The Royal Forums

The Royal Forums (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/)
-   British Royals (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f23/)
-   -   The Monarchy under Charles (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f23/the-monarchy-under-charles-16252.html)

cepe 02-02-2015 08:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hernameispekka (Post 1746308)
Yes, me too. Some comments seem realistic (like the ones about C&C "living apart" (as in spending alot of time alone not as in separated)) and it is worth discussing the validity or chance of comments being right. But it's frightening how many people take stuff at face value.

It is an isolated statement. I spent 4 yrs working away from home - only coming home at weekends. Many people would class that as living apart.
People in the military do that as well; so do business people travelling the world; pilots; maritime workers; people on ships; etc etc.

I dont speak for everyone but the time I spent away from home made coming home better and now we are together fulltime - its great.

What is missing in these statements is balance: so when people read it think who else does this? etc.

For the first time in royal history a senior member of the royal family had a life before joining the BRF - and they are making room for them outside of the formal life of the BRF. Camilla's children and grandchildren are used to Ray Mill and Charles and Camilla have agreed how that is to be managed.

Catherine and William get grief for the same thing - there is a family outside of the BRF. They love and want to spend time with them.

It is the UK media who create waves - not the people connected to the BRF or the BRF themselves. I'm sure Sophie sees her family as does Tim Lawrence. But the UK media aren't interested so we dont read about it.

Other royal families cope and so does other media - good example is the family of Maxima, or Mette-Marit.

UK media making a crisis out of nothing (or trying to sell newspapers)

hernameispekka 02-02-2015 08:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cepe (Post 1746324)
It is an isolated statement. I spent 4 yrs working away from home - only coming home at weekends. Many people would class that as living apart.
People in the military do that as well; so do business people travelling the world; pilots; maritime workers; people on ships; etc etc.

I dont speak for everyone but the time I spent away from home made coming home better and now we are together fulltime - its great.

What is missing in these statements is balance: so when people read it think who else does this? etc.

For the first time in royal history a senior member of the royal family had a life before joining the BRF - and they are making room for them outside of the formal life of the BRF. Camilla's children and grandchildren are used to Ray Mill and Charles and Camilla have agreed how that is to be managed.

Catherine and William get grief for the same thing - there is a family outside of the BRF. They love and want to spend time with them.

It is the UK media who create waves - not the people connected to the BRF or the BRF themselves. I'm sure Sophie sees her family as does Tim Lawrence. But the UK media aren't interested so we dont read about it.

Other royal families cope and so does other media - good example is the family of Maxima, or Mette-Marit.

UK media making a crisis out of nothing (or trying to sell newspapers)

I did not say their "living apart" was a bad thing. I know a few of my friends have grandmothers living apart from spouses/longtime boyfriends. When you reach a certain age you have your life and routine so set in stone that a half-separate life can be much better than a constant compromise. If Charles wants to spend two weeks painting and gardening at Highgrove and Camilla enjoying the noisy family life, that sounds perfect to me.

I agree with your whole post. It must be like pulling teeth sometimes having a relationship with media....

ROYAL NORWAY 02-02-2015 08:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cepe (Post 1746277)
Nearly every paper in the UK has gone into tabloid mode.

Yes, even the telegraph.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cepe (Post 1746277)
Its embarassing so see how awful UK media has become. No doubt the articles will be syndicated world wide and more garbage about the BRF will be published without thought and consideration.

I fear that the press will be even worse in their behavior towards Charles when he becomes king. They have also become more critical of William and Catherine.

royal rob 02-02-2015 08:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cepe (Post 1746324)
It is an isolated statement. I spent 4 yrs working away from home - only coming home at weekends. Many people would class that as living apart.

People in the military do that as well; so do business people travelling the world; pilots; maritime workers; people on ships; etc etc.



I dont speak for everyone but the time I spent away from home made coming home better and now we are together fulltime - its great.



What is missing in these statements is balance: so when people read it think who else does this? etc.



For the first time in royal history a senior member of the royal family had a life before joining the BRF - and they are making room for them outside of the formal life of the BRF. Camilla's children and grandchildren are used to Ray Mill and Charles and Camilla have agreed how that is to be managed.



Catherine and William get grief for the same thing - there is a family outside of the BRF. They love and want to spend time with them.



It is the UK media who create waves - not the people connected to the BRF or the BRF themselves. I'm sure Sophie sees her family as does Tim Lawrence. But the UK media aren't interested so we dont read about it.



Other royal families cope and so does other media - good example is the family of Maxima, or Mette-Marit.



UK media making a crisis out of nothing (or trying to sell newspapers)


There is a difference between being away from home when your working and being with your partner/ family when your not ..to working with your partner and then going to your own home after.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

SElizabeth 02-02-2015 08:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cepe (Post 1746324)
It is an isolated statement. I spent 4 yrs working away from home - only coming home at weekends. Many people would class that as living apart.
People in the military do that as well; so do business people travelling the world; pilots; maritime workers; people on ships; etc etc.

I dont speak for everyone but the time I spent away from home made coming home better and now we are together fulltime - its great.

What is missing in these statements is balance: so when people read it think who else does this? etc.

For the first time in royal history a senior member of the royal family had a life before joining the BRF - and they are making room for them outside of the formal life of the BRF. Camilla's children and grandchildren are used to Ray Mill and Charles and Camilla have agreed how that is to be managed.

Catherine and William get grief for the same thing - there is a family outside of the BRF. They love and want to spend time with them.

It is the UK media who create waves - not the people connected to the BRF or the BRF themselves. I'm sure Sophie sees her family as does Tim Lawrence. But the UK media aren't interested so we dont read about it.

Other royal families cope and so does other media - good example is the family of Maxima, or Mette-Marit.

UK media making a crisis out of nothing (or trying to sell newspapers)

Extremely well said and very thoughtful.

Lady Nimue 02-02-2015 09:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cepe (Post 1746324)
For the first time in royal history a senior member of the royal family had a life before joining the BRF - and they are making room for them outside of the formal life of the BRF. Camilla's children and grandchildren are used to Ray Mill and Charles and Camilla have agreed how that is to be managed.

This is key, I think. :flowers: Well said.

Duke of Marmalade 02-03-2015 02:24 AM

Prince Charles and what he really thinks about Prince Andrew's 'sex slave' scandal | Daily Mail Online

I really hope that Charles will slim down the RF and concentrate of the core family: Himself & Camilla, WK & their children, Harry and his spouse.

royal rob 02-03-2015 02:44 AM

I think it a certainty to happen I'm sure the government would want it that way too.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

Iluvbertie 02-03-2015 03:05 AM

Why Harry - like Andrew he will only be the second son of the monarch with a new generation already here to replace him in the nation's affections.

royal rob 02-03-2015 03:27 AM

I think Will and Kate will only have the 2 children as appears to be the norm now in the royal family so if Harry has the same that's a nice amount of royals. The Queen blew things out a bit by having 4


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

Duke of Marmalade 02-03-2015 04:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iluvbertie (Post 1746428)
Why Harry - like Andrew he will only be the second son of the monarch with a new generation already here to replace him in the nation's affections.

As long as the Cambridge children are old enough for duty.

Iluvbertie 02-03-2015 04:46 AM

By the time Harry has finished in the army - and he has indicated that he wants to stay the distance - so another nearly 20 years or so before he can be full-time. By then George will be 21 and so definitely old enough. Harry, by then will already be the 'joke' younger brother with the same sort of negative press that Margaret and Andrew were getting by then - and they were both more popular than their older siblings in their 20s - more fun, more charismatic - just like Harry.

Lumutqueen 02-03-2015 04:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duke of Marmalade (Post 1746414)
Prince Charles and what he really thinks about Prince Andrew's 'sex slave' scandal | Daily Mail Online

I really hope that Charles will slim down the RF and concentrate of the core family: Himself & Camilla, WK & their children, Harry and his spouse.


So with a slimdown monarchy; we loose out on seeing the RF. 8 people are not going to be able to do the pint of engagements the RF does now. It's not logical.


Also, both William and Catherine have said they want a large family, so they're not going to stick to two children.

Skippyboo 02-03-2015 05:09 AM

The Monarchy under Charles
 
There is a glaring error in the article where it talks about Edward wanting to be Duke of Edinburgh and Sophie wanting to be made a Royal Duchess like Camilla and Kate before the Queen passes so she would be on equal footing.

In order for Edward to get his father's Dukedom both his parents have to pass. Since Charles will inherit the title when Philip dies and it merges with the Crown when his mother dies then it can be reissued.

Plus in every Richard Kay article there is Camillia bashing. This one claims that both Sophie and Kate don't have a great relationship with Camilla. Even though there doesn't appear evidence to support either claim.

The Royal family will reduce its size naturally. The Gloucesters and Kents will not be replaced by their children and no formal role for the Wessex kids or the York girls.

George is at least 20 years away from Royal duties. He still needs to grow up, go to school and university and then spend time in the service first so he only comes into play towards the end of his grandfather's reign sort of like William is now.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

Duke of Marmalade 02-03-2015 05:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lumutqueen (Post 1746453)
So with a slimdown monarchy; we loose out on seeing the RF. 8 people are not going to be able to do the pint of engagements the RF does now. It's not logical.


To be honest, I think that will change as well within the next decades. There will be changes to both scope and size.

miss whirley 02-03-2015 06:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ROYAL NORWAY (Post 1746332)
Yes, even the telegraph.



I fear that the press will be even worse in their behavior towards Charles when he becomes king. They have also become more critical of William and Catherine.

The press has always been rough on Commoner Catherine. Even during the honeymoon phase all the compliments were backhanded. Or the praise was so deliberately over the top, that the writer knew the readers would roll their eyes. A very passive-aggressive formula that the press follows. The blue bloods who own the papers are very exclusive and sly that way.

I actually think they'll be lenient on Charles once he takes the throne. Right now they are posturing, once they think he respects their power and influence they'll let up. It's all a power game with the press. They want the BRF to bow to their whims.

And yes, the Telegraph has become an embarrassment on the same footing as The Daily Mail and The Express. It doesn't help that in recent years they've mainly hired ex-Mail employees.

Rudolph 02-03-2015 07:05 AM

Charles, the thoughtful prince - Telegraph
Quote:

The Prince of Wales has borne that title for almost 57 years, during which time he has thought deeply about the crown he will wear and the kingdom he will serve. To listen to some of his observers, the fact that this reflective man has well-developed views about important matters is something to regret and even fear. Anyone taking a more considered view, though, will see things differently.

First, note that we are debating what sort of king Prince Charles will be, not whether he will be king. In an age of populist cynicism about British institutions, this is testament to the remarkable stability of the monarchy, the historic achievement of the Queen.

Second, Prince Charles has spent so many years contemplating this country and his place in it as a consequence of his mother’s own long service – something that should inspire celebration and gratitude, not the cavilling lamentation of those who fret about “meddling” from the throne.

The Prince’s thoughts during his long period of reflection do not raise the constitutional questions his detractors snidely and feebly suggest. And if Prince Charles does not reign precisely as his mother has, that is not automatically a bad thing. The monarchy may be a symbol of continuity, but it has never been preserved in aspic, instead evolving gradually along with the nation and its people. Indeed, attempting to reign as a carbon copy of his mother instead of being true to himself would surely not be the best course for the prince and his kingdom.

The succession, and the Prince’s sensible preparations for it, will inevitably prompt debate about crown and constitution. But supporters have nothing to fear from that. The argument for the monarchy, like that great institution itself, will surely triumph and emerge even stronger than before.


Marty91charmed 02-03-2015 07:10 AM

:previous: Completely agree!

miss whirley 02-03-2015 07:32 AM

I once read a description in the late 90's that said, "Charles will be the most thoughtful and aware King the UK has ever had when he is crowned". I thought it was a apt statement, and I still remember it almost 20 years later.

USAPolitics 02-03-2015 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lumutqueen (Post 1746453)
So with a slimdown monarchy; we loose out on seeing the RF. 8 people are not going to be able to do the pint of engagements the RF does now. It's not logical.


Also, both William and Catherine have said they want a large family, so they're not going to stick to two children.


And long term, Charles and Camilla will be gone, Sophie and Edward will be aged. Just don't see any other outcome than William calling on the help of his cousins Beatrice and Eugenie. Perhaps not now or for a very long time, but seems he will definitely have to.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:06 AM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021
Jelsoft Enterprises