The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #121  
Old 05-19-2005, 11:55 AM
sara1981's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: North Little Rock, United States
Posts: 3,437
Quote:
Originally Posted by sophie
I WAS WONDERING WAS CAMILLA AT THE OPENING OF PARLERMENT,BECAUSE I DO REMEMBER DIANA IN THE COACH WITH THE QUEEN WHEN SHE WAS FIRST MARRIED TO CHARLES????
no!

she not attend at parliament with HM Queen because she very busy with schedules to do!

when Princess Diana been attend there at Parliament in 1981 since she got married to Prince Charles they later she attend there in 1992 because she very popular Princess but she will become Queen of England that why she attend there!

many people dont wanted Camilla at parliament because she not going become Queen of England because of favourite Princess Diana very much and im sure many people wanted William to become King after his dad and Granny the HM Queen but i would agree with that!

Sara Boyce
__________________

  #122  
Old 05-19-2005, 01:49 PM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,878
I'm sure that Camilla will be just as likely to attend the opening of Parliament one of these years as Diana was, or Princess Anne. It's probably simply a matter of the ceremony following rather soon after the wedding and a feeling that Camilla should be eased into her role rather than being involved in something official with such a high profile so soon after her wedding. Diana used that event at least once to upstage the Queen, and I'm sure that if Camilla had been there this year it'd have happened again, what with being the first time she'd have been done up in a tiara and everything. Much better to let the first grand-togs-and-tiara occasion be something less official.
__________________

  #123  
Old 05-19-2005, 07:37 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,194
I really don't think that Camilla is hated that much by the royal family that she would not be able to go.
  #124  
Old 05-19-2005, 08:36 PM
wymanda's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 1,527
I thought that the members of the family attending had been curtailed some years ago and now it was only Her Majesty & the Duke of Edinburgh who went. I have a feeling it came about when Mr Blair began the reformation of the House of Lords. Prior to that Prince Charles was entitled to a seat in the house as were the Dukes of Kent & Gloucester. In the reorganisation these seats were, I think, given up.
__________________
Everything I write here is my opinion and I mean no offence by it.
  #125  
Old 05-20-2005, 10:11 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,194
Oh. Ok. I didn't know this.
  #126  
Old 05-21-2005, 08:29 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: glasgow, United Kingdom
Posts: 359
Yes Wymanda you are spot on. The Opening of Parliament has been restricted to the Queen and Prince Philip for the past few years now. The only exception has been the odd inclusion of Prince Charles and Princess Anne. The days when the Kents and Gloucesters also attended seem to have stopped altogether. I don't know why this has happened. It may have been, as you say, something to do with the Prime Minister's intervention but I really don't know. The last time the Kents and Gloucesters were there was, I think, in in 1990's but I can't rightly recall.
  #127  
Old 05-21-2005, 10:30 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,194
You talk about the Prime Minister's intervention. But doesn't Blair find any ally in the royal family?
  #128  
Old 05-21-2005, 10:45 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: glasgow, United Kingdom
Posts: 359
Well yes he is quite chummy with them but has made no secret of his desire to scale the whole operation down.
  #129  
Old 06-02-2005, 12:52 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 151
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubbette
Charles himself never said he was in love with Diana--remember the interview, when asked if he was in love, he said "whatever love is?" He was always in love with Camilla, never with Diana.
I believe he didn't believe in feeling in love, versus developing a strong relationship based on common interests and experiences. I believe that is what he meant. Furthermore he wasn't given enough time to explain what he meant. As for Diana's mental health, there were a lot of issues that showed up early in her childhood. I think I should start a thread about her mental issues. I believe that during the early part of their marriage Charles was proud of her popularity, but he and the royals grew concerned when Diana started getting competitive. It was that competitiveness that caused a fracturing.
  #130  
Old 06-02-2005, 03:54 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,194
I don't think he was ever proud of her.
  #131  
Old 06-04-2005, 10:37 AM
michelleq's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Philadelphia Region, United States
Posts: 792
I do think that Charles was proud of her in the beginning. But when she started believing in her "Royal Power"(my phrase), she put a wedge between them. I also believe that Charles definitely knew was "In Love" means, because he was and still is in love with Camilla.
__________________
"Love thy neighbor as thyself"
  #132  
Old 06-04-2005, 10:06 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,194
Yes, I must agree that Charles knew everything about love.
  #133  
Old 06-08-2005, 12:42 PM
EmpressRouge's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 1,208
Anyone read this Slate article/commentary in defense of Prince Charles and his wedding to Camilla. For all the Camilla-bashers, it's different perspective on their marriage:
Pity the Poor Prince
Charles is atoning for the sins of rich, middle-aged men everywhere.

Poor Prince Charles can't catch a break. He had to postpone his wedding day to accomodate a funeral 900 miles away; devotees of his deceased ex-wife are threatening to picket the nuptials; and wedding memorabilia is selling poorly—apparently, his future subjects don't want to dry their dishes on a towel bearing the likeness of his bride-to-be, Camilla Parker Bowles. His family and fellow royals won't even do him the honor of inventing decent excuses to skip the ceremony—his father refused to cancel a trip to Germany (Germany!); Sweden's crown princess is otherwise engaged opening an IKEA store in Japan—and his mother dashed his dreams of serving an organic feast at the reception.
Charles is an easy and usually deserving target. He's the squarest man in the world, a rich, underemployed old fogy who has dressed and acted like the 56-year-old he is for the last 40 years. But after a lifetime of feckless world travel, dilettantism, and endless chukkas of polo, he's finally coming good. Despite enduring years of unforgivably cruel jokes at the expense of the woman he loves, Charles is about to do something a Frenchman would never consider: He's going to marry his mistress.

If the groom in Saturday's ceremony were Charlie Windsor instead of "His Royal Highness Prince Charles Philip Arthur George, Prince of Wales, KG, KT, GCB, OM, AK, QSO, PC, ADC, Earl of Chester, Duke of Cornwall, Duke of Rothesay, Earl of Carrick, Baron of Renfrew, Lord of the Isles and Prince and Great Steward of Scotland," he would be a hero—a mensch of modern maturity. But somehow the British press doesn't see it that way. Instead of praising the prince for his devotion, the media have simply intensified the torture, gleefully reporting the many missteps on the way to the wedding.

Apart from doctrinal condsiderations—and since the British sovereign is the head of the Church of England, the royals are expected to be more frum than the person in the next pew—what's wrong with two divorcees correcting the mistakes of their youth and finally getting wed? Just take a look at them: Charles and Camilla are living proof that love is blind. Yes, they committed adultery, but according to veteran royal-watcher Ingrid Seward, the prince didn't resume his connection with Camilla until 1986, when his marriage had suffered an "irretrievable breakdown" and after Diana had cuckolded him at least twice—with Sgt. Barry Mannakee, one of her protection officers, and Maj. James Hewitt, a man she described as "her riding instructor."

Camilla is the anti-Di. Whereas Diana was forever getting her chakras balanced and her colon irrigated, Camilla is self-confident and well-adjusted. Diana was obsessed with the trappings of celebrity, while Camilla, like the royals, prefers to hide her wealth behind a thick veneer of ordinariness. Her main interests are said to be horses, dogs, and farm prices—standard Buckingham Palace talking points, in other words.

Diana was the family student of self-help literature, but it's Charles who has jettisoned his self-defeating behavoirs. In his 20s, when he set out on the long road to the royal rose ceremony, he foolishly listened to the advice of his great-uncle and mentor Lord Mountbatten, who judged Camilla an unsuitable princess because she was older than Charles—by 16 months—and because she was "experienced." Diana may have been a godsend for the House of Windsor's gene pool and for the tabloid press, but she was a terrible match for Charles. Pledging his troth to a Sloane Ranger 12 years his junior with experience of absolutely nothing beyond a little light child-minding worked out annus-horribilisly for the prince of Wales. If Samuel Johnson was right, and second marriages represent the triumph of hope over experience, Charles and Camilla are an exception; in their case it is the long-deferred victory of experience over hope.

In an age when preposterously coiffed tycoons engage in serial matrimony with ever younger and more beautiful partners, Charles is doing his bit to atone for the sins of rich, middle-aged men everywhere. He's making an honest woman of his age-appropriate partner, a woman with whom he is well-matched in looks, habits, and hobbies, whom he has known and loved for more than 30 years. Charles' mistake was to get his weddings out of order: He married his first wife second and his trophy wife first.
http://slate.msn.com/id/2116364
__________________
Real princesses always wear sleeves so why do we all go for strapless?
  #134  
Old 06-08-2005, 04:33 PM
RoseMary's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: , United States
Posts: 150
Post

gee, Image is everything. Camilla is given a hard time for a good reason. She, like Diana has to prove herself but unlike Diana we were introduced to Camilla as, lets face it an "homewrecker".

I think Camilla is doing an okay job so far but it will take a while. Diana might have had her issues and problems but we first saw and embraced her as an innocent 20 year old, who was in love. It was only after her marriage started to crumble that the public saw all of her problems.

Its sad but true, Camilla has to work harder at her image.
__________________
If you want something done right, do it yourself.
  #135  
Old 06-08-2005, 06:14 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,194
Quote:
Originally Posted by EmpressRouge
He's making an honest woman of his age-appropriate partner, a woman with whom he is well-matched in looks, habits, and hobbies, whom he has known and loved for more than 30 years.
OMG! So funny yet true!
  #136  
Old 06-25-2005, 12:31 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,735
Camilla is doing just fine and will prove herself to be a popular royal and well-accepted as consort of Prince Charles. She is a lovely woman and times have changed. As long as Prince William and Harry are seen to have embraced her, there is no reason why she should not become Queen Consort when Charles becomes King.
  #137  
Old 06-25-2005, 10:32 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,194
But the problem is that the people are still in love with Diana. The people can overthrow the monarchy if they really wanted.
  #138  
Old 06-25-2005, 10:44 PM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,878
Well, so far it appears they don't really want to.

I think people are far less in love with Diana than they were; her wedding was a quarter of a century ago, her death was nearly 10 years ago, there have been a lot of books written about her, including by friends, that have shown her in a less than purely flattering light, and a lot of people are just tired of the whole business. They seem to be far more interested in Prince William than Charles, Diana, and Camilla these days.
  #139  
Old 06-26-2005, 10:35 PM
sara1981's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: North Little Rock, United States
Posts: 3,437
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elspeth
Well, so far it appears they don't really want to.

I think people are far less in love with Diana than they were; her wedding was a quarter of a century ago, her death was nearly 10 years ago, there have been a lot of books written about her, including by friends, that have shown her in a less than purely flattering light, and a lot of people are just tired of the whole business. They seem to be far more interested in Prince William than Charles, Diana, and Camilla these days.
i would agree with you!

Prince Charles and late Diana,Princess of Wales's wedding in 1981 was 24 years ago but almost 25 years of their wedding remind! and her wedding dress display at Althorp they wont sell it!

Princess Diana was buried in 1997 its would be 8 years but now 7 years but im wishes Diana was here! but i never met her before but im miss her very much but she very beautiful Princess and glamorous woman.

i read someone says Althorp will close but im not sure why! but her brother counts people as guests but not enough but need more! but I never went to Althorp but i wanted go see that.

Sara Boyce
  #140  
Old 07-03-2005, 03:29 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: TO, Canada
Posts: 30
Ever wonder what CAMILLA thinks?!

I sometimes wonder what Camilla thinks when she's with Prince William...

Here are some possible thoughts that go through her head:

-Diana's charm, looks, and charisma live on in Prince William's captivating presence (something that the public loves, but the public does not even care that much for her own kids)

-Even though Cam is married to Chas she is NOT THE MOTHER OF THE HEIR TO THE THRONE (ouch, she must really hate the fact that her own son will never have a key role!)

-Her own kids will never ever be treated as importantly as Princes William and Prince Harry (more ouches!)

-And, last but not least, "WHY THE HECK DID I NOT MARRY CHAS EARLIER??!?! AARRRRGHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!" (And to this I say: mwa ha ha ha ha!!)
__________________

__________________
M o n e y cannot buy h a p p i n e s s.
H a p p i n e s s, normally comes from being cared for, and caring for others. :)

Closed Thread

Tags
camilla, diana princess of wales, duchess of cornwall, prince charles, prince of wales, princess diana, relationships


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
Diana/Charles/Camilla's Relationships Part 2 Warren The Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall 935 12-07-2005 06:49 PM
The Great Baby Guessing Challenge Part 4 Alexandria General Royal Discussion Archive 17 05-16-2005 08:02 PM
The Great Baby Guessing Challenge Part 3 Alexandria General Royal Discussion Archive 24 04-10-2005 06:33 PM
The Great Baby Guessing Challenge Part 2 Alexandria General Royal Discussion Archive 7 03-06-2005 11:20 AM
King Carl XVI Gustaf and Queen Silvia, Current Events Part 1: November 2002-June 2004 Josefine Current Events Archive 300 06-12-2004 08:13 AM




Popular Tags
"chinese gordon" aif antony armstrong-jones biography bonaparte british royal family camilla canada clothes commonwealth games corruption current events current events thread daughter de belgique duchess of cornwall duke of york emma extramarital affairs fashion genetics germany grandchild harry and meghan hereditary prince alois history interesting facts introduction jacobite juan carlos king willem-alexander liechtenstein meghan markle modernization nobel 2017 osborn piromallo porphyria prince charles prince charles; biographies; tom bower prince harry prince harry of wales princess beatrice prince william public opinion pyrmont queen mary of teck queen mathilde queen maxima royal royal ancestry royal ancestry; oscar and sophia royal family royal geneology royal ladies royal wedding sarah ferguson siblings soldier state visit sweden swedish royal family the crown titles uk styles tony armstrong-jones visit from sweden waldeck wedding windsor castle working visit



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:47 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2018
Jelsoft Enterprises