Camilla and The Public

[scooter]

... isn't it much nicer to read about Britain's future queen who is adored by the future king, called my "Darling wife" and treated not only with courtesy but with genuine affection?

No doubt the first wife would have enjoyed being treated with such courtesy and affection as well.

 

[MissJanet]

No doubt the first wife would have enjoyed being treated with such courtesy and affection as well.

We don't know how Charles treated Diana in the first years of their marriage. Both said that the marriage went downhill after Harry's birth, so it must have been better before. For everything else, we only have Dianas word and she was really bitter when she spoke about the failed marriage, she repeatedly said that she did not want the affection that Charles had to offer.

What really helps Camilla is the fact that she never talked about the whole triangle in public. From early on, in all of this filthy mud fighting around her, I respected her for that. And she was the only one I could at least respect a little bit.

 

[Kataryn]

No doubt the first wife would have enjoyed being treated with such courtesy and affection as well.

I don't buy into the story that a man who can treat one person with courtesy and affection is not able to do that with others. Or vice versa: no man who does not treat the wife he himself chose with courtesy and affection is able to give those feelings in any genuine form to another - man or woman. I've seen so many times how courteous and kind Charles is and I see how content and happy Camilla is so he is absolutely able to behave that way.

If he didn't do that to Diana from a certain point any longer (and he surely did it in the beginning!), is IMHO a sign that both had massive problems with each other. Courtesy and affection may be given at frist but have to be earned after that day after day. As does respect. Only love is something different, but I doubt we will ever know what love means for Charles.Which is okay with me.

But back on topic. IMHO it shows that Charles and Camilla have what most people believe is a good marriage. And isn't that what we wish for the Royals or other people we value?

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

Diana was probably a spoiled woman, but Charles was definitely a spoiled man....so let's not just put that label on Diana.
What was everyone's take on Camilla's public appearance with The Queen and Kate. She must be such a self assured woman to appear with a woman who has been loved for decades, and the new, young, pretty, woman who the media want to be the new Diana.

 

[Artemisia]

Camilla's appearance was quite a success. The three generations of royal ladies appeared to be so genuinely at ease with each other and rather relaxed that it affected everyone else. The warm display between the two Duchesses was also a pleasant sight.

 

[James VI]

Diana was probably a spoiled woman, but Charles was definitely a spoiled man....so let's not just put that label on Diana.
What was everyone's take on Camilla's public appearance with The Queen and Kate. She must be such a self assured woman to appear with a woman who has been loved for decades, and the new, young, pretty, woman who the media want to be the new Diana.

I think you hit the nail on the head with the last part of your comment, Xenia. Camilla is self assured in her own position, comfortable in her own skin, and entirely natural, natural in a way that Princess Diana, for all her other qualities, never was.

 

[Baroness of Books]

Camilla back then was seen as a "Rottweiler" both in looks and temperament and nobody seemed to understand back then why Charles preferred to be with her in London when he could have been the one to spoil the beauty in France.

Today that view changed - and rightfully so.
Diana is understood to have been a beautiful but troubled woman with a good, compassionate heart which made people fall for her but made it very difficult if not impossible to live with her in the long-term while Camilla is seen as a good-hearted lady in the best sense of the world who one can turn to in whatever trouble and get help and support which in return gets her others love, affection and support - and that indefinatedly. No matter how she looks for beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I personally when I see her genuine smile, I am glad that she is Charles' life, for I believe he is worth having her for a wife. But then I'm a very romantic fan of Camilla...

Beauty is indeed in the eye of the beholder and in Camilla, Charles has found everything beautiful on a spiritual and emotional level that encompasses his ideal and what we can only wish for ourselves, no matter how old we are. Looks can fade, but not your character and personality which will always remain.

 

[Tyger]

Camilla's appearance was quite a success. The three generations of royal ladies appeared to be so genuinely at ease with each other and rather relaxed that it affected everyone else. The warm display between the two Duchesses was also a pleasant sight.

I am curious - this evening on Al-Jazeera news there was a very nice piece on the Queen and Philip kicking off the Jubilee Year in Leinster (sp? awful - not sure) 'today'. The reporting seemed to identify 'today' as the beginning of the Jubilee celebrations - and then was particular in showing that the Duchess of Cambridge was along. I have some questions.

- Is 'today' - the 8th of March - the start of the Jubilee Year?

- If it is, why do you think the Queen chose to include Kate and not also Camilla if the threesome were so successful in their previous outings?

Thank you.

 

[Artemisia]

Not really, 8 March is definitely not any kind of official start of Jubilee celebrations.
Technically, the Jubille celebrations have already started a month ago since Her Majesty ascended to the Throne on 6 February. There have already been fair few events dedicated to Queen Elizabeth's Diamond Jubilee. However, the majority of celebrations will take place in June, probably to coincide with the anniversary of the Queen's Coronation ceremony, which took place on 2 June 1953.

There is no specific reason why Camilla was not included in this particular engagement. It was announced via the royal diary that this event will be attended by the Queen, the Duke of Edinburgh and the Duchess of Cambridge. The previous event was attended by all three royal ladies. In coming days, Kate will join several senior royals during official engagements, including one with Prince Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall.

 

[HRHHermione]

I am curious - this evening on Al-Jazeera news there was a very nice piece on the Queen and Philip kicking off the Jubilee Year in Leinster (sp? awful - not sure) 'today'. The reporting seemed to identify 'today' as the beginning of the Jubilee celebrations - and then was particular in showing that the Duchess of Cambridge was along. I have some questions.

- Is 'today' - the 8th of March - the start of the Jubilee Year?

- If it is, why do you think the Queen chose to include Kate and not also Camilla if the threesome were so successful in their previous outings?

Thank you.

Because Camilla did an engagement with the two of them last week? And because today was a day for the Duchess of Cambridge to be with Her Majesty and Prince Phillip?

 

[Tyger]

Not really, 8 March is definitely not any kind of official start of Jubilee celebrations.
Technically, the Jubille celebrations have already started a month ago since Her Majesty ascended to the Throne on 6 February. There have already been fair few events dedicated to Queen Elizabeth's Diamond Jubilee. However, the majority of celebrations will take place in June, probably to coincide with the anniversary of the Queen's Coronation ceremony, which took place on 2 June 1953.

There is no specific reason why Camilla was not included in this particular engagement. It was announced via the royal diary that this event will be attended by the Queen, the Duke of Edinburgh and the Duchess of Cambridge. The previous event was attended by all three royal ladies. In coming days, Kate will join several senior royals during official engagements, including one with Prince Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall.

Thank you, Artemisia. Good context with which to understand what I heard/saw.

Because Camilla did an engagement with the two of them last week? And because today was a day for the Duchess of Cambridge to be with Her Majesty and Prince Phillip?

What? I was asking because the report on Al-Jazeera conveyed an impression that seemed 'off' and I now realize from Artemisia's post that I was in fact correct in my 'take'.

 

[Iluvbertie]

The main celebrations in June are to coincide with the normal Official Queen's Birthday weekend (which is going to be a long weekend in the UK). That is also coincides with the 59th anniversary of her coronation is more an accident than a design. They wouldn't want to have these celebrations in February because of the weather so June it is.

 

[HRHHermione]

Thank you, Artemisia. Good context with which to understand what I heard/saw.



What? I was asking because the report on Al-Jazeera conveyed an impression that seemed 'off' and I now realize from Artemisia's post that I was in fact correct in my 'take'.

Apologies I failed to read the Al-Jazeera article and assumed you were making a passive-aggressive swipe at Camilla. Now that I read the article, I see I was in the wrong.

 

[cepe]

As previous posts mentioned, Jubilee year really started on 6th February, however the 8th March is the start of the Queen's tour of Great Britain. The Royal website has information about the nationwide tour.

Following Prince Philip's health scare at Christmas, there was an announcement that on some of the tour the Queen would be accompanied by other members of the Royal family. I thought at time that this was in case Prince Philip wasn't well enough. I think we'll see more of this in the future.

 

[Tyger]

As previous posts mentioned, Jubilee year really started on 6th February, however the 8th March is the start of the Queen's tour of Great Britain. The Royal website has information about the nationwide tour.

Okay - yes - that was what Al-Jazeera said - the first day of the tour of Great Britain. Okay. All explained. Al-Jazeera's reporting standards remain intact.

Apologies I failed to read the Al-Jazeera article and assumed you were making a passive-aggressive swipe at Camilla. Now that I read the article, I see I was in the wrong.

Thank you, HRHHermione. Finally I've unravelled it. It winds up being me not having a full enough grasp of what was being referenced on the newscast - so how I interpreted what I heard was not what was being said. Isn't that always the way?

Anyway, was there an Al-Jazeera article, like in newspaper article? I only ever see Al-Jazeera on television - my local PBS station carries it - so I don't see articles from Al-Jazeera, like in a newspaper.

 

[James VI]

Accession day

The Jubilee celebrations did not begin on February the sixth, since this date not only commemorates the Queen`s accession to the throne, but is also the anniversary of the death of her much loved father, George VI. There is never any public celebration, or indeed, private celebration within the Royal family, on this date.

 

[MARG]

The Jubilee year kicked off then with or without celebrations. They are winding up to the "real" celebrations gradually with the Queen visiting around the UK and other members of the BRF visiting the Commonwealth Countries.

 

[Zonk]

Let's get back on topic...Camilla and the Public.

 

[lightningbearer]

I think these days Camilla has been accepted by the public and usually gets favorable coverage, although the D of Cambridge eclipses her now I think Camilla has done really well since she's been married and acted fantastically. She'll never hold the spotlight that Diana did but I think most people accept that now as part of her appeal

 

[James VI]

I could`nt agree more.

 

[Baroness of Books]

And it's a good thing that Camilla doesn't hold that spotlight, either. She doesn't have the personality to want to be in the limelight, I think.

 

[PrincessKaimi]

Camilla is very gracious about sharing and, from my point of view, was never involved with Charles in order to be in a spotlight. She seems very well-adjusted, happy and, well, kind.

 

[Duchess of Durham]

I think these days Camilla has been accepted by the public and usually gets favorable coverage, although the D of Cambridge eclipses her now I think Camilla has done really well since she's been married and acted fantastically. She'll never hold the spotlight that Diana did but I think most people accept that now as part of her appeal

I don't get the impression she wants the same spotlight Diana had. In fact, other than the Kardashians and a few other people who want to be snapped by the paparazzi, I can't think of anyone who would want the same spot light Diana had.

 

[Patra]

I have been quite impressed with Camilla and the impression she has left on the Public. I always thought I'd have a resentment about Camilla being the "other woman", but time has healed a lot. Charles seems happy, his sons love her, and the public (including me) seems to respond to that!

 

[Artemisia]

So have I. Camilla has managed to win my respect and support with the grace, sense of humour and charm she carries her engagements. The pictures and videos I've seen of her show a lovely woman with great sense of humour, someone you'd feel very comfortable around.
Definitely a nice addition to the Royal Family.

 

[Royal Newbie]

So have I. Camilla has managed to win my respect and support with the grace, sense of humour and charm she carries her engagements. The pictures and videos I've seen of her show a lovely woman with great sense of humour, someone you'd feel very comfortable around.
Definitely a nice addition to the Royal Family.

I have to admit that without any real knowledge of what happened, I was not that fond of Camilla. My opinion since finding this forum has drastically changed. Actual knowledge is a wonderful thing.

She seems to be a very nice, down-to-earth woman. And the fact that it seems that William and Harry accept and like her goes a long way with me. They KNOW her, I don't. And yes, I think their acceptance of her and their positive feelings towards her are genuine, not an ACT put on for the masses.

 

[PetticoatLane]

I know I'm bumping a thread that's been quite quiet for some time, but I thought this was the most appropriate place to put this. I haven't seen it covered in other threads, but if it has, my apologies and this post can be either moved or deleted.

A new YouGov poll has found that a majority of Britons now support Camilla being referred to as 'Queen' when Charles accedes to the throne, by a margin of 53% to 32%.

Camilla can become 'Queen', say public

I'm sure this is a heartening development for Clarence House.

 

[Nico]

I know I'm bumping a thread that's been quite quiet for some time, but I thought this was the most appropriate place to put this. I haven't seen it covered in other threads, but if it has, my apologies and this post can be either moved or deleted.

A new YouGov poll has found that a majority of Britons now support Camilla being referred to as 'Queen' when Charles accedes to the throne, by a margin of 53% to 32%.

Camilla can become 'Queen', say public

I'm sure this is a heartening development for Clarence House.

Surprising that the Daily Mail didn't pick up that one ...

 

[Iluvbertie]

Doesn't fit with the DM's idea of news I suppose. Of course the Camilla haters will say 'you can't trust a poll' - the same people who last year or in years past pointed to the same poll as the evidence that Camilla should never by The Queen Consort.

 

[Baroness of Books]

Well, those naysayers will have to live with the fact that Camilla is popular because she will be Queen Consort whether they like it or not.