The Royal Forums

The Royal Forums (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/)
-   The Earl and Countess of Wessex and Family (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f114/)
-   -   Edward and Sophie: Advice, Issues, Role and Questions (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f114/edward-and-sophie-advice-issues-role-and-questions-15351.html)

rmay286 05-18-2008 02:30 PM

I think one could ask quite easily whether anything any members of the royal family do is necessary? Does Britain need a monarchy?

But since it's probably going to still have one for a while, I don't think it's surprising that the younger royals are now attracting more attention than the older ones. In the 1980s all eyes were on Charles and Diana and Sarah and Andrew because they were the younger royals, in their twenties and thirties. Now their children are the same age. I think it makes sense.

As for Edward and Sophie, I think they're probably content to be seen as the boring older generation and forgotten about. They definitely don't seem to want public attention, and in fact they tried hard for a while to pursue non-royal careers. I think they'd be quite happy to disappear into relative oblivion.

TLLK 05-18-2008 05:20 PM

I agree. I believe that the Wessexes will continue with their royal duties, but remain out of the public view as much as possible. Once Charles becomes King, I believe that they will scale back even more.

Bijoux Roy 05-24-2008 02:25 PM

I think it's up to the parents whether their children are seen in public or not. Personally I don't mind if I don't see either child. I believe it's best for the children.

My issue is with Sophie and Edward themselves. I believe that both of them have used their royal connections for business gains. Sophie attempted to use them with her PR firm and failed miserably. She didn't mind being, "almost" royal when she lived with Edward as his girlfriend for 7 or so years at BP.

Edward's company was caught taking pictures of William at Eton after Diana's death, when the Palace asked the Press to please back off. Evidently it didn't mean his??

They've been the worst offenders (and people knock Sarah, Dutchess of York!)

I used to have tremendous respect for Edward, unfortunately it diminished as years went on, and then he married Sophie, who to me is no better than any other person who married into the family and divorced.

Hopefully he'll stay wise and continue to shield his children, the most certainly deserve that much.

Mermaid1962 05-24-2008 05:48 PM

It was at St. Andrews and not at Eton when Edward filmed, but William was not filmed personally. The footage was of the town.

I like Edward and Sophie very much, because after making some serious errors in judgement about business ventures they've shown themselves to be effective working members of the Royal Family. They cherish their personal and family lives, and I admire that. They've been married for nine years now, and there's never been any serious hint that their marriage is troubled. Given the environment that they live in, that's quite significant.

Kezza 05-24-2008 06:45 PM

Sophie worst than the Duchess of York??? I don't think so IMO. When it comes to trading in royal connections for business.

Like Mermaid1962 said they made some mistakes in 2001, but they both learnt from it quickly. They both work hard as members of the Royal Family. Where their marraige is at is happy one, and success story when you consider the divorces of Pr Edward's older siblings.

I agree with what you Bijoux Boy when it comes to the issue of whether they want their children photographed in public or not. Thats up to them... I don't feel comfortable personally when children are thrust into the spotlight, it leaves them open to all sorts of stuff being written in the press.

pinkie40 06-08-2008 11:58 PM

I hope Edward finds some way to channel some of his enormous creativity and talent for making royal history vibrant. I so miss his fabulous documentaries.

He would be the best person to write and produce/direct a series on the royal history of England for Children.

I'm not so sure what would be the best avenue for Sophie other than tending to the daily needs of very young children which is the biggest job on the planet for every good mother.

agogo 07-16-2010 12:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TLLK (Post 767712)
I agree. I believe that the Wessexes will continue with their royal duties, but remain out of the public view as much as possible. Once Charles becomes King, I believe that they will scale back even more.

Maybe, maybe not. I believe that Prince Charles will welcome help with the family duties. State dinners must be a tedious bore. QE II always had cousins and family atteding.

Lumutqueen 07-16-2010 05:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by agogo (Post 1111981)
Maybe, maybe not. I believe that Prince Charles will welcome help with the family duties. State dinners must be a tedious bore. QE II always had cousins and family atteding.

At State Occasions maybe, but that will be it.
When Charles becomes King, Edward and Sophie will scale down their duties substantially.

muriel 07-16-2010 05:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lumutqueen (Post 1112099)
At State Occasions maybe, but that will be it.
When Charles becomes King, Edward and Sophie will scale down their duties substantially.

I do not think that Edward and Sophie will materially reduce the number of engagements they carry out once Charles is King. They are quite low profile at the moment, but effective at what they do. I think Charles will keep them on. Its the York girls that are likely to have very limited or nio public role, IMO.

Fürstin Taxis 07-16-2010 04:27 PM

I heard that some English magazines criticized that the Queen gave them the titel Earl and Countess of Wessex. This title was 1000 years not used.
The "Sunday Mirror" wrote: Itīs a shame. Because itīs unmodern. Aha.

Lumutqueen 07-17-2010 06:26 AM

Royal titles are not meant to be Modern, so whoever criticised them knows nothing about royal titles.
And it was just less then a 1000.

Hissy 01-04-2011 07:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fürstin Taxis (Post 1112623)
I heard that some English magazines criticized that the Queen gave them the titel Earl and Countess of Wessex. This title was 1000 years not used.
The "Sunday Mirror" wrote: Itīs a shame. Because itīs unmodern. Aha.

When the title for Prince Edward was released I remember that one of the titles that was also mentioned was Duke of Clarence. Of course there are some negative associations with that title! So Wessex is definitely better. Yet I too was a bit disappointed because I thought he would be titled a Duke, like his brother Andrew. I wonder if Prince Edward had much say as to choice. Any insight on that?

As for being "unmodern", that is a strange thing for the Mirror to write. After all even being titled a prince seems very old fashioned....

Mermaid1962 01-04-2011 05:47 PM

Prince Edward has gradually been taking over the work of the Duke of Edinburgh's Award scheme, and the understanding has been that he will receive that title after Prince Philip dies. The title will revert to the Crown, but then it will be re-issued (recreated?) to Prince Edward rather than it being directed inherited. This was announced at the time that Prince Edward became the Earl of Wessex, which apparently was his choice of title.:flowers:


Quote:

Originally Posted by Hissy (Post 1184901)
I wonder if Prince Edward had much say as to choice. Any insight on that?


NoorMeansLight 01-04-2011 05:56 PM

It was Edward's choice, as far as I know. He liked the way it sounded (Earl of Wessex) and asked HM to be given this particular title.

Royal Fan 01-05-2011 02:15 PM

is their a formal ceromony like when she grants a Knighthood??

Lumutqueen 01-05-2011 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Royal Fan (Post 1185737)
is their a formal ceromony like when she grants a Knighthood??

You mean when Edward became an Earl?
No I don't think there is, just papers to sign and letter heads to change. Nothing like when Charles became POW.

Edward chose to be an Earl..

Iluvbertie 01-05-2011 02:48 PM

There used to be a formal ceremony when the new title holder took their seat in the House of Lords. Philip, Charles and Andrew all went through that but Edward never did. This applied to all new title holders.

My great-aunt had a great time watching her cousin take his seat in the House of Lords in the 1930s and told us about it a number of times after that. Her son was the representative of the Australian branch of the family invited when the next member of the family took his seat. Unfortunately he was an only son of an only son and had only daughters so the title is now extinct.

Royal Fan 01-05-2011 03:04 PM

if i may ask what was the title

Iluvbertie 01-06-2011 04:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Royal Fan (Post 1185785)
if i may ask what was the title


Viscount Leverhulme.

The 1st Viscount and his brother founded Sunlight soap and built the village of Sunlight for their workers.

IloveCP 06-10-2011 01:55 PM

I would say keep doing what your doing and keep your problems out of the public because in your postion it is very difficult.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:08 AM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021
Jelsoft Enterprises