GMG Classical Music Forum

The Back Room => The Diner => Topic started by: vandermolen on November 28, 2017, 06:48:16 AM

Title: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on November 28, 2017, 06:48:16 AM
I'm shocked (hahaha  8)) that nobody else has started a thread on the forthcoming wedding between Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, especially in view of all the transatlantic contacts on this forum. Did we have a 'Royal Family' thread before? Here is your chance to express your views on any aspects of the Royal Family. Speaking personally I would not describe myself as a great royalist but I like the idea of a non political Head of State and have a lot of respect for The Queen. How is this news being covered in the USA, Kyiv, Helsinki, Prague, Delft etcetc?
8)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42147412
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Parsifal on November 28, 2017, 06:51:27 AM
Certain news sites are trying to hype it, but I think it is a non-event. Impact about 10% of a Trump tweet.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on November 28, 2017, 07:20:17 AM
Quote from: Scarpia on November 28, 2017, 06:51:27 AM
Certain news sites are trying to hype it, but I think it is a non-event. Impact about 10% of a Trump tweet.
Thanks!
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on November 28, 2017, 07:31:35 AM
Romanian TV stations stressed the fact that she's the second American divorcee to enter the British royal family.  :)

On a general note, I wish monarchy were restored in my country, but with an almost dying 94-old former king with no direct male heirs, and with the only collateral male heir having been expelled from succession by obscure intrigues and for a ridiculous reason (he apparently has an illegitimate child --- I can hear all Kings of France, England and Spain up until 19th century laughing their bones out loud in their graves), it seems a sheer impossibility. Not to mention that supporters of a restoration amount to less than 10% of the population.  :laugh:
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on November 28, 2017, 07:49:17 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 28, 2017, 07:31:35 AM
Romanian TV stations stressed the fact that she's the second American divorcee to enter the British royal family.  :)

On a general note, I wish monarchy were restored in my country, but with an almost dying 94-old former king with no direct male heirs, and with the only collateral male heir having been expelled from succession by obscure intrigues and for a ridiculous reason (he apparently has an illegitimate child --- I can hear all Kings of France, England and Spain up until 19th century laughing their bones out loud in their graves), it seems a sheer impossibility. Not to mention that supporters of a restoration amount to less than 10% of the population.  :laugh:

How very interesting - thanks for your response.  :)

I'm hopeful that this royal alliance with this divorced American will be much more successful than the last disastrous alliance with a twice divorced Americal lady. Times have moved on but thank goodness that Edward VIII and Mrs Simpson, with their stupid visit to Hitler, were not on the throne in World War Two. I think that the Duke of Windsor (as he became post-abdication) and Mrs Simpson probably deserved each other. MM has made a much more favourable impression and I'm hopeful that it will be a good match.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: kishnevi on November 28, 2017, 07:57:19 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on November 28, 2017, 07:49:17 AM
How very interesting - thanks for your response.  :)

I'm hopeful that this royal alliance with this divorced American will be much more successful than the last disastrous alliance with a twice divorced Americal lady. Times have moved on but thank goodness that Edward VIII and Mrs Simpson, with their stupid visit to Hitler, were not on the throne in World War Two. I think that the Duke of Windsor (as he became post-abdication) and Mrs Simpson probably deserved each other. MM has made a much more favourable impression and I'm hopeful that it will be a good match.

It also helps that Prince Henry of Wales manages to usually put himself across a sensible young man who has done his military duty--and such times that he did not could be excused by the fact that he was, after all, a young man--who, short of some disaster to his brother's brood, will not be in danger of inheriting the throne.  And the traditionalists can target a divorcee who is much closer to the throne,  the Duchess of Cornwall.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Parsifal on November 28, 2017, 08:56:41 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 28, 2017, 07:31:35 AM
Romanian TV stations stressed the fact that she's the second American divorcee to enter the British royal family.  :)

C'mon now. It is clear from one look that Prince Harry did not spring from the loins of Prince Charles, but from Lady Di's riding coach, or body guard, or whomever it was (I forget the details now). He is the offspring of a borderline commoner and a peasant. Marrying an American is a small thing. :)
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on November 28, 2017, 09:21:43 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on November 28, 2017, 07:57:19 AM
It also helps that Prince Henry of Wales manages to usually put himself across a sensible young man who has done his military duty--and such times that he did not could be excused by the fact that he was, after all, a young man--who, short of some disaster to his brother's brood, will not be in danger of inheriting the throne.  And the traditionalists can target a divorcee who is much closer to the throne,  the Duchess of Cornwall.
Yes, a good point I think - thanks.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on November 28, 2017, 09:24:19 AM
Quote from: Scarpia on November 28, 2017, 08:56:41 AM
C'mon now. It is clear from one look that Prince Harry did not spring from the loins of Prince Charles, but from Lady Di's riding coach, or body guard, or whomever it was (I forget the details now). He is the offspring of a borderline commoner and a peasant. Marrying an American is a small thing. :)


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hewitt
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Turner on November 28, 2017, 09:25:34 AM
Harry gets positive media descriptions here in Denmark, as a person who is popular and in better contact with real life, thus a necessary renewal of the British institution he represents.

British Royalty isn't a subject of many dinner discussions here however, we're quite busy enough with our own Royalty and some recent problems and events there. Also there is a minority who wants Royalty abolished, of course.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Parsifal on November 28, 2017, 09:37:17 AM
I rather like Prince Harry, but that his doings are of importance to the world at large is an absurdity.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on November 28, 2017, 12:11:36 PM
Quote from: Turner on November 28, 2017, 09:25:34 AM
Harry gets positive media descriptions here in Denmark, as a person who is popular and in better contact with real life, thus a necessary renewal of the British institution he represents.

British Royalty isn't a subject of many dinner discussions here however, we're quite busy enough with our own Royalty and some recent problems and events there. Also there is a minority who wants Royalty abolished, of course.

Thank you! I've just been reading about Prince Henrik of Denmark not wanting to be buried next to his wife. It reminded me of my uncle who, having discovered that his wife had arranged for the two of them to be buried next to relatives whom he couldn't stand, told my brother and I that he was 'insisting on an outside position.'
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: nodogen on November 28, 2017, 12:20:01 PM
I wonder if the maybot (or the tories...) will factor the wedding date into planning for the date of the general election. Be patriotic - love the wedding! Be patriotic - vote tory!
Their best hope, short of a good football tournament.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on November 28, 2017, 12:20:15 PM
I didn't want to open 'Pandora's Box' here but maybe it was naïve of me to expect not to.

Anyway, I just wanted to say that I have been, so far, impressed by Meghan Markle who, despite her sort-of movie star background, seems genuine and nice and maybe a really good thing for the Royal Family here - her charity work, like Prince Harry's, augurs, I think, well for the future. I've noticed that the BBC etc have started to pronounce her surname differently ('Markel' instead of ('Markelee').

Next time I start a new topic I'll make sure that it's not controversial:

'North Korea - The Sunshine State' or something like that.

Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on November 28, 2017, 12:20:58 PM
Quote from: nodogen on November 28, 2017, 12:20:01 PM
I wonder if the maybot (or the tories...) will factor the wedding date into planning for the date of the general election. Be patriotic - love the wedding! Be patriotic - vote tory!
Their best hope, short of a good football tournament.

Wouldn't surprise me one bit.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: nodogen on November 28, 2017, 12:29:46 PM
Quote from: vandermolen on November 28, 2017, 12:20:15 PM

I didn't want to open 'Pandora's Box' here but maybe it was naïve of me to expect not to.

Next time I start a new topic I'll make sure that its not controversial:

'North Korea - The Sunshine State' or something like that.

Start one on Maria Callas 🤐
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on November 28, 2017, 12:36:16 PM
Quote from: nodogen on November 28, 2017, 12:29:46 PM
Start one on Maria Callas 🤐
8)
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Que on November 28, 2017, 12:46:25 PM
Quote from: vandermolen on November 28, 2017, 12:20:15 PM
I didn't want to open 'Pandora's Box' here but maybe it was naïve of me to expect not to.


Unfortunately.... ::) 

But let's hope that the young couple will be happy together.  :)

Seems that Harry picked a very nice young woman, who has her heart in the right place.

Maybe royal princes marrying UN advocates is the new fashion....

Q

Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Gurn Blanston on November 28, 2017, 12:57:23 PM
Quote from: Que on November 28, 2017, 12:46:25 PM
Unfortunately.... ::) 


Maybe royal princes marrying UN advocates is the new fashion....

Q

We can only hope... :-\

8)
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: kishnevi on November 28, 2017, 01:16:26 PM
Quote from: nodogen on November 28, 2017, 12:20:01 PM
I wonder if the maybot (or the tories...) will factor the wedding date into planning for the date of the general election. Be patriotic - love the wedding! Be patriotic - vote tory!
Their best hope, short of a good football tournament.

The wedding will be sometime in May, exact date to be announced
https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/uk-42156565


She's stopping her work with the UN. The article seems to be saying she'll go through the normal process to become a UK citizen.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: kishnevi on November 28, 2017, 01:18:31 PM
Quote from: Scarpia on November 28, 2017, 08:56:41 AM
C'mon now. It is clear from one look that Prince Harry did not spring from the loins of Prince Charles, but from Lady Di's riding coach, or body guard, or whomever it was (I forget the details now). He is the offspring of a borderline commoner and a peasant. Marrying an American is a small thing. :)

Perhaps it's my imagination but to me HRH seems to resemble  his great great grandfather George V.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Mr. Minnow on November 28, 2017, 04:29:49 PM
Quote from: nodogen on November 28, 2017, 12:20:01 PM
I wonder if the maybot (or the tories...) will factor the wedding date into planning for the date of the general election. Be patriotic - love the wedding! Be patriotic - vote tory!
Their best hope, short of a good football tournament.

That would imply some sort of capacity for forward planning. Their Brexit "strategy" would suggest this may not be their area of expertise.   
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on November 29, 2017, 02:40:02 AM
Quote from: Que on November 28, 2017, 12:46:25 PM
Unfortunately.... ::) 

But let's hope that the young couple will be happy together.  :)

Seems that Harry picked a very nice young woman, who has her heart in the right place.



Q

I agree. Thanks.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: nodogen on November 29, 2017, 04:27:17 AM
I don't wish to poop at the party, but as she is not British, under the terms of Brexit (as detailed by the Daily Mail) ALL foreigners have got to get out of our country and stop taking our jobs, ruining our infrastructure, destroying our culture and shagging our royals. Just sayin' .
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on November 29, 2017, 04:31:04 AM
Quote from: nodogen on November 29, 2017, 04:27:17 AM
I don't wish to poop at the party, but as she is not British, under the terms of Brexit (as detailed by the Daily Mail) ALL foreigners have got to get out of our country and stop taking our jobs, ruining our infrastructure, destroying our culture and shagging our royals. Just sayin' .

That will indeed restore the purity of that great "nation of shopkeepers"...  :laugh:

Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: nodogen on November 29, 2017, 04:40:06 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 29, 2017, 04:31:04 AM
That will indeed restore the purity of that great "nation of shopkeepers"...  :laugh:

Yes! White shopkeepers of course. 🤭
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on November 29, 2017, 04:47:48 AM
Quote from: nodogen on November 29, 2017, 04:40:06 AM
Yes! White shopkeepers of course. 🤭

I haven't even realized that Ms. Markle is half black until some people made a fuss about it here, writing "she's black" as if they wrote "she's lepper". There's nobody's but Harry's business whom he marries, and if you ask me he made an excellent choice, at least in what concerns the physical appearance.  :)
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on November 29, 2017, 05:10:47 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 29, 2017, 04:47:48 AM
I haven't even realized that Ms. Markle is half black until some people made a fuss about it here, writing "she's black" as if they wrote "she's lepper". There's nobody's but Harry's business whom he marries, and if you ask me he made an excellent choice, at least in what concerns the physical appearance.  :)

I'm hopeful that it will work out and I see her mixed-race background as a positive. Maybe just what we need here at a time of increasing intolerance and fundamentalism.

You can't accuse me of starting boring threads, can you?

8)
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on November 29, 2017, 05:14:02 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on November 29, 2017, 05:10:47 AM
You can't accuse me of starting boring threads, can you?

Do start one on "The Advantages of a Monarchy over a Republic" and I'll be a regular contributor as well as a redoubtable polemicist.  :D
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: nodogen on November 29, 2017, 05:25:24 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on November 29, 2017, 05:10:47 AM
I'm hopeful that it will work out and I see her mixed-race background as a positive.


Hopefully. The royal and the Muslim didn't end well though.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on November 29, 2017, 05:30:29 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on November 29, 2017, 05:10:47 AM
I'm hopeful that it will work out

I wish them all the happiness that can be afforded to mortals.

Quote
and I see her mixed-race background as a positive.

Harry himself is more than mixed, although not racially but ethnically. I find the obsession with ethnic or racial purity a bloody nonsense (both literally and figurative). I contend that there is no man or woman alive today, nor has it ever been, who is / was ethnically pure --- you and me included: although I am not aware of any ancestor of mine who was not Romanian (and I doubt there was none), the Romanian people itself is the result of an ethnic mixture. Plus: non-Romanians have massively contributed, politically, socially, culturally and economically, to the establishment of modern Romania and its progress ever since 1848.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Gurn Blanston on November 29, 2017, 05:53:58 AM
Quote from: nodogen on November 29, 2017, 04:27:17 AM
I don't wish to poop at the party, but as she is not British, under the terms of Brexit (as detailed by the Daily Mail) ALL foreigners have got to get out of our country and stop taking our jobs, ruining our infrastructure, destroying our culture and shagging our royals. Just sayin' .

Is shagging royals still a job over there? Good show then, I need to emigrate to the land of my ancestors!  :)

8)
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on November 29, 2017, 05:57:34 AM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on November 29, 2017, 05:53:58 AM
Is shagging royals still a job over there?

I think it's actually royal shagging, and it's more a tradition than a job.  ;D
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Jo498 on November 29, 2017, 06:41:41 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 29, 2017, 04:47:48 AM
I haven't even realized that Ms. Markle is half black until some people made a fuss about it here,
Me neither. To me she looks very slightly "exotic" but I would have guessed a little oriental (e.g. Lebanese or Persian) admixture rather than African American. Not that it matters, but she is "passing as white" to my eyes.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on November 29, 2017, 06:42:57 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on November 29, 2017, 06:41:41 AM
To me she looks very slightly "exotic" but I would have guessed a little oriental (e.g. Lebanese or Persian) admixture rather than African American. Not that it matters, but she is "passing as white" to my eyes.

Agreed on all accounts.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: pjme on November 29, 2017, 07:04:35 AM
Quote from: Turner on November 28, 2017, 09:25:34 AM
Harry gets positive media descriptions here in Denmark, as a person who is popular and in better contact with real life, thus a necessary renewal of the British institution he represents.

British Royalty isn't a subject of many dinner discussions here however, we're quite busy enough with our own Royalty and some recent problems and events there. Also there is a minority who wants Royalty abolished, of course.

Could be the Belgian attitude.

Btw, will the  Master of the Queen's Music write an anthem, a fanfare or a march? 

P.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on November 29, 2017, 07:12:47 AM
Quote from: Turner on November 28, 2017, 09:25:34 AM
there is a minority who wants Royalty abolished, of course.

Denmark is often cited as one of the least corrupt, most prosperous and safe countries. If this were true, I doubt monarchy plays no role in it, and if I were Danish I would be cautious of any republican experiment.  :laugh:
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: nodogen on November 29, 2017, 07:39:00 AM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on November 29, 2017, 05:53:58 AM
Is shagging royals still a job over there? Good show then, I need to emigrate to the land of my ancestors!  :)

8)

Actually, I'm not sure of the specific protocols. Maybe I'll start a thread on it.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Gurn Blanston on November 29, 2017, 07:56:45 AM
Quote from: nodogen on November 29, 2017, 07:39:00 AM
Actually, I'm not sure of the specific protocols. Maybe I'll start a thread on it.

Likely involves no more than asking... privilege and all... :D

8)
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: AnthonyAthletic on November 29, 2017, 08:08:33 AM
Well, we got a day off work for Will and Kate, no Bank Holiday freebie for Harry and Meg, so it's no interest to me 😘 But I do wish them all the best hahahaha.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Parsifal on November 29, 2017, 08:29:34 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on November 29, 2017, 06:41:41 AM
Me neither. To me she looks very slightly "exotic" but I would have guessed a little oriental (e.g. Lebanese or Persian) admixture rather than African American. Not that it matters, but she is "passing as white" to my eyes.

Hi Jo498,

Since you are from Germany and presumably not a native English speaker (although your English is utterly impeccable) I'll give you an unsolicited tip on usage. The term 'oriental' is considered mildly offensive when applied to people. A Persian carpet is oriental, a Persian person is Asian (or West Asian). :)
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Parsifal on November 29, 2017, 08:34:25 AM
I feel justified because my wife lived in Germany for a time and she said that commenting on and correcting the behavior of people encountered in public is a cultural norm in Germany.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Spineur on November 29, 2017, 08:34:53 AM
Quote from: Scarpia on November 29, 2017, 08:29:34 AM
The term 'oriental' is considered mildly offensive when applied to people
How about grabbing women by the crotch, as your president brags about.  Le politiquement correct, c'est fini 
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Parsifal on November 29, 2017, 08:39:01 AM
Quote from: Spineur on November 29, 2017, 08:34:53 AM
How about grabbing women by the crotch, as your president brags about.  Le politiquement correct, c'est fini 

Please don't judge us all by our president. But I refer to Richard Nixon, who once said, "if the President does it, it is legal." That didn't end well for him.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Turner on November 29, 2017, 09:38:19 AM
Quote from: Scarpia on November 29, 2017, 08:39:01 AM
Please don't judge us all by our president. But I refer to Richard Nixon, who once said, "if the President does it, it is legal." That didn't end well for him.

;D
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Jo498 on November 29, 2017, 12:13:30 PM
Thanks, I am not always on top of the latest PC developments. Maybe it even changed in German but "orientalisch" would for me be both more precise (because it usually refers to the near/middle east and not East Asia) and probably more polite than "asiatisch", so this seems to be different in contemporary English usage. The point was that apart from having rather fair skin she does not really have other features commonly associated with people of (subsaharan) African heritage.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Parsifal on November 29, 2017, 01:05:02 PM
Quote from: Jo498 on November 29, 2017, 12:13:30 PM
Thanks, I am not always on top of the latest PC developments. Maybe it even changed in German but "orientalisch" would for me be both more precise (because it usually refers to the near/middle east and not East Asia) and probably more polite than "asiatisch", so this seems to be different in contemporary English usage. The point was that apart from having rather fair skin she does not really have other features commonly associated with people of (subsaharan) African heritage.

I hope, from my phrasing, it was clear that I had no intention to shame you, but just to make you aware of a linguistic subtlety. In any case, I can only really comment on American implications in the use of the word, I don't know if conventions are the same in the UK or other English speaking countries.

Regarding Markle's relatively light skin, this may be related to some very ugly history. Being "black" used to be an important legal distinction in the US, since up until recently it was illegal in many jurisdictions for a 'black' to marry a white person and a 'black' person was excluded from many government benefits. It didn't matter if you looked black, or considered yourself black, it mattered whether your birth certificate said you were black. Any African lineage would classify you as black. So the 'black' side of Ms Markle's family may very well have had a large fraction of European lineage.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Gurn Blanston on November 29, 2017, 04:16:33 PM
Quote from: Jo498 on November 29, 2017, 12:13:30 PM
Thanks, I am not always on top of the latest PC developments. Maybe it even changed in German but "orientalisch" would for me be both more precise (because it usually refers to the near/middle east and not East Asia) and probably more polite than "asiatisch", so this seems to be different in contemporary English usage. The point was that apart from having rather fair skin she does not really have other features commonly associated with people of (subsaharan) African heritage.

I agree on all points. Until I saw the post (now deleted) sarcastically bewailing it, I didn't even suspect it, even though I've worked with people of African descent every day for the last 40 years, and have learned that skin color is not the only visible characteristic. I am also not up on all the latest PC developments, nor entirely sure I will adopt each and every one of them. For example, my partner for many years was a Mexican. I said something about 'Latino' or 'Hispanic' (can't remember which now) and he said "screw that, I'm a Mexican and proud of it". So, ones man's PC is another's insult. Why am I not surprised?  :D

8)
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Hollywood on November 29, 2017, 10:45:04 PM
Nice to hear that my cousin Harry (10 times cousin, once removed) is getting married to a divorced, catholic, Los Angeles gal (3 things I have in common with her) AND that the royal Windsors are not making a big fuss about it. But it makes you wonder how the royals would have reacted if William wanted to marry a divorced, catholic, American girl. Since William is second in line for the crown and not sixth in line as Harry is currently, I bet there would have been some problems with that choice. I don't think the family really would enjoy having a repeat of the Edward VIII and Wallis Simpson scenario.  ;)  ;D

So congrats and good luck to Harry and his bride to be. May they have a long, happy life together.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on November 29, 2017, 11:01:07 PM
Quote from: Hollywood on November 29, 2017, 10:45:04 PM
Nice to hear that my cousin Harry (10 times cousin, once removed) is getting married to a divorced, catholic, Los Angeles gal (3 things I have in common with her) AND that the royal Windsors are not making a big fuss about it. But it makes you wonder how the royals would have reacted if William wanted to marry a divorced, catholic, American girl. Since William is second in line for the crown and not sixth in line as Harry is currently, I bet there would have been some problems with that choice. I don't think the family really would enjoy having a repeat of the Edward VIII and Wallis Simpson scenario.  ;)  ;D

So congrats and good luck to Harry and his bride to be. May they have a long, happy life together.
An interesting point - thank you.
Fortunately things have moved on since the ghastly Edward VIII and Mrs S. Thank goodness George VI, the nervous, stuttering but dutiful King managed to restore the warmth between the crown and the people through his wartime role and refusing to leave London during the Blitz. It will be interesting to see what happens when Prince Charles becomes King because Camilla is, of course, divorced. Will she be Queen or given another title?
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: nodogen on November 30, 2017, 12:48:02 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on November 29, 2017, 11:01:07 PM
An interesting point - thank you.
Fortunately things have moved on since the ghastly Edward VIII and Mrs S. Thank goodness George VI, the nervous, stuttering but dutiful King managed to restore the warmth between the crown and the people through his wartime role and refusing to leave London during the Blitz. It will be interesting to see what happens when Prince Charles becomes King because Camilla is, of course, divorced. Will she be Queen or given another title?

I bet Harry and William have already got a title for her.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on November 30, 2017, 11:42:25 AM
Quote from: nodogen on November 30, 2017, 12:48:02 AM
I bet Harry and William have already got a title for her.
Perhaps, but their mother, like the rest of us, was not 'whiter than white' either.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: nodogen on December 01, 2017, 01:21:06 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on November 30, 2017, 11:42:25 AM
Perhaps, but their mother, like the rest of us, was not 'whiter than white' either.

Heresy!
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on December 02, 2017, 07:22:42 AM
Well, the walk about in Nottingham went well yesterday. The crowds loved MM so, good luck to them.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on December 05, 2017, 03:56:08 AM
A sad off-topic

King Mihai (Michael) of Romania has died today, aged 96. As a great-great-grandson of Queen Victoria, through both of his parents, Michael was a third cousin of Queen Margrethe II of Denmark, King Harald V of Norway, King Juan Carlos I of Spain, King Carl XVI Gustav of Sweden and Queen Elizabeth II.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_I_of_Romania (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_I_of_Romania)

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6b/Mihai_I_of_Romania.jpg/200px-Mihai_I_of_Romania.jpg) (http://www.romaniaregala.ro/wp-content/uploads/foto-mihai-i-ii.jpg)

October 25, 1921 - December 5, 2017

RIP.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Spineur on December 27, 2017, 02:11:18 PM
Prince Harry wants to invite the Obama's at his wedding.  A big problem for Theresa May as Trump official visit to the UK hasnt even been scheduled.  As such this is a crime of lèse majesté against the current POTUS.  How is Mrs. May an her buoyant foreign minister going to avert the diplomatic crisis ?
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: zamyrabyrd on December 27, 2017, 09:45:59 PM
Quote from: Parsifal on November 29, 2017, 08:29:34 AM
The term 'oriental' is considered mildly offensive when applied to people. A Persian carpet is oriental, a Persian person is Asian (or West Asian). :)

I would like to know WHO decides that neutral terms like "Oriental" can be offensive. Somehow I think the late Edward Said made that into a pejorative term. UGH!
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Hollywood on December 28, 2017, 12:19:09 AM
Quote from: Spineur on December 27, 2017, 02:11:18 PM
Prince Harry wants to invite the Obama's at his wedding.  A big problem for Theresa May as Trump official visit to the UK hasnt even been scheduled.  As such this is a crime of lèse majesté against the current POTUS.  How is Mrs. May an her buoyant foreign minister going to avert the diplomatic crisis ?

Damn shame if this makes a problem for Mrs. May. Prince Harry should be able to invite who he wants to his wedding. I can't wait to see what happens, if anything, to see the Obamas at this wedding. Perhaps Trump is throwing a tizzy fit because he hasn't been invited...one can hope.

Anyway, hasn't Trump already made an official visit to the UK yet? If not then he is about the only U.S. President who hasn't done this before  the end of their first year in office. But then again Trump does what he wants when he wants to.  ::)
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Que on December 28, 2017, 12:45:30 AM
Quote from: Hollywood on December 28, 2017, 12:19:09 AM
Anyway, hasn't Trump already made an official visit to the UK yet? If not then he is about the only U.S. President who hasn't done this before  the end of their first year in office. But then again Trump does what he wants when he wants to.  ::)

After Brexit, Trump must be the biggest British headache in foreign affairs:

QuoteMr Trump was invited on an official state visit — including a meeting with the Queen — to the UK earlier this year by Theresa May, on a White House visit in which she was pictured holding hands with the President.

While Downing Street insists the invitation still stands, it is yet to be scheduled and has led to reports that Buckingham Palace was unhappy at the idea of the negative publicity Mr Trump may bring to the monarch.

Promises of demonstrations if the President sets foot in the UK have been stiffened by a series of Twitter interventions by Mr Trump in British affairs, including one in which he criticised the UK's response to terror attacks and London's Muslim mayor, Sadiq Khan.

Most recently, he re-tweeted racist videos from far-right group Britain First, drawing public criticism from Downing Street.

Mr Trump is expected to make a fleeting visit to the UK in February to open the new US Embassy in London.

I hope the Obamas will make it onto the guest list.... Trump will be furious....   :D


Q
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: nodogen on December 29, 2017, 02:11:24 PM
Quote from: Spineur on December 27, 2017, 02:11:18 PM
Prince Harry wants to invite the Obama's at his wedding.  A big problem for Theresa May as Trump official visit to the UK hasnt even been scheduled.  As such this is a crime of lèse majesté against the current POTUS.  How is Mrs. May an her buoyant foreign minister going to avert the diplomatic crisis ?

May doesn't deal with crises. She'll just carry on chewing that wasp.

I'm a staunch republican, but hopefully the Obamas will come to Harry's shindig and piss Trump off just that little bit more. Something else to tweet-rage about of a morning while he's sitting on the bog.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on January 23, 2018, 07:36:16 AM
Now there's a new Royal Wedding on the horizon. Hope you are all excited about it.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/shortcuts/2018/jan/23/who-is-jack-brooksbank-and-will-you-be-paying-for-his-wedding-to-princess-eugenie

8)
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Scion7 on February 11, 2018, 11:16:39 PM
I prefer the Cromwellian solution for the royals.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on May 16, 2018, 09:12:03 AM
So, are you getting excited as the time grows ever nearer? The whole thing, admittedly, does seem to be degenerating into some kind of fiasco.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: drogulus on May 16, 2018, 09:31:32 AM


     She's taking over. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/smiley.gif)

     (https://static.ok.co.uk/media/images/625x938_ct/1145396_Princess_Charlotte_hair_eyes_colour_addf7395621b5b3fc157aa108f401887.jpg)

     

     
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Baron Scarpia on May 16, 2018, 09:35:50 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on May 16, 2018, 09:12:03 AM
So, are you getting excited as the time grows ever nearer? The whole thing, admittedly, does seem to be degenerating into some kind of fiasco.

A fiasco compared to Charles and Diana? I hope Markle's mentally unbalanced father does manage to walk his daughter down the isle. Where will it be, Westminster Abbey?
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on May 16, 2018, 12:15:38 PM
Quote from: vandermolen on May 16, 2018, 09:12:03 AM
So, are you getting excited as the time grows ever nearer?

Oh yeah, I've already lost my night sleep over it...  ;D

Seriously now, I couldn't care less.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on May 16, 2018, 12:43:14 PM
Nice replies guys - thanks
:)

I think to avoid echoes of Charles and Diana the wedding is in Windsor. I should know really  ::)

Yes, Windsor Castle.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: XB-70 Valkyrie on May 16, 2018, 02:22:51 PM
Can't imagine anything more boring--except maybe the Academy Awards, Superbore, and/or Beyonce and Kayne West worship. The Royals (some of them at least) must be schiting themselves because Megan is 1/4 black or whatever. F-em!

She is certainly very pretty and seems like a nice enough young woman--let's hope she doesn't have an *accident* like Lady Diana.

Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Baron Scarpia on May 16, 2018, 02:25:01 PM
Quote from: vandermolen on May 16, 2018, 12:43:14 PM
Nice replies guys - thanks
:)

I think to avoid echoes of Charles and Diana the wedding is in Windsor. I should know really  ::)

Yes, Windsor Castle.

Windsor was named after "Windy Castle" in Peppa Pig, no?

This is what happens to you when you have a toddler.  ::)
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Hollywood on May 16, 2018, 11:24:18 PM
I wish Meghan and cousin Harry all the best on their wedding day. I guess the reason I didn't get an invitation is that Harry and I are not frst or second cousins but 10th cousins.  :(  But it is nice to see that he is marrying a native L.A. Lady, like myself. Congrats cuz!  8)
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: ComposerOfAvantGarde on May 17, 2018, 02:54:03 AM
Quote from: Baron Scarpia on May 16, 2018, 02:25:01 PM
Windsor was named after "Windy Castle" in Peppa Pig, no?

This is what happens to you when you have a toddler.  ::)


I...uh.....enjoy watching that show from time to time
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on May 18, 2018, 11:37:17 PM
So, Prince Harry is to be the Duke of Sussex from today.

Surely I should now be appointed as GMG Forum's Special Royal Correspondent - at a nominal salary of course.

8)
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Judith on May 19, 2018, 05:43:30 AM
What did Camilla have on her head????
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on May 19, 2018, 07:49:40 AM
I've caught on TV the very moment when they were sworn in as husband and wife, then some glimpses of their carriage tour of Windsor. Nice. Wish them happiness and all the best --- just as I wish each and every just married couple.

Still, I can't help but wonder: would William, as direct heir of the British Crown and future King of Great Britain, have been allowed to marry a mulatto woman? Would the British royals have swallowed the idea of a future mulatto King or Queen? My guess is in the negative. ;D
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Spineur on May 19, 2018, 08:57:12 AM
And the music at the royal wedding ?
British teenage cellist Kanneh-Mason played three pieces accompanied by an orchestra: "Apres un Reve" by French composer Gabriel Faure, "Sicilienne" by Maria Theresia von Paradis and Schubert's "Ave Maria".
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on May 19, 2018, 09:20:58 AM
Quote from: Spineur on May 19, 2018, 08:57:12 AM
And the music at the royal wedding ?
British teenage cellist Kanneh-Mason played three pieces accompanied by an orchestra: "Apres un Reve" by French composer Gabriel Faure, "Sicilienne" by Maria Theresia von Paradis and Schubert's "Ave Maria".

To my everlasting shame, I overheard a moment of the "Ave Maria" and thought to myself "Wtf --- do they play funeral music on this occasion?" only to realize the very second after what it really was...  :-[

And yet I dare call myself an unrepentant and unabashed Schubertian...  :laugh:

Oh, and was that really a Coptic bishop delivering a short sermon?
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on May 19, 2018, 09:58:29 AM
Quote from: Judith on May 19, 2018, 05:43:30 AM
What did Camilla have on her head????
+1
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on May 19, 2018, 10:03:44 AM
Quote from: Florestan on May 19, 2018, 07:49:40 AM
I've caught on TV the very moment when they were sworn in as husband and wife, then some glimpses of their carriage tour of Windsor. Nice. Wish them happiness and all the best --- just as I wish each and every just married couple.

Still, I can't help but wonder: would William, as direct heir of the British Crown and future King of Great Britain, have been allowed to marry a mulatto woman? Would the British royals have swallowed the idea of a future mulatto King or Queen? My guess is in the negative. ;D
I'm not sure, although the Royal Family's survival is connected with their ability to move with the times.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on May 19, 2018, 10:16:04 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on May 19, 2018, 10:03:44 AM
the Royal Family's survival is connected with their ability to move with the times.

Moving with the times might very well mean Mr. Charles* William Windsor-Mountbatten being elected --- or rather not --- as the 1st President of the Second British Republic.  :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

*Given Lizzie's longevity, Charles' reign will probably last just the time needed to sign his abdication in William's favor...  ;D AFAIC, he's more than welcome, though, to be crowned as Charles III of Romania.  :P
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Sammy on May 19, 2018, 02:31:42 PM
I don't recall any modernist music being played at the royal event.  Why not?
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on May 19, 2018, 02:42:25 PM
Quote from: Spineur on May 19, 2018, 08:57:12 AM
And the music at the royal wedding ?
British teenage cellist Kanneh-Mason played three pieces accompanied by an orchestra: "Apres un Reve" by French composer Gabriel Faure, "Sicilienne" by Maria Theresia von Paradis and Schubert's "Ave Maria".
Yes, I thought he was really good and I enjoyed all of the music performed at the wedding today.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: ComposerOfAvantGarde on May 19, 2018, 03:52:47 PM
Quote from: Sammy on May 19, 2018, 02:31:42 PM
I don't recall any modernist music being played at the royal event.  Why not?
Depends on what you mean by 'modernist' ;D
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: mc ukrneal on May 19, 2018, 03:55:00 PM
The thing I noticed was how incredibly good the weather was. Boy were they lucky...
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Cato on May 19, 2018, 04:03:06 PM
Quote from: Sammy on May 19, 2018, 02:31:42 PM
I don't recall any modernist music being played at the royal event.  Why not?

Explosante-fixe was censored by Royal Security!   $:)
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on May 19, 2018, 10:25:01 PM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on May 19, 2018, 03:55:00 PM
The thing I noticed was how incredibly good the weather was. Boy were they lucky...

That is very true! Cloudy and over-cast this morning. Back to normal.  :-[
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Hollywood on May 19, 2018, 10:42:27 PM
Quote from: Judith on May 19, 2018, 05:43:30 AM
What did Camilla have on her head????

Perhaps a dead flamingo.  ::)
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Que on May 19, 2018, 11:08:57 PM
Well, luckily the happy couple avoided the attendance of Donald Trump.... :D (Or Theresa May for that matter)

The United States was instead represented by, amongst others, strong black women like Oprah Winfrey ans Serena Williams...

Quote from: Sammy on May 19, 2018, 02:31:42 PM
I don't recall any modernist music being played at the royal event.  Why not?

On CNN, a middle aged white British lady, self proclaimed royalty expert, already felt uncomfortable by the inclusion of gospel music... Which she claimed she liked, but was "inappropriate" for this occasion. Perhaps somebody tell her she died some years ago, she is obviously unaware... 8)

I guess if she had been a white middle aged American woman, she would have called the police to report the inappropriate presence of black individuals in St. George's Chapel. And the presence of a "mulatto", as some seem to refer to Meghan Markle. Which is a term from colonial times of racial segregation; she refers to herself as being "biracial" and of "mixed race":

https://www.elle.com/uk/life-and-culture/news/a26855/more-than-an-other/

Q
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: ComposerOfAvantGarde on May 20, 2018, 12:04:51 AM
Unemployed London Man Marries Successful Hollywood Actress (http://www.theshovel.com.au/2018/05/19/successful-hollywood-actress-marries-unemployed-london-man/)
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on May 20, 2018, 01:05:51 AM
Quote from: Que on May 19, 2018, 11:08:57 PM
Well, luckily the happy couple avoided the attendance of Donald Trump.... :D (Or Theresa May for that matter)

The United States was instead represented by, amongst others, strong black women like Oprah Winfrey ans Serena Williams...

On CNN, a middle aged white British lady, self proclaimed royalty expert, already felt uncomfortable by the inclusion of gospel music... Which she claimed she liked, but was "inappropriate" for this occasion. Perhaps somebody tell her she died some years ago, she is obviously unaware... 8)

I guess if she had been a white middle aged American woman, she would have called the police to report the inappropriate presence of black individuals in St. George's Chapel. And the presence of a "mulatto", as some seem to refer to Meghan Markle. Which is a term from colonial times of racial segregation; she refers to herself as being "biracial" and of "mixed race":

https://www.elle.com/uk/life-and-culture/news/a26855/more-than-an-other/

Q
I thought that the gospel music was a highlight of the ceremony.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on May 20, 2018, 01:35:47 AM
In Romanian mulatto has no racist connotation whatsoever; it simply denotes a person of mixed, specifically white and black, race, and is widely used.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: ComposerOfAvantGarde on May 20, 2018, 01:52:23 AM
Quote from: Florestan on May 20, 2018, 01:35:47 AM
In Romanian mulatto has no racist connotation whatsoever; it simply denotes a person of mixed, specifically white and black, race, and is widely used.

It's probably just a language thing. English is notorious for taking words from other languages and using or abusing them to suit the ideology they wish to push.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Que on May 20, 2018, 08:29:20 AM
Quote from: Florestan on May 20, 2018, 01:35:47 AM
In Romanian mulatto has no racist connotation whatsoever; it simply denotes a person of mixed, specifically white and black, race, and is widely used.

Quote from: jessop on May 20, 2018, 01:52:23 AM
It's probably just a language thing. English is notorious for taking words from other languages and using or abusing them to suit the ideology they wish to push.

I think we should keep in mind that words are invented to serve a specific social purpose.

In this case the term "mulatto" was used in colonial Latin America to distinguish persons of mixed race, specifically those with parents of European (white) and African (black) descent, from other groups for the purpose of racial catagorisation and segregation. "Mulattos" being considered as a new human "species". It was adopted into English during the times of slavery in the British colonies and the later United States for the exact same purpose.


But let's do a little experiment:.... Everybody raise his hand that has ever heard Barack Obama being refered to as a "mulatto" in the press? Because technically that is what he would be.... ::)

Q
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Sammy on May 20, 2018, 08:58:59 AM
Quote from: Que on May 20, 2018, 08:29:20 AMBut let's do a little experiment:.... Everybody raise his hand that has ever heard Barak Obama being refered to as a "mulatto" in the press? Because technically that is what he would be.... ::)

I've only heard that reference from extreme right-wing sources and various racist individuals.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Ken B on May 20, 2018, 01:08:05 PM
I hate to agree with Que, because of his snide remark about middle aged American women, but he is right about mulatto. There were terms for the various degrees of black blood. Octoroon for example meant 1/8 black. Quadroon for 1/4 black. The whole logic of these terms was racist, and they originated in the American South. Better to retire them.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Que on May 20, 2018, 11:14:11 PM
Quote from: Ken B on May 20, 2018, 01:08:05 PM
I hate to agree with Que, because of his snide remark about middle aged American women,

I guess it was indeed a snide remark, sorry about that....  ::)
Absolutely no insult meant to every white middle aged woman. Though I know of quite a few in my immediate (Dutch) surroundings, that would fit the bill quite neatly... you don't need to be American to be a bigot.

The bigotry of the middle aged British woman on CNN just strongly reminded me of reports in the media of black Americans being reported to the police for their unwanted presence in all kinds of places: parks, restaurants, university spaces. Because the underlying sentiment is the same: "these" people (and their cultural traditions) don't belong here, in our domain.


PS  Perhaps I shouldn't have brought it up, a thread about a wedding should have a happy tone.... :)
But it seems that everything these days, including this wedding, is about a funfamentally changing world & society and some people's fear of that change and their virulent resistance to it.

Q
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on May 21, 2018, 12:51:47 AM
As the person who started the thread I just hoped it would generate some (ideally but maybe unrealistically) genial discussion on the topic and I have enjoyed the observations. As a British middle aged male I have to say that I thought the comment about the gospel music being 'inappropriate' was ridiculous - the gospel choir were back on the BBC News yesterday performing again for us. I expect that the vast majority of people here thought that their contribution was great and thoroughly enjoyed it. Certainly the views of those to whom I have spoken have been exclusively positive. One or two thought that the bishop went on a bit too long but others thought that his extended sermon was brilliant and this, together with the multi-culturalism of the occasion was just what the country and the Royal Family needed. As someone correctly said - it makes the Royal Family 'more like the rest of us'. I have to say that it was fun watching various members of the Royal Family trying not to giggle during the sermon.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Que on May 21, 2018, 02:36:29 AM
I watched most of the proceedings, and it was a lovely wedding!  :)
Though like you, I'm a middle aged white man myself  ;), I thought the combination of traditional pomp & circumstance with tributes to Meghan's background was very successful. The sermon went on a bit too long though.... 8)
And the weather was great, highlighting the beautiful scenery of Windsor Castle.

But apart from being a happy celebration, I think this wedding also really brought home the fact that British identity has changed or has to change, and that people of colour are part of present and future Britain. An undeniable, and for some uncomfortable, truth... Despite Brexit, and despite Windrush....

Harry and Meghan, or hostile environment: which is the real spirit of Britain? (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/may/20/spirit-britain-royal-wedding-brexit)

Q
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on May 21, 2018, 03:50:00 AM
Quote from: Que on May 21, 2018, 02:36:29 AM
I watched most of the proceedings, and it was a lovely wedding!  :)
Though like you, I'm a middle aged white man myself  ;), I thought the combination of traditional pomp & circumstance with tributes to Meghan's background was very successful. The sermon went on a bit too long though.... 8)
And the weather was great, highlighting the beautiful scenery of Windsor Castle.

But apart from being a happy celebration, I think this wedding also really brought home the fact that British identity has changed or has to change, and that people of colour are part of present and future Britain. An undeniable, and for some uncomfortable, truth... Despite Brexit, and despite Windrush....

Harry and Meghan, or hostile environment: which is the real spirit of Britain? (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/may/20/spirit-britain-royal-wedding-brexit)

Q

Totally agree with all of this - although, compared to myself,  you are still in the 'first flush of youth' as far a being a white middle-aged British male is concerned!
:)
Very much agree with your comments re: Brexit and Windrush. The wedding is a nice corrective to all that as far as I'm concerned.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Tsaraslondon on May 21, 2018, 04:14:18 AM
Quote from: nodogen on November 28, 2017, 12:20:01 PM
I wonder if the maybot (or the tories...) will factor the wedding date into planning for the date of the general election. Be patriotic - love the wedding! Be patriotic - vote tory!
Their best hope, short of a good football tournament.

And lo and behold!
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Tsaraslondon on May 21, 2018, 04:19:02 AM
Quote from: nodogen on November 28, 2017, 12:29:46 PM
Start one on Maria Callas 🤐

Already done. It's garnered 597 posts since our own dear knight66 started it back in 2007. Not that many in 10 years, really, but then opera and vocal music garners very few posts anyway.

Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Baron Scarpia on May 22, 2018, 09:36:34 AM
Here's what I don't understand. All of a sudden, some American is the Duchess of Sussex. And he's the Duke. How does that happen? Sussex didn't already have a Duke, or was the previous Duke evicted and now living out of his car? (Hopefully it's a Rolls Royce or at least a Bentley). Or if Sussex didn't already have a Duke why does in need one now? And who decides these things? In the old days it was clear, if you wanted to be the Duke you had to be descended from the old Duke, or you had to slaughter the old Duke and his descendants. Raping and pillaging was involved. At the very least you had to have the old Duke declared a heretic.

Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Ken B on May 22, 2018, 09:46:31 AM
Quote from: Baron Scarpia on May 22, 2018, 09:36:34 AM
Here's what I don't understand. All of a sudden, some American is the Duchess of Sussex. And he's the Duke. How does that happen? Sussex didn't already have a Duke, or was the previous Duke evicted and now living out of his car? (Hopefully it's a Rolls Royce or at least a Bentley). Or if Sussex didn't already have a Duke why does in need one now? And who decides these things? In the old days it was clear, if you wanted to be the Duke you had to be descended from the old Duke, or you had to slaughter the old Duke and his descendants. Raping and pillaging was involved. At the very least you had to have the old Duke declared a heretic.

Not quite. The King's brothers were usually automatically made dukes. So your brother could do any requisite slaughtering.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on January 08, 2020, 11:32:40 PM
Harry and Meghan
Rather than start (yet another) new thread I thought that I'd usurp this one to ascertain your views on the couple's announcement (without discussing it with the Queen apparently) to step down from front-line royal duties and relocate for half the year to North America. I wonder what our N. American friends think about it.
I'm sure that this is all that you really want to be discussing today.
;D


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51043220
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: DaveF on January 09, 2020, 12:33:57 AM
Commentators have been asking how the Sussexes' intended "financial independence" will actually work.  Well, apparently Harry has inherited £5 million from his mother, plus £2 million that was held in trust from his great-grandmother - so yeah, I'm worried too.  How will they possibly live?

Does this also mean that there will be a vacancy for a Duke and Duchess of Sussex?  Anybody know of any Sussex residents who might be worthy of the roles?
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Papy Oli on January 09, 2020, 01:42:09 AM
And Lizzie gave them Frogmore Cottage with £2.4M of our public money to refurbish it.. they still want to keep it as well but not doing their bit of royal work in compensation anymore...poor darlings... Reimbursement !!!! oh and the public money spent for their wedding as well.... And Lizzie learnt all about it on the telly... pfffft.....poor manners as well....Maybe Queenie should her swans to attack Trudeau for taking them in ...  >:D  ;D 0:)






Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Irons on January 09, 2020, 02:20:03 AM
Cake and eat it comes to mind and not for the first time!
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Biffo on January 09, 2020, 02:53:50 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on January 08, 2020, 11:32:40 PM
Harry and Meghan
Rather than start (yet another) new thread I thought that I'd usurp this one to ascertain your views on the couple's announcement (without discussing it with the Queen apparently) to step down from front-line royal duties and relocate for half the year to North America. I wonder what our N. American friends think about it.
I'm sure that this is all that you really want to be discussing today.
;D


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51043220

I feel violated.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on January 09, 2020, 03:08:58 AM
Quote from: DaveF on January 09, 2020, 12:33:57 AM
Commentators have been asking how the Sussexes' intended "financial independence" will actually work.  Well, apparently Harry has inherited £5 million from his mother, plus £2 million that was held in trust from his great-grandmother - so yeah, I'm worried too.  How will they possibly live?

Does this also mean that there will be a vacancy for a Duke and Duchess of Sussex?  Anybody know of any Sussex residents who might be worthy of the roles?

I know the perfect Sussex-based candidates!
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Tsaraslondon on January 09, 2020, 04:02:38 AM
If you want to point the finger at anyone, pont it at our vile, intrusive, vitriolic tabloid press. Is it any wonder they fear the consequences of staying in the public eye after what happened to Harry's mother?

Details will obviously have to be ironed out, but I don't doubt their commitment to becoming financially independent. It could actually be a good thing and might just precipitate the slimming down of our present royal list.

Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: JBS on January 09, 2020, 07:08:04 AM
Quote from: DaveF on January 09, 2020, 12:33:57 AM
Commentators have been asking how the Sussexes' intended "financial independence" will actually work.  Well, apparently Harry has inherited £5 million from his mother, plus £2 million that was held in trust from his great-grandmother - so yeah, I'm worried too.  How will they possibly live?

Does this also mean that there will be a vacancy for a Duke and Duchess of Sussex?  Anybody know of any Sussex residents who might be worthy of the roles?

There are, including Princes Phillip, Charles, Andrew, William,  and Harry, 31 Dukes in the UK.  Of the 26 others, two are cousins to the queen, the rest not related.  Eventually, the Duchy of Sussex will be inherited by Archie Mountbatten-Windsor and drop out of the royal limelight, just like the Duchies of Kent and Gloucester (the two cousins), even if Harry and Meghan made no attempt to go private.

BTW, the current Duke of Gloucester is Prince Richard, but he doesn't seem to be hunchbacked.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Irons on January 09, 2020, 07:59:24 AM
Quote from: Tsaraslondon on January 09, 2020, 04:02:38 AM
If you want to point the finger at anyone, pont it at our vile, intrusive, vitriolic tabloid press. Is it any wonder they fear the consequences of staying in the public eye after what happened to Harry's mother?



But are Harry and Meghan placing themselves in the same position as Diana? All royalty enjoy 24 hour protection from an elite squad from the Met. Diana chose to reject this and use Fayed's security team on the day of her death. Harry may decide he wishes to step back from the royal family but that does not alter the fact he is in a vulnerable position. Will the Canadian tax payer fund security costs or will H&M expect the UK to send a team to decamp in North America? Or will the do what Diana did.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Tsaraslondon on January 09, 2020, 08:15:54 AM
Quote from: Irons on January 09, 2020, 07:59:24 AM
But are Harry and Meghan placing themselves in the same position as Diana? All royalty enjoy 24 hour protection from an elite squad from the Met. Diana chose to reject this and use Fayed's security team on the day of her death. Harry may decide he wishes to step back from the royal family but that does not alter the fact he is in a vulnerable position. Will the Canadian tax payer fund security costs or will H&M expect the UK to send a team to decamp in North America? Or will the do what Diana did.

They may not have made the right decision, and they may not have worked out the details, but I understand completely why they made it. I really dislike the British tabloid press. Even Madonna couldn't believe quite how intrusive it was when she was living here - and she is someone who really craves the spotlight.

Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: DaveF on January 09, 2020, 08:45:42 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on January 09, 2020, 03:08:58 AM
I know the perfect Sussex-based candidates!

On further reflection... the Marquis of Abergavenny actually lives in Sussex (Eridge Park, Crowborough, in fact) so it's only fair that the new Duke of Sussex should live at... ;D
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: mc ukrneal on January 09, 2020, 08:45:58 AM
They have made what they think is the best decision for them and their family. Good for them. 
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: JBS on January 09, 2020, 08:57:48 AM
Quote from: DaveF on January 09, 2020, 08:45:42 AM
On further reflection... the Marquis of Abergavenny actually lives in Sussex (Eridge Park, Crowborough, in fact) so it's only fair that the new Duke of Sussex should live at... ;D

The Marquess is also Earl of Lewes, so he can claim a Sussex link on his own.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Ratliff on January 09, 2020, 09:00:31 AM
Quote from: Papy Oli on January 09, 2020, 01:42:09 AMMaybe Queenie should her swans to attack Trudeau for taking them in ...  >:D  ;D 0:)

Trudeau? When I read "North America" I assume Las Vegas. :)
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on January 09, 2020, 09:36:47 AM
Quote from: DaveF on January 09, 2020, 08:45:42 AM
On further reflection... the Marquis of Abergavenny actually lives in Sussex (Eridge Park, Crowborough, in fact) so it's only fair that the new Duke of Sussex should live at... ;D
Excellent point. I know Eridge Park well. It's down the road!
(//)
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: DaveF on January 09, 2020, 01:25:03 PM
Quote from: JBS on January 09, 2020, 08:57:48 AM
The Marquess is also Earl of Lewes, so he can claim a Sussex link on his own.

He can also claim a musical link, since he owns My Ladye Nevells Booke - or did, apparently, until the taxman came along and took a fancy to it.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Mirror Image on January 09, 2020, 09:41:24 PM
I think it's a courageous thing what Harry and Meghan are doing. I suppose they figured out that in order to have the semblance of any kind of normal family life, the best thing for them is to not be in the public eye. The drama that'll unfold will be interesting to watch. [Gets popcorn ready.]
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on January 09, 2020, 10:15:22 PM
Thanks for your views guys. Read with great interest.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: André on January 11, 2020, 09:51:16 AM
This article in the Washington Post nails it nicely IMO


https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/01/10/i-write-romance-meghan-wrote-this-chapter-way-i-would-because-racism/#comments-wrapper (https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/01/10/i-write-romance-meghan-wrote-this-chapter-way-i-would-because-racism/#comments-wrapper)
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Herman on January 11, 2020, 09:59:00 AM
I think Harry is suffering a bit of Saviour Syndrome.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on January 12, 2020, 01:28:48 AM
There is a kernel of truth in the Washington Post article posted above and there is evidence of racism here, exacerbated, whatever your view of it, by Brexit and its accompanying xenophobia. My daughter actually witnessed racism against a Spanish person on the underground last week. Having said that, Prince Harry's 'Meghan gets what Meghan wants' comment was bound to alienate many people from the initially very popular royal couple.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Irons on January 12, 2020, 03:06:13 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on January 12, 2020, 01:28:48 AM
There is a kernel of truth in the Washington Post article posted above and there is evidence of racism here, exacerbated, whatever your view of it, by Brexit and its accompanying xenophobia. My daughter actually witnessed racism against a Spanish person on the underground last week. Having said that, Prince Harry's 'Meghan gets what Meghan wants' comment was bound to alienate many people from the initially very popular royal couple.

Do you really think racism is at play here, Jeffrey? I like to think racism is dying a slow lingering death in the UK. You get the odd idiot at a football game for example but London in particular is multi-ethnic and people get on. Race riots are a thing of the past.
I think we as a nation welcomed Meghan with open arms and more so that she is American. That she is mixed race is not here or there, 99% could not give a stuff no matter what the Washington Post says. It is too easy to blame Meghan for this mess, as always it goes deeper. William said a telling thing quoted in today's Sunday Times " I've put my arm around my brother all our lives. I can't do it any more." I fear for Harry.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on January 12, 2020, 05:44:13 AM
Quote from: Irons on January 12, 2020, 03:06:13 AM
Do you really think racism is at play here, Jeffrey? I like to think racism is dying a slow lingering death in the UK. You get the odd idiot at a football game for example but London in particular is multi-ethnic and people get on. Race riots are a thing of the past.
I think we as a nation welcomed Meghan with open arms and more so that she is American. That she is mixed race is not here or there, 99% could not give a stuff no matter what the Washington Post says. It is too easy to blame Meghan for this mess, as always it goes deeper. William said a telling thing quoted in today's Sunday Times " I've put my arm around my brother all our lives. I can't do it any more." I fear for Harry.
I don't think that I expressed myself clearly Lol. I meant that I think that there has been a growth of racism since Brexit although I don't think that it is a huge issue in Britain and personally I have seen little evidence that the Duchess of Sussex has been on the receiving end of it. She was indeed welcomed into the country as a breath of fresh air but is now alienating many people. Yes, I fear for Harry too.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Mirror Image on January 12, 2020, 07:09:48 AM
I'm going to have to walk back my previous comments about Harry and Meghan after giving it much thought. I never did think Meghan was really the right fit for the Royal Family. It's not because she's of mixed race or an American, it's because of her attitude and lack of foresight leaves much to be desired. What did she think was going to happen when she married Harry? Surely Harry warned her of what their duties were going to be and that their lives were very much going to be in broadcasted for the entire world to view. If she's craving privacy, then she shouldn't have chosen to live that life. I have no sympathy for her or Harry and it's a damn shame that he lost his brother in the process, but I'm on his brother's side. They had a job to do and it was their civic duty to do it.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: steve ridgway on January 12, 2020, 09:10:44 AM
The Queen has always demonstrated exactly how the job should be done.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on January 12, 2020, 09:39:23 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on January 12, 2020, 07:09:48 AM
I'm going to have to walk back my previous comments about Harry and Meghan after giving it much thought. I never did think Meghan was really the right fit for the Royal Family. It's not because she's of mixed race or an American, it's because of her attitude and lack of foresight leaves much to be desired. What did she think was going to happen when she married Harry? Surely Harry warned her of what their duties were going to be and that their lives were very much going to be in broadcasted for the entire world to view. If she's craving privacy, then she shouldn't have chosen to live that life. I have no sympathy for her or Harry and it's a damn shame that he lost his brother in the process, but I'm on his brother's side. They had a job to do and it was their civic duty to do it.

Very much in agreement with you John.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on January 12, 2020, 11:59:12 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on January 12, 2020, 09:39:23 AM
Very much in agreement with you John.

+ 1. John nailed the whole matter on its head.

Every Night & every Morn
Some to Misery are Born
Every Morn and every Night
Some are Born to sweet delight
Some are Born to sweet delight
Some are Born to Endless Night


If Harry really thinks that he was born to misery by being born in the Windsor House, or Meghan really thinks that she was born to endless night by marrying into the Windsor House they both should think twice, assuming their thinking organ is up and running.  ;D
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on January 12, 2020, 01:13:18 PM
Quote from: 2dogs on January 12, 2020, 09:10:44 AM
The Queen has always demonstrated exactly how the job should be done.
Yes.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Rinaldo on January 12, 2020, 09:45:11 PM
Quote from: Irons on January 12, 2020, 03:06:13 AMDo you really think racism is at play here, Jeffrey?

(https://i.imgur.com/e1fFqWT.jpg) (https://i.imgur.com/41Tblo4.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/4QOcVkX.jpg) (https://i.imgur.com/w2tnrf9.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/uuHNhsu.jpg)
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Irons on January 12, 2020, 11:07:29 PM
Quote from: vandermolen on January 12, 2020, 09:39:23 AM
Very much in agreement with you John.

Yes, spot on.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Irons on January 12, 2020, 11:09:59 PM
Quote from: Rinaldo on January 12, 2020, 09:45:11 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/e1fFqWT.jpg) (https://i.imgur.com/41Tblo4.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/4QOcVkX.jpg) (https://i.imgur.com/w2tnrf9.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/uuHNhsu.jpg)

Criticised for not following protocol is not racist.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Rinaldo on January 12, 2020, 11:37:06 PM
Quote from: Irons on January 12, 2020, 11:09:59 PMCriticised for not following protocol is not racist.

You don't see the double standard? Kate 'dazzles', Meghan's similar dress is 'vulgar'. Kate's avocados are a cure, Meghan's cause 'drought and murder'. Kate's makeup is 'sophisticated', Meghan's 'Hollywood'. The Queen gets to keep her hands in her pockets, Meghan 'steps too far'.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Tsaraslondon on January 13, 2020, 01:22:37 AM
Other examples from that trash rag the Daily Mail.

Kate "tenderly cradles her baby bump" but asks why Meghan "can't keep her hands off her bump." WTF has that got to do with protocol?

Our right wing gutter press is nothing if not vindictive and I've no doubt that things got worse after the couple spoke out publicly about press intrusion. I just wonder why we even bothered with Leveson. It's made no difference at all.

Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: mc ukrneal on January 13, 2020, 03:36:58 AM
Quote from: 2dogs on January 12, 2020, 09:10:44 AM
The Queen has always demonstrated exactly how the job should be done.
Really? She headed the family that has had all these scandals. She raised the kids that had the scandals. I find it a bit ironic that Harry's scandal is worse, considered when he announces they are going to make a real living, earn an honest dollar and step away from that privileged life. The queen may act the way you think a sovereign should, but she seems to have stumbled in passing it on (putting it nicely). You reap what you sow.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Irons on January 13, 2020, 07:11:08 AM
Quote from: Rinaldo on January 12, 2020, 11:37:06 PM
You don't see the double standard? Kate 'dazzles', Meghan's similar dress is 'vulgar'. Kate's avocados are a cure, Meghan's cause 'drought and murder'. Kate's makeup is 'sophisticated', Meghan's 'Hollywood'. The Queen gets to keep her hands in her pockets, Meghan 'steps too far'.

But it is not racist! I agree with you it is shocking to treat her in that way. I feel for her as she had no idea what she was letting herself in for. The British press are awful, I totally agree. But please don't bring racism into it because it isn't what is going on here.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Rinaldo on January 13, 2020, 07:46:35 AM
Quote from: Irons on January 13, 2020, 07:11:08 AMBut please don't bring racism into it because it isn't what is going on here.

So what is? Why is Kate treated so differently?
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Ratliff on January 13, 2020, 08:41:09 AM
Quote from: Irons on January 13, 2020, 07:11:08 AM
But it is not racist! I agree with you it is shocking to treat her in that way. I feel for her as she had no idea what she was letting herself in for. The British press are awful, I totally agree. But please don't bring racism into it because it isn't what is going on here.

Not racist, yeah, whatever you say.

Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: The new erato on January 13, 2020, 08:50:47 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on January 12, 2020, 09:39:23 AM
Very much in agreement with you John.
And me as well. You just cannot be born into the wealth and advantages that comes from being royal, much of it coming from taxpayers and the civilian society, and then just walk when you don't like the job any more. That goes for William. As for Meghan, if she cannot take the pressure of being royal, than she should choos eto not be, by not marrying someone royal.

And it all convinces me that royalty is an outmoded concept, not suitable for todays world.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Que on January 13, 2020, 08:51:10 AM
Quote from: Ratliff on January 13, 2020, 08:41:09 AM
Not racist, yeah, whatever you say.

The colour of her skin or not being a "proper home grown girl", or probably a combination of both...

I think Meghan and Harry will have to choose for a fully (financially) independent life and only showing up on family occasions. Half in- half out will not work.

Q
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Tsaraslondon on January 13, 2020, 09:02:04 AM
Quote from: The new erato on January 13, 2020, 08:50:47 AM
And me as well. You just cannot be born into the wealth and advantages that comes from being royal, much of it coming from taxpayers and the civilian society, and then just walk when you don't like the job any more. That goes for William. As for Meghan, if she cannot take the pressure of being royal, than she should choos eto not be, by not marrying someone royal.



So being royal includes having to put up with the increasingly intrusive right wing tabloid press and never being able to comment on the lies or contest them?

Press coverage of the royal family has changed completely since the Queen became sovereign. However we see it, Harry feels the tabloids hounded his mother to her death. Is it any wonder he worried about how the negative press coverage was affecting his wife, whom he married for love, not out of duty?

Incidentally the Queen has in the last hours made a statement that she supports Harrry and Meghan's decision and that details are still to be worked out.

Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: JBS on January 13, 2020, 09:28:34 AM
Quote from: Tsaraslondon on January 13, 2020, 09:02:04 AM
So being royal includes having to put up with the increasingly intrusive right wing tabloid press and never being able to comment on the lies or contest them?

Press coverage of the royal family has changed completely since the Queen became sovereign. However we see it, Harry feels the tabloids hounded his mother to her death. Is it any wonder he worried about how the negative press coverage was affecting his wife, whom he married for love, not out of duty?

Incidentally the Queen has in the last hours made a statement that she supports Harrry and Meghan's decision and that details are still to be worked out.

The fallacy is that the tabloids will step back from their coverage of the couple.  This by the way is equally true of the US tabloids, which will gladly hound them if they come to the States.

For instance, of the four top stories currently on US magazine's website, the top one is the Queen's statement and one of the other three is this one
https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/prince-william-prince-harry-deny-bullying-caused-their-rift/

That link has a side link that wants us to know that Harry and Meghan have been unroyalled by Madame Tussaud's .

Of the other two top stories, one announces that a reality starlet I've never heard of has just had her tenth child (with husband number three), and the other lists the oscar nominations.  And the sidebar wants us to know that Meghan's cookbook sales have gone up as a result of all this.

I might add that US is one of the more responsible entertainment magazines, more a competitor of People than of the National Enquirer.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: mc ukrneal on January 13, 2020, 10:53:30 AM
Quote from: JBS on January 13, 2020, 09:28:34 AM
The fallacy is that the tabloids will step back from their coverage of the couple.  This by the way is equally true of the US tabloids, which will gladly hound them if they come to the States.
That's true, but just being outside the UK will be an improvement I think.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Tsaraslondon on January 13, 2020, 11:02:51 AM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on January 13, 2020, 10:53:30 AM
That's true, but just being outside the UK will be an improvement I think.

And actually the British tabloids are, by all accounts, the worst in the world. Even Madonna, who has never been one to shirk the limelight, was surprised at the amount of press intrusion when she was living here. She said she'd never come across anything like it.

Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Ratliff on January 13, 2020, 07:34:56 PM
Quote from: The new erato on January 13, 2020, 08:50:47 AM
And me as well. You just cannot be born into the wealth and advantages that comes from being royal, much of it coming from taxpayers and the civilian society, and then just walk when you don't like the job any more. That goes for William. As for Meghan, if she cannot take the pressure of being royal, than she should choos eto not be, by not marrying someone royal.

And it all convinces me that royalty is an outmoded concept, not suitable for todays world.

It is slavery then, no way out?

Harry said he wants to establish financial independence. That would be the best thing for him. Maybe he could write a tell all book about the inbred degenerate parasites that comprise the "House of Windsor."  That might pay handsomely. :)
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Mirror Image on January 13, 2020, 07:38:24 PM
Quote from: Ratliff on January 13, 2020, 07:34:56 PM
It is slavery then, no way out?

Harry said he wants to establish financial independence. That would be the best thing for him. Maybe he could write a tell all book about the inbred degenerate parasites that comprise the "House of Windsor."  That might pay handsomely. :)

Every one should have the right to exit the Royal Family. I mean this isn't some crazy cult. My main argument is concerning Meghan Markle and I have a sneaking suspicion she persuaded Harry to follow suit. Anyway, it's all water under the bridge now since the Queen has given them both her blessings.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Ratliff on January 13, 2020, 08:00:24 PM
Certainly he should not shirk his "duties" and maintain the same level support, living in royal palaces, etc. But what are his duties? Cutting ribbons at openings of public buildings and having his personal life serve as fodder for the yellow press? As to Markle, maybe she expected to be treated like the other Royals. Maybe Harry looked at the way his father allowed Diana to be savaged and decided he would not do the same.

And as to the "disgrace" to the Royal Family, wasn't Queen Elizabeth II's uncle a Nazi sympathizer who married an American who was cheating on her second husband with him (and another man) before he abdicated?
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: The new erato on January 13, 2020, 09:42:36 PM
Quote from: Ratliff on January 13, 2020, 07:34:56 PM
It is slavery then, no way out?

Harry said he wants to establish financial independence. That would be the best thing for him. Maybe he could write a tell all book about the inbred degenerate parasites that comprise the "House of Windsor."  That might pay handsomely. :)
Yes it is. And you forgot my last sentence. Monarchy is therefore an impossible concept in todays world.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Jo498 on January 14, 2020, 12:28:40 AM
They wanted the gold but not the cage; it's not called a golden cage for nothing. I also think such absurdly twisted monarchies should be abolished. (I don't think it will, with Brexit Britain will need them more than since a long time for identity building etc.)
Or at the very least, the Royals should be given a decent education, live mostly from their own coffers, not from huge publicly funded allowances and then at 25 or so been given the option to either "opt out" completely, i.e. get no benefits (I mean simply through education and connections they would be among the most privileged fractions of their society) and not duties. Or assume their representative obligations duties and receive a corresponding "wage" but these allowances should be moderate and proportional to the actual duties.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: André on January 14, 2020, 05:20:17 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on January 14, 2020, 12:28:40 AM
They wanted the gold but not the cage; it's not called a golden cage for nothing. I also think such absurdly twisted monarchies should be abolished. (I don't think it will, with Brexit Britain will need them more than since a long time for identity building etc.)
Or at the very least, the Royals should be given a decent education, live mostly from their own coffers, not from huge publicly funded allowances and then at 25 or so been given the option to either "opt out" completely, i.e. get no benefits (I mean simply through education and connections they would be among the most privileged fractions of their society) and not duties. Or assume their representative obligations duties and receive a corresponding "wage" but these allowances should be moderate and proportional to the actual duties.

This makes a lot of sense. Going further, the immense real estate portfolio would have to be discussed. Who needs royal castles (and 'houses', 'cottages') in all corners of the Kingdom for a 'working' royal family? And all the Rembrandts, Gainsboroughs, etc that hang on their walls? Turn Buckingham Palace into a National Museum and put up turnstiles at the entrance.

Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on January 14, 2020, 06:41:28 AM
Quote from: The new erato on January 13, 2020, 09:42:36 PM
Monarchy is therefore an impossible concept in todays world.

You live in an impossible country then.  :D

Are there any Norwegian parties which advocate turning the country into a republic? What is the public support for such an idea?
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on January 14, 2020, 06:53:35 AM
Quote from: André on January 14, 2020, 05:20:17 AM
This makes a lot of sense. Going further, the immense real estate portfolio would have to be discussed. Who needs royal castles (and 'houses', 'cottages') in all corners of the Kingdom for a 'working' royal family? And all the Rembrandts, Gainsboroughs, etc that hang on their walls? Turn Buckingham Palace into a National Museum and put up turnstiles at the entrance.
What's the attitude in Canada André to current developments?
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: The new erato on January 14, 2020, 07:44:50 AM
Quote from: Florestan on January 14, 2020, 06:41:28 AM
You live in an impossible country then.  :D

Are there any Norwegian parties which advocate turning the country into a republic? What is the public support for such an idea?
This is a question that is not a subject for party politics and I think you find supporters for a  Republic in most parties. We have the same problems here with "problematic" princesses that want to be civilians though still making money from the royal title. The idea of a republic in Norway doesn't seem as outlandish as it did 20 years ago - though it is a major issue to do something about it, requiring lots of constitutional, judicial and organizational changes.

I think hereditiary titles and advantages is a very undemocratic idea, though still seeing that a monarch may have som role to play. But then they have to play the game, even though that is a game they have not chosen and cannot get away from. With great advantages comes great responsibilities.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on January 14, 2020, 07:52:57 AM
Quote from: The new erato on January 14, 2020, 07:44:50 AM
This is a question that is not a subject for party politics and I think you find supporters for a  Republic in most parties. We have the same problems here with "problematic" princesses that want to be civilians though still making money from the royal title. The idea of a republic in Norway doesn't seem as outlandish as it did 20 years ago - though it is a major issue to do something about it, requiring lots of constitutional, judicial and organizational changes.

Thanks.

QuoteI think hereditiary titles and advantages is a very undemocratic idea,

The 1923 Constitution of the Kingdom of Romania expressly forbade anyone from bearing nobility titles. The only hereditary office was that of the King. There were no dukes, counts, barons, marquesses and the like.  :)

Quote
though still seeing that a monarch may have som role to play. But then they have to play the game, even though that is a game they have not chosen and cannot get away from. With great advantages comes great responsibilities.

Completely agreed.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Irons on January 14, 2020, 08:28:19 AM
Quote from: Rinaldo on January 13, 2020, 07:46:35 AM
So what is? Why is Kate treated so differently?

Square peg in a round hole. Kate knows her place, three steps behind William.

There is a parallel with Wallis Simpson - beautiful American divorcee who creates havoc in the royal family. But more telling, I think, is Grace Kelly, like Meghan from the entertainment industry who after marrying Prince Rainer of Monaco met a distraught Diana on her first public engagement and said to her "Don't worry dear, you'll see - it'll only get worse". 
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on January 14, 2020, 11:00:42 AM
Quote from: Irons on January 14, 2020, 08:28:19 AM
Square peg in a round hole. Kate knows her place, three steps behind William.

There is a parallel with Wallis Simpson - beautiful American divorcee who creates havoc in the royal family. But more telling, I think, is Grace Kelly, like Meghan from the entertainment industry who after marrying Prince Rainer of Monaco met a distraught Diana on her first public engagement and said to her "Don't worry dear, you'll see - it'll only get worse".

Yes, the appalling Wallis Simpson and Grace Kelly very much come to mind.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: André on January 14, 2020, 12:33:56 PM
Quote from: vandermolen on January 14, 2020, 06:53:35 AM
What's the attitude in Canada André to current developments?

Well, the news were very quickly eclipsed by the downing of the ukrainian airline in Tehran in which 57 Canadians died. Much of the anger is turned toward the US (Trump and his senior military brass). Without their uncalled for, idiotic moves in the region there would not have been any need for face saving retaliation from the Iranians. Editorials across the country are urging the government to let Washington know how upset Canadians are at the outcome. Therefore, the Harry & Meghan show has been relegated to the sidelines, but it still makes headlines - mostly negative about the UK press (yes, the 'R' word is very much talked about here), but with no gushing about the prospects of what is seen as a rather unnatural graft to the maple tree. A good article has appeared inthe New York Times (of all places) that neatly details the legal intricacies of the case. It's not gonna be a walk in the park if they want to emigrate. Check:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/14/world/canada/harry-meghan-canada-queen-royals.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/14/world/canada/harry-meghan-canada-queen-royals.html)

Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on January 14, 2020, 10:38:09 PM
Quote from: André on January 14, 2020, 12:33:56 PM
Well, the news were very quickly eclipsed by the downing of the ukrainian airline in Tehran in which 57 Canadians died. Much of the anger is turned toward the US (Trump and his senior military brass). Without their uncalled for, idiotic moves in the region there would not have been any need for face saving retaliation from the Iranians. Editorials across the country are urging the government to let Washington know how upset Canadians are at the outcome.

Not to derail the thread but this is ridiculous. Iranians down a Ukrainian civil plane (hardly a face saving retaliation) and it's all the fault of the US? That's like saying that if a robber got in my yard and stole my car and the next day I shoot the first person that I spot walking past my front yard it's all the robber's fault.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Irons on January 15, 2020, 07:37:33 AM
Quote from: Que on January 13, 2020, 08:51:10 AM


I think Meghan and Harry will have to choose for a fully (financially) independent life and only showing up on family occasions. Half in- half out will not work.

Q

I agree with your second sentence. As for the first - I wish, but it isn't going to work. Harry, and by marriage Meghan, will require 24-7 protection for the rest of their lives. As a British tax payer I'm not over the moon coughing up if they live in North America. Fair play to Canada for taking over the burden. But what happens if as Meghan says they will move to the US when Trump has gone? The royal family have an ongoing major worry in that history must not in any circumstances repeat itself but they are losing control.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Jo498 on January 15, 2020, 08:59:05 AM
They are fairly rich and Harry has a rich family. They should pay  the ca. 1 million p.a. for personal security themselves. Or sell some real estate or crown jewels. As soon as the kid(s) are older, Meghan can go back to acting and contribute...
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Irons on January 15, 2020, 01:28:40 PM
Quote from: Jo498 on January 15, 2020, 08:59:05 AM
They are fairly rich and Harry has a rich family. They should pay  the ca. 1 million p.a. for personal security themselves. Or sell some real estate or crown jewels. As soon as the kid(s) are older, Meghan can go back to acting and contribute...

The British taxpayer paid £2.4 million to renovate Frogmore Cottage for Meghan and Harry. I may be completely wrong but I have a sneaky suspicion that Meghan will not set foot in the UK again. Crown jewels are not theirs to sell as owned by the nation. But you are right, the royal family have considerable wealth so for them to use it.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Ratliff on January 15, 2020, 02:07:19 PM
I feel sorry for them and hope they can find a way to live a normal life; that may not be possible. I could imagine them being given a modest (by Royal standards) severance package and being required to live privately thereafter. Enough to buy a nice house in Santa Monica, with enough in reserve to pay the upkeep, until the book royalties start coming in...
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Mirror Image on January 15, 2020, 02:53:26 PM
Quote from: Ratliff on January 15, 2020, 02:07:19 PM
I feel sorry for them and hope they can find a way to live a normal life; that may not be possible. I could imagine them being given a modest (by Royal standards) severance package and being required to live privately thereafter. Enough to buy a nice house in Santa Monica, with enough in reserve to pay the upkeep, until the book royalties start coming in...

Both Harry and Meghan knew the pressures of being in the Royal Family. As I mentioned, I'm sure Harry warned Meghan of the viciousness of the British press. This was something that just wasn't passed over without much consideration and they decided to take that leap anyway in spite of it. I think what the reality is is that Meghan thought they'd be living in the UK like the Kennedy's had lived in the US. All of that fairy tale imagery she had built up in her mind came to a crushing halt when she got a serious taste of the life of a Royal. They made their final decision and it was to walk away from all of this --- there's nothing to feel sorry for them about.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: mc ukrneal on January 15, 2020, 05:52:46 PM
I thought this article nicely highlighted some of the key issues, divisions, etc.:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/megxit-is-the-new-brexit-in-a-britain-split-by-age-and-politics/ar-BBYZG4i?ocid=spartanntp (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/megxit-is-the-new-brexit-in-a-britain-split-by-age-and-politics/ar-BBYZG4i?ocid=spartanntp)

Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on January 15, 2020, 10:51:33 PM
Quote from: André on January 14, 2020, 12:33:56 PM
Well, the news were very quickly eclipsed by the downing of the ukrainian airline in Tehran in which 57 Canadians died. Much of the anger is turned toward the US (Trump and his senior military brass). Without their uncalled for, idiotic moves in the region there would not have been any need for face saving retaliation from the Iranians. Editorials across the country are urging the government to let Washington know how upset Canadians are at the outcome. Therefore, the Harry & Meghan show has been relegated to the sidelines, but it still makes headlines - mostly negative about the UK press (yes, the 'R' word is very much talked about here), but with no gushing about the prospects of what is seen as a rather unnatural graft to the maple tree. A good article has appeared inthe New York Times (of all places) that neatly details the legal intricacies of the case. It's not gonna be a walk in the park if they want to emigrate. Check:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/14/world/canada/harry-meghan-canada-queen-royals.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/14/world/canada/harry-meghan-canada-queen-royals.html)
Thanks André. I totally understand that it was understandably eclipsed by the UIA tragedy which affected so many Canadians.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on January 15, 2020, 11:38:16 PM
Quote from: Florestan on January 14, 2020, 10:38:09 PM
Not to derail the thread but this is ridiculous. Iranians down a Ukrainian civil plane (hardly a face saving retaliation) and it's all the fault of the US? That's like saying that if a robber got in my yard and stole my car and the next day I shoot the first person that I spot walking past my front yard it's all the robber's fault.
I see your point Andrei but if Trump had not ordered that assassination 'to prevent war' none of this would have happened. It was the catalyst for a spiral of events. The British satirical magazine 'Private Eye' ran a spoof newspaper article this week, allegedly from 1914, quoting 'Gavrilo Princip' claiming that his assassination of Franz Ferdinand, the heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne, in Sarajevo was a great contribution to world peace and security and designed to 'prevent war'.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Irons on January 16, 2020, 12:09:21 AM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on January 15, 2020, 05:52:46 PM
I thought this article nicely highlighted some of the key issues, divisions, etc.:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/megxit-is-the-new-brexit-in-a-britain-split-by-age-and-politics/ar-BBYZG4i?ocid=spartanntp (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/megxit-is-the-new-brexit-in-a-britain-split-by-age-and-politics/ar-BBYZG4i?ocid=spartanntp)

A lot is true. I would take issue with some points though as they contain half-truths. For example The papers criticised them for flying on private jets they did because of the hypocrisy of just prior to jetting off to Elton John's mansion in the South of France they gave a speech encouraging us to curb air travel for the sake of climate change.  That was a PR disaster. William and Kate rubbed salt in the wounds by very publicly using a commercial airline soon after. 
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on January 16, 2020, 12:35:12 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on January 15, 2020, 11:38:16 PM
I see your point Andrei but if Trump had not ordered that assassination 'to prevent war' none of this would have happened. It was the catalyst for a spiral of events.

And if Iran had not tried to create a network of client states Trump had not ordered that assassionation.  :D

Look, I'm not defending US's actions. All I'm saying is that the direct responsibility for downing the Ukrainian plane lies with the Iranian anti-aircraft defense and specifically with whoever ordered the missile to be fired. Even Khamenei himself admitted that much.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Tsaraslondon on January 16, 2020, 03:29:14 AM
Quote from: Irons on January 15, 2020, 01:28:40 PM
The British taxpayer paid £2.4 million to renovate Frogmore Cottage for Meghan and Harry. I may be completely wrong but I have a sneaky suspicion that Meghan will not set foot in the UK again. Crown jewels are not theirs to sell as owned by the nation. But you are right, the royal family have considerable wealth so for them to use it.

One might also mention that the probable revenue from the Royal Wedding was in excess of both the cost of the wedding itself and the cost to the taxpayer of renovating Frogmore Cottage combined. If we're talking about waste, let's talk about the £66 billion Brexit has cost us so far! All this Harry and Meghan stuff is a welcome distraction and a smoke screen because the right wing prefer to ignore it.

Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on January 16, 2020, 10:26:04 AM
Quote from: Florestan on January 16, 2020, 12:35:12 AM
And if Iran had not tried to create a network of client states Trump had not ordered that assassionation.  :D

Look, I'm not defending US's actions. All I'm saying is that the direct responsibility for downing the Ukrainian plane lies with the Iranian anti-aircraft defense and specifically with whoever ordered the missile to be fired. Even Khamenei himself admitted that much.

I do agree that the direct responsibility lies with the Iranian Anti-aircraft defence.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Herman on January 17, 2020, 11:05:43 AM
I cannot help but think sometimes that his wedded state is bringing out all kinds of bad stuff in Harry.
This idea that the press killed his mom, not Fayed's drunken chauffeur.
In reality the press has generally been nice to Harry, who gave them naked billiard pictures and all other kinds of fun stuff.
Meghan is prompting a saviour syndrome in Harry that is not helping him.

This whole notion that they are going to try living "financially independently" is ridiculous.
Meghan had 4 million quid in the bank before marrying; Harry is far richer.
What they are doing is continuing to ask for attention with this bullshit.
If they want to live under the radar they should do so, but clearly that's not what they want.

They wanted Frogmore Cottage (which is NOT a cottage) redone to their wishes.
The required 2,4 million is just a blip on the screen compred to the Brexit costs, but it makes H & M look like spoiled brats just the same.

And about Canada. There is a lot of lobbying going on right now to make Harry Governor General, a job that is (formally) the Queen's to give.
There is not sufficient time in the universe to explain how bad an idea this would be, turning back the clock and making Canada a UK colony.
Let's just say H & M are bad idea magnets.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: André on January 17, 2020, 12:26:28 PM
The Queen doesn't have any jobs to hand, she merely rubber stamps the canadian Prime Minister's suggestion. Harry has as much chance to become Gov Gen as Trudeau has of becoming Pope - for the very reason you give: the clocks have been set over 60 years ago on that matter and they will not be turned back, especially not by a minority government.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: mc ukrneal on January 17, 2020, 01:12:34 PM
Quote from: Herman on January 17, 2020, 11:05:43 AM
I cannot help but think sometimes that his wedded state is bringing out all kinds of bad stuff in Harry.
This idea that the press killed his mom, not Fayed's drunken chauffeur.
In reality the press has generally been nice to Harry, who gave them naked billiard pictures and all other kinds of fun stuff.
Meghan is prompting a saviour syndrome in Harry that is not helping him.

This whole notion that they are going to try living "financially independently" is ridiculous.
Meghan had 4 million quid in the bank before marrying; Harry is far richer.
What they are doing is continuing to ask for attention with this bullshit.
If they want to live under the radar they should do so, but clearly that's not what they want.

They wanted Frogmore Cottage (which is NOT a cottage) redone to their wishes.
The required 2,4 million is just a blip on the screen compred to the Brexit costs, but it makes H & M look like spoiled brats just the same.

And about Canada. There is a lot of lobbying going on right now to make Harry Governor General, a job that is (formally) the Queen's to give.
There is not sufficient time in the universe to explain how bad an idea this would be, turning back the clock and making Canada a UK colony.
Let's just say H & M are bad idea magnets.
Do we live on the same planet I wonder. I have nearly the exact opposite view as you on almost every point. Perhaps I'll post more after dinner...
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: JBS on January 17, 2020, 03:30:43 PM
Quote from: André on January 17, 2020, 12:26:28 PM
The Queen doesn't have any jobs to hand, she merely rubber stamps the canadian Prime Minister's suggestion. Harry has as much chance to become Gov Gen as Trudeau has of becoming Pope - for the very reason you give: the clocks have been set over 60 years ago on that matter and they will not be turned back, especially not by a minority government.

You are referring to the fact that the GG has been a Canadian for decades now, I assume.  But would appointing the grandson of the Queen of Canada be in the same category as appointing a semi-random British general or politician?

I think it is all theoretical, since I know of no reason why Trudeau would be motivated to do it.  And since the GG is not appointed for life, eventually we'd be back to the same Trouble With Harry.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: mc ukrneal on January 18, 2020, 07:31:22 PM
Just a quick update, they seem to have come to an agreement. Key points I've seen so far:
1. Will repay Frogmore Cottage repairs (implying they will continue to live there or use it in some way)
2. Security still unclear
3. Will not use HRH, but will continue to use Duke/Duchess of Sussex
4. Harry remains sixth in line
5. Agreement to start in the spring, with a review 12 months after
6. Prince Charles will continue to provide some kind of support (unclear source and use of funds)

Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Mirror Image on January 18, 2020, 07:41:16 PM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on January 18, 2020, 07:31:22 PM
Just a quick update, they seem to have come to an agreement. Key points I've seen so far:
1. Will repay Frogmore Cottage repairs (implying they will continue to live there or use it in some way)
2. Security still unclear
3. Will not use HRH, but will continue to use Duke/Duchess of Sussex
4. Harry remains sixth in line
5. Agreement to start in the spring, with a review 12 months after
6. Prince Charles will continue to provide some kind of support (unclear source and use of funds)

This doesn't make any sense at all. The third, fourth, and sixth points are what really what have me scratching my head. It's not a total break from the Royal Family. I mean the idea, or so I thought, was to get as far away from this institution as they could. Looks like this is just more tabloid fodder.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: steve ridgway on January 18, 2020, 08:12:34 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on January 18, 2020, 07:41:16 PM
This doesn't make any sense at all. The third, fourth, and sixth points are what really what have me scratching my head. It's not a total break from the Royal Family. I mean the idea, or so I thought, was to get as far away from this institution as they could. Looks like this is just more tabloid fodder.

It means they are royal no more, merely rich celebrities, although retain the small possibility of inheriting it back again.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Mirror Image on January 18, 2020, 09:12:09 PM
Quote from: 2dogs on January 18, 2020, 08:12:34 PM
It means they are royal no more, merely rich celebrities, although retain the small possibility of inheriting it back again.

My previous opinion still stands. This is hardly the separation notice they issued at the beginning of this fiasco.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Irons on January 20, 2020, 08:03:46 AM
The debate, in the UK at least, has gone beyond Meghan and Harry which at the end of the day who cares. The R word has raised its ugly head and even beyond that, the left right/left divide which has caused not a small uproar. I maintain that Meghan has suffered, but not racism. But of course, I may not be right. An unlikely source, the actor Laurence Fox, has opened up the debate when appearing on "Question Time". The ---- has certainty hit the fan   https://youtu.be/_jhQsp4Ow0A but I don't think it a bad thing to openly discuss.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on January 20, 2020, 09:11:40 AM
Quote from: Irons on January 20, 2020, 08:03:46 AM
The debate, in the UK at least, has gone beyond Meghan and Harry which at the end of the day who cares. The R word has raised its ugly head and even beyond that, the left right/left divide which has caused not a small uproar. I maintain that Meghan has suffered, but not racism. But of course, I may not be right. An unlikely source, the actor Laurence Fox, has opened up the debate when appearing on "Question Time". The ---- has certainty hit the fan   https://youtu.be/_jhQsp4Ow0A but I don't think it a bad thing to openly discuss.

I totally agree with Laurence Fox on this.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Ratliff on January 20, 2020, 11:33:10 PM
Basically, I think Harry witness how his mother was savaged by the press as the royal family stood by and is not willing to allow history to repeat itself. Perhaps in his initial request he wanted to have it both ways, to some extent, but now is willing to accept that if he is out he must be really out of the royal circle. However it seems hard to define how he will completely separate himself from the royal advantages. It is not clear where this is going, but I wish the best of luck to him of luck to him.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Herman on January 21, 2020, 05:34:02 AM
Quote from: Ratliff on January 20, 2020, 11:33:10 PM
Basically, I think Harry witness how his mother was savaged by the press as the royal family stood by and is not willing to allow history to repeat itself.

And then he married an actress, who by definition cannot live without media attention.

It does not make sense.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: ritter on January 21, 2020, 05:53:29 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 21, 2020, 05:34:02 AM
And then he married an actress, who by definition cannot live without media attention.

It does not make sense.
Good point!

BTW, why Canada? I would have thought the natural place was the Bahamas.  ::)  >:D
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Irons on January 21, 2020, 06:41:35 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 21, 2020, 05:34:02 AM
And then he married an actress, who by definition cannot live without media attention.

It does not make sense.

Nail hit on head.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Ratliff on January 21, 2020, 07:20:44 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 21, 2020, 05:34:02 AM
And then he married an actress, who by definition cannot live without media attention.

It does not make sense.

I didn't say he isn't stupid. :)

He screwed up, that doesn't mean he doesn't have a right to try to fix it.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: mc ukrneal on January 21, 2020, 07:24:44 AM
I don't think he screwed up. And I don't think he has to fix anything. And I don't think it matters what any of us think. I just hope he finds happiness.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on January 21, 2020, 07:27:34 AM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on January 21, 2020, 07:24:44 AM
I don't think it matters what any of us think.

This applies to GMG overall so let's close the forum and get back to our lives.  :D
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: mc ukrneal on January 21, 2020, 07:29:36 AM
Quote from: Florestan on January 21, 2020, 07:27:34 AM
This applies to GMG overall so let's close the forum and get back to our lives.  :D
But, but, curses...foiled by my own post! :)
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on January 21, 2020, 08:38:04 AM
Quote from: Florestan on January 21, 2020, 07:27:34 AM
This applies to GMG overall so let's close the forum and get back to our lives.  :D

Wasn't your New Year's Resolution to only post on musical matters Andrei?

- although personally I'm always interested to read your comments in any section.


;D 8)
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on January 21, 2020, 09:10:38 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on January 21, 2020, 08:38:04 AM
Wasn't your New Year's Resolution to only post on musical matters Andrei?

Yeah, it was. But hey, at least for the time being I didn't start, or let myself involved in, any controversy. Fingers crossed.  :D

Quote
- although personally I'm always interested to read your comments in any section.

Thanks and likewise.  8)
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: steve ridgway on January 21, 2020, 10:48:15 AM
Any bets on 2020's least popular name for baby girls?  ;)
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Ratliff on January 21, 2020, 10:52:35 AM
Quote from: 2dogs on January 21, 2020, 10:48:15 AM
Any bets on 2020's least popular name for baby girls?  ;)

I don't know about the least popular, but I bet Meghan pushes Khaleesi off the most popular list. They're about to become to new Kardashians! :)

It amazes me when I see people from the UK regard the "royals" as anything but a national embarrassment.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on January 21, 2020, 01:48:11 PM
Quote from: Ratliff on January 21, 2020, 10:52:35 AM
I don't know about the least popular, but I bet Meghan pushes Khaleesi off the most popular list. They're about to become to new Kardashians! :)

It amazes me when I see people from the UK regard the "royals" as anything but a national embarrassment.

I'm more embarrassed by Boris Johnson.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Ratliff on January 21, 2020, 02:20:10 PM
Quote from: vandermolen on January 21, 2020, 01:48:11 PM
I'm more embarrassed by Boris Johnson.

Well, there's that...
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: The new erato on January 22, 2020, 12:31:51 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 21, 2020, 05:34:02 AM
And then he married an actress, who by definition cannot live without media attention.

It does not make sense.
What's love got to do with it, to quote Tina Turner....
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Irons on January 22, 2020, 06:37:24 AM
Quote from: Ratliff on January 21, 2020, 10:52:35 AM


It amazes me when I see people from the UK regard the "royals" as anything but a national embarrassment.

Good point. First Andrew and now this, embarrassment is right. The Queen is a woman I greatly admire, as for the rest .......
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on January 22, 2020, 07:10:16 AM
Quote from: Irons on January 22, 2020, 06:37:24 AM
Good point. First Andrew and now this, embarrassment is right. The Queen is a woman I greatly admire, as for the rest .......
+1

Someone described the Harry/Meghan relationship as like a 'holiday romance' which has gone/is going horribly wrong.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Mirror Image on January 22, 2020, 08:13:38 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on January 22, 2020, 07:10:16 AM
+1

Someone described the Harry/Meghan relationship as like a 'holiday romance' which has gone/is going horribly wrong.

I'm really in no position to judge whether there's love involved or simply a mutual infatuation, but I really do believe that Meghan thought the life of a Royal was a going to be a fairy-tale and being married to Harry was going to be one of the best decisions she's made for herself as she's someone, which Herman pointed out, that loves the spotlight and making everything about her.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on January 22, 2020, 08:44:18 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on January 22, 2020, 08:13:38 AM
I'm really in no position to judge whether there's love involved or simply a mutual infatuation, but I really do believe that Meghan thought the life of a Royal was a going to be a fairy-tale and being married to Harry was going to be one of the best decisions she's made for herself as she's someone, which Herman pointed out, that loves the spotlight and making everything about her.
Very much agree with you John.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Herman on January 22, 2020, 01:14:03 PM
What kind of surprises me is that Harry, who did mention "mental health" issues at some recent point doesn't seem to see that he's backed himself into a very tough position.

He's married a woman who displays some of the same things that his mom had (this notion of making a difference in the world in such a manner that people will think that it's really about her, not about the making the world a better place), which in turn triggers a kind of saviour complex in him which makes for rather counterproductive moves.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Ratliff on January 26, 2020, 10:16:51 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on January 22, 2020, 08:44:18 AM
Very much agree with you John.

It puzzles me that people think they know what is in Megan Markle's heart. It will be years or decades before we know how their marriage will play out. The "horrible" Wallis Simpson remained a loyal wife for 35 years.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: mc ukrneal on January 26, 2020, 11:06:42 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 22, 2020, 01:14:03 PM
What kind of surprises me is that Harry, who did mention "mental health" issues at some recent point doesn't seem to see that he's backed himself into a very tough position.

He's married a woman who displays some of the same things that his mom had (this notion of making a difference in the world in such a manner that people will think that it's really about her, not about the making the world a better place), which in turn triggers a kind of saviour complex in him which makes for rather counterproductive moves.
Actually, I think it's likely quite the opposite (that he's gotten himself out of a tough position). 

Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Irons on January 27, 2020, 07:01:20 AM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on January 26, 2020, 11:06:42 AM
Actually, I think it's likely quite the opposite (that he's gotten himself out of a tough position).

Sadly I don't think it is as easy as that - getting out of a tough position.

A thought, a long shot for sure. But what if all this (or partly) is down to antenatal depression?

Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Irons on March 05, 2021, 08:35:19 AM
If our American friends happen to watch the Oprah Winfrey interview on Sunday with Meghan and Harry I am sure not being alone in being most interested in their impressions.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on March 07, 2021, 12:03:55 AM
Quote from: Irons on March 05, 2021, 08:35:19 AM
If our American friends happen to watch the Oprah Winfrey interview on Sunday with Meghan and Harry I am sure not being alone in being most interested in their impressions.
+1
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on March 07, 2021, 07:38:44 AM
I hope to watch it tonight.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on March 07, 2021, 07:58:49 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on March 07, 2021, 07:38:44 AM
I hope to watch it tonight.
Excellent PD. I'll look forward to reading your observations.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on March 08, 2021, 08:57:45 AM
I started watching it last night and then faded away; however, I was able to watch the rest of it this morning.  Heard that it will be shown in the UK tonight.  Looking forward to comparing notes.

PD
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on March 08, 2021, 10:45:35 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on March 08, 2021, 08:57:45 AM
I started watching it last night and then faded away; however, I was able to watch the rest of it this morning.  Heard that it will be shown in the UK tonight.  Looking forward to comparing notes.

PD

Thanks for responding PD. Having seen some excerpts on the news this morning I'm not sure that I can face sitting through the whole thing!
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: DavidW on March 08, 2021, 11:50:02 AM
I only read the Times article summarizing it.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on March 08, 2021, 12:49:45 PM
Quote from: vandermolen on March 08, 2021, 10:45:35 AM
Thanks for responding PD. Having seen some excerpts on the news this morning I'm not sure that I can face sitting through the whole thing!
Well, I found it to be quite eye-opening, so I hope that you are watching and finding it to be of interest.

PD
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: steve ridgway on March 08, 2021, 09:01:20 PM
Quote from: vandermolen on March 08, 2021, 10:45:35 AM
Having seen some excerpts on the news this morning I'm not sure that I can face sitting through the whole thing!

Same here. It's not as if one could come to know the actual truth about the situation.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Mirror Image on March 08, 2021, 09:18:33 PM
Thought I would post the interview in question for those that might like to watch it:

https://www.youtube.com/v/4Kj8UPnZfPc
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on March 09, 2021, 01:40:23 AM
I did sit through it all in the end. It wasn't as bad as I thought it would be. They say that over here younger adults (under 40 maybe) were more on the side of Meghan and Harry and older people (like myself) are more sympathetic to the Royal family. Watching Harry 'drop a bomb' on his family was uncomfortable viewing and there is an element (I speak for myself of course) of self-righteousness and entitlement about M and H which I dislike and which I felt more strongly by the end of the interview. These things are never black and white (no bad-taste pun intended) and I'd like to know the context in which Harry was asked about the colour of his baby. Obviously it was a thoughtless thing to say.

I'd like to have heard Harry talk about the time that he dressed up as a Nazi for a fancy-dress party or Meghan respond to accusations of bullying herself. As far as I'm concerned Meghan was generally warmly welcomed into the royal family and the TV and press coverage was universally positive at the time of their wedding - it's just a shame that its all gone so horribly wrong. Like the breakdown of any relationship there are always two sides to the story.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: The new erato on March 09, 2021, 01:52:25 AM
It only shows that the gilded cage of royalty is impossible in a modern world. When additionally they don't play any practical role apart from national pomp and circumstance I cannot see why the institution isn't terminated.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on March 09, 2021, 01:52:54 AM
I think it's a bad-taste publicity stunt. If they really wanted to have nothing to do with the Royal Family anymore they would have kept a low profile and lived their life in tranquility. What they did instead was throwing bombs all around them. I'm sure that the RF is dysfunctional but a spoiled brat and an attention seeking lass are not going to fix it.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on March 09, 2021, 01:53:51 AM
Quote from: The new erato on March 09, 2021, 01:52:25 AM
It only shows that the gilded cage of royalty is impossible in a modern world. When additionally they don't play any practical role apart from national pomp and circumstance I cannot see why the institution isn't terminated.

Maybe Norway will give an example to the world?  ;D
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: The new erato on March 09, 2021, 01:56:34 AM
Yes, I hope they will. Rather less dysfunctional in Norway, but we see the same tendencies here, even though we are a smaller country and less royalty obsessed.

Problem is; they are alle spoiled brats. How could it be otherwise?
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on March 09, 2021, 02:01:25 AM
Quote from: The new erato on March 09, 2021, 01:56:34 AM
Yes, I hope they will.

I wouldn't hold my breath.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on March 09, 2021, 02:06:42 AM
I think one of the main problems and root causes of the scandals in the BRitish royalty is the longevity of the Queen. I think she should have abdicated long, long ago in favor of Charles and he in turn should have abdicated in favor of William.  ;D
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: The new erato on March 09, 2021, 02:34:30 AM
Probably right. Her children and grandchildren are probably not prime examples of royalty (I mean royal families seldom came to power by being particularly inteligent and empatic, and inbreeding certainly didn't help), but the longer they go without assuming office, the more rot sets in.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: The new erato on March 09, 2021, 02:38:26 AM
Quote from: Florestan on March 09, 2021, 02:01:25 AM
I wouldn't hold my breath.
The sad fact is that if Fridtjof Nansen had been willing, Norway would have been a republic. When he said no, they had to scourge the unemployment queues and ended up with an out of work Danish prince.

That said; I hold quite a bit of respect for the Norwegian royalty as persons. We could have done far worse. I'm just as concerned about the "gilded cage" these persons are born into, and the sad fact that when somebody is obviously unfit, there are no exits.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on March 09, 2021, 02:56:22 AM
Quote from: Florestan on March 09, 2021, 01:52:54 AM
I think it's a bad-taste publicity stunt. If they really wanted to have nothing to do with the Royal Family anymore they would have kept a low profile and lived their life in tranquility. What they did instead was throwing bombs all around them. I'm sure that the RF is dysfunctional but a spoiled brat and an attention seeking lass are not going to fix it.

That's a good point.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: The new erato on March 09, 2021, 03:03:32 AM
Sitting in a multimillion dollar interview and complaining about how badly they've been treatedm just confirms my general opinion that being born into that much wealth and unearned privileges arent't good for any person.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on March 09, 2021, 03:10:45 AM
Quote from: The new erato on March 09, 2021, 02:34:30 AM
Probably right. Her children and grandchildren are probably not prime examples of royalty (I mean royal families seldom came to power by being particularly inteligent and empatic, and inbreeding certainly didn't help), but the longer they go without assuming office, the more rot sets in.

Exactly.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on March 09, 2021, 03:11:11 AM
Quote from: The new erato on March 09, 2021, 03:03:32 AM
Sitting in a multimillion dollar interview and complaining about how badly they've been treatedm just confirms my general opinion that being born into that much wealth and unearned privileges arent't good for any person.

This, too.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: MusicTurner on March 09, 2021, 03:11:36 AM
Quote from: The new erato on March 09, 2021, 03:03:32 AM
Sitting in a multimillion dollar interview and complaining about how badly they've been treated just confirms my general opinion that being born into that much wealth and unearned privileges arent't good for any person.

I'd tend to go along with this ... can't say that these people seem particularly interesting either, and they live in a different sphere from ours.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: milk on March 09, 2021, 03:17:08 AM
Quote from: The new erato on March 09, 2021, 03:03:32 AM
Sitting in a multimillion dollar interview and complaining about how badly they've been treatedm just confirms my general opinion that being born into that much wealth and unearned privileges arent't good for any person.
They should thank their lucky stars they got out. I live in Japan where I think it's probably even worse and I doubt they'd let you out, much less marry who you want.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on March 09, 2021, 03:19:34 AM
Quote from: The new erato on March 09, 2021, 02:38:26 AM
The sad fact is that if Fridtjof Nansen had been willing, Norway would have been a republic. When he said no, they had to scourge the unemployment queues and ended up with an out of work Danish prince.

Imo, a comstitutional monarchy with a purely  ceremonial king/queen is a republic in all but name and has none of the latter's problems.

QuoteThat said; I hold quite a bit of respect for the Norwegian royalty as persons. We could have done far worse. I'm just as concerned about the "gilded cage" these persons are born into, and the sad fact that when somebody is obviously unfit, there are no exits.

What do you mean by "obviously unfit"?
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: The new erato on March 09, 2021, 03:57:48 AM
Charles for example.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on March 09, 2021, 04:16:27 AM
Quote from: The new erato on March 09, 2021, 03:57:48 AM
Charles for example.

How and why is Charles "obviously unfit" for being king?
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on March 09, 2021, 04:30:47 AM
I've always felt rather sympathetic to Charles. The big disaster for him was not marrying Camilla in the first place. I suspect that he'll be a good and dutiful King.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on March 09, 2021, 04:38:17 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on March 09, 2021, 04:30:47 AM
I've always felt rather sympathetic to Charles. The big disaster for him was not marrying Camilla in the first place. I suspect that he'll be a good and dutiful King.

My thoughts exactly. He has his flaws and sins --- just like we all have --- but I see nothing, absolutely nothing at all in his public behavior or personal life that would make him "obviously unfit" for the office.

Imo the only case of obvious unfitness is a clinically certified mental disease, but I'm sure both UK and Norway (or any other constitutional monarchy for that matter) have the constitutional and legal mechanisms to deal with such a situation.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: steve ridgway on March 09, 2021, 04:39:06 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on March 09, 2021, 04:30:47 AM
I've always felt rather sympathetic to Charles. The big disaster for him was not marrying Camilla in the first place. I suspect that he'll be a good and dutiful King.

Yes, Charles and William look like they'll stick to the rules.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: pjme on March 09, 2021, 04:50:55 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on March 09, 2021, 04:30:47 AM
I suspect that he'll be a good and dutiful King.

But does Great Britain really need that?
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: The new erato on March 09, 2021, 04:59:28 AM
Emotionally mature would do it for a king. The Diana debacle clearly shows that he isn't. Stick to the rules don't suffice and in that case he would still be married to Diana. It's the bending of the rules that shows a Human side that makes the Norwegian royalty loved.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on March 09, 2021, 05:07:36 AM
Quote from: The new erato on March 09, 2021, 04:59:28 AM
Emotionally mature would do it for a king. The Diana debacle clearly shows that he isn't.

I really don't get your point. Charles was pressured into marrying Diana and she was pressured into marrying him. They didn't get along well and eventually separated. Happens everywhere, all the time. What debacle are you talking about?
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on March 09, 2021, 05:42:52 AM
Quote from: Florestan on March 09, 2021, 05:07:36 AM
I really don't get your point. Charles was pressured into marrying Diana and she was pressured into marrying him. They didn't get along well and eventually separated. Happens everywhere, all the time. What debacle are you talking about?
I agree - they were both victims.

Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on March 09, 2021, 06:11:27 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on March 09, 2021, 05:42:52 AM
I agree - they were both victims.

Not least of the tabloid press.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Irons on March 09, 2021, 07:02:06 AM
I have not watched it - The Hammers were playing Monday evening so no chance - should not comment, not stopped me in the past, so I will. The queen is 94 it doesn't matter how angry Meghan and Harry are, could they have not waited? Yes, they had plenty to say about Harry's family but what about Meghan's? Apparently not a word. It did make me cringe when Meghan interviewed in one of the poorest African nations complained "no one asked if I was OK".
My view is six of one and half a dozen of the other. Bit rich of the Royal family to accuse Meghan of bullying which included Princes Margaret and Prince Andrew, pot calling kettle black. The one thing that makes me angry is that the interview portrays the Royal family and by association the UK as racist, I do not think that at all fair.   
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on March 09, 2021, 08:01:50 AM
Quote from: Irons on March 09, 2021, 07:02:06 AM
I have not watched it - The Hammers were playing Monday evening so no chance - should not comment, not stopped me in the past, so I will. The queen is 94 it doesn't matter how angry Meghan and Harry are, could they have not waited? Yes, they had plenty to say about Harry's family but what about Meghan's? Apparently not a word. It did make me cringe when Meghan interviewed in one of the poorest African nations complained "no one asked if I was OK".
My view is six of one and half a dozen of the other. Bit rich of the Royal family to accuse Meghan of bullying which included Princes Margaret and Prince Andrew, pot calling kettle black. The one thing that makes me angry is that the interview portrays the Royal family and by association the UK as racist, I do not think that at all fair.   
Agree with your last point Lol. Not in my experience anyway.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: MusicTurner on March 09, 2021, 08:20:01 AM
I read a couple of news summaries about the interview, and saw a you-t sequence of Piers Morgan walking out during a rather stupid morning programme. It's strange that this Morgan has remained a local TV star for so long, and this episode wasn't flattering for him either ... I think it would be good for him to find a new thing to do.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Karl Henning on March 09, 2021, 08:41:07 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on March 09, 2021, 04:30:47 AM
I've always felt rather sympathetic to Charles. The big disaster for him was not marrying Camilla in the first place. I suspect that he'll be a good and dutiful King.

That's been my impression, from across the waves, too.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: The new erato on March 09, 2021, 08:55:15 AM
Letting himself be pressured to marry somebody he obviously didn't  love and then not staying the course (despite his breakup being a zillion more times significant and problematic than other breakups) don't bode well in my book. OTOH, it is not like these people really matters.

Here's the then Norwegian king taking the tram with his skis during the oil crisis in 1973. The person beside him is an ordinary commuter, and he is paying for the ride:

(https://g.acdn.no/obscura/API/dynamic/r1/nadp/tr_2000_2000_s_f/0000/2016/01/14/3423180519/1/original/2400463.jpg?chk=02EC20)

Here's the current royal couple after the July 2011 terror:

(https://gfx.nrk.no/7eEbOdzbga2Sua0Dz7rApwpAzYTn9BzzaSAMqG1BVscA)

And here he is with one of his infamous (and quite often really funny) jokes during an official presentation (he likes to present them during interviews as well):

(https://ddjh0q34m0xak.cloudfront.net/mmo/images/2017/5/0050b56c-05a7-460e-979e-4d7871a6d66b.jpg?w=650)

And here he is in his open car during the Covid pandemic at the age of 82 and with a heart operation behind him:

(https://nab.no/bilder/web/58fa26dfbdbadc627cc0c8a3c5.jpg?v=1591419692)

Despite severe pressure he married a person - of bourgeoisie background - he really did love in 1967 and they still seem to have a wonderful relationship.

I respect him enormously. Still I would like to be able to have the democratic right to exchange him if he didn't perform to expectations. The people are paying his bills and privileges.

Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on March 09, 2021, 09:50:39 AM
Quote from: MusicTurner on March 09, 2021, 08:20:01 AM
I read a couple of news summaries about the interview, and saw a you-t sequence of Piers Morgan walking out during a rather stupid morning programme. It's strange that this Morgan has remained a local TV star for so long, and this episode wasn't flattering for him either ... I think it would be good for him to find a new thing to do.

He's just resigned from 'Good Morning Britain'. I watched his 'on air walk out' live. I have to say that I find him and Susanna Reid quite entertaining and they are good foils for each other. I'm not unsympathetic to PM's views on Meghan but over the last two days he just started ranting - which was not a good look.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on March 09, 2021, 09:55:16 AM
Quote from: The new erato on March 09, 2021, 08:55:15 AM
Letting himself be pressured to marry somebody he obviously didn't  love and then not staying the course (despite his breakup being a zillion more times significant and problematic than other breakups) don't bode well in my book. OTOH, it is not like these people really matters.

Here's the then Norwegian king taking the tram with his skis during the oil crisis in 1973. The person beside him is an ordinary commuter, and he is paying for the ride:

(https://g.acdn.no/obscura/API/dynamic/r1/nadp/tr_2000_2000_s_f/0000/2016/01/14/3423180519/1/original/2400463.jpg?chk=02EC20)
Here's the current royal couple after the July 2011 terror:

(https://gfx.nrk.no/7eEbOdzbga2Sua0Dz7rApwpAzYTn9BzzaSAMqG1BVscA)

And here he is with one of his infamous (and quite often really funny) jokes during an official presentation (he likes to present them during interviews as well):

(https://ddjh0q34m0xak.cloudfront.net/mmo/images/2017/5/0050b56c-05a7-460e-979e-4d7871a6d66b.jpg?w=650)

And here he is in his open car during the Covid pandemic at the age of 82 and with a heart operation behind him:

(https://nab.no/bilder/web/58fa26dfbdbadc627cc0c8a3c5.jpg?v=1591419692)

Despite severe pressure he married a person - of bourgeoisie background - he really did love in 1967 and they still seem to have a wonderful relationship.

I respect him enormously. Still I would like to be able to have the democratic right to exchange him if he didn't perform to expectations. The people are paying his bills and privileges.
Is that King Olav V?
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: The new erato on March 09, 2021, 10:14:47 AM
The one on the tram is, the father of the current Harald.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on March 09, 2021, 10:34:21 AM
Quote from: The new erato on March 09, 2021, 10:14:47 AM
The one on the tram is, the father of the current Harald.

If King Olav V's bills and privileges were paid by the Norwegian people, then his paying his tram ticket was just a cheap show.  ;D

Now seriously, what privileges do the Norwegian royalty have and what percentage of the GDP do they cost?
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Herman on March 09, 2021, 10:35:51 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on March 09, 2021, 09:50:39 AM
He's just resigned from 'Good Morning Britain'. I watched his 'on air walk out' live. I have to say that I find him and Susanna Reid quite entertaining and they are good foils for each other. I'm not unsympathetic to PM's views on Meghan but over the last two days he just started ranting - which was not a good look.

It's especially a bad look, because there's the story that Meghan (for whom I have virtually nil sympathy) would not return his phone calls when she was still single.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: MusicTurner on March 09, 2021, 10:38:07 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on March 09, 2021, 09:50:39 AM
He's just resigned from 'Good Morning Britain'. I watched his 'on air walk out' live. I have to say that I find him and Susanna Reid quite entertaining and they are good foils for each other. I'm not unsympathetic to PM's views on Meghan but over the last two days he just started ranting - which was not a good look.

OK, seen from the outside, it would have been strange if he stayed on the programme, unless it was to become a bizarrely staged reality show.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on March 09, 2021, 10:38:24 AM
Quote from: Herman on March 09, 2021, 10:35:51 AM
Meghan (for whom I have virtually nil sympathy)

Finally, something we can agree upon.  :D
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: The new erato on March 09, 2021, 10:44:22 AM
Florestan: I'm not up to the current budget, but for a start all of their substantiv holding in Norway is a result og an out of work Danish Prince being asked to be king. If you believe they are self financed you are sdfioysly wrong. Bit I think that is beside the point. The head of state in o democracy should be demecratically elected.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on March 09, 2021, 10:54:18 AM
Quote from: The new erato on March 09, 2021, 10:44:22 AM
Florestan: I'm not up to the current budget, but for a start all of their substantiv holding in Norway is a result og an out of work Danish Prince being asked to be king.

I am aware that the first Norwegian king was actually a Danish prince.

QuoteIf you believe they are self financed you are sdfioysly wrong.

I believe no such thing and I hope you don't believe that I believe that. All I ask is what are their actual privileges and how much do they cost.

QuoteBit I think that is beside the point. The head of state in o democracy should be demecratically elected.

Are you implying Norway is not a democracy?
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on March 09, 2021, 11:25:10 AM
Quote from: Florestan on March 09, 2021, 10:38:24 AM
Finally, something we can agree upon.  :D
+1
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: The new erato on March 09, 2021, 11:38:52 AM
Florestan: Are you implying they are democraticalky elected?

This discussion is going nowhere. You are considering royalty from northern Europe based on Roumanian experiences. I wouldn't have your "elected" leders either.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on March 09, 2021, 11:49:27 AM
Quote from: The new erato on March 09, 2021, 11:38:52 AM
Florestan: Are you implying they are democraticalky elected?

Answering a question with another question, really?

I imply, nay, I state it plainly: Norway is just as democratic as France or Germany.

By all means feel free to disagree.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Daverz on March 09, 2021, 11:49:57 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on March 09, 2021, 09:50:39 AM
He's just resigned from 'Good Morning Britain'. I watched his 'on air walk out' live. I have to say that I find him and Susanna Reid quite entertaining and they are good foils for each other. I'm not unsympathetic to PM's views on Meghan but over the last two days he just started ranting - which was not a good look.

He's an odious toad, and I'm glad he's no longer on our airwaves in the US.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Mirror Image on March 09, 2021, 01:17:46 PM
If I had it my way, I would disband the Royal Family, turn Buckingham Palace into a government building and make them all get real jobs. Could you imagine seeing the Duchess of Cambridge wait tables? How about the Duke of Cambridge flip burgers? These people need a serious dosage of reality and given the current state of the UK as I type, the tax payers' money should be better spent elsewhere. As I mentioned before, I think Harry and Meghan need to make a full break from the Royals or simply shut the hell up with their diatribes about society or being mistreated. I personally think the whole thing was a publicity stunt from Harry and Meghan. Good/bad press means $$$ for them.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on March 09, 2021, 01:21:24 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on March 09, 2021, 01:17:46 PM
I think Harry and Meghan need to make a full break from the Royals or simply shut the hell up with their diatribes about society or being mistreated. I personally think the whole thing was a publicity stunt from Harry and Meghan. Good/bad press means $$$ for them.

Agreed 150 %.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: DavidW on March 09, 2021, 01:30:45 PM
+2 to that.

Considering everything going on in the world I really can't devote any brain cells to worrying about those cry babies.  Sorry brits on board.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on March 09, 2021, 01:45:49 PM
Quote from: DavidW on March 09, 2021, 01:30:45 PM
+2 to that.

Considering everything going on in the world I really can't devote any brain cells to worrying about those cry babies.  Sorry brits on board.

No problem - I rather agree with you.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Herman on March 09, 2021, 02:59:26 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on March 09, 2021, 01:17:46 PM
If I had it my way, I would disband the Royal Family, turn Buckingham Palace into a government building and make them all get real jobs. Could you imagine seeing the Duchess of Cambridge wait tables?

yes, totally.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Stürmisch Bewegt on March 09, 2021, 03:45:47 PM
Help me here, Brits, I'm not the brightest gem in the treasure chest of humanity.  But as subscribers to Brit Box, my wife and I are consistently impressed with what appears to be a genuine effort - at least on Telly - to be a more inclusive country.  Or is this programming literally and figuratively "just for show?"
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Herman on March 09, 2021, 05:41:26 PM
The Royal Family business (including all the hangers-on and flunkies) is a different beast compared to the UK as a whole.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on March 09, 2021, 09:17:51 PM
Quote from: Stürmisch Bewegt on March 09, 2021, 03:45:47 PM
Help me here, Brits, I'm not the brightest gem in the treasure chest of humanity.  But as subscribers to Brit Box, my wife and I are consistently impressed with what appears to be a genuine effort - at least on Telly - to be a more inclusive country.  Or is this programming literally and figuratively "just for show?"
I'm biased but I think that, generally speaking, Britain is a tolerant and inclusive country and I'm happy living here, despite the many problems (Brexit, Harry and Meghan, Boris Johnson etc). Please do not judge the country on the (IMO) self-serving, comments of Meghan Markle. I also don't think that the Royal Family are racist despite the stupid question about the baby's likely skin colour.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Stürmisch Bewegt on March 10, 2021, 04:04:05 AM
Thank you, He Who Lives By a Mill; your "You Are There" perspective much appreciated.  To me, Harry and Meghan appear spoiled and overindulged and certainly not up to Royal tasks.  I have plum run outta sympathy for them. 
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Irons on March 10, 2021, 07:44:13 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on March 09, 2021, 09:17:51 PM
I'm biased but I think that, generally speaking, Britain is a tolerant and inclusive country and I'm happy living here, despite the many problems (Brexit, Harry and Meghan, Boris Johnson etc). Please do not judge the country on the (IMO) self-serving, comments of Meghan Markle. I also don't think that the Royal Family are racist despite the stupid question about the baby's likely skin colour.

Totally agree. I must admit being a tad surprised - I shouldn't be - at the even-handed response from far and wide on GMG. I feared a Brexit/Johnson style UK kicking but not at all. Balanced views well put and some relief that the rest of the world does not totally view this in *black and white terms. A disaster for the Royal family, and they know it. Meghan is now a superstar, but I fear for Harry in the long term.

Edit: *Unintentional pun!
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on March 15, 2021, 01:36:51 AM
Quote from: Irons on March 10, 2021, 07:44:13 AM
Totally agree. I must admit being a tad surprised - I shouldn't be - at the even-handed response from far and wide on GMG. I feared a Brexit/Johnson style UK kicking but not at all. Balanced views well put and some relief that the rest of the world does not totally view this in *black and white terms. A disaster for the Royal family, and they know it. Meghan is now a superstar, but I fear for Harry in the long term.

Edit: *Unintentional pun!
Yes, I very much agree with your last point Lol.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Irons on March 15, 2021, 08:34:05 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on March 15, 2021, 01:36:51 AM
Yes, I very much agree with your last point Lol.

There is some debate who said it Jeffrey but a saying made to measure here: Two nations divided by a a common language. In PR terms the "interview" is a disaster in the UK and a roaring success in the US. I thought the Palace response to the interview was measured and effective which took the heat out of a tricky situation, here anyway. Lets face it there are far more important things to worry about, not least the tragic event in South London.

Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on March 15, 2021, 12:31:17 PM
Quote from: Irons on March 15, 2021, 08:34:05 AM
There is some debate who said it Jeffrey but a saying made to measure here: Two nations divided by a a common language. In PR terms the "interview" is a disaster in the UK and a roaring success in the US. I thought the Palace response to the interview was measured and effective which took the heat out of a tricky situation, here anyway. Lets face it there are far more important things to worry about, not least the tragic event in South London.
I agree Lol that the Palace handled it well as did Kate for visiting the memorial to Sarah Everard and Prince William for pointing out to a shouted-out press question that the Royal Family are not racist.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on April 09, 2021, 07:28:46 AM
RIP Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh. He had multiple family connections to Mihai (Michael), the last King of Romania.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on April 09, 2021, 07:35:49 AM
Quote from: Florestan on April 09, 2021, 07:28:46 AM
RIP Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh. He had multiple family connections to Mihai (Michael), the last King of Romania.
Interesting. He's been around all my life and it seems strange that he is now gone.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11437314
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Irons on April 09, 2021, 08:19:30 AM
He had a good innings and losing a lifetime partner happens to 50% of us who are fortunate to have one. The Queen is altogether at a higher level though. A lifetime of service and devotion to a role thrust on her. Her favourite son has let her down badly and possibly favourite grandson too. Ninety four years old, alone and the genuine worry that what she has devoted her life for will end when she goes.   
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on April 09, 2021, 09:10:54 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on April 09, 2021, 07:35:49 AM
Interesting. He's been around all my life and it seems strange that he is now gone.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11437314
I can only imagine Jeffrey.

It's strange--and sad--for me too at this end.  On a personal level, it reminds me of my trips to the UK with my parents.  My dad was a bit of an anglophile and loved going there.  My last trip there was with him shortly before he died, so it also brings up family memories...visiting Buckingham Palace, going to the Tower, visiting the War Rooms, going to Chartwell, etc.  So bittersweet here.

Quote from: Irons on April 09, 2021, 08:19:30 AM
He had a good innings and losing a lifetime partner happens to 50% of us who are fortunate to have one. The Queen is altogether at a higher level though. A lifetime of service and devotion to a role thrust on her. Her favourite son has let her down badly and possibly favourite grandson too. Ninety four years old, alone and the genuine worry that what she has devoted her life for will end when she goes.   
I feel for the Queen and her family.  I can only imagine how she's feeling--losing her husband and companion of 70+ years...not to mention that she'll be expected to maintain her dignity and composure when in public (like during the funeral).

His story is quite amazing and interesting.  I hadn't known very much about him.  The story on the BBC's website is quite good.  I'm not sure whether or not this is the same article that Jeffrey linked to or not as there are numerous ones there:  https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-10224525  I am sure that it must have been difficult for him to after only a few years together and happily working on his military career, to find out that things would now be radically changing with the death of her father (only in his early 50's).  His early life too was far from easy, but he 'got on with it' and figured out a role for himself within the royal family and without (helping children and animals, including co-founding what would become the World Wildlife Fund, and getting involved in and/or founding other charities).

PD
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on April 09, 2021, 09:18:10 AM
Honesly, I don't understand why Charles is that vilified. Imho he'll be a decent, if not exceptional, king. Harry otoh is an unmitigated disaster and disgrace.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on April 09, 2021, 09:55:19 AM
Quote from: Florestan on April 09, 2021, 07:28:46 AM
RIP Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh. He had multiple family connections to Mihai (Michael), the last King of Romania.

I liked his dry sense of humor, and he was my favorite person in the British royal family.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on April 09, 2021, 10:10:48 AM
The BBC are doing him proud with all the schedule changed in tribute. Just listened to Elgar's Cello Concerto (Du Pre/Barbirolli) and listening to Vaughan Williams Symphony No.5 played in tribute - rather a good performance I think from Andrew Davis with (I suspect) BBC SO.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on April 09, 2021, 10:12:04 AM
Quote from: Florestan on April 09, 2021, 09:18:10 AM
Honesly, I don't understand why Charles is that vilified. Imho he'll be a decent, if not exceptional, king. Harry otoh is an unmitigated disaster and disgrace.
I agree with you Andrei. Are you and your wife better now?
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on April 09, 2021, 10:24:27 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on April 09, 2021, 09:10:54 AM
I can only imagine Jeffrey.

It's strange--and sad--for me too at this end.  On a personal level, it reminds me of my trips to the UK with my parents.  My dad was a bit of an anglophile and loved going there.  My last trip there was with him shortly before he died, so it also brings up family memories...visiting Buckingham Palace, going to the Tower, visiting the War Rooms, going to Chartwell, etc.  So bittersweet here.
I feel for the Queen and her family.  I can only imagine how she's feeling--losing her husband and companion of 70+ years...not to mention that she'll be expected to maintain her dignity and composure when in public (like during the funeral).

His story is quite amazing and interesting.  I hadn't known very much about him.  The story on the BBC's website is quite good.  I'm not sure whether or not this is the same article that Jeffrey linked to or not as there are numerous ones there:  https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-10224525  I am sure that it must have been difficult for him to after only a few years together and happily working on his military career, to find out that things would now be radically changing with the death of her father (only in his early 50's).  His early life too was far from easy, but he 'got on with it' and figured out a role for himself within the royal family and without (helping children and animals, including co-founding what would become the World Wildlife Fund, and getting involved in and/or founding other charities).

PD
Nice to hear about your visits to the UK with your dad PD. We don't live very far from Chartwell and my daughter loves going there. We have often met there and, of course, I have to pay for a 'slap-up' lunch (her expression) for her. I have also arranged school trips to both Chartwell and the War Rooms. On my daughter's 30th birthday I took her and her (now ex) American boyfriend to the War Rooms.
The news about Prince Philip is sad but I also heard of a tragedy today which rather puts things in perspective. The 28 year old wife (a medical doctor) of one of my school colleagues died, completely unexpectedly, over night, leaving three very young children (the youngest may not even be two years old). I'm finding Vaughan Williams's 5th Symphony, on the BBC, very appropriate and comforting listening this evening.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on April 09, 2021, 11:16:54 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on April 09, 2021, 10:24:27 AM
Nice to hear about your visits to the UK with your dad PD. We don't live very far from Chartwell and my daughter loves going there. We have often met there and, of course, I have to pay for a 'slap-up' lunch (her expression) for her. I have also arranged school trips to both Chartwell and the War Rooms. On my daughter's 30th birthday I took her and her (now ex) American boyfriend to the War Rooms.
The news about Prince Philip is sad but I also heard of a tragedy today which rather puts things in perspective. The 28 year old wife (a medical doctor) of one of my school colleagues died, completely unexpectedly, over night, leaving three very young children (the youngest may not even be two years old). I'm finding Vaughan Williams's 5th Symphony, on the BBC, very appropriate and comforting listening this evening.
I'm so sorry to hear of your colleague's wife's death...how horrible!  I imagine that they will be doing an autopsy...or not?  Were you very close to the couple?  Does he have any family nearby who are willing and able to help raise them?

PD
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on April 09, 2021, 11:22:15 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on April 09, 2021, 11:16:54 AM
I'm so sorry to hear of your colleague's wife's death...how horrible!  I imagine that they will be doing an autopsy...or not?  Were you very close to the couple?  Does he have any family nearby who are willing and able to help raise them?

PD
Thank you PD. I gather that his parents have come down from the North of England to help. I did not know the wife but my colleague and I both share a love of music. He has corresponded with the composer James MacMillan and kindly took me to the premiere of MacMillan's 5th symphony in London a while back.

This is how the BBC and ITV interrupted their programmes this morning. The newscasters must keep black clothes handy for such occasions:
https://www.thesun.co.uk/tv/14596331/bbc-itv-interrupted-programmes-prince-philip-death/
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: MusicTurner on April 09, 2021, 12:22:41 PM
Quote from: vandermolen on April 09, 2021, 11:22:15 AM
Thank you PD. I gather that his parents have come down from the North of England to help (...)

Sorry to hear those sad news. It seems that he has some good colleagues in his working environment, to help him a bit coping with all this, too - whatever the best way for him to handle it will be.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on April 09, 2021, 12:26:53 PM
Quote from: vandermolen on April 09, 2021, 11:22:15 AM
Thank you PD. I gather that his parents have come down from the North of England to help. I did not know the wife but my colleague and I both share a love of music. He has corresponded with the composer James MacMillan and kindly took me to the premiere of MacMillan's 5th symphony in London a while back.

This is how the BBC and ITV interrupted their programmes this morning. The newscasters must keep black clothes handy for such occasions:
https://www.thesun.co.uk/tv/14596331/bbc-itv-interrupted-programmes-prince-philip-death/
By the way, for those outside of the UK, I am able to watch the programming (should have checked earlier).  I only noticed this once before (when the vote for Scotland leaving the UK was going on).  Some amazing stories!

PD
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Irons on April 09, 2021, 01:24:37 PM
Quote from: Florestan on April 09, 2021, 09:18:10 AM
Honesly, I don't understand why Charles is that vilified. Imho he'll be a decent, if not exceptional, king. Harry otoh is an unmitigated disaster and disgrace.

I think the public are growing more understanding with the passage of time but the whole Diana episode rightly or wrongly did him great harm.
As for Harry, I could not agree with you more.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on April 09, 2021, 10:45:57 PM
Quote from: Irons on April 09, 2021, 01:24:37 PM

I think the public are growing more understanding with the passage of time but the whole Diana episode rightly or wrongly did him great harm.
As for Harry, I could not agree with you more.
+1
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on April 17, 2021, 06:14:01 AM
Watching Prince Philip's funerals.

I've always thought he was of German origin but to my pleasant surprise I learnt he was a member of the Greek and Danish Royal Houses, baptized in the Orthodox faith. He had multiple family connections to the last Romanian King, whose mother was a Greek princess and whose wife was a Danish princess.

A 73-year long marriage, wow!

May he rest in peace.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on April 17, 2021, 06:57:26 AM
Beside the image of the mourning Queen (actually, a wife taking farewell to his 73-year long husband) the most impressive moment for me was that lone bagpiper leaving the church while playing his mournful song. It brought tears in my eyes, not least for recent personal reasons.

Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on April 17, 2021, 02:28:30 PM
Quote from: Florestan on April 17, 2021, 06:57:26 AM
Beside the image of the mourning Queen (actually, a wife taking farewell to his 73-year long husband) the most impressive moment for me was that lone bagpiper leaving the church while playing his mournful song. It brought tears in my eyes, not least for recent personal reasons.
I can understand that Andrei. It was the most poignant musical moment of the service for me as well. The Queen cut a lonely figures, head bowed on her own.
I liked Prince Philip's musical choices, Holst, Parry, Elgar, Britten etc.
I thought that the whole service was very well done and not too long.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on April 18, 2021, 12:13:55 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on April 17, 2021, 02:28:30 PM
I thought that the whole service was very well done and not too long.

Impressive by its austerity and simplicity.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Papy Oli on April 18, 2021, 12:25:47 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on April 17, 2021, 02:28:30 PM
I can understand that Andrei. It was the most poignant musical moment of the service for me as well. The Queen cut a lonely figures, head bowed on her own.
I liked Prince Philip's musical choices, Holst, Parry, Elgar, Britten etc.
I thought that the whole service was very well done and not too long.

A very moving service indeed.

I have found the list of works that were played during the service (Britten, Bach, also RVW) but I can't find a list of what was played by the military band beforehand. I recognised Nimrod i think and Jerusalem. Which other ones ? Which Holst did they play ?
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: ritter on April 18, 2021, 12:38:48 AM
Quote from: Papy Oli on April 18, 2021, 12:25:47 AMWhich Holst did they play ?
I Vow to Thee, My Country.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Papy Oli on April 18, 2021, 12:47:52 AM
Quote from: ritter on April 18, 2021, 12:38:48 AM
I Vow to Thee, My Country.

Thank you Rafael, and good morning to you.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: ritter on April 18, 2021, 01:44:03 AM
Quote from: Papy Oli on April 18, 2021, 12:47:52 AM
Thank you Rafael, and good morning to you.
You are welcome, Olivier. And good day to you as well.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: André on April 18, 2021, 04:43:19 AM
Quote from: ritter on April 18, 2021, 12:38:48 AM
I Vow to Thee, My Country.

That's our old friend Jupiter, yes?
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: ritter on April 18, 2021, 06:33:56 AM
Quote from: André on April 18, 2021, 04:43:19 AM
That's our old friend Jupiter, yes?
Indeed it is...I didn't know that (I'm not much of a Holstian, quite obviously)...
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Irons on April 18, 2021, 06:53:42 AM
Weather wise a beautiful day.

Covid restrictions had the opposite effect to that predicted. Paired down made it more poignant somehow. Brothers are now talking which is how it should be.   
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on April 18, 2021, 09:22:40 AM
Quote from: André on April 18, 2021, 04:43:19 AM
That's our old friend Jupiter, yes?
Yes, Indeed although Holst couldn't stand it in that form.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on April 18, 2021, 12:29:46 PM
Quote from: Irons on April 18, 2021, 06:53:42 AM
Weather wise a beautiful day.

Covid restrictions had the opposite effect to that predicted. Paired down made it more poignant somehow. Brothers are now talking which is how it should be.
I watched it too here.

Beautiful day; sad occasion.  Music-wise, I liked the choral work that he had had commissioned to Psalm 104....the solitary bagpiper walking slowly away was quite poignant too.  Nice to see all of the different troops there tool

Felt for Her Majesty:  sitting alone and I imagine struggling to get through the service and knowing that at least in this life, she would never see him again.  73 wonderful years together though.  Some consolation--eventually?

And yes, I saw a photo of Harry and William talking to each other...very happy to see that.

PD
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on April 18, 2021, 12:42:36 PM
This photo was released by the Countess of Wessex (who took the photo) after Prince Philip died. It is the nicest I have seen of the two of them:
(//)
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on April 18, 2021, 12:44:47 PM
Quote from: vandermolen on April 18, 2021, 12:42:36 PM
This photo was released by the Countess of Wessex (who took the photo) after Prince Philip died. It is the nicest I have seen of the two of them:
(//)
I suspect that I know which one you were referring to; however, you neglected to post the image (or link).

PD
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on April 18, 2021, 11:50:45 PM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on April 18, 2021, 12:44:47 PM
I suspect that I know which one you were referring to; however, you neglected to post the image (or link).

PD
Oh, thanks PD - although it's showing on my screen. I'll try again below (is it visible now?):
(//)
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on April 19, 2021, 04:11:26 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on April 18, 2021, 11:50:45 PM
Oh, thanks PD - although it's showing on my screen. I'll try again below (is it visible now?):
(//)
Yes, it is.  And I agree, it's a lovely photo.  They look very happy and relaxed.

PD
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on May 31, 2021, 06:11:27 AM
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/tens-of-thousands-sign-petition-calling-for-prince-harry-to-give-up-royal-titles/ar-AAKybbN?ocid=msedgdhp (https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/tens-of-thousands-sign-petition-calling-for-prince-harry-to-give-up-royal-titles/ar-AAKybbN?ocid=msedgdhp)
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Irons on May 31, 2021, 06:55:14 AM
Quote from: Florestan on May 31, 2021, 06:11:27 AM
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/tens-of-thousands-sign-petition-calling-for-prince-harry-to-give-up-royal-titles/ar-AAKybbN?ocid=msedgdhp (https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/tens-of-thousands-sign-petition-calling-for-prince-harry-to-give-up-royal-titles/ar-AAKybbN?ocid=msedgdhp)

I am more interested who is behind the petition then the petition itself. Lady Colin Campbell is a strange one indeed. A one-off in every sense.

Edit: https://youtu.be/e4N4xqzGdxo
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on May 31, 2021, 07:06:08 AM
Quote from: Irons on May 31, 2021, 06:55:14 AM
I am more interested who is behind the petition then the petition itself. Lady Colin Campbell is a strange one indeed. A one-off in every sense.

Edit: https://youtu.be/e4N4xqzGdxo

Never heard of her until stumbling on this article but I think she has a good point. Harry can't keep on denigrating his family and the monarchy while being himself a fully titled, fully funded royal. It's immoral and absurd.