What is your opinion of Frederik and Mary

[lilybart]

Hello, I just had to jump in here. I wanted to remind everyone that fashion is an industry. It creates jobs and pumps money into the Danish economy. If Mary can boost her new country's economy by attending a Fashion event and wearing Danish fashion, this is a good thing.

Also, why do we have to "judge" Mary. She is a human being, with strengths and weaknesses. She'll do good things, and she'll make mistakes, just like everyone else. Can you imagine having to live under this kind of scrutiny yourself? With scores of people interpreting every thing you say and do, everything you wear, every facial expression (even those made when you are tired, or having a bad day)?

Lilybart

 

[wiwaxia]

Mental health isn't a nice photo oppertunity, fashion shows are. Photographers are going to take the pictures that sell for example Mary looking stylish at fashion shows. Mary meeting a person with a mental disease is not "sexy" and does not sell. Very simple.

Your post if it is your opinion is disturbing, - magazines, are indifferent about the occassion, just as long as she turns up dressed to the nines, and looks the part, the actual content that she is representing will not be the primary factor, just her being a clothes horse, and that is their primary interest -I think your opinion of mental disease not being "sexy" is way OTT, are all the other things she's associated with "sexy"? Is heart disease "sexy" for example?

 

[Christo's Girl]

Your post if it is your opinion is disturbing, - magazines, are indifferent about the occassion, just as long as she turns up dressed to the nines, and looks the part, the actual content that she is representing will not be the primary factor, just her being a clothes horse, and that is their primary interest -I think your opinion of mental disease not being "sexy" is way OTT, are all the other things she's associated with "sexy"? Is heart disease "sexy" for example?

Well, obviously you completely missed my point, aside from the fact that you think I am not capable of opinions. I am taking the viewpoint of a photographer and of the magazines they sell to. The public is not interested in what Mary is doing with mental health. Her sitting with someone talking to that person about their bi-polar or whatever condition they may have is not interesting to the newspapers. It isn't that shot that everyone wants to see. Everyone wants to see Mary sitting at a fashion show in Copenhagen with Helena Christiansson. That is interesting, that is the big "sexy" shot that sells newspapers. I am sorry my mind is a little dull today and I cannot think of a creative way to explain by what I meant by "sexy". I was using it as an adjective to describe a preferred photograph of Mary. I am in no way saying that mental illness is "sexy" it is anything but, what it is though is "neglected", which Mary is trying to change with her patronage.

 

[wiwaxia]

Well, obviously you completely missed my point, aside from the fact that you think I am not capable of opinions. I am taking the viewpoint of a photographer and of the magazines they sell to. The public is not interested in what Mary is doing with mental health. Her sitting with someone talking to that person about their bi-polar or whatever condition they may have is not interesting to the newspapers. It isn't that shot that everyone wants to see. Everyone wants to see Mary sitting at a fashion show in Copenhagen with Helena Christiansson. That is interesting, that is the big "sexy" shot that sells newspapers. I am sorry my mind is a little dull today and I cannot think of a creative way to explain by what I meant by "sexy". I was using it as an adjective to describe a preferred photograph of Mary. I am in no way saying that mental illness is "sexy" it is anything but, what it is though is "neglected", which Mary is trying to change with her patronage.

Thanks for your reply Christo's Girl, definitely no suggestion of you not having an opinion, I used many of them in my post! It seems a shame if Mary's feathers detract from the event she is representing, kind of defeats the issue, a loss for her patronages, but a bonus for the magazine coffers.

 

[kelly9480]

Mental health isn't a nice photo oppertunity, fashion shows are. Photographers are going to take the pictures that sell for example Mary looking stylish at fashion shows. Mary meeting a person with a mental disease is not "sexy" and does not sell. Very simple.

Then that's an issue just for Mary's coverage then because several crown princesses have been able to sell magazines when the charity they visited wasn't popular or something the general public would like to focus on. Diana's the most obvious example -- she was able to put AIDS and mental illness to the forefront. Maxima's sold magazines when she's talking to ethnic minorities and women. Mathilde's been covered when she's visiting impoverished nations. If Mary covering an unpopular or less-attractive topic doesn't sell, then the magazines just aren't thinking about marketing because the "Saviour Crown Princess" sells like hotcakes.

 

[semisquare]

Also, why do we have to "judge" Mary. She is a human being, with strengths and weaknesses. She'll do good things, and she'll make mistakes, just like everyone else. Can you imagine having to live under this kind of scrutiny yourself? With scores of people interpreting every thing you say and do, everything you wear, every facial expression (even those made when you are tired, or having a bad day)?

its because she is royalty and like all the other royals she is intitle to her share of scrutiny. its not fair or right but what can u do.

 

[Aotearoagal]

I think a princess promoting fashion has a stigma attatched to it. Why is it bad? Fashion helps the economic cycle go around. Maybe those designers need Mary's support otherwise they would be no-name designers going nowhere. BTW, she just had a baby and is probably very tired. If she did something that other people call more "worthy" she might not be able to give them 100%. Yes, I would like Mary to do other things than fashion but to compare her to Crown princess Victoria (who I love) is like comparing apples to oranges. Victoria has no husband or child and is younger than Mary which might enable her to do other sorts of official duties.

I think it's a matter of unnecessary obviousness. A princess does not have to attend a fashion show to be known to be wearing fashion, and whose. Did Di attend fashion shows? I think not. She made it known whose designers she was wearing, and that was the story. Di was actually much more canny PR-wise than Mary, I think. Di focused on the serious patronage stuff, not the consumerist flim-flam. I suspect she wasn't all that interested in fashion, she was definitely a country girl and animal lover. I remember her quoted as saying she only possessed one long frock before her engagement. I find Mary's overt preoccupation with fashion very boring. Mary needs to be more subtle, and also show more substance. Much as I admire aspects of Mary, I'm not confident that the substance is there.

Aotearoagal

 

[soCal girl]

As Crown princess she's expected to have some kind of nice wardrobe. If she only possessed that one frock, people would be complaining. She might have overdone the spending just a bit, but what princess doesn't have a closet filled with designer duds? Besides, I'm sure Mary was a little lagging in the fashion department pre-wedding compared to the other crownprincesses who had high power jobs (Maxima and Letizia) who already had the designer suits. Plus, Diana was a princess in a completely different decade. Even though the time difference seems little, today's world has gotten much more judgemental and fashion-conscious.

 

[Saragli]

I think it's a matter of unnecessary obviousness. A princess does not have to attend a fashion show to be known to be wearing fashion, and whose. Did Di attend fashion shows? I think not. She made it known whose designers she was wearing, and that was the story. Di was actually much more canny PR-wise than Mary, I think. Di focused on the serious patronage stuff, not the consumerist flim-flam. I suspect she wasn't all that interested in fashion, she was definitely a country girl and animal lover. I remember her quoted as saying she only possessed one long frock before her engagement. I find Mary's overt preoccupation with fashion very boring. Mary needs to be more subtle, and also show more substance. Much as I admire aspects of Mary, I'm not confident that the substance is there.

Aotearoagal

Diana was a city girl and didnt care for the country. She also wasnt all about the serious stuff. She did fashion shoots and attended the cannes film festivile. She was very glitzy, glamorous, and fashionable. Fashion is a part of being a princess. Mary does many things for denmark and charities but you dont hear about it. They dont fit into the fairytale image. You hear about the fashion part because its sexy and a part of the princess transformation and you also hear about her association with heart disease charities because her mother died from it and there is an emotional personal story behind it. The international and australian press want the princess stuff and you wont usually hear about the other stuff.

 

[crisiñaki]

Diana was a city girl and didnt care for the country. She also wasnt all about the serious stuff. She did fashion shoots and attended the cannes film festivile. She was very glitzy, glamorous, and fashionable. Fashion is a part of being a princess. Mary does many things for denmark and charities but you dont hear about it. They dont fit into the fairytale image. You hear about the fashion part because its sexy and a part of the princess transformation and you also hear about her association with heart disease charities because her mother died from it and there is an emotional personal story behind it. The international and australian press want the princess stuff and you wont usually hear about the other stuff.

You are right about that, but if you see, the charities of the other Crown Princesses are all around the media, you see a lot of pictures of them even in countries like Belgium where the royals are very respected by the press; and what do we see about Mary's charities?, zilch, zero, nada; yes, she's new to the "job" and it's getting used to it, yes, she has a little one to take care about back at home, but still, Mary hasn't gotten out of her shell in what means to the Danish people and it doesn't help much that Alexandra is still so popular in Denmark and why, because she merged with Danes, she accepted many charities patronages and overall became very accesible to the people, so Mary has to fill very big shoes about that.

I don't dislike Mary because she hasn't done anything for better or worse to love or hate her, I'm still waiting for her to come around, but somehow, I know she wouldn't be what we expect from her

 

[Saragli]

Yes the media built her up as this next Diana. It is kinda obvious now that Mary is still a bit shy in front of the cameras. Mary does have a wide spectrum of charities and I know they will expand in the future. Its not her fault the press doesnt report it and I think she does try to use fashion to bring attention to other charities but it backfired on her a little. She will not be this great international celebrity royal. Australia will get tired of her soon and soon she will just be the Crown Princess of Denmark and just focus on Denmark.

 

[pollyemma]

The Australian media is overwhelmingly positive. Not all are as gushing as the weekly magazines of course, but still you would be hard-pressed to find negative stories. Earlier on the magazines tried the Mary vs Alexandra line, but soon dropped it, and more recently there was something about Mary vs Queen Margrethe, but that went nowhere.
As to a more objective view... you'd probably have as much success as finding an objective view of the Queen Mother.

From this distance we seem to be interested in domestic details... Mary and Frederik, Mary and Christian, what she's wearing, how she's going. I don't think too many people would be interested in a debate about "has Mary done too many interviews?" or "was appearing in Vogue a mistake?" The Denton interview was one of the most-watched TV shows of last year, and the Vogue issue one of that magazine's biggest sellers. The two major weekly magazines both had Christening Specials.

Everyone loves a romance, a 'fairytale', palaces, jewels, a wedding, a baby... and when it comes to one of ours, Mary has it sewn up. The tide may well turn, but not yet.

i completely agree that Aussies are right to be proud of one of their own becoming a crownprincess and I'm happy for mary that she gets glowing coverage in Australian media.

I get so upset though by Australian media's attempts to 'magnify' Mary's achievements by running down the other members of the Danish royal family. They made this huge thing that Mary was 'defying' her in laws by wanting to raise her children herself and criticized Margarethe and Henrik's parenting of Frederick saying they did a bad job and left him emotionally scarred etc. They call Margarethe 'frosty" and things like that.

I realize that we loved seeing Empress Sissi defy her mother-in-law in those wonderful German movies but its silly to try to make Mary into a modern Sissi. Even if they havent seen Sissi-these attempts by Australian media to add more drama to Mary's story are ridiculous and just plain bad journalism.

I realize Mary is not responsible for this type of coverage. It just absolutely infuriates me and I think it gives the non-royalty obsessive Australian public a very unfair view of Danish royal life.

 

[Australian]

i completely agree that Aussies are right to be proud of one of their own becoming a crownprincess and I'm happy for mary that she gets glowing coverage in Australian media.

I get so upset though by Australian media's attempts to 'magnify' Mary's achievements by running down the other members of the Danish royal family. They made this huge thing that Mary was 'defying' her in laws by wanting to raise her children herself and criticized Margarethe and Henrik's parenting of Frederick saying they did a bad job and left him emotionally scarred etc. They call Margarethe 'frosty" and things like that.

I realize that we loved seeing Empress Sissi defy her mother-in-law in those wonderful German movies but its silly to try to make Mary into a modern Sissi. Even if they havent seen Sissi-these attempts by Australian media to add more drama to Mary's story are ridiculous and just plain bad journalism.

I realize Mary is not responsible for this type of coverage. It just absolutely infuriates me and I think it gives the non-royalty obsessive Australian public a very unfair view of Danish royal life.

There are many Australian articles that refer to the Queen and the family as very down to earth and like to defy convention. I hardly seen any that refers to the family in a negative way, perhaps there are such articles but there are many more articles referring to them as nice down to earth people.

 

[Aussie Princess]

I find you get a bit of a mixture, maybe because they really don't know the facts at all so they just write whatever they feel like at the time. I do agree though trying to make someone else seem better by criticising the family.so stupid and disrespectful. do they think that is what people actually want to hear? i think at first the aus. media played the they are so down to earth card, because we were used to seeing a more reserved British royal family, then they got sick of that, so the knives came out, because you need to print interesting things. I've read some horrible things, saying that Frederik was lonely and insecure because he was raised by nannies, and that it damaged him physically and emotionally.it is nasty to print stories like this, and as ssaid before, if most of what you know of the Danish royal family is from the australian media, you will get a very biased and uniformed story. I think maybe the fact that Queen Margrethe has been self critical of herself as a mother perhaps had something to do with that too.
Uuuh, and slightly more on topic(whoops!) i find it hard to form a solid opinion on them, as i believe there is much merit in the criticism of them, and I often agree very strongly with it, while at the same time, I can also agree with some of the praise. i guess that should tell me that they are just like everyone else, good,decent people, but still very flawned none the less. i'm still deciding

 

[Australian]

I've read some horrible things, saying that Frederik was lonely and insecure because he was raised by nannies, and that it damaged him physically and emotionally.it is nasty to print stories like this.

Frederik said this himself in his wedding speech, he himself said he had a lonely life, thats probably why the australian media printed that.

 

[angele]

There are little things that bother me but its not so much Mary as it is the situation around her. I don't like how the Australian press is co-opting everything about the Danish royal family and calling it Australian. They claimed that Mary was going to raise her baby the Australian way, they keep calling the little one half-Australian and little kingaroo. They gave the little prince a pair of Tasmanian devils that the Danes don't know what to do with and is causing problems with the Danish animal control authorities. It's too much and I imagine the Queen and the Danish public are going to get sick of it after awhile; Mary is Danish now as is her little prince. You would expect that the Danes didn't know anything until Mary came along. That's not Mary's fault but its irritating just the same.

I think it is partially Mary's fault, Mary often adds an Australian element to her big occasions that are highly publicised ie she added flowers unique to Australia in her wedding arrangement, as well as in the christening. By adding this Australian theme to her royal occasions she is invariably going to draw the Australian media, which I sometimes feel she knows very well she is doing.

 

[Aotearoagal]

I've read some horrible things, saying that Frederik was lonely and insecure because he was raised by nannies, and that it damaged him physically and emotionally.

Wasn't that Mary being quoted by her 'unnamed source'????? (Amber?)

 

[Warren]

Did Di attend fashion shows? I think not.

Gianni Versace? How quickly we forget!

I don't like how the Australian press is co-opting everything about the Danish royal family and calling it Australian... I think it is partially Mary's fault, Mary often adds an Australian element to her big occasions that are highly publicised ie she added flowers unique to Australia in her wedding arrangement..

I suspect many of our members, including some Australians who should know better, give too much credence to the weekly gossip mags. No different to basing one's views of the Windsors on what appears in such trash tabloids as the UK's "News of the World". Most people view these publications with a healthy dose of scepticism and I am surprised that members who know these mags choose to take them so seriously.

Then to claim it is "partially Mary's fault" because she added a few gum leaves to her wedding bouquet... Just a tad overstated? Time for a bit of perspective I think before this discussion really gets ridiculous.

 

[Ariel]

I have a question, why the danish couple is the only one to have a thread like this?

 

[Little_star]

"Can you imagine having to live under this kind of scrutiny yourself? With scores of people interpreting every thing you say and do, everything you wear, every facial expression (even those made when you are tired, or having a bad day)?"

no, but then I didn't choose to marry a Prince. Mary did, and when she did so she knew the consequences of her decision.

 

[Linda Hsu]

I have a question, why the danish couple is the only one to have a thread like this?

Good Question! I would like to ask it as well?

 

[Little_star]

"Good Question! I would like to ask it as well? "

Maybe it's because, as I suggested before, there are alot of people who don't buy into all the hype about this Royal couple.
There's a similar thread in the Jordanian Royal Forum.

 

[UserDane]

and what do we see about Mary's charities?, zilch, zero, nada;

It is absolutely not correct that we see nothing of Mary's charities. Try looking up pictures from last August/September. There is at least one or two from each visit. There were pictures of her visit to a school for children with special needs where a blind boy pats her pregnant tummy; from the inauguration of a new cancer councelling centre at Vejle; from a visit to Thorvaldsen's museum in Copenhagen; from her visit to the Danish cultural institute in Latvia; her visit to the network group at Nørrebro which does voluntary work with refugees; her attendence at a press meeting for the Danish heart association - etc. etc. etc.
The fact that you and others may not have seen these pictures just supports what PrinceJohnny and others have already said: Fashion pictures sell and they sell a lot compared to most other events. At these events you may not only see Mary; last time you saw her ex-sister in law as well; Helena Christensen and whoever usually appear in Danish magazines and make them sell.

So naturally, the media will put extra focus on events that sell. It has IMO nothing to do with Mary and her priorities.

Can't help wondering if Mary had become patron of the Danish beer industry or a similarly important product (for the Danish economy). Would she be perceived as prone to drinking then? What I'm trying to say is that I just don't understand the underlying critisim of fashion as an object of patronage. It is an industry in the country and an important one at that.

​

 

[Little_star]

"The fact that you and others may not have seen these pictures just supports what PrinceJohnny and others have already said: Fashion pictures sell and they sell a lot compared to most other events."

That is very true. So as that is the case, perhaps she should downplay her role with that particular patronage and be actively seen to be devoting more time to her other causes.

 

[Ariel]

"Good Question! I would like to ask it as well? "

Maybe it's because, as I suggested before, there are alot of people who don't buy into all the hype about this Royal couple.
There's a similar thread in the Jordanian Royal Forum.

In my opinion the press is the one that creates all the hype. They want a fairy tale, so they make it looks like that. The tabloids and the pink press in general. But that it is just one side of the coin, if the difficulties come, they will exploit them as much as possible.

The press also made Diana looks like the princess of a fairy tale and at the end it took advantage of anything that happened to her, which is disgraceful.

 

[norwegianne]

I have a question, why the danish couple is the only one to have a thread like this?

This is an attempt to keep the discussion in the current event threads focussed on current events, rather than centered on Frederik’s and Mary’s qualities, traits and characteristics.

This discussion was taking over most threads in this forum - which made it nearly impossible to discuss their current events. The Danish forum moderators jointly decided that something had to be done. Rather than go on a mass-deletion for all the off-topic posts- we decided to let the members get it off their chests in a civil discussion.

So far, I've been very impressed with the discussion. I've learned a lot from it, and seen that members who disagree can be civil towards each other, and disagree without resorting to childish namecalling, and I don't think I'm the only one.

Why the other royals don't have threads like this? One was created for Diana, one was created recently for Abdullah and Rania... so I would say that they definitely have them. Why not all have them? I think these kind of threads are for royals who ignite strong feelings among the members, and where the discussion about being bothered by something takes over the rest of the threads in that particular forum. I know it was the case with the Diana-thread, and it was also the case with this one. Most of the time this kind of discussion can work out fine in ordinary threads - as is the case with most of the other royals.

This being said - let's get back on topic, shall we? Further discussion of why some threads exist can be done via PM to a moderator.

Thank you.

 

[Linda Hsu]

It is absolutely not correct that we see nothing of Mary's charities. Try looking up pictures from last August/September. There is at least one or two from each visit. There were pictures of her visit to a school for children with special needs where a blind boy pats her pregnant tummy; from the inauguration of a new cancer councelling centre at Vejle; from a visit to Thorvaldsen's museum in Copenhagen; from her visit to the Danish cultural institute in Latvia; her visit to the network group at Nørrebro which does voluntary work with refugees; her attendence at a press meeting for the Danish heart association - etc. etc. etc.

The fact that you and others may not have seen these pictures just supports what PrinceJohnny and others have already said: Fashion pictures sell and they sell a lot compared to most other events. At these events you may not only see Mary; last time you saw her ex-sister in law as well; Helena Christensen and whoever usually appear in Danish magazines and make them sell.

So naturally, the media will put extra focus on events that sell. It has IMO nothing to do with Mary and her priorities.

Can't help wondering if Mary had become patron of the Danish beer industry or a similarly important product (for the Danish economy). Would she be perceived as prone to drinking then? What I'm trying to say is that I just don't understand the underlying critisim of fashion as an object of patronage. It is an industry in the country and an important one at that.

​

​

WOW.......GREAT POST........UserDane! I wouldn't agree with you more!

Amen

 

[UserDane]

So as that is the case, perhaps she should downplay her role with that particular patronage and be actively seen to be devoting more time to her other causes.

Of course not; she should go on doing her job and make an appearance to the important events - important for fashion as an industry in her country - and that will among other things be the upcoming CIFF. Just as she has done up till now.

To bow to people's misconceptions leads no way.

​

 

[Little_star]

"Of course not; she should go on doing her job and make an appearance to the important events - important for fashion as an industry in her country - and that will among other things be the upcoming CIFF. Just as she has done up till now.

To bow to people's misconceptions leads no way. "

Well pople shouldn't really complain if Mary is criticised for being only a "fashion princess", as that seems to be her primary cause.

It's a tag she could easily lose if she was prepared to put in the extra effort and time.

 

[UserDane]

Well pople shouldn't really complain if Mary is criticised for being only a "fashion princess", as that seems to be her primary cause.

It's a tag she could easily lose if she was prepared to put in the extra effort and time.

What 'seems to be' all depend on the eyes that are looking.

She has put effort and time into her causes. You seem to forget that she has had most of these patronages for about one year only during which time she has also had her child. There will be lots of more opportunities and lots of years to work with these patronages. Don't worry.

​