The Royal Forums

The Royal Forums (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/)
-   Royal House of Denmark (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f24/)
-   -   The Future of the Danish Monarchy (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f24/the-future-of-the-danish-monarchy-14778.html)

Izzie 12-10-2021 12:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Muhler (Post 2442188)
More on Mary's visit to Kræftværket.
https://www.billedbladet.dk/kongelig...dte-juleglaede

The top photo of Mary is very good!

Judging from the photos Mary's visit was very much appreciated. The body-language and atmosphere in the photos leaves an impression of warmth and being relaxed. - As it should be.

With all possible respect for QMII and Benedikte. It wouldn't have been quite the same, I think.
These are young people 15-29 and Mary (and Frederik) suits that age-group well. Also because to most present I think M&F is the regent couple.

I agree. This is one of the demographics that needs/wants to see themselves reflected the DRF (if that makes sense)...M&F (and now in larger part the kids as they get older) is who they identify with and see the same interests, issues and POVs being championed, represented, and given a voice. And that is very important. This demographic is one of the ones that needs to stay supportive in order to carry the monarchy forward. Let's face it, QMII's demographic is diminishing in #s. And pardon the analogy (which I do not intend with any disrespect)...but if you look at history, the dinosaurs went extinct, because they did not evolve and adapt to their changing surroundings. They stopped reflecting the environment around them and died out. And NO I am not calling anyone a dinosaur...I am simply using the example as an illustration of what happens when things (or in this case institutions) do not modernize.

Muhler 12-10-2021 01:11 PM

And fortunately that does seem to be the case.

They overlap.

QMII of course appeal very much to 50+ in particular. But she is also, so to speak, "honorary grandmother" for those who are younger. Perhaps especially for those under 25. - A bit out of touch sometimes, but nice and it's good to have her around for a visit.
M&F of course appeal mostly to those below 50, that would be only natural. But that doesn't prevent many, if not most, of the 50+ to look at M&F with considerable satisfaction and relief. Because they are doing so well.
They are also the ones the vast majority can directly relate to, in the sense that M&F cover a wider age-group.
M&F have the advantage that they can relate to children and teens because they have children themselves.

Once Christian in particular, but also very much Isabella, turn 20, a lot of focus will be turned on them. And this is when the youngest really start to relate to them.
We are going to see that very clearly in Denmark, Belgium, Spain and Norway in five years.

- That coverage, so to speak, is the main strength of having a monarchy. There are always someone you can relate to.
The members of the royal family, like any other family, say and do stupid things from time to time. They make mistakes. And sometimes you want to wack whoever it is on the head with a shovel.
But at other times they do so very well. Sometimes they struggle and overcome something. Some are shy, some are extrovert.
Even if you are a hardcore republican, I don't think you can help feeling just a little proud when they do well.
And unless you are a mean-spirited person, you want them to do well. You may not be interested in them, but it's good to know they do well.

And there is always someone who you think is a shovel. (Skovl = being called a shovel in DK is not a compliment!)

So, as long as the different generations are allowed to move around and make their mark as they grow up and older, the system works very well.
It's when the institution of monarchy becomes dusty, stuck up and too old-fashioned - without the younger generations getting a prominent place in the spotlight that the monarchy begins to become unrelatable to the younger generations - that where the problems begin to set in.
It's that eternal balance between tradition and renewal. It should preferably be gradual in order to ensure the most smooth transition.

Hmmm, a long rant.
So let me summarize: The DRF is doing well. But Frederik must not turn into another prince Charles. So hoping that QMII will live a long and healthy life, Denmark should perhaps adopt the Dutch approach - and soon.

Izzie 12-10-2021 01:55 PM

So agree with you! I'd hate to see Frederik as another Prince Charles! And I agree...sooner better than later. M&F are in their prime at the moment. And if I may be so blunt as to say that it seems they are doing the heavy lifting anyway and have been for quite a while. So why not just let them officially take over. I have certain speculations, but I'll keep them to myself for now.

IMO, M&F strike the perfect balance for the most part. Honoring the traditions and being reverent to them, but also knowing when to let their guard down more. You see this with let's say Flag Day and the Royal Run (please correct me if I am wrong). We see them in the very formal events, but then we also see them (and the kids) as relatable, approachable and fun. It is a hard/delicate balance sometimes, but I think they do a good job of it. You cannot be one extreme or the other these days because there is such a broad spectrum of people as your target group. And what greater balance than to give M&F the reigns and still have QMII there as well with all she represents as well. IMO it is a win/win for the DRF, the monarchy and everyone!

Tatiana Maria 12-10-2021 03:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Izzie (Post 2442245)
I agree. This is one of the demographics that needs/wants to see themselves reflected the DRF (if that makes sense)...M&F (and now in larger part the kids as they get older) is who they identify with and see the same interests, issues and POVs being championed, represented, and given a voice. And that is very important. This demographic is one of the ones that needs to stay supportive in order to carry the monarchy forward. Let's face it, QMII's demographic is diminishing in #s.

If 15-29-year-old Danes are capable of supporting and relating to a couple old enough to be their parents, that suggests ageism is not an insurmountable barrier for older royals.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Izzie (Post 2442245)
And pardon the analogy (which I do not intend with any disrespect)...but if you look at history, the dinosaurs went extinct, because they did not evolve and adapt to their changing surroundings. They stopped reflecting the environment around them and died out. And NO I am not calling anyone a dinosaur...I am simply using the example as an illustration of what happens when things (or in this case institutions) do not modernize.

However, it seems you feel that the Queen is slower to modernize the institution to reflect the current environment than her son and daughter-in-law. Do you have an example of this?

Izzie 12-10-2021 04:32 PM

The entire context of the statement was overlooked. It had ZERO to do with "ageism" at all...but what I said made that completely clear.

The second part of my comment was a common analogy used to address the importance of making sure that institutions remain fluid in order to stay relevant and reflective of current times with an eye to the future. And yes, I do believe QMII is slower to modernize the institution just based on her generation alone. M&F have grown up in a different generation, a more recent generation and are more immersed in the topics and issues of today and more in tune with technology and modern business acumen. IMO, there is nothing blasphemous about saying that. It just is what it is. I am the same age as Mary...by parents are from QMII's generation...they are not up-to-date on things like I am. In many ways, they still do things very old school because that is what they know and it is hard for them to move on from that (my dad still writes manual checks, the still have a land line). Again, it just is what it is. It is the normal cycle of how things evolve.

Tatiana Maria 12-10-2021 05:11 PM

It may very well be true (or not) that the queen is less in tune with modern Denmark than the crown princely couple. I am not qualified to judge. But if the public assumes that Margrethe is slower to modernize, less in tune with modern business, etc. not based on her behavior or choices but "based on her generation alone", then that a prejudicial assumption that is based on age, which is what I was referring to.

Duc_et_Pair 12-10-2021 05:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Izzie (Post 2442287)
The entire context of the statement was overlooked. It had ZERO to do with "ageism" at all...but what I said made that completely clear.

The second part of my comment was a common analogy used to address the importance of making sure that institutions remain fluid in order to stay relevant and reflective of current times with an eye to the future. And yes, I do believe QMII is slower to modernize the institution just based on her generation alone. M&F have grown up in a different generation, a more recent generation and are more immersed in the topics and issues of today and more in tune with technology and modern business acumen. IMO, there is nothing blasphemous about saying that. It just is what it is. I am the same age as Mary...by parents are from QMII's generation...they are not up-to-date on things like I am. In many ways, they still do things very old school because that is what they know and it is hard for them to move on from that (my dad still writes manual checks, the still have a land line). Again, it just is what it is. It is the normal cycle of how things evolve.


I do not know what could be modernized what has not been modernized. The Danish Royal Court probably has the best multimedia team, the Household is run like a business, the functionaries are appointed because of their expertise and not because they are a Baroness this or a Countess that.

The Danish royal residences are in superb state now and the Queen makes use of all residences (Amalienborg, Fredensborg, Marselisborg, etc.) It is actually a very good mix of traditions with modernity. I would not know what is "oldfashioned" at the Danish Court and urgently needs to be ended. Or it must be the monarchy itself, which is old-fashionism in optima forma.

The New Year's Levée in grand gala? Would Danmark be happy when it is a no-dresscode business suit-and-tie (or no tie at all) affair? Ending the sailing with the Dannebrog? Would Denmark be happy with the new King just take the helicopter for a turbo meet-and-greet ?

Danmark is a monarchy and luckily it is not a republic with a crown, like for an example Belgium sometimes looks with little grand ceremonies.

Muhler 12-10-2021 05:30 PM

If I may interject.

I don't think there is a public opinion of QMII being too old to rule. She is hugely respected and well liked. And I'd say no Danes under 55 can remember a time without QMII on the throne - and that matters. In the sense that there is some security, or perhaps rather stability, in someone being there for so long.

There is also a widespread feeling, that certainly is my impression, which I share, that's no secret, that M&F are ready.

We have seen especially Frederik grow from a shy, reluctant, awkward young man, into a confident, mature man. We have seen him learn from his mistakes, sometimes more or less unwillingly. We have seen him work on and improve on his weak sides. We can relate to him as a devoted husband and family man.
We have seen Mary taking on and grow into a role you'd be forgiven for thinking she had been born for.
We have seen M&F complement each other and constitute a formidable team when together.
We have seen their children grow and being groomed into a role that now feel natural to them.

Serving for life IMO does not necessarily mean serving until you drop dead at 102. It can also mean devoting your life to service until the time comes when you can safely hand over the reins.

To quote Queen Ingrid, who said to her daughter in an unexpected speech: "Now I know, I can safely close my eyes."

I would so much like to see Frederik and his family smile the day he becomes king.

Not least because M&F are already the de facto regent couple.

Izzie 12-10-2021 05:41 PM

I think the traditions are important. They provide historical references, timeframes and continuity. With that said, IMO within that framework, there must also be room and freedom to review processes with regular intervals and revise/improve same if deemed necessary for the continued operation of the institution to keep it up-to-date in operation, modernity and its ability to communicate efficiently and effectively via all the channels at its disposal and amongst the various entities, governments, groups with whom it needs to keep those lines of communication open. And that encompasses many things.

And I 100% agree with Muhler above about M&F. They are in their prime and ready for the undertaking and the tasks that undertaking entails. And further, handing over the reigns does not have to signal an end to service. I am not sure why these two things have to go hand-in-hand. QMII can hand the reigns to M&F and still be visible, relevant and of service to the DRF and Denmark. Giving up one does not negate the ability to do the other. Imagine her looking on proudly on as Frederik becomes King with Mary at his side and the kids all happy. Imagine Frederik being able to be joyful on the day and looking over to his mother to know that she is still there to offer support, guidance and counsel. The same for Mary...to know that she has QMII still there to support her as she takes on the role of Queen. What a happy day that would be for the M&F, the kids, QMII, the DRF and Denmark!

Prinsara 12-10-2021 07:54 PM

By your logic, in another 10 years or so — 20 at the outset — it's Christian who will be fully in touch with the rising generations and Mary and Frederik who will be passing the reins and best poised to take on roles of "senior advisers in the wings".

Muhler 12-11-2021 05:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prinsara (Post 2442316)
By your logic, in another 10 years or so — 20 at the outset — it's Christian who will be fully in touch with the rising generations and Mary and Frederik who will be passing the reins and best poised to take on roles of "senior advisers in the wings".

Was that a question for me?

Actually no. The important thing for me, is the age of the heir.

I'd say the most ideal time for a monarch is from 45 years old. That's when they IMO appeal most to the broadest segment of the population.
Where they have the most energy, combined with lots of experience and with will and energy to implement reforms.
And they generally don't have small children at that age.
Once an heir pass 60 or even 65. Then it becomes a "Prince Charles."

So yes, M&F would ideally have a considerably shorter span to reign than QMII, if Christian is to take over when he is 45-50 years old.
That is nevertheless still a reign of some 30 years.

Prinsara 12-11-2021 05:34 AM

Not your argument, but the insistence that QM doesn't resonate with the populace anymore and so she's currently in the way of Mary and Frederik who understand young people and will make sure the monarchy is up-to-date. It seems to me with that logic, Christian will be reigning the second his parents are no longer considered "with it".

Edit: But this is also heading into "Future of the Danish Monarchy" territory, perhaps.

Duc_et_Pair 12-11-2021 05:38 AM

And I am still waiting for the finger to be laid on the sore spot. What exactly is what hinders today's Danish monarchy under Queen Margrethe II and would improve with Frederik ?

Muhler 12-11-2021 05:41 AM

Where these questions for me or Izzie?

I don't mind holding back, if you wish to have Izzie to elaborate. :smile:

Anyway it's lunchtime.

Duc_et_Pair 12-11-2021 06:09 AM

Just a general remark. Beause the given portrayal in the last posts is that a sort of moulded and cobwebbed sleepy monarchy which urgently needs a firm booster in F&M. But all I see is a successful, efficient and well-managed monarchy with the highest approval ratings in Europe. So I am a bit surprised by the hurry to have MII replaced.

Archduchess Zelia 12-11-2021 06:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Muhler (Post 2442297)
(...) Not least because M&F are already the de facto regent couple.

How exactly? :ermm: They've stepped up their roles in the last couple of years, sure, but I'd say there's still a fairly long way from their current positions to that of a regent couple.

I have noticed certain reporters pushing a "Mary (and Frederik) is running the monarchy" narrative. Not only do I think that's extremely incorrect and a slight to QMII and her person, I also think that has more to do with said reporters and their own sentiments on M&F.

Blog Real 12-11-2021 07:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Muhler (Post 2442351)
Was that a question for me?

Actually no. The important thing for me, is the age of the heir.

I'd say the most ideal time for a monarch is from 45 years old. That's when they IMO appeal most to the broadest segment of the population.
Where they have the most energy, combined with lots of experience and with will and energy to implement reforms.
And they generally don't have small children at that age.
Once an heir pass 60 or even 65. Then it becomes a "Prince Charles."

So yes, M&F would ideally have a considerably shorter span to reign than QMII, if Christian is to take over when he is 45-50 years old.
That is nevertheless still a reign of some 30 years.

I also think that this is the ideal age for someone to become a monarch.
Frederik and Mary are at the best time to reign, but as Queen Margrethe II will never abdicate, they will have to wait.
As a matter of fact, I think the Danish monarchy is the safest in Europe, the royal family is very popular.

Muhler 12-11-2021 07:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair (Post 2442360)
Just a general remark. Beause the given portrayal in the last posts is that a sort of moulded and cobwebbed sleepy monarchy which urgently needs a firm booster in F&M. But all I see is a successful, efficient and well-managed monarchy with the highest approval ratings in Europe. So I am a bit surprised by the hurry to have MII replaced.

IMO more a question of using M&F while they are in their prime and relatable to the broadest segment of the population.
If we stick to the current tradition of serving until death, we will by the end of this century have a situation where several heirs are well into their 80's.
And some monarchs are more dominant than others and don't want to implement reforms. We have seen that before, we even see that today.
I.e. a situation where the heir cannot exercise his/her influence and implement the natural reforms and adaptations that are necessary in order to keep the monarchy relevant for as broad a segment as possible.

Admittedly QMII has allowed some changes and reforms to take place. Some on her own initiatives, like inviting the spouse of same sex relationships. (That was before same sex marriages were legal, and they were only registered as spouses.)
But others, like the recent releasing of private photos has Frederik (or perhaps even Joachim's) fingerprints all over it. Because how to use the Internet is not something that comes natural to QMII. She admits that openly.

Because of course M&F appeal to a broader segment than QMII. That's only natural. It would actually be deeply worrying if that was not the case!
It's not as much as QMII getting old, because had QMII been 21 when she got on the throne, she would naturally appeal to a smaller segment of the population. The agegroup of say 40+ might instead look more to an older uncle or aunt of hers.

So yes, the DRF runs well - now.
But with a 95 year old QMII on the throne and Frederik well into his 60's, wouldn't there be a risk of the dust beginning to settle?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Archduchess Zelia (Post 2442361)
How exactly? :ermm: They've stepped up their roles in the last couple of years, sure, but I'd say there's still a fairly long way from their current positions to that of a regent couple.

I have noticed certain reporters pushing a "Mary (and Frederik) is running the monarchy" narrative. Not only do I think that's extremely incorrect and a slight to QMII, I also think that has more to do with said reporters and their own sentiments on M&F.

Because they are.

Who handles official incoming and outgoing visits?
Who handles incoming state visits, apart from hosting the gala dinner?
Outgoing state visits now very much rely on Frederik.
Who heads and leads the most public events and campaigns?
Who are the younger people mainly listening to, following and see as rolemodels? - (Of course insofar as they are interested in royalty.)
Who score highest on the glamour scale?
Who are the most interesting and most followed both by Danish and foreign press?

QMII still have her eagerly awaited and just as keenly watched New Year speeches.
She is still The Queen.
She still has a very sharp mind and her delightful and very frank interviews and portraits are a huge hit, when shown on flow-TV. - Which not many young watch. (Even though the TV companies seem to think they can attract the younger people...)

QMII is the grandmother of the nation. A well liked, very respected and even loved grandmother. A grandmother who will be deeply lamented when she is gone.

But...

But symbolically speaking the king and queen were traditionally seen as the mother and father of a nation.
That's a role M&F fits now - but not in 20 years.

Izzie 12-11-2021 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Muhler (Post 2442365)
IMO more a question of using M&F while they are in their prime and relatable to the broadest segment of the population.
If we stick to the current tradition of serving until death, we will by the end of this century have a situation where several heirs are well into their 80's.
And some monarchs are more dominant than others and don't want to implement reforms. We have seen that before, we even see that today.
I.e. a situation where the heir cannot exercise his/her influence and implement the natural reforms and adaptations that are necessary in order to keep the monarchy relevant for as broad a segment as possible.

Admittedly QMII has allowed some changes and reforms to take place. Some on her own initiatives, like inviting the spouse of same sex relationships. (That was before same sex marriages were legal, and they were only registered as spouses.)
But others, like the recent releasing of private photos has Frederik (or perhaps even Joachim's) fingerprints all over it. Because how to use the Internet is not something that comes natural to QMII. She admits that openly.

Because of course M&F appeal to a broader segment than QMII. That's only natural. It would actually be deeply worrying if that was not the case!
It's not as much as QMII getting old, because had QMII been 21 when she got on the throne, she would naturally appeal to a smaller segment of the population. The agegroup of say 40+ might instead look more to an older uncle or aunt of hers.

So yes, the DRF runs well - now.
But with a 95 year old QMII on the throne and Frederik well into his 60's, wouldn't there be a risk of the dust beginning to settle?



Because they are.

Who handles official incoming and outgoing visits?
Who handles incoming state visits, apart from hosting the gala dinner?
Outgoing state visits now very much rely on Frederik.
Who heads and leads the most public events and campaigns?
Who are the younger people mainly listening to, following and see as rolemodels? - (Of course insofar as they are interested in royalty.)
Who score highest on the glamour scale?
Who are the most interesting and most followed both by Danish and foreign press?

QMII still have her eagerly awaited and just as keenly watched New Year speeches.
She is still The Queen.
She still has a very sharp mind and her delightful and very frank interviews and portraits are a huge hit, when shown on flow-TV. - Which not many young watch. (Even though the TV companies seem to think they can attract the younger people...)

QMII is the grandmother of the nation. A well liked, very respected and even loved grandmother. A grandmother who will be deeply lamented when she is gone.

But...

But symbolically speaking the king and queen were traditionally seen as the mother and father of a nation.
That's a role M&F fits now - but not in 20 years.

Thank you Muhler. This is what I've been trying to say. Would it be safe to say that M&F handle what could be considered the heavy lifting for lack of a better term. Since when have they basically handled the bulk of state and official visits? It seems they are the ones on the pulse of current topics and issues reflected in the causes they champion. And as far as them being perceived as de facto regents at this point...maybe it is also the optics as well some look at what regents of a comparable age group are handling and how the issues they focus on and activities they undertake are in the lane or level. I'm also curious if there was any commentary during Frederik's 50th birthday that it felt like the Birthday of more that a CP?

Would it be safe to say that maybe one area where the DRF is possibly not as at the forefront as it could be now is in going more green? If that makes sense? For example starting a transition to electric vehicles just to give the most basic example? Would that even be their decision alone?

Archduchess Zelia 12-11-2021 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Muhler (Post 2442365)
Because they are.

Who handles official incoming and outgoing visits?
Who handles incoming state visits, apart from hosting the gala dinner?
Outgoing state visits now very much rely on Frederik.
Who heads and leads the most public events and campaigns?
Who are the younger people mainly listening to, following and see as rolemodels? - (Of course insofar as they are interested in royalty.)
Who score highest on the glamour scale?
Who are the most interesting and most followed both by Danish and foreign press?

QMII still have her eagerly awaited and just as keenly watched New Year speeches.
She is still The Queen.
She still has a very sharp mind and her delightful and very frank interviews and portraits are a huge hit, when shown on flow-TV. - Which not many young watch. (Even though the TV companies seem to think they can attract the younger people...)

QMII is the grandmother of the nation. A well liked, very respected and even loved grandmother. A grandmother who will be deeply lamented when she is gone.

But...

But symbolically speaking the king and queen were traditionally seen as the mother and father of a nation.
That's a role M&F fits now - but not in 20 years.

... Maybe in your opinion, but it's certainly a sentiment that can be debated.

I suppose to begin with, it depends how you define the term "regent couple". If your definition is the couple that generally receives the most attention, sure (I'd then argue it's the wrong term to use but sure). If your definition is that M&F are the, say, WA and Máxima to QMII's Beatrix, then no. I think they're far from in all respects but official being the King and Queen (and I'm even in the age group I think was outsourced to M&F on the previous page ;)).

As I see it, M&F's increase in duties (they've always had the attention locked down) has been a natural consequence of QMII's preparing them for their future roles, QMII's own health declining and also first Henrik's retirement and death and subsequently going from having little J&M to having even less J&M.

That makes their roles very prominent but I still think symbolically and in public opinion, there'd be little disagreement that QMII still very much still fulfils the mother of the nation role. Something that has become all the more apparent during the pandemic.

Additionally, I think there's a chance (certainly if they follow QMII's example) that lots of what makes M&F popular and relatable to the general public would be something they'd scale down on once they assume that role. There's a lot more leverage without the actual title.

Saying that M&F in all respects but official currently function as the regent couple while encouraging the implementation of abdication is also a bit of an oxymoron to me. Surely, if they're de facto the regent couple all an abdication now would do is add the title to their names and not much else?

Muhler 12-11-2021 02:32 PM

De facto regent couple.

The Regent Couple is the reigning couple in name and deed.

That's what M&F to a very large extent are today, in the sense that they lift the main burden of work within the DRF.
The regent couple is also, per definition the main characters in the royal roadshow - I'll claim that also cover M&F.
QMII is still there, but a little more in the background.

I will also claim that there is a considerable difference in M&F's role at present, being the IMO de facto regent couple, and actually being the Regent Couple.
As with any job, there is a considerable difference between acting in a function and having that function.
In the former you are still basically a substitute. In the latter the job is yours to shape and adapt to what you want to do with it.

I disagree with you regarding QMII during the pandemic, I actually think your argument backs my claim.

It was very much M&F who went out and encouraged people, by example, to follow the restrictions and guidelines and urge vaccinations.
In that sense M&F were the mother and father.

It was when things started to creak a little in the seams that the wise old, respected and well liked grandmother opened her mouth. Saying it's inconsiderate not comply by the restrictions.

--------------

- I have been asked why an abdication would even be necessary. what is wrong with the system as it is?

I'd like to turn that question around:
Should Frederik (and probably later on Christian) wait until he is 70 or older before he can be allowed to make his personal mark. QMII has had 50 years to put her mark on the DRF and Danish history.
Because QMII could easily live to her late 90's.

And considering their health and modern medical treatment is more than likely M&F will live long lives as well.
Christian, his generation can expect to live past 100.

Something has to happen for the first time. And the monarchies of Spain, Belgium are still around. The Netherlands have had the system of abdications for generations. That monarchy shows no serious signs of falling.
Even the Papal State recently had a head of state who abdicated.

Do we, the Danes, want to see Frederik as the next Prince Charles?

Prinsara 12-11-2021 02:37 PM

Charles keeps being brought up as the 'must avoid at all costs', but on the other hand, he's done more as Prince of Wales than any other Prince of Wales, ever, he doesn't particularly want his mother dead, and he's long ago learned to enjoy the freedoms of speech and action he has by not having the top job — the last of which I believe was already mentioned here. I think anyone who feels sorry for Charles or sees him as a negative example doesn't really understand Charles, what he's managed to do, or the fact he's pretty content as he is right now.

Frederik could and should be so lucky, frankly.

Muhler 12-11-2021 02:49 PM

Or he simply got used to it?
And made the best of it.

Of course he is not going to say: I hate being in this here waiting situation.

Nor does he wish his mother dead, surely. I sincerely hope not!

My point is: If they look like a regent couple, sound like a regent couple and walk like a regent couple - they are a regent couple. So make them the regent couple.

I will not presume to go in and tell the British that they should introduce abdications, it's not my monarchy. What works there may not work in DK and vice versa.

I will however have serious problems drumming up even five ordinary Danes on the streets who would think it's great that Frederik was still Crown Prince at 73.

Prinsara 12-11-2021 02:54 PM

Okay, you go tell Miss Daisy she's holding Fred and Denmark back and she needs to step down.

I will get the popcorn and watch. :smile:

But, again, I think it belongs in "Future of the Danish Monarchy".

Somebody 12-11-2021 03:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prinsara (Post 2442408)
Charles keeps being brought up as the 'must avoid at all costs', but on the other hand, he's done more as Prince of Wales than any other Prince of Wales, ever, he doesn't particularly want his mother dead, and he's long ago learned to enjoy the freedoms of speech and action he has by not having the top job — the last of which I believe was already mentioned here. I think anyone who feels sorry for Charles or sees him as a negative example doesn't really understand Charles, what he's managed to do, or the fact he's pretty content as he is right now.

Frederik could and should be so lucky, frankly.

Charles has also expressed that he has prepared for what you call the 'top job' his entire life; he is quite ready! So, I am quite sure he would be happy to take over, especially if that would NOT involve the death of his mother.

In addition, I don't think William is looking at Charles and thinking: I would love to be a 'trainee' until I'm in my 70s. If needed, William and Catherine could take over... While they might benefit from a few more years under their belt (and their children a little older), they don't need a few decades...

So, I fully agree with Muhler that for the health of a monarchy (and also personal happiness of the royals themselves) handing over the reigns while the heir is in their fourties is excellent timing. I don't expect future generations (i.e., the current younger generations, for example William or Frederick in the case of Denmark) to stick to the no-abdication principle. However, neither one would like to be a very short-lived monarch either, so they'll most likely try to find a balance: probably a reign of at least 20 years (if they have those years) and preferably handing over well before the heir is of retirement age (so at the latest in their 50s).

Prinsara 12-11-2021 04:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Somebody (Post 2442424)
Charles has also expressed that he has prepared for what you call the 'top job' his entire life; he is quite ready! So, I am quite sure he would be happy to take over, especially if that would NOT involve the death of his mother.

In addition, I don't think William is looking at Charles and thinking: I would love to be a 'trainee' until I'm in my 70s. If needed, William and Catherine could take over... While they might benefit from a few more years under their belt (and their children a little older), they don't need a few decades...

I don't call it the top job; they do. And there is no way he's going to obtain it other than the death or incapacity of his mother, so saying he'd love another option is pointless. He's done pretty amazingly well with what he has. William has been quoted saying "I don't lie awake at night" wondering when he'll be king. The que sera sera principle works well enough for now.

Perhaps leave the Prince of Wales out of discussions of monarchies where abdication is a slight possibility or an established precedent? It's apples and pears.

Somebody 12-11-2021 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prinsara (Post 2442427)
I don't call it the top job; they do. And there is no way he's going to obtain it other than the death or incapacity of his mother, so saying he'd love another option is pointless. He's done pretty amazingly well with what he has. William has been quoted saying "I don't lie awake at night" wondering when he'll be king. The que sera sera principle works well enough for now.

Perhaps leave the Prince of Wales out of discussions of monarchies where abdication is a slight possibility or an established precedent? It's apples and pears.

Why is it 'apples and pears'? The situation of Charles could be the situation of heirs in monarchies where abdication is not established practice; so it provides an excellent example of what these monarchies might face in this age where people in general get much older than in past centuries. It shows very well what many think is not in the best interest of the monarchy as an institution in the long run (that doesn't mean that people don't value queen Elizabeth or queen Margrethe or Harald etc).

I don't think it is good for a monarchy if people start to pity the heir for having to wait so long and calling for him to be skipped. While Charles knows fully well that he will have to wait for his mother to die to become king; that's probably the case for several other heirs as well. So, while very few would wish their parents to die (unless they know they are suffering), at the same time heirs might (secretly) wish that they wouldn't have to wait for their parent to die to take on the position they've been preparing for their whole life and wish to do that well before their peers retire! In addition, they might also honestly wish for their parents to allow themselves to lay the burden down at a certain point and enjoy what they have left of life without the feeling that it would be a failure to do so and with the added joy of seeing their child take up the position they know so well. Again, that doesn't mean that these heirs that are 'waiting' don't try to make the best of the situation until that moment arrives.

If I am not mistaken, Margrethe herself expressed how hard that transition is: not only loosing your parent but at exactly the same time also having to follow in their footsteps (without them being around to discuss anything that you might run into; and little time to grieve).

Mbruno 12-11-2021 05:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prinsara (Post 2442414)
Okay, you go tell Miss Daisy she's holding Fred and Denmark back and she needs to step down.

I will get the popcorn and watch. :smile:

But, again, I think it belongs in "Future of the Danish Monarchy".

"Daisy" might have made up her mind on the topic of abdication, as has Queen Elizabeth, but I think future generations of royals might have a different attitude about it. The real problem is that it would be unfair for Charles, or Frederik for that matter, to give up the throne after waiting until their 70s to become King. With increased life expectancy, if someone doesn't break the cycle at some point, a situation like that of Prince Charles can keep repeating itself. Spain, Belgium and the Netherlands are in a comfortable situation because they all have kings who ascended in their 40s or early 50s and can still reign for 30 years (give or take), and "leave their marks" as Muhler said before stepping down for their successors to take over at a similarly reasonable age.

The issue of what is best for the monarchy is, however, a more complicated one. Queen Elizabeth II for example is way more popular than Prince Charles, but William appears by the polls to be nearly as popular as his grandmother. I don't know the poll numbers in Denmark to make an informed comment. In any case, I guess it is fair to say that crown princely couples in their 40s who are still reasonably good-looking and have good-looking teenage kids tend to be attractive and popular (I know those are very shallow reasons, but I am just stating what I see in practice). When a Crown Prince, however, waits too long to ascend and , as his own children move into adulthood and start to eclipse him ,his "popularity capital" begins to fade.

Alison H 12-11-2021 05:31 PM

Have people got used to having younger leaders? Joe Biden is an obvious exception, but it's now quite common for presidents and prime ministers to be in their 40s. That would have been considered too young to have the necessary experience/gravitas at one time, and some Victorian political leaders were in their 80s. That doesn't affect the position of an heir who's still "waiting" in their 70s, but I wonder if people have just got used to seeing younger men and women on the world stage.


It's actually quite strange that, as life expectancy's increased, politicians have got younger.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:32 AM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2022
Jelsoft Enterprises