Andrews giving up his military patronage’s?
The article says the venue had to be changed due to Andrew suspending ties so I guess that could mean anything.
Andrews giving up his military patronage’s?
JMHO, but nothing like a royal wedding to refocus everyone's attention on the royal family and the monarchy rather than those inclined to leave the fold.
This wedding may get even more attention than was originally anticipated.
You couldn't be more SPOT ON if you tried, miss whirley. And in the slim chance that the Sussexes decide to make a joint appearance, the networks might reconsider their decision not to cover the event.
Osipi, I agree with you about Beatrice's resemblance to her ancestress Queen Victoria. It is uncanny....
I agree, click- and viewbait at its worst.
IF the wedding would be televised (of which we know it won't happen), it should be because of Princess Beatrice and her fiancé themselves - not for the possibility of the Sussexes possibly making an appearance. They have become more of a hindrance than helpful.
Is there any clarity on when the wedding date will be announced? Just so that the public knows *a little* more?
I have sadly resigned myself to not seeing much of anything. But this is the strangest Royal wedding ever....no interview, no date, no location, nothing.
It will get plenty of attention even if for the wrong reasons. They'll focus on Beatrice arriving to the chapel with "disgraced" Andrew. They'll comment on the Sussexes, especially if it's there first real joint appearance with the greater BRF. They'll go crazy analyzing body language. They'll talk about Edo's ex if she attends. Endless storylines...
Maybe Charles will step in and do the honors for Beatrice, then it can be televised.
Maybe Charles will step in and do the honors for Beatrice, then it can be televised.
That will never happen. Her father is not dead or exiled or in prison or incapacitated in some way. Disgraced, yes. But not non-existent.
there's no need for it to be televised. Eugenie's was only on TV as part of Morning TV. I would imagine Beatrice would prefer privacy, in the circumstances...
I didn't say there was a need for it to be televised. I said that Charles walking her down the aisle will never happen.
I truly don’t understand how not having her wedding televised in any way diminishes the joy of the occasion for Beatrice. She is a private individual who has no official role in the RF. She is not a celebrity, nor does she need a celebrity profile for her career. A wedding is meaningful to the bride, groom, their families, and their friends. Peter’s wedding was private, Zara’s wedding was private, the Queen’s cousin’s children’s weddings were private. Yet all of those occasions seemed joyous and meaningful to the couple involved. The outlier here IMO was Eugenie, and in hindsight there was some blowback about expense because she chose to make her wedding more public. Beatrice can marry at Windsor like her cousins sans cameras, the Queen can host the breakfast, the York’s the evening reception & the day after party as they did for Eugenie, the only difference would be no television cameras.
For all we know, Beatrice may be over the moon and sincerely happy that the public will not be intruding on her wedding day. We just don't know.
Perhaps the only people that will be sorely disappointed if the wedding is a private one are those (like me) that love to watch royal weddings. ?
I'm glad she gets a reception in Buckingham Palace!
As for the church, perhaps St. Margaret's?
(Although I don't see why the Guards' Chapel should be ruled out because of Andrew's recent problems. He hasn't been convicted of anything).
Could there be a balcony appearance if it's at BP? I wonder too if we are talking about BP hosting the afternoon AND evening reception like W and C, that would be lovely.