General News about Joachim, Marie and Family Part 6: January 2021 - December 2023

[Archduchess Zelia]

I do wish they would stop it with the victim narrative. It's so unnecessary that they keep reinforcing the idea that boo-hoo we're perfect scapegoats when the vast majority of the criticism they've received has been self-inflicted. And it's especially unnecessary since the public mood around Joachim in Denmark has really changed after he did his very popular documentary series, and also after his blood clot. I don't understand their (and seemingly especially Marie's) need to wallow around in this mentality instead of building on the positive attitude towards them.

The "Nothing is defined [for the spare]" part is also slightly puzzling to me considering, how less than a year ago, they went on record basically implying they were forced to move to France. So it's wrong when they have room to define their own roles but when others are trying to define it for them it's also wrong?

I do, however, think what Joachim said about Harry and Meghan was very lovely. Don't appreciate the media's apparent intention to ask every royal available about H&M (IIRC Marie's also been asked before – gave a bit of a different answer that I can't remember off the top of my head) but Joachim's answer is definitely the most sensible one I've heard yet.

And poor little Henrik. A sensitive soul like his cousin Vincent. But what Marie said about installing confidence in the kids is very reassuring. (And I'm not surprised Athena is already a pillar of confidence – the difference in character between Henrik and Athena reminds me a lot of the difference between their twin cousins.)

Oh, and I can appreciate that Joachim and Marie don't hide behind "courtiers" and "royal sources" when they want to get their points across. I don't always agree with said points but I think it's commendable that they're actually taking responsibility for what they're putting out there.

 

[Nordic]

Breaking news....
https://www.bt.dk/royale/aerlig-prins-joachim-jeg-oplever-samme-utilfredshed-som-min-far

 

[Somebody]

Breaking news....
https://www.bt.dk/royale/aerlig-prins-joachim-jeg-oplever-samme-utilfredshed-som-min-far

I guess you are still busy writing a short summary of what the breaking news is ?

Edit: Went to Google translate for a translation; and it is just writing about the piece in Vanity Fair and stressing the point that I stressed above about 'dissatisfaction'.

 

[polyesco]

I do wish they would stop it with the victim narrative. It's so unnecessary that they keep reinforcing the idea that boo-hoo we're perfect scapegoats when the vast majority of the criticism they've received has been self-inflicted. And it's especially unnecessary since the public mood around Joachim in Denmark has really changed after he did his very popular documentary series, and also after his blood clot. I don't understand their (and seemingly especially Marie's) need to wallow around in this mentality instead of building on the positive attitude towards them.

The "Nothing is defined [for the spare]" part is also slightly puzzling to me considering, how less than a year ago, they went on record basically implying they were forced to move to France. So it's wrong when they room to define their own roles but when others are trying to define it for them it's also wrong?

I agree. Their multiple interviews over the past year or so have been confusing. This narrative of painting themselves as the victims, through no fault of their own, is tiring. Joachim had turned a leaf with his documentaries. Marie, well, Im still puzzled with her work.

I do, however, think what Joachim said about Harry and Meghan was very lovely. Don't appreciate the media's apparent intention to ask every royal available about H&M (IIRC Marie's also been asked before – gave a bit of a different answer that I can't remember off the top of my head) but Joachim's answer is definitely the most sensible one I've heard yet.....

Marie said something along the lines of 'Complaining is useless'. But then goes on to complain a little in a future interview.

Breaking news....
https://www.bt.dk/royale/aerlig-prins-joachim-jeg-oplever-samme-utilfredshed-som-min-far

and right before Christian's confirmation
I do help Joachim finds his niche. He has some talents and I hope he continues exploring them. But at 51 and 45, lets also take some personal responsibility.

 

[Blog Real]

Not her place to say that

Truth. The one who has to talk about her children's future is Princess Mary and Prince Frederik.

 

[Muhler]

Joachim is pointing out that he sense a similar (public) displeasing with him, that is comparable to what PH felt.

- I actually agree with him. There is a tendency IMO, for quite a few to shall we say vilify him. In the sense that whatever he does, say or behave it isn't right. - He's snob, he's arrogant, he's cold - he is all sorts of things.

And when he has had failures in life, which he undeniably has, there is very little sympathy from some people. When he talks about his failures, from his point of view there is a tendency among to dismiss it outright as whining.

We can debate endlessly as to whether he is right or not, but that how he feels it.
Royals are human too, and that includes the very human feeling of sometimes feeling sorry for yourself.

One more thing: Why shouldn't our Marie say something that is official and has been official for years: That apart from Christian, none of M&F's children will get an apanage and they will have to make a living on their own.
That has been mentioned very often here on TRF. - In fact I'm one of the few who is convinced that at least Isabella will have some sort of official role as a royal - and as such either get an apanage or have a public expense account.
Leading politicians have talked about, the DRF have talked about, the press talk about it, people talk about it. - So why not Marie?

 

[Somebody]

Joachim is pointing out that he sense a similar (public) displeasing with him, that is comparable to what PH felt.

- I actually agree with him. There is a tendency IMO, for quite a few to shall we say vilify him. In the sense that whatever he does, say or behave it isn't right. - He's snob, he's arrogant, he's cold - he is all sorts of things.

And when he has had failures in life, which he undeniably has, there is very little sympathy from some people. When he talks about his failures, from his point of view there is a tendency among to dismiss it outright as whining.

We can debate endlessly as to whether he is right or not, but that how he feels it.
Royals are human too, and that includes the very human feeling of sometimes feeling sorry for yourself.

One more thing: Why shouldn't our Marie say something that is official and has been official for years: That apart from Christian, none of M&F's children will get an apanage and they will have to make a living on their own.
That has been mentioned very often here on TRF. - In fact I'm one of the few who is convinced that at least Isabella will have some sort of official role as a royal - and as such either get an apanage or have a public expense account.
Leading politicians have talked about, the DRF have talked about, the press talk about it, people talk about it. - So why not Marie?

Why would she talk about it?

She presents it as 'CP Frederik and CP Mary have decided that...', which is very different from what you are describing: it is official that none of their children will get an apanage. Was that truly something that the CP couple could decide? And what are the consequences of not receiving an apanage; do they have no role whatsoever and can they do as they please? Or will they have a limited role but won't be completely funded (still, why would she talk about it? There was no reason). I am not sure that all of that is set in stone and I don't recall any official communication on what their roles as not-sponsored siblings of a future monarch will be.

Marie's statement seems to go further than earlier discussions... She is not talking about 'an apanage', she is talking about 'the children will lead a life as they see fit' - which is also different than what you are saying, i.e., that it is likely that Isabella will have some kind of official role as the spare.

However, I would be interested in reading any specifics that Frederik and Mary previously said about the future of their younger children (probably in a different topic). Thanks in advance!

N.B. Joachim is right that it isn't the easiest way as their role is less fixed but some siblings have found very fulfilling lives enjoying a lot of the privileges of being a member of the royal family, without the burden of being the monarch. Others seem to have had more trouble accepting that it is their sibling that is (to become) the monarch and not they themselves (although they might not like the responsibility and limitations that come with it - most of the prestige is already there; although they will always be 'second' to their sibling). And some families have dealt with it better than others: expecting siblings to first support the monarchy and then figure it out for themselves when they are much older doesn't seem to be a good way of going about it.

 

[Muhler]

In what way does it differ?

Of course M&F have decided. It's their children.
It wouldn't be the official policy if M&F was in total disagreement. Especially as they are going to be in charge within a foreseeable span of years.
Then some other phrase would have been used.

ADDED:
Yes, they are going to have a life as they see fit - if they are not going to have an apanage and as such no royal role. Unless you expect them to work for free.
As for Isabella - that is my opinion. I believe there will be a need for Isabella in a royal role, just in case and when needed. She may do a Benedikte, but I believe Isabella will be around and as such get some money from the state.

Try turn it around: "J&M refuse to comment on whether M&F's children will get money from the state when they grow up!" - "Are they going to get an apanage anyway?" - "Is there a change of plans?"
So why not stick to official policy?

Suggest you do a search: Prins Chistian apanage
It won't be difficult for you to find official references.
https://www.dr.dk/nyheder/indland/k...vi-forventer-kun-aarpenge-til-prins-christian
https://www.berlingske.dk/samfund/kongehuset-forventer-kun-aarpenge-til-prins-christian
https://underholdning.tv2.dk/royale...-boerneboern-de-er-noedt-til-at-knokle-ekstra
https://www.kristeligt-dagblad.dk/liv-sjael/selvrealisering-tvinger-kongehuse-til-skaere-ned
- And it explains why I believe in the distinct possibility of Isabella getting an apanage.

 

[Somebody]

In what way does it differ?

Of course M&F have decided. It's their children.
It wouldn't be the official policy if M&F was in total disagreement. Especially as they are going to be in charge within a foreseeable span of years.
Then some other phrase would have been used.

Could they really decide that the government was going to fund their children for the next 80+ years? Wow, that is quite impressive for a royal family. I would think something like that would have to be agreed upon with the government; and would not be a personal decision of the future king and queen that will cost the state millions for decades to come.

ADDED:
Yes, they are going to have a life as they see fit - if they are not going to have an apanage and as such no royal role. Unless you expect them to work for free.
As for Isabella - that is my opinion. I believe there will be a need for Isabella in a royal role, just in case and when needed. She may do a Benedikte, but I believe Isabella will be around and as such get some money from the state.

If there are or might be certain expectations of Isabella, that means that she cannot live a life as she sees fit. She would need to find something that works with both being the spare and building a life of her own. A delicate but not impossible balance.

Try turn it around: "J&M refuse to comment on whether M&F's children will get money from the state when they grow up!" - "Are they going to get an apanage anyway?" - "Is there a change of plans?"
So why not stick to official policy?

But she wasn't asked about Frederik and Mary's children! They were asked about their own children. Joachim answered that question (and wasn't even done answering the question as after Marie's interruption he continued talking about his eldest sons) and than Marie felt the need to start talking about her nieces and nephew for some unknown reason. So, your scenario does not apply.

Thanks for the links, will look at it!

 

[Muhler]

As there was no official political demand for not giving M&F's children an apanage, except Christian, yes.
Because the DRF decided to be proactive and state, very clearly, as described in the links I posted, that there is no, and never has been an expectation of Isabella, Vincent and Josephine getting an apanage.
- That was a decision.

Okay, Marie shouldn't answer a question, she hasn't been asked, I take it that's what you mean?
Well, she did. Big deal. - Still, it's official stance of the DRF, so the problem is...?

 

[Somebody]

Okay, Marie shouldn't answer a question, she hasn't been asked, I take it that's what you mean?
Well, she did. Big deal. - Still, it's official stance of the DRF, so the problem is...?

No, I am afraid you don't understand and I don't think going back and forth much longer well help us better understand each other - so will try to explain it one more time and leave it at that.

That was not my issue -nor that of others who had the same response about it not being her place- (that's the issue you made of it as a way of justifying her behavior) but that makes it even worse. She shouldn't start talking about (the future of) other people's children, that's all.

 

[Blog Real]

About the Interview

https://princessmariescloset.com/20...covid-or-my-stroke-its-to-live-in-the-moment/

[/URL]

The interview is interesting. I liked Prince Joachim's response when asked about Harry and Meghan. He gave the correct answer. But I don't understand why the press, whenever it interviews a royal member, asks about Harry and Meghan.
Prince Joachim also mentioned what the older children are doing. Félix wants to pursue a military career and Nikolai is studying economics and business.
I also liked what Prince Joachim said about Chateau de Cayx.

 

[Isabelle de France]

Joachim is pointing out that he sense a similar (public) displeasing with him, that is comparable to what PH felt.

- I actually agree with him. There is a tendency IMO, for quite a few to shall we say vilify him. In the sense that whatever he does, say or behave it isn't right. - He's snob, he's arrogant, he's cold - he is all sorts of things.

And when he has had failures in life, which he undeniably has, there is very little sympathy from some people. When he talks about his failures, from his point of view there is a tendency among to dismiss it outright as whining.

We can debate endlessly as to whether he is right or not, but that how he feels it.
Royals are human too, and that includes the very human feeling of sometimes feeling sorry for yourself.

One more thing: Why shouldn't our Marie say something that is official and has been official for years: That apart from Christian, none of M&F's children will get an apanage and they will have to make a living on their own.
That has been mentioned very often here on TRF. - In fact I'm one of the few who is convinced that at least Isabella will have some sort of official role as a royal - and as such either get an apanage or have a public expense account.
Leading politicians have talked about, the DRF have talked about, the press talk about it, people talk about it. - So why not Marie?

Joachim seemed so unloved and unhappy a few years ago... he was constantly mocked, criticized, always compared to his brother in a negative way...
i think Marie helped him to open up and restore his confidence... he can now show himself as he is... and talk about his joys and sorrows like anyone else... despite critics, Marie has at least one quality, make Joachim happy...

 

[Muhler]

There has of course been reactions to this interview, as there usually is when a member of the DRF gives an interview.
I noticed four before going to bed. Two in serious papers and two in the tabloid BT.
Three of them focused on Joachim talking about and to some extent comparing himself to PH, in regards to the way he has been portrayed by the public.
The fourth focus on how the children are doing and that Henrik has been teased about him being royal, and that he didn't like that.

https://www.bt.dk/royale/11-aarige-...-let-med-sin-titel-han-kan-ikke-lide-at-blive

In this post I will focus on the comments from this article, because I too find what was said somewhat remarkable.
https://www.bt.dk/royale/bts-royale-korrespondent-prins-joachim-rasler-med-sablen

BT's royal correspondent, Jacob Heinel Jensen, comments:
"I very much notice that Prince Joachim label his situation as complicated and you sure must say that he turn up the drama himself by comparing his own situation with that of Prince Henrik.
That's quite remarkable, as Prince Herik's problems with his role in DRF has been the most talked about conflict during the 2000's. When you pull the Prince Henrik card yourself, it's because you want to say something serious."
Jacob Heinel Jensen goes on to notice that this to him is another indication that J&M being posted to Paris, wasn't perhaps the most desired let alone happy thing for them. Something that has been said before, so combined with this recent interview this indicates that what is said is meant seriously.
That Joachim on top of that call Harry for brave (bold?) and show understanding emphasize what is said about J&M's current situation.
Jacob Heinel Jensen believe that what J&M is saying must be annoying for the rest of the DRF. (In particular QMII I'd say, I doubt Frederik had much if anything to do with Joachim being posted to Paris. That IMO was political.)
Jacob Heinel Jensen ends by saying:
"I can only commend their honesty. I think it's good they have started to speak more honestly about the things that went on in connection with moving to Paris. It really suits and it helps to nuance the debate. I hope they will continue."

---------

Okay, before commenting on this, let me make my own stand very clear:
I do sympathize with Joachim in regards to how he has been treated by the press and considerable parts of the public. - I do however believe the timing is off. Joachim had managed to acquire a lot of public goodwill in connection with a TV-portrait of him a few years ago, and not least in regards to the historical series he narrated. - I fear this may result in a setback.

I do not sympathize much with Joachim de facto being ordered to Paris.
That's part of the package if you are a career soldier. When king and country calls, you go.

I can well sympathize with our Marie. She had settled well in DK, found friends here and had her protections and now she - and her children - were being uprooted for several years at least. Without her having any say in this.
And it has been a stressful period. She has pretty much on her own had to manage the practical details about settling in in their home there, as well as dealing with the children settling at a new school and all the other transition problems in regards to that.
On top of that came Corona and Joachim's stroke.
All that with relatively little support from Joachim, who was away all day six days a week.
- Many other wives face similar challenges and she may not yet have realized how much stronger and mature this will have made her.

Now for the article.
I think the comparison to H&M is apt.
Without going into details about H&M and what I think about what they are doing, I am in no doubt whatsoever, that H&M genuinely feel, repeat feel, that they have been wronged.
I also believe that J&M honestly feel they have been steamrolled into a life they did not choose themselves, nor had any say in deciding.
- Pointing that out in public is a risky thing though, because just as with H&M this can backfire in regards to the press and the public. Albeit hardly on anything nearly at the same scale.
But when it comes to feelings people often don't act rationally. And they tend to view things from their perspective only.

And that I think is important to have in the back of the mind, when discussing this.

-----------

Having said that, I will sit most of this discussion out, because I won't have much time for the TRF over the next couple of days.
I have more - pleasant - things to do. ?

 

[valeas]

"My father experienced the same dissatisfaction and never managed to get a clarification of his place in the royal family."
This tells all, doesn't it? There are simply some who are unlucky in making choices and maybe Joachim is one of those, but to blame his royal roots for all things went wrong in his life is a bit too easy.
The choices he made in the past were his, now France was an offer from the gov, a positive minded adult would simply make the best of it and be thankful for the chance. I mean he is not 22 and has tried a lot so far, still searching his role and still complaining.

Every time they give an interview I ask myself WHY ?

 

[Archduchess Zelia]

I agree. Their multiple interviews over the past year or so have been confusing. This narrative of painting themselves as the victims, through no fault of their own, is tiring. Joachim had turned a leaf with his documentaries. Marie, well, Im still puzzled with her work.

Yup. I genuinely think they'd come along way by admitting their own (and their court's) faults instead of always pointing the finger at others. And most importantly, I think they benefit from moving on from this narrative altogether.

Joachim is pointing out that he sense a similar (public) displeasing with him, that is comparable to what PH felt (...)

That's not really what he's saying at all though. He's comparing himself to Henrik in terms of his role within the DRF being undefined. Not in terms of the public's feelings towards either of them.

We can debate endlessly as to whether he is right or not, but that how he feels it.
Royals are human too, and that includes the very human feeling of sometimes feeling sorry for yourself.

We got that. We all got that that's how they feel the first 3-4 times they talked about it. But what on earth is the point of incessantly bringing it up in every interview they do? Why choose to remain stuck in that narrative instead of building on the sympathy he/they enjoyed post the documentary series and his illness?

One more thing: Why shouldn't our Marie say something that is official and has been official for years: That apart from Christian, none of M&F's children will get an apanage and they will have to make a living on their own.
That has been mentioned very often here on TRF. - In fact I'm one of the few who is convinced that at least Isabella will have some sort of official role as a royal - and as such either get an apanage or have a public expense account.
Leading politicians have talked about, the DRF have talked about, the press talk about it, people talk about it. - So why not Marie?

I think it's very rich to equate what Marie said with the DRF's statement on apanage. The court said that the only one of M&F's four children who is guaranteed apanage is Christian. (Contrary to popular interpretation, they never said he'd be the only one to receive apanage.) You can't derive anything from that statement about Isabella, Vincent or Josephine's respective futures. Only Christian's.

Marie, on the other hand, explicitly commented on their future and what M&F have "decided" for them. That's not the same, it's not just echoing what the DRF has already said.

Okay, Marie shouldn't answer a question, she hasn't been asked, I take it that's what you mean?

I think it's pretty obvious that that is not what @Somebody meant. The point is that it isn't Marie's place to even venture onto the subject of Isabella, Vincent and Josephine's future. That's not to say that she can't speak about her nieces and nephew(s) but that it's inappropriate for her to comment on something M&F have never commented on themselves. And I understand you disagree but that's no reason to deliberately misinterpret other people's words.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

I think it's pretty obvious that that is not what @Somebody meant. [...] And I understand you disagree but that's no reason to deliberately misinterpret other people's words.

I think it is obvious that Muhler was not deliberately misinterpreting other people's words.

 

[Archduchess Zelia]

I think it is obvious that Muhler was not deliberately misinterpreting other people's words.

Really?! Well, then can you perhaps help identify the part in the below where @Somebody 1. was at all unclear about what they meant, and 2. wrote that Marie should only answer when asked? Oversimplifying the argument that this isn't a subject for Marie to comment on as oh so "Marie shouldn't answer a question, she hasn't been asked" is a textbook irrelevant conclusion.

But she wasn't asked about Frederik and Mary's children! They were asked about their own children. Joachim answered that question (and wasn't even done answering the question as after Marie's interruption he continued talking about his eldest sons) and than Marie felt the need to start talking about her nieces and nephew for some unknown reason.

Okay, Marie shouldn't answer a question, she hasn't been asked, I take it that's what you mean?

 

[Muhler]

Thank you, Archduchess Zelia.

I can always count on you to point out my ulterior motives - even those I didn't know I had.

But let's move ahead with the topic at hand, the interview with J&M - and specifically what Joachim said and meant.

First a little confession though. Having reread the interview I admit I misinterpreted Joachim's meaning. I belived he was referring to the public view of him being comparable to what PH experienced, when he instead referred to the problems of defining the role of being the spare being comparable to the problems PH had in defining his role as Prince Consort.
Sloppy reading on my part - I blame the government... ?

The reactions have been interesting.
The interview hasn't as far as I am aware not caused that big a stir, as I feared it would. It has rather been a mix of puzzlement and curiosity.

It can basically be boiled down to three questions:
A) What exactly are Joachim's misgivings about his role as the spare? And how does he propose they should be addressed?

B) What is the role of the spare in the Continental monarchies, that are currently being slimmed down?

C) What do we do with an adult spare, once the heir has secured the line of succession by having children?

These are questions that are relevant today and certainly in the future as well.
Let us take Isabella. At least on paper she is not expected to get an apanage - and as such not being a working royal either - unless she is expected to work for free.
Okay, Isabella finds a career and education of her own and settles in Australia, where she finds a husband and perhaps have a child.
Then at the age of say 33, something happens. Christian dies, is sterile, is gay, kill someone while speeding or is mentally or physically incapacitated.
So: Sorry, Isabella. You are up. You and your family are to move to Denmark and you are to be monarch and your child will be the heir one day.
Is that reasonable? Is it reasonable for the Danes? We have an unprepared heir/monarch who has been out of the limelight for fifteen years and to whom there a little connection. (She is a kind of Madeleine.)
Or is Isabella and her life a state affair? Just in case.
That means the government has a say in her education, her career, how she makes her living, whom she marries? It also means she has to stay relevant in eyes of the public. I.e. she is to have a public working profile.
What is Isabella's destiny? A working spare? Or a private person, who just happens to be in the Line of Succession?

The system with only giving apanage to the heir and only having the heir as a working royal, works fine - until it doesn't.

Okay, let us say that Isabella does a Joachim or a Benedikte. That is she is getting money from the state. Her training, how she earns a living and whom she marries is a state affair. Her life is public.
In this hypothetical case, fortunately nothing happens to Christian. He becomes crown prince, he marries, has children, and becomes monarch.
What about Isabella then?
Will she around the age of 45 be dismissed, because there is no longer a need for her? Will she be free to pursue her own dreams and ambitions? Or will she be expected to still carry out royal duties?

- This is applicable to all Continental monarchies today and in the future.
Carl-Phillip and Sophia, what is their future, once Estelle is an adult?
What is the role of Sofia once Leonor has children?
Alexia in the Netherlands? Is she free? Or is she a royal?

Joachim has always been the spare. And because his life as such was a state affair, he could not marry whomever he wanted. It required an OK from the Monarch and the government - or he would be out and as such potentially causing a crisis, because Frederik got married later on. Not to mention letting his brother and family down.
He could not pursue any career he wanted, he could not live anywhere he wanted. Instead he got a manor as a boy and told: "You are gonna be a farmer, whether you want to or not, whether you have the abilities or not and whether you are interested in such a life or not."
Okay, perhaps Joachim thought (we shall see) that now he was free to follow his dreams and abilities, since M&F have four healthy children. Then: "Sorry Joachim, king and country calls, you are off to Paris, whether you like it or not."

- Perhaps these are the misgivings Joachim has.
One thing is certain the DK press will not rest until Joachim has explained exactly what he meant in that interview.
And it sure is a risky thing! He may get sympathy and understanding for his arguments and start a debate about what we do with the spares in the future.
But there is also a very real risk of backfire. That Joachim leaves the impression of whining.

I will certainly look very much forward to what Joachim says next.

 

[Somebody]

It seems the Netherlands found a pretty sustainable solution: the spare (it ended up being Constantijn instead of Friso) is having his private career that is compatible with his status as royal (not having a commercial career for example helps) but he and his wife do some royal engagements each year and if they would have been called to the throne, they would have been able to do so (and they would have known that by now for about 10 years; so plenty of time to build up their profile as future monarchs and to start preparing their eldest child for her different future).

A somewhat comparable scenario is happening in Luxembourg; Felix and Claire are mostly living a private life; attend a few royal engagements a year; and if Guillaume and Stéphanie would not have had a child last year, they would most likely in a few years start to prepare Amalia for her future; and gradually take on more and more royal engagements.

So, imho it is perfectly possible. Most important: the spare (and spouse) must be willing to build up a professional life that is compatible with a limited number of royal engagements and the expectations that come with it. AND the spare should not be expected to first engage fully in royal engagements and next be 'dumped' when no longer needed (if they start out as full-time royals, they should remain full-time royals - or at least have that option).

 

[Muhler]

I agree.
Such a system would probably be the most workable.

BT has a piece today:
https://www.bt.dk/royale/bts-royale-korrespondent-jorden-braender-under-prins-joachim

It's a bit dramatic I think, since the journalist hints that J&M are pretty much being outed by the rest of the DRF, and perhaps not least by Mary, who de facto will be the one in charge of the DRF in the future.
I do not believe neither QMII nor M&F have the slightest interest or intention of outing J&M. That IMO is fiction.

But the essence of the article is this: Is it reasonable to basically sack Joachim (i.e. strip Joachim of his apanage, voluntarily or otherwise) when he has actually faithfully done his duty all life. Since his was born actually.
And is it reasonable of Joachim to expect that he is to keep his apanage, since he has kept his part of the bargain?
- Especially since he had no say at all. He was after all born into the role of being the spare.

 

[Somebody]

I agree.
Such a system would probably be the most workable.

(...)

But the essence of the article is this: Is it reasonable to basically sack Joachim (i.e. strip Joachim of his apanage, voluntarily or otherwise) when he has actually faithfully done his duty all life. Since his was born actually.
And is it reasonable of Joachim to expect that he is to keep his apanage, since he has kept his part of the bargaining?
- Especially since he had no say at all. He was after all born into the role of being the spare.

If Joachim would have been fine with finding a new semi-royal role and would find fulfillment in this way of life after serving the crown faithfully for so many years, I don't see why he would need to continue receiving the same amount of money - he should be paid for his regular job and probably receive a more limited amount to cover his royal duties.

However, it seems that Joachim and Marie never sought this but were forced into it (at least that is what they want us to believe). And it must stick as well that Alexandra received an apanage for about 15 years (if I am not mistaken) while not doing any royal duties, so from that perspective it would be rather harsh to take it away from Joachim at this point while he has less than 15 years left until retirement age.

So, in the current situation, the best thing would probably be for Joachim to offer to accept a reduced apanage, while finding a different solution for the next generation to avoid this from happening again. Alternatively, Joachim and Marie could return to Denmark and take up their royal roles at least while Margrethe is still queen and/or until Christian is done with his education - which most likely consists of both military training and university education (I guess that will take at least another 10 years or so); but somehow that seems less likely. A third alternative is of course to leave it as is: Joachim is working abroad but is 'paid' as if he is doing full-time royal duties. I am sure this will come up as a topic of debate from time to time but as long as Joachim and Marie can refrain from commenting on it, I think the DRF would manage.

 

[Muhler]

Sounds very sensible to me. - If indeed that is what Joachim's misgivings is about.

I can imagine one scenario that could have been the reason for some malcontent by J&M. And this is hypothetical.
That J&M when then moved to Copenhagen were led to expect that they would be free to have a reduced royal role, while finding their own feet and pursuing their own dreams. Making documentaries springs to mind.
And then after a while they might indeed accept a reduced apanage or give up their apanage, say when Christian turns eighteen or Frederik becomes king.
- And then all of a sudden. Sorry, new plans. Off to Paris.

I personally don't believe QMII had a big say in this. There was a wish by the Danish military, and politicians, to have Danish officers attending this advanced staff course. And I'm convinced a good deal of lobbying would have taken place behind the scenes, before President Macron extended the invitation.
I believe another Danish officer will attend this course when the Corona crisis has lifted. Joachim is the trailblazer.
As I have mentioned before in this thread, there is a close, and ever closer military cooperation between Denmark and France. Not least in Africa, but also in the Mediterranean.

Right now we can pretty much only speculate as to what Joachim has problems with.

 

[BriarRose]

Though I don't think the press interview was the wisest choice, I do feel bad for Joachim and Marie. I can only read the English translation of their interview, so perhaps some nuance was lost, but I didn't think they were complaining but trying to explain their position under the lens of how the royal family needs to change. I may also be a bit biased - I've always liked Marie. I also never assumed that Joachim and Marie chose to move to France, so I never held it against them in any way. I don't know what the perception was in Denmark.

In fairness to Joachim and other spares, as Muhler elaborated, these spares were, in essence, "working" since the day they were born. And then their older brother or sister has children, and they are no longer needed under today's slimmed-down monarchies, but they are never quite able to escape the expectations of an active royal. And to end an appendage and/or royal role for such spares seems unfair, as they gave 40+ years of their lives to their country.

I do believe that the Dutch Royal Family has the best balance, but the balance may not be as easy with pretty young princesses now growing up in the world of Instagram and cell phone paparazzi. Maybe it will be fine. I'm just not sure. If I were a future monarch though, I would be openly talking with my children about the Dutch system and what that could mean for their future.

I also think that everyone will continue to expect immediate family members to be apolitical, but that means these non-paid, nonworking family members will be expected to live by "full-time royal" rules even though they are out on their own.

And if a spare is raised to be a private citizen, as Muhler hypothesized with Isabella, and moves away, never being prepared for being the monarch, what then if a terrible accident occurs and they are needed? Personally, even though I lean towards being a royalist, I do hope future spares have the public's support in abdicating/declining. The line of succession is long. There is no reason to trap someone. I want monarchs to understand it is their choice, not their burden. I think we would have some happier heirs and spares if they really could choose. And I think they would be freer to make decisions in their 20's about their futures.

 

[lucien]

Joachim should get a grip on himself instead of whining and complaining,what a drama queen...literally!Really,he has been complaining or a nuisance since the cradle.He has absolutely nothing to complain about,at all!The mishaps in his life are entirely on his own plate,served by his very own lackey,and dealt with by his wonderfull first wife Alexandra.I do not need to be more explicit,do I??Good.

Let him look at our Prince Constantijn,he does what he wants to do and makes his own income,without any state funding at all!Nor any complaining in any which way.But then he has more then average grey cells,c´est ca.C´est la vie.

And on another note,he should have been left the free choice of partner,female or male, and just have pursued a career in whatever interests him except from playing the prince without a meaning which is very cheap..Must be in the genes.Gosh,what a wimp.

 

[maria-olivia]

I stand with Lucien !

 

[Archduchess Zelia]

The DRF does have a tendency not to deal with problems until they're standing square in the middle of them, I'll give Joachim that. (For example, the primogeniture was changed but they still haven't got a solution for the consequences of it. As it is right now, Isabella, who presumably will function as a spare, isn't able to pass on any titles while her younger brother and three male cousins, provided they're given permission to marry, all theoretically are allowed to pass on theirs. This could have been dealt with when they introduced the Monpezat titles but they were only made hereditary in the male line.)

But I will also say that Joachim and Marie had a good 5 years from moving to Copenhagen till he was admitted to the military course in France where they could've helped shape their own roles within the family. That could've been finding positions (not unlike Joachim's current role) that they actually wanted, stepping up their amount of duties, or reducing their allowance to mirror their relatively sparse amount of engagements. Given the media attention surrounding Alexandra's apanage especially, I think it would've been very naive to assume they could've just gone on "as usual" after the move to Copenhagen.

I maintain that privately saying no to either the course or the subsequent position would have been a much more respectful solution than accepting only to repeatedly do interviews leaving no doubt that they're in Paris against their will. No matter how you twist or turn it, that gives off the impression that they're complaining. Especially considering how he's actually immensely overpaid by receiving his apanage instead of the usual wage for his position.

 

[ladongas]

Paris? What a hardship!

I’m sure they didn’t wish to move, but it happens. It happens to people working for BigCorp, happily living in San Francisco, for example, for many years; suddenly they are transferred to Baton Rouge, or Baltimore. They may move; they may resign. They have to suck it up.

 

[lucien]

I’m sure they didn’t wish to move, but it happens. It happens to people working for BigCorp, happily living in San Francisco, for example, for many years; suddenly they are transferred to Baton Rouge, or Baltimore. They may move; they may resign. They have to suck it up.

You can not,in any which way,compare the Danish Royal Family to something as vulgar as an american company..You can´t.Next!

 

[Nordic]

I maintain that privately saying no to either the course or the subsequent position would have been a much more respectful solution than accepting only to repeatedly do interviews leaving no doubt that they're in Paris against their will. No matter how you twist or turn it, that gives off the impression that they're complaining.

Has Joachim also said that they are in Paris against their will or is it only Marie?