The Royal Forums

The Royal Forums (
-   The Earl and Countess of Wessex and Family (
-   -   Did Edward succeed or fail to live a 'normal' life? (

sydney00 12-17-2007 10:03 AM

Did Edward succeed or fail to live a 'normal' life?
hello! :smile:
i ll have to write on a certain topic for school.and now i thought of writing about edward and how much he was able to be like somebody from middle class or so. because i read about him working for lloyd webber etc., "royal tea boy"..
so i would like to know from you, what you think about it! it means, i d like you to say, if you think it was an imagination of him, kind of a dream, or if he has realized a lot, or if he completely failed?
what would you say are really important aspects about him for such a work?

well, my personal opinion is, that he kind of failed, because maybe it was a nice idea, but he wasn t used to such a life. his company hasn t ever really worked, perhaps when he made some film about royalty, yes but not seriously.although i think he loves the life style he has now, i think he showed us that it is possible for them to like usual things, like acting, marrying a middle class woman etc.^^

a big, big thank you to all of you, who ll answer. thank you.:flowers:

CasiraghiTrio 12-17-2007 11:09 AM

^ To me, Prince Edward is a success story because he continues to work hard at whatever he is doing. When he was making documentaries, he threw himself into it 100%. Now he is 100% in royal engagements. When he was in college and the Royal Marines, he was totally into that. When he was a "royal tea boy" he was 100% in it as well. He does whatever he does well and he has a good attitude about life. That is what I like most about him. He never failed at anything in his life. He just tried many things and they worked for him at different times in varying ways. He rolls with the punches.

BeatrixFan 12-17-2007 11:14 AM

You sure Ashley? I would have thought Edward did at almost everything he tried his hand at. He wanted to be an actor but like many a hopefull he had no talent whatsoever. He had a go at being a Marine, he couldn't hack it and he left. His TV company ended up being a farce and got him into trouble. Even his wife caused him problems by declaring that he wasn't dancing at the other end of the ballroom. Edward isn't really a success story where the Windsors are concerned.

CasiraghiTrio 12-17-2007 01:15 PM

^ I am sure. :smile: I do not believe in the word failure in most cases. The only way to fail, imo, is to not try at all. So what that he quit the Royal Marines early on? At least he had the courage to admit it wasn't for him. He tried it, and not everyone would even try it. Contrary to popular belief, quitting something does not equal failure. People quit things all the time, for many reasons. In edward's case, his reason was probably just that he realized that the Marine life was not for him. He wanted to do other things, and try other things. The time for him to be in the Marines passed. There was a new time for a new thing. Flexibility is a much-underrated virtue. :flowers:

BeatrixFan 12-17-2007 01:18 PM

There's flexibility and then there's trying your hand at almost everything and failing everytime. He's found out that the only thing he's good at is being paid to wave at people and ok, he does it well. But if we're talking failure, I'd say he is a failure because not one thing he's set out to do, has he actually done. He wanted to do other things, he did them and he cocked it up. In the real world he'd be forced to sign on, lucky for him mummy and daddy bailed him out. If he wasn't an HRH, what would he be?

Claire 12-17-2007 04:08 PM

I stand from a very different view point on this. I make no excuses that I admire Prince Edward deeply. So my answer is coloured by this.
Was Edward able to live an ordinary life? No, simply because Edward was never ordinary. Of course you have a ask what is ordinary, I'm have to say that if that soul was born to any family in England he would never have been ordinary. But Edward was born to the Queen of England and regardless of how much he tried to shake off the image of the Prince and to have people forget that he was the son of the monarch they were always more people waiting to remind him. I personally don't think Edward wanted to be ordinary - he simply wanted to carve his own path and indeed he has. Edward never wanted to cast off his family or his heritage, they are more part of him than you can imagine. But they are also a burden that pulled him down and also provided a target for his critics to strike.

It is important that we look at the way Edward sees the world. Many people believe that Edward simply took on his jobs causally, knowing that he had the safety net of mummy and pappa to pick him up if anything happened. That is a big mistake - Edward invested his heart, soul and a large chunk of his own money in his project and was greatly saddened when they failed. But he moved on, learnt from the experience.
I know that BP will promote the successes of other royals as they are more important to the throne then Edward and that they have downplayed Edward's successes to enhance others. It is a fact that Edward accepts this as his understands his role in the family and in the world. I know that while at Cambrigde while Edward was in charge of thier rag campaign they collected more money than they ever had. It was Edward's fund raising alone that saved the Duke of Edinburgh Awards in the 1980's. But I'm afraid you will not get any stats or fifty facts out of the Buckingham Palace press office about how much money Edward actually brings in to the Award Scheme or how many participants join after he visits. They will not even tell you able how many charities and organisations request Edward to visit them. An former aide told me once that Edward could cure AIDS, Cancer and win the Noble prize peace for solving the Palestine issue and Buckingham Palace would still sell the story of Prince Charles falling off his horse the next morning. The problem is his position - far enough away from the throne for noone to care, but close enough for people to call nepotism.

Personally I think that the problem Edward experienced with trying to be normally was due to him been a prince. Sure you could argue that the money of been a prince gave him the capacity to became a producer in the first place. But I think that Edward made a series of damning decisons because he was naive and never realised that most people out them were simply waiting for him to fail. Most people were simply not willing to accept him.

But was he able to live like you and me? Oh yes, Edward was possibly the first royal ever to regular join mates for a beer after work, didn't leave at three and falling over his feet. He opened a bank account, used an ATM, went shopping. Went to a rock concert and stood among the crowd. He still visits the public library and does his own cooking and cleaning. Heaven's know whatelse he got to down in New Zealand.

zembla 12-17-2007 05:30 PM

He's the only one of the Queen's sons I'm familiar with that actually had a real I think he did well...that really makes him very normal. He also married a woman who was ambitious and had her own life which was unusual too...low scandal factor for once as well...

CasiraghiTrio 12-18-2007 07:19 AM

Thank you, Claire, for this brilliant answer.

Another point: Prince Edward is successful in providing a totally private life for his family. Lady Louise is a different looking girl, taller and of new age each time there is a photo of her in the media. So I think while there is no way to answer the question of whether he was able to lead a "normal life" (because "normal" is a highly subjective term) we can say unequivocally that he has achieved for his family the kind of comfortable private life he always craved for himself.

While Prince Edward was brought up in Buckingham Palace being an HRH, his daughter is being brought up in a country manor like any other aristocrat's daughter. At school, instead of being the singled-out Princess, she is Lady Louise among many other Ladies and Honourables. I think we can count this as the successful result of her parents' intentions.

sydney00 12-18-2007 02:49 PM

i just wanted to say thank you for all the great answers i got until now, because i think they are really important for me not having anyone i know who knows sth about him and a discussion is alsways helpful. in my holidays now i will go and look for stuff and i hope i will find thinks about him.
but i really love those different point of yours, and thank you especially, claire, for your long one ;)

CasiraghiTrio 12-18-2007 02:58 PM

Sydney, you might find books more helpful than online. I think if you do a search on, or you will find at least two, maybe three, biographies relating to Edward, and many more with secondary relation to Edward. Or check your local library. If it's big, they might have the books there. You could also inquire at Majesty Magazine ( about back issues with features about Edward. Good luck! :biggrin:

Oh....... probably the best tip I can give, assuming you have not checked it yet, is the Royal Library forum here at TRF. LINK

Jane1 12-19-2007 06:15 AM

I think he has both succeeded and failed. He has succeeded in having a happy and stable marriage and ensuring as much privacy as possible for his children. He has succeeded in carrying out his royal duties, probably better than we hear about. He seems to be close to both his parents and have good friends.
However I think his non-royal career was a failure in that he did not understand how the normal world worked. He used his royal connections in a way that irritated people; being the only TV producer with total access to archived royal material does not , for example, make you a talented TV producer. Sophie also, instead of teaching him how the world worked, took on his doomed approach and was happy to play on her connections to win business.
I guess I would say he has succeeded as a royal but not as a civilian.

CasiraghiTrio 12-21-2007 12:09 AM

^ I think there is truth to what you say, Jane, but at the same time, I must be the voice of dissent. I am probably in a minority opinion here. I have read and heard from people how Edward was not a good producer of documentaries. But even though my opinion is different, and is the unpopular one, I still always enjoyed his work. I thought it was all very good, and I don't begrudge him at all for having the advantage of all-access-pass to Royal Archives. I think he would have been stupid not to use that.
Who wouldn't love to use that? :lol:

rmay286 12-26-2007 06:41 PM

Maybe in terms of his career, Prince Edward wasn't all that successful, but his family life seems to be the most stable of all his siblings thus far. He managed to marry a woman who (perhaps apart from the fake sheikh incident) has never caused any scandal, who's adapted to royal life and royal duties without any obvious difficulties and seems to be very well-received in all her public engagements. He's made sure his children won't be titled "prince and princess", and he's kept them well out of the public eye. So I think in many ways, at least in regards to marriage and family, Prince Edward's been quite successful...whether you judge him as a commoner or a royal.

Incas 12-31-2007 12:08 AM

Edward did several documentary based on his family's history and the royal parks. They were well photographed and not fawning at all. Not standout but very enjoyable. Perhaps some expected more private details due to his family association. Unfortunately, documentaries such as these were not in high demand, they were too bland compared to the dramas the BRF was going through at the time. I don't he failed in business either. It was a very competitve field and a lot of documentarians have even less recognition than he achieved. Just think of the candidates during Academy Awards, most people draw a blank at all of the entries.

ZaJa 12-31-2007 12:12 AM

I remember those documentaries. I enjoyed them, I think they aired on PBS and TLC here in the US. At least the man tried. There are people with less money but the access to making it on their own and yet aren't even half as successful as Edward. I admire his willingness to try and make something of himself outside his royal status.

Penny Lane 01-02-2008 01:54 PM

He made some good documentries I think maybe in time he would have improved and understood the business better I give him credit for trying even if it was connected to his life as a royal that shouldn't be a strike against him.I think his main problem and Sophie's as well was thinking they could live more or less as some of his cousins have and lead a life maily seperate from royal duties and functions.It didn't work maybe because he is the Queen's son and while he grew up in a more modern era then say even Prince Andrew he still couldn't lead that seperate life that maybe he wanted to.Charles,Anne and Andrew all excepted their roles rather easily I just think Edward saw himself a different from them in that way as the fourth child he may have thought he would be allowed the life of his choice not of his birth.The life he has now was a process and maybe all they things he did before will give him greater insight to how he can help others,in the end I don't see him as a failure because he can bring his life experience which is quite varied to the life he has now in support of the Queen.It will give him a broader outlook then mayn others inhis position have had.

pinkie40 01-04-2008 11:02 PM

I adored his documentaries. Very well done. Very sad there are not any more. He certainly had a wonderful talent for those. I remember Prince Edward walking in the inner workings of Big Ben.

He has a lovely wife and precious children..So he is a very wealthy man in that sense. Sophie is absolutely perfect for him...And deserves many cheers for her contribution.

What is his downfall perhaps is his high sense of entitlement. He does have sort of an "well, I am a prince, so you better like me and fawn over me" attitude that comes out every now and then...He also has his sister's bitter scowl when perturbed...

I still cringe whenever I think of the "It's a Royal Knockout" and wonder what the heck was he (and Princess Anne) was thinking!!!!

Skydragon 01-05-2008 04:29 PM

I had to think about this question, but my conclusion has to be he is a failure.

He is riding on his fathers coat tails, everything he has done as a 'normal' person, he has given up on. He barely got through his officer commissioning course, so why, oh why did he try to become a marine. If someone constantly 'gives up', that is failure, the fact that he has not gone on to do anything worthwhile or note worthy, equals failure to me.

Incas 01-22-2008 01:48 AM


Originally Posted by Skydragon (Post 712618)
....the fact that he has not gone on to do anything worthwhile or note worthy, equals failure to me.

That depends on what the press now-a-days deems "note worthy". I think as a third son, he never fit any archtypes the media could easily latch on, such Charles is the heir/action man, Andrew was the spare and then the playboy, etc. He was always more quiet and conventional, too boring for scandals until the marine episode. After that, he was cast as the "lost cause". Once a label is tacked on, the rest of the coverage follows the same path. Just look how long it took Anne to turn around her public image after once telling some photographer off. And people still treat Charles as bit of looney for admit to talking to plants. My point is, short of him convert to Catholicism and start a new crusade, his efforts will be ignored for the most part. And it seems to me, he has found fullfillment with his own family now and just do the job assigned to him to pay the bills. And that is so "normal".

RubyPrincess168 01-22-2008 05:20 AM

I have to agree with Claire's answer. I don't think he would have had a chance at a normal life unless he was born to a dethroned and financially broke royal family. And even though he'd probably still have a title in fron t of his name, thus making him anything but normal.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:29 PM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2022
Jelsoft Enterprises