The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #321  
Old 10-24-2019, 05:56 PM
Zaira's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: A, United States
Posts: 1,199
Quote:
Originally Posted by wartenberg7 View Post
Sorry...? The Monarch is to be supported by his/ her family and the aristocracy (they even swear it at the coronation!) as a mark of loyalty, respect and "compensation" for the heavy burden of her office - and not a young celebrity couple!
Who does not see the difference between these two, has no idea of the concept of monarchy at all!
Sorry...did you not read the rest of the earlier posts I was responding to? Perhaps you should before making such a condescending response to me. Thanks.

And that young celebrity couple is her family whom she loves.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #322  
Old 11-18-2019, 03:43 PM
Ista's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: the West, United States
Posts: 2,539
An interesting article in The Times:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/n...firm-x5z2mjhhg
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #323  
Old 11-18-2019, 04:11 PM
ACO ACO is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 2,858
I do think these are trying times for the image of the monarchy. 2020 will be interesting because I feel they will focus more than ever on Charles and his line.
Reply With Quote
  #324  
Old 11-18-2019, 04:47 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 14,665
I don't believe the Queen is "losing her grip" on the monarchy or that anything really is that much different than how the BRF always has been. Its just that the "mystique" is gone and the royal family is being seen more and more for who they really are as human beings.

With everyone and their poodle carrying a smart phone with a camera, the popularity of social media and a media that has a nose like a hunting dog to "sniff" out any kind of story, the public is being inundated more than ever with information we want to know about the royal family (and things also that we shouldn't know).

If the monarchy can survive all of the crises such as Queen consort losing their head, a King that abdicated over the love of a woman and a public that relentlessly demanded the Queen show herself at a time of great loss in the family, it'll survive Andrew's foibles and bad decisions.
__________________
No law can be sacred to me but that of my nature. Good and bad are but names very readily transferable to that or this; the only right is what is after my constitution, the only wrong what is against it.

~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #325  
Old 11-18-2019, 05:21 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Northamptonshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 411
The present model of having a royal family support the monarch may be on the way out. It is after all a relatively recent phenomena. It might be to the good if relatives of the monarch can lead the lives they want & not be bound by a duty they didn't ask for. In the end they might be happier & more fulfilled.

The crown as an institution will endure because the alternative is a republic & there is no real appetite for that. Not in this realm at least, I can't speculate about the others.
Reply With Quote
  #326  
Old 11-18-2019, 09:02 PM
loonytick's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Tennessee, United States
Posts: 756
All the fussing here over Harry and Meghan is just insane to me. Itís exactly the kind of in-house squabbling that every generation of this family has gone through and weathered. In the scheme of things it is truly NOTHING.

But Andrew is potentially a much bigger blow. Forget about whether or not he had sex with the woman who accuses him of that. To go on a TV interview and be the poster child for out-of-touch, donít-even-notice-the-little-people-because-theyíre-probably-just-staff stereotypes of royals at their least necessary is incredibly damaging. A major aspect of the ďbrandĒ of modern royalty is that they use their prominence to shine light on the needs of people less fortunate than them. Their work is largely charity and taking the role of personifying their nationís care for the Everyman. His own daughters are patrons of organizations that combat sex trafficking/slavery, and yet he canít be bothered to express even a basic blanket statement of compassion or concern for the girls caught in Epsteinís web? His selfish, blasť attitude feeds the concern many have that the royals donít really care and that itís really all about living that privileged, extravagant life. That interview was very much a ďlet them eat cakeĒ kind of moment.
Reply With Quote
  #327  
Old 11-18-2019, 09:59 PM
Leopoldine's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 620
Quote:
Originally Posted by Durham View Post
The present model of having a royal family support the monarch may be on the way out. It is after all a relatively recent phenomena. It might be to the good if relatives of the monarch can lead the lives they want & not be bound by a duty they didn't ask for. In the end they might be happier & more fulfilled.

The crown as an institution will endure because the alternative is a republic & there is no real appetite for that. Not in this realm at least, I can't speculate about the others.

A smaller official Royal Family seems the way forward. The current apparatus is based on the needs of HM in the 1950's and 1960's, before reliable television from so many parts of the world, before improved airline transport and before the internet. A Royal tour by a cousin of the Queen could take months back then. Nowadays, Charles can be in Cardiff, Oslo, Cairo and Bucharest inside of a week and still spend his Sunday in Highgrove.


The Queen is right in saying that she "has to be seen". Charles will have to be seen as well when he is Monarch.

The other official royals might not need the full rig of recce visits, police outriders, etc. that goes on now. It's very expensive.
Reply With Quote
  #328  
Old 11-18-2019, 10:07 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 5,048
Quote:
Originally Posted by Durham View Post
The present model of having a royal family support the monarch may be on the way out. It is after all a relatively recent phenomena. It might be to the good if relatives of the monarch can lead the lives they want & not be bound by a duty they didn't ask for. In the end they might be happier & more fulfilled.
But who holds the purse strings?
Yes the RF can work; but would they have the jobs they have if not for their royal status?
In the end it all comes down to money.
Reply With Quote
  #329  
Old 11-19-2019, 05:06 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 1,332
The main focus under the next reign will be Charles, Camilla, William, Catherine, Harry and Meghan.

But i think Anne, Edward and Sophie will continue with what they are already doing for as long as they want to or have the health. Can anyone see the hardest working Princess Anne going from high speed to zero over a night ? I can’t. And Edward is taking over The Duke of Edinburgh’s Award.

Andrew’s days as a star is over.

Beatrice and Eugenie will continue to do what they do now and help their uncle when they are needed but they will never be asked to become full time working royals unless a terrible catastrohe happens in Charles’ family.

The Gloucester and Kent branches are soon over anyway.
The Duke and Duchess of Gloucester may continue for awhile but their children are 100 % private citizens and will remain so.

The Duke and Duchess of Kent and Princess Alexandra will likely retire completely soon.
Prince and Princess Michael of Kent have never been a part of the firm and only represents when they are asked to (basically when no one else have time to go).
Their children are all private citizens and will remain so.

The monarchy will undoubtly consist of much fewer working members in the future but i think the transition will happen naturally.
Reply With Quote
  #330  
Old 11-19-2019, 01:59 PM
Claire's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hans-Rickard View Post
Can anyone see the hardest working Princess Anne going from high speed to zero over a night ? I canít. .
Actually I think if Anne was given the opportunity she would like to make a real go at horse breading , managing Team GP Horse jumping - there is probably hundreds of things Anne would rather be doing.

The problem is they feel duty bound to do this role for the Queen and Country and therefore she (ie - the Queen , not Charles or editor of the Telegraph) who has to right to ask/tell Andrew to stop. She also can only tell him to stop doing things as a representative of the crown , he can continue doing them as an individual.
Reply With Quote
  #331  
Old 11-19-2019, 02:40 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Northamptonshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirabel View Post
But who holds the purse strings?
Yes the RF can work; but would they have the jobs they have if not for their royal status?
Possibly, maybe probably not in some cases. On the other hand there are plenty of jobs that can only be done by those who are fully qualified/capable. There may be members of the family who might have wanted to be a vet or an academic or a pianist or a commercial pilot or a dentist or an opera singer or whatever. Plenty of occupations can only be entered via merit/ability.

Obviously being related to the monarch will confer some advantages but you still need something about you to succeed. Lord Snowden almost certainly got his start in life because he was the Queen's nephew but his reputation would not have grown as a furniture maker if he had not also had genuine talent. Zara Tindell is another example.

Plenty of people in plenty of countries get a leg up from their famous families. It might not be fair but it is what it is.

I think it's unfair to expect someone to be denied what they want to pursue in life just because they happen to be born into the royal family, no matter how close to the throne.
Reply With Quote
  #332  
Old 11-21-2019, 07:14 PM
Somebody's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Somewhere, Suriname
Posts: 4,029
Quote:
Originally Posted by camelot23ca View Post
In the near future royals of the Queen’s generation will no longer be with us. Anne and Edward may not want or be able to continue the work they currently do as they get older and their children, as well as Eugenie and Beatrice will not be taking their parents’ places - they may be associated with one or two organizations that especially interest them but that’s it.

So over, let’s say, the next ten years the working royal family will be made up of Charles, Camilla, William, Kate, Harry and Meghan. And it will be at least twenty years from now before William’s children can start taking on a significant amount of royal work. So I think there are a ton of patronages that will be “orphaned” quite soon. I don’t see anything wrong with that.. the only reason so many organizations were able to get royal patronage was the Queen and DoE having four children, a situation that hasn’t been repeated in subsequent generations.
Don't forget about the age gap between Charles and Anne on the one hand and (Andrew and) Edward on the other. In 10 years time Edward is only 65 years old. I do expect him and Sophie to still be quite active. Especially as his 15+ year older brother would be 81 by that time and is expected to be fulfilling his duties. In addition, I don't see Anne retiring early unless she is forced to. She might slow down a bit (and rightly so) but I see no indication that she would be completely out of royal duties.

Nonetheless, I do agree that not all royal patronages will be re-awarded to other members of the family.
Reply With Quote
  #333  
Old 11-30-2019, 02:18 AM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 15,828
I think the Prince Andrew firestorm will now cause the royal family to make some very necessary changes much more sooner than we think.
__________________
"WE CANNOT PRAY IN LOVE AND LIVE IN HATE AND STILL THINK WE ARE WORSHIPING GOD."

A.W. TOZER
Reply With Quote
  #334  
Old 11-30-2019, 02:24 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 14,665
I don't see the BRF and the "Firm" drastically changing anything over one member's bad decisions. They just put the problem out to pasture and will most likely continue as they've always done without Andrew around.

Whatever does happen or change won't be because of Andrew but because of the slow transition between monarchs that has been going on for a while here. The "keep calm and carry on" motto would be the way I think they'd all look at things.
__________________
No law can be sacred to me but that of my nature. Good and bad are but names very readily transferable to that or this; the only right is what is after my constitution, the only wrong what is against it.

~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #335  
Old 11-30-2019, 03:43 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Scotland, United Kingdom
Posts: 460
Quote:
Originally Posted by Durham View Post
The present model of having a royal family support the monarch may be on the way out. It is after all a relatively recent phenomena. It might be to the good if relatives of the monarch can lead the lives they want & not be bound by a duty they didn't ask for. In the end they might be happier & more fulfilled.

The crown as an institution will endure because the alternative is a republic & there is no real appetite for that. Not in this realm at least, I can't speculate about the others.

There is an interesting documentary called ' The queens lost family ' which covers how and why the BRF started to do public events to the extent they now do. It starts with George V.
Reply With Quote
  #336  
Old 11-30-2019, 05:32 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 2,225
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dman View Post
I think the Prince Andrew firestorm will now cause the royal family to make some very necessary changes much more sooner than we think.
What changes are you alluding to?
Reply With Quote
  #337  
Old 11-30-2019, 06:01 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 5,767
Quote:
Originally Posted by Durham View Post
Possibly, maybe probably not in some cases. On the other hand there are plenty of jobs that can only be done by those who are fully qualified/capable. There may be members of the family who might have wanted to be a vet or an academic or a pianist or a commercial pilot or a dentist or an opera singer or whatever. Plenty of occupations can only be entered via merit/ability.

Traditionally, when members of the RF had a non-royal full-time job, it was service in the military as exemplified in the past generations by the current Duke of Kent or the Duke of York. Prince Richard, however, is a trained architect who wanted to practice full-time, but I believe had to change his plans once he became the heir to the dukedom of Gloucester.



If you think about it, it is rather silly by modern standards that someone who is currently 27th (and falling) in the line of succession should be a full-time working royal and could not have a private career of his own when, in other monarchies in the continent, even siblings of the King or Queen have careers while doing occasional royal duty in parallel or not having any official role at all. I am thinking for example of Prince Constantijn or Infanta Elena , who are respectively fourth and third in line !


I accept that the British Royal Family has a much higher profile and a heavier workload than most continental RFs, including those from bigger countries like Spain, so it is not realistic that someone like Prince Harry or Prince George's siblings in the future could ever not be full-time royals, but, for more distant members of the family, I believe having their own careers outside royal duty should be natural and I think it will become increasingly common as the RF is slimmed down as allegedly planned for the future.
Reply With Quote
  #338  
Old 11-30-2019, 09:21 AM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 15,828
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post
What changes are you alluding to?
Iím thinking there could be some adjustments made. Perhaps a slimming down of the family. I donít know, but some changes could occur.
__________________
"WE CANNOT PRAY IN LOVE AND LIVE IN HATE AND STILL THINK WE ARE WORSHIPING GOD."

A.W. TOZER
Reply With Quote
  #339  
Old 11-30-2019, 10:35 AM
O-H Anglophile's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 3,640
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dman View Post
Iím thinking there could be some adjustments made. Perhaps a slimming down of the family. I donít know, but some changes could occur.
Really? why should hard working Royals like Anne, Edward & Sophie, the Dukes of Kent and Gloucester be thrown out because of Andrew?
Reply With Quote
  #340  
Old 11-30-2019, 12:01 PM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 15,828
Quote:
Originally Posted by O-H Anglophile View Post
Really? why should hard working Royals like Anne, Edward & Sophie, the Dukes of Kent and Gloucester be thrown out because of Andrew?
I didnít say they would be thrown out. I just happen to believe Charles and his family will become the main focus of the royal family sooner than we think.
__________________

__________________
"WE CANNOT PRAY IN LOVE AND LIVE IN HATE AND STILL THINK WE ARE WORSHIPING GOD."

A.W. TOZER
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Future of the Belgian monarchy Marengo Royal Family of Belgium 119 03-24-2020 10:41 AM
Future and Popularity of the Spanish Monarchy TODOI Royal Family of Spain 1530 03-22-2020 02:01 PM
The Future of the Danish Monarchy Empress Royal House of Denmark 768 02-15-2020 03:49 PM
Future of the Dutch Monarchy Marengo Dutch Royals 39 11-29-2017 09:53 AM




Popular Tags
alqasimi archie mountbatten-windsor aristocracy belgian royal family birthday celebration charles of wales chittagong cht clarence house countess of snowdon cover-up crown prince hussein crown prince hussein's future wife crown princess victoria crusades danish history denmark duke & duchess of cambridge; duke of cambridge duke of sussex dutch dutch history dutch royal family felipe vi future games germany henry v hill historical drama house of bourbon house of glucksburg house of grimaldi house of orange-nassau house of saxe-coburg and gotha jerusalem jumma kent languages list of rulers lithuanian castles mail marriage mbs monarchism northern ireland norway norwegian royal family official visit palaces palestine popularity prince charles prince harry prince of wales romanov family royal tour shakespeare snowdon spain spanish royal startling new evidence state visit sweden swedish history swedish royal family tracts trump united kingdom usa


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:03 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020
Jelsoft Enterprises
×