The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #221  
Old 08-21-2005, 11:13 AM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,387
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roshanah
True and the difference is, one didn't conspire to trap an innocent young women into a loveless marriage, mainipulate her and play upon her naivity. This was done solely for the purpose of continuing the affair throughout Charles married life, that really was awful. People may say it's the past but as you and I both know, the aforesaid really scarred Diana for many years. No offence. Diana indeed made mistakes as regards her duties in the beginning only because Charles didn't take her under his wing and so on. That's well docmented.
So when Charles does something wrong its Charles' fault...and when Diana makes mistakes....its Charles' fault! Let's make everything simple, why don't we make all the dumb things Diana did between 1981 and 1997 Charles' fault, shall we? Interesting sense of justice you have there.
__________________

  #222  
Old 08-21-2005, 11:16 AM
Roshanah's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Bandar, Brunei
Posts: 466
I do not prefer one to the other, in the beginning I rather looked forward to Charles being King.

With regard to the aforemenitioned 'assertion' I referred to the fact that although Charles might have been King many years ago, he isn't at present. Moreover QEII shows no signs of slowing down in terms of her official duties. One suggests that that would have been the first sign.

I reiterate that I have no preferance as to weather Charles or William succeed the Queen. In due course indeed but perhaps maybe not within QEII lifetime (not that I wish for QEI death because I don't.)




Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren
I understand that some contributors to the Forums would prefer William to succeed The Queen in place of his father; but I cannot see any sense to the assertion "...the way it looks doesn't seem to indicate that Charles will be King."

The way what looks? What indications? What evidence?

Unless the Prince of Wales predeceases his mother, or there is an Act of Parliament removing him (willingly or unwillingly) from the succession, he will become King in due course.
.
__________________

__________________
Peace, Harmony & Balance.
  #223  
Old 08-21-2005, 11:38 AM
Roshanah's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Bandar, Brunei
Posts: 466
I mean before she married she was taught the reality of her new position, as you know which are three rungs up the ladder from Lady. there are different protocols, which Diana would've had to become accustomed to in timely fashion.

As such she may have made mistakes of that kind. Ie that wherever she travelled had to be approved by HM, she needed to have a co-ordinating office, embossed stationary, her mail checked replies sent at times without her knowing (unless expressly stated otherwise.0 Also that she needed to have at least two wardrobes for Official Functions, Soire's etc which would have been set and approved by HM (although not without Diana's input.) She also would have had ot become acquainted with her means. Ie she came from a wealthy background however the level of wealth that she then inherited with her new title was astonomical compared to her aforementioned income. Such takes time to grasp much less accustomed to in terms of her expenses. That of which would have exceeded the needs of herself, Her husband and their Children. Also she had to employ staff, inform them of their function as per her needs and so on. Such etiquettes need at least a decade to become truely accustomed to in terms of knowing them by heart.

Diana was expected to to know the aforesaid in less the time. So much so that QN, the late Princesss Grace and others had to aid her in places where her inlaws (unless I'm mistaken) did not. She should have had to deal with that.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Alicky
You mean the mistakes she made before they were married? What were they? I don't understand. You mean she made mistakes with etiquette at the beginning? :)
He could not have fixed the media, although they did try to get her more privacy, but obviously it wasn't going to work.
__________________
Peace, Harmony & Balance.
  #224  
Old 08-21-2005, 11:47 AM
Alicky's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Somewhere, United States
Posts: 580
I don't see the relation. Besides, Charles and her grandmother did warn her that it would be a very different lifestyle, a very different family, and about her various duties and responsibilities that would come along with it, and naturally it would be a difficult adjustment no matter how long you had to learn about it ahead of time. A difficult adjustment period cannot be blamed on Charles, and it is not a phenomena strictly limited to Diana.
  #225  
Old 08-21-2005, 11:49 AM
Roshanah's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Bandar, Brunei
Posts: 466
I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that If Diana made mistakes of course they'd be her fault within reason. Charles isn't to be blamed for all of his past mistakes just as Diana isn't to be for all of hers, simply because the foundations of such depended upon other persons and other factors.:)



Quote:
Originally Posted by ysbel
So when Charles does something wrong its Charles' fault...and when Diana makes mistakes....its Charles' fault! Let's make everything simple, why don't we make all the dumb things Diana did between 1981 and 1997 Charles' fault, shall we? Interesting sense of justice you have there.
__________________
Peace, Harmony & Balance.
  #226  
Old 08-21-2005, 12:04 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,387
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roshanah
I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that If Diana made mistakes of course they'd be her fault within reason. Charles to be blamed for all of his past mistakes just as Diana isn't, simply because the foundations of such depended upon another person and other factors.:)
Roshanah, following your reasoning, Diana should be blamed for Charles' affair with Camilla because she was a bulimic and living with a bulimic is so difficult and it is so impossible to get real love and support from them that a normal man who needs some love and kindness himself would naturally look for some comfort and support from outside the marriage-because he can't get it within the marriage.

This last part is actually true, a friend of mine was bulimic and her husband couldn't take it - he left, but you see the difficulties with blaming one marriage partner for what the other does.

Actually I think they're both to blame for not realizing earlier that their marriage was not going to work and not having the guts to call it quits. Both had doubts before the marriage, both had doubts during the marriage but neither of them did anything until 11 years after the marriage and then they left the separation going on for another 3 years.
  #227  
Old 08-21-2005, 12:29 PM
Roshanah's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Bandar, Brunei
Posts: 466
Of course she was for warned, even her own Grand Mother warned her. However speaking as someone whom holds a Royal Title by Birth adn as such those of us born to Royal priviledge and duty, were under the tutilage of Governors/ness' and other such members of the court in order to perform our duties to the best of our ability. No exceptions were made, we had to read, learn and live duty mastering such took most of us 20 or so in order to . Although many of us hated it.

Diana did not ( have such tutilage and as such it would (irresoective of the aforemenitoned relations warnings) have been a daunting experience and trying at the best of times (irespective of what she later said.) She was only able to better understand the aforementioned warnings when she later saw evidence of such within marriages around her ie Princess Grace, Princess Sarah (aka Duches of York) Qeen Noor etc.

Charles was born to the afore and was tutored by the aforementioned methods. Therefore as he was accustomed to such he was the best person to aid her in becoming aclimated within her new position.

I'm not saying that at times she didn't take a liking to conformity (which is mostly what the learning process is about in terms of the Court) but the one whom could have said words to the effect of "this is how it is although at times is unfair if you want to retain the title you have to go along until you reach a point where you can then exude discernableinfulence and therefore make a discernable difference." This is what Charles could have done which he didn't because it was documented that even QEII many a time ticked him off for such.

"naturally it would be a difficult adjustment no matter how long you had to learn about it ahead of time." Of course hence I emphasised that Diana shouldn't have been expected to master such knowledge in such a short spanse of time. This indeed can be blamed upon the House of Windsor, because they themselves didn't acquire such within such time, therefore on that same not they should've expected Diana to.

"A difficult adjustment period cannot be blamed on Charles, and it is not a phenomena strictly limited to Diana" It can in the areas where she couldn't have attempted to master the aforementioned by herself and areas where it became evident that she couldn't cope. The parts where she could have done so by herself, without problems of course couldn't be blamed upon him, nor was I. Moreover of course it isn't a phenominon restricted to Diana, but the topic of the forum was with regard to charelss hence the other accounts until now weren't mentioned. Queen Noor, Queen Rania, Queen Alia, Queen Victoria, Princess Grace etc had similar experiences, I didn't mentiond those because I didn't want to go off the topics mentioned.:)







Quote:
Originally Posted by Alicky
I don't see the relation. Besides, Charles and her grandmother did warn her that it would be a very different lifestyle, a very different family, and about her various duties and responsibilities that would come along with it, and naturally it would be a difficult adjustment no matter how long you had to learn about it ahead of time. A difficult adjustment period cannot be blamed on Charles, and it is not a phenomena strictly limited to Diana.
__________________
Peace, Harmony & Balance.
  #228  
Old 08-21-2005, 12:42 PM
Roshanah's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Bandar, Brunei
Posts: 466
I'm not saying that at all. That isn't my method of reasoning. I'm saying that Diana was not to be blamed for Charles' affair. I'm also saying that both had unrealistic expectations of their marriage, as such the marriage was unable to stand within the face of adversity. :) Both Charles and Diana had faulty foundations upon which to build and become well rounded individuals for many reasons. Although it couldn't be completely blamed, it explains some of what later transpired within their marriage.

Both Charles and Diana had unresolved issues, which they both knowingly and unknowingly brought into the marriage. Although they both had hoped to work hard to work to make the marriage work, their past unresolved issues unfortunately seriously influenced their perceptions and decision, which incertain cases causes irreperable damage to their marriage.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ysbel
Roshanah, following your reasoning, Diana should be blamed for Charles' affair with Camilla because she was a bulimic and living with a bulimic is so difficult and it is so impossible to get real love and support from them that a normal man who needs some love and kindness himself would naturally look for some comfort and support from outside the marriage-because he can't get it within the marriage.

This last part is actually true, a friend of mine was bulimic and her husband couldn't take it - he left, but you see the difficulties with blaming one marriage partner for what the other does.

Actually I think they're both to blame for not realizing earlier that their marriage was not going to work and not having the guts to call it quits. Both had doubts before the marriage, both had doubts during the marriage but neither of them did anything until 11 years after the marriage and then they left the separation going on for another 3 years.
__________________
Peace, Harmony & Balance.
  #229  
Old 08-21-2005, 01:25 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,387
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roshanah
Both Charles and Diana had unresolved issues, which they both knowingly and unknowingly brought into the marriage. Although they both had hoped to work hard to work to make the marriage work, their past unresolved issues unfortunately seriously influenced their perceptions and decision, which incertain cases causes irreperable damage to their marriage.
I agree wholeheartedly. The House of Windsor did not even come close to adequately preparing Diana and Fergie for their roles, if their marriages had been strong otherwise, this lack of preparation wouldn't have mattered as much.

Officials from the U.S. Embassy during the early Reagan years, complained that there was not one set of royal protocol procedures from Buckingham Palace to follow. They had to rely on the opinion of one offical or another and oftentimes, what one official said contradicted another. Nothing was written down.

Diana was the first Princess of Wales since 1910. Most everyone in the Palace had grown up with royal protocol to the extent that it was as natural as breathing - you don't explain to someone else how to breathe. The Queen Mother hadn't grown up in royal circles but in her early childhood, society in general was so much stricter that she probably couldn't relate to Diana's or Fergie's bewildernment.

My grandfather was born in 1885 and when he was a young man, men and women had to walk an umbrella's length apart. Until he died in 1982, he always wore a hat outside and a longsleeved white shirt with cufflinks, vest, suspenders and jacket everywhere, even to the grocery store. We weren't wealthy and definitely weren't royal but sometimes it seems to us that my grandfather lived on a different planet.
  #230  
Old 08-21-2005, 05:38 PM
tiaraprin's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Near NY City, United States
Posts: 1,839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roshanah
However speaking as someone whom holds a Royal Title by Birth adn as such those of us born to Royal priviledge and duty, were under the tutilage of Governors/ness' and other such members of the court in order to perform our duties to the best of our ability. No exceptions were made, we had to read, learn and live duty mastering such took most of us 20 or so in order to . Although many of us hated it.
You are a born royal, Roshanah??
  #231  
Old 08-29-2005, 09:03 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 414
I'm so proud of myself, y'all, my thread's lived to see itself grow up to be a strapping young lab of 12 pages. But, alas, we must say goodbye to this thread, and make a new one, one which will further encourage stimulating conversation on the future of the British monarchy and Prince Charles's role in it.
__________________
The English take the breeding of their horses and dogs more seriously than they do their children- HRH Princess Michael of Kent
  #232  
Old 08-29-2005, 09:23 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: , Canada
Posts: 3,220
Quote:
Originally Posted by grecka
I'm so proud of myself, y'all, my thread's lived to see itself grow up to be a strapping young lab of 12 pages. But, alas, we must say goodbye to this thread, and make a new one, one which will further encourage stimulating conversation on the future of the British monarchy and Prince Charles's role in it.
Actually, as it's a discussion rather than a general news or picture thread, this thread will be left open-ended.

While the effort of opening a new thread is appreciated, as many interesting and varied points have been made in this thread (all 12 pages of it), it would be much easier for new members joining the dicussion -- as well as old members coming back to it -- to re-fresh themselves and quote from previous comments made or ask questions from previous posts.
  #233  
Old 08-29-2005, 10:09 PM
azile's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 471
The amazing thing about monarchies is that when a ruler dies, their subjects (us!) tend to support the new King or Queen, usually without question or reservation. We forget their faults and almost give them a "clean slate" to create their own monarchy.

Charles is not perfect. Nor was Elizabeth II, George VI, Edward VIII, George V, etc. etc. etc. Being regeant however, does not require perfection. It could actually be argued that there are hundreds, maybe thousands of people in these countries that are better qualified to be the monarch, and who probably WOULD make a better monarch.... in theory! The reality is that the Crown Princes and Princesses WILL become the next Kings and Queens, if they outlive their parents. It's that simple- a matter of birth, and then death.
It's probably the only 100% guaranteed job in the world!

So, Charles WILL become King, as long as he outlives his mother. Queen Elizabeth II seems to be enough of a traditionalist that she would follow protocol on such matters. Charles has been groomed for this role and my guess is that Elizabeth has no plans to mess around with tradition.

On the matter of Charles and Diana- let's all agree that in every divorce, like in every marriage, there are two parties. While none of us will ever know exactly what went on between these two, it seems less and less relevant.

What is however, a lasting legacy from this marriage, is how the other royal houses in Europe changed their expectations for royal marriages. Since the late 90s, there have been lots of marriages! Some of these marriages would likely have not occured 10 or 15 years earlier- marriages to commoners, single mothers, divorced news reporters, daughters of questionable politicians etc.

I really believe that Charles and Diana paved the way for LOVE to become the most important factor in royal marriages. It is no longer mainly a matter of breeding or title- it is now a matter of compatibility, passion and partnership. Through their (Charles & Diana) pain, other royals have much more freedom in choosing a spouse. I think most of us would agree this is a very good thing.

I think that all of the princes and princesses in Europe owe Charles and Diana a great deal of thanks.

Eliza
  #234  
Old 08-29-2005, 11:59 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,736
The Queen will never abdicate as long as she is physically and mentally able to carry out her duties. She has made it very clear to all concerned that she intends remain the Sovereign until her death.

Given the Queen's excellent health and the Queen Mother's longevity, I think we will see Her Majesty remain on the throne for at least another decade or so. Certainly, however, the Queen will gradually slow down and allow Prince Charles and Prince William to take on more duties on her behalf as she ages.
  #235  
Old 08-30-2005, 12:16 AM
tiaraprin's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Near NY City, United States
Posts: 1,839
Quote:
Originally Posted by branchg
The Queen will never abdicate as long as she is physically and mentally able to carry out her duties. She has made it very clear to all concerned that she intends remain the Sovereign until her death.

Given the Queen's excellent health and the Queen Mother's longevity, I think we will see Her Majesty remain on the throne for at least another decade or so. Certainly, however, the Queen will gradually slow down and allow Prince Charles and Prince William to take on more duties on her behalf as she ages.

God Save the Queen!! If I am going to say God Save the King, I want to say it for William in 15-20 years time!
  #236  
Old 08-30-2005, 04:55 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by azile1710
The amazing thing about monarchies is that when a ruler dies, their subjects (us!) tend to support the new King or Queen, usually without question or reservation. We forget their faults and almost give them a "clean slate" to create their own monarchy.

Charles is not perfect. Nor was Elizabeth II, George VI, Edward VIII, George V, etc. etc. etc. Being regeant however, does not require perfection. It could actually be argued that there are hundreds, maybe thousands of people in these countries that are better qualified to be the monarch, and who probably WOULD make a better monarch.... in theory! The reality is that the Crown Princes and Princesses WILL become the next Kings and Queens, if they outlive their parents. It's that simple- a matter of birth, and then death.
It's probably the only 100% guaranteed job in the world!

So, Charles WILL become King, as long as he outlives his mother. Queen Elizabeth II seems to be enough of a traditionalist that she would follow protocol on such matters. Charles has been groomed for this role and my guess is that Elizabeth has no plans to mess around with tradition.

On the matter of Charles and Diana- let's all agree that in every divorce, like in every marriage, there are two parties. While none of us will ever know exactly what went on between these two, it seems less and less relevant.

What is however, a lasting legacy from this marriage, is how the other royal houses in Europe changed their expectations for royal marriages. Since the late 90s, there have been lots of marriages! Some of these marriages would likely have not occured 10 or 15 years earlier- marriages to commoners, single mothers, divorced news reporters, daughters of questionable politicians etc.

I really believe that Charles and Diana paved the way for LOVE to become the most important factor in royal marriages. It is no longer mainly a matter of breeding or title- it is now a matter of compatibility, passion and partnership. Through their (Charles & Diana) pain, other royals have much more freedom in choosing a spouse. I think most of us would agree this is a very good thing.

I think that all of the princes and princesses in Europe owe Charles and Diana a great deal of thanks.

Eliza
I agree completely with your post
  #237  
Old 08-30-2005, 07:55 AM
Von Schlesian's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: York, United Kingdom
Posts: 491
Quote:
Originally Posted by tiaraprin
God Save the Queen!!
Indeed God Save the Queen!! Long mey Her Majesty reign over us, us who debate about the legitimacy of Her Majesty's successors, in spite of Her Majesty's excellent health, the well known long life-spans of Windsor women, and direct statement of there being no chance of Her Majesty's abdication while she is physically and mentally able.

I have emphasised my un-easiness with this topic, and am glad Tiaraprin that you made that simple, but clear statement.
__________________
May she defend our laws, and ever give us cause, to sing with heart and voice, God save the Queen.
  #238  
Old 08-30-2005, 03:38 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: , Switzerland
Posts: 53
I really like Prince Charles, but I think he is not the youngest and the british monarchy needs a " fresh breeze" ...
  #239  
Old 08-31-2005, 09:55 PM
tiaraprin's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Near NY City, United States
Posts: 1,839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Von Schlesian
Indeed God Save the Queen!! Long mey Her Majesty reign over us, us who debate about the legitimacy of Her Majesty's successors, in spite of Her Majesty's excellent health, the well known long life-spans of Windsor women, and direct statement of there being no chance of Her Majesty's abdication while she is physically and mentally able.

I have emphasised my un-easiness with this topic, and am glad Tiaraprin that you made that simple, but clear statement.
Thank you Von Schlesian. Her Majesty is not going anywhere just yet. However, I have my dreams for what will happen after the horrible event takes place in the far away future!!!!

Once again, I say GOD SAVE THE QUEEN!!!
  #240  
Old 09-01-2005, 03:23 AM
sara1981's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: North Little Rock, United States
Posts: 3,448
Quote:
Originally Posted by tiaraprin
Thank you Von Schlesian. Her Majesty is not going anywhere just yet. However, I have my dreams for what will happen after the horrible event takes place in the far away future!!!!

Once again, I say GOD SAVE THE QUEEN!!!
i would agree with you!

HM Queen never let down! because she is 79 years old and she will become 80 next years but she still majestic Queen for more over 50 years since her become Queen.

god bless HM Queen

Sara Boyce
__________________

Closed Thread

Tags
prince charles, prince of wales


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
Who Will Reign First / Next mktv2000 Royal Chit Chat 150 10-01-2013 02:28 PM
Will Charles Ever Reign? Part 5 Avalon The Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall 106 06-17-2009 09:02 AM
Will Charles Ever Reign? Part 4 Elspeth The Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall 286 02-07-2008 07:58 AM
Will Charles Ever Reign? Part 3 ysbel The Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall 406 08-16-2007 08:53 PM
Will Charles Ever Reign? Part 2 Warren The Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall 425 05-14-2006 02:36 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 danish calendar duchess of cambridge e-mail fashion poll grand duke jean greece hereditary grand duchess stéphanie's fashion & style ingrid alexandra kate middleton king abdullah ii king felipe king felipe vi king willem-alexander member introduction monarchy movies 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 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 casual outfit royal fashion september 2016 sheikha moza 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 11:25 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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