General News and Information for the Norwegian Royal Family: 2003 -

[Tatiana Maria]

http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums...ml#post2246297

Thank you for the nicely written obituary of Mr. Totland, Royal Norway.

Originally Posted by ROYAL NORWAY

About him: Short explained, he was a teacher in his home city Bergen who had become interested in royalty after having read books and magazines for his royal-mad mother when she was severely ill. And when he sent letters upon letters to the Norwegian rag-mag Se og Hør during the late 1980s to complain about errors in their royal coverage, it resulted in him (after having turned it down more than once) being offered a job as their royal editor in 1991, the year The King acceded to the throne. And was until he wanted more freedom to comment on TV and stuff in 2011, the only reliable person there.

That was a surprisingly amicable offer for a "rag-mag"!

Originally Posted by ROYAL NORWAY

Although it should be said that he has never had any problem voicing his opinion when there was something he didn't agree with. - Including Märtha's commercial use of her princess-title, which he has been ''highly critical'' of for years.
And he always respected those who didn't agree with him when it came to his stance on the monarchy.

Those are essential conditions for reputable royal reporting, I would say.

Originally Posted by ROYAL NORWAY

And that was the start of seven years of which we have never seen anything like in other monarchies when it comes to royal experts/commentators. Yes, he would often appear several times a week on TV2 News Channel and News-shows on their main channel TV2 to explain/comment on day-to-day royal engagements and large-scale events such as The King's Silver/Consecration Jubilee celebrations in 2016, The Regent-Couple's 80th Birthday celebrations in 2017, The Regent-Couple's Golden Wedding Anniversary celebrations in 2018 and various royal events abroad, where he annoyingly spoke the whole time, also over the music. LOL. I.e. about history, architecture of the various palaces, popularity of the various monarchies, orders, uniforms, military-displays, jewellery, dresses, shoes, etc, etc.

[...]

Another thing to mention is that he's probably the person besides The King (as someone said it the other day) who is most responsible for the monarchy's record-high support in the polls over the past 5 years.
How? Because he was the monarchy and the NRF's BIGGEST supporter and would constantly praise them (and the institution) like no other (especially The King).

I wonder if not only his praise, but his educated commentary on daily engagements, history, comparisons to other monarchies, the intricacies of official events, etc., contributed to bolstering support for the monarchy? It seems plausible to me that for some individuals, an improved understanding of the institution might generate more affection for it.

[LadyFinn]

Svensk Damtidning:
Here are the pictures that reveal that an engagement can be near! Princess Märtha Louise took her boyfriend Shaman Durek on a summer boat trip in the Norwegian Archipelago.
It's serious between Princess Märtha Louise and Shaman Durek. New pictures show how Crown Prince Haakon goes on a boat with his sister, Princess Märtha Louise, and her new love. King Harald and Queen Sonja invited the whole family - including Märtha Louise's boyfriend - to their summer house Mågerø in southern Oslo.
This is the first time Shaman Durek meets the entire royal family. The purpose was, of course, that they should all get to know him a little better. In the picture below we see Crown Prince Haakon add to the dock with a very happy Shaman Durek in the stern. Princess Märtha Louise also looked very happy. Finally everyone would meet her beloved!
The only one who was not present was Princess Ingrid Alexandra. She had something else to do. Crown Princess Mette-Marit sunbathed on the rocks while Prince Sverre Magnus steered the motorboat with the shaman, Princess Märtha Louise, her brother Haakon and the cousins ​​in.
When Norwegian King Harald stepped aboard the royal ship Norway at Bygdøy in Oslo recently, he was asked several questions about daughter Märta Louise and her new love Shaman Durek. King Harald chose not to answer many of the questions, but took the time to comment on some of them, reports the Norwegian newspaper Dagbladet.
Partly he said that it was nice that she found a boyfriend and revealed that he had not been able to meet the princess's boyfriend yet.
But now both Harald and Sonja have had close contact with Shaman Durek. We hope they had a nice weekend together. It looks like this in the pictures, don't you think?
The criticism has been massive and many have wondered how the mother of three planned a future with the new boyfriend, who did not live in Norway. When the princess and the shaman sat on a TV couch, the question was:
Märtha Louise, you have three children, you have a family around you. How do they handle all this?
- I talk to them a lot about what's going on. We know who we are. The kids know who we are. And there is a lot that has been written in the media that is not true.
Asked if she will receive support from her mother queen and father the king, Märtha Louise answered a little evasively:
- I get support from many people.
Se bilderna! Här semestrar kungaparet med Shaman Durek _ Svensk Damtidning

According to DanaPress, the photos are taken on 6th August
ROYAL: EXKLUSIV - Die norwegische Königsfamilie im Sommerurlaub in Mågerø - 06. August 2019

[ROYAL NORWAY]

Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria

Thank you for the nicely written obituary of Mr. Totland, Royal Norway.

You're welcome!

Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria

I wonder if not only his praise, but his educated commentary on daily engagements, history, comparisons to other monarchies, the intricacies of official events, etc., contributed to bolstering support for the monarchy? It seems plausible to me that for some individuals, an improved understanding of the institution might generate more affection for it.

Yes, but all that was packed in among the praise!

BTW: It may sound a bit strange saying that a royal expert/commentator ''probably is the person besides The King who is most responsible for the monarchy's record-high support in the polls over the past 5 years.''
But we are talking about a person with a lot of air-time on television here, where he would speak about ''vår folkekjære konge'' (''our beloved King''), ''vår kjære konge'' (''our dear King''), ''vår fantastiske konge'' (''our amazing King''), ''vår utrolige folkekonge'' (''our unbelievable people's King''), ''vår samlende konge'' (''our unifying King''), ''vårt folkekjære monarki'' (''our beloved monarchy''), ''vårt samlende monarki'' (''our unifying monarchy''), ''vår kjære dronning'' (''our dear Queen''), ''vårt kjære kronprinspar'' (''our dear CP-Couple''), ''kongens enorme popularitet'' (''The King's enormous popularity''), ''monarkiets enorme popularitet'' (''the monarchy's enormous popularity''); praising The King's ''unifying and amazing'' speeches, describing him as a ''moralsk veiviser, et moralsk kompass og en moralsk far for hele nasjonen'' (''a moral guide, a moral compass and a moral father for the whole naation''), etc, etc.

Plus saying that The Regent-Couple ''have saved the monarchy,'' saying that ''politicians don't dare to go against our amazing King,'' praising The Queen and CP MM for ''their unbelievable work for the monarchy,'' etc, etc.
Yes, as most of you have probably now understood, the man had very few boundaries when it came to speaking well about The NRF, and absolutely no one went against him either, not even the republicans.

And here one can read his blog-post from August last year where he wrote about The King and Queen in connection with their golden Wedding Anniversary (link).

Google translation (link).

Quotes translated by me:

A golden wedding Anniversary is a great and happy occasion to celebrate in every family - and a Royal golden wedding Anniversary is a happy event for the entire nation.
And when it now is our dear Regent-Couple who have been married for 50 years, we would all like to join in the celebration.

For King Harald and Queen Sonja truly deserve our tribute on their big day. For 50 years, the two have been our foremost ambassadors - the last 27 years as Norway's cherished King and Queen.

[...]

Family life, with wife and children and eventually children-in-law and grandchildren, have undoubtedly helped to shape our beloved monarch.

[...]

The strength of the Norwegian royal house after 1905 has been their unique ability to both reflect our Norwegian values in their work and their lives - and to feel their time on the pulse. This is also King Harald and Queen Sonja's great strength.

Since the wedding in 1968, the two have been a driving skilled team both privately and in their special job. Together and individually, they have the honour for the well-functioning and beloved monarchy we have in Norway today. Together, the two have managed to modernize and renew the royal house - and make it relevant to ''new'' generations (yes, he wrote ''new,'' not ''future,'' so not an error from me).

Another thing to mention is that the funeral took place yesterday, and the RF family was represented by Sven Gjeruld Gjeruldsen, Assistant Communications Manager at the court (been in the position since 2001 and is one of the courtiers closest to The King).

--------------------

Originally Posted by LadyFinn

Svensk Damtidning:
This is the first time Shaman Durek meets the entire royal family.

Thanks!

The first time he met the ''entire royal family'' was on May 17th.

Originally Posted by LadyFinn

When Norwegian King Harald stepped aboard the royal ship Norway at Bygdøy in Oslo recently, he was asked several questions about daughter Märta Louise and her new love Shaman Durek. King Harald chose not to answer many of the questions, but took the time to comment on some of them, reports the Norwegian newspaper Dagbladet.
Partly he said that it was nice that she found a boyfriend and revealed that he had not been able to meet the princess's boyfriend yet.

That was in May!

Yes, Svensk Damtidning and their facts!

No, give me BILLED-BLADET instead!

[Blog Real]

Crown Prince Haakon, Norway's acting monarch in the King's absence, announces that he will meet the press soon at 3 PM / 15:00 Norwegian time.

An update on King Harald's health is expected.


https://mobile.twitter.com/OAanmoen/...19072110563328

Crown Prince Haakon has just met the press and said:

"I thank you for your thoughtfulness.

The king is in recovery, we expect him to be home from the hospital during this week. After the conditions he is fine.
He was dizzy and unwell, which is why he was admitted to hospital."
The Crown Prince added: "It has been a heavy period in recent weeks. We try as best we can to take care of each other."

[Muhler]

That's a relief.

[sm1939]

good they are bringing him home.

[An Ard Ri]

Will Crown Prince Haakon continue to act as Regent?

[HereditaryPrincess]

Glad to hear that Harald is recovering. I hope he'll get to be discharged soon on time.

[ROYAL NORWAY]

Originally Posted by An Ard Ri

Will Crown Prince Haakon continue to act as Regent?

As long His Majesty is unable to fulfil his duties, yes!
But it was said by the court on Jan 8 (the day he was admitted to hospital) that he will be on sick leave for (only) two weeks.
And I see now that the RH-calendar has stopped referring to CP Haakon as regent on Jan 23.

[principessa]

The norwegian royal court cancels all official engagements because of the Covid19.

https://www.kongehuset.no/nyhet.html...2325&sek=26939

[Princess Larisa]

Not surprising at all. Considering the ages of the King and Queen and Mette-Marit’s compromised health I’m surprised they didn’t do it sooner.

[polyesco]

"The King and Queen are in home-quarantine from today. Both the King and Queen are symptom free. The King will lead the Council of State tomorrow through video phone"
https://twitter.com/OAanmoen/status/1238161973839384576

[0325.Mikael.0929]

Haakon VII was 33 when he got elected as King of Norway, and Maud was then almost 36. Olav V is their only son, then 2 years old. Olav V never had a younger sibling, and I guess that have to do with Haakon VII suddenly becoming the King of Norway rather than a spare for Denmark, and thus receiving much duties. It would be more troublesome to raise one more kid while acting as head of state.
-
In the 1930s, Olav V and Märtha raised three children. At 29 Märtha gave birth to Ragnhild, at 30 to Astrid, and at 35 to Harald V. Since Ragnhild and Astrid had no rights of succesion at the time, they don't need to worry about being disqualified from the line of succesion because they weren't on the line at all.
And hence they married commoners and got to live their private lives with their family. Their families have never considered to be royals (similar to John Ambler's and Tord Magnuson's families).
-
But Harald V is a very different case where he is the heir and is the only one in line for the Norwegian Throne in the 1960s. He has dated Sonja Haraldsen for nine years, and his love, fidelity and determination towards Sonja made Olav V accept the marriage. At 32 Sonja gave birth to Märtha Louise and at 34 to Haakon Magnus.
-
As opposed to Sweden, whose parliament gave the first green light for the absolute primogeniture constitutional amendment in 1978, before Carl Philip was born (a second green light has to be given by a new parliament after election), Norway passed their amendment in 1990. Haakon Magnus was then 17, so it would be unfair to strip him of his place as heir apparent.
Since Haakon Magnus is expected to have children of his own, Märtha Louise chose a private business life and married Ari Behn who and whose children were not granted any titles at all.
-
Haakon Magnus' spouse Mette Marit had 3 kids, Marius at 24 (not sired by Haakon), Ingrid Alexandra at 30 and Sverre Magnus at 32. Marius, as the half-brother of the two royals, chose to live a private life. Sverre Magnus is not a part of the Royal House and therefore does not receive HRH titles at all. Ingrid Alexandra's generation was the first generation of absolute primogeniture in Norway (compare Sweden where Victoria's generation is the first to use AP), but the difference is that Carl Philip and his nephew Oscar remained members of the Royal House, yet Sverre Magnus wasn't born a member of the Royal House. I wonder what makes the difference between Sweden and Norway.

[Prinsara]

It's a rather bizarre question to ask, when if you go back to a period of about thirty years, the Swedish line of succession was mostly-underage Carl Gustav and heroically-remaining-single Bertil.

I think that makes Sweden-at-the-time smaller than Norway now.

A lot of your answer is probably just "luck, circumstances, and letting women succeed".

[Countessmeout]

Simple different countries, different monarchies. The monarchies don't fit some cookie cutter mould. They follow the constitution of their country. Belgium, Netherlands, Denmark, UK all have AP but none of them follow the exact same model of how the royal house is governed.

Ingrid Alexandra is not the first generation absolute primogeniture applied to. Norway introduced it prior to her birth in 1990.

The difference between Sweden and Norway was in Sweden it was done retroactively. Like the UK, the law was worded so that it was dated to when the process was started instead of when the law was passed. In Sweden that meant while the law was not passed until January 1980, it was retroactive to the date the process started before Victoria was born. Meaning that Victoria was heir to the throne. In the UK though the law was passed in 2013, it applies to any children born after 2011. This wasn't the case with Norway.

Ingrid Alexandra wasn't the first person affected by the law though. Before 1990 Martha Louise was not in line to inherit the throne. Like the king's sisters, they were excluded all together. The new law in 1990 stated that while not done retroactively (meaning Haakon remained heir) any female born after 1971 was now in line for the throne (which only applies to Martha). Martha Louise's children are also in line for the throne, as they would never have been before the change in laws.


Martha Louise did not choose a private life from the start. She very much had a role in the royal family for years. Like Anne in the UK, her husband simply didn't gain a title or role, and either did her children. It wasn't until 2002 that she started paying taxes and her HRH status was removed to allow her more freedom in the business world.

Its simply a matter of how countries choose to limit their membership to the royal house. Some don't choose to have a huge number of HRH.

Norway: king queen, heir/wife, and eldest child of the heir to the throne
Sweden: king/queen, all their children, and the children of the heir (now)

Look at other monarchies and you will see other variations of how it is handled. And how the financing of the royals are handled as well. Its about the different constitution and laws in place. Though as we saw in Sweden with the grandchildren recently, the king did have a say in some.

It's a rather bizarre question to ask, when if you go back to a period of about thirty years, the Swedish line of succession was mostly-underage Carl Gustav and heroically-remaining-single Bertil.

I think that makes Sweden-at-the-time smaller than Norway now.

A lot of your answer is probably just "luck, circumstances, and letting women succeed".

Indeed, until 1980 the only heirs to the throne were CP and Bertil who was 68 years old at the time. Until the birth of CP, Bertil was the one and only heir to the Swedish throne.

Bertil put off marrying the woman he loved for years so that he could be regent to Carl Gustaf if needed. All the other males had removed themselves from the line of succession due to their marriages.


They started the process of allowing women to inherit, before Victoria was even born. The idea was to take the pressure off the king and queen in producing a son. That any child the queen bore would be able to succeed the throne after their father died.


If the law had not changed, until the birth of Alexander, CP was the one and only heir to the throne of Sweden as the old law was male only.

[0325.Mikael.0929]

Originally Posted by Prinsara

It's a rather bizarre question to ask, when if you go back to a period of about thirty years, the Swedish line of succession was mostly-underage Carl Gustav and heroically-remaining-single Bertil.

I think that makes Sweden-at-the-time smaller than Norway now.

A lot of your answer is probably just "luck, circumstances, and letting women succeed".

If you're talking about the line of succession or the royal house, true. On 15 September 1973, the line of succesion is as follows:
Gustaf VI Adolf and his two brothers were dead,
his cousin Carl of Östergötland lost his royal status in 1937,
his sons Sigvard and Carl Johan and his nephew Lennart lost their royal statuses in 1934, 1946 and 1932 respectively, probably because of their status as spares and the expectation that Gustaf Adolf will live long and sire a heir and a spare. Only Prince Bertil, who just as you said, heroically remained single, remained on the line at the time until 1979. That was 6 years with only one person on the line.
-
But for Harald V, if he dies before he can sire any children, the Norwegian Royal Family will die with him too unless Ragnhild and Astrid are given succession rights. After Olav V's ascension in 1957, Harald V is the only one in line until Haakon Magnus is born in 1973. That was 16 years.
-
I must admit that luck and other circumstances affected Norway in their first 100 years. However, I'm still not sure why Norwegian spares (Märtha Louise, Sverre Magnus) tend to live private lives while their Swedish counterparts (Carl Philip, Madeleine, Oscar) had at least some royal duties. Is it because of Norway's population being half of that of Sweden's and the appanage is expected to be lower than that of Sweden's? But Denmark has a similar population and all four children of Frederik X have HRH.

Originally Posted by Countessmeout

Ingrid Alexandra is not the first generation absolute primogeniture applied to. Norway introduced it prior to her birth in 1990.

The difference between Sweden and Norway was in Sweden it was done retroactively. Like the UK, the law was worded so that it was dated to when the process was started instead of when the law was passed. In Sweden that meant while the law was not passed until January 1980, it was retroactive to the date the process started before Victoria was born. Meaning that Victoria was heir to the throne. In the UK though the law was passed in 2013, it applies to any children born after 2011. This wasn't the case with Norway.

Ingrid Alexandra wasn't the first person affected by the law though. Before 1990 Martha Louise was not in line to inherit the throne. Like the king's sisters, they were excluded all together. The new law in 1990 stated that while not done retroactively (meaning Haakon remained heir) any female born after 1971 was now in line for the throne (which only applies to Martha). Martha Louise's children are also in line for the throne, as they would never have been before the change in laws.

Absolute primogeniture means the ranking is determined without regard to gender. Though the 1990 admendment gave Märtha Louise succession rights she is still behind Haakon Magnus, so it's not AP but rather male-preference primogeniture for those born between 1971-1990. No Norwegian royal has been born during 1990-2004, so Ingrid Alexandra is the first generation under AP though not the first generation affected by the amendment.

[Countessmeout]

Originally Posted by 0325.Mikael.0929

Absolute primogeniture means the ranking is determined without regard to gender. Though the 1990 admendment gave Märtha Louise succession rights she is still behind Haakon Magnus, so it's not AP but rather male-preference primogeniture for those born between 1971-1990. No Norwegian royal has been born during 1990-2004, so Ingrid Alexandra is the first generation under AP though not the first generation affected by the amendment.

The amendment wasn't simply absolute primogeniture. They went from being Male only to absolute. So yes, Martha Louise very much was affected by the amendment. Before the amendment she had no right to inherit the throne.

Its not like the UK where a woman could always inherit the throne, she just came after her brothers. Anne and the York girls, Louise didn't all suddenly get put in line of succession. The change didn't affect them at all. For Martha Louise she went from being not in being in the line of succession at all to second in line for the throne.

It also affected her daughters who were born before Ingrid. And who would never have been in line of succession if not for the amendment.



If Harald had died before he had children, the Norway parliament would simply have chosen a new monarch. There are articles in the constitution stating that if a legal heir to the throne doesn't exist, it falls to parliament to select a new heir.


It wouldn't be the first time. In 1905 the throne was vacant. Harald's own grandfather came to the throne by election from the parliament.


Sweden clearly felt more need to ensure a clear line of succession, and adding women helped to do that. Norway didn't feel the same pressure until later.

[wartenberg7]

Originally Posted by 0325.Mikael.0929

Haakon VII was 33 when he got elected as King of Norway, and Maud was then almost 36. Olav V is their only son, then 2 years old. Olav V never had a younger sibling, and I guess that have to do with Haakon VII suddenly becoming the King of Norway rather than a spare for Denmark, and thus receiving much duties. It would be more troublesome to raise one more kid while acting as head of state.

Well, I don´t know what having become the King of Norway would have to do with Haakon VII and Queen Maud not having a further child?
Dozends of other monarchs had plenty of children, too. And Kings, especially 100 and more years ago, never raised their own offspring by themselves (if they did at all) - we know they had plenty of help.

Being a "spare Prince" of Denmark would certainly not have required more children!
I guess they, or one of them, had medical problems or doctors have advised the Queen not to have a further child!

[0325.Mikael.0929]

Originally Posted by Countessmeout

It also affected her daughters who were born before Ingrid. And who would never have been in line of succession if not for the amendment.

Sorry for my ignorance, I have forgotten that Maud Agelica Behn (2003.4.29.) was born before Ingrid Alexandra (2004.1.21.).
-

Originally Posted by Countessmeout

If Harald had died before he had children, the Norway parliament would simply have chosen a new monarch. There are articles in the constitution stating that if a legal heir to the throne doesn't exist, it falls to parliament to select a new heir.
It wouldn't be the first time. In 1905 the throne was vacant. Harald's own grandfather came to the throne by election from the parliament.

Indeed. But who will the Norwegians choose? A spare from another Royal Family? That's another question.
-

Originally Posted by Countessmeout

Sweden clearly felt more need to ensure a clear line of succession, and adding women helped to do that. Norway didn't feel the same pressure until later.

True. Having that said though, as of 18 August 2020, Norway has the shortest succesion line among the seven kingdoms (7 members) compared to NL (8), SE (10), DK (11), BE (16), ES (depends on constitutional interpretation), GB (more than 60).
Yet there are articles of the constitutions to settle throne vacancies in the seven kingdoms now, so it won't be a national worry unless things get too slow.

Originally Posted by wartenberg7

Well, I don´t know what having become the King of Norway would have to do with Haakon VII and Queen Maud not having a further child?
Dozends of other monarchs had plenty of children, too. And Kings, especially 100 and more years ago, never raised their own offspring by themselves (if they did at all) - we know they had plenty of help.

They did have help back then. Still, it couldn't have been as easy as before if Haakon VII sired another child.

Originally Posted by wartenberg7

Being a "spare Prince" of Denmark would certainly not have required more children!

Of course. But Haakon VII is already King when Olav V is 2 years and 4 months old, and Haakon VII would most likely have sired his second child after enthronement, not before.
If Haakon VII is not elected king at all I don't think he'll have another child either.

Originally Posted by wartenberg7

I guess they, or one of them, had medical problems or doctors have advised the Queen not to have a further child!

That's another possibility.

[Princess_Eleanor]

Originally Posted by 0325.Mikael.0929

As opposed to Sweden, whose parliament gave the first green light for the absolute primogeniture constitutional amendment in 1978, before Carl Philip was born (a second green light has to be given by a new parliament after election), Norway passed their amendment in 1990. Haakon Magnus was then 17, so it would be unfair to strip him of his place as heir apparent.
Since Haakon Magnus is expected to have children of his own, Märtha Louise chose a private business life and married Ari Behn who and whose children were not granted any titles at all.
-
Haakon Magnus' spouse Mette Marit had 3 kids, Marius at 24 (not sired by Haakon), Ingrid Alexandra at 30 and Sverre Magnus at 32. Marius, as the half-brother of the two royals, chose to live a private life. Sverre Magnus is not a part of the Royal House and therefore does not receive HRH titles at all. Ingrid Alexandra's generation was the first generation of absolute primogeniture in Norway (compare Sweden where Victoria's generation is the first to use AP), but the difference is that Carl Philip and his nephew Oscar remained members of the Royal House, yet Sverre Magnus wasn't born a member of the Royal House. I wonder what makes the difference between Sweden and Norway.

I think the difference is that, as you say, Märtha Louise chose to become a private business person as opposed to a working member of the royal family. I think that precisely because of the small size of the Norwegian Royal Family, she would have been very welcome to had she wanted.

When she made that decision, she left the Royal House and gave up her HRH. I suppose it was decided, that for the next generation it would be easier for Sverre Magnus not to be a member of the Royal House or have an HRH title from the beginning. It makes things a bit clearer. I think they've made it rather obvious that he is not expected to take up royal duties as an adult but will rather choose and make his own career.

The question of spares is a difficult one for all of royal Europe. I think it is nice for Magnus to know that he can choose his own path in life and not be a spare until he's basically "no longer needed".

On the other hand, even for a country with a relatively small population, I think the Norwegian Royal family have gotten themselves into a spot where the whole workload rests on the shoulders of 2 octogenarians and one other person = Haakon, with Mette-Marit being ill and unable to conduct too many duties. It will probably mean that Ingrid will have to step up young but there might also be a point at which Haakon will have to almost everything by himself. So there is also that.

By the way, I don't think it's that Märtha Louise would be incapable of conducting royal duties. I have watched her, she was raised a Princess and it shows. She knows quite well how to conduct herself on engagements and what to answer in interviews - if she wishes. It's that sometimes she does not wish to conduct herself in that way
But even if she wanted to, which I don't think she does, as long as the shaman is her partner, I don't think she would be acceptable to the Norwegian public as a working royal.
Notably, I believe she hasn't done any public engagements since the shaman scandal erupted last May, before that she always did some in addition to her private career.