Charles and Camilla: The Marriage (2005 and on)

[Susanna Wynne]

Unceasing Camilla-Bashing

I am sick, sick of the continuing attempts by a segment of our forum to demonize Camilla. She's no saint, but she's no devil, either. She's a good mom, grandmom, and, most revealing: she has great relationships with her stepsons. If she were as evil as is sometimes suggested, they would hate her.

I will always remember a photo from Windsor after the reception following Charles and Camilla's wedding which showed William and Harry being totally mischievous, having personally decorated the "getaway" car, and throwing rose petals and laughing as C & C drove away. That picture spoke a thousand words.

 

[Oliv]

for some reason many people just cannot accept Charles and Camilla are simply happy together. every relationship has its ups and down, but some would like to believe this one has no ups

how do we even know all those articles about the "leading separate lives" are true? because some mysterious "friends of the couple" apparently said so? yeah, right. C and C are very lucky to have extremely discreet friends who would not speak about their private problems (if they had any) to the media, ever. sometimes I wonder if these so-called journalist just make up their articles completely, with absolutely no source, just because they have nothing to write about

C and C probably spend some time apart, yes, but what is wrong with that? it doesn't mean they don't love each other (because they obviously do) or that they are going to divorce. it is hard to get married in late 50's, when both of them have their own families

a little off-topic and might have been discussed before, but at the W and K wedding, when everyone was leaving the balcony, I think Charles was holding Eliza's hand leading her out. so cute The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge watch the fly past with their families - YouTube

 

[antonieta]

I am sick, sick of the continuing attempts by a segment of our forum to demonize Camilla. She's no saint, but she's no devil, either. She's a good mom, grandmom, and, most revealing: she has great relationships with her stepsons. If she were as evil as is sometimes suggested, they would hate her.

I will always remember a photo from Windsor after the reception following Charles and Camilla's wedding which showed William and Harry being totally mischievous, having personally decorated the "getaway" car, and throwing rose petals and laughing as C & C drove away. That picture spoke a thousand words.

Couldn't agree with you most!

 

[Daria_S]

I am sick, sick of the continuing attempts by a segment of our forum to demonize Camilla. She's no saint, but she's no devil, either. She's a good mom, grandmom, and, most revealing: she has great relationships with her stepsons. If she were as evil as is sometimes suggested, they would hate her.

I will always remember a photo from Windsor after the reception following Charles and Camilla's wedding which showed William and Harry being totally mischievous, having personally decorated the "getaway" car, and throwing rose petals and laughing as C & C drove away. That picture spoke a thousand words.

Well said! I don't think it's fair to have this much animosity towards someone that we have never met (and most likely won't meet either). What happened didn't involve the entire, world, but because of all the publicity it received, it certainly felt like everything was everyone's business. In reality, it's not like that. Camila makes Charles happy, so therefore, the rest of the public can just relax and go on about their daily lives. I highly doubt that Camila is disliked by Charles' children, because if that were the case, her granddaughter would not have been involved in William's wedding.

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

I agree with Bertie and Susanna, especially this insane idea that Camilla schemed for 30+ years to become the Princess of Wales Muhahahaha! The woman has been through just as much h--- as Diana and Charles.

 

[PrincessKaimi]

I have found the ignore feature helpful when it comes to hiding repetitive opinion that demonizes anyone. That's not why I'm here. I want to learn. I don't want to moralize (although I will deconstruct fashion; I won't do the same thing to a person's marriage or their character).

And, if you've said it once, it's been said, you're not going to win others over by saying it a bunch of times.

 

[Aliza]

I am sick, sick of the continuing attempts by a segment of our forum to demonize Camilla. She's no saint, but she's no devil, either. She's a good mom, grandmom, and, most revealing: she has great relationships with her stepsons. If she were as evil as is sometimes suggested, they would hate her.

I will always remember a photo from Windsor after the reception following Charles and Camilla's wedding which showed William and Harry being totally mischievous, having personally decorated the "getaway" car, and throwing rose petals and laughing as C & C drove away. That picture spoke a thousand words.

It's amazing how people can read the exact same material and come away with completely different impressions! I find this forum to be, by far the most pro-Camilla and anti-Diana of all the major Royal forums.

I will never deny that I am more sympathetic to Diana's point of view, but Diana is dead and beyond being hurt now. Camilla can not change the past and I don't think her life was easy during the "three in this marriage" period, either. Like everyone, Camilla has made mistakes, and like everyone, she deserves the chance to move past them without having them waved in her face every day.

I don't know if anyone outside of William, Harry (and maybe Kate can truly say what Camilla's relationship is with Charles and Diana's sons. I learned a huge lesson when "Diana, Her True Story" and Dimbleby's "The Prince Of Wales" were published: Both showed the general public does not usually know what is going on in private royal lives unless the royals themselves choose to lift the curtain. Perhaps Camilla has a wonderful relationship with William and Harry or maybe they treat her with respect and friendliness out of love for their father. We will never know as I doubt those two young men are ever going to indulge in repeats of their parents' confessionals, in print or on television.

I think we will have to wait for William to be king before we see how much lasting influence Diana had on him and how much her ideas will influence his reign.

But to get back to the topic of your post, Camilla should not be demonised by Diana's admirers. Had the Princess lived, I'm sure she would have been long past any animosity towards Camilla; after all, she became great friends with Raine Spencer, a lady she detested for far longer than she did Camilla. The Princess could indeed forgive and no one does anything constructive "for" Diana by slamming Camilla. I don't think Camilla helps her cause sometimes but I'll leave that for another post as I don't want to obfuscate the point I'm trying to make.

 

[Nico]

I find this forum to be, by far the most pro-Camilla and anti-Diana of all the major Royal forums.

Mmmm i would say you can find here more OBJECTIVE points of view than other forums...

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

I wouldn't say this forum is anti-Diana; but it does seem to be more open towards Camilla and willing to believe the good rather than always believing the bad.

 

[Aliza]

Mmmm i would say you can find here more OBJECTIVE points of view than other forums...

I will respectfully disagree; there is much more tolerance for pro-Camilla posts whereas similar pro-Diana posts are many times deleted. Personally, I don't think there needs to be a competition between the dead Princess and an alive Camilla; under the circumstances, it can hardly be fair to either side.

I do very much believe that Camilla has brought much happiness to - and has very much settled - the Prince of Wales, and I am glad for both of them. Only good can come from his happiness and I'm sure he will be a better king because of the security of being in a happy and secure marriage with Camilla. That said, it is not necessary to put Diana down in order to raise up Camilla's reputation. I think the more relaxed and content PoW that we all can see does that for Camilla far more effectively than any dissection of the past could ever accomplish. In fact, I strongly believe that if Camilla's boosters were as generous to Diana's memory as they are to Camilla's and Charles' mistakes, then much of the rancour that is left would disappear and Camilla would benefit.

 

[Mermaid1962]

I think you're right, Aliza. Diana had her "issues", certainly; but a person doesn't have to be harsh about Diana to support Camilla. The reverse is also true.

In fact, I strongly believe that if Camilla's boosters were as generous to Diana's memory as they are to Camilla's and Charles' mistakes, then much of the rancour that is left would disappear and Camilla would benefit.

 

[MARG]

This thread is called "The Marriage"! To say something nice about Camilla does not imply anything negative about Diana.

The Marriage deals with an event that occurred after the death of Diana PoW and does not have anything to do with her. There really is no logical reason to bring Diana into this discussion.

 

[Kataryn]

In fact, I strongly believe that if Camilla's boosters were as generous to Diana's memory as they are to Camilla's and Charles' mistakes, then much of the rancour that is left would disappear and Camilla would benefit.

Maybe it's because Diana had so much but showed not much generosity of spirit when it came to the people closest to her while Camilla was very discreet, very undemanding.
It was a very bad situation for all of them but Camilla surely, once she was named by Diana, had the worst part .

 

[Zonk]

Lets get back on topic....this thread has NOTHING to do with Diana.

 

[HRHLondon]

Camilla's been working hard to make a go of it - she seems to be much more suited and comfortable in the country, living out her life and spending time with her family. But, instead of living out a quiet life, she's doing engagements and putting up with all the criticism. I've never been a huge fan of hers, but I do respect her for her efforts in the last few years.

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

I must say that surprisingly Camilla has turned out to be quite a good Princess and representative for England. I often wondered how their marriage came about and if Charles had to convince her to step out of the shadows and take on an official role; if so she has exceeded all expectations and carries herself well.

 

[Zonk]

After a MAJOR clean up that removed several posts that weren't about the marriage of Charles and Camilla ---- this thread is now reopened.

Any and all discussion regarding Diana as well as the Charles and Camilla relationship prior 2005 will be deleted without notice.

Let's remain on topic.

Warren, wbenson & Zonk
British Forums Moderators
​

 

[Warren]

...there is much more tolerance for pro-Camilla posts whereas similar pro-Diana posts are many times deleted.

Before we move on, I'd like to pick up on this. Let me state for the record there is no "line" that the British Forum moderators take when it comes to so-called "pro-Camilla" or "pro-Diana" posts. The assertion that "similar pro-Diana posts are many times deleted" has no basis in fact whatsoever and I'd challenge anyone to provide evidence to the contrary. Posts are NOT removed by the moderators because they are "pro" or "anti" anything. Posts are edited or deleted due to intemperate language, deliberate incitement [we're experienced enough to pick these straight off, plus there are some members who specialise in it], repetitiveness, emptiness and irrelevancy. More usually, posts are deleted simply because they are completely off-topic and have led to a lengthy digression, more often than not into the same-old Charles-Camilla-Diana [CCD] triangle.

The British Forums is an organised structure which contains nearly 200,000 posts in over 900 threads. That's a lot of individual discussion topics. For obvious reasons, the moderators cannot allow a CCD discussion to develop wherever a member chooses to initiate it. For some members this comes as a surprise and the moderators are accused of "favouritism" and "censorship" and "bias". Sorry, there's no conspiracy, the truth is more prosaic: it's about thread content and ensuring they remain largely on topic within the overall structure. Dull eh?

This thread is titled " Charles and Camilla: The Marriage" (I've just added "2005 and on" to make it crystal clear). It is not a thread for the discussion of who was responsible for the breakdown of the relationship and marriage between Charles and Diana and arguments about who was the guilty party. Yesterday's moderator intervention was due to exactly this. As a result, 36 posts were removed. No tally was done as to the number of "pro-Camilla" vs "pro-Diana" posts involved.

I trust this has made the situation clear and we won't be seeing any more sweeping statements about "pro-Camilla" and "pro-Diana" posts.
If anyone wishes to discuss this issue further, please do so via PM to a British Forums moderator of your choice and not in this thread.

thanks

Warren , wbenson and Zonk
The British Forums moderating team

 

[Tyger]

What strikes me as interesting is that the Queen Consort - the woman, after all, the wife - will set the tone for Charles' 'Court' - however that manifests in modern day, whenever it will be for Charles. Just like it is the woman/wife/mother who sets the tone of holiday celebrations - not always, of course - but as a general tendency.

Given that Charles and Camilla are proving to be a benevolent pairing, with mutual respect and support manifesting - will there be more 'interesting' dinners at the palace? Will they have soiress and a more lively social scene around them?

This may be about the future - so what is it like now? I think I read that there are dinners at Clarence House with notable quests, that William and Harry attended/attend, contributing to their education. Does that still go on? Is that a regular weekly thing? Seasonal? Or is it considered 'below the radar' of public engagements and not publicized?

 

[MARG]

Unfortunately I am guessing it will be very "under the radar", so we will miss this aspect until such time as they deign to make it "public".

However, over the years Charles has built up a wide and eclectic range of friends from all aspect of life. Add Camilla's life friends and I think it must make for great dinner parties.

I don't think they would be chatting soley about hounds and fashion!

 

[Lady74]

Maybe under the radar because it doesn't happen. Camilla is also reported to spend a lot of away from Charles and with her grandchildren. Who knows

 

[PrincessKaimi]

The modern day "Court" manifests itself in political speeches, charity drives and similar activities. There's virtually no "court" as there was, for example, in the days of Henry II.

Many couples spend time apart, royal or not. Not everyone has the "be together all the time model," indeed - I think that is a main factor in whether a marriage works (both people should be on the same page; if one wants or needs more attention than the other is willing to give, big problems).

Both Camilla and Charles strike me as independent, he strikes me as a bit solitary (I'm like that too, I feel as if I can recognize a kindred spirit). Women who will tolerate lack of attention from their spouses seem to be few and far between in my world (it's the biggest complaint women have - their husbands don't pay enough attention to them, here in my world).

But Camilla seems happy with the relationship - and that's a good thing. I think it's a chief reason why Charles is able to be himself around her. Being one's own self around a spouse is extremely important to happiness. Modifying the self to be with the spouse is possible for malleable people, so malleable women, in particular, are attractive to some men - but not all men. Camilla doesn't strike me as unmalleable, by the way, she seems quite adaptable.

 

[Tyger]

The modern day "Court" manifests itself in political speeches, charity drives and similar activities. There's virtually no "court" as there was, for example, in the days of Henry II.

Oh, so that's how much I know.

But it must make a difference for the extended family to have an agreeable couple 'at the helm' - wouldn't you say?

How about Balmoral in the summer/fall - and Christmas at Sandringham - are these not sort of - maybe - equivalent to a 'court'?

When was the last 'court' as I am talking about? What king or queen - what era?

 

[PrincessKaimi]

Tyger, I wish I knew (I'm stuck in Renaissance history). Surely there was a court then. Yes, I do believe Christmas at Sandringham counts - but doesn't probably include major religious figures like the Archbishop of Canterbury or the nation's top bards. Does it even have mummery/a play? Does it patronize the arts at all? (Oh, how I love these questions).

Yes, it does make a big difference to society at large to have an agreeable couple with a reasonable functional marriage at the helm. Public appearances are very important and people are very much influenced by symbolism, what they see with their own eyes and much more. It helps to have a "real family" somewhere in the upper echelons of government, as most of us live in families and we relate to the familiarity. That's why monarchy is so precious. But what a burden, in many ways, it must be (most families have 'rules' and we all know that it's uncomfortable to be the rulebreaker - getting divorced, etc.)

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

I dont think there is any such thing as a court in the modern world, at least not in England. You could maybe have a posse or entourage as big headed celebrities do.
I am another person who likes being alone and in isolation; if that is Charles' forte then Camilla has definitely been aware of it for a long time. I honestly don't envision that there was some kind of honeymoon period for these 2 when they got married; it was really just putting an official stamp on a decade(s) long relationship.

 

[muriel]

Maybe under the radar because it doesn't happen.

By inference, are you suggesting that anything that is not published and announced with photographs probably did not happen?

 

[Lady74]

By inference, are you suggesting that anything that is not published and announced with photographs probably did not happen?

No I'm saying how do we know it happens. You are saying it does so how do you it does. Unless we are friends or family neither of us know what happens in their private life. Do you not agree

 

[MARG]

Maybe under the radar because it doesn't happen. Camilla is also reported to spend a lot of away from Charles and with her grandchildren. Who knows

Do we have any reputable sources for the above statement and a definition of "a lot"?

 

[Lady74]

Do we have any reputable sources for the above statement and a definition of "a lot"?

As I say who knows , how long do you want to keep playing ping pong

 

[muriel]

Maybe under the radar because it doesn't happen.

By inference, are you suggesting that anything that is not published and announced with photographs probably did not happen?

You are saying it does so how do you it does.

I am not suggesting that it does happen. I merely take exception to you suggestion that if there is no public evidence, then it is quite likely that these regular soirrees do not take place.

It is well know that C&C regularly hold weekends at Sandringham, amongst other country homes, for people from the arts and literary world. Jeremy Paxman and Stephen Fry have commented about these in the past.