"1015 København K" by Trine Villemann (2007)

[Elspeth]

Here we go again: I am not pretending anything.This is a thread about a book I wrote on the DRF and I am allowed to express my views. I think most posters on this thread have got that by now. Time to change the record, wouldn't you say?

I don't think Lilla is having a problem with your expressing your own opinion. It's when you're talking about "The Danish people think..." that's bothering her. I wouldn't especially appreciate it if you'd written a similar book about the British royals and were on here saying "The British people think..." and coming up with something that didn't align in the least with what I think. There's a difference between "Many Danish people think..." or "Most of the Danes I've talked to/who answered a poll in the newspaper/who've left comments on my website think..." and "The Danish people think..."

 

[Lilla]

(* IIRC it was the June or July issue, in case any of my compatriots
are interested! It was a 4-page article on the new "commoner"
princesses)

Thanks Viv, I will try to get hold on that article .

I don't think Lilla is having a problem with your expressing your own opinion. It's when you're talking about "The Danish people think..." that's bothering her. I wouldn't especially appreciate it if you'd written a similar book about the British royals and were on here saying "The British people think..." and coming up with something that didn't align in the least with what I think. There's a difference between "Many Danish people think..." or "Most of the Danes I've talked to/who answered a poll in the newspaper/who've left comments on my website think..." and "The Danish people think..."

Thanks Elspeth, for clarifying what I have been trying to clarify myselfe. You are perfectly right

It is interesting how you can see pictures ....and see a perfect family ...and then the announcement of divorce. Was the public in Denmark surprised or were there rumblings about the marriage.

As far as I can remember there were no rumblings...at least not in the circles I move in. To me it came as a surprise.

My brother though - who is a carpenter - had been doing some work at Shackenborg and he wasn't surprised.

 

[denice]

Thanks for the information. Is Alexandra still held in high regard since she remarried. I know many people on this message board like her. But that was before she remarried.

 

[Lilla]

Thanks for the information. Is Alexandra still held in high regard since she remarried.

IMO I think she is. I holde her in high regard. It is my understandig that the organisations - whom she chose to remain the patron for after remarrying - are very pleased with the continued connection. And when it comes to tabloid magazines, not a week passes by without Alexandra being a subject for one or two articles. IMO she has mannaged more then most princesses - to gain the respect of the intellektuel elite - simply by abandoning the traditional role she was put in as a princess and instead choosing the life she wanted (by the way read Vivs post 684). She has got my respect that is for certain.

 

[ysbel]

Originally Posted by Viv
IMO, the point of departure for a consort is that she/he is
expected to be a support rather than a management consultant!
I hasten to add that it does preclude that the consort eventually
becomes a "modernizer". In CP Mary's case it could well happen
once she knows the royal ropes and inside out and -not to forget -
when she is in a position to do so, that is when she becomes
Queen consort! For now, she is still an apprentice,
a subordinate who has to align and adjust to the procedures,
customs, and traditions of the royal house.

Danish antropologist Anne Skjeldborg Jensen (an upcoming royalty
pundit)made a comment in a recent issue of "Eurowoman"*, a Danish
monthly. It went something like:
" Many of the new European crown princesses are well educated,
however they never get an opportunity to bring their education
into play. It is as if their personalities fade away once they are
swallowed up by the royal institutions, which are being governed
by men. They all become mothers fairly quickly and get involved
in suitable "soft" value causes and charities."

(* IIRC it was the June or July issue, in case any of my compatriots
are interested! It was a 4-page article on the new "commoner"
princesses)

And Ms Jensen is absolutely right. These educated young women become like a dear caught in the royal headlights as soon as they have married their prince.

Well a sensible question is how much education does a young Crown Princess need to assume her role? I would assume quite a bit but not the same type of education a businesswoman needs to succeed in today's economy.

My opinion of Alexandra's and Joachim's marriage changed when I found out she had been a portfolio manager. I work with portfolio managers and they tend to be very ambitious and short term results oriented. I can't see someone with a temperament to make a good portfolio manager really being happy playing a royal consort. Royalty by its definition has a much more long term focus and the results of one's efforts are much more fuzzy and hard to measure.

 

[Odette]

Hi, Trine, thanks for the quick reply. I guess that Queen M and P Hendrik don't see much of their grandchildren by P J much after the marriage if they don't ever see the boys alone. A bit sad, but then if they aren't kid magnets and dislike Countess Al, it naturally follows.

Does Queen M dislike Countess A as much as P Hendrik?

Take care,

I do not think P Henrik disliked Alexandra before the divorce. Actually I read an interview he gave at the time of Mary's and Frederick's engagement. He told the reporter that Mary could learn a lot from then Princess Alexandra who was doing an excellent job. Of course this came after the interview he gave a few months earlier blasting all the Crown Princes in Europe for cheapening the Monarchy by marrying commoners.....

 

[Odette]

I don't think Lilla is having a problem with your expressing your own opinion. It's when you're talking about "The Danish people think..." that's bothering her. I wouldn't especially appreciate it if you'd written a similar book about the British royals and were on here saying "The British people think..." and coming up with something that didn't align in the least with what I think. There's a difference between "Many Danish people think..." or "Most of the Danes I've talked to/who answered a poll in the newspaper/who've left comments on my website think..." and "The Danish people think..."

Elspeth this post made me smile.........I live in the US and hear every day all day from TV and read in the newspapers............what the American people want and I talk to myself..........NO I DON"T but no one is listening to me......... Sorry for the interruption.

 

[Viv]

IIRC it was the June or July issue, in case any of my compatriots are interested! It was a 4-page article on the new "commoner" princesses

re. my post no.684: Found it!
It's in the July issue of Eurowoman, p. 46-49.
"Are you princess material?" (Har du prinsessepotentiale?) by
Mia Hessner Sovinsky.

My quotation is not verbatim, but the essence is there.
In fact, Anne Skjeldborg goes even further!

 

[Viv]

The most interesting thing I found in reading the book was the information about Alexandra. It is interesting how you can see pictures ....and see a perfect family ...and then the announcement of divorce. Was the public in Denmark surprised or were there rumblings about the marriage.

There were rumblings! They surfaced shortly after the CPly wedding in May 2004. Not suprisingly they appeared in the republican Ekstra-Bladet, a tabloid, which - for a change (!) - turned out to be spot on about the actual state of affairs. It doesn't happen often, which is why other media, Billed-Bladet in particular dismissed the rumours.

 

[sneeuwklokje]

I have only read little pieces of the book, but how does Trine think of the new Princess Marie? She fits the bill perfectly, being foreign, upper middle-class and well educated. Any thoughts of that?? Is there any reason that she has been so very, very low key sofar, apart from the fact that she is the second wife??

 

[Villemann]

I don't think Lilla is having a problem with your expressing your own opinion. It's when you're talking about "The Danish people think..." that's bothering her. I wouldn't especially appreciate it if you'd written a similar book about the British royals and were on here saying "The British people think..." and coming up with something that didn't align in the least with what I think. There's a difference between "Many Danish people think..." or "Most of the Danes I've talked to/who answered a poll in the newspaper/who've left comments on my website think..." and "The Danish people think..."

Thanks, Elspeth, for clarifying what Lila REALLY means. It doesn't change anything, though. Basically, Lila does not believe a word of what I am saying anyway, so I see no reason, whatsoever to try to phrase my language differently just to accomodate that one person on this thread, who refuses to get, that I am expressing my own views!

I for one would hate to see this thread closed. I read the book and found it interesting. The author gave her opnions and not everyone will agree with them. I think we should move on! The most interesting thing I found in reading the book was the information about Alexandra. It is interesting how you can see pictures ....and see a perfect family ...and then the announcement of divorce. Was the public in Denmark surprised or were there rumblings about the marriage.

Friends of the royal couple knew for years, that they were not happy together, but the divorce was still a surprise to everyone.

I have only read little pieces of the book, but how does Trine think of the new Princess Marie? She fits the bill perfectly, being foreign, upper middle-class and well educated. Any thoughts of that?? Is there any reason that she has been so very, very low key sofar, apart from the fact that she is the second wife??

Princess Marie, from what I understand, is spending time getting to know her new country, language and home. So far it has not been the easiest of transitions, but she has a very sweet and likeable personality and people are bending over backwards to help her out. One of the reasons for her low key status so far is the Danish language. She is struggling a bit in that department, and then, of course, there are all those pregnancy rumours......

 

[MARG]

Thanks, Elspeth, for clarifying what Lila REALLY means. It doesn't change anything, though. Basically, Lila does not believe a word of what I am saying anyway, so I see no reason, whatsoever to try to phrase my language differently just to accomodate that one person on this thread, who refuses to get, that I am expressing my own views!

Sarcasm aside, please rest assured that Lilla is not the one person on this threat who refuses to get, that you are expressing your own views. She and I (and not a few other hapless posters) share the same point of confusion:

I am not pretending anything.This is a thread about a book I wrote on the DRF and I am allowed to express my views. I think most posters on this thread have got that by now.

Indeed we have. And if we had not? Well there is always this stirling post to clarify your point:

Well, if you don't really care, then why are you on this thread? If you don't like my "voice of authority," as you call it, then what are you doing here? If you can't recommend my book, why do you bother engaging me at all? . . . . . .

By engaging you are you refering to posting on yourthread!

Forgive my confusion. I thought this was a thread discussing (rationally) the merits of your book. By your own words you claim the thread as your own and villify anyone who does not endorse your book.

If that is what this thread is all about I think it only fair to either change the parameters of discussion or close the thread altogether.

 

[Villemann]

I have never claimed ownership of this thread, but i find it relevant that I participate because it is after all my book, we are discusing here. I have been over this with Lila SO many times, but she keeps on bringing it up. I fail to understad what Lila - and you for that matter - are trying to achieve by insisting on revisiting old, old ground. Yes, I am expressing my own views here. NOW, can we move on?

 

[ysbel]

Well it would be helpful if people confined themselves to discussing the book.

Elspeth read it and gave a quite detailed analysis but posts like that are few and far between.

I was intrigued by the similarities that Elspeth saw the way the DRF was being described and what we know of the BRF. Certain family dynamics have occurred other times in royal history such as the doting domineering grandmother and the distant mother. I admit I hadn't thought of Ingrid as quite the dominating force as Queen Mother Elizabeth has been but Margrethe is somewhat of an intellectual so it makes sense that she would not be as warm and chummy with her children as another mother who does not have that intellectual leaning. Not everyone can be warm and fuzzy but I fail to see how that makes her a bad mother. Some mothers impart a chumminess and closeness to their children and other mothers impart a discipline. It does not make one way worse than another. However, I do agree that in that circumstance a doting grandmother can undercut the discipline that the parents seek to set for their children.

It appears from what I read about the book and have seen of Frederik that he does not have his mother's intellect and he doesn't have his mother's height. He is not a good public speaker (I have listened to some of his speeches) and this situation can be uncomfortable for an heir. I don't see where that makes Fred a basketcase as Elspeth has indicated that the book implies.

I also don't see why Trine thinks that Fred is so hopeless if she says that Fred has broken the mold from his parents and has endeavoured to have a close relationship with his children. Surely Trine must think this is a good development.

 

[Lilla]

I have never claimed ownership of this thread, but i find it relevant that I participate because it is after all my book, we are discusing here. I have been over this with Lila SO many times, but she keeps on bringing it up

I have never said nor implyed that it isn't relevant for you to be on this thread. It is just as relevant for you to be here as it is for all other members.

I fail to understad what Lila - and you for that matter - are trying to achieve by insisting on revisiting old, old ground. Yes, I am expressing my own views here

.

If you stick to expressing your own views - the revisiting old ground will not happen. But when you make broad generalisations about the oppinions of the Danes I can assure you, the old ground will be revisited.

NOW, can we move on?

I don't know whether you regard this phrasing to be polite, but for your information it can be percived rather rude.
It might not be your intention to be rude, so I thought I'd rather let you know as you have used the phrasing several times.

By the way my name is Lilla with two l's - not Lila.

 

[Jo of Palatine]

I admit I hadn't thought of Ingrid as quite the dominating force as Queen Mother Elizabeth has been but Margrethe is somewhat of an intellectual so it makes sense that she would not be as warm and chummy with her children as another mother who does not have that intellectual leaning. Not everyone can be warm and fuzzy but I fail to see how that makes her a bad mother.

I've seen recently a portrait of the marriage of Sonja and Harald of Norway on German TV and in it, Sonja describes how much help and support she received from Margrethe, first during the time when the king of Norway would not allow Harald to marry her and later when she struggled as a young Crown Princess on a Royal court that consisted mainly of male officers where noone but Harlad bothered to think about her and her situation. She described Margrethe as a warm personality and how she could always turn to her, that they still are talking nearly daily on the phone and that she received sound and valuable advice from Margrethe when Haakon wanted to marry Mette-Marit and Märtha Louise Ari Behn.

So that doesn't sound as if Margrethe was very much opposed to marriages to commoners and to marriages between the Crown Prince to a fellow country girl.

 

[Elspeth]

Thanks, Elspeth, for clarifying what Lila REALLY means. It doesn't change anything, though. Basically, Lila does not believe a word of what I am saying anyway, so I see no reason, whatsoever to try to phrase my language differently just to accomodate that one person on this thread, who refuses to get, that I am expressing my own views!

Well, just for general clarity, if you could stick an IMO or something next to your "the Danish people think/believe/want..." posts, it might help avoid confusion. Some people (myself included) can get quite irked by having someone else apparently speaking for them when that person is expressing a view they don't agree with.

In the meantime, if other posters here can bear in mind that Trine's statements on matters other than verified fact are her own opinion, and that she isn't trying to claim some sort of special status as the only person who can speak on behalf of the Danish people, we might avoid some of these misunderstandings in the future.

Thanks.

 

[HRH Abigail]

Well, just for general clarity, if you could stick an IMO or something next to your "the Danish people think/believe/want..." posts, it might help avoid confusion. Some people (myself included) can get quite irked by having someone else apparently speaking for them when that person is expressing a view they don't agree with.

In the meantime, if other posters here can bear in mind that Trine's statements on matters other than verified fact are her own opinion, and that she isn't trying to claim some sort of special status as the only person who can speak on behalf of the Danish people, we might avoid some of these misunderstandings in the future.

Thanks.

Elspeth, I don't think the posters here are all that stupid.
I mean, I always think the Trine means "IMO" or is expressing her opinion anyway, and I think others can understand that too.
Some people here can take matters awfully personally, I have noticed.

-- Abbie

 

[Elspeth]

A lot of people can take things personally, and I know from experience that "the British people want..." can be downright offensive if it isn't used sensitively.

Trine is in a slightly different position from the rest of the posters here because she's the author of the book, so she can talk from a position of authority about the book which the rest of us can't, and we're very glad for the opportunity to have the author take part in the thread. However, obviously some of the posters are inferring from some of her posts that she's trying to talk from a position of authority outside the parameters of just the book. Which is why I'm asking if Trine would try to be more specific about when she's just giving her opinion and I'm asking the other posters if they'd cut her some slack.

 

[HRH Abigail]

A lot of people can take things personally, and I know from experience that "the British people want..." can be downright offensive if it isn't used sensitively.

Trine is in a slightly different position from the rest of the posters here because she's the author of the book, so she can talk from a position of authority about the book which the rest of us can't, and we're very glad for the opportunity to have the author take part in the thread. However, obviously some of the posters are inferring from some of her posts that she's trying to talk from a position of authority outside the parameters of just the book. Which is why I'm asking if Trine would try to be more specific about when she's just giving her opinion and I'm asking the other posters if they'd cut her some slack.

Glad that you are asking others to cut Trine some slack. Seems to my mind that she has taken quite a beating, of late.
I found her book to be almost tame in what it revealed, but I have also already posted my thoughts about it, here too.
Considering what Trine could have revealed, the book is pretty respectful.
Sure, there are some racy passages, but, that's to be expected, I think.They keep the reader interested, and reading along, that's for sure!
But, I came away from reading her book far more sympathetic towards the Royals, feeling they were more human than ever before, than I was "synpatico", going into reading T's book.
The book accomplished a good feat and that was to humanise people who many think to be a bit "above it all", and unreachable. Many of us probably won't have the opportunity to meet Royalty and now, through Trine, we can

-- Abbie

 

[Jo of Palatine]

Considering what Trine could have revealed, the book is pretty respectful.

Abigael, I just realised that you voiced this sentiment before. Last time I just noticed it but didn't respond, so allow me this time: you claim that there was much more Villemann could have revealed. It read to me
a) you have the same or even more knowledge as Villemann
b) that while you applaud Villemann's selection of information, you think there could have been a much more revealing, much more controversial one as well.

So my question is: what kind of dead bodies/skeletons does the Danish RF hide that Villemann did not (by purpose) unearth? And why doesn't she/why doesn't you?

 

[Elspeth]

Glad that you are asking others to cut Trine some slack. Seems to my mind that she has taken quite a beating, of late.
I found her book to be almost tame in what it revealed, but I have also already posted my thoughts about it, here too.
Considering what Trine could have revealed, the book is pretty respectful.
Sure, there are some racy passages, but, that's to be expected, I think.They keep the reader interested, and reading along, that's for sure!


-- Abbie

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree about some of this. For me, the "racy passages" were not only unnecessary but downright counterproductive. When you're writing your first book and marketing it to a demographic where you're basically an unknown quantity (as was the case with the English edition), and the book has only one named source - an unusually small number for a royal biography, however much a person might want to make excuses - it's to your great advantage to stay as far away from anything that sounds like tabloid gossip as possible.

I mean, how many people have you come across who believe that Simone Simmons enhanced her credibility by telling her readers that Diana used to go out without any underwear on? Who actually needs to know that? And how much more positively do most people view either Diana or Simone Simmons after that little revelation? I think we're dealing with the same danger in this book; in an attempt to make the book more readable, I think Trine has cheapened it with some of these intrusive comments, and that will tend to lead readers, even sometimes subconsciously, to take all of it less seriously, which is a shame because a lot of it is very informative and interesting.

 

[Lilla]

For me, the "racy passages" were not only unnecessary but downright counterproductive. When you're writing your first book and marketing it to a demographic where you're basically an unknown quantity (as was the case with the English edition), and the book has only one named source - an unusually small number for a royal biography, however much a person might want to make excuses - it's to your great advantage to stay as far away from anything that sounds like tabloid gossip as possible.

in an attempt to make the book more readable, I think Trine has cheapened it with some of these intrusive comments, and that will tend to lead readers, even sometimes subconsciously, to take all of it less seriously, which is a shame because a lot of it is very informative and interesting.

I for one am a very good example of this - which my posts on this thread proofs. My focus has become the reliability of what she has written and not her exelent presentation- and writingskills. IMO she should have left out the "racy passages" and listened to the advice of her editor quoted in Trines own words beneath. That would have done such a benefit to her book and I might have bought it instead of just borrowing it at the library.

And the final chapter was also the one I really had to fight for. My editor wanted more of the biographical stuff and I could have provided much more, but the whole "deal" for me was to channel the knowledge and information I had gathered over the years and with this book into an "editorial" - if you like - on the state of the Danish monarchy.

 

[denice]

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree about some of this. For me, the "racy passages" were not only unnecessary but downright counterproductive. When you're writing your first book and marketing it to a demographic where you're basically an unknown quantity (as was the case with the English edition), and the book has only one named source - an unusually small number for a royal biography, however much a person might want to make excuses - it's to your great advantage to stay as far away from anything that sounds like tabloid gossip as possible.

I mean, how many people have you come across who believe that Simone Simmons enhanced her credibility by telling her readers that Diana used to go out without any underwear on? Who actually needs to know that? And how much more positively do most people view either Diana or Simone Simmons after that little revelation? I think we're dealing with the same danger in this book; in an attempt to make the book more readable, I think Trine has cheapened it with some of these intrusive comments, and that will tend to lead readers, even sometimes subconsciously, to take all of it less seriously, which is a shame because a lot of it is very informative and interesting.

Here we go again. I am surprised the feelings this book and the author stirred up! I am from the US and not too familiar with the DRF and found the book interesting and informative. I am not too sure as to why....but Trine really struck a nerve with some.

 

[ysbel]

I've seen recently a portrait of the marriage of Sonja and Harald of Norway on German TV and in it, Sonja describes how much help and support she received from Margrethe, first during the time when the king of Norway would not allow Harald to marry her and later when she struggled as a young Crown Princess on a Royal court that consisted mainly of male officers where noone but Harlad bothered to think about her and her situation. She described Margrethe as a warm personality and how she could always turn to her, that they still are talking nearly daily on the phone and that she received sound and valuable advice from Margrethe when Haakon wanted to marry Mette-Marit and Märtha Louise Ari Behn.

So that doesn't sound as if Margrethe was very much opposed to marriages to commoners and to marriages between the Crown Prince to a fellow country girl.

I don't necessarily think Margrethe was opposed to marriages with commoners. She saw what happened to her relatives that dared to marry commoners and were stripped of their royal status. It does seem she was against marriage to a Dane however.

I think I would accept a pronoucement of Margrethe's warmth if it came from someone other than Sonja for Sonja seems even more reserved than Margrethe.

That isn't a criticism. I don't believe women should always be so soft and fuzzy. I would call Margrethe fascinating, brilliant, a great Queen, but not necessarily displaying warmth.

 

[Elspeth]

Here we go again. I am surprised the feelings this book and the author stirred up! I am from the US and not too familiar with the DRF and found the book interesting and informative. I am not too sure as to why....but Trine really struck a nerve with some.

"Here we go again"? I guess I missed the edict that it's some sort of crime or sin to point out a book's perceived flaws. As I've said a couple of times now, I also found the book interesting and informative. I also believe that Trine has taken it a bit too far in the direction of appealing to the lowest common denominator, in both content and production, and has sacrificed some credibility in the process, which is a shame.

 

[HRH Abigail]

Abigael, I just realised that you voiced this sentiment before. Last time I just noticed it but didn't respond, so allow me this time: you claim that there was much more Villemann could have revealed. It read to me
a) you have the same or even more knowledge as Villemann
b) that while you applaud Villemann's selection of information, you think there could have been a much more revealing, much more controversial one as well.

So my question is: what kind of dead bodies/skeletons does the Danish RF hide that Villemann did not (by purpose) unearth? And why doesn't she/why doesn't you?

Jo-of Palatine, sorry but I don't understand what you are asking me. And, if you are asking me what I think you are, then I can't reveal HERE (any skeletons or secrets) other than what Trine did in her book.
To do so, just would not be cool or appropropriate, sorry.

Trine has palace connections that tell me, she might know more than she is letting on ... So, I thought her book wasn't as revealing as it could have been in light of what I have just said.

I still don't get what all the fuss here, is about.
But, maybe I am not meant to, being that I am not a Dane nor do I live in a country with Royalty.

-- Abbie

 

[HRH Abigail]

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree about some of this. For me, the "racy passages" were not only unnecessary but downright counterproductive. When you're writing your first book and marketing it to a demographic where you're basically an unknown quantity (as was the case with the English edition), and the book has only one named source - an unusually small number for a royal biography, however much a person might want to make excuses - it's to your great advantage to stay as far away from anything that sounds like tabloid gossip as possible.

I mean, how many people have you come across who believe that Simone Simmons enhanced her credibility by telling her readers that Diana used to go out without any underwear on? Who actually needs to know that? And how much more positively do most people view either Diana or Simone Simmons after that little revelation? I think we're dealing with the same danger in this book; in an attempt to make the book more readable, I think Trine has cheapened it with some of these intrusive comments, and that will tend to lead readers, even sometimes subconsciously, to take all of it less seriously, which is a shame because a lot of it is very informative and interesting.

Hi, Elspeth:

I don't mind agreeing to disagree, at all. Not all flights are smooth ones. We'll hit some chop from time to time. Unavoidable with online friends and acquaintences, and their posts.

This said, I think that the only reason that some of the more 'racy' parts of Trine's book were so stunning to some people, is that she simply is in quite the bind here, and really can not name her sources. I mean, I have corresponded with the woman and her husband for a few months now, and neither strikes me as being out to bring anyone down.

How can I put this? There is a reference to someone's observation about Queen Margrethe's female body parts after seeing her sport a tutu, and although the words used are a bit racy, still I found the revelation a bit funny to read because it just underlined how very human this elegant woman really is!
Sorry, but I can't be more specific publicly.
And, even the Royals aren't always prim and proper, too.
I thought the raciness gave the book balance, in a way. I didn't feel as though I were reading a copy of say, the UK's "The Sun" for example.

(No "Page Three girls" in Villeman's book.)

 

[HRH Abigail]

I have never claimed ownership of this thread, but i find it relevant that I participate because it is after all my book, we are discusing here. I have been over this with Lila SO many times, but she keeps on bringing it up. I fail to understad what Lila - and you for that matter - are trying to achieve by insisting on revisiting old, old ground. Yes, I am expressing my own views here. NOW, can we move on?

Hi, there Trine ... It's Abbie here. How's it going? I never thought you were speaking for the whole of Denmark or royalists there in your book. The fact that you are espressing your thoughts on matters, was always obvious to me.
I read your book and loved it, btw. I thought it was tamer than I thought it would be, and a kick to read, too. There was never any doubt in my mind, that you are supportive of The Danish Royal Family, throughout it as well. Looking forward to your next book, on The King of Greenland.
Trine, are you planning on writing a Bio of the Countess of Fredensborg (the former Princess Alexandra)? I am hoping so. Your current book piqued my interest in the woman.

-- Abbie

 

[Brabant]

I am going to strongly urge my wife Trine to stop posting here.
It is a complete waste of time.
If she was to say that something was black and white,most of the posters here would describe it as lime green with pink spots.
And my final word is...
If you want to preserve the mystique of Royalty...don't wear a tutu.
Goodbye.