The Monarchy under Charles


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Charles took up full time duties after being told to give up military life by the Queen - because he was the Heir to the throne

Anne took up full time royal duties when she ceased 3 day eventing (her early career if you like) and after Peter and Zara were born

It seems to me that the Cambridges are following Anne's example, and as William is not Heir to the throne, he did not have to follow the example of Charles. Maybe both the Queen and Charles learnt that taking up full time duties early is not a good thing (Philip didn't like leaving the navy either; and Andrew has been rather lost since he did).

Harry could follow the example of Duke of Kent - serve in the Army for 20 years and combine with some royal duties.
 
I don't know, I personally like the idea of them teaming up for some official engagements and on ceremonial occasions. It something we see a lot of with the Swedish, Danish and Norwegian royals. The Queen & Duke of Edinburgh and Charles & Camilla don't team up often enough, IMO. I hope to see a more of a family unit under Charles or at least under William's reigns.

There actually is quite a bit of this that we don't get to see. State Dinners are a great example - no official photos unless from up in the rafters, or shots of the queen and the dignitary making their speech. But there is much family there - we just don't get to see them. Nor do we get photos from Holidays.

One change Charles could (and I think should make) is to add some official photogs for more events. In the US, we have photogs at the arrivals to State Dinners with no harm, no foul. Let us see the family and others at state banquets. Other Royals houses in Europe have official holiday photos from one day on holiday, birthdays, etc. Well, why not?

In fact, that was the deal brokered to give young William and Harry privacy until in University. The press was given official access on certain dates - and it worked just fine.
 
QEII and DOE, and also Charles and Anne are bend to do, what they percives beeing their duty, in an excessive way you do not find a lot now adays - if this is healthy is another question. Clearly the Cambridges and Harry are looking for a more balanced live / work scheme. And I congratulate them on that.

I see a kind of obsession/passion/zeal in the Queen, DoE, PoW and The PR. But,for some reason I cant see that in William and Harry. I dont know its for good or bad. I find them more 'entertaining' than 'inspiring'. Or maybe that much overworking is not necessary in the first place. And with all lessons from past, I seriously dont want Kate to work enormously from beginning. As cepe said, maybe once they become full-timers like their father and aunt, they will develop that passion..

I cannot see any of the other royal houses (Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Netherland, Belgien etc) performing nearly anywhere that much

The 'performances' need not be compared. The scope, scrutiny, expectations and demands of work are all very high for British Royals, compared to other continental royals. So they automatically have higher benchmarks.
 
There actually is quite a bit of this that we don't get to see. State Dinners are a great example - no official photos unless from up in the rafters, or shots of the queen and the dignitary making their speech. But there is much family there - we just don't get to see them. Nor do we get photos from Holidays.

One change Charles could (and I think should make) is to add some official photogs for more events. In the US, we have photogs at the arrivals to State Dinners with no harm, no foul. Let us see the family and others at state banquets. Other Royals houses in Europe have official holiday photos from one day on holiday, birthdays, etc. Well, why not?

In fact, that was the deal brokered to give young William and Harry privacy until in University. The press was given official access on certain dates - and it worked just fine.

I agree, there should be more media access to the State Banquets, official dinners and the Reception for the Diplomatic Corps. The Diplomatic Corps reception happens around November or December every year but we never really hear about it because there's no reports or media access.

I would like to see a more family unit within the royal family and not just for the Trooping of the Colour and anniversary services. I'd like to see Charles & Camilla accompany The Queen & Duke of Edinburgh on some official engagement tours around the UK. I'd like to see William & Catherine attend some State Banquets, official dinners and the annual Diplomatic Corps Reception.

I just think the younger members of the royal family should be stepping up their job within the "Firm" and present a more updated look on the Monarchy.
 
The Queen has given the press access several times, just watch documentaries like the Royal Family 1969, Elizabeth R 1992, Royal Family At Work 2007, The Diamond Queen 2012 and Our Queen 2013.The British Royal Family is the most popular and famous family in the world. They do many more engagement than other royal families, and they do much together take for example trooping the colour, the garter service, the ascot, state visits and several other things. It is actually much more access to the British Royal Family than what we see in The netherlands, Norway, Sweden and Denmark. The British Royal Family is also much more close to the people they goes walkabout and does much more charity.

Long Live Elizabeth The Great
 
I was merely suggesting that it was something Charles might also do. He did it with the boys and it was a success, for little effort. Yes, I agree, they do other things. They could also do this.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree there should be more access / coverage of some of the events the Royal Family do escecially as they are publice events anyway so its not as if its going to infringe on their privacy. Hopefully Charles would encourage that as King. He seems much more aware of the media than his mother (though that can always be a bad thing)
 
One thing that has not been mentioned is that Charles and Camilla are already retirement age, and are still not in the top job. I question their ongoing health and endurance.
 
The Queen has given the press access several times, just watch documentaries like the Royal Family 1969, Elizabeth R 1992, Royal Family At Work 2007, The Diamond Queen 2012 and Our Queen 2013.The British Royal Family is the most popular and famous family in the world. They do many more engagement than other royal families, and they do much together take for example trooping the colour, the garter service, the ascot, state visits and several other things. It is actually much more access to the British Royal Family than what we see in The netherlands, Norway, Sweden and Denmark. The British Royal Family is also much more close to the people they goes walkabout and does much more charity.

Long Live Elizabeth The Great

I don't wish to be rude, but pressure to get pictures of RFs in Norway, Sweden Netherlands and Denmark are just not in the same league as BRF, esp Catherine. The US market clamour for pix of her. If some of the foreign royals didn't do photocalls there wouldn't be any pix at all because the paps aren't interested. Unless, of course, there is a scandal!

Charles did negotiate well with the press about the boys when they were younger. But that was pre social media days. The BRF need a strong strategy that encompasses not only the British media but wider afield.

If anyone can tackle it, Charles can. But it is difficult.
 
I see a kind of obsession/passion/zeal in the Queen, DoE, PoW and The PR. But,for some reason I cant see that in William and Harry. I dont know its for good or bad.

I think that level of obsession/passion/zeal is excessive and not a good thing, and that William and Harry probably feel the need for a better work/life balance.
 
I think The Royal Families of other European countries are probably glad that The British Royal Family get the bulk of the Media Attention and that they are always in the press and not them. They can go on doing thing more quietly without the Media always there and causing a stir. It would take something big or a huge Scandal to get the Royal Family of Denmark, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden in the Papers, Magazines and On TV outside of their respective country.
 
I think that level of obsession/passion/zeal is excessive and not a good thing, and that William and Harry probably feel the need for a better work/life balance.

They all have loyalty and a strong sense of duty.

Charles, William and Harry have passion for causes - environment, military, children, built environment, young people

Anne is passionate about riding, lighthouses and sailing

The Queen is passionate about horse and racing; and corgis

Not sure about DoE - perhaps Award scheme and trying to come out of the shadow.
 
Not sure about DoE - perhaps Award scheme and trying to come out of the shadow.

I'd add carriage driving to the list for the DoE. :)
 
Philip was into polo and sailing when younger and then don't forget his carriage driving. He also was world president of the WWF.

As for media coverage of state dinners and such, is there the British equivalent of CSPAN? CSPAN in the US shows coverage of sessions of congress. The also show arrivals to a State Dinner and the speeches. Plus they show PM question time sometimes on Sunday. However, the main stream news don't cover a state visit except when the BRFs come to the US. If it was the president of Hungary no one would mention it.
 
CSPAN do cover a great deal and they have the videos up in their Video Library.

I just wish there were some media access to these State Banquets, official dinners and the Diplomatic Corps Reception. The pictures are very scarce and the Diplomatic Corps Reception at the Buckingham Palace takes place without anyone knowing it even happened. I just hope Charles and William will give the media a bit more access at these major events. I see nothing wrong with coverage, pictures and a little video of the arrivals. I think there should be some Live Video Coverage provided on the Monarchy's official website and uploaded on their YouTube site. They just need to get with the program with the technology.
 
. In 1952 there were only QEII, Philip, QEQM, the Duke and Duchess of Gloucester and the Duchess of Kent around to undertake engagements. but it would be a major adjustment for the monarchy if there are only 6 or so to do all of the engagements and I do not see that happening except by natural attrition. I dont think anyone will have to give up all their official positions or cease to undertake engagements just because Charles III is on the throne.
Also undertaking public engagements in 1952 were Princess Margaret, The Princess Royal (Princess Mary), and Princess Alice Countess of Athlone. I think there might have been one or two more as well whose names escape me at the moment.:flowers:
 
I think Charles will make a good king. For whatever period of time. It will be short. No 60th anything for him. They still think of themselves as sacrosanct, so it is hard to see them in a modern light. I think Charles will be close to 80 when he succeeds. hardly an interesting concept. And, frankly, it is the concept, as there is little else. People loved Diana, because she was stunning and vibrant. They love Kate for the same thing. Mostly they are dull. Perhaps, that is good if you are British. Hardly matters if they are there or not. The other RFs keep out of most things and try and give a modern edge to their tenures.
 
LOL, I don't think Charles will be 80 when he comes to the throne.
 
He is very close to 70, now. The queen seems quite well and I think she will be around for a bit more, her mother was over 100. I said close, not necessarily 80, but he will be quite mature. He is now.
 
We tend to like our monarchs best when they are very young or very old, so succeeding at a more mature age may not be such a bad thing for Charles. It is when they are middle aged that we get a bit cranky because they are not young and glamorous or aged and respected.
 
It is media access to the state banquets, but the media shows it only when it is visits from large countries. There was live coverage from the France and Saudi visits in 2007, and for the US visit in 2011.
In 2005 the Norwegian Royal Family was on a state visit to the UK, media here in Norway had live coverage, it was not even mentioned in the British media.

Long Live Elizabeth The Great
 
He is very close to 70, now. The queen seems quite well and I think she will be around for a bit more, her mother was over 100. I said close, not necessarily 80, but he will be quite mature. He is now.

He's only 64 now- not even close enough to 70 to round up. Elizabeth II is 87. Lets be generous and say 76 is close to 80. Elizabeth II would have to reign until she's 99 years old.

It's not impossible, but it's improbable.
 
As far as media coverage of events that aren't covered now - is there really a demand, except for die-hard royal watchers - for any coverage? I suspect not.
 
Charles is now closer to being King. The Queen is 87 and may she continue to enjoying great health but reality is setting in that she's older and slower (as she puts it). I think if she makes it to her 90's, I think it's going to be very challenging for her to carry on the burden of being the Monarch.

QUOTE=Iluvbertie;1593244]As far as media coverage of events that aren't covered now - is there really a demand, except for die-hard royal watchers - for any coverage? I suspect not.[/QUOTE]

It would be nice for them to provide some Live video feed from their official website though. If not on TV.
 
Last edited:
Congrats to Prince Charles on that milstone. I wonder if he will celebrate? Just in case anyone was wondering or keeping track Prince Charles well become the Longest Serving Prince of Wales on September 9, 2017.
 
So it's correct to say His Royal Highness is the oldest Heir Apparent.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It will be interesting to see if Charles continues to invite the same family members to Sandringham at Christmas as currently invited the Queen. I can't see Princess Margaret'a children attending for example. Likewise, Princess Anne's children may not want to go now they are married and have their own children. I am sure Charles will still want his own siblings along though.
 
I would imagine his siblings will still attend as Margaret attended for many years. If his siblings don't attend there wont be a big turn out!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom