Probably of minority interest here but I thought it worth posting:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-62834633
Get a juicy bone ready to prevent the dog from barking.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/lifestyle/what-happens-queen-dies-scotland-27939919
Details of the action plan.
Oh, dear. :(
Thanks for letting us know.
PD
Main BBC presenter Huw Edwards replacing the "secondary" BBC news presenters all of a sudden before 2pm, wearing a black suit and tie, with the sign interpreter in tow, also fully in black on the news channel. BBC One on a Queen "special" until 6 pm. All the family rushing to Balmoral.
Sadly not boding well at all.
Quote from: Papy Oli on September 08, 2022, 05:27:58 AM
Main BBC presenter Huw Edwards replacing the "secondary" BBC news presenters all of a sudden before 2pm, wearing a black suit and tie, with the sign interpreter in tow, also fully in black on the news channel. BBC One on a Queen "special" until 6 pm. All the family rushing to Balmoral.
Sadly not boding well at all.
I heard that earlier (on CNN). Alas, I don't currently get BBC World (news channel on t.v.).
PD
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on September 08, 2022, 05:33:45 AM
I heard that earlier (on CNN). Alas, I don't currently get BBC World (news channel on t.v.).
PD
I've just found out that one can listen to live coverage on it (at least in the US though I suspect that it pertains to most of the rest of the world too).
Here: https://www.bbc.com/news/live/uk-62834633
PD
Yes, worrying that all the immediate Royal Family en-route to Balmoral and that Queen's doctors felt it necessary to issue a statement of concern. My daughter works in the House of Commons, and she tells me that it's all going on there ('mass panic').
I'm interested to know what, if any, coverage this is getting outside the UK.
Quote from: vandermolen on September 08, 2022, 04:39:49 AM
Probably of minority interest here but I thought it worth posting:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-62834633
Thx
Quote from: vandermolen on September 08, 2022, 05:53:20 AM
I'm interested to know what, if any, coverage this is getting outside the UK.
Non-stop on the main news channel in France, BFM TV, since early afternoon:
https://www.bfmtv.com/en-direct/ (https://www.bfmtv.com/en-direct/)
That was the same when Prince Philip passed away.
Quote from: vandermolen on September 08, 2022, 05:53:20 AM
.... ('mass panic').....
I'm interested to know what, if any, coverage this is getting outside the UK.
The international press loves "mass panic" and we will be inundated with more information than necessary, I'm afraid. Even if she just has to "rest" for a couple of days.
The queen is 96....
here is some soothing music for her...https://www.youtube.com/v/0deF_DTWGl4
Quote from: vandermolen on September 08, 2022, 05:53:20 AM
Yes, worrying that all the immediate Royal Family en-route to Balmoral and that Queen's doctors felt it necessary to issue a statement of concern. My daughter works in the House of Commons, and she tells me that it's all going on there ('mass panic').
I'm interested to know what, if any, coverage this is getting outside the UK.
CNN were covering it for some time; now, they are talking about Ukraine.
Just heard that 7 members of the royal family are on a flight to Aberdeen and the plane is expected to land in about 10 minutes.
PD
Thanks for feedback.
What a bloody awful year. When will it end! I have little time for the royal family but the Queen I have great admiration for. I fear she was more important in keeping the UK together then we ever imagined.
Quote from: Irons on September 08, 2022, 08:20:52 AM
What a bloody awful year. When will it end! I have little time for the royal family but the Queen I have great admiration for. I fear she was more important in keeping the UK together then we ever imagined.
I agree with you there.
I'm glad that you're getting some rain--at least around Balmoral, but it does seem to be a bad omen at the moment. Or perhaps fitting? I don't know.
PD
Quote from: Irons on September 08, 2022, 08:20:52 AM
What a bloody awful year. When will it end! I have little time for the royal family but the Queen I have great admiration for. I fear she was more important in keeping the UK together then we ever imagined.
You are probably right Lol, added to by the fact that it is all playing out in Scotland.
Just heard the news about her death.
I'm so sorry!
PD
Long live Chuck?
www.republic.uk.org
She was a great personality, quite possibly the last great Queen, or indeed monarch, of the UK. May God rest her in peace.
Just heard the news too, I'm very sorry; she was a strong and charismatic figure, and a great point of reference for the United Kingdom.
She lived a long life. I assume citizens of the UK find it unsettling that there is no one of her caliber to succeed her in the Royal Family.
I think Charles could be a decent, if not particularly great, king.
My condolences to all our friends in the UK.
R.I.P. Queen Elizabeth II. The end of an era...
I hope Charles chooses to be a more aggressive advocate for his pet causes and beliefs.
Quote from: SimonNZ on September 08, 2022, 11:12:10 AM
I hope Charles chooses to be a more aggressive advocate for his pet causes and beliefs.
Well, he owns a real estate in the Romanian province of Transylvania which is very dear to him and is an enthusiastical supporter and promoter of Romanian wildlife and traditions, so I hope it too. 8)
As a related oddity, in some Romanian monarchist circles the idea has been vehiculated, that if opportunity arised he could even be proclaimed King of Romania as well, thus linking Romania and the UK by a personal union. Pure fantasy, of course, but one that I would not mind at all seeing come true. ;)
Quote from: SimonNZ on September 08, 2022, 11:12:10 AM
I hope Charles chooses to be a more aggressive advocate for his pet causes and beliefs.
You mean his biscuit empire?
(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51LvvcvL34L.jpg)
They're not bad, actually.
(//)
(https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2020/11/GettyImages-170941684-9990863.jpg)
(//)
Quote from: Spotted Horses on September 08, 2022, 12:50:40 PM
You mean his biscuit empire?
(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51LvvcvL34L.jpg)
They're not bad, actually.
I was about to reply perhaps not his town planning like Poundbury, but actually I think that's a pretty great thing for a monarch to be doing. Plus I've never been to Poundbury and might well feel I could live there happily.
Quote from: SimonNZ on September 08, 2022, 02:28:53 PM
I was about to reply perhaps not his town planning like Poundbury, but actually I think that's a pretty great thing for a monarch to be doing. Plus I've never been to Poundberry and might well feel I could live there happily.
You can browse through it on Google Street View. Here's a central bit of town (https://www.google.com/maps/@50.7118845,-2.4661301,3a,75y,24.24h,91.34t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSDxjZCTCqepwAXMWp8BJgQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656). Looks nice although I don't understand where the sidewalks are supposed to be since cars are parked in them.
He's also written one or two booklet notes for Chandos (I read one about Hubert Parry) and is/was a bigtime advocate in the UK's farm to table, fresh produce, and modern British food movements. Those have been transformative for the experience of eating there.
This makes me sad even though she lived a very long and extremely full life. It's just hard to conceptualize the loss of someone who was always present. This is the first day of my life where she's not there. RIP.
Quote from: relm1 on September 08, 2022, 04:34:47 PM
This makes me sad even though she lived a very long and extremely full life. It's just hard to conceptualize the loss of someone who was always present. This is the first day of my life where she's not there. RIP.
This is the first day of the mainstream stereo era of music recording where she was not Queen.
Some classical works premiered during her reign:
Walton's Orb and Sceptre (written for her coronation, the last such work any composer has had to write!)
Vaughan Williams' Symphonies 7, 8, and 9
Walton's Symphony No. 2 and Cello Concerto
Britten's Turn of the Screw, Gloriana, Midsummer Night's Dream, and War Requiem
Tippett's Midsummer Marriage, Corelli Fantasia, and Piano Concerto
Bliss's Violin and Cello Concertos and Meditations on a Theme by John Blow
When she became queen, Colin Davis was 24, Peter Maxwell Davies was 17, James Galway was 12.
By the way, the current master of the queen's music is Judith Weir, but her job description reportedly no longer involves composing music for occasions, just education, outreach, and advocacy.
Quote from: Brian on September 08, 2022, 05:39:26 PM
This is the first day of the mainstream stereo era of music recording where she was not Queen.
Some classical works premiered during her reign:
Walton's Orb and Sceptre (written for her coronation, the last such work any composer has had to write!)
Vaughan Williams' Symphonies 7, 8, and 9
Walton's Symphony No. 2 and Cello Concerto
Britten's Turn of the Screw, Gloriana, Midsummer Night's Dream, and War Requiem
Tippett's Midsummer Marriage, Corelli Fantasia, and Piano Concerto
Bliss's Violin and Cello Concertos and Meditations on a Theme by John Blow
When she became queen, Colin Davis was 24, Peter Maxwell Davies was 17, James Galway was 12.
By the way, the current master of the queen's music is Judith Weir, but her job description reportedly no longer involves composing music for occasions, just education, outreach, and advocacy.
Interesting - thanks
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-61605149
There's a disconnect between the way the reporting say people remember the queen and what they saw as her significance and what I hear from her admirers irl and online.
I have heard zero real people say they rhought oh her as an island of stability in an ever changing world.
Quote from: relm1 on September 08, 2022, 04:34:47 PM
This makes me sad even though she lived a very long and extremely full life. It's just hard to conceptualize the loss of someone who was always present. This is the first day of my life where she's not there. RIP.
Ditto here... she took the throne just a handful of years before I was born. RIP.
Quote from: krummholz on September 09, 2022, 02:40:01 AM
Ditto here... she took the throne just a handful of years before I was born. RIP.
Same sentiments here. RIP.
I'm watching some of the tributes online: there's currently a number of "Death Gun Salutes" going on (96 rounds of cannon fire in a number of places around the UK). It's being broadcast live on the BBC's website.
PD
Just got a very silly email from Europadisc. In tribute to the Queen, they are not sending out their usual Friday promotional email...but all their Friday promotions are still available and ready if you click through to their website.
So they still have promotions...and they still sent an email...their tribute to the Queen is just to not put the link in the email ;D
I think her receiving Boris Johnson and Liz Truss just two days before her death was an amazing illustration of her being indefatigable, and yet...
in my view she set a horrible example by keeping on these many years, till 96 years for godsake, and not giving Charles a chance when he was, say, sixty years old.
rather than keeping the UK together as a beacon of stability I could well imagine her stubborness exacerbated many things that have been going very bad in the UK the past fifteen years.
however, perhaps I'm wrong in this view.
Maybe she considered it before the Camilla/Di/Dodi affair blew up?
And then it would have been too risky to abdicate in favor of Charles who would not have been close in popularity and as a symbol of stability. And I doubt that he would have stood up against the things that have been going "very bad" for decades.
It's not that the UK is alone here.
That some things seem more extreme there is probably at least partly because they could afford some pernicious developments because of windfalls like North sea oil in the 1970s and a crazy world economy that made reliance on banksters (= city of London) not only possible but lucrative for a surprisingly long period of time.
Quote from: Herman on September 09, 2022, 04:54:20 AM
I think her receiving Boris Johnson and Liz Truss just two days before her death was an amazing illustration of her being indefatigable, and yet...
in my view she set a horrible example by keeping on these many years, till 96 years for godsake, and not giving Charles a chance when he was, say, sixty years old.
rather than keeping the UK together as a beacon of stability I could well imagine her stubborness exacerbated many things that have been going very bad in the UK the past fifteen years.
however, perhaps I'm wrong in this view.
In the contrary, I think it's just fine that Elizabeth held on to the end. Let's face it, the Monarch plays almost no role in the governance of the country: in a sense it doesn't matter who he/she personally is. Charles has played an increasing role which was both fitting and necessary from the point of view of the minor if visible duties of the Monarch.
For example -- a ceremonially very important one -- Charles opened the current session of Parliament as the Queen's personal surrogate. Note the Imperial State Crown, normally worn by the Queen herself when opening Parliament, is displayed beside Charles.
(https://media-cldnry.s-nbcnews.com/image/upload/t_focal-760x428,f_auto,q_auto:best/mpx/2704722219/2022_05/1240576360-7yzvuk.jpg)
Quote from: Spotted Horses on September 08, 2022, 12:50:40 PM
You mean his biscuit empire?
(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51LvvcvL34L.jpg)
They're not bad, actually.
I must say, seeing this has caused a sharp intake of breath. Somehow, and I speak with some authority here because I am British through and through, somehow the idea of His Majesty the King being basically a biscuit salesman seems totally wrong.
By the way, his oatcakes are nowhere near as good as Nairn's - but maybe Nairn hasn't made it to The Lone Star State.
Quote from: Herman on September 09, 2022, 04:54:20 AM
I think her receiving Boris Johnson and Liz Truss just two days before her death was an amazing illustration of her being indefatigable, and yet...
in my view she set a horrible example by keeping on these many years, till 96 years for godsake, and not giving Charles a chance when he was, say, sixty years old.
rather than keeping the UK together as a beacon of stability I could well imagine her stubborness exacerbated many things that have been going very bad in the UK the past fifteen years.
however, perhaps I'm wrong in this view.
My own thought is that, if you receive the likes of Boris Johnson and Liz Truss in one day it's almost inevitable that you will die two days after.
When Parliament was opened this year, Charles delivered the Queen's speech. I felt he was totally uncomfortable with the role, he came across to me as an unwell and unhappy old man. Constipated.
Quote from: Mandryka on September 09, 2022, 07:12:47 AM
My own thought is that, if you receive the likes of Boris Johnson and Liz Truss in one day it's almost inevitable that you will die two days after.
;D
Not religious, but sometimes .........
Not only a rainbow over Windsor Castle yesterday
(https://i.imgur.com/0BJKC21.jpg)
but Buckingham Palace too!
I don't pretend to unspool the ol' memory with any accuracy, but I should guess that Queen Elizabeth was the first foreign figure I was aware of, and I probably knew of her before I knew who the President of the US was.
Whatever one may think of the British monarchy as an institution, Elizabeth ll was a close to a perfect sovereign as the UK will ever have. She discharged the duties of her position with a nobility which was both personal and practical. She was Queen for seventy years, never faltered, and was loved by countless people around the world.
I don't envy King Charles lll. He must now master his personal grief, put whatever he learned from his mother into daily practice, and try to be a worthy successor.
It wouldn't surprise me at all to learn that he was wishing he could be anything but the King of England.
Quote from: Mandryka on September 09, 2022, 07:10:54 AM
I must say, seeing this has caused a sharp intake of breath. Somehow, and I speak with some authority here because I am British through and through, somehow the idea of His Majesty the King being basically a biscuit salesman seems totally wrong.
By the way, his oatcakes are nowhere near as good as Nairn's - but maybe Nairn hasn't made it to The Lone Star State.
Actually we often eat Nairn biscuits here. I'm not sure I've ever found the King's biscuits here in the states. I might have tried them some years ago when I was in London and Cambridge on holiday.
She was beautiful inside and out! Incredible woman. The rainbows are beautiful.
Quote from: Brian on September 09, 2022, 04:38:24 AM
Just got a very silly email from Europadisc. In tribute to the Queen, they are not sending out their usual Friday promotional email...but all their Friday promotions are still available and ready if you click through to their website.
So they still have promotions...and they still sent an email...their tribute to the Queen is just to not put the link in the email ;D
That sounds strange!
Quote from: Irons on September 09, 2022, 07:17:23 AM
;D
Not religious, but sometimes .........
Not only a rainbow over Windsor Castle yesterday
(https://i.imgur.com/0BJKC21.jpg)
but Buckingham Palace too!
I heard about (saw in pictures) those rainbows and thought that was particularly special--including a double rainbow!
From this American's standpoint [And I hope that you don't mind me adding my two-cents worth], King Charles III will certainly have quite some challenges ahead of him (to say the least) and will have to figure out his own path. From what I recall reading and hearing about in the past, he's been very much involved in a number of environmental and organic gardening/food *charities and was also one of the earlier warners about the dangers of climate change and that we needed to figure out a way to reverse it. I remember when his book on Highgrove was published too.
Obviously now, he has a whole new position with different responsibilities and commitments. How he'll figure out how to balance things/duties and what to spend time on and how to use his voice effectively will be interesting to see. That and how to evolve with the times and find the right balance between modernizing the monarchy and keeping certain traditions alive.
It will also be interesting to see if he meets regularly with the PMs and what kind of relationships he develops there and advice that he gives them--though, from what I understand, those discussions are normally kept private.
I wish him all the best--wisdom, health, fortitude and strength particularly in these trying times and with the recent loss of his mother and Queen. And my heart goes out to his family, their friends and all who knew and loved Queen Elizabeth, II all across the world.
*amongst others
Flags at half-mast here; a fitting tribute me thinks.
PD
Quote from: Florestan on September 08, 2022, 10:05:13 AM
I think Charles could be a decent, if not particularly great, king.
I'm not sure what it even means to be a great king. The King doesn't have any duties or powers, except to preside at various ceremonies. I think his biggest problem is that he has taken it on himself to advocate for various causes, and as the King he is supposed to be entirely neutral. He will have to pull back from his advocacy if he is to satisfy that requirement.
I saw a newspaper article and it said that Camilla would become Queen, but without any powers. Then I thought, what powers would those even be?
Quote from: Spotted Horses on September 09, 2022, 11:12:43 AM
I'm not sure what it even means to be a great king. The King doesn't have any duties or powers, except to preside at various ceremonies. I think his biggest problem is that he has taken it on himself to advocate for various causes, and as the King he is supposed to be entirely neutral. He will have to pull back from his advocacy if he is to satisfy that requirement.
I saw a newspaper article and it said that Camilla would become Queen, but without any powers. Then I thought, what powers would those even be?
Maybe they were trying to emphasize thar Queen Regnant (which Queen Elizabeth was) is a very different position than Queen Consort (which seems to be Camilla's title).
I seem to remember that at the time she married Charles, it was announced she would never be Queen, only Duchess of Cornwall (she was never officially Princess of Wales). That apparently is now down the memory hole.
Quote from: Mandryka on September 09, 2022, 07:10:54 AM
I must say, seeing this has caused a sharp intake of breath. Somehow, and I speak with some authority here because I am British through and through, somehow the idea of His Majesty the King being basically a biscuit salesman seems totally wrong.
By the way, his oatcakes are nowhere near as good as Nairn's - but maybe Nairn hasn't made it to The Lone Star State.
From what I can see, the proceeds goes towards charity?
From the Waitress Duchy Organic website:
Sales from Waitrose Duchy Organic provide a donation to The Prince of Wales's Charitable Fund. Since 2009, you have helped us raise over £30 million for good causes, supporting a wide range of projects and communities
Registered Charity 1127255 (England and Wales) Not certain if that means that it's a 100 donation (probably net vs. gross sales) or "x-amount/percentage"? Does anyone here know? The wording sounded to me like it was all of the Waitress Duchy Organic problems that this applies to too.
https://www.waitrose.com/ecom/shop/browse/groceries/organic_shop/duchy
PD
Quote from: Mandryka on September 09, 2022, 07:12:47 AM
My own thought is that, if you receive the likes of Boris Johnson and Liz Truss in one day it's almost inevitable that you will die two days after.
Quote from: Mandryka on September 09, 2022, 07:10:54 AMI am British through and through
Yes, you are ;D
I can't but echo Relm1's thoughts on the matter:
Quote from: relm1 on September 08, 2022, 04:34:47 PM
This makes me sad even though she lived a very long and extremely full life. It's just hard to conceptualize the loss of someone who was always present. This is the first day of my life where she's not there. RIP.
I'm not a Brit, and as much as I like to believe I was an Englishman in a recent past life, I have no way of proving this—but one cannot deny that this marks the end of a (seven-decade) era.
My understanding is that "Queen Consort" is a completely made-up title for Camilla only which has never been used for the queen of any previous British king, and that it is meant to make people think about Diana. Silliness.
Quote from: Brian on September 09, 2022, 03:53:44 PM
My understanding is that "Queen Consort" is a completely made-up title for Camilla only which has never been used for the queen of any previous British king, and that it is meant to make people think about Diana. Silliness.
I suppose the idea is related to Victoria's Prince Consort. I'm inclined to buy it, but then, who am I?
Quote from: Mandryka on September 09, 2022, 07:12:47 AM
My own thought is that, if you receive the likes of Boris Johnson and Liz Truss in one day it's almost inevitable that you will die two days after.
;D ;D ;D
This was the front of The Times yesterday. The black border is only ever used for the death of the Monarch.
(//)
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on September 09, 2022, 08:43:20 AM
That sounds strange!
I heard about (saw in pictures) those rainbows and thought that was particularly special--including a double rainbow!
From this American's standpoint [And I hope that you don't mind me adding my two-cents worth], King Charles III will certainly have quite some challenges ahead of him (to say the least) and will have to figure out his own path. From what I recall reading and hearing about in the past, he's been very much involved in a number of environmental and organic gardening/food *charities and was also one of the earlier warners about the dangers of climate change and that we needed to figure out a way to reverse it. I remember when his book on Highgrove was published too.
Obviously now, he has a whole new position with different responsibilities and commitments. How he'll figure out how to balance things/duties and what to spend time on and how to use his voice effectively will be interesting to see. That and how to evolve with the times and find the right balance between modernizing the monarchy and keeping certain traditions alive.
It will also be interesting to see if he meets regularly with the PMs and what kind of relationships he develops there and advice that he gives them--though, from what I understand, those discussions are normally kept private.
I wish him all the best--wisdom, health, fortitude and strength particularly in these trying times and with the recent loss of his mother and Queen. And my heart goes out to his family, their friends and all who knew and loved Queen Elizabeth, II all across the world.
*amongst others
Flags at half-mast here; a fitting tribute me thinks.
PD
I think it brilliant that forum members from overseas join the discussion and PD, your views are worth much more then two cents!
He has already said Prince Charles and King Charles are completely different roles. He will be well advised from now on to keep his strong beliefs on climate change and architecture to himself.
If he follows the advice from his mother
Never complain and never explain he will be OK.
He has began well with his address to the nation yesterday by expressing his love for Harry and Meghan. Shrewd that!
Quote from: vandermolen on September 09, 2022, 11:58:55 PM
This was the front of The Times yesterday. The black border is only ever used for the death of the Monarch.
(//)
Thanks for those images. I'll read the Times article later. Sweet and poignant cartoon of the corgi. :(
Currently watching the proclamation (up pretty early here). Watching via computer as the definition is better!
Quote from: Irons on September 10, 2022, 01:23:14 AM
I think it brilliant that forum members from overseas join the discussion and PD, your views are worth much more then two cents!
He has already said Prince Charles and King Charles are completely different roles. He will be well advised from now on to keep his strong beliefs on climate change and architecture to himself.
If he follows the advice from his mother Never complain and never explain he will be OK.
He has began well with his address to the nation yesterday by expressing his love for Harry and Meghan. Shrewd that!
Sadly, I missed some of his speech to the public yesterday; I noticed that it's (unsurprisingly) on the BBC website, so will watch that later. I suspect that many of our members here were busy watching/listening to the various ceremonies, etc., yesterday and will throughout the coming weeks?
PD
Overall, though riduculed, Charles has been way ahead of his time in environmental and nature-conservation issues, and what appears to be a more 'democratic' engaged attitude; and with the experience he must have gathered, I can't but see him becoming a good king. He has said that he will downplay quasi-political content when getting the throne. There's the question though, if critical voices elsewhere in the Commonwealth will be gaining some momentum, now that such a prominent and stabilizing member of the institution has gone.
Quote from: Irons on September 10, 2022, 01:23:14 AM
I think it brilliant that forum members from overseas join the discussion and PD, your views are worth much more then two cents!
He has already said Prince Charles and King Charles are completely different roles. He will be well advised from now on to keep his strong beliefs on climate change and architecture to himself.
If he follows the advice from his mother Never complain and never explain he will be OK.
He has began well with his address to the nation yesterday by expressing his love for Harry and Meghan. Shrewd that!
+1
Charles knows his classical so I'm curious who is going to compose the coronation music.
Quote from: Brian on September 10, 2022, 03:12:51 AM
Charles knows his classical so I'm curious who is going to compose the coronation music.
I wonder how much Judith Weir will be involved? She's the Master of the *
Queen's Music. Apparently, according to this article, "The Master of the Queen's Music is an honorary position conferred on an eminent musician. There are no fixed duties involved although the Master may compose pieces for Royal or State occasions."
Perhaps she'll make suggestions and maybe compose one or two pieces herself?
*Change of title now too?
https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-28408319
PD
Quote from: Irons on September 10, 2022, 01:23:14 AM
. He will be well advised from now on to keep his strong beliefs on climate change and architecture to himself.
I disagree.
King Charles III will get a congratulatory gift from Finnish candy manufacturer Fazer. The gift is a box of 23 marmalade sweets. This tradition started in 1902 when King Edvard VII was crowned and now after 70 years it is continuing.
Quote from: Brian on September 10, 2022, 03:12:51 AM
Charles knows his classical so I'm curious who is going to compose the coronation music.
Where is Elgar when you need him? ;D
Quote from: 71 dB on September 10, 2022, 06:03:25 AM
Where is Elgar when you need him? ;D
Answering Elizabeth ll's questions, for the time being. ;)
To put her long reign in some historical perspective: that her first prime-minister was Winston Churchill is perhaps less astounding a fact than her being born in the same decade that saw the death of Saint-Saens and Gabriel Faure. ;)
Quote from: Florestan on September 10, 2022, 06:56:08 AM
To put her long reign in some historical perspective: that her first prime-minister was Winston Churchill is perhaps less astounding a fact than her being born in the same decade that saw the death of Saint-Saens and Gabriel Faure. ;)
Someone pointed out; her first Prime Minister (Churchill) was born in 1874 while her last (Liz Truss) was born 101 years later....! (1975)
Quote from: 71 dB on September 10, 2022, 05:55:37 AM
King Charles III will get a congratulatory gift from Finnish candy manufacturer Fazer. The gift is a box of 23 marmalade sweets. This tradition started in 1902 when King Edvard VII was crowned and now after 70 years it is continuing.
Very nice!
Quote from: Roasted Swan on September 10, 2022, 07:00:34 AM
Someone pointed out; her first Prime Minister (Churchill) was born in 1874 while her last (Liz Truss) was born 101 years later....! (1975)
Remarkable, indeed.
Now, King Michael of Romania ascended to the throne as a major person in 1940. Had his reign not been brought to an abrupt end by the USSR-engineered Communist takeover of my country in 1947, he'd have been the longest reigning monarch in known history, with 77 years of reign (he died in 2017 at 96, exactly the same age as the Queen). Incidentally, he was a relative of Elisabeth II both by himself and by his wife, Anna of Bourbon-Parma.
What strikes me about the social media response to the death of Queen Elizabeth is the variety of filtration settings on the lenses through which everyone sees the late monarch, and how many people volunteer that they're the only ones to see the unvarnished truth.
Quote from: 71 dB on September 10, 2022, 05:55:37 AM
King Charles III will get a congratulatory gift from Finnish candy manufacturer Fazer. The gift is a box of 23 marmalade sweets. This tradition started in 1902 when King Edvard VII was crowned and now after 70 years it is continuing.
Very nice!
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on September 10, 2022, 03:27:20 AM
I wonder how much Judith Weir will be involved? She's the Master of the *Queen's Music. Apparently, according to this article, "The Master of the Queen's Music is an honorary position conferred on an eminent musician. There are no fixed duties involved although the Master may compose pieces for Royal or State occasions."
Perhaps she'll make suggestions and maybe compose one or two pieces herself?
*Change of title now too?
https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-28408319
PD
I'm curious too! Of course the fact that it has been 70 years since the last coronation adds another layer of guesswork. Previously, it appears that multiple composers contributed. William Walton never held the Master title (by his own preference) but wrote Crown Imperial for George VI and Orb and Sceptre for Elizabeth II (I listened to both yesterday). Arnold Bax and Arthur Bliss, who did have the Master title, also contributed additional music.
Maybe we can hope for multiple works, maybe by Weir and...Adès? Hough? Turnage? It's not a deep bench of composers.
I also wondered if it is possible Charles asked someone to write a piece for him years and years ago, and has been saving it up.
.
Quote from: Brian on September 10, 2022, 01:44:45 PM
Maybe we can hope for multiple works, maybe by Weir and...Adès? Hough? Turnage? It's not a deep bench of composers.
How about something modern/jazzy/funky/wild/younameit by Jacob Collier? 8)
Quote from: Roasted Swan on September 10, 2022, 07:00:34 AM
Someone pointed out; her first Prime Minister (Churchill) was born in 1874 while her last (Liz Truss) was born 101 years later....! (1975)
I heard someone on the news the other day mention about when Churchill was born, but hadn't heard the comparison and comment about when Liz Truss was born! Oh, my!
Quote from: Brian on September 10, 2022, 01:44:45 PM
I'm curious too! Of course the fact that it has been 70 years since the last coronation adds another layer of guesswork. Previously, it appears that multiple composers contributed. William Walton never held the Master title (by his own preference) but wrote Crown Imperial for George VI and Orb and Sceptre for Elizabeth II (I listened to both yesterday). Arnold Bax and Arthur Bliss, who did have the Master title, also contributed additional music.
Maybe we can hope for multiple works, maybe by Weir and...Adès? Hough? Turnage? It's not a deep bench of composers.
I also wondered if it is possible Charles asked someone to write a piece for him years and years ago, and has been saving it up.
I suspect that it will be a combination of older works with some new and specially composed ones mixed in.
Quote from: 71 dB on September 10, 2022, 02:05:21 PM
0:)
Oh right! Finally she gets to ask about the Enigma...
;D 8)
PD
'I cannot mourn': Former colonies conflicted over the queen (https://apnews.com/article/king-charles-iii-africa-caribbean-slavery-50f9175b541f307adb2e494fcccc80f5)
Quote from: Cara Anna, Danica Coto, and Rodney MuhumuzaAnger came from ordinary people. Some called for apologies for past abuses like slavery, others for something more tangible.
The queen was a nice old lady.
We will undoubtedly see the old imperial favourites trotted out for KCIII. I think there is enough talent out there to write new material for ceremonial or state occasions, but the appetite will only be for the same standard pieces that emphasise continuity, history, and a spirit of empire. The familiar vehicles of ritualised monarchy and Anglican formalism will predominate, with a smattering of Cool Britannia, perhaps.
The Queen is dead; long live the King.
The British monarchy is the ultimate bulwark against messianic leaders in the western world. There is always somebody more powerful than the PM who has to be bowed down to!! There have been no messianic British PMs under their constitutional monarchy and none (OK, perhaps Trudeau in Canada) in the rest of the Commonwealth. Not like the USA which sure could have used a monarch to deter the messianic Trump; a President in a culture which celebrates 'stardom'. The Brits are the opposite of this and I'm so very thankful. Republicans need to think very carefully about checks and balances if and when they consider dumping the monarchy.
The Left despises the monarchy as it's the last bastion - apart from the christian churches - which hasn't fallen to their long march through the remaining institutions. Let's hope the churches can withstand that march for much longer.
Eleven. I went back and counted.
Eleven is the number of times I said bullshit and rolled my eyes in reading that post.
Quote from: SimonNZ on September 11, 2022, 04:20:18 PM
Eleven. I went back and counted.
Eleven is the number of times I said bullshit and rolled my eyes in reading that post.
There are reasons why I use the Ignore function.
It seemed really odd singing 'God Save the King' in the school chapel last Friday the day after the Queen died. She has been around all my life, and I can understand why many people feel so upset and disorientated by her passing. I agree that a non-political Head of State is a good thing, and, in that respect, I support the monarchy, although I'm no great royalist.
Quote from: vandermolen on September 12, 2022, 02:09:18 AM
It seemed really odd singing 'God Save the King' in the school chapel last Friday the day after the Queen died. She has been around all my life, and I can understand why many people feel so upset and disorientated by her passing. I agree that a non-political Head of State is a good thing, and, in that respect, I support the monarchy, although I'm no great royalist.
I can see all that.
Quote from: vandermolen on September 12, 2022, 02:09:18 AM
It seemed really odd singing 'God Save the King' in the school chapel last Friday the day after the Queen died. She has been around all my life, and I can understand why many people feel so upset and disorientated by her passing. I agree that a non-political Head of State is a good thing, and, in that respect, I support the monarchy, although I'm no great royalist.
I wonder how many people have "goofed" in singing the song and by rote said "queen" instead? Or stumbled when they came to that part?
Question for you all: I am checking in to the live coverage now and am wondering who is the woman sitting between Charles and Camilla (Scottish Parliament is currently addressing them)?
PD
EDIT: I suspect that it was the Countess of Wessex, Prince Edward's wife.
Quote from: Christabel on September 11, 2022, 03:11:20 PM
The Queen is dead; long live the King.
The Left despises the monarchy as it's the last bastion - apart from the christian churches - which hasn't fallen to their long march through the remaining institutions. Let's hope the churches can withstand that march for much longer.
How right you are. When King Charles attended the Accession Council at St James Palace all past leaders were lined up in the front row. One was notable for his absence. No prizes for guessing who.
Quote from: Irons on September 12, 2022, 11:23:10 AM
How right you are. When King Charles attended the Accession Council at St James Palace all past leaders were lined up in the front row. One was notable for his absence. No prizes for guessing who.
Sorry, but your American friend here is missing who didn't show up...trying to keep up with all of the British prime ministers. I saw Blair, Johnson, Cameron, May, Major, Truss.
Oh, googled further: Corbyn didn't show up. May I ask as to why you think/heard that he didn't? I don't know much about him and also his political views and relationship with the Queen.
PD
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on September 12, 2022, 12:24:53 PM
Sorry, but your American friend here is missing who didn't show up...trying to keep up with all of the British prime ministers. I saw Blair, Johnson, Cameron, May, Major, Truss.
Oh, googled further: Corbyn didn't show up. May I ask as to why you think/heard that he didn't? I don't know much about him and also his political views and relationship with the Queen.
PD
Not sure about the Scottish Parliament - maybe the Speaker. Corbyn was never PM - all the others were.
Quote from: vandermolen on September 12, 2022, 02:09:18 AM
It seemed really odd singing 'God Save the King' in the school chapel last Friday the day after the Queen died. She has been around all my life, and I can understand why many people feel so upset and disorientated by her passing. I agree that a non-political Head of State is a good thing, and, in that respect, I support the monarchy, although I'm no great royalist.
It seemed odd to watch the
Peppa Pig episode where Miss Rabbit receives an award from the Queen and visits the Queen at her palace. Although it is never explicit the Queen, the only human to have appeared in
Peppa Pig, was clearly based on Queen Elizabeth III. It is even said that permission was sought before the episode was made.
That's an American's view.
Quote from: vandermolen on September 12, 2022, 01:57:16 PM
Not sure about the Scottish Parliament - maybe the Speaker. Corbyn was never PM - all the others were.
Starmer there, Jeffrey.
Quote from: vandermolen on September 12, 2022, 01:57:16 PM
Not sure about the Scottish Parliament - maybe the Speaker. Corbyn was never PM - all the others were.
Whoops! Sorry, my goof! Not certain where I got my info from at the time.... :-[
And whomever the lady was, she was sitting between Charles and Camilla but seated behind them. I'll see if I can find a photo of the Speaker to compare....
PD
Quote from: Irons on September 13, 2022, 06:19:36 AM
Starmer there, Jeffrey.
Present as Leader of the Opposition.
After googling, I suspect that you're right Jeffrey.
PD
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on September 13, 2022, 07:37:48 AM
Whoops! Sorry, my goof! Not certain where I got my info from at the time.... :-[
And whomever the lady was, she was sitting between Charles and Camilla but seated behind them. I'll see if I can find a photo of the Speaker to compare....
PD
The "lady" is I think Penny Mordaunt.
The "charismatic" king...
https://www.youtube.com/v/HhV2082VhPA
Paying respect to these people in the middle of the 21st Century is frankly absurd. After the Brexit, abolishing the monarchy should be the next step.
Quote from: Florestan on September 08, 2022, 09:38:02 AM
She was a great personality, quite possibly the last great Queen, or indeed monarch, of the UK. May God rest her in peace.
Belated Thank You Andrei.
I'm surprised by my emotional reaction to all this.
It may be difficult for those outside the UK (or Commonwealth?) to understand this, but it is very real here.
I found the TV images of her coffin being driven back into Buckingham Palace, through streets lined with silent people, to be very moving.
Quote from: ritter on September 08, 2022, 10:12:49 AM
My condolences to all our friends in the UK.
R.I.P. Queen Elizabeth II. The end of an era...
Belated thank you Rafael. Much appreciated. :)
Quote from: Symphonic Addict on September 13, 2022, 12:22:11 PM
The "charismatic" king...
Nobody ever claimed Charles was charismatic.
Quotehttps://www.youtube.com/v/HhV2082VhPA
The 'furiously' in the title is gratuitous, as anyone can see just by watching the video. He was not furious but annoyed --- and rightly so: how was he supposed to sign the papers with all those things on the desk hindering the movements of his right hand?
QuotePaying respect to these people in the middle of the 21st Century is frankly absurd.
No, it's not. The respect is paid not so much to this or that Queen or King but to the whole history of a nation. I think that having such a fixed, unchanging and immutable point of reference above mere ephemeral politicians and politics as the monarchy is great. Had it not been for the communist takeover, Romania would have had it too.
QuoteAfter the Brexit, abolishing the monarchy should be the next step.
That's for the British people to decide and they seem to think otherwise.
Sorry, Cesar, I'm in complete disagreement with you here.
Quote from: vandermolen on September 13, 2022, 01:44:01 PM
Belated Thank You Andrei.
I'm surprised by my emotional reaction to all this.
It may be difficult for those outside the UK (or Commonwealth?) to understand this, but it is very real here.
I found the TV images of her coffin being driven back into Buckingham Palace, through streets lined with silent people, to be very moving.
No, you're not alone.
PD
Difficult transition period. Whatever the provocation or personal emotional challenge, to my knowledge QEII never publicly displayed temper or poor grace in the way that we have seen in KCIII on two occasions in the last week. Tough time for him, no doubt, but the preservation of monarchy, Commonwealth and global respect faces hard scrutiny in coming months. I appreciate all the reminders of his loss and new responsibilities, but he is the King with a huge advisory team and years of preparation not a new management promotee. Two children were expected to shadow their mother's coffin without loss of composure when Diana died, which they did, and he is not a child.
The death of QEII was always going to herald the move to exit the Commonwealth for many constituent nations, but a petulant or media-unaware King won't help.
Quote from: Florestan on September 13, 2022, 11:27:27 PM
That's for the British people to decide and they seem to think otherwise.
Has there ever been a case of the monarchy (with a considerable, here >1000 years tradition) in a major country being abolished quietly and peacefully? Usually this is only done during/after momentous events, like revolution, civil war (as in England in the 17th century or in France and Russia) or after catastrophically lost wars (like in Germany and Austria). So I'd rather not wish for conditions that could lead to abolishing the monarchy in Britain.
Quote from: Jo498 on September 14, 2022, 06:53:21 AM
Has there ever been a case of the monarchy (with a considerable, here >1000 years tradition) in a major country being abolished quietly and peacefully?
No.
QuoteI'd rather not wish for conditions that could lead to abolishing the monarchy in Britain.
+ 1.
Quote from: Florestan on September 13, 2022, 11:27:27 PM
Nobody ever claimed Charles was charismatic.
The 'furiously' in the title is gratuitous, as anyone can see just by watching the video. He was not furious but annoyed --- and rightly so: how was he supposed to sign the papers with all those things on the desk hindering the movements of his right hand?
No, it's not. The respect is paid not so much to this or that Queen or King but to the whole history of a nation. I think that having such a fixed, unchanging and immutable point of reference above mere ephemeral politicians and politics as the monarchy is great. Had it not been for the communist takeover, Romania would have had it too.
That's for the British people to decide and they seem to think otherwise.
Sorry, Cesar, I'm in complete disagreement with you here.
I haven't even watched the clip: All the earmarks of the media playing "Gotcha." Damn, I miss serious journalists.
Quote from: vandermolen on September 13, 2022, 01:44:01 PM
Belated Thank You Andrei.
I'm surprised by my emotional reaction to all this.
It may be difficult for those outside the UK (or Commonwealth?) to understand this, but it is very real here.
I found the TV images of her coffin being driven back into Buckingham Palace, through streets lined with silent people, to be very moving.
I would not question your warm feelings towards the Queen herself, but in the grand scheme of things British Royalty is the vestige of a brutal, grotesque history. We in the U.S. have our own brutal, grotesque history, in the form of chattel slavery, genocide of the native population of North America, and racism. And we have our cohort of people who romanticize the confederacy as a noble lost and the expansion into the west as a grand adventure and want to "make America great again" by reviving our racist past.
The British Royalty has been neutered and rendered harmless, but it should not be forgotten how the originated. Colonialism with it's outrages against humanity. My wife attended Cambridge University, St John's College, and John Fisher, the first Master, was executed and his head mounted on a spike outside the Tower of London because he remained loyal to the Catholic Church after King Henry VIII replaced in with the Church of England, to facilitate his divorce. John Fisher was Henry VIII's childhood tutor. That's what comes to mind when I see the video of Charles III getting into a tizzy over an ink well on his desk.
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 14, 2022, 07:35:34 AM
I haven't even watched the clip: All the earmarks of the media playing "Gotcha." Damn, I miss serious journalists.
+1
This is a ridiculous charge.
The monarchy was not the main/only source of brutalities that pervaded virtually ALL human history (and still does in many parts).
It's basically irrevelant whether you have tribes with chiefs, ancient priest-kings, "democratic" city states, the Roman Republic, the Chinese or Persian Empires or the last 1000 years of our own history since the middle ages.
There will often be someone with the power over life and death and sometimes have the opportunity to abuse it. It still occurs frequently even in today's civilised countries although fortunately it's usually not power over life and death but often over career, wealth, well-being etc. and not kings but petty bureaucrats or corrupt "consultants" or whatever.
I don't see any evidence that monarchies or monarchs are especially bad here. The main difference is that it's easier to put personal blame when a monarch messes up.
Quote from: Jo498 on September 14, 2022, 07:51:24 AM
This is a ridiculous charge.
The monarchy was not the main/only source of brutalities that pervaded virtually ALL human history (and still does in many parts).
It's basically irrevelant whether you have tribes with chiefs, ancient priest-kings, "democratic" city states, the Roman Republic, the Chinese or Persian Empires or the last 1000 years of our own history since the middle ages.
There will often be someone with the power over life and death and sometimes have the opportunity to abuse it. It still occurs frequently even in today's civilised countries although fortunately it's usually not power over life and death but often over career, wealth, well-being etc. and not kings but petty bureaucrats or corrupt "consultants" or whatever.
I don't see any evidence that monarchies or monarchs are especially bad here. The main difference is that it's easier to put personal blame when a monarch messes up.
This.
Henry VIII was a particularly brutal and merciless monarch but he's just a naughty schoolboy compared to the "liberal" and "democratic" leaders of the First French Republic who ordered, advocated, aided and abetted far more numerous atrocities.
The French were rank amateurs at brutality compared to Leopold II.
There really is no reason for monarchs to exist in any form now, but some will hang on for years to come. Already there are (hopeful) articles about the possibility that the Commonwealth will lose members and ultimately fade away now that Elizabeth is dead. I expect similar articles calling into question the viability of the UK itself to pop up even more frequently over the coming years.
It is true that non-monarchical systems have at times been at least as bad as monarchical ones. That is not an argument to preserve monarchy, even in an ineffectual, ceremonial capacity. Individual countries can certainly choose to maintain whichever outdated institutions tickle the fancy of the population, though.
Quote from: Todd on September 14, 2022, 11:08:40 AM
The French were rank amateurs at brutality compared to Leopold II.
There really is no reason for monarchs to exist in any form now, but some will hang on for years to come. Already there are (hopeful) articles about the possibility that the Commonwealth will lose members and ultimately fade away now that Elizabeth is dead. I expect similar articles calling into question the viability of the UK itself to pop up even more frequently over the coming years.
It is true that non-monarchical systems have at times been at least as bad as monarchical ones. That is not an argument to preserve monarchy, even in an ineffectual, ceremonial capacity. Individual countries can certainly choose to maintain whichever outdated institutions tickle the fancy of the population, though.
Of course, the Commonwealth developed from our shameful history of Imperialism. Nevertheless, the Commonwealth is a free association of nations - no country is forced to be in the Commonwealth.
Quote from: Spotted Horses on September 14, 2022, 07:38:23 AM
I would not question your warm feelings towards the Queen herself, but in the grand scheme of things British Royalty is the vestige of a brutal, grotesque history. We in the U.S. have our own brutal, grotesque history, in the form of chattel slavery, genocide of the native population of North America, and racism. And we have our cohort of people who romanticize the confederacy as a noble lost and the expansion into the west as a grand adventure and want to "make America great again" by reviving our racist past.
The British Royalty has been neutered and rendered harmless, but it should not be forgotten how the originated. Colonialism with it's outrages against humanity. My wife attended Cambridge University, St John's College, and John Fisher, the first Master, was executed and his head mounted on a spike outside the Tower of London because he remained loyal to the Catholic Church after King Henry VIII replaced in with the Church of England, to facilitate his divorce. John Fisher was Henry VIII's childhood tutor. That's what comes to mind when I see the video of Charles III getting into a tizzy over an ink well on his desk.
What you say is true - although I'd still much rather have a non-political Head of State rather than someone like Trump or Johnson
My daughter works as the Editor in the House of Commons Library - today she was asked to help supervise the press/TV journalists in Westminster Hall, which meant that she was there when the Queen's coffin arrived. She said that it was the most surreal day of her life.
Quote from: vandermolen on September 14, 2022, 02:21:57 PM
What you say is true - although I'd still much rather have a non-political Head of State rather than someone like Trump or Johnson
If a Trump-like or Johnson-like character was next in the line of succession to be King or Queen, how would you get rid of that person? Like in the old days, a mace to the temple?
Quote from: Spotted Horses on September 14, 2022, 06:43:55 PM
If a Trump-like or Johnson-like character was next in the line of succession to be King or Queen, how would you get rid of that person? Like in the old days, a mace to the temple?
I'm sure they'd find away.
Quote from: Jo498 on September 14, 2022, 07:51:24 AM
This is a ridiculous charge.
The monarchy was not the main/only source of brutalities that pervaded virtually ALL human history (and still does in many parts).
It's basically irrevelant whether you have tribes with chiefs, ancient priest-kings, "democratic" city states, the Roman Republic, the Chinese or Persian Empires or the last 1000 years of our own history since the middle ages.
There will often be someone with the power over life and death and sometimes have the opportunity to abuse it. It still occurs frequently even in today's civilised countries although fortunately it's usually not power over life and death but often over career, wealth, well-being etc. and not kings but petty bureaucrats or corrupt "consultants" or whatever.
I don't see any evidence that monarchies or monarchs are especially bad here. The main difference is that it's easier to put personal blame when a monarch messes up.
very well put!
Quote from: Spotted Horses on September 14, 2022, 06:43:55 PM
If a Trump-like or Johnson-like character was next in the line of succession to be King or Queen, how would you get rid of that person? Like in the old days, a mace to the temple?
The powers that the King/Queen has are nowhere near a tenth of those that the POTUS has, so in the unlikely event that a Trump-like character would ascend to the throne, he'll have basically no means to implement his will. He might of course try to overstep the bounds and assert his personal rule but in this case he'd certainly be declared insane by an ad hoc Crown Council and either forced to abdicate or a Regent would be appointed.
Quote from: Florestan on September 14, 2022, 11:39:25 PM
The powers that the King/Queen has are nowhere near a tenth of those that the POTUS has, so in the unlikely event that a Trump-like character would ascend to the throne, he'll have basically no means to implement his will. He might of course try to overstep the bounds and assert his personal rule but in this case he'd certainly be declared insane by an ad hoc Crown Council and either forced to abdicate or a Regent would be appointed.
Well put.
Still, I'm kind of curious what type of fountain pen Charles uses.
Having used fountain pens since god knows when I have slowly but surely graduated (at some cost) to fail safe writing equipment.
And (as yet) I have no valet checking my stuff every day.
Elizabeth II was person grace and dignity as well as dedication to her constitutional role as Head of State in a parliamentary democracy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliamentary_system).
We should understand that in a parliamentary democracy the Head of State, whether Monarch or President, is largely a figurehead. A Prime Minister, (Chancellor or whatever name), cannot, (or at least ought not), to be Head of State because he/she services at the whim of the House of Commons, (National Assembly, Parliament, or whether), and can be forced from office at any time.
So what is the difference between a President and Monarch, and why might one might be preferable to the other in a parliamentary system?
I favor hereditary monarchy where there is a history of such: the monarch can add stability and continuity, and obviate the need for possibly contentious and costly elections that a president would involve. Furthermore a really good Monarch such as Elizabeth can contribute much to a sense of nationhood, solidarity and history beyond what a president is likely to do. Who is the President of Germany or Israel for example? Who knows? Who cares? Thus I strongly support the Monarch for Britain. (In the case of Scottish independence, I would also support Monarchy and specifically the same the current British Monarch.)
The case for Monarch in former colonies is less clear, especially where these colonies have a history of slavery or other forms of exploitation. Canada is an interesting case without slavery but, arguably, with exploitation of indigenous people. French Canadians mostly anti-Monarchy but then a significant portion also favor separation from Canada. Otherwise consider that Canada has Governor General, a viceroy nominally appointed by the British Monarch; this person fits in the "Who knows? Who cares?" category. The current GG happens to be an indigenous person, a former diplomat, and nice lady, but lots of Canadians don't even know that. But everyone knows who the British Monarch is, (whether they personally like him/her or not).
Hereditary rule, of either the substantive or ceremonial type, is silly. Most of the world has long since moved on.
Quote from: Todd on September 15, 2022, 04:34:53 AM
Hereditary rule, of either the substantive or ceremonial type, is silly. Most of the world has long since moved on.
"Silly", eh? No, not when there is a history of monarch. Granted, it makes no sense if a country has no such history -- despite the advantages of monarchy I mentioned in my early post.
Quote from: Fëanor on September 15, 2022, 06:23:16 AM
"Silly", eh? No, not when there is a history of monarch. Granted, it makes no sense if a country has no such history -- despite the advantages of monarchy I mentioned in my early post.
Not much sillier than having every four or five or seven years an expensive circus/freak show in the guise of electoral campaigns, whereby a person is elected whose powers far exceed those of any monarch and whose capacity to, and propensity for, wreaking havoc in society, economy and the world at large are greater than those of any monarch.
Actually, I have no hesitation to call the USA and France elective monarchies. ;D
Quote from: Fëanor on September 15, 2022, 04:12:38 AM
Elizabeth II was person grace and dignity as well as dedication to her constitutional role as Head of State in a parliamentary democracy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliamentary_system).
We should understand that in a parliamentary democracy the Head of State, whether Monarch or President, is largely a figurehead. A Prime Minister, (Chancellor or whatever name), cannot, (or at least ought not), to be Head of State because he/she services at the whim of the House of Commons, (National Assembly, Parliament, or whether), and can be forced from office at any time.
So what is the difference between a President and Monarch, and why might one might be preferable to the other in a parliamentary system?
I favor hereditary monarchy where there is a history of such: the monarch can add stability and continuity, and obviate the need for possibly contentious and costly elections that a president would involve. Furthermore a really good Monarch such as Elizabeth can contribute much to a sense of nationhood, solidarity and history beyond what a president is likely to do. Who is the President of Germany or Israel for example? Who knows? Who cares? Thus I strongly support the Monarch for Britain. (In the case of Scottish independence, I would also support Monarchy and specifically the same the current British Monarch.)
The case for Monarch in former colonies is less clear, especially where these colonies have a history of slavery or other forms of exploitation. Canada is an interesting case without slavery but, arguably, with exploitation of indigenous people. French Canadians mostly anti-Monarchy but then a significant portion also favor separation from Canada. Otherwise consider that Canada has Governor General, a viceroy nominally appointed by the British Monarch; this person fits in the "Who knows? Who cares?" category. The current GG happens to be an indigenous person, a former diplomat, and nice lady, but lots of Canadians don't even know that. But everyone knows who the British Monarch is, (whether they personally like him/her or not).
The idea that there is an advantage to having a head of state who inherits the position as an accident of birth and has absolutely no power to influence events strikes me as absurd. The fact that the actual leaders of the country do not have the ceremonial title of "head of state" puts no constraint on them.
Quote from: Fëanor on September 15, 2022, 06:23:16 AM"Silly", eh? No, not when there is a history of monarch.
"Silly" is a kind word. Dynastic rule is anachronistic. No family is uniquely or specially fit to hold such positions of authority, concrete or ceremonial. Again, most of the world has moved on, including countries formerly ruled by their own monarchs. Some countries will cling to monarchy for sentimental (ie, anti-rational) reasons, which fortunately is more or less benign for most countries still reliant upon such an outdated institution.
Quote from: Florestan on September 15, 2022, 06:53:10 AM
Not much sillier than having every four or five or seven years an expensive circus/freak show in the guise of electoral campaigns, whereby a person is elected whose powers far exceed those of any monarch and whose capacity to, and propensity for, wreaking havoc in society, economy and the world at large are greater than those of any monarch.
Actually, I have no hesitation to call the USA and France elective monarchies. ;D
Indeed, but as in the USA the problem can be exactly the opposite of too much power for the President. The POTUS can't get anything much done if he doesn't have the support of majority of the House of Representatives
plus 60% of the Senate. The the US "checks and balances" system can be a real boat anchor when it comes to getting stuff done.
A prime minister/chancellor doesn't exactly have the problem in a parliamentary democracy because if he doesn't have the support of parliament, he has to resign. It's amusing to thing of Donald Trump having to resign when he didn't have the support of Congress.
Quote from: Spotted Horses on September 15, 2022, 07:13:25 AM
The idea that there is an advantage to having a head of state who inherits the position as an accident of birth and has absolutely no power to influence events strikes me as absurd. The fact that the actual leaders of the country do not have the ceremonial title of "head of state" puts no constraint on them.
But parliamentary prime ministers, (
i.e. heads of government but not heads of state),
DO have constraints. This is, if they don't have the support of the majority in parliament they must resign. The POTUS, OTOH, doesn't have to resign, he just can get much done without a majority in the HofR and
60% of the Senate.
Quote from: Fëanor on September 15, 2022, 08:46:47 AM
But parliamentary prime ministers, (i.e. heads of government but not heads of state), DO have constraints. This is, if they don't have the support of the majority in parliament they must resign.
Well, not necessarily. In some cases, it's the parliament itself which is dissolved and snap elections are called. ;)
Quote from: Fëanor on September 15, 2022, 08:46:47 AM
But parliamentary prime ministers, (i.e. heads of government but not heads of state), DO have constraints. This is, if they don't have the support of the majority in parliament they must resign. The POTUS, OTOH, doesn't have to resign, he just can get much done without a majority in the HofR and 60% of the Senate.
That is a red herring. The difference between the parliamentary system in which the parliament chooses a prime minister and the American system in which the president is elected independently is unrelated to the issue of monarchy. There are countries with a parliamentary system with no monarchy.
As you say, the parliamentary system avoids the possibility of a stalemate, where the president and congress are from different parties and obstruct each other. On the other hand the parliamentary system admits the possibility of the parliament being unable to select a prime minister and form a government, or repeatedly voting no confidence when the governing coalition falls apart. Both systems can work well when the participants act in good faith, and can fail when the participants fail to act in good faith or cannot reach a consensus on anything.
Quote from: Spotted Horses on September 15, 2022, 09:15:11 AM
That is a red herring. The difference between the parliamentary system in which the parliament chooses a prime minister and the American system in which the president is elected independently is unrelated to the issue of monarchy. There are countries with a parliamentary system with no monarchy.
As you say, the parliamentary system avoids the possibility of a stalemate, where the president and congress are from different parties and obstruct each other. On the other hand the parliamentary system admits the possibility of the parliament being unable to select a prime minister and form a government, or repeatedly voting no confidence when the governing coalition falls apart. Both systems can work well when the participants act in good faith, and can fail when the participants fail to act in good faith or cannot reach a consensus on anything.
Sure, most parliamentary-style democracies today in fact have presidents rather than monarchs. Virtually all have Heads-of-State with very limited powers. But as I said, where there is historical prescient I see no reason to switch from monarchy to a president.
Granted, with parliamentary system there can be problems especially where the election system is proportional representation. Israel and Italy have been the worst examples, but even with that election system, it typical a PM can selected.
I laugh when I think of the USA
vis-à-vis good faith & consensus. The "founding fathers", especially Washington, hoped that the new country could be government by those virtues and that political parties wouldn't immerge
-- that didn't last his first term of office.
Quote from: Fëanor on September 15, 2022, 09:28:40 AM
Sure, most parliamentary-style democracies today in fact have presidents rather than monarchs.
Not in Western Europe. Monarchies: UK, Spain, The Netherlands, Belgium, Luxemburg, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Monaco, Liechtenstein, ie 10 countries. Parliamentary republics: Italy, Germany, Austria, Portugal, Greece, ie 5 countries. France and Finland are a mixture of parliamentary and presidential systems while Switzerland's system is peculiar to that country and not seen anywhere else.
Quote from: Fëanor on September 15, 2022, 09:28:40 AMI laugh when I think of the USA vis-à-vis good faith & consensus. The "founding fathers", especially Washington, hoped that the new country could be government by those virtues and that political parties wouldn't immerge -- that didn't last his first term of office.
There was no golden age in which things worked perfectly, but in the past there have been times when things worked a lot better than now. The uptick in disfunction correlates with the rise Newt Gingrich in the Republican leadership.
Quote from: Fëanor on September 15, 2022, 08:42:16 AM
Indeed, but as in the USA the problem can be exactly the opposite of too much power for the President. The POTUS can't get anything much done if he doesn't have the support of majority of the House of Representatives plus 60% of the Senate. The the US "checks and balances" system can be a real boat anchor when it comes to getting stuff done.
A prime minister/chancellor doesn't exactly have the problem in a parliamentary democracy because if he doesn't have the support of parliament, he has to resign. It's amusing to thing of Donald Trump having to resign when he didn't have the support of Congress.
None of this has anything to do with whether monarchy is good or desirable.
Quote from: Florestan on September 15, 2022, 09:39:17 AMNot in Western Europe. Monarchies: UK, Spain, The Netherlands, Belgium, Luxemburg, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Monaco, Liechtenstein, ie 10 countries. Parliamentary republics: Italy, Germany, Austria, Portugal, Greece, ie 5 countries. France and Finland are a mixture of parliamentary and presidential systems while Switzerland's system is peculiar to that country and not seen anywhere else.
The high proportion of monarchical governments in Europe is a blot on the continent.
Quote from: Spotted Horses on September 15, 2022, 09:46:13 AM
There was no golden age in which things worked perfectly, but in the past there have been times when things worked a lot better than now. The uptick in disfunction correlates with the rise Newt Gingrich in the Republican leadership.
I saw a most illuming piece which made that very point.
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 15, 2022, 10:47:28 AM
I saw a most illuming piece which made that very point.
I suspect I read the same article.
One thing (which I believe that I've mentioned before?) is what is the impact of the monarchy have on tourism in the UK? How much money does it bring in? Here's one article that you might want to read:
https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/royal-family/royal-family-money-tourism-queen-b2166830.html
"How much money does the royal family bring in tourism?
Each year, millions of tourists travel to the UK to visit its many historical royal landmarks"
PD
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on September 15, 2022, 01:25:00 PM
One thing (which I believe that I've mentioned before?) is what is the impact of the monarchy have on tourism in the UK? How much money does it bring in? Here's one article that you might want to read:
https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/royal-family/royal-family-money-tourism-queen-b2166830.html
"How much money does the royal family bring in tourism?
Each year, millions of tourists travel to the UK to visit its many historical royal landmarks"
Those landmarks could be preserved without a royal family. Buckingham Palace could be turned into one of the poshest hotels in the world, fetching tens of thousands of quid per night, per room, maybe more.
Quote from: Florestan on September 15, 2022, 09:39:17 AM
Not in Western Europe. Monarchies: UK, Spain, The Netherlands, Belgium, Luxemburg, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Monaco, Liechtenstein, ie 10 countries. Parliamentary republics: Italy, Germany, Austria, Portugal, Greece, ie 5 countries. France and Finland are a mixture of parliamentary and presidential systems while Switzerland's system is peculiar to that country and not seen anywhere else.
Do Monaco and Lichtenstein rate as countries? If so, San Marino must be included as a parliamentary republic; the legislature elects two heads of state at a time for a six month term.
Quote from: JBS on September 15, 2022, 01:57:15 PM
Do Monaco and Lichtenstein rate as countries?
Of course they do, they are sovereign states.
QuoteIf so, San Marino must be included as a parliamentary republic; the legislature elects two heads of state at a time for a six month term.
Granted, I forgot SM. This makes 6 parliamentary republics, still less than the number of parliamentary monarchies.
It should be noted that all those monarchies but one are highly stable, highly developed nations with a standard of living which is the envy of the world.
Quote from: Todd on September 15, 2022, 04:34:53 AM
Hereditary rule, of either the substantive or ceremonial type, is silly. Most of the world has long since moved on.
Are the thousands that join a five mile queue and wait over eight hours to pay respects silly too?
Quote from: Irons on September 16, 2022, 02:17:15 AM
Are the thousands that join a five mile queue and wait over eight hours to pay respects silly too?
In December 2017 I queued uo for nine hours to pay my respect to King Mihai (Michael) of Romania lying in state. I got to do it at about 11:45 PM and when I got out of the building I noticed that the queue was just as long and crowded as it was when I had joined it.
Quote from: Irons on September 16, 2022, 02:17:15 AM
Are the thousands that join a five mile queue and wait over eight hours to pay respects silly too?
Reuters puts the estimate at 750,000 people. The queen's death obviously meant enough to them, for whatever reason, to spend hours in line. Some people become attached to political figures. That's their prerogative. Hereditary rule, of either the substantive or ceremonial type, is silly.
For anyone interested, next Wednesday at 11:00am (EDT), 21 September, Washington National Cathedral will hold a memorial service for the Queen, and it will be livestreamed at the link below. (I found out because a friend is singing in the choir.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GgJz0FVaLXc
--Bruce
Quote from: Todd on September 16, 2022, 04:50:18 AM
Reuters puts the estimate at 750,000 people. The queen's death obviously meant enough to them, for whatever reason, to spend hours in line. Some people become attached to political figures. That's their prerogative. Hereditary rule, of either the substantive or ceremonial type, is silly.
Nothing to sneeze at. Only 80,000 queued for Elvis' funeral, although there were two deaths among the mourners.
Quote from: Spotted Horses on September 16, 2022, 05:47:36 AM
Nothing to sneeze at. Only 80,000 queued for Elvis' funeral, although there were two deaths among the mourners.
And he was the real king.
The only person I might be willing to stand in line to pay tribute to is Ignacio Anaya, but he died before Elvis.
Quote from: Todd on September 16, 2022, 05:56:11 AM
The only person I might be willing to stand in line to pay tribute to is Ignacio Anaya, but he died before Elvis.
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Post of the Month
Quote from: Todd on September 16, 2022, 05:56:11 AM
The only person I might be willing to stand in line to pay tribute to is Ignacio Anaya, but he died before Elvis.
Pass the
TUMS (https://www.tums.com/) :D
Quote from: Irons on September 16, 2022, 02:17:15 AM
Are the thousands that join a five mile queue and wait over eight hours to pay respects silly too?
Current queuing time estimate, (EDT 12:20), is 24 hours: see real-time updates ...
https://youtu.be/cJxDwDzAwEs (https://youtu.be/cJxDwDzAwEs)
What is really silly is to believe that a republic is intrinsically better than a monarchy and that a republican government can, and will, work irrespective of the social, economic, cultural, religious and political traditions and particularities of any given nation. This naively optimistic and grossly reductionist view (a relic of the long-discredited Enlightenment rationalism) is given a big lie when one considers the Spanish-speaking South American republics, whose history, ever since their establishment until well into the twentieth century, is an almost uninterrupted succession of civil wars, coups and authoritarian rulers mostly of the military sort, none of which was ever heard of during the 300 years of the Spanish Crown rule in the relevant parts of the continent.
Quote from: Florestan on September 16, 2022, 08:35:53 AM
What is really silly is to believe that a republic is intrinsically better than a monarchy and that a republican government can, and will, work irrespective of the social, economic, cultural, religious and political traditions and particularities of any given nation. This naively optimistic and grossly reductionist view (a relic of the long-discredited Enlightenment rationalism) is given a big lie when one considers the Spanish-speaking South American republics, whose history, ever since their establishment until well into the twentieth century, is an almost uninterrupted succession of civil wars, coups and authoritarian rulers mostly of the military sort, none of which was ever heard of during the 300 years of the Spanish Crown rule in the relevant parts of the continent.
None of this has anything to do with whether monarchy is good or desirable.
No form of government is "good" or "desirable" a priori, by itself, in abstracto. What can work wonders for a nation (Switzerland's cantonal system) can wreak havoc to another and threaten its very existence (the First Spanish Republic). In matters as complicated as human societies and their organization there is no one-size-fits-all solution. Things should be judged on a case by case basis.
Quote from: Florestan on September 16, 2022, 08:58:10 AMNo form of government is "good" or "desirable" a priori, by itself, in abstracto.
Monarchy is not good and desirable in practice in the contemporary world. Monarchists disagree.
(//)
Whether a particular monarchy is "good" and "desirable" is for the people of that nation to decide. What foreigners think or wish in respect to it is at best irrelevant and at worst presumptuous. That being said, I am not aware of any significant republican movement or sentiment in any of the European monarchies save Spain.
Quote from: Florestan on September 16, 2022, 09:41:25 AMWhether a particular monarchy is "good" and "desirable" is for the people of that nation to decide.
There is something intrinsically contradictory in this statement.
Quote from: vandermolen on September 16, 2022, 09:39:22 AM
(//)
Love it! At first I wasn't certain who was asking the question, but I could then see that the Queen's mouth was open. :D
Oh, and by the way, when I first looked at your corgi cartoon the other day, I hadn't noticed that it's nametag said "UK" on it. :( Even more poignant.
PD
Quote from: Todd on September 16, 2022, 09:28:44 AM
Monarchy is not good and desirable in practice in the contemporary world.
The universe is change; life is opinion. - Marcus Aurelius, Meditations
People would rather believe than know - E.O. Wilson
Quote from: Florestan on September 16, 2022, 08:35:53 AM
What is really silly is to believe that a republic is intrinsically better than a monarchy and that a republican government can, and will, work irrespective of the social, economic, cultural, religious and political traditions and particularities of any given nation. This naively optimistic and grossly reductionist view (a relic of the long-discredited Enlightenment rationalism) is given a big lie when one considers the Spanish-speaking South American republics, whose history, ever since their establishment until well into the twentieth century, is an almost uninterrupted succession of civil wars, coups and authoritarian rulers mostly of the military sort, none of which was ever heard of during the 300 years of the Spanish Crown rule in the relevant parts of the continent.
Especially true considering the hard lessons that America is learning about the power bad-faith actors have to destroy the system.
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on September 16, 2022, 09:57:46 AM
Love it! At first I wasn't certain who was asking the question, but I could then see that the Queen's mouth was open. :D
Oh, and by the way, when I first looked at your corgi cartoon the other day, I hadn't noticed that it's nametag said "UK" on it. :( Even more poignant.
PD
Thanks PD - glad you enjoyed them.
This made me smile too:
(//)
Quote from: Florestan on September 16, 2022, 08:35:53 AM
Spanish-speaking South American republics, whose history, ever since their establishment until well into the twentieth century, is an almost uninterrupted succession of civil wars, coups and authoritarian rulers mostly of the military sort, none of which was ever heard of during the 300 years of the Spanish Crown rule in the relevant parts of the continent.
Quote from: Florestan on September 16, 2022, 09:41:25 AM
Whether a particular monarchy is "good" and "desirable" is for the people of that nation to decide. What foreigners think or wish in respect to it is at best irrelevant and at worst presumptuous.
The way the peoples of South America decided they wanted the Spanish monarchy? The way they were happy with that rule?
Quote from: SimonNZ on September 16, 2022, 03:54:16 PM
The way the peoples of South America decided they wanted the Spanish monarchy? The way they were happy with that rule?
It was not "the peoples" who decided to get rid of the Spanish rule. It was the local elites. They replaced the monarchy with their own rule, from which ordinary people benefitted little, and least of all the indians. Tellingly, a large number of the latter actually fought alongside the royalists. Also tellingly, Simon Bolivar ended up greatly and notoriously disillusioned with the outcome of his "liberation".
I think you're willing to give a pass to oppression slavery and murder if it's done in the name of the greater good of Christianity.
That's what we're talking about here isn't it? Not monarchy but Christianity. If another faith or ideology had put their boot on the necks of the people's of South America you wouldn't be painting such a rose tinted history.
Quote from: SimonNZ on September 17, 2022, 01:51:10 AM
That's what we're talking about here isn't it? Not monarchy but Christianity.
On the contrary, we're (or at least we've been until you chimed in) talking about monarchy not Christianity.
Quote from: Florestan on September 16, 2022, 11:08:27 PMTellingly, a large number of the latter actually fought alongside the royalists.
What does this tell? This is standard strategic thinking that native peoples all over the Americas engaged in. It does not demonstrate in any way that the native peoples liked or trusted their allies, only that their allies were seen as marginally less odious than their enemies.
Quote from: Todd on September 17, 2022, 05:28:24 AM
What does this tell? This is standard strategic thinking that native peoples all over the Americas engaged in. It does not demonstrate in any way that the native peoples liked or trusted their allies, only that their allies were seen as marginally less odious than their enemies.
Well after all the lessor evil is the lessor evil.
So for example after the "French & Indian Wars", the British Parliament, (not the King mind you), imposed a ban on settlement roughly east of the Appalachian mountain chain to prevent antagonizing the indigenous peoples. This was resented by American colonists who wanted to move to the west, (obviously displacing the natives). Not the least resentful were wealthy land speculators, such as George Washington, who intended seize control of large tracts of land and parcel it out to small settlers at a large profit. This aspect of objection to British rule is less commonly mention by Americans who'd rather talk about the Stamp Tax, etc.
Quote from: Fëanor on September 17, 2022, 09:28:14 AMNot the least resentful were wealthy land speculators, such as George Washington, who intended seize control of large tracts of land and parcel it out to small settlers and a large profit.
Mt Vernon faces west for several reasons.
The British obviously cared only about British interests and did not care about native peoples when they passed the law, and the law did not prevent war with Pontiac in any event. The law did, however, represent another injustice suffered by the colonists. Also, it is worth pointing out that Britain was running a most lucrative slave trade at the same time, and not just to the thirteen colonies. The Crown and Parliament acted duplicitously to suppress and exploit the colonists, all the while acting in a most immoral manner. As everyone knows, British evils became no longer sufferable.
Quote from: Todd on September 17, 2022, 10:11:54 AM
Mt Vernon faces west for several reasons.
The British obviously cared only about British interests and did not care about native peoples when they passed the law, and the law did not prevent war with Pontiac in any event. The law did, however, represent another injustice suffered by the colonists. Also, it is worth pointing out that Britain was running a most lucrative slave trade at the same time, and not just to the thirteen colonies. The Crown and Parliament acted duplicitously to suppress and exploit the colonists, all the while acting in a most immoral manner. As everyone knows, British evils became no longer sufferable.
The American Declaration of Independence (https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/declaration-transcript) included a long rant directed at the "present King of Great Britain", (George III), that included a long list of injustices. These injustices, such as they were, were imposed by Parliament and, though signed off by the King, were by no means instigated by him.
The stark truth is that the American colonies had be largely ignored by the British government at mostly allowed to "do their thing" until after the French & Indian War. It was only after that war that American grievances came to the fore. This was a result of the British Government's feeling that the American colonies ought to pay a portion of the huge cost of the war in North America that had been largely in their defense. Added to that was the colonists' disappointment that they couldn't exploit the former French territories.
(//)
Light artist projects image of the Queen and Prince Philip into the skies above Switzerland:
Unfortunately, in the era of mass culture, it appears inevitable that a solemn occasion like the death of Britain's longest serving monarch will be surrounded by, or downright degenerate into, kitsch.
Quote from: ritter on September 18, 2022, 02:28:31 AM
Unfortunately, in the era of mass culture, it appears inevitable that a solemn occasion like the death of Britain's longest serving monarch will be surrounded by, or downright degenerate into, kitsch.
Yes, I must admit that there is a kitsch-like quality to it.
And I must admit it's rather cleverly done... :)
Good day to you, Jeffrey!
Quote from: Todd on September 17, 2022, 10:11:54 AM
The British obviously cared only about British interests and did not care about native peoples when they passed the law, and the law did not prevent war with Pontiac in any event. The law did, however, represent another injustice suffered by the colonists. Also, it is worth pointing out that Britain was running a most lucrative slave trade at the same time, and not just to the thirteen colonies. The Crown and Parliament acted duplicitously to suppress and exploit the colonists, all the while acting in a most immoral manner. As everyone knows, British evils became no longer sufferable.
The legitimate complaint of the America colonists is that the British Government was imposing laws for the benefit of UK interests, not the colonists, and that those laws were passed by a Parliament where they had no representation. Beyond that, the American colonists, and especially the colonial elites, were every bit as self-interested as the British and despised the natives and slaves far more.
It's gratuitous
in this context to mention the British slave trade. To be sure British slave traders and estate holder, principally in the Caribbean, benefited grossly from slavery. But American slaves and slave holders, (after Independence), soon came to hugely outnumber British slaves and slave holders.
Britain freed all its slaves in peacefully 1833, albeit with compensation to slave holders but none to slaves. America freed slaves only with the 14th Amendment in 1868 after a bloody Civil War that killed more Americans than any war before or since. Neither slave holders nor slave received any compensation. Americans are still struggling to acknowledge that its Black citizens are fully equal.
Americans' righteousness about their history can be tedious at times.
So, how many here are planning to watch (and also are able to) watch the funeral on Monday? The time difference here is pretty rough (even for a morning person).
PD
p.s. I believe that Monday is a bank holiday in the UK? Obviously, not so here in the US.
I might watch a report with some of the key moments ...
Quote from: ritter on September 18, 2022, 02:42:06 AM
And I must admit it's rather cleverly done... :)
Good day to you, Jeffrey!
And to you too
Rafael :)
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on September 18, 2022, 04:36:04 AM
So, how many here are planning to watch (and also are able to) watch the funeral on Monday? The time difference here is pretty rough (even for a morning person).
PD
p.s. I believe that Monday is a bank holiday in the UK? Obviously, not so here in the US.
We'll be watching PD and observing the One-minute silence this evening at our front door.
Yes, Monday is a bank holiday here.
Quote from: Fëanor on September 17, 2022, 03:58:51 PMThe American Declaration of Independence (https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/declaration-transcript) included a long rant directed at the "present King of Great Britain"
Which every American knows.
Quote from: Fëanor on September 17, 2022, 03:58:51 PMThe stark truth is that the American colonies had be largely ignored by the British government at mostly allowed to "do their thing" until after the French & Indian War.
Had the Crown and Parliament been wise, they would have continued to let the colonists do their own thing. The Crown and Parliament were unwise. Now the entire English-speaking world is subservient to the US. So, thanks crazy George III and incompetent Parliament of the late 18th Century!
Quote from: vandermolen on September 18, 2022, 05:30:30 AM
We'll be watching PD and observing the One-minute silence this evening at our front door.
Yes, Monday is a bank holiday here.
For those who are wondering what the order of events will be on Monday, I found this helpful article (online) by Time Magazine. Particularly helpful for those living in EST as it also shows those times besides the BST ones.
https://time.com/6214346/queen-elizabeth-ii-funeral-schedule/
I think that I'll pass on watching the closing of the doors to the public (re vigil) as that would be VERY early for me here! Also, I discovered a little while ago that the funeral service at Westminster Abbey doesn't start until 11 a.m. BST time so much more doable for me here; some of the t.v. stations in the US are starting their t.v. coverage at 4 a.m.! ???
PD
(https://www.danburymint.co.uk/dw/image/v2/BDZH_PRD/on/demandware.static/-/Sites-full-catalog/default/dwc72899d9/images/hi-res/the-queen-elizabeth-ii-memorial-bear-by-steiff_UK-QEMB_b_two.jpg?sw=800&sh=800)
£249
Quote from: Mandryka on September 18, 2022, 12:18:50 PM
(https://www.danburymint.co.uk/dw/image/v2/BDZH_PRD/on/demandware.static/-/Sites-full-catalog/default/dwc72899d9/images/hi-res/the-queen-elizabeth-ii-memorial-bear-by-steiff_UK-QEMB_b_two.jpg?sw=800&sh=800)
£249
Well, that was probably inevitable ....
Previously unseen photo of Elizabeth II issued by Buckingham Palace today ahead of the State Funeral:
(//)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news
Quote from: vandermolen on September 19, 2022, 12:01:31 AM
Previously unseen photo of Elizabeth II issued by Buckingham Palace today ahead of the State Funeral:
(//)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news
That photo reminded me of an article I read yesterday of people recounting the experience of meeting the Queen. As one commented her smile lit up a room.
My wife summed it up when I said many from overseas must look at the Royal Family as antiquated and a ridiculous concept in the modern world. She replied "it is who we are".
Quote from: Irons on September 19, 2022, 12:59:17 AM
That photo reminded me of an article I read yesterday of people recounting the experience of meeting the Queen. As one commented her smile lit up a room.
My wife summed it up when I said many from overseas must look at the Royal Family as antiquated and a ridiculous concept in the modern world. She replied "it is who we are".
Your wife is right.
(//)
No less than 11 Romanian TV channels, including the state one, are brodcasting live the funerals.
Quote from: Florestan on September 19, 2022, 01:41:44 AM
No less than 11 Romanian TV channels, including the state one, are brodcasting live the funerals.
Too many to count here. Currently, over 550,000 online at BBC's website.
PD
Quote from: Florestan on September 19, 2022, 01:41:44 AM
No less than 11 Romanian TV channels, including the state one, are brodcasting live the funerals.
Really? In Finland the national public broadcasting company Yleisradio Oy is broadcasting it live on their "most important/primary" channel YLE 1. That's it as far as I can see. All other (Finnish) channels are doing their normal programme.
It is done. Sobre, rigorous and impressive ceremonies all throughout. My admiration and respect for the British people, their monarchy and their faithful and enthusiastic preservation of their traditions and historical continuity has deepened.
Quote from: Florestan on September 19, 2022, 08:21:07 AM
It is done. Sobre, rigorous and impressive ceremonies all throughout. My admiration and respect for the British people, their monarchy and their faithful and enthusiastic preservation of their traditions and historical continuity has deepened.
Kind words Andrei. Thank you
Quote from: Todd on September 18, 2022, 06:38:53 AM
Had the Crown and Parliament been wise, they {the American colonies} would have continued to let the colonists do their own thing. The Crown and Parliament were unwise. Now the entire English-speaking world is subservient to the US. So, thanks crazy George III and incompetent Parliament of the late 18th Century!
This is true; of course we have the benefit of hindsight to realize that.
No doubt the American colonies would eventually gain independence, perhaps with similar status to Canada's achieved less than 100 years after US independence. And no doubt such a successor would also have been a world leader.
Who knows? Achieving independence under the latter circumstance, the USA, (or whatever it would be called), might have benefited from retaining a constitutional monarchy with a parliamentary form of government.
Makes it all the more painfully shameful here in the US that we had a mini Nuremberg rally in Ohio last night.
Quote from: Fëanor on September 19, 2022, 10:01:25 AMAchieving independence under the latter circumstance, the USA, (or whatever it would be called), might have benefited from retaining a constitutional monarchy with a parliamentary form of government.
There is no benefit to monarchy. Relative benefits of parliamentary democracy are best left to polisci profs.
Quote from: Todd on September 19, 2022, 10:49:17 AM
There is no benefit to monarchy. Relative benefits of parliamentary democracy are best left to polisci profs.
Don't you think that rather depends on the historical context and the type of monarchy we are talking about?
Quote from: vandermolen on September 19, 2022, 12:43:14 PM
Don't you think that rather depends on the historical context and the type of monarchy we are talking about?
There is no valid reason why any family or small number of families should have members who serve in lifetime roles as head of state. All senior leaders, actual or ceremonial, should be able to be replaced by the people at regular intervals.
Of course, I understand that a small number of countries will retain monarchies for various reasons. It just seems all so 17th Century.
The benefit of monarchy can be summed up this way: the Queen was the symbol and representative of the UK. Without her the symbol and representative of the UK the last few years would have been...Boris Johnson.
I admit the gap between the new King Charles and Liz Truss is not nearly as big, but it's still there.
This, from a blogger who lives in Indianapolis
http://twowheeledmadwoman.blogspot.com/2022/09/image-of-man.html?m=1
Quote from: JBS on September 19, 2022, 06:20:24 PMThe benefit of monarchy can be summed up this way: the Queen was the symbol and representative of the UK. Without her the symbol and representative of the UK the last few years would have been...Boris Johnson.
I admit the gap between the new King Charles and Liz Truss is not nearly as big, but it's still there.
First, monarchy is not unique to the UK.
Second, Johnson was head of government, not head of state, so your example would only be accurate if the British decided to have the PM be head of both government and state. Other structures are possible and in use in the world today.
Your summation is wrong.
Quote from: Todd on September 19, 2022, 06:43:38 PM
First, monarchy is not unique to the UK.
Second, Johnson was head of government, not head of state, so your example would only be accurate if the British decided to have the PM be head of both government and state. Other structures are possible and in use in the world today.
Your summation is wrong.
Your republicanism is boring.
Quote from: JBS on September 19, 2022, 06:49:38 PM
Your republicanism is boring.
I guess royalists survived past 1783 after all.
Quote from: Todd on September 19, 2022, 06:53:02 PM
I guess royalists survived past 1783 after all.
I'm not a royalist.
I didn't say republicanism is boring.
I said *your* republicanism is boring.
Have a good night.
My overall impression is that the warmth the public felt for Queen Elizabeth II is of great significance. The "pomp" (all those people parading around in archaic uniforms) was absurd and added nothing to the first thing. The fact that her mortal remains were paraded around the country in that fashion strikes me as grotesque and disrespectful, using her remains as a prop. This is just how it struck me, and I am not trying to convince anyone to agree with me.
Quote from: Todd on September 19, 2022, 01:51:27 PM
There is no valid reason why any family or small number of families should have members who serve in lifetime roles as head of state. All senior leaders, actual or ceremonial, should be able to be replaced by the people at regular intervals.
Of course, I understand that a small number of countries will retain monarchies for various reasons. It just seems all so 17th Century.
That's true and it's not very logical in the 21st Century to retain a monarchy but it is very much part of who we are and connected with history and national identity. It may not survive in the long-term after the death of the Queen although, speaking personally, I hope that it does (and I am not a particular Royalist).
Quote from: Spotted Horses on September 19, 2022, 11:11:30 PM
My overall impression is that the warmth the public felt for Queen Elizabeth II is of great significance. The "pomp" (all those people parading around in archaic uniforms) was absurd and added nothing to the first thing. The fact that her mortal remains were paraded around the country in that fashion strikes me as grotesque and disrespectful, using her remains as a prop. This is just how it struck me, and I am not trying to convince anyone to agree with me.
I respect your opinion but I can't help saying that what you call absurd and grotesque I call admirable and moving. Here is a people who is proud of their centuries old history (actually, the British monarchy stretches back in time more than a millenia), customs and traditions and unafraid/unashamed to show it. This is a great lesson, especially in our world and times, when many people, especially many if not most youngsters, seem to believe that the world has been born when they were born and have only a vague idea of their own history and national and cultural identity (if they don't reject them altogether, that is).
(NB: All of the above is in no way an attempt to start a polemic with you on the issue. You expressed your opinion not trying to convince anyone, I expressed my opinion not trying to convince you or anyone else.)
Quote from: Todd on September 20, 2022, 05:07:24 AM
That's good to know.
Why? You don't pay for it. It is not part of the fabric of your nation. Why do you feel so strongly about something not on your remit that when someone feels the same makes you feel good. I don't understand.
A point of comparison would be the funeral procession for Ronald Reagan, shown here on Constitution avenue, en route to the Capital.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b3/Ronald_Reagan_casket_on_caisson_during_funeral_procession.jpg)
Not sure I consider it any more grotesque than a garden-variety wake. After Lincoln's assassination, his remains traveled around the country to give citizens an opportunity to bid him farewell. I suppose television made that unnecessary in Reagan's case, although it would not surprise me if people traveled to DC to "see him off" as it were.
Quote from: Irons on September 20, 2022, 06:45:33 AM
Why? You don't pay for it. It is not part of the fabric of your nation. Why do you feel so strongly about something not on your remit that when someone feels the same makes you feel good. I don't understand.
Fanatical republicanism believes republic to be an international one-size-fits-all form of government but I doubt that even the most fanatical British monarchist thinks that the US should become a kingdom or that Brazil should restore their Emperor. As on so many occasions and with respect to so many issues, common sense and pragmatism lie precisely where they are said to be missing. ;D
Quote from: Irons on September 20, 2022, 06:45:33 AMWhy?
He is American. American royalists would be slightly more troublesome than American communists.
Quote from: Florestan on September 20, 2022, 07:20:07 AMFanatical republicanism believes republic to be an international one-size-fits-all form of government but I doubt that even the most fanatical British monarchist thinks that the US should become a kingdom or that Brazil should restore their Emperor.
About a fifth of UK residents support a republican form of government. I don't know how many Brazilians favor a new emperor.
From an American standpoint, the UK's form of government is less important than if they go along with US policy - as they have with Echelon, Iraq, AUKUS, and so forth. The UK and other countries can and will maintain quaint institutions and elevate very special families to places of permanent prominence. Some will then talk of how civilized they are.
Quote from: JBS on September 19, 2022, 06:20:24 PM
The benefit of monarchy can be summed up this way: the Queen was the symbol and representative of the UK. Without her the symbol and representative of the UK the last few years would have been...Boris Johnson.
I admit the gap between the new King Charles and Liz Truss is not nearly as big, but it's still there.
In a parliamentary democracy a monarch can represent the nation in the domestic and international eye in a way the an elected president is unlikely to. (
For instance, who is the President of Germany? Who knows? Who cares?)
Beyond that, (in a parliamentary system), an hereditary monarch provides stability and continuity and obviates the need for potentially contentious, periodic elections for a president who is all most entirely a figurehead. I don't see a good reason that a country with a long history as a constitutional monarchy should convert to a republic; that includes Canada IMHO.
I'm a monarchist but not a royalist. That means I support monarchy constitutionally, not because I necessarily admire the king/queen or the royal family.
Quote from: Spotted Horses on September 19, 2022, 11:11:30 PM
My overall impression is that the warmth the public felt for Queen Elizabeth II is of great significance. The "pomp" (all those people parading around in archaic uniforms) was absurd and added nothing to the first thing. The fact that her mortal remains were paraded around the country in that fashion strikes me as grotesque and disrespectful, using her remains as a prop. This is just how it struck me, and I am not trying to convince anyone to agree with me.
Nah!! The funeral was great TV. Tradition is a delightful if irrational think. That said, the funeral of Charles III is likely to be trimmed down considerably.
In Elizabeth II's case it was fortuitous that she died in Scotland and is a good thing from a certain POV. That's because it was a chance to reinforce the connection of the monarchy, and hence the UK, in Scotland where independence is a popular idea ... and independence is popular as much because Scottish politics is much more left-leaning than is England's than for any other reason.
Incidentally I believe that current, pro-independence Scottish First Minister is in favor of retaining current British monarch as monarch of Scotland ... very sensible IMHO.
Quote from: Fëanor on September 20, 2022, 08:51:58 AM
In a parliamentary democracy a monarch can represent the nation in the domestic and international eye in a way the an elected president is unlikely to. (For instance, who is the President of Germany? Who knows? Who cares?)
Beyond that, (in a parliamentary system), an hereditary monarch provides stability and continuity and obviates the need for potentially contentious, periodic elections for a president who is all most entirely a figurehead.
How contentious are elections for presidents in parliamentary systems, especially if presidents hold no real power?
Ultimately, nothing you wrote strengthens the case for monarchy. Rather, it reinforces the fact that monarchy is rather lacking in democratic legitimacy. Ain't no families out there that are all that.
Quote from: Todd on September 20, 2022, 09:02:58 AM
How contentious are elections for presidents in parliamentary systems, especially if presidents hold no real power?
Ultimately, nothing you wrote strengthens the case for monarchy. Rather, it reinforces the fact that monarchy is rather lacking in democratic legitimacy. Ain't no families out there that are all that.
There is nothing undemocratic about a constitutional monarchy such as Britain's.
Quote from: Fëanor on September 20, 2022, 09:08:44 AM
There is nothing undemocratic about a constitutional monarchy such as Britain's.
Aside from the hereditary monarchy bit.
Quote from: Todd on September 20, 2022, 09:12:42 AM
Aside from the hereditary monarchy bit.
That's just wrong: the hereditary monarch doesn't detract from democracy in the slightest way. To imply that is a gratuitous affront the British people.
Quote from: Fëanor on September 20, 2022, 09:17:31 AMthe hereditary monarch doesn't detract from democracy in the slightest way.
Hmm.
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 20, 2022, 07:01:22 AM
Not sure I consider it any more grotesque than a garden-variety wake. After Lincoln's assassination, his remains traveled around the country to give citizens an opportunity to bid him farewell. I suppose television made that unnecessary in Reagan's case, although it would not surprise me if people traveled to DC to "see him off" as it were.
I'd say a garden variety wake is pretty grotesque. I don't know what is done in other parts of the world, but the embalming process used in the U.S. basically turns the remains of the deceased into toxic waste. The sane thing to do is to bury the remains immediately in a manner which allows them to return to the natural world, not to remain in a box without decomposing. Cremation also seems sensible, except for the greenhouse gases.
Quote from: Florestan on September 20, 2022, 07:20:07 AM
Fanatical republicanism believes republic to be an international one-size-fits-all form of government but I doubt that even the most fanatical British monarchist thinks that the US should become a kingdom ....
No it's the white grievance Christian Nationalists here in the United States who want that.
Quote from: Spotted Horses on September 20, 2022, 10:17:36 AM
I'd say a garden variety wake is pretty grotesque. I don't know what is done in other parts of the world, but the embalming process used in the U.S. basically turns the remains of the deceased into toxic waste. The sane thing to do is to bury the remains immediately in a manner which allows them to return to the natural world, not to remain in a box without decomposing. Cremation also seems sensible, except for the greenhouse gases.
I'll sign on with all that.
Quote from: Fëanor on September 20, 2022, 09:01:42 AM
Nah!! The funeral was great TV. Tradition is a delightful if irrational think. That said, the funeral of Charles III is likely to be trimmed down considerably.
In Elizabeth II's case it was fortuitous that she died in Scotland and is a good thing from a certain POV. That's because it was a chance to reinforce the connection of the monarchy, and hence the UK, in Scotland where independence is a popular idea ... and independence is popular as much because Scottish politics is much more left-leaning than is England's than for any other reason.
Incidentally I believe that current, pro-independence Scottish First Minister is in favor of retaining current British monarch as monarch of Scotland ... very sensible IMHO.
That's my understanding. I wondered if the Queen's passing in Scotland was a bit of a 'tactical death' to reinforce the union, but the fact is that she loved Balmoral and always spent as much time there as possible in the summer months.
Does anyone know what the brass band was playing during the long final procession?
Googling seems to bring up conflicting information.
Quote from: SimonNZ on September 20, 2022, 12:27:42 PM
Does anyone know what the brass band was playing during the long final procession?
Googling seems to bring up conflicting information.
This?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XF71TKKgcwY
Thanks.
So its called Beethoven, but its not really Beethoven. I think that's the part that was confusing me.
My pleasure. I asked a similar question (see Beethoven thread), and the other Jeffrey (JBS) very kindly alerted me to this article which clarified the situation:
https://amp.classicfm.com/composers/beethoven/walch-funeral-march-royal-family-remembrance-sunday/
Maybe it shows me up in a bad light but I'm loving the Queue PR disaster of Holly Willoughby and Phillip Schofield. Serves them right.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11234347/Petition-axe-Holly-Phil-queue-jump-row-passes-37-000-Dominos-troll-them.html
Never been David Beckham's greatest fan, but I am now. Disgrace that MP's were allotted four passes to swerve the Queue and pay respects. When a MP offered one to Beckham he declined as his late grandad "would not approve". Instead he joined the Queue at 2am and lined up with everyone else.
Watching some of the service at Washington National Cathedral, mostly because the daughter of some friends is in the choir. Have to say, between the organists, U.S. Marine Band, and the chorus, the music is quite nice.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GgJz0FVaLXc
--Bruce
Quote from: Irons on September 21, 2022, 07:00:42 AM
Maybe it shows me up in a bad light but I'm loving the Queue PR disaster of Holly Willoughby and Phillip Schofield. Serves them right.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11234347/Petition-axe-Holly-Phil-queue-jump-row-passes-37-000-Dominos-troll-them.html
Never been David Beckham's greatest fan, but I am now. Disgrace that MP's were allotted four passes to swerve the Queue and pay respects. When a MP offered one to Beckham he declined as his late grandad "would not approve". Instead he joined the Queue at 2am and lined up with everyone else.
Yes Lol, I'm also enjoying the schadenfreude of the Holly and Phillip PR fiasco - so you are not alone 8)
Journalists!! ..them two ?? :laugh: :laugh:
Quote from: Papy Oli on September 21, 2022, 11:51:57 PM
Journalists!! ..them two ?? :laugh: :laugh:
The problem is the lying as much as anything else. After being there they were filmed saying that it was one of 'the most profound moments' of their lives and then, when it all kicked-off on social media, stated that they were just there for their job and not 'paying respect' to HM.
I noticed that Susanna Reid of 'Good Morning Britain' queued up with her mother for hours, like almost everyone else.
I saw only a few short fragments of the funeral.
I discovered by chance that this was played. Haunting.
https://www.youtube.com/v/7YGl162hcXM
Quote from: vandermolen on September 22, 2022, 12:35:29 AM
The problem is the lying as much as anything else. After being there they were filmed saying that it was one of 'the most profound moments' of their lives and then, when it all kicked-off on social media, stated that they were just there for their job and not 'paying respect' to HM.
I noticed that Susanna Reid of 'Good Morning Britain' queued up with her mother for hours, like almost everyone else.
Yes Jeffrey, fair play to Susanna Reid. People were queuing on crutches, walking sticks and even I read some blind. It's the hypocrisy that does my head in, Holly Willoughby sets herself up as the quintessential English rose and earned a fortune. The mask has slipped and she knows it.
Apparently neither saw the funny side of a social media post directed at Schofield -
www.wejumpanyqueue.com ;D
Quote from: Irons on September 22, 2022, 03:50:18 AM
Yes Jeffrey, fair play to Susanna Reid. People were queuing on crutches, walking sticks and even I read some blind. It's the hypocrisy that does my head in, Holly Willoughby sets herself up as the quintessential English rose and earned a fortune. The mask has slipped and she knows it.
Apparently neither saw the funny side of a social media post directed at Schofield -
www.wejumpanyqueue.com ;D
Yes Lol, it's the dispiriting hypocrisy which stands out most. They strike me as a rather shallow and vacuous pair. As you rightly say, the mask has slipped revealing a less than pleasant reality. Their spurious denials - a reflection of Johnsonian excuses.
I enjoyed the Domino Pizza tweet (below):
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2022/sep/22/can-phillip-schofield-and-holly-willoughby-recover-from-queens-queue-fallout
Quote from: pjme on September 22, 2022, 01:57:15 AM
I saw only a few short fragments of the funeral.
I discovered by chance that this was played. Haunting.
https://www.youtube.com/v/7YGl162hcXM
I know that the tune that was played was called "Sleep, dearie, sleep". I don't know whether or not this is the same one but by another name as you have linked to? And, yes, it was haunting. Believe that it was the same tune played (and in the same way) as at Philip's funeral. Very moving--particularly with the piper walking away whilst still playing. :(
PD
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on September 22, 2022, 09:34:44 AM
I know that the tune that was played was called "Sleep, dearie, sleep". I don't know whether or not this is the same one but by another name as you have linked to? And, yes, it was haunting. Believe that it was the same tune played (and in the same way) as at Philip's funeral. Very moving--particularly with the piper walking away whilst still playing. :(
PD
Yes PD, the bagpipes, with the piper then walking away, really did it for me.
I gather that it was the same man who played outside the Queen's window at Windsor early in the morning whenever HM was in residence. He played for 15 minutes and then after a short break (like a 'snooze' function) played for another 15 minutes.
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/09/19/uk/queen-piper-funeral-westminster-gbr-intl-scli/index.html#:~:text=Among%20the%20thousands%20of%20tributes,piper%20between%202015%20and%202019.
The Skye boat song was played by multiple pipers during the procession to Buckingham castle.
Quote from: pjme on September 22, 2022, 10:34:25 AM
The Skye boat song was played by multiple pipers during the procession to Buckingham castle.
Do you mean Buckingham Palace or Windsor Castle?
:)
Quote from: vandermolen on September 22, 2022, 10:15:29 AM
Yes PD, the bagpipes, with the piper then walking away, really did it for me.
I gather that it was the same man who played outside the Queen's window at Windsor early in the morning whenever HM was in residence. He played for 15 minutes and then after a short break (like a 'snooze' function) played for another 15 minutes.
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/09/19/uk/queen-piper-funeral-westminster-gbr-intl-scli/index.html#:~:text=Among%20the%20thousands%20of%20tributes,piper%20between%202015%20and%202019.
I knew that she was awoken by the pipes every morning, and that he played for 15 minutes, but hadn't heard about the "snooze button". ;D :D
PD
Quote from: vandermolen on September 22, 2022, 11:46:17 AM
Do you mean Buckingham Palace or Windsor Castle?
:)
:-[ :-[ :-[
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on September 22, 2022, 01:08:29 PM
I knew that she was awoken by the pipes every morning, and that he played for 15 minutes, but hadn't heard about the "snooze button". ;D :D
PD
One account mentioned that PD but not others, although I like to think that it's true.
Quote from: vandermolen on September 22, 2022, 09:05:56 AM
Yes Lol, it's the dispiriting hypocrisy which stands out most. They strike me as a rather shallow and vacuous pair. As you rightly say, the mask has slipped revealing a less than pleasant reality. Their spurious denials - a reflection of Johnsonian excuses.
I enjoyed the Domino Pizza tweet (below):
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2022/sep/22/can-phillip-schofield-and-holly-willoughby-recover-from-queens-queue-fallout
The parallel with Johnson and "partygate" is a good one, Jeffrey.
I found this bit of fake news hilarious (but then I have a very, very low opinion on the affected person)
https://twitter.com/miss_snuffy/status/1569042231750787073
Quote from: ritter on September 23, 2022, 01:09:52 AM
I found this bit of fake news hilarious (but then I have a very, very low opinion on the affected person)
https://twitter.com/miss_snuffy/status/1569042231750787073
Who is Dan Wooton?
PD
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on September 23, 2022, 07:56:52 AM
Who is Dan Wooton?
PD
He's a UK based journalist from New Zealand,
PD. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Wootton
He works for a relatively new UK TV news network, GB News, so far to the right that next to it, Fox News would appear like the mouthpiece of international Anarco-Communism. ;D
As usual with this type of characters, some of the issues he raises can be worthy of consideration and reflection, but his constant recourse to spurious arguments, logical fallacies, and ad hominem attacks invalidates his whole discourse IMHO. I watched him several nights in the UK this summer (I didn't have much choice), and he comes through as a thoroughly unpleasant chap, but seems to hold a certain fascination for some. He really got on my nerves!
Quote from: ritter on September 23, 2022, 11:38:21 AM
He's a UK based journalist from New Zealand, PD. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Wootton
He works for a relatively new UK TV news network, GB News, so far to the right that next to it, Fox News would appear like the mouthpiece of international Anarco-Communism. ;D
As usual with this type of characters, some of the issues he raises can be worthy of consideration and reflection, but his constant recourse to spurious arguments, logical fallacies, and ad hominem attacks invalidates his whole discourse IMHO. I watched him several nights in the UK this summer (I didn't have much choice), and he comes through as a thoroughly unpleasant chap, but seems to hold a certain fascination for some. He really got on my nerves!
Thanks for the info.
PD
Quote from: vandermolen on September 19, 2022, 11:15:01 PM
That's true and it's not very logical in the 21st Century to retain a monarchy but it is very much part of who we are and connected with history and national identity. It may not survive in the long-term after the death of the Queen although, speaking personally, I hope that it does (and I am not a particular Royalist).
Sorry for being so late. I cannot help but wonder if the monarchy theatre is just a front by now.
Yes, a lot of people were saying they liked the Queen so much (often saying emotional things about their own mom, too) but a lot of the traditional English of British values have been wiped out in the past fifty years and QE2 was obviously unable to stop this.
Quote from: Herman on September 23, 2022, 11:55:40 PM
Sorry for being so late. I cannot help but wonder if the monarchy theatre is just a front by now.
Yes, a lot of people were saying they liked the Queen so much (often saying emotional things about their own mom, too) but a lot of the traditional English of British values have been wiped out in the past fifty years and QE2 was obviously unable to stop this.
She was a living memory of what once was, of an Empire that is long gone.
Her passing might be a wake up call for many that their country has to move forward in(to) the 21st century.
Quote from: Que on September 24, 2022, 06:55:45 AM
She was a living memory of what once was, of an Empire that is long gone.
Her passing might be a wake up call for many that their country has to move forward in(to) the 21st century.
And do what?
Quote from: Florestan on September 24, 2022, 07:49:24 AM
And do what?
Wake up and adapt, which is quite difficult if you live in an alternatively reality rooted in the past.
(//)
An early music friend posted this to Facebook:
When David Munrow performed at Windsor Castle with the Early Music Consort, the queen was intrigued by his crumhorn.
Munrow told her that Henry VIII owned 18 of them. The queen: 'Well Henry always did do things rather to excess'.
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 24, 2022, 02:59:14 PM
An early music friend posted this to Facebook:
When David Munrow performed at Windsor Castle with the Early Music Consort, the queen was intrigued by his crumhorn.
Munrow told her that Henry VIII owned 18 of them. The queen: 'Well Henry always did do things rather to excess'.
Very nice!
One of the new commemorative stamps:
(//)
Quote from: vandermolen on September 27, 2022, 05:51:46 AM
One of the new commemorative stamps:
Oh, nice!
The other day, I did some googling because I saw a photo of her when she had just started her reign which I thought was gorgeous. It turns out that it was taken by the professional photographer Dorothy Wilding. There's info about Wilding (and more photos by her) at the National Portrait Gallery.
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/b7/1f/f1/b71ff15e7a30dae0545ba1f48355819a.jpg)
PD
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on September 27, 2022, 06:43:52 AM
Oh, nice!
The other day, I did some googling because I saw a photo of her when she had just started her reign which I thought was gorgeous. It turns out that it was taken by the professional photographer Dorothy Wilding. There's info about Wilding (and more photos by her) at the National Portrait Gallery.
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/b7/1f/f1/b71ff15e7a30dae0545ba1f48355819a.jpg)
PD
Very nice PD.
Quote from: vandermolen on September 27, 2022, 06:55:43 AM
Very nice PD.
I love how she was lit, that it's a side portrait and the extreme blackness of the background. Would love to know how she came up with that. Wish that I could take better photos. :(
PD
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on September 27, 2022, 07:01:17 AM
I love how she was lit, that it's a side portrait and the extreme blackness of the background. Would love to know how she came up with that. Wish that I could take better photos. :(
PD
Hologram portrait
(//)
Quote from: vandermolen on September 27, 2022, 07:14:03 AM
Hologram portrait
(//)
A hologram portrait?! ??? Where was/is this creation?
PD
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on September 27, 2022, 08:28:32 AM
A hologram portrait?! ??? Where was/is this creation?
PD
https://www.itv.com/news/channel/2022-09-19/the-history-behind-the-queens-hologram
Quote from: vandermolen on September 27, 2022, 12:48:08 PM
https://www.itv.com/news/channel/2022-09-19/the-history-behind-the-queens-hologram
Interesting! And thanks!
PD
https://www.aol.co.uk/news/queen-died-old-age-death-131736152.html
I have to say that I did smile when I read:
'Occupation: Her Majesty The Queen'.
Quote from: vandermolen on September 29, 2022, 05:52:12 AM
https://www.aol.co.uk/news/queen-died-old-age-death-131736152.html
I have to say that I did smile when I read:
'Occupation: Her Majesty The Queen'.
:)
Quote from: vandermolen on September 29, 2022, 05:52:12 AM
https://www.aol.co.uk/news/queen-died-old-age-death-131736152.html
I have to say that I did smile when I read:
'Occupation: Her Majesty The Queen'.
Nice!
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on September 27, 2022, 07:01:17 AM
Would love to know how she came up with that. Wish that I could take better photos. :(
She didn't. It's not a selfie.
The picture was made by a team of pros.
Quote from: Herman on September 29, 2022, 07:30:08 AM
She didn't. It's not a selfie.
The picture was made by a team of pros.
Herman,
I was referring to Dorothy Wilding and wishing that I could photograph like she did--not to the Queen! lol ;D ;)
PD
Quote from: vandermolen on September 29, 2022, 05:52:12 AM
https://www.aol.co.uk/news/queen-died-old-age-death-131736152.html
I have to say that I did smile when I read:
'Occupation: Her Majesty The Queen'.
Reminds of me when Pedro II of Brazil checked in at the hotel in Bayreuth to attend the first festival in 1876, he filled the occupation field in the registration form with "Emperor ". :D
Quote from: ritter on September 29, 2022, 07:48:38 AM
Reminds of me when Pedro II of Brazil checked in at the hotel in Bayreuth to attend the first festival in 1876, he filled the occupation field in the registration form with "Emperor ". :D
Well, that's what he was, ain't it? :D
Many people left Paddington Bears outside Buckingham Palace in tribute to HM. They are being given to the Children's charity Dr Barnado's. I rather liked this photo, in the newspaper, of Camilla, the Queen Consort with them:
(//)
Quote from: vandermolen on October 16, 2022, 12:20:35 PM
Many people left Paddington Bears outside Buckingham Palace in tribute to HM. They are being given to the Children's charity Dr Barnado's. I rather liked this photo, in the newspaper, of Camilla, the Queen Consort with them:
(//)
I saw that photo and an article on the BBC's website yesterday. Very sweet! Apparently, they figured out a way to get all of the bears picked up (with the aid of many volunteers) and cleaned up. Happy that they will be finding new homes. :)
PD
Before this thread disappears, I thought that I'd post this, which I found quite endearing.
Here is the Royal Piper waking up King Charles (I wrote 'Prince' initially) for the first time at Clarence House. He is the same piper who played at the late Queen's funeral. Not sure if it will play outside the UK:
https://www.itv.com/news/2022-10-25/king-charles-woken-by-bagpipe-alarm-clock-just-like-the-queen
Quote from: vandermolen on October 25, 2022, 11:55:57 PM
Before this thread disappears, I thought that I'd post this, which I found quite endearing.
Here is the Royal Piper waking up King Charles (I wrote 'Prince' initially) for the first time at Clarence House. He is the same piper who played at the late Queen's funeral. Not sure if it will play outside the UK:
https://www.itv.com/news/2022-10-25/king-charles-woken-by-bagpipe-alarm-clock-just-like-the-queen
Thanks for sharing this, Jeffrey!
Quote from: vandermolen on October 25, 2022, 11:55:57 PM
Before this thread disappears, I thought that I'd post this, which I found quite endearing.
Here is the Royal Piper waking up King Charles (I wrote 'Prince' initially) for the first time at Clarence House. He is the same piper who played at the late Queen's funeral. Not sure if it will play outside the UK:
https://www.itv.com/news/2022-10-25/king-charles-woken-by-bagpipe-alarm-clock-just-like-the-queen
Thank you for sharing that Jeffrey. It's on Twitter, so yes, I was able to watch it in the States. :)
PD
Excellent PD. I thought that you'd be a 'safe bet' to respond and I'm glad that Karl was able to as well.
:)
Quote from: vandermolen on October 26, 2022, 07:08:44 AM
Excellent PD. I thought that you'd be a 'safe bet' to respond and I'm glad that Karl was able to as well.
:)
I saw an article the other day which I think you as an animal lover you would enjoy.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/15/uk/queen-elizabeth-corgis-sarah-ferguson-trnd/index.html
PD
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on October 26, 2022, 07:13:11 AM
I saw an article the other day which I think you as an animal lover you would enjoy.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/15/uk/queen-elizabeth-corgis-sarah-ferguson-trnd/index.html
PD
Lovely PD - they seem well-looked after. Thanks for posting :)
Quote from: vandermolen on October 25, 2022, 11:55:57 PM
Before this thread disappears, I thought that I'd post this, which I found quite endearing.
Here is the Royal Piper waking up King Charles (I wrote 'Prince' initially) for the first time at Clarence House. He is the same piper who played at the late Queen's funeral. Not sure if it will play outside the UK:
https://www.itv.com/news/2022-10-25/king-charles-woken-by-bagpipe-alarm-clock-just-like-the-queen
I played it too. Very moving. Queens and kings come and go, the piper stays. :D
Quote from: Florestan on October 26, 2022, 08:18:47 AM
I played it too. Very moving. Queens and kings come and go, the piper stays. :D
I found it very moving as well Andrei :)
Nice to read that King Charles kept the same piper...rather bittersweet. :'(
PD
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on October 26, 2022, 01:52:09 PM
Nice to read that King Charles kept the same piper...rather bittersweet. :'(
PD
As an animal lover PD, I suspect that you'll be pleased to hear that it is reported (in my 'Times Souvenir Guide') that the royal corgis (Muic and Sandy) were in attendance with HM during her final hours.
Quote from: vandermolen on October 29, 2022, 03:25:37 AM
As an animal lover PD, I suspect that you'll be pleased to hear that it is reported (in my 'Times Souvenir Guide') that the royal corgis (Muic and Sandy) were in attendance with HM during her final hours.
I hadn't thought about it before now, but I would have been surprised if they weren't. :( Still, good to hear it.
PD
Aye.
Painting of HM Lying-In-State by her last artist in residence: