The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #181  
Old 11-16-2005, 07:44 PM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,859
Everyone in that family is banking on William.

We can't possibly know that. Let's look at it from an outsiders point of view -

Anne and Tim, probably couldn't care less. They'll be in Kensington Palace growing old gracefully.

Edward and Sophie, they could divorce if they really aren't happy and he could be a film producer (and possibly come out if he is gay)

Andrew, could marry Sarah again and open a golf club

Edward and Katherine, She wants to be Mrs Kent so if a revolution happens it'll be a blessing. He probably wouldn't mind if it all went under.

Alexandra, She was raised by Queen Mary - the most Imperial Queen since Victoria. She has her country estate and her grandchildren. As long as she's kept in stockings and gin she'll be happy.

Michael and Marie-Christine, nobody likes them anyway whether its Elizabeth, Charles or William.

Richard and Birgitte, Low key and probably wouldnt mind much what happened.

If the House of Windsor collapsed tomorrow, they would all write books, spread across the world and live as the Romanians, the Germans, the Greeks etc etc have lived. William isn't their last hope. It's the whole lot - they have to work as a team to stay afloat.
__________________

__________________
Kaye aka BeatrixFan
  #182  
Old 11-16-2005, 07:45 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 589
From the beginning, I believe that Camilla can survive in the royal family. She knows how to shield her power behind the scences. She did not have any interest to upstage those who were born into royalties. She was bought up in a traditional monarchist way and she likes the style of establishment. I appreciate her tradtional way to be a royal not a celerbity instead. Diana was probably too young and too modern for the royal family. Diana did not know much about the traditional values of royal family I guess.She cannot fit in the royal family's styles.

Finally, I think Camilla is interested in Charles because Charles is much more faithful to her than Andrew Parker Bowles was. Charles depends on her for a lot of things and she likes the dependence. Even Charles may have other women, no one can shake their relationships and she has this kind of self-confidence. Camilla did not let Charles go because Charles needs her and she needs him as well. They two are emotional people and quite selfish to satisfy their own needs first. I guesss Camilla was heartbroken by Andrew's philanding and decided to keep close with Charles which can save her from her marriage pains.
__________________

  #183  
Old 11-16-2005, 07:49 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,387
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zonk1189
In terms of the emotional support, from what I see....Camilla provides it in spades to Charles.
I'm not so sure of that. She told him she wouldn't go see him play polo any more - it was boring.

She reminds me a bit of my old riding teacher - pleasant but brusque, no-nonsense, doesn't make a big deal out of anything and has no patience if others make a big deal out of things. I imagine she told Charles quite a few times to stop whining. :p

Actually I do think Charles has indulged in self-pity in the past but he's seemed to move out of it into more self-confidence in the last few years.
I think Charles has become less defensive and more self-confident if only for the reason that Camilla might not put up with him if if kept on feeling sorry for himself. I don't think she has patience for too much of that. Is that giving support? Yeah, in a way but its not what most people think of as support. Maybe tough love? But it works! :p

I wouldn't read to much in the 60 minutes interview, he basically said it was hard to have an effect because it was easy for people to blow him off for his privileged position. His tone was very matter-of-fact but what he said was the truth; all the Crown Princes have that problem. Fred, Haakon, Willem. Willem gets blown off more than Charles.
  #184  
Old 11-16-2005, 07:49 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago, United States
Posts: 1,584
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeatrixFan
Everyone in that family is banking on William.

We can't possibly know that. Let's look at it from an outsiders point of view -

Anne and Tim, probably couldn't care less. They'll be in Kensington Palace growing old gracefully.

Edward and Sophie, they could divorce if they really aren't happy and he could be a film producer (and possibly come out if he is gay)

Andrew, could marry Sarah again and open a golf club

Edward and Katherine, She wants to be Mrs Kent so if a revolution happens it'll be a blessing. He probably wouldn't mind if it all went under.

Alexandra, She was raised by Queen Mary - the most Imperial Queen since Victoria. She has her country estate and her grandchildren. As long as she's kept in stockings and gin she'll be happy.

Michael and Marie-Christine, nobody likes them anyway whether its Elizabeth, Charles or William.

Richard and Birgitte, Low key and probably wouldnt mind much what happened.

If the House of Windsor collapsed tomorrow, they would all write books, spread across the world and live as the Romanians, the Germans, the Greeks etc etc have lived. William isn't their last hope. It's the whole lot - they have to work as a team to stay afloat.
NOW that..is one hell of an interesting way of looking at it...

stockings and gin....I cannot stop laughing...

I picture Marie-Christine saying, "Give me that crown, I worked hard for it and I want to wear it!!!!!"
  #185  
Old 11-16-2005, 07:50 PM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,859
Quote:
I picture Marie-Christine saying, "Give me that crown, I worked hard for it and I want to wear it!!!!!"
Darling - MC probably opens a bread-bin and tiaras fall out. She'd be sick of the sight of them!
__________________
Kaye aka BeatrixFan
  #186  
Old 11-16-2005, 07:51 PM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 11,329
You know that brings up an interesting point. Someone mentioned that Diana should be ashamed because if she was the betrayed party in her marriage to Charles she shouldn't have done the same thing to other woman (Will Carlings wife, etc.)

Might the same thing be said of Camilla? If she was devastated by Andrew's philandering....why she do the same to another woman (Diana if you are going with the assumption that Charles cheated first)? Or does it not count (committing adultery) if you are in love?
  #187  
Old 11-16-2005, 07:51 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago, United States
Posts: 1,584
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeatrixFan
Darling - MC probably opens a bread-bin and tiaras fall out. She'd be sick of the sight of them!
Be still my heart, to have that problem..
  #188  
Old 11-16-2005, 07:52 PM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,859
Love is the greatest mystery known to man. Whoever claims to understand it can't possibly have known it.
__________________
Kaye aka BeatrixFan
  #189  
Old 11-16-2005, 08:09 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,387
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zonk1189
You know that brings up an interesting point. Someone mentioned that Diana should be ashamed because if she was the betrayed party in her marriage to Charles she shouldn't have done the same thing to other woman (Will Carlings wife, etc.)
Why are we keeping score on who has the most blame? Isn't that rather pointless since everybody agrees that all three were to blame?
  #190  
Old 11-16-2005, 08:32 PM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 11,329
You are right Ysbel..sorry. I try to rise above the fray. It just sometimes...it frustrating to read some of the posts about Diana. Some members accuse the so-called Diana fanatics of elevating her to Sainthood..yet treat Camilla as if she was the second coming. I just want to know why she is being judged by a different critieria. But I will be good :)
  #191  
Old 11-16-2005, 09:05 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,387
No need to apologize, Zonk. :)

I'm analytical, give me a chance and I can be critical of anyone and everyone, and still like the person. :) That can have its drawbacks on a board like this. I end up reading posts of people complaining about bashing and think, what in the hell are they talking about. :)

I've probably bashed a half a dozen royals by now without realizing it. :p
  #192  
Old 11-17-2005, 06:36 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,945
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady Marmalade
You know when the can of worms was opened with the media started before we were all even born....when the Queen, spurned on by Prince Philip, allowed the documentary to be made "The Royal Family" in the late 1960's.

:)
I'm not ashamed to say I was about at the time and we were all enthralled by the programme.:)
  #193  
Old 11-17-2005, 06:52 AM
Warren's Avatar
Administrator in Memoriam
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 15,476
Royal Family program 1969

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon
I'm not ashamed to say I was about at the time and we were all enthralled by the programme.:)
Same here, and at the time this program was groundbreaking, and very popular. I still have the book! It was only much later on that certain media pundits declared that this program "started the rot" but I don't see why; it didn't reveal that much. In a way they are saying that because the program piqued the public interest, the public wanted more, thereby leading to the intense media intrusion we have today; ie the Royal Family "brought it on themselves".

I think the reason has more to do with the extremely competitive nature of the British tabloids, the rise of the paparrazzi as legitimate photo sources, and the general public acceptance of media trashing of public figures. (Wasn't Kate Moss done over and hung out to dry?) [pun intended]
  #194  
Old 11-17-2005, 07:01 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,945
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zonk1189
You know that brings up an interesting point. Someone mentioned that Diana should be ashamed because if she was the betrayed party in her marriage to Charles she shouldn't have done the same thing to other woman (Will Carlings wife, etc.)
The point was raised by me to try to debunk this idea you seem to have of Diana, in her upset at believing Charles was having an affair, turning to someone who showed her affection. If as you say she was the 'victim' why would she do the same to all those other women. If she was this caring person that you see her as having been, why would she even look at a man, with a partner or wife (Gilbey, Hoare, Manakee, Dunne etc). You seem to see her as the tragic wife, used and abused, who turned to other men for comfort.
To me she was 10 times worse, because she was clearly not in love with all these men, she just used them for her own gratification. To make herself feel good, love true or not didn't appear to enter into it.
  #195  
Old 11-17-2005, 07:09 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,945
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren
Same here, and at the time this program was groundbreaking, and very popular. I still have the book! It was only much later on that certain media pundits declared that this program "started the rot" but I don't see why; it didn't reveal that much. In a way they are saying that because the program piqued the public interest, the public wanted more, thereby leading to the intense media intrusion we have today; ie the Royal Family "brought it on themselves".

I think the reason has more to do with the extremely competitive nature of the British tabloids, the rise of the paparrazzi as legitimate photo sources, and the general public acceptance of media trashing of public figures. (Wasn't Kate Moss done over and hung out to dry?) [pun intended]
Years ago, we were grateful for any little bit of news that came out about the royals, we didn't want to know their intimate secrets. Their private life was their private life and it should have stayed that way.
The shameful attack on the Queen, Prince Charles etc when they didn't tear back from Scotland to be seen grieving after Diana died. They weren't even allowed to grieve in peace, to comfort those young boys without the glare of the media.
I just wonder how other people would feel about having a camera stuck under their noses at such a time, or do they all revel in it?
  #196  
Old 11-17-2005, 07:47 AM
Warren's Avatar
Administrator in Memoriam
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 15,476
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon
The shameful attack on the Queen, Prince Charles etc when they didn't tear back from Scotland to be seen grieving after Diana died. They weren't even allowed to grieve in peace, to comfort those young boys without the glare of the media.
I just wonder how other people would feel about having a camera stuck under their noses at such a time, or do they all revel in it?
My take on this at the time was that the public anger was beginning to build against the paparazzi (those following the car into the tunnel being initially blamed for the crash); by association the tabloids started to feel the heat, and to protect themselves turned the public anger away from their own culpability and onto the Royal Family grieving at Balmoral. Nonsense headlines such as "where is the Queen? Where are the Princes" etc, the ultimate diversion being the hoo-ha over the flag above Buckingham Palace. And before we knew it, somehow the Queen was to blame. It was very ugly.

Similarly Earl Spencer's funeral address. Again at the time I thought it an attack on the press; instead the press reported it as an attack on the Windsors. Perhaps it was a bit of both, but the they certainly had a vested interest in slanting it as anti-Windsor. I don't think Prince William would have applauded a public attack on his own family!

Funerals after shocking events, public and private, bring out a whole range of emotions. For Diana, most of us look back and think "wasn't that extreme?" but it reflected the public mood at the time. And of course there are some who choose to wallow in death and funerals, but that's nothing new.

There are those who are convinced there was no mourning or grief at Balmoral because the TV cameras weren't there to record it. Some would only be satisfied if they could count the number of tears rolling down the cheeks, and then probably decide there weren't enough. Or have it both ways, and claim "they are only crying for the cameras."

Irrationality plays a part: those who bewail that we are "trying to forget" Diana, and claim custodianship of the flame, conveniently overlook the large chunk of this Message Board devoted to her. As always, some prefer to remain locked in the past and assign blame, and some choose to move on. To each their own.
  #197  
Old 11-17-2005, 07:51 AM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,387
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren
Same here, and at the time this program was groundbreaking, and very popular. I still have the book! It was only much later on that certain media pundits declared that this program "started the rot" but I don't see why; it didn't reveal that much.
I kinda agree with you there Warren. If you compare the BRF with the Danish royals, the Danes have been a lot more open for a lot longer but still there are some things we don't know. We don't know the causes for Joachim's and Alexandra's breakup, we don't know how Margrethe and Henrik patched up their differences when Henrik rebelled and went off to France, etc.

It may be because there is little interest in the DRF outside of Denmark but even in Denmark where there is a lot of interest in the DRF, you don't see that kind of voyeuristic interest.

One reason may be that Britain has a strong republican movement and quite frankly they have an agenda. They're going to use any excuse to tear the royal family down. In Denmark, there isn't a strong republican interest so while everybody is really interested in the Royal Family, there aren't so many people with an agenda against them.
  #198  
Old 11-17-2005, 07:57 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,945
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady Marmalade
He has never had a lot self-confidence and likes to play pity, it is evident sometimes in his interviews both today and years ago.
I have to disagree with you there. Prince Charles was always a self confident young man. He was respected and well liked when he was in the navy and again the RAF. He was brilliant at polo, riding and had a go at racing.
He has always been honest about the way people look at him. They brush ideas he has aside, with, a what would he know attitude. Just because he is rich and from a privilaged background, does that make his views any less valid. Do we only have to listen to the disadvantaged within our society. If I have a few thounsand pounds more than you each month, does that make my view any less valid?
I don't believe he 'plays pity', it is just his very British cynical way of judgeing the judges.:)
  #199  
Old 11-17-2005, 08:13 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,945
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren
My take on this at the time was that the public anger was beginning to build against the paparazzi (those following the car into the tunnel being initially blamed for the crash); by association the tabloids started to feel the heat, and to protect themselves turned the public anger away from their own culpability and onto the Royal Family grieving at Balmoral. Nonsense headlines such as "where is the Queen? Where are the Princes" etc, the ultimate diversion being the hoo-ha over the flag above Buckingham Palace. And before we knew it, somehow the Queen was to blame. It was very ugly.

Similarly Earl Spencer's funeral address. Again at the time I thought it an attack on the press; instead the press reported it as an attack on the Windsors. Perhaps it was a bit of both, but the they certainly had a vested interest in slanting it as anti-Windsor. I don't think Prince William would have applauded a public attack on his own family!

Funerals after shocking events, public and private, bring out a whole range of emotions. For Diana, most of us look back and think "wasn't that extreme?" but it reflected the public mood at the time. And of course there are some who choose to wallow in death and funerals, but that's nothing new.

.
What a very astute post Warren. I have to admit I had never thought about the press deflecting the blame.
The public were whipped up to a frenzy of grieving after the crash, that's all that was in the papers and on the tv at the time.

I don't deny Diana's existence, I just feel that everyone blames Charles and Camilla for all that happened and I know that most of that is based on Diana's courting of publicity.
  #200  
Old 11-17-2005, 08:21 AM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,387
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren
Funerals after shocking events, public and private, bring out a whole range of emotions. For Diana, most of us look back and think "wasn't that extreme?" but it reflected the public mood at the time. And of course there are some who choose to wallow in death and funerals, but that's nothing new.
At the time I didn't understand the reaction but later when JFK, Jr. died and the same outpouring of grief happened, I could understand.

When these two public figures died at such a young age, they killed the hope that a lot of people had in them. Many people had placed their hopes on Diana saving the monarchy and earning all the respect and gratitude from the BRF as Princess which people thought she deserved. Many Americans kept the hope that JFK, Jr. would be President. The deaths effectively killed that.

Some of the hope was irrational, JFK, Jr. was never cut out to be President, but people feel a much greater loss when their hopes and aspirations are lost than with other losses.

I myself personally didn't have any hopes for Diana. Some of the changes she brought to the monarchy were good; some I thought were not. So I did not feel the loss of hope that others did. I did nurse a small unrealistic hope that JFK, Jr. would rise to become President but I knew that wasn't going to happen even before he died. But that small wish for him to become President helped me understand the great loss that others felt with Diana.
__________________

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
Relationships of Prince Charles and His Parents love_cc The Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall 140 09-18-2016 07:18 AM
Diana's Relationships with The Queen and Other Members of the Royal Family Beck Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) 572 09-08-2016 10:54 PM
Relationships between members of the Princely Family michelle Princely Family of Monaco 315 01-19-2012 12:18 PM
Diana/Charles/Camilla's Relationships Part 1 blondebeauty123 The Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall 342 11-07-2005 08:15 AM




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 duchess of cambridge duchess of cornwall's fashion e-mail fashion poll germany 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 poland state visit to norway prince bernhard prince charles princess madeleine princess marie princess mary princess mary daytime fashion princess mary fashion princess mary hats queen juliana queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen letizia style queen mathilde queen mathildes outfits queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania queen rania in oslo royal fashion september 2016 spencers state visit state visit to denmark 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 09:54 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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