The Royal Forums

The Royal Forums (
-   Royal Chit Chat (
-   -   Royal Influence (

lucys 12-29-2004 09:00 PM

Royal Influence
I am always amused to read on some post or another about this princess or the other who is the "absolute best" "most elegant" "most gorgeous" or whatever—as though they don't all have their individual charms and talents. And there seems to also be a concern among some "fans" of some princesses (the concern doesn't seem to be about the princes) that their princess be the one that is "the next Lady Di." And I think what people mean by that is the next widely admired and loved princess—ignoring the more questionable parts of her legacy.

So I got to thinking, does any contemporary royal, male or female, really have any impact or garner any significant attention beyond what I will call their natural sphere of influence?

For example. The Grimaldis get a lot of press coverage because their natural sphere of influence is the celebrity world—between their mother who was one of the great Hollywood stars, their colorful lives and the current status of Monaco as a playground for the jet set, they essentially are a representation of the jet set. So they get lots of "celebrity" coverage.

Any person related to the British Royals is pretty much widely known and covered outside the UK because they represent one of the world's most powerful countries, which also was one of the world's great empires. So many people in the world don't know much about let's say Princess Alexandra, the soon to be divorced wife of a second royal son, but tons of people know Fergie. Similarly, the Spanish Royals are well known in Latin America in great measure because of the historic connection and the role of Spain in contemporary Latin America.

Foreign princess can also make their new countries interesting to their native countries. So Maxima has made the Dutch royals interesting to Argentina and Mary makes the Danes interesting to the Aussies. Both are covered in their home countries--all natural spheres of influence.

Here's my question. Has any one among the young royals (40 and under, let's say) really broken out of that natural sphere of interest? And I don't mean an occassional press mention here or there, rather have they become part of the zeitgeist beyond their natural sphere of influence?

If you think so, please explain why you think so.

Who do you think might yet become an object of interest beyond their natural sphere of influence? Again, please explain why.

If my post makes any sense at all, I look forward to your comments.

semisquare 12-29-2004 10:35 PM

lucy, girl u wrote a minnie book. i like to follow their lives because i love history and they are living history. let me know if that answer your question

Alexandria 12-30-2004 11:07 AM

Some very interesting comments and observations lucys, and much of it is spot on I would say.

I think most of the European princes and princesses barely rate a blip on the world stage, even when it is a very important or momentous occasion in their lives such as a wedding or the birth of the next heir. Very few royals that we follow avidly or discuss in such detail here are hardly known outside of their countries (or the German tabloids! ;)).

But I think there is even a sphere of relativity for which the British royals are known. Certainly the Queen, Prince Phillip, Prince Charles, Princess Diana and their sons Princes William and Harry, the Duchess of York are very well known on the world stage for good as well as infamous reasons. But the other members of the Queen's family, such as Princess Anne, Prince Andrew and the Earl and Countess of Wessex aren't as well known. (Prince Andrew keeps a very low profile so I can understand why so little is mentioned of him on the world stage, but I'm not sure I understand why the others don't receive much attention; maybe because there is very little scandal associated with them -- dog biting incidents and the fake Sheik incident aside.)

When Prince Joachim visited Toronto earlier this fall it was the first time many people realized that Denmark even had a monarchy -- let alone it being one of the oldest monarchies in history. I saw many of my colleagues with copious amounts of print outs from the Danish official web site as well as English translations of Danish articles about Prince Joachim.

An important point I think is that some royals are well known in certain parts of the world (even if it's just a city or a country) outside of their native country for assorted reasons. In Ottawa, where the Canadian parliament is, there is very much a soft spot for Queen Juliana of the Netherlands and her young family who stayed there temporarily during the war. Princess Margriet was in fact born in Ottawa but the land around the hospital where she was born was declared Dutch land so that Princess Margriet would be born a Dutch citizen. Following the family's return after the war, as a thank you, Queen Juliana sent thousands of tulip bulbs that were planted in the gardens around parliament. Several years ago, Princess Margriet returned to Ottawa to much fan fare.

And for other reasons certain royals just seem to capture the world stage, or parts of the world stage without any such emotional or significant ties as Margriet has with Ottawa. While Canada and specifically Toronto are known for their multiculturalness, and Spanish is spoken among parts of our population, it is not one of the top three languages (English, French and Chinese being the top three), yet when Felipe and Letizia became engaged in October of 2003, their engagement made the front page of one commuter paper as well as blurbs in all four local and national papers. I recently even found a picture of their wedding in the 'Just Married' section of our national weddings magazine, Wedding Bells.

Other royals break through for a moment but don't last long on the world stage. I remember when Haakon and Mette-Marit got married Mette-Marit's fairytale-esque story made it into a two page story in People magazine but nothing was mentioned again until the birth of Ingrid Alexandra.

And royals who are very much talked about here, I find hardly make any waves into media sources in North America, such as Maxima, Mary, Mathilde and Victoria.

To answer lucys question: I think the one royal who may have broken through the parameters of her own country would be Queen Rania. I think it's some combination of her being the youngest reigning queen, her beauty, her fashion sense and the fact that she comes from a Middle Eastern country is eternally fascinating. But to a lesser degree her work is much lesser known.

I think the world of royalty, despite the hard work of the various kings and queens, princes and princesses, will always be a relative and sheltered one. Unless they are your nation's monarchy or unless you avidly follow monarchies like all of us do here, you won't hear much about the likes of Silvia, Margrethe, Mary, Alexandra, Maxima, Sofia or Paola. And if you do hear about them outside of these circles, more often than not, it is for infamous reasons, such as if there was quite a scandal caused by someone that was so juicy and gossipy. (Although if Margarita's allegations of spying by the royal court and stories of her aunt Queen Beatrix being a boozer didn't warrant any stories on the world stage I can't imagine what else could be more scandalous.)

Josefine 12-02-2005 10:58 AM

very though quastians
let me think about it

Marengo 12-06-2005 12:15 PM

I agree with Alexandria that only Rania has come out of her natural atmosphere. The main reasons of course are that her husband is a monarch with actual power and Jordan being a middle eatern ally of the US.

CyrilVladisla 12-31-2014 05:02 PM

I think that Crown Princess Mary of Denmark has been a definite asset to the Danish Royal Family.
She is involved with quite a lot of charity work, as is her husband, Crown Prince Frederik.
Look at how well Frederik and Mary worked with the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge in helping to get supplies ready at the UNICEF supply center in Copenhagen.

MARG 12-31-2014 08:02 PM

:previous: That was merely a PR event staged by UNICEF in a time of humanitarian crisis. I am not sure whose idea it was, UNICEF, the two governments or either of the royal couples, but I lean toward UNICEF because neither couple is a patron. In point of fact, Countess Alexandra of Frederiksborg was one of their royal patrons who worked as a UNICEF Goodwill Ambassador.

They believed (correctly) that the joining of these two royal couples would raise the profile of UNICEF and, as a consequence, raise more money for the East Africa Crisis.

Skippyboo 12-31-2014 08:27 PM

I think what helps Jordanian Queen is that the previous Queen- Noor was an American so that raised the profile of Jordan in the states like it did for Monaco with Princess Grace.

Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

lucymae88 12-31-2014 09:32 PM

I think a other reason so many people don't know much about the royal families in the Mideast is those families own the news companies and control what's posted about them. With the British royals and other royal families the media pretty much can write what they want about them. I think Queen Rania is so popular around the world is simple. She's beautiful, hard working, and is modern royal with her own life and causes. She is very much like Diana in some ways.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:11 AM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2018
Jelsoft Enterprises