Relationships of Prince Charles and His Parents


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

love_cc

Courtier
Joined
Sep 10, 2005
Messages
589
City
Sydney
Country
Australia
I wonder how you guys think of the relationships among Prince Charles and his parents?
I think Charles loves his parents by his heart but sometimes his behaviours angers his parents especially his complains about their parenting and his attitude about Camilla. I read Chinese Feng Shui comments, it is said that sometimes Charles is rebellious against his parents because he revenged on them for his unhappy childhood. It seemed to give some clues. It is know Prince Andrew is Queen's favourable son and Prince Edward is Duke's favourable son and he is very proud of Princess Anne.
Charles is a very jealous child, isn't he? He craved his parent's love and praise but he was unsatisfied. Such a hypersensitive son is really hard to bring up. So only Queen Mother gave the warmth Prince Charles needed and thus their relationships were much closer than his parents. Later Lord Mountbatten was another example for that. Charles want very strong emotional supports and he chose to rebel and distant his relationships with his parents once he found himself upsatisfied. very self-protective actually.
 
I think Prince Phillip was a reasonably good father just not for Prince Charles. Charles needed somebody loving and comforting while Phillip was too harsh for his sensitive son. The Queen seems like she was rather distant from her children both physically and emotionally. Charles sounds like he was a very sweet and sensetive boy who needed very loving, affectionate and emotional supportive parents. However that wasn't the type of parents that he had.
 
I'm surprised that Edward would be the Duke's preferred son. After all, Edward's the one who washed out of military training, and then wanted to be a thespian. Hardly the actions of a "manly man" who would win the Duke's approval. (You'd think the Duke would prefer Andrew, but I've never had the impression that there was any special closeness there.)
 
Edward was the only one of the three sons to stand up and say "no" to what was expected of him. I think he was in the early 20's. Look at all the troubles his big brother got into for doing his duty. Edward was brave enough to follow his own dream, inspite of the derisions the press heeped on him. I think that alone earned points in the Duke's eyes. After all, the Duke has been known to speak his own mind. It's also know he favors the Princess Royal, who had a reputation for telling the press off.
 
The fact that The Queen Mother was really close to Prince Charles was well-known, everyone know that, i have not read much books talked about The Queen and Prince Philip 's relationship with The Prince of Wales, but through their appearance in the public, i also have some feelings of The Queen's distant with Prince Charles. It was really exactly when Charles and Anne's childhood, The Queen did not have much times witht hem as her father was sick and she had to take part in the Royal Duties, and in the years Prince Andrew and Edward were born, everything seemed were fine, and The Queen had more times with Andrew and Edward than, but i often saw pictures of The Queen rode with The Princess Royal alot, not sure with the relationship, but i read on a website it said that since the deaths of Princess Margaret and The Queen Mother, The Queen has been more closer to The Countess of Wessex and Princess Royal alot, especially The Countess of Wessex.And The Queen is also close to Prince William and Zara Phillips.
 
HMQueenElizabethII said:
The fact that The Queen Mother was really close to Prince Charles was well-known, everyone know that, i have not read much books talked about The Queen and Prince Philip 's relationship with The Prince of Wales, but through their appearance in the public, i also have some feelings of The Queen's distant with Prince Charles. It was really exactly when Charles and Anne's childhood, The Queen did not have much times witht hem as her father was sick and she had to take part in the Royal Duties, and in the years Prince Andrew and Edward were born, everything seemed were fine, and The Queen had more times with Andrew and Edward than, but i often saw pictures of The Queen rode with The Princess Royal alot, not sure with the relationship, but i read on a website it said that since the deaths of Princess Margaret and The Queen Mother, The Queen has been more closer to The Countess of Wessex and Princess Royal alot, especially The Countess of Wessex.And The Queen is also close to Prince William and Zara Phillips.
Queen is very emotional reserved. So is Prince Charles. So it is hard for them to express their feelings directly. Prince Andrew and Princess Anne are outgoing people and the communications will be easier. It is said that Lord Mountbatten used to be a good channel for Prince Charles and Queen to communicate with each other. But the death of Lord Mountbatten changed many things. I think Sir Michael Peat minght be good for them since he has the trust from both Queen and Prince Charles.
I think Queen and Prince Philip had no idea how to live with Prince Charles. Queen cannot express her true feelings and Prince Philip has no impatience to deal with Charles's sensitivity and self-pity.
 
It is no secret that the Duke of Edinburgh was not a good father to Charles. Charles didn't fit his ideal of what a man should be. Charles was a sensitive, shy child. Philip wanted a tough, rugged, outgoing child. He got that in his daughter, not his eldest son. If Charles had Anne's personality, things would have been different but not necessarily better. Charles could have grown up to be the brute Philip is. Charles was not going to come out of that parental relationship well. Look what has happened because of it. Charles couldn't manage a marriage and a wife. He took his father's exasperation as a command to marry Diana and made a horrible mistake that ruined many people's lives. The damage is incalculable. It has shaken the monarchy to the core and now we have the prospect of Queen Camilla. It is so distasteful.
 
You can't blame a person's parents for decisions that person takes when they are in their thirties. Which Charles was when he married 20year old Diana.
If the reason for the distance between Queen and Charles is because of her role as monarch when he was small then why does she not have the same distance with Anne? Anne has said in interviews to commemerate the Golden Jubilee that it's "ridiculous" to say that the Queen never showed any love. When Anne's children were small their grandparents were always photographed with them like grandparents out and about at horse shows etc. Even now both Anne's kids are close to Queen and Prince Philip.
Similarly, if Philip had wanted a 'male Anne' then why, according to the press is Edward his favourite?
Poor Andrew, he doesn't get a look in!!!
 
I agree that Charles is very very sensitive, possibly quite insecure as well, so he sort of felt betrayed by his parents lack of time for him. I think that is why he was so close with his grandmother, she took on such a mother role to him.
 
Last edited:
I do think that both parents love Charles. I have read where Philip said that they both did the best they could for their children. I am also sure that Charles loves his parents BUT... I also feel that their is an element of not understanding each other as well that has clouded the relationship over the years.

I hate to say this but at the back of my mind I sometimes wonder, with absolutely no evidence whatsoever, that the Queen Mum deliberately/subconsciously encouraged Charles to think that his parents didn't understand him or even really love him. Once her husband died she lost a position to Philip, of whom she didn't really approve anyway according to some reports, so maybe putting seeds of doubt into the son was a way of proving her assessment of Philip correct. I repeat that I have absolutely no evidence but as my old mum says - "I have a feeling in my waters" and her feelings are so often right!!!
 
The Queen Mother might also have been trying to counteract the influence Mountbatten had on Charles. I get the impression she didn't trust Mountbatten, partly because he'd been a friend of Edward VIII and partly because he was such a forceful personality.
 
I think in the family Charles ended up being the odd man out, only the Queen Mother seemed to encourage him to spread his wings and fly, everyone else seemed to be busy telling him what, how and who he should be as oppose to accepting him exactly the way he was. Charles wore a very heavy burden at a young age.
 
Last edited:
chrissy57 said:
I do think that both parents love Charles. I have read where Philip said that they both did the best they could for their children. I am also sure that Charles loves his parents BUT... I also feel that their is an element of not understanding each other as well that has clouded the relationship over the years.

I hate to say this but at the back of my mind I sometimes wonder, with absolutely no evidence whatsoever, that the Queen Mum deliberately/subconsciously encouraged Charles to think that his parents didn't understand him or even really love him. Once her husband died she lost a position to Philip, of whom she didn't really approve anyway according to some reports, so maybe putting seeds of doubt into the son was a way of proving her assessment of Philip correct. I repeat that I have absolutely no evidence but as my old mum says - "I have a feeling in my waters" and her feelings are so often right!!!


That is an interesting theory Chrissy. You have made me think. . . . .
 
Charles and his relationship with his parents...gosh....one could write a thesis on this! I think a lot of the comments touched on different aspects or reasons on why he isn't on the surface close to his parents...and they are all different and very legitimate.

I definitely agree on the two regarding the Queen Mother and Lord Mountbatten. In addition to the Queen losing her beloved husband, her daughter know had to face additional responsiblities. I believe I read, at one point, before Charles was five, the Queen and Prince Phillip had been on tour of the Commonwealth for at least six months at time! Now, I don't have kids...but you are missing a lot of your child's formative years. That's crazy! The Queen Mother also spent a lot of time with Charles (and later Anne) while the Queen was learning her new role, and considering she had just lost her husband..I am assuming she transferred a lot of her love and attention to her first grandchild. Also supposedly, the Queen's relationship with Prince Andrew and Edward (her surprises) are somewhat closer cause she devoted more time to their upbringing.

I am also going to add two additional points to consider: 1) Charles is a product of a different generation and class. If I recall from readings and some BBC America miniseries, most upper class children were not reared by their parents but rather their nannies. Any special "me" time with parents were reserved for a couple of hours a day. During breakfast and before dinner, when your parents where on their way out the door. This is also not a reflection on the English lifesyste, the American upper class also experienced this during the first have of the 20th century.; and 2) a "Windsor" pattern...every other generation the parents are so called "distant" with their children and it affects their relationships with kids. King George V couldn't communicate his love openly to his children (Edward VIII, George VI, Duke of Kent, Gloucester, Princess Mary) but his kids (at least his sons) had no problem with their children. Which I am sure is a reflection on the strong wives that their sons married. But I read somwhere that the Princess Royal (Princess Mary) had difficuly communicating her love as well. But their kids and sometimes their grandchildren have called their parents cold and unfeeling. For that you can reference Prince Charles and Marina Mowatt. And that is a generalization...its not a statement regarding everyone. But that makes you wonder....is it in environment or genetics?
 
I see a great similarity between Charles and Crown Prince Frederik of Denmark who has that same hesitating nature and looks like he lacks direction.

Queen Margrethe and Prins Henrik are very different from Elizabeth and Philip so I somehow think that personalities aren't the only factor. Mothers tend to love their children no matter what, but fathers tend to be more demanding before they give approval. But when the mothers become Queen and their children are still at a young age, they can't be around much. The fathers are around but then they have their own ego problems with playing second fiddle to their wives. In the Denmark forum, we're talking about Prins Henrik's tantrum when he had to take second place to his son at an official function.

The same situation doesn't seem to affect Willem-Alexander of the Netherlands. He was the first male heir to the throne in over 100 years so I think he was rather spoiled.
 
I think Charles must have been extremely emotionally neglected in his youth.

Neglect is usually a parental attitude--often expressed as a preoccupation with work or "duties"--which results in the parent having little time for, interest in or awareness of the child's continuing attachment with an adult to whom he can turn for help in satisfying his needs. Such an adult fails to provide interested and sympathetic support to the child's efforts to feel satisfied with himself, and so does not give the child the feeling that he has someone "in his corner."

And this was not written with Charles is mind, so can you imagine how this would be amplified if the "preoccupation with work or duties" were from the mother being Queen? Let alone Philip's distant situation. (does anyone recall that footage of him holding baby Charles out at arm's length?)
 
I don't know much about Charles relationship with his parents, although Diana said he had a "very tricky" relationship with his father. But he wouldn't behave as he does with Camilla if all his caregivers were distant and cold. I think he had a very loving warm nanny. I wonder if he was attracted to Camilla because she resembled his nanny emotionally?
 
Well, between his nanny and his grandmother, he did seem to get most of his nurturing from older women, so it's not really surprising that he was looking for a mother figure in his wife. Seems to be the same pattern that Edward VIII went through.
 
In Jonathan Dimblebly's book, he decribled Camilla having warmth, understanding and steadiness to support Prince Charles. Being with Camilla, Charles would certainly feel warm, secure, and comforted. Part of the reason is that Camilla is older than Charles and part of the reason is due to Camilla's mothering nature.

Camilla is a Cancerian and she does mother Charles emotionally. Diana is a Cancerian but she gave mothering to her sons not her husband. That's a pity. Charles is very insecure and hypersensitive by his natures and he felt badly neglected by his parents even they said they tried their best.

I think, not only Queen and Duke were very busy and seldom had time spent with Charles and Anne but also Charles lacked encourgement and praise from his parents since his childhood. It is part of the source why Charles lacked of confidence and having low self-esteem.
 
IMHO, Charles' insecurity has more to do with the position he was born into than any lack of praise/encouragement from his parents. The Queen was only 25 when she ascended the throne and Charles was around five. He had a really sheltered, and isolated, childhood until he went to boarding school. By then, all his schoolmates knew who he was. At that time, people were much more deferrential to social status than today. I read in one of his biographies that he had to walk alone because the other boys didn't want to be seen as sucking up to him. If anyone dared to chat with him, the others would make slurping noises. It wouldn't be surprising if in the back of his mind, Charles always wondered if people are being nice to him because of who he is, not what he is and what they can gain from association. It would take a lot of effort and time for someone to convince him that their friendship is genuine. That kind of uncertainty, overtime, must have had some impact on his personality and approach to new relationships.
 
Incas, as I said in my previous post. If that is true why does Anne not have the same issues as Charles? She was born only 2years later. Elizabeth was not on the throne and yet she didn't spend any more time with Anne as she had done with Charles.
 
She wasn't heir to the throne, and she wasn't a disappointment to her father. She also didn't seem to have a particularly close relationship with the Queen Mother.
 
Georgia said:
Incas, as I said in my previous post. If that is true why does Anne not have the same issues as Charles? She was born only 2years later. Elizabeth was not on the throne and yet she didn't spend any more time with Anne as she had done with Charles.

Well the easy answer is that Anne is not heir to the throne. She had pressure but not to the extent that Charles did.

But Anne still had problems. She fought against going to an all girls boarding school and she lost that battle. When she signed her exercise books P. Anne, the girls started calling her P.A. and she had a fighting row with her parents before going back her second term.

When she was young she had a horrible relationship with the press. She was impatient with them and they were brutal to her.

Her first marriage fared no better than Charles'. People around Mark Philips complained that the Royals treated their in-laws as less than they were and Mark Phillips apparently had some affairs.

Anne's saving grace was that when her marriage fell apart, no one was interested. Everyone just wanted to read about Charles and Di. So she had some private space to get her life in order, get a divorce, find someone more compatible and settle down.

Charles never had that luxury.
 
No one is the same. Everyone handles things differently. It is not just that Charles is heir to the throne, he handles things differently than Anne. For example, when you have two children you can not treat them the same because they are not the same. You can not discipline them the same either. With one child you may have to beat it into them, the other you may only have to tell once. That is why compairing one person to another will get you nowhere, it is pointless and unfair to compair anyone.
 
I have read this thread with interest, but noticed the last posts were from 2005. Have your thoughts evolve on the relationship between the Prince of Wales and his parents, especially after his Jubilee tribute to the Queen and the speech he gave at the concert ?

I think Prince Charles appears more at ease with himself and settled and that his relationship with his elderly parents may be better now. His speech at the concert was perfect, both witty and respectful. It seems heartfelt and genuine. Asking the crowd to shoot out for his father was particularly touching : it means he realizes how important Prince Philip is for the Queen (the reaction from the crowd was astonishing by the way, by far the biggest cheer of the night!).

But still, mixed feelings emerge from his one-hour tribute to the Queen (which is without doubt the most surprising and revealing documentary ever made on the royal family, certainly because it is really intimate and genuine, as opposed to staged).

In every piece of film, Prince Philip appears to be a hands-on father, ready to look after the children or take part in whatever they are up to. But Prince Charles acknowledges this only once with “what parents do for their children” and he doesn’t put much sentiment into it, as if he had to acknowledge it but is not wholly convinced. He demonstrates much more affection towards Lord Mountbatten, the Queen Mother and even the grandfather he barely knew, than towards his father. Likewise, he seems surprised, twice, to find out that he and Princess Ann were part of processions with their parents and not left out. It is as if some films were in contradiction to his own recollection of his childhood.

The tribute also left me wondering why none of his brothers was included and why all the unknown films were from his early childhood and not after the 60’s.

But well, I might be reading too much into it!
 
I think you might well be reading too much into it. This was his tribute to his mother on her 60th Jubilee. His siblings had participated in the Diamond Queen which he did not take part in, so all of her children have passed along their commentary on the reign in one documentary or another.
I think if any of us look back at pictures/films of our childhoods after 60 years no doubt there would be things that we had long forgotten or remembered differently. Also our relationship with our parents and how we view them as people does change as we ourselves get older. The relationship between sons and fathers can be difficult at times when we are young. Probably more so if we are not a chip off the old block.
I thought it was a very warm tribute to his mother, who after all is the focus of the year.
 
Last edited:
I always feel The Queen Mother could have done better..

It is not rare in the royals that once the parents ascend the throne, the grandparents take care of the kids. Even the Queen's parents, left their daughters several times with Queen Mary while going on foreign tours, before and after taking over. You can see how much active role the Dowager Queen has taken in moulding the future Queen..taking them to galleries, theatres, coaching them on how to behave in public, following up on what books their governesses are making them read and so on and on.She didnt even shy away from scolding TheQueen Regnant for wearing short skirts for funeral..
I am of the opinion that Queen Mother has hardly played any active role in case of Charles. He stayed with her means he just stayed with her..She always kept herself busy with her colorful social life and extravagance..(She fortunately got tremendous positive press that overshadows her extravagance). Wasnt she who refused to send her daughters to school..saying all my sisters had governesses and we alll got good husbands (See Wikipedia of Princess Margaret).And inspite of being a sort of retired person she could never help her daughter Margaret..did not provide her proper counsel or tried to control whats going on..
And what she did to Prince charles..Can anyone bet that with all the age and experience she has...and knowing Diana, her family situation and brought-up very very well..Would she have ever dreamed that charles and Diana will click? But still she pushed him to that side..just to counteract Mountbatten..
I know its very easy to blame someone in hindsight..But just shared my thoughts..wat do u say
 
Ii don't think there is any doubt at all that there was a very close relationship between the Queen Mother and her eldest grandchild Prince Charles. She was the one he turned to when he was at Gordonstoun and hating it. She was the one who included a stop to visit him at Geelong when she was visiting Australia and knew he was lonely. While he was of course close to Louis Mountbatten, his honorary grandfather, I think it was the QM that he turned to for comfort at difficult times in his life. It was she afterall who made Birkhall available to him when he was seeing Camilla. Even his lifestyle today somewhat emulates the Edwardian lifestyle of his grandmother.
Charles has no doubt been influenced by many people in his life, his parents, grandmother and Louis Mountbatten amongst them, but that could be said about us all. I don't think it was a competition between any of them.
 
While I do not doubt that QEII has been a very dutiful queen, she has never seemed like a very warm person. From bios and pictures throughout her life, the only one she has seemed to show any kind of affection is her husband. She does not come through as the mothering type and had she been from my generation (30-35) I think she would have chosen not to have children and focused on her carreer. That is ofcourse difficult when you have to ensure the continuation af the monarchy, but neverthrless my humble opinion. I think she could have been quite satisfied with just sharing her life with Philip. It is not that she doesn't love her kids, they have not/are just not her priority. It is very telling that her sons has chosen very maternal women as mothers of their own children.
 
Back
Top Bottom