Calenei
Aristocracy
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2010
- Messages
- 215
- City
- Calgary
- Country
- Canada
Madeleine's hair was really lovely from all angles not just the front.
[...] Letizia was, and is, in my opinion, the most naturally beautiful woman to marry into any of the Royal Houses since Diana Spencer. [....]
That British ladies can have ingenious hairdoes as well is proven by the Hon. Serena Stanhope on her wedding to Lord David Armstrong-Jones, Viscount Linley. It lifted her above an everyday appearance. Lady Serena, Viscountess Linley, again showed that a diadem needs a special hairdo, when she wore a wooden diadem carved by her spouse: see picture.
Letizia's hair looked like it had not even been washed. It's a harsh statement given the drenching rain that she had to contend with, which probably made her hair go limp. Most of it was hidden under her veil, but what little was visible was underwhelming. Letizia was, and is, in my opinion, the most naturally beautiful woman to marry into any of the Royal Houses since Diana Spencer. I had high hopes for her as a bride, but I could not have been more disappointed.
Same for Lady Diana Spencer. Until Letizia years later, she was the most naturally beautiful Royal fiancée in years. But her hair was a right mess for the ceremony. The fringe looked plastered to her forehead and it looked greasy, as if too much product had been applied. After she left Buckingham Palace to begin her honeymoon journey her hair looked perfect. Very frustrating.
I concur 100% with Duc's statement on Sarah Ferguson. Overall she was a splendid bride with one of the most beautiful gowns ever, far more successful than Diana's imo. But those red ringlets seemed more suited to a pastoral milkmaid than a newly minted Royal Duchess. I was very disappointed.
Catherine Middleton's hair is her best feature, along with her legs. But her half-curled, half-limp wedding day hair was a disaster. The idea of an up/down was great on paper. But with her veil and tiara very little of the up/down was evident. All I saw was limp curls. On the day of the announcement of her engagement her hair looked flawless, as it has on several occasions since the wedding. Kate had the potential to have a Madeleine of Sweden pitch perfect bridal hairstyle...but she did not.
That hairstyle reminds me of those infamous beehive hairdos that were so ubiquitous in old movies ...they always look so unnatural when you see them today. (Like Catherine Deneuve In The Umbrellas of Cherbourg after she married the rich man...like her hair is glued into place! Awful).
Serena Stanhope's hairdo was unfortunate. It looks so hard and unnatural and I think it takes away from the beautiful tiara.
But was Princess Beatrix not just sporting a 1960's hairdo which was common back then?
Princess Beatrix of the Netherlands (what a magnificent diadem...)
Princess Sophia of Greece and Denmark
Princess Anne-Marie of Denmark
Princess Irene of the Netherlands
all with similar hairstyles...
But she was the Hon. Serena Stanhope, daughter of the current 12th Earl of Harrington and Lady Eileen of the Baronets Grey. She was going to marry Lord David Armstrong-Jones, Viscount Linley. In the presence of the absolute high society and the who-is-who. Everything, the stunning surroundings of the House of Commons' parish church in Westminster, the bride's appearance, the classic dress with a "prudent" overcoat, the fantastic jewels and the elaborate hairdo showed Serena as a statuesque bride in a classic British wedding.
Of course she will not have that hairdo when wearing marigolds and washing the Wedgwood china.
Pic: Hon. Serena Stanhope with her father Lord Charles Stanhope, then Viscount Petersham
Pic: Viscountess Linley with a "Downton Abbey"-vibe next to Prince Michael of Kent, her current hairdo is flat: http://i.huffpost.com/gadgets/slideshows/303694/slide_303694_2583329_original.jpg
Wasn't her updo meant for another (bigger) tiara which broke just before the wedding and she had to "make do" with this lower one?
Yes, it was expected the Hon. Serena Stanhope would wear her future mother-in-law's Poltimore Diadem. Her wedding-updo was very similar to Princess Margaret. Even her dress had similarities. We don't know, it is all (fun) speculating.
She did indeed have natural beauty but she was drowned by her hair, veil and gown. I think she must have lost weight.If you mean what I think by "rumors" yes, I do. And even though Queen Letizia is still a lovely woman, I think she was much more beautiful BEFORE she made certain....adjustments to her appearance.
In other words she had natural beauty.
Mette-Marit's complexion and bone structure are a marvel.
I was very disappointed with Catherine's hair, the half up half down was never going to work. The 'down' sausage curls were pulled almost straight by the weight and volume of her hair and the density and weight of the veil was not chosen to work with either her hair or the tiara.So true, Moonmaiden. Catherine's hair was a disaster. In my opinion her hair style or lack thereof turned a very royal wedding into a suburban one. I can only hope she has changed hair stylists.
Exactly!
I liked Kate's hair as well. It suited the rather small tiara, although I think an updo would have worked too.