Royals Among The People And With Children


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
roseroyal said:
I thought that the different " feel" between these 2 photos was interesting.

http://www.princess-diana-remembered.com/uploads/5/3/3/5/5335384/october_2000-006.jpg
Click to expand...

I think the author got it a bit wrong when he/she insinuated that Her Majesty doesn't have the same knack with children as Diana. We need to remember that these women are different. One is a monarch, and has been taught to behave a certain way (not to mention growing up at a time when royalty wasn't as accessible to the general public), and the other, a much younger woman, who is/was a princess, but was brought up with different experiences, and at a different time. I think both women have a touch with children, because if either one didn't, the children won't be flocking to her. Her Majesty may not kneel down when speaking to children, but that certainly doesn't imply that she doesn't like or can't relate to them.
 
Daria_S said:
I think the author got it a bit wrong when he/she insinuated that Her Majesty doesn't have the same knack with children as Diana. We need to remember that these women are different. One is a monarch, and has been taught to behave a certain way (not to mention growing up at a time when royalty wasn't as accessible to the general public), and the other, a much younger woman, who is/was a princess, but was brought up with different experiences, and at a different time. I think both women have a touch with children, because if either one didn't, the children won't be flocking to her. Her Majesty may not kneel down when speaking to children, but that certainly doesn't imply that she doesn't like or can't relate to them.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Here is what I meant by different "feel"- Both H.M. and Diana have a knack with children, and that is clearly obvious, even if one doesn't kneel down and the other does.
I just feel a bit sorry for H.M.- one can see that she wants to kneel down, but being in her position, hesitates to do so. Great shame for her- I think she'd love it! .
Because of her generation, Diana was able to kneel down, and appear to be fully at ease with kids, while still having the appropriate level of majesty, something that because of her generation, HM. is/feels incapable of doing, which is a great shame.
That being said, both women no doubt had/have a knack with kids, each in her own different way. The important thing is that both approaches work/worked which is wonderful!
 
roseroyal said:
Agreed. Here is what I meant by different "feel"- Both H.M. and Diana have a knack with children, and that is clearly obvious, even if one doesn't kneel down and the other does.
I just feel a bit sorry for H.M.- one can see that she wants to kneel down, but being in her position, hesitates to do so. Great shame for her- I think she'd love it! .
Because of her generation, Diana was able to kneel down, and appear to be fully at ease with kids, while still having the appropriate level of majesty, something that because of her generation, HM. is/feels incapable of doing, which is a great shame.
That being said, both women no doubt had/have a knack with kids, each in her own different way. The important thing is that both approaches work/worked which is wonderful!
Click to expand...

I think if given the chance Her Majesty would definitely take part in playing with the kids. Those receptions at Buckingham Palace that involve Robert Hardy and children with special needs would be great opportunities. Heavens, I bet the kids would get a kick out of that (especially if some of the corgis made an appearance :D [and that makes me think of who exactly would have the most fun; kids, Mr. Hardy, Her Majesty, or the corgis :lol: :ROFLMAO:]). Of course one can only dream, because as we know, Her Majesty's position wouldn't allow for that kind of behavior.
 
Daria_S said:
I think if given the chance Her Majesty would definitely take part in playing with the kids. Those receptions at Buckingham Palace that involve Robert Hardy and children with special needs would be great opportunities*1. Heavens, I bet the kids would get a kick out of that (especially if some of the corgis made an appearance :D [and that makes me think of who exactly would have the most fun; kids, Mr. Hardy, Her Majesty, or the corgis *2:lol: :ROFLMAO:]). Of course one can only dream, because as we know, Her Majesty's position wouldn't allow for that kind of behavior.
Click to expand...
Let me just add, I think H.M. definitely has that knack with kids within her, and I think one can learn to combine a knack with kids, and the necessary/appropriate level of needed formality with such a knack. Look at D. S, COW, and W&K, whom I believe will still be that way when they become King/Queen, or at least be more relaxed, than the present Queen.There are even some monarchs who appear better at being laid-back with kids, while still being regal , than QEII. The sad thing is, because she is the monarch, QEII does not feel she can ever truly relax her regal side a bit.
Because of her generation, she is/feels unable to learn how to combine her knack with kids, with her majesty. Great shame- I think she has the ability in her.
*1- Perfect ones, and RH would be the best teacher- funny how both he and H.M. are from the same generation, both had a strict formal upbringing, brought up more by nannies, governesses,than parents- a time when parents did not really play with their children, yet one is perfectly comfortable closely interacting with children, while the other is not. Of course one was not brought up to be the Queen of England either.Sadly, I can see any of the other members of the BRF, that I mentioned above joining in the fun with RH, but not H.M. She is relaxed enough to let RH play with the kids on the floor of B.P- which is awesome, don't get me wrong, hope that never stops- knowing RH it will when :pigsfly: ( if he could not play with the kids, he would not go, period.)- but not enough to join in- which would be fantastic.
*2-I don't know myself- and if you add H.M.'s jolly vet from Yorkshire which would then equal playtime perfection..... that makes it even tougher!:D:lol::ROFLMAO:
 
roseroyal said:
Let me just add, I think H.M. definitely has that knack with kids within her, and I think one can learn to combine a knack with kids, and the necessary/appropriate level of needed formality with such a knack. Look at D. S, COW, and W&K, whom I believe will still be that way when they become King/Queen, or at least be more relaxed, than the present Queen.There are even some monarchs who appear better at being laid-back with kids, while still being regal , than QEII. The sad thing is, because she is the monarch, QEII does not feel she can ever truly relax her regal side a bit.
Because of her generation, she is/feels unable to learn how to combine her knack with kids, with her majesty. Great shame- I think she has the ability in her.
*1- Perfect ones, and RH would be the best teacher- funny how both he and H.M. are from the same generation, both had a strict formal upbringing, brought up more by nannies, governesses,than parents- a time when parents did not really play with their children, yet one is perfectly comfortable closely interacting with children, while the other is not. Of course one was not brought up to be the Queen of England either.Sadly, I can see any of the other members of the BRF, that I mentioned above joining in the fun with RH, but not H.M. She is relaxed enough to let RH play with the kids on the floor of B.P- which is awesome, don't get me wrong, hope that never stops- knowing RH it will when :pigsfly: ( if he could not play with the kids, he would not go, period.)- but not enough to join in- which would be fantastic.
*2-I don't know myself- and if you add H.M.'s jolly vet from Yorkshire which would then equal playtime perfection..... that makes it even tougher!:D:lol::ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...

Very valid points, as always. I think it all comes down to several things; time period of one's upbringing, the nature of the said upbringing, but most importantly, one's own disposition. I remember reading that Her Majesty learned very early on that she needed to be reserved, and keep up a certain front. This became more evident when her relationship with Philip of Greece and Denmark was discovered, and at one point, at a public appearance, people demanded to know where Philip was. I think that unnerved her (and rightfully so). For that reason, I think she keeps certain emotions guarded while in public (though when she's with kids, I think that guard comes down just a tad, because if it didn't, the kids won't be so eager to show her their pictures and reading nooks that looked like castles). She was brought up to be Queen, and at that time, monarch wasn't expected to be 'down with the average Joe' if you will. Now, Diana, Sophie, Camila, William, Harry, and Catherine, though not all royal from birth (accept William and Harry), had upbringing that was vastly different. Sophie and Catherine came from middle/upper middle class families, and weren't taught to keep a certain front in public, if you will. William and Harry had plenty of exposure to 'regular' people, and therefore felt comfortable in that atmosphere, where Her Majesty didn't have that chance (safe for a very short time before the end of WWII). I think for that reason, we see Camila, Sophie, William, Harry, and Catherine so comfortable with just switching gears if you will. They're able to go from just being 'one of us' to a 'Royal Highness'. Her Majesty has trouble with that, and it's understandable why. Now, that being said, she's still great with little ones. I remember her grin when during her recent visit to Australia, a little girl was showing off her 'dog-themed' tights. It was positively infectious. I think as time moves forward, so does the way a royal comports him/herself. In fifty years from now, the way let's say Camila handled talking to the public may be considered 'formal'.
 
Daria_S said:
Very valid points, as always. I think it all comes down to several things; time period of one's upbringing, the nature of the said upbringing, but most importantly, one's own disposition. I remember reading that Her Majesty learned very early on that she needed to be reserved, and keep up a certain front. This became more evident when her relationship with Philip of Greece and Denmark was discovered, and at one point, at a public appearance, people demanded to know where Philip was. I think that unnerved her (and rightfully so). For that reason, I think she keeps certain emotions guarded while in public (though when she's with kids, I think that guard comes down just a tad, because if it didn't, the kids won't be so eager to show her their pictures and reading nooks that looked like castles). She was brought up to be Queen, and at that time, monarch wasn't expected to be 'down with the average Joe' if you will. Now, Diana, Sophie, Camila, William, Harry, and Catherine, though not all royal from birth (accept William and Harry), had upbringing that was vastly different. Sophie and Catherine came from middle/upper middle class families, and weren't taught to keep a certain front in public, if you will. William and Harry had plenty of exposure to 'regular' people, and therefore felt comfortable in that atmosphere, where Her Majesty didn't have that chance (safe for a very short time before the end of WWII). I think for that reason, we see Camila, Sophie, William, Harry, and Catherine so comfortable with just switching gears if you will. They're able to go from just being 'one of us' to a 'Royal Highness'. Her Majesty has trouble with that, and it's understandable why. Now, that being said, she's still great with little ones. I remember her grin when during her recent visit to Australia, a little girl was showing off her 'dog-themed' tights. It was positively infectious. I think as time moves forward, so does the way a royal comports him/herself. In fifty years from now, the way let's say Camila handled talking to the public may be considered 'formal'.
Click to expand...
Thanks! Very well put! Agree with all the above!
And can I assume you agree with me re a certain jolly vet from Yorkshire, joining in the fun with RH, kids and corgis at BP?:D:ROFLMAO:
 
roseroyal said:
Thanks! Very well put! Agree with all the above!
And can I assume you agree with me re a certain jolly vet from Yorkshire, joining in the fun with RH, kids and corgis at BP?:D:ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...

Seriously didn't mean to forget about that point. Just got carried away with what was going through my mind at the time. Since the said vet was acquainted with Her Majesty, I can only imagine the atmosphere if he were to be at one of those parties. There would be a lot of happy kids and corgis, that's for sure :D.

Glad you liked my previous novel of a post. By the end I was beginning to wonder if I were making any sense anymore :bang:.
 
Daria_S said:
Seriously didn't mean to forget about that point. Just got carried away with what was going through my mind at the time*1. Since the said vet was acquainted with Her Majesty, I can only imagine the atmosphere if he were to be at one of those parties. There would be a lot of happy kids and corgis, that's for sure*2 :D.

Glad you liked my previous novel of a post. By the end I was beginning to wonder if I were making any sense anymore*3 :bang:.
Click to expand...
*1- Happens to me all the time- no worries!
*2. Indeed , along with S. himself- There again, I don't know, who would have the best time, the dogs, the kids, or S.:D;)
*3- Don't sweat it- you made perfect sense!:flowers:
 
susan alicia said:
the 2 pictures are not a fair comparison, diana would not have knelt down if she was wearing a long formal dress like the queen in the picture. But having said that the queen would not kneel down to be on face level with a little child in public.
Click to expand...
With respect, I disagree. I've seen pics of Diana in a ballgown, kneeling down to talk to a child more times than I could count.
 
Is this some sort of a comparison between a woman who was born in 1926 and a woman born in 1961, women raised in differnt eras to different standards as to what was appropriate behaviour, and women raised to different destinies? Seems rather unfair.
 
NGalitzine said:
Is this some sort of a comparison between a woman who was born in 1926 and a woman born in 1961, women raised in differnt eras to different standards as to what was appropriate behaviour, and women raised to different destinies? Seems rather unfair.
Click to expand...
This post by Daria puts it rather well, NG. It may appear that it is an unfair comparison but it is not meant to be. And why is a comparison unfair IYO?

Daria_S said:
I think the author got it a bit wrong when he/she insinuated that Her Majesty doesn't have the same knack with children as Diana. We need to remember that these women are different. One is a monarch, and has been taught to behave a certain way (not to mention growing up at a time when royalty wasn't as accessible to the general public), and the other, a much younger woman, who is/was a princess, but was brought up with different experiences, and at a different time. I think both women have a touch with children, because if either one didn't, the children won't be flocking to her. Her Majesty may not kneel down when speaking to children, but that certainly doesn't imply that she doesn't like or can't relate to them.
Click to expand...
Look, I know that Diana was Diana, and the Queen is the Queen- different eras,different standards, different destinies. I wouldn't expect nor want The Queen to be Diana, nor Diana to be the Queen( meaning EII, I think Diana would have been an outstanding Queen.) We're not criticizing the Queen nor Diana for their different approaches, as Daria's post shows, we in fact praise H.M. we are just pointing out each woman's different strengths and abilities to switch gears,.( a reference to post # 487 ;)), nor expecting them to be the same. Of course, they have different approaches,/abilities to do so, that is wonderful, both work extremely well, and like I said, I don't expect/want the Queen to change.
But with all that said, the two women have/had a different approach when it comes to the kids, and all the differences in approach/abilities to switch gears are fascinating, when you consider differences in era, standards, and destiny.
 
Last edited:
 
:previous: The picture where Diana is looking on as a little boy is playing with LEGOs (or so it looks to me) is probably very likely what she did at home, with Wills and Harry :D. You always find such wonderful pictures of Diana.
 
Daria_S said:
This needs no words (and I have none, because anything that I'll say will not be adequate). The woman had a way with people. She understood hurt and was able to reach out and give a little of herself, with hope that maybe, just maybe, a life will be eased.
Click to expand...
Carry out a random act of kindness, with no expection of reward, safe in the knowledge that someday, someone might do the same for you.
- Princess Diana
 
roseroyal said:
Carry out a random act of kindness, with no expection of reward, safe in the knowledge that someday, someone might do the same for you.
- Princess Diana
Click to expand...

Very true. Something that very few people live by, nowadays.
 
Daria_S said:
No problem :flowers:. I love the pictures! Louise is precious and what a memory. Harry's looking a little bemused though, as if he can't quite understand the fascination (or is being shy and not knowing if he can talk to the little guest :D).
Click to expand...
Looks like both to me, but more of the latter....:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
Laws of the House of Grimaldi
Replies
3
Views
413
Tatiana Maria
T
Zonk
Princess Anne: Save the Children Fund, Charities and Patronages 2: Sep 2022 -
2 3 4
Replies
105
Views
6K
iceflower
iceflower
Sun Lion
  • Locked
Royals At War, The Untold Story of Harry and Meghan's Split with the House of Windsor
3 4 5
Replies
128
Views
14K
Marengo
Marengo
LadyFinn
The Crown Princess Couple's 10th Wedding Anniversary: 19th June 2020
2
Replies
37
Views
5K
LadyFinn
LadyFinn
A
Future and Popularity of the Thai Monarchy
2 3 4
Replies
99
Views
11K
Tatiana Maria
T

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom