am also sure that their friends do not discuss the matter with other, out of their circle, friends.

I would imagine that to their friends, the relationship they have enjoyed with Charles and Camilla, for many years is far too valuable (and I don't mean a monetary value) to them to risk letting a snippet escape.

I also doubt many of the staff, past and present, would chance gossiping, they know that unless they earn enough to live on in the future, their chances of employment elsewhere are zero..

Originally Posted by Al_bina

As for friends, money tends to fatally attract even the most loyal friends.

Not in my opinion!

[jcbcode99]

I read with humor and mild interest the "saga" of Charles and Camilla as they near their anniversary--and then I read with HORROR that some members of the beloved forum may actually be buying these rag--PERISH THE THOUGHT! I personally feel that my trash bin is entirely too good for those drivel filled, mundane, second rate, B-class, tacky, and sensationalist rags. I actually did coursework on the topic of Yellow Journalism years ago when I was working on a degree in English Literature--and it is apparent that the Daily Mail and other such rags are guilty of indulging in this, what I believe to be, highly suspect form of journalism. I simply call it sensationalism. Certainly to a lesser degree than the Hearst/Pulitzer journalism wars which helped to lead the US into a war (The Spanish-American War) --of course, we are seeing that sort of publication currently with all the things occuring in the world right now (no need to diverge into a political discussion--it will surely become heated and words and little orange icons with various facial expressions will fly back and forth as one upmanship is strived for), but I sense a strong undercurrent/leaning towards this yellow journalism whenver I read about Charles and Camilla arging, divorcing, barely tolerating each other, etc....It really is written to sell papers, and to get people who do not agree with their right to marrige up in arms -- why? Not really because of any loyalty to the first wife--but to sell more papers. Money is always the bottom line. While I am not one of those who believe that Diana was a victim (lets not go down that road of discussion for the 10,000th time, please) I do strongly believe these articles, while not always mentioning Diana by name, are of course aimed at those who cherish her memory and who tend to get a bit fanatical about her and the whole triangle. And, what do fanatics do? They spend money on what they are fanatics about. It's a pity she is so marketable in death--I can only begin to imagine how much money she has made for papers since 1997. And, now, with the inquest looming to an end (hopefully, finally!) the rags know they won't be able to throw accusations and point fingers and make barely veiled assumptions about the Royal Familiy--so they now go on the attack with these stories of a marriage in trouble--when in all truth they are quite happy together and are perfectly comforable with the relationship to spend time apart from each other as well. It's their routine and has been for decades. If it ain't broke......

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by jcbcode99

I read with humor and mild interest the "saga" of Charles and Camilla as they near their anniversary--and then I read with HORROR that some members of the beloved forum may actually be buying these rag--PERISH THE THOUGHT!.

Indeed, Perish the thought!