Charles & Camilla: How has your opinion changed since the wedding?


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Al bina, plain can also mean that someone isn't attractive or good looking. It's one of those wierd English words. I think that's where the confusion has come from.
 
Thanks for additional explanation. :flowers: I shall be very careful with choice of words in future. I always forget how sensitive deeply devoted fans can be.
 
My opinion of Camilla has not changed at all after the wedding. I have some respect for Camilla for trying to re-invent her image and keeping her head held high when her name was under scrutiny but that is it. I've never been a fan of hers and never will.
 
Thanks for additional explanation. :flowers: I shall be very careful with choice of words in future. I always forget how sensitive deeply devoted fans can be.
My objection wasn't connected as such to Camilla, devotee or not, it was the assumption that English women are all plain (ugly, unattractive), All nations have some 'unusual' looking women and all nations have some absolute crackers! :flowers: The definition in the UK Oxford dictionary when pertaining to a woman is - ugly or unsophisticated, when speaking of a man - homely, which is another description of ugly! It is a standard British word, but with a variety of meanings, :D So perhaps you can see where I misunderstood your comment. :flowers:

Avalon - I was only teasing you, I knew you didn't mean it in a negative way! :flowers:
 
Last edited:
I like Camilla a bit more now that I see how happy Charles is. He's a lot more centered, for lack of a better word. She looks more confident. They seem happy together, and that's a good thing. I don't like the circumstances that they found themselves in, but I don't feel I can judge them for what happened in their lives, as I'm not them.
 
It may not be the most popular thing to say. I think that Camilla is a good match for Charles. Being born royal must be a very odd world to live and love into. Diana will always be my favorite but Camilla is better for Charles. :)
 
Camilla is a wonderful match for Charles, and a wonderful addition to the Royal Family and to the monarchy as well. She is not given to hysterics or theatrics and she is who she is--Camilla. She seems to be steadfast person who knows who she is and where she comes from and who loves her husband and is devoted to being supportive of him. I say she is exactly who he has always needed and together they appear to be a well suited, witty, and happy couple who are comfortable with each other. Diana may have been more sequined and glamourous, but that is all she had on Camilla--things that don't have a whole of substance, in my own humble opinion.
 
That would be similar to suggesting that all German ladies wear national custume and their hair in plaits, whereas they are among the most beautifully turned out women I know and not a plait in sight. :bang:

Except at Oktoberfest-season.... You get to wonder where all those plaits come from (it's fairly obvious where those dresses were bought - speciality fashion boutiques in Munich and the fashionable villages close to or in the Alps..)
 
Last edited:
Thanks for additional explanation. :flowers: I shall be very careful with choice of words in future. I always forget how sensitive deeply devoted fans can be.

At least you didn't use the word "sensible" instead of "sensitive" - that's another of those language mistakes us foreigners like to make...;)

But it's often useful to look up all meanings in a dictionary of a certain word, because it gives a clearer view on what is additionally implied with the word.
Plain for example can mean genuine, but genuine rather in the sense that it's simply so, other explanations of plain are: it is simple, flat, frugal or even ordinary, trivial or vulgar (that's what my dictionary has to say to it).
 
Last edited:
.

Camilla is a wonderful match for Charles, and a wonderful addition to the Royal Family and to the monarchy as well. She is not given to hysterics or theatrics and she is who she is--Camilla. She seems to be steadfast person who knows who she is and where she comes from and who loves her husband and is devoted to being supportive of him. I say she is exactly who he has always needed and together they appear to be a well suited, witty, and happy couple who are comfortable with each other. Diana may have been more sequined and glamourous, but that is all she had on Camilla--things that don't have a whole of substance, in my own humble opinion.
I very much agree with you!:flowers: It's a pity that the circumstances were not favourable for them from the beginning.
 
My opinion is the same now as it has always been.......they were meant to be together from the start. They are so happy and relaxed in each other's company, Charles is once again the happy laughing Prince I remember from years ago ( I am the same age, in fact 11 months older lol)

The Duchess carries herself with poise and is a perfect Consort, William and Harry seem happy and comfortable with both their father and stepmother. I wish them all the very best
 
My opinion is the same now as it has always been.......they were meant to be together from the start. They are so happy and relaxed in each other's company, Charles is once again the happy laughing Prince I remember from years ago ( I am the same age, in fact 11 months older lol)

The Duchess carries herself with poise and is a perfect Consort, William and Harry seem happy and comfortable with both their father and stepmother. I wish them all the very best
:welcome: What a lovely post! :flowers:
 
But it's often useful to look up all meanings in a dictionary of a certain word, because it gives a clearer view on what is additionally implied with the word.
Plain for example can mean genuine, but genuine rather in the sense that it's simply so, other explanations of plain are: it is simple, flat, frugal or even ordinary, trivial or vulgar (that's what my dictionary has to say to it).
It seems to me that I excel at stirring up word-related controversies. In efforts to avoid these controversies in the future, I shall consult Longman English dictionary.:flowers:
 
I apologise for not sharing you adoration of Duchess of Cornwall.

Al_Bina, why are you apologizing for not adoring the Duchess of Cornwall?

You've already said that you prefer more ethereal ladies which makes it totally understandable why Diana is the type of woman you admire and Camilla is not. There is nothing wrong in that.
 
:welcome: What a lovely post! :flowers:

Thank you :flowers: It is so nice to be able to express how I feel. From letters to the Editor in Australian papers Camilla is still "that woman" by and large unless staff are very selective in what they print (which I wouldn't doubt) Not turning this into a Camilla vs Diana debate just stating things how I see it here
 
I prefer to think of it as an ongoing discussion rather than a debate :)

Al bina, never apologize for what you think--and I always enjoy your posts tremendously, regardless of whether we do or do not share an opinion. I think most posters would agree with me......
 
It seems to me that I excel at stirring up word-related controversies. In efforts to avoid these controversies in the future, I shall consult Longman English dictionary.:flowers:

Maybe the problem is that you are often using very distinct words to transmit your very distinct opinions. When your are working with very pointed remarks you must be aware that these remarks transmit the meaning in a much stronger way. And I use "pointed" well aware of the fact that a "point" (from French "la pointe") could mean the top of a dagger or sword and thus the meanings of "pointed" include being a sucessful hit and being hurtful. So you're in for applause (because of the sucessful strike) as well as an equally "cutting" response.:flowers:
 
It seems to me that I excel at stirring up word-related controversies. In efforts to avoid these controversies in the future, I shall consult Longman English dictionary.:flowers:
I think both Charles and Camilla are ugly. That has nothing to do with their characters, but in my opinion they are in fact unattractive. English is your second tongue so you're doing just fine, and just as long as your intent was not malicious, then you have nothing to fear. If you make a statement that a reader deemed inaccurate, it's the responsibility of that reader to request clarification when there is disagreement. In conversations, often times words can be misinterpreted (MEA CULPA). Keep your chin up.:flowers:
 
Last edited:
I think both Charles and Camilla are ugly. That has nothing to do with their characters, but in my opinion they are in fact unattractive.

Just to highlight what has been said: of course you have every right to think Charles and Camilla are ugly. beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. But you didn't imply that the typical "English lady" is plain (aka "ugly" in the understanding of the speakers of English as their mother tongue) because that's what the English produce as "The English lady". That I believe was the reason for the somewhat stormy remarks. :flowers:
 
Just to highlight what has been said: of course you have every right to think Charles and Camilla are ugly. beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. But you didn't imply that the typical "English lady" is plain (aka "ugly" in the understanding of the speakers of English as their mother tongue) because that's what the English produce as "The English lady". That I believe was the reason for the somewhat stormy remarks. :flowers:
Oh, I understand that, but perhaps she should have been asked to clarify her statement rather than scare her half to death. She kept apologizing over and over so I felt bad for her.:flowers:
 
Oh, I understand that, but perhaps she should have been asked to clarify her statement rather than scare her half to death. She kept apologizing over and over so I felt bad for her.:flowers:

I think you are right.:flowers: At least, you are right in general. But I'm afraid we have had that kind of discussion with Al Bina already and so some sort of, hmmmm, let's call it automatic reaction started which is, of course, not really the thing to do. But maybe this time all sides will find your post as the incentive to try to be more polite with each other. :flowers:
 
I think you are right.:flowers: At least, you are right in general. But I'm afraid we have had that kind of discussion with Al Bina already and so some sort of, hmmmm, let's call it automatic reaction started which is, of course, not really the thing to do. But maybe this time all sides will find your post as the incentive to try to be more polite with each other. :flowers:
I don't share Al Bina's dislike of Camilla, but the discussion is a lot more interesting when we are not afraid to express our opinion. I sent you a pm so I could keep on topic.
 
It seems to me that I excel at stirring up word-related controversies. In efforts to avoid these controversies in the future, I shall consult Longman English dictionary.:flowers:
Al bina, the problem is that your command of English is very good and so when there is a little difference in the meaning of the word, I forget that your native tongue is not English, therefore it is I who owe you an apology. :flowers: Don't feel that you can't say what you think or feel, it is nice chatting to you, even though we rarely agree. :flowers:
 
I'm glad we are all bonding as a community but do you think we can we go back to discussing Camilla at least in this thread? :D

Thanks for taking the other discussion to pm.
 
Last edited:
first I have have to admit I am Diana's friend. But I am not a Camilla hater. I don't have too much thoughts on her from the beginning. The same as now. Hence I can't say my opinion to Camilla has changed since the wedding. I am not so impressed by those good qualities of Camilla in her admirers eyes. I think Camilla is a figure what an old society would prefer: being 99% obedient to her men, trying the best to appeal to her men's needs and desires, even building the whole morality based on her men. If one thing can make her man happy then it is right, if not then it's wrong. She lacks her own opinions.

Of course there is some exceptions, the episode of Diana's memorial service was one of them. But I didn't think she really had any her own opinion on whether she should attend or not. At first she would attend because it was her man's desire, so she should attend. And then the opposed voice came, and when it was louder than her man's, she was forced out. Other people's opinions dominated the whole incident. I really wonder, what was Camilla's true thought on it? If it were Diana, I think from the very beginning, she would not aggree to attend no matter how Charles would insist. And if she'd decided to attend, she would not yield to other people's desire.

It's said that Charles and Camilla shared the same hobits, the same interests and even the same opinions on every issues. So they were perfect couple. However it's exactly this extreme harmony which made me frown. I don't think two people with independent minds would have such similar thoughts on everything. To me this harmony came from the sacrifice of personality from one part. This is not easy. And it's amirable in some way. But it's not my ideal
love. I will let my man know, "I disaggree , or argue with you doesn't mean I don't love you. We will argue because by nature we all have our own minds."
 
If you make a statement that a reader deemed inaccurate, it's the responsibility of that reader to request clarification when words have several meanings. That’s the rule of engagement in conversations, as I understand it.
Unfortunately English being my native tongue, there was nothing to clarify. The various meanings of plain are - clear, evident, uncomplcated, not elaborate, without a decorative pattern, ugly, outspoken, straightforward, unsophisticated, homely, not coloured, not in code, unequivocally, simply, a level tract, a basic knitting stitch, plain flour, plain chocolate etc, etc. As we were talking about women, English women at that, the only version that would fit would be the one I took Al_Bina to mean. Knowing Al_bina is not keen on Camilla, it was a basic assumption to make and one that we were able to sort out without any lasting harm done on either side. To suggest that we clarify what every poster means by the use of one word or another, would as you can see, have taken up the whole thread. I would add that we are not at war with one another, so I don't think that there are any 'rules of engagement', just a simple (plain, unadorned) effort to remain courteous and not resort to personal remarks or condemnation. :flowers:
 
Sorry ysbel, the computer fell asleep and I was still trying to post my earlier reply, long after your request! :flowers:

-SNIPPED- I think Camilla is a figure what an old society would prefer: being 99% obedient to her men, trying the best to appeal to her men's needs and desires, even building the whole morality based on her men. If one thing can make her man happy then it is right, if not then it's wrong. She lacks her own opinions. -SNIPPED-

It's said that Charles and Camilla shared the same hobits, the same interests and even the same opinions on every issues. So they were perfect couple. However it's exactly this extreme harmony which made me frown. I don't think two people with independent minds would have such similar thoughts on everything. To me this harmony came from the sacrifice of personality from one part. This is not easy. And it's amirable in some way. But it's not my ideal
love. I will let my man know, "I disaggree , or argue with you doesn't mean I don't love you. We will argue because by nature we all have our own minds."
I have to disagree, the 'old society' here in the UK has bred independent women throughout history, women who made up their own minds, Boudica, Q Victoria etc. It may be said that they share the same habits, interests and opinions, but is it true? Many couples share the majority of interests and opinions, but rarely all. I am quite certain Camilla lets her husband know in no uncertain terms when he has displeased her or she disagrees. :lol:
 
first I have have to admit I am Diana's friend. But I am not a Camilla hater. I don't have too much thoughts on her from the beginning. The same as now. Hence I can't say my opinion to Camilla has changed since the wedding. I am not so impressed by those good qualities of Camilla in her admirers eyes. I think Camilla is a figure what an old society would prefer: being 99% obedient to her men, trying the best to appeal to her men's needs and desires, even building the whole morality based on her men. If one thing can make her man happy then it is right, if not then it's wrong. She lacks her own opinions.

Of course there is some exceptions, the episode of Diana's memorial service was one of them. But I didn't think she really had any her own opinion on whether she should attend or not. At first she would attend because it was her man's desire, so she should attend. And then the opposed voice came, and when it was louder than her man's, she was forced out. Other people's opinions dominated the whole incident. I really wonder, what was Camilla's true thought on it? If it were Diana, I think from the very beginning, she would not aggree to attend no matter how Charles would insist. And if she'd decided to attend, she would not yield to other people's desire.

It's said that Charles and Camilla shared the same hobits, the same interests and even the same opinions on every issues. So they were perfect couple. However it's exactly this extreme harmony which made me frown. I don't think two people with independent minds would have such similar thoughts on everything. To me this harmony came from the sacrifice of personality from one part. This is not easy. And it's amirable in some way. But it's not my ideal
love. I will let my man know, "I disaggree , or argue with you doesn't mean I don't love you. We will argue because by nature we all have our own minds."

It sounds as if you don't think Camilla has a thought to call her own--which I find incredulous, to say the least. She and Charles have been both friends, lovers, and now spouses and I cannot help but think that Prince Charles is the sort of man who enjoys good discussions and appreciates different points of view. I think that Camilla and Charles probably have some very interesting discussions where they are in disagreement--and they like that. I also think that Camilla has not sacrificed part of her personality to keep harmony in a marriage. I think the PoW loves her because she is the same person she was when they met--I mean really, a lady who walks up to a man and says "My great-grandmother was your great-grandfather's mistress--what do you say" or something like that is not what I would call a silly girl who hasn't a thought in her pretty little head. She knows how to keep his attention, and I think that he likes that.
Regarding the memorial service--I think that perhaps too much tabloid reading is going on......:flowers:
 
I am not sure Camilla would have strong personal opinion upon Charles. Maybe she had, but I never heard, never any sort of her opinions over any issue. I heard some of her opinion about Diana, but all of them were just heresay. But I remembered Diana gave her a nick name. I think there should be some reasons for Diana to use that nick name to describe her. I even don't know how she thinks of Charles, for example how she thinks of Charles' work. Or did she say anything other than "thank you", "It's so nice to meet you" or something similar when she chatted to the crowds?

The overall impression Camilla gave me just like my grandmother, who was very obedient to her husband, never work, not much opinions about the world, the center of her world was her man and her children.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom