GMG Classical Music Forum

The Back Room => The Diner => Topic started by: vandermolen on November 28, 2017, 07:48:16 AM

Title: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on November 28, 2017, 07:48:16 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, 07:51:27 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, 08:20:17 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, 08:31:35 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, 08:49:17 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, 08:57:19 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, 09:56:41 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, 10:21:43 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, 10:24:19 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, 10:25:34 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, 10:37:17 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, 01:11:36 PM
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, 01:20:01 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, 01:20:15 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, 01:20:58 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, 01:29:46 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, 01:36:16 PM
Start one on Maria Callas 🤐
8)
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Que on November 28, 2017, 01:46:25 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, 01:57:23 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, 02:16:26 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, 02:18:31 PM
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, 05:29:49 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, 03:40:02 AM
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, 05:27:17 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, 05:31:04 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, 05:40:06 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, 05:47:48 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, 06:10:47 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, 06:14:02 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, 06:25:24 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, 06:30:29 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, 06:53:58 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, 06:57:34 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, 07:41:41 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, 07:42:57 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, 08:04:35 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, 08:12:47 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, 08:39:00 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, 08:56:45 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, 09:08:33 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, 09:29:34 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, 09:34:25 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, 09:34:53 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, 09:39:01 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, 10:38:19 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, 01:13:30 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, 02:05:02 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, 05:16:33 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, 11:45:04 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 30, 2017, 12:01:07 AM
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, 01:48:02 AM
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, 12:42:25 PM
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, 02:21:06 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, 08:22:42 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, 04:56:08 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, 03:11:18 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, 10:45:59 PM
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, 01:19:09 AM
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, 01:45:30 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:

Quote
Mr 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, 03:11:24 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, 08:36:16 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 12, 2018, 12:16:39 AM
I prefer the Cromwellian solution for the royals.
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on May 16, 2018, 08:12:03 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, 08:31:32 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, 08:35:50 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, 11:15:38 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, 11:43:14 AM
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, 01:22:51 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, 01:25:01 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, 10:24:18 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, 01:54:03 AM
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, 10:37:17 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, 04:43:30 AM
What did Camilla have on her head????
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Florestan on May 19, 2018, 06:49:40 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, 07:57:12 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, 08:20:58 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, 08:58:29 AM
What did Camilla have on her head????
+1
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: vandermolen on May 19, 2018, 09:03:44 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, 09:16:04 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, 01:31:42 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, 01:42:25 PM
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, 02:52:47 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, 02:55:00 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, 03:03:06 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, 09:25:01 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, 09:42:27 PM
What did Camilla have on her head????

Perhaps a dead flamingo.  ::)
Title: Re: Royal Wedding.
Post by: Que on May 19, 2018, 10:08:57 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...

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 19, 2018, 11:04:51 PM
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, 12:05:51 AM
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, 12:35:47 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, 12:52:23 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, 07:29:20 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.

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, 07:58:59 AM
But 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, 12:08:05 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, 10:14:11 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 20, 2018, 11:51:47 PM
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, 01:36:29 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, 02:50:00 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, 03:14:18 AM
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, 03:19:02 AM
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, 08:36:34 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, 08:46:31 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.