William and Kate: engagement and relationship rumours and musings 2009

[Menarue]

Where the private money that comes out of the private pockets of the royal family comes and came from is a bit of a mystery. Good investments, we have heard rumours of bad investments too, but there had to be money to invest in the first place. The civil list until fairly recently extended to more than just the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh, before that it was very generous to quite a few family members.
I remember a story about Queen Victoria getting a very large legacy from a someone and she accepted it, usually the royal family don´t accept gifts, but it seems on occasion they do.
I am still trying to figure out how the Queen mother was supposed to be in so much debt and the Queen had to bail her out, but Queen Elizabeth managed to leave all her grandchildren and greatgrandchildren millions, there must be a logical explanation for that.
Actually when Edward VIII abdicated there was an inventory to see what could be called private property so that Edward could be compensated and have enough to live in luxury for the rest of his life. I think Sandringham was one house that was considered private and Balmoral but of that I am not quite certain but whichever properties they were, King George bought them off his brother to give him an income but I believe it was this crisis that really got the family thinking about what they actually owned and what belonged to the crown.

 

[Jo of Palatine]

The situation is different nowadays because people have less and less trouble imagining a Republican system replacing a Monarchy. It's been done elsewhere, and successfully, so why not?

Can you post a link where a serious survey that more and more Britons (or Danes or Norwegians or Spaniards...) tend to want a republic replacing their monarchies? I can't recall any such survey results, so where's the proof behind your statement?

As for: "It's been done elsewhere" one should see the historical background of WWI and why revolutions ended a lot of monarchies. I doubt we will see a lot of revolutions in EU-countries in the next decades. As for democratic changes of the form of the democracy - we see how difficult it is to change the succession laws in some countries. And in that case we have the political wish of all people involved to add the idea of gender equality into the constitutional succession laws. But where will one find the needed majorities for a change of constitution to abolish the monarchy? Politicians tend to want to rule in a stable and secure state - they fear nothing more than uproar and revolutionary ideas. Abolishing a monarchy would mean to open the gates and let the flood in - I can't see 75% or only 66% of parlamentarians wanting that! People normally don't want change - no matter who William is going to marry, they will still want him as king. Just recall how the establishment let Diana drop like a hot potato after she had dared to mention a change in the line of succession in her "Panorama"-interview.And you believe that this same establishment won't do anything to make sure republican ideas don't win ground in the political system of Britain. Come on!

 

[Skydragon]

If he marries Kate and if that trend of marrying dull commoners perdues, the British people will start asking why they are funding or are being represented by a bunch of ordinary people playing dress-up.

There are a great many dull Princesses and aristocrats about and I don't think many Britons would welcome another 'celeb' type into the RF.

Britons are too apathetic to push for a republic, even if there were that many that wanted one. I haven't seen any polls to suggest even the majority of the 1000 normally asked favour such a thing!

 

[Menarue]

. Just recall how the establishment let Diana drop like a hot potato after she had dared to mention a change in the line of succession in her "Panorama"-interview.

That was a big mistake on Diana´s part, I think she was dropped more for being so disloyal to her husband, it was a really terrible thing to do. She wasn´t calling for a Republic she wanted her son to take his father´s place, it was a nasty piece of spite and I think the public as well as the establishment recognized it. If she hadn´t died so tragically and been promoted to a saint these words would have haunted her for a long time.

 

[Idriel]

Can you post a link where a serious survey that more and more Britons (or Danes or Norwegians or Spaniards...) tend to want a republic replacing their monarchies? I can't recall any such survey results, so where's the proof behind your statement?

You have misread my post (unsurprisingly). I said more and more people have no trouble imagining a Britain with no monarchy. If you can't see the nuance, well, let's drop the subject.

There are a great many dull Princesses and aristocrats about and I don't think many Britons would welcome another 'celeb' type into the RF.

Indeed, there are a lot a dull aristocrats (William being a prime example). At least they have an interesting ancestry so I consider it a bit better than a dull commoner.
And I think we already had that discussion about a 'celeb' into the RF a couple of pages ago.

Britons are too apathetic to push for a republic, even if there were that many that wanted one.

Briton are apathetic, I agree. I personally don't think that's a good sign when people are indifferent to something.
It doesn't really matter when you have the Queen who is hugely respected, but I don't know about what will happen with her descendants, judging by how they behave and how they are perceived. There is a fine line between apathy and annoyance and then contempt and then anger.

Some here might think the British monarchy is safe no matter what because it's in the British psyche or something... well there has been many instance of growing Republican sentiments in recent British history and none of them coincided with a revolution but were because the British public felt the monarch didn't fulfill a role anymore (under Queen Victoria, after the abdication crisis, etc.). Talking to younger people is also quite eye-opening.

 

[Menarue]

Indeed, there are a lot a dull aristocrats (William being a prime example). At least they have an interesting ancestry so I consider it a bit better than a dull commoner.

I have to agree with this. I am afraid that this Queen just might be the end of the line and it makes me very sad. Perhaps Britons are too apathetic to change but Britain is changing rapidly, there are so many Britains now that don´t have that native British mentality and they are growing in number every day. I think it is time for the future generations to earn some respect and show the advantages of having a monarchy instead of spending their time and money in nightclubs and other frivolous occupations. By that I don´t mean to visit an occasional hospital but really get down to being royal and when it comes to choose a partner choose someone who knows what being a royal is.
Someone once said to Queen Sophie of Spain that she was a very professional Queen and she was not pleased and said the following "I was a Queen in my mother´s womb", you can put whatever interpretation you please to these words.

 

[iakynthi]

Let me come to the point.Question: Do you think Kate-if she finally becomes a princess/Queen-will ever be loved by the people as much as Diana?

 

[Menarue]

The answer is no. Besides, Diana wasn´t as loved as you may think, she died young, she was pretty and it was a tragedy and that certainly made people believe they loved her and any foreigner seeing the mass hysteria at her funeral would think she was the most loved person in Britain, she wasn´t. In fact when I think of the time when she stared at the TV camera with those very made up soulful eyes and said she wanted to be thought of as the Queen of hearts it makes me squirm with embarassment as it did at the time. It is not the kind of theatrics one expects from an English aristocrat.
If she hadn´t died so tragically young I am sure she would have been forgotten very quickly, or perhaps the kind of "forgotten" that Sarah Ferguson is enjoying.

 

[Jo of Palatine]

I have to agree with this. I am afraid that this Queen just might be the end of the line and it makes me very sad. Perhaps Britons are too apathetic to change but Britain is changing rapidly, there are so many Britains now that don´t have that native British mentality and they are growing in number every day.

As I tried to tell it is not so easy to get rid of a monarchy if you have one - it can be that more and more people (how many more each year?) can imagine to live in something else but a monarchy but that won't change a thing in fact. What can change it is the will of the political elite and there I don't see any change of heart because a monarchy has certain advantages a presidential democracy hasn't. Soap Operas included. But getting rewards in form of membership in historical orders or being elevated to the nobility helps as well. So really, I don't see any change on the horizon - this is just wishful thinking of those who would want the Royals to be "Royals" after their own hearts.

 

[Amelia]

Let me come to the point.Question: Do you think Kate-if she finally becomes a princess/Queen-will ever be loved by the people as much as Diana?

I think that there is a thread about this some where already but anyway I personally don’t think that Diana was as loved as some think (like to believe?). There was a lot of hype surrounding her both during her life and then when she died but I don’t think that there will ever be anything like that again. As much as the media have the constant search for the “New Diana” I don’t think anyone is all that interested in taking on the role.

 

[Ella Kay]

Let me come to the point.Question: Do you think Kate-if she finally becomes a princess/Queen-will ever be loved by the people as much as Diana?

I think the real challenge for William's wife, be it Kate or not, will be to try to create her own identity in the face of the Diana comparisons that the media will inevitably keep hanging over her head. I hope that William's wife has the chance to become her own woman in the role she takes on rather than constantly being judged against the media's concept of the late Princess of Wales.

Surely as long as she takes on a large slate of charity work, dresses prettily, pops out a few charming children, supports her husband, and avoids indiscreet contact with the press, she'll be fine.

 

[Menarue]

This making a comparison between the future wife of Prince William and his mother is a bit of a non-starter, if any comparison is to be made it is with the second wife Camilla.
So far Camilla has done very well and the Diana myth seems to be fading except in the minds of a few romantics, who seem to think she was exceptional, I must say that when I heard that Prince Charles was going to marry Camilla I thought she would have a hard time of it, but she hasn´t, she has acted discreetly and with dignity and I have no doubt that if Prince Charles is going to be King Charles III she will make a very good Queen.

 

[kimebear]

This thread is neither about Diana, nor about Camilla. It is about the engagement and relationship musings between William and Kate.

 

[Idriel]

What can change it is the will of the political elite and there I don't see any change of heart because a monarchy has certain advantages a presidential democracy hasn't. Soap Operas included. But getting rewards in form of membership in historical orders or being elevated to the nobility helps as well.

I agree with you here.
If a change comes it won't be initiated by the establishment, it will come from the bottom up.
But let's not forget Britain is a democracy so if enough people want a change the establishment will have to comply.

So really, I don't see any change on the horizon - this is just wishful thinking of those who would want the Royals to be "Royals" after their own hearts.

I don't see any change in the near future too. I think there will be a king Charles and likely a King William. After that, we'll see...
It is not my wishful thinking to see the British monarchy disappear. It's pretty clear from my posts I would like better to see it survive the 21st century, hopefully not in a bastardised version.
We already have Monaco for the operetta princes.

 

[Mermaid1962]

I don't see an illegitimate children inheriting the throne soon. But I don't think that's what you meant.

I would like better to see it survive the 21st century, hopefully not in a bastardised version.

 

[Jo of Palatine]

I wrote in november last year that I'll wash my hands off William and Catherine if they don't get engaged till Valentine's day. Well, they didn't (okay, they probably thought Frederick Windsor had the better claim to the date....) and now I'm sorry for Catherine, sorry for William and really think Catherine should go on with her life instead of playing the "inofficial bride". I like the girl and I pity the way she lives her life right now, buried in Bucklebury when she had gone to university in the hope that one day the world would be open to her. She obviously loves seeing something of the world, hence her stay in Florence in her gap year and now all she gets to see is back roads in country backwaters. Really, if William loved her he would seek a way with her to live life as it is fitting for a young millionaires daughter with a university degree instead of profit from her love while she lives like a nun.

 

[Menarue]

Well said Jo. She deserves better than that. Contrary to what people may think, I have absolutely nothing against the girl, I just don´t think she and William are suited, there seems to be something definitely missing there. I hope that she finds someone who will fall madly in love with her, someone with a similar background of money and education and they can live happily ever after.

 

[Skydragon]

I like the girl and I pity the way she lives her life right now, buried in Bucklebury when she had gone to university in the hope that one day the world would be open to her..

Err, I know many a young thing that went to university, stayed in various foreign countries for a short time, had a flat in London but prefer to live a country life, with the occasional foray in for the nightclubs!

 

[Menarue]

When I said she deserves better I meant lovewise, I think for me the perfect life is having a flat in London and a country house.....wonderful, but then I love horses, I don´t know if I would like it so much if I were allergic to them. (lol).

 

[Amelia]

I wrote in november last year that I'll wash my hands off William and Catherine if they don't get engaged till Valentine's day. Well, they didn't (okay, they probably thought Frederick Windsor had the better claim to the date....) and now I'm sorry for Catherine, sorry for William and really think Catherine should go on with her life instead of playing the "inofficial bride". I like the girl and I pity the way she lives her life right now, buried in Bucklebury when she had gone to university in the hope that one day the world would be open to her. She obviously loves seeing something of the world, hence her stay in Florence in her gap year and now all she gets to see is back roads in country backwaters. Really, if William loved her he would seek a way with her to live life as it is fitting for a young millionaires daughter with a university degree instead of profit from her love while she lives like a nun.

I like Kate too but I don’t have any pity for her for how she is living her life. I guess I don't really think that there is anything to pity. She has a choice how to live her life, even more so than most people her age, so I can only presume that she is happy with the choices she has made or she would be doing something different. It may not be what some of us would have chosen but at the end of the day we can only really do what makes us happy

On another note, while I give my congratulations to Freddie (never knew he had a girlfriend), I‘m not a big fan of the whole Valentine‘s day nonsense, I always found engagements on that day a tad corny (no insult meant to anyone who ever got engaged around the day), so I hope if they do get engaged that they don’t ever do it on the 14th February.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

Really, if William loved her he would seek a way with her to live life as it is fitting for a young millionaires daughter with a university degree instead of profit from her love while she lives like a nun.

that sounds like the key point to me: if william loved her ... he could make so many small but important things possible outside an official engagement that would put kate in a better, much more respected position but he doesn't. we don't know why there is an obvious lack of commitment towards her but can only guess that he doesn't even think of getting married at this stage. their relationship more and more sounds like: if kate wants to stay, fine, if she doesn't, that's fine too. it's not a nice position to be in but i refrain from feeling sorry for kate because it's her who has chosen to go down that path, not william or anybody else.

 

[Ella Kay]

I agree with you on almost all points, DoM ... but the lack of commitment part is the issue that I think we (the public) just don't know enough about to pass judgment on. For all we know, the two of them could have some sort of private understanding at this point. I just don't know that we can assume there's no commitment just because there's been no announcement. He might be stringing her along as some suggest he is, but it's surely equally possible that they are committed and we aren't privy to it.

 

[Skydragon]

we aren't privy to it.

Let all write in and demand to be informed!

 

[Ella Kay]

Surely that's what the tabloids have been doing for years now, don't you think?

 

[Jo of Palatine]

Let all write in and demand to be informed!

Good idea! But what I wanted to point out is simply that for this simple person here it's been too long. It probably is okay for Catherine and William but I've grown tired of them and their private relationship.

 

[muriel]

It probably is okay for Catherine and William but I've grown tired of them and their private relationship.

Very well put, JoP!

The voyeuristic streak in the general royal watching public seems to overtake the basic thought that when (and if) William and Kate are ready to get engaged, they will. If they were based in London and often seen in the press, a lot of the responses we are seeing on the forums would be different.

Lets not forget that it is not very common these days for young British couples to marry at 26-27 years of age, and I am guessing that the more common age for couples to marry now is closer to 30.

 

[muriel]

If he marries Kate and if that trend of marrying dull commoners perdues, the British people will start asking why they are funding or are being represented by a bunch of ordinary people playing dress-up.

As for the people who are arguing that a Royal marriage is a private matter (?!!?) and that the people should just mind their own business, I will just say that this kind of attitude contribute towards the demise of that institution.

There seem to be some pretty strong thoughts here. Everybody is entitled to their own views, but there are a few points I would like to make:

1) Replacing the monarch as head of state with an elected president (the usual alternative!) is not perceived by most British people as a better alternative, else we would have had a republic by now.

2) The last aristocrat to marry into the royal family was Diana.... and we all know where that ended up! I do believe in the importance of bloodlines if I was buying a prized pig, but when it comes to human relationships, IMO it is people that matter, not their ancestry. If Kate and Will are happy, and she has the "right" qualities, I am sure she will make a good consort.

3) As to comments about William and Kate being dull, I have to say that QE2 has probably been one of the dullest people on the public stage, yet she has done her job well (which is all that matters to most of us!) So when it comes to choosing a consort for the future monarch, I would be inclined to go for dull and boring rather than exciting!

4) I do accept that the monarchy has to regularly reinvent itself to be relevant to the current times, and I am sure Charles will help with that. I do believe it is only natural when you have a monarch who is well into her 80s and has been in the job for nearly 60 years, there may be some "updating" required, when the next claimant to the job is called to duty!

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

Originally Posted by Idriel
If he marries Kate and if that trend of marrying dull commoners perdues, the British people will start asking why they are funding or are being represented by a bunch of ordinary people playing dress-up.

and you can't even get rid of them!

you hit the nail on the head, idriel. and not only the british people will start asking soon but also the spanish, norwegian, danish etc. the question is not if but when the first monarchy will go, exactly for that reason.

Originally Posted by Muriel
Replacing the moanrch as head of state with an elected president (the usual alternative!) is not perceived by most British people as a better alternative, else we would have had a republic by now.

no because we are not there yet. there is an icon on the throne, full royal with 50 years+ service on her back. nobody will question elizabeth II as long as she is around, more people will question charles but there is more substance to him than to any other cp, and many many more people will question william in case he doesn't step up a gear and gets married to kate (i will refrain from repeating the image / controversy that surrounds her).

Originally Posted by Muriel

As to comments about William and Kate being dull, I have to say that QE2 has probably been one of the most dull people on the public stage,uet she has done her job well, which is all that matters to most of us. So when it comes to choosing a consort for the future monarch, I would be inclined to go for dull and boring rather than exciting.

i see elizabeth II rather as dutiful, not dull. william is dull, not dutiful. and as for the consort, prince philip, the same goes for him as for his wife: dutiful yes, dull no. it's all about substance / personality and i don't see any of it in neither william nor kate. well that's kind of a match but not for an instituiton to be put to the test in years to come.

 

[Menarue]

I agree with your assessment of Queen Elizabeth II, Duke, dutiful but not dull and William the exact opposite.
It would be terrible if Britain yawns itself into a Republic....

 

[muriel]

....more people will question charles but there is more substance to him than to any other cp, and many many more people will question william in case he doesn't step up a gear and gets married to kate (i will refrain from repeating the image / controversy that surrounds her).


i see elizabeth II rather as dutiful, not dull. william is dull, not dutiful.

There is no doubt that it is very important for William to shape up a public role for himself in the time between entering royal duties full time and becoming King, just like his father continues to do.

Charles has had to work hard to win the respect of the people, but I do believe that they do now appreciate that a lot of the unfashionable causes that Charles supported through the 1980s and 1990s are "mainstrean" issues now, eg concern for the environment, preserving city centres etc. But lets not forget that (Diana notwithstanding), it took Charles a long time to get to this point. Similarly, I think it is unfair to expect William to have developed and pursued his interests to a similar level at this stage of his life... he will get there. Key to his enduring popularity will be his being able to communciate clearly to the British people how he is using his position and time responsibly.