The Royal Forums

The Royal Forums (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/)
-   Current Events Archive (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f166/)
-   -   Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall Current Events 6: October 4-16, 2005 (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f166/prince-of-wales-and-duchess-of-cornwall-current-events-6-october-4-16-2005-a-7432.html)

Lindy80 10-06-2005 07:23 PM

She looks great! Her hair's a little shorter too, which is fresher looking.

Alisa 10-06-2005 09:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HMQueenElizabethII
The Duchess of Cornwall attended the Opening of The Eleven Gallery in Central London yesterday 5th of October .The Gallery is run by her daughter Laura Parker-Bowles:
The skirt is something in really new style on The Duchess, she does looks really cool on that dress.
Pics from Abacausa Press and Isifa:

She looks really nice! I like the skirt.

caroline mathilda 10-06-2005 11:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elspeth
It still just says "early November" on the Prince's website. This is rather late for the dates not to be known; early November is just a month away.

President Bush's press secretary, Scott McClellan, announced today that Charles and Camilla will have lunch and dinner at the White House on November 2nd.
(source: USA Today)

Elspeth 10-06-2005 11:56 PM

Well, I hope they remember to inform Clarence House, which doesn't seem to know the dates (unless they're being withheld deliberately).

caroline mathilda 10-07-2005 12:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elspeth
Well, I hope they remember to inform Clarence House, which doesn't seem to know the dates (unless they're being withheld deliberately).

Hello Elspeth,
This date is official from the White House in Washington and is also printed in many of the big city dailies here. Their other tour dates in the US are vague. This may be secondary to security which is reported to be tight as there are murmurings of potential Anti- C&C protests by Diana supporters who are hostile to the couple.

Also the New York subway has been reportedly (allegedly) targeted by terrorists. So we are on heightened alert here Stateside so C&C's itinerary may be not published too far in advance.

CM

ysbel 10-07-2005 12:37 AM

Michael Kinsley of the Washington Post had this interesting commentary about Charles and Camilla.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...040801799.html

a quote from the article

Quote:

There's no special magic about a prince approaching middle age who marries a young society beauty. And the more we learn about Princess Diana, the less magical that story seems. And, of course, the abdication tale remains far from inspiring.
Now, what about a prince who marries a young beauty out of his sense of duty, who waits for decades until a car crash frees him and then marries the woman he really loves -- a woman whom almost everyone else in the world finds remarkably unattractive; a woman he didn't need to marry in order to enjoy her companionship as he had for decades; a woman his family and the world didn't want him to marry. And what about a woman who watched her longtime lover marry a much younger beauty; who married someone else herself out of some kind of bitter realism; who fell in love with a young future king but is marrying an old weirdo who very likely won't ever occupy the throne; a woman who is inviting a lifetime of public mockery for every aspect of her public appearance. . . . Now that is a love story.
He says a lot more but he ends by saying that: .....Camilla and Charles [is] the greatest love story of the 21st century, so far.

ysbel 10-07-2005 12:51 AM

Here's another article I found about Camilla's style:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...-2005Apr2.html

quote from the article

Quote:

The public is judging Parker Bowles, too. And if there is anything that her clothing has said over the years, it is that she will not be swayed by public perceptions. Rare is the person who can withstand withering public scrutiny without trying to put a more pleasing gloss on her appearance. But Parker Bowles's appearance over the years has shown a more natural evolution than concerted effort.

Warren 10-07-2005 03:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harry's polo shirt
The books we saw were beautiful!! the artistry and design was amazing. I was suprised that the queen owns those Devinchi (sp?) drawings--they are the most recognised and famous drawings.

The Queen has the largest collection in the world of Leonardo Da Vinci sketches and drawings. They are kept at Windsor Castle.
.

Princejohnny25 10-07-2005 05:51 AM

I Queen has a pretty cool collection. I like Millas hiar shorter. It is fresher and much more flattering. I just wish she would choose a more lively hair color. I would like to see a really light brown/dark blond color on her. There are security threats against New York so they have to be cautious. I cant believe people have time in their lives or are that obsessed to protest thier visit because a long dead women said one line about her " there were three of us in this marriage, so it was a bit crowded." Diana took half the blame which means charles and camilla take 25% each or it is what it really was and just charles and diana were not right to be married toghether. Those protesters need a life. Does anybody know how long their in the US. Will it be a whirlwind tour or more than a week.

Warren 10-07-2005 09:18 AM

Whew, we covered a bit of ground in that post!
I trust we won't get a continuing debate on blame apportionment following Princejonnhy25's interesting and novel percentage calculation:
Quote:

Originally Posted by Princejonnhy25
Diana took half the blame which means Charles and Camilla take 25% each...


ysbel 10-07-2005 09:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Princejonnhy25
Those protesters need a life.

I agree, although I haven't heard of any C&C protests planned that caroline mathilda is referring to.

But it seems that Camilla has a very strong sense of who she is regardless of what other people think of her.

While I don't like everything that she has done, I do admire that. Its very rare to have such a strong self-identity that you are unaffected by other's perceptions of you. In fact I wish I had that.

Warren 10-07-2005 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ysbel
...I haven't heard of any C&C protests planned that caroline mathilda is referring to.

What exactly would they be protesting about? That Camilla is not Diana? Surely that's self-evident?
.

BeatrixFan 10-07-2005 10:12 AM

Re:
 
Exactly Warren!

Bawling at Camilla won't ressurect St Diana - it will show that those who protest will worship any temporary Gods that enter the world stage without having a clue what the person is really like.

I'm sure that Her Royal Highness will be extremely popular in America - she's elegant, charming, attractive, sweet natured and she'll be Queen one day.

What gets my goat is that these Diana fanatics have taken it upon themselves to spout utter rubbish in an attempt to 'keep her memory alive'. As unpopular as this will sound, why are we keeping her memory alive? Do we do the same for Queen Mary or Queen Alexandra, who in my humble opinion did a damn sight more for the monarchy than Diana ever did. Why can't she fade into the history books which will eventually happen whether people like it or not.

The only people who should be concerned with remembering her and 'keeping her memory' is her close family and of course, her sons. The rest of the world needs to move on and stop worshipping a woman who was no Saint. She was a temporary God in a world obsessed by fame and fortune.
The Duchess of Cornwall is Princess of Wales and will be Queen. They can stage all the protests they like, but the Monarchy is not run by commitee and nor should it be.

What makes certain sectors of the community believe that it is anything to do with them to criticise the relationship of a future King and a dead ex-wife? If Prince Charles and the Duchess are carrying out their official duties well then they are doing their jobs properly - the affairs of their marriage bed are private and have nothing to do with anyone but themselves.

Alicky 10-07-2005 10:44 AM

I just can't believe how personally these people are taking the whole thing. What are they like in person I wonder?

Alicky 10-07-2005 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeatrixFan
What gets my goat is that these Diana fanatics have taken it upon themselves to spout utter rubbish in an attempt to 'keep her memory alive'. As unpopular as this will sound, why are we keeping her memory alive?

Not only why, but how do they think that bawling at Camilla will do so?

Eilish 10-07-2005 11:08 AM

BeatrixFan,

You took the words right out of my mouth. Excellent and eloquent post!

Lady Marmalade 10-07-2005 11:41 AM

I think part of the reason why people have talked about protesting is because Diana was hugely popular in the U.S. and Charles was not. For the most part he was seen as the bad guy who was first to cheat in his marriage and then added insult to injury by marrying his mistress.

While many in the U.S. are fascintated by royalty in general, it is the British Royal Family who always gets the most press coverage here for anything they do.

If I said the Queen....people would respond...oh you mean Queen Elizabeth...never thinking there are other queens.

I think the view here in may respects is Diana was beloved greatly for her modern approach to royalty and for her glamour and youth.

In the U.S. as well, and this just maybe my view, so please forgive, marrying the woman who broke up your marriage is still not viewed as socially acceptable no matter the circumstances.

But, I along with all of you, CANNOT WAIT, to see them here.

Another tidbit is Charles has been openly critical of President Bush at times so that relationship will be interesting to see.

BeatrixFan 10-07-2005 12:04 PM

Re:
 
You took the words right out of my mouth. Excellent and eloquent post

Thanks!!

If I said the Queen....people would respond...oh you mean Queen Elizabeth...never thinking there are other queens

I've noticed that alot too! Sometimes I hear American TV Presenters talk about the Queen as if Elizabeth II was still the USA's Head of State and not Bush.

In the U.S. as well, and this just maybe my view, so please forgive, marrying the woman who broke up your marriage is still not viewed as socially acceptable no matter the circumstances

I think we British are a bit strange. Years ago, Divorcees were the scum of society - now the children of the Queen are all divorcees apart from Prince Edward. America isn't as progressive in its attitudes to sex and relationships as we are I think. But I may be wrong. The whole Janet Jackson nipple thing - over here nobody would have flinched. In Britain, two people can lay on the floor and indulge in passionate love-making and nobody would look up from their newspaper but jump the queue and there's outrage.

Another tidbit is Charles has been openly critical of President Bush at times so that relationship will be interesting to see

Joan Rivers was on a radio station here and said how suprised she was as to how anti-Bush Britain is. She said that in the USA, its the general idea that we love Bush and that Britain and the USA are the strongest of allies. Sadly, not true at all. If that is true, Prince Charles is sharing the opinions of many.

caroline mathilda 10-07-2005 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Warren
What exactly would they be protesting about? That Camilla is not Diana? Surely that's self-evident?
.

The "protests" I was referring to were found when I was reading through some of the online US newspapers. Nothing huge or organized; probably all talk. The articles were just saying how some folks still are not happy with the C&C marriage and are still Diana supporters in this "post-Diana" era.

As an American, my read on the "mood" here towards C&C will either be indifference or mild curiosity. IMO, in most quarters there is not enough interest to generate outright hostility. William and Harry are actually the favourite British Royals and generate the greatest buzz right now.

Caroline Mathilda

ysbel 10-07-2005 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lady Marmalade
I think part of the reason why people have talked about protesting is because Diana was hugely popular in the U.S. and Charles was not. For the most part he was seen as the bad guy who was first to cheat in his marriage and then added insult to injury by marrying his mistress.

I think you have a point, iowabelle. I continue though to be amazed at the hypocrisy of people's attitudes. Charles' and Diana's marriage is not the first to be affected by an affair. Several marriages in the papers have broken up that are far worse. Just take the Brad Pitt/Jennifer Aniston/Angelina Jolie scenario. Even among royal watchers, the same people who condemned Charles and Camilla have glossed over Fergie's dalliances with that Texan. And Prince Andrew was really and seriously hurt by that infidelity. But I guess Andrew's hurt isn't real or at least important to some.

This is just my opinion only, but I see a degree of selfishness with the idolization of Diana. Somebody here once mentioned that she would have been better off if she hadn't married Charles and someone else responded that if she hadn't married Charles we wouldn't have had her to love. That is extremely selfish I think.

People identified with her and felt sorry for her but if she hadn't had so many troubles and she hadn't been so beautiful, she wouldn't have been in the papers so much for people to read about. The tabloids fed off her troubles. And if there hadn't been so many people willing to shell out money for the latest magazine with her picture on the cover and latest personal crises, she wouldn't have been chased by a posse of photographers into that Paris tunnel which killed her.

It was as if people needed an idol to identify and feel sorry for to project their own fantasies about without any regard of how that idolization would affect the object of their adoration. Basically the idolization ended up killing her.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:55 PM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020
Jelsoft Enterprises