William and Harry: what happened next?

Posted in Chelsy Davy, Diana, Kate Middleton, Prince Harry, Prince William, Prince of Wales on January 27th, 2009
By John - leave a comment!

Tonight Channel 4 broadcast an explosive documentary about Prince William and Prince Harry.

Typically for Channel 4 it covered a lot of “toff” activities, like hunting and polo in a deliberately disparaging way, and hyped up every glitch and problem that the Princes endured in their youth.

More interesting were journalist Richard Kay, who was close to their mother Diana, and James Whitaker, the Mirror photographer and lately pundit on all things Royal.

Richard Kay suggested that William is using Kate Middleton as a kind of decoy to cover his other activities. Both Princes, he said, are reluctant Royals who don’t want to do the job.

Whitaker also pursued this line, saying that their decisions to continue in the military “were extraordinary” and indicated they were turning their back on Royal duties and, by implication, marriage.

William does not come out of this very well. We hear that Diana referred to Harry as King Henry because she felt he would be more able to handle the role.

Chelsy Davy’s recent split from Harry was spliced onto the end of the tape, but carried the same message: the Princes are not interested in settling down, and both girls now seem to be aware of that.

Royal Anecdotes has known this for some time, as regulars will know, but the most astonishing assertion, made by Richard Kay, is that Kate is a decoy for William’s private activities.

No doubt a lot of flak will be generated by this documentary, and by the main interviews in particular, so we will await the outcome without commenting further for the time being.

(Overseas readers may be able to watch it on the Catchup service under the title “What happened next”.)

173 Responses to “William and Harry: what happened next?”

1. Wow… that… I don’t know what to say except wow.

   And how unfortunate if the ladies were unaware of this. I hope that if they do know all of this info, that they are not holding out hope for anything.

   By Meg on January 27th, 2009 at 1:36 am

2. Wow if it’s true then if I was Kate i’d get out like Chelsy has and fast.

   By Belinda on January 27th, 2009 at 1:41 am

3. So many conspiracies, so little time… And CM is supposed to be utterly unaware of her “true” role, or actually happily willing?

   And as for Mr. Kay, what does this do for his future access to Royals?

   By Sojourner on January 27th, 2009 at 2:07 am

4. Sorjourner, I would imagine that Mr. Kay would find it harder to get access to the Royals; but was if it were true?

   John, you quoted “Richard Kay suggested that William is using Kate Middleton as a kind of decoy to cover his other activities. Both Princes, he said, are reluctant Royals who don’t want to do the job.” Well I’d like to know what other activities he’s talking about – drinking, polo, hunting, what? Or Is he indulging in more unroyal behaviours? Uhg,

   By NCKat on January 27th, 2009 at 2:41 am

5. I agree with some of this. Not with the Harry and Chelsy part though. Not many people expected that relationship to last. Ms Davy has never seemed like she would fit easily into royal life so their breakup isn’t a huge surprise. But it’s been widely reported that Harry was the one with a real passion for the military. He was very vocal about going to Afghanistan. Staying on that path is totally in character. It’s definitely William that comes across as wanting to avoid any kind of real responsibility- marriage, full time royal duties etc. Still, I can’t agree that Kate is being used. She’s not a 17 yr old girl, she’s a woman in her late 20s who should know better. If she is choosing to stay in this relationship without the protection of marriage I can’t feel sorry for her.

   By Lizzy on January 27th, 2009 at 2:51 am

6. Please, someone explain what kind of decoy is KM? Why is the press
   so down on this lady.

   By Judy on January 27th, 2009 at 5:03 am

7. Maybe what is being suggested is that Kate is being used as a cover while he plays around on the side with other women.

   I’m not saying that that is what is actually happening. I think it would actually be a rather pointless strategy on PW’s part. Very damaging in fact if a young lady came forward to the press with cellphone snaps, while PW is supposedly still “seeing” Kate in some capacity.

   It’s probably just Richard Kay trying to make things sound more interesting.

   The only part that rings true to me is that neither of the Princes is ready to marry yet. Let’s be fair. The majority of men these days don’t get married around the age of 25 and if they were not Princes in the public eye, but just ordinary young men, we probably wouldn’t be expecting announcements of engagements.

   It’s actually quite impressive that both of them formed long-lasting attachments in their early 20s, rather than playing the field as their father did.

   By miki on January 27th, 2009 at 5:24 am

8. I cannot watch the clip, as it says I must be in the UK or Ireland. Is anyone in North America able to watch it? Or is there some sort of workaround?

   By greycella on January 27th, 2009 at 4:32 pm

9. Graycella, I can’t watch it either, as I’m in the USA. Can anyone give a synopsis of what the program said?

   By NCKat on January 27th, 2009 at 4:57 pm

10. I confess that I place little credence in anything that is written by Richard Kay. As for James Whitaker, I feel and have felt for some time that what he writes is generated almost exclusively to garner the spotlight for himself. I am not pleased that this program was on public television in the UK, because I am frankly tired of the media using their bully pulpit to take pot shots at the Royal Family. These are the same media persons who have made their fortunes and careers on the backs of the Royal Family, after all. These writers seem to know no shame, no sense of decency.

    I shall continue to place my faith and trust in my intrinsic belief in the good character of our two golden Princes, Prince William and Prince Harry, until it is conclusively proven to my satisfaction that such is not the case.

    By Gigi on January 27th, 2009 at 5:31 pm

11. Gigi – i was waiting for you to weigh in on this.

    By coni on January 27th, 2009 at 5:48 pm

12. “…who have made their fortunes and careers on the backs of the Royal Family, after all. These writers seem to know no shame, no sense of decency”. Well said Gigi,well said!!

    Some journalists have been hit by credit crunch so badly…..

    By Mikado-watcher on January 27th, 2009 at 6:09 pm

13. John, is that a precise quote from Richard Kay about Kate serving as a “decoy for William’s private activities”?

    If those are his words, he’s trying to create mischief, rumor, innuendo, etc. The only time a woman willingly serves in such capacity is when she’s providing cover for a gay man who wants the public to think he’s straight.

    Is Kay trying to create a tabloidish controversy regarding William’s sexuality?

    By Dan on January 27th, 2009 at 8:07 pm

14. Last week some scolding occurred on this site regarding the extent of speculation about KM’s fertility, etc. A statement was made about being libelous and recommendations made about not passing a certain line in the comments on this site. Wow! It seems to me all this speculation about PW seems kind of in a danger zone—if what was said previously about accountability is true.

    By Karen on January 27th, 2009 at 8:25 pm

15. Richard Kay is someone who has been in touch with William and Harry and is generally discreet. His view is not to be sneezed at, especially when it coincides with that of Royal Anecdotes.

    By John on January 27th, 2009 at 8:37 pm

16. I’m sorry that the documentary is not available outside the UK. I’ll take a look at it again and report more fully on its contents.

    By John on January 27th, 2009 at 8:38 pm

17. Dan, there are a few comments in the program that I missed — I was not expecting such a challenging argument and was otherwise engaged doing my tax return.

    I’ll take another look and report back, but what I reported is substantially true.

    Decoy and other activities were mentioned. I have to say I give a lot of credibility to Richard Kay. Something strange has been going on.

    By John on January 27th, 2009 at 8:44 pm

18. Yes, I am confused as the others about what kind of “decoy” KM could be. While I did not believe the “staying friends to ease media speculation” it at least seemed a plausible explanation. But this “decoy” business leaves me bewildered since I don’t see what “private activities” PW would need cover for…?

    By Imani on January 27th, 2009 at 8:53 pm

19. Karen, I understand your reaction to my post. Let me assure you that I am not engaging in speculation (or encouraging any) about William.

    I asked John for clarification about the quote because it is a very provocative choice of words on Kay’s part. Such words would clearly invite all kinds of speculation about what kinds of “private activities” a Prince would need a girlfriend to cover for.

    I can only think of the obvious one. The same speculation whirled around Prince Edward’s marriage, which is why we were repeatedly assured, in somewhat un-Royal fashion, that Sophie’s second pregnancy occurred “naturally.” (Is that the kind of thing you’d expect to read in an official announcement on a Royal website?) Prince Albert’s many relationships with women have also been suggested as a similar cover.

    I apologize to any of you who feel I was wrong to bring it up. But again, if the quote is accurate, I believe Kay is being deliberately provocative, particularly if he didn’t elaborate on what he meant, and left his readers to ponder.

    By Dan on January 27th, 2009 at 9:16 pm

20. I suggest few women would willingly be used as cover for a gay man who wants the public to think he is straight. What more usually happens is the woman is duped, often for years, into a relationship which is a cover for such ‘private activities’.

    Certainly I agree with Dan, that is the implication from using those words. What game is being played I don’t know.

    By Maria Marciano on January 27th, 2009 at 9:43 pm

21. In all due respect, I am not sure that what has been going on with CM and PW is all that strange, though certainly disappointing. PW behaves as many other rich, feckless young men about town do. We expect better from a prince, but maybe that is our problem? The historical record is certainly against us on that one…

    What is more, despite a rather effective PR campaign, it is clear that the princes military experience has been modified to accommodate their requirements (stag party attendance and eyesight for PW; foot in mouth disease for PH). Furthermore, these young men have to know that they can choose to discontinue their careers and suffer no other consequence than a momentary media backlash (and when you have a job that no one can take from you, what do you really care about that, anyway?)

    Titillation (or wishful thinking) aside, I think this broadcast is a new spin on old arguments about how the prince’s lives are much worse because of their mother’s death. A nasty road to go down, and not much worth finding at the end, as we have seen time and again.

    By Sojourner on January 27th, 2009 at 10:26 pm

22. Dan, I watched the doc again tonight and tightened up on the quotes. Here they are:

    Richard Kay said: Kate is there to deflect attention from William. I think he uses her so he can go away and do whatever he wants. [There's no "gay" implication there.]

    William is hostile to the outside world. Public affection is built on visibility and William doesn’t want to do that.

    James Whitaker says: William doesn’t want to be Royal, so Harry is put down to promote William [which is a bit of a contradiction].

    Ken Wharfe says that William is sly and will push Harry into trouble to get out of things. Diana thought King Harry would be a better option because William was very reluctant to do the job.

    That’s what was said. I’ll leave you to sort it out.

    Basically, I agree that the RAF decision by William conforms with Richard Kay’s view, and mine for nearly a year.

    We won’t know the truth until it emerges though. Kate, unfortunately, seems destined to a supporting role.

    By John on January 27th, 2009 at 11:15 pm

23. John, if this is all true, then I truly feel sorry for Harry. He must be in an impossible situation. This all makes William look rather selfish and irresponsible.

    But why is Kate staying in such a situation? Does she so desire to be his consort that she’s willing to put up with anything to get there? This really puts her in a bad light, too.

    I have not seen any reaction in the DM or any other of the papers, at least in their online editions. I wonder if CH is trying to keep a tight lid on things.

    By NCKat on January 27th, 2009 at 11:36 pm

24. NCKat, Richard Kay is the Mail’s diarist. He hasn’t mentioned it in today’s Diary.

    I think a lot of media folk know what’s happening and what’s not happening. With William retreating to the hills for up to seven years, the story is virtually dead.

    By John on January 27th, 2009 at 11:43 pm

25. John, while I’m unable to watch the video as well, I’m confused as to the actual clip that’s being discussed here. Is the title “What happened next” or “What really happened”?

    If it’s the latter, and it’s about what happened during the media blackout of the princes’ student days, I can’t imagine what the source of the stories would be (since there was supposed to be a media black out during that time).

    By Maricar on January 28th, 2009 at 12:53 am

26. For whatever it is worth, here is a somewhat different take on the princes’ personality and character here

    http://tinyurl.com/cahl4o

    It does not (necessarily) contradict John’s assessment of CM’s chances at becoming royal.

    By Sojourner on January 28th, 2009 at 1:23 am

27. After some careful thought about this, I’ve come to the following conclusion:

    It has been pointed out that in the current state of global economics, it wouldn’t be right to have a lavish wedding. To deny the people of such would not go over well, based on the people’s love for the Royal Family, and it wouldn’t be fair to deny the family, people, and most of all the bride, of the “fairy tale” wedding.

    It seems logical for William to go off and pursue military activities and use that as time to wait for the economy to turn back around. It’s a long time in the military and it’s a long time for things to turn around. They seem to have a strong relationship, and I’m sure they’re just weathering the economic storm like the rest of us.

    In spite of all the suggestions otherwise, I’m hopeful they will end up together and we will have a fabulous wedding.

    There will be highs and lows. Keep the faith.

    By Meg on January 28th, 2009 at 3:56 am

28. Well, how naive am I. It never occurred to me that William might be gay.

    By miki on January 28th, 2009 at 6:03 am

29. It doesn’t ring true to me. I think he was genuinely interested in Kate at one time.

    It does seem reasonable to guess that William doesn’t want the high public profile. I have a feeling that his mother’s shenanigans with the press put him off totally. Who could blame him.

    By miki on January 28th, 2009 at 6:10 am

30. Maricar, the documentary is a new one covering much of their lives until the present day.

    As Miki says, it shows how their reluctance to “go public” — and their signing up for the military — relates to the problems their mother had with the press.

    William, in particular, is said to use all kinds of strategems to get rid of the press, which he loathes. Richard Kay suggests that he uses Kate as cover so he can get on with other things, presumably other girls.

    He also makes the point that affection is built by visibility and the two Princes are not doing the groundwork for their future roles.

    Whitaker, like me, said that William’s choice of seven years in the RAF at this stage is “extraordinary” and doesn’t make any sense.

    Ken Wharfe called William sly and manipulative, unlike Harry who is totally upfront.

    They all put the boot into William. I think he needs to improve his image a lot if that’s what three of the best-known Royal watchers think.

    By John on January 28th, 2009 at 8:40 am

31. Meg, the issue here isn’t whether or not William will marry Kate; it’s his bolting away for seven years to avoid all the responsibilities of learning his real job and using his brother and Kate as screens. He’s coming off as manipulative and sly, neither of them good qualities for a modern-day prince. And as I have said before, one wonders why Kate puts up with it. Harry is trapped because of his being born into the family, but Kate could leave, and who knows? She might get fed up with the whole bit and bolt, too. I wonder if William has promised the big wedding if she will provide the screen for his activities. Again, not a very happy omen.

    By NCKat on January 28th, 2009 at 11:43 am

32. NCKat, that’s why I think Kate may well follow Chelsy’s lead in the not too distant future. She’s clearly on a hiding to nothing and dogged by “Waity Katie” — used again in today’s Mail by Allison Pearson.

    However, she may have calculated that, for all his roving around, William has not had a stable relationship with anyone but her. Many eligible girls, like Isabella Calthorpe, have actually turned him down.

    Kate may take an enormous gamble that when he is eventually forced to marry, as his father was, she will be the only one around.

    Needless to say, that is a near-suicidal bet to place, since — just like his father — he may be tempted by a much younger model.

    Royal Anecdotes’s advice to her is to strike out now, give him a “now or never” ultimatum, and be prepared to walk away — if she hasn’t already.

    By John on January 28th, 2009 at 1:04 pm

33. Is there any possibility that the Monarchy decides in the end Harry should be King and not William? If the end goal is to secure the Monarchy’s place in the UK and the world, wouldn’t it behove them to think that maybe Harry is that right person to carry the Monarchy forward and not William?

    From what we hear and read, William has a major (and borderline childish) hatred towards the media. We know, you’re mother died, we’re all sorry, but at sometime you need to grow up and move pass it. His mother even though William doesn’t want the role and lately William acts more and more like the second fiddle to Harry who may get himself into trouble, but at the same time seems more comfortable with the media, children and attention.

    Why not have William abdicate when time, I fear with William as King he’ll be a recluse and give the press more ammo for their dislike of the Royal Family, finally paving the way for it to be abolished. Give the job to Harry, your new King has solid military experience, seems to be happy and not disappointed with his position in life and probably would make a more entertaining King than William.

    By American Cousin on January 28th, 2009 at 1:35 pm

34. AC, we have heard the same argument with Charles. We can’t go on discarding genuine claimants to the Throne without debasing its currency.

    I actually think William may be a good King when his time comes. His great-grandfather King George VI was a quiet King, but much loved. It’s not the job of Monarchy to be “entertaining”, but Monarchs do need to communicate well with the people.

    William needs to attain gravitas and learn the art. Harry might be a little too outgoing to strike the right balance.

    By John on January 28th, 2009 at 2:09 pm

35. I’ll have to respectfully disagree on “debasing its currency.” If anything, the currency is currently trading at Icelandic levels (nothing against Iceland, love the country). Outside of the Queen and Prince Charles, the future King may as well bankrupt the Monarchy. If the Monarchy wants to change with the times, then if the situation is right, maybe it is best that William doesn’t inherit the throne, especially if its a position he certainly doesn’t want. I have no problems with Charles as King. I also believe with the changing of the guard with Charles will continue to have the same momentum from QEII. But from Charles to William, you could see the beginning of the end. Especially if during Charles reign William continues to act aloof and stand offish. Enough of William’s hatred for the media, its time for him to grow up and act like a future King, not a petulant child.

    By American Cousin on January 28th, 2009 at 2:40 pm

36. John, thanks for the clarification. I feel silly for jumping to conclusions about Kay’s words without first seeing or hearing them!

    Let that be a lesson to me. Forget I said anything!

    By Dan on January 28th, 2009 at 4:22 pm

37. We talk as though Kate waiting for William is the result of a terrible character flaw, but let’s remember who we’re talking about here. The public loved Diana because she was independent, strong-willed and outgoing. But you may all recall that those are the same reasons the “Establishment” detested her. We ridicule Kate because she is none of these things. Shouldn’t we consider that perhaps that’s what makes THEM like her? Her lack of those traits could be working in her favor as far as they are concerned.

    Also, I must respectfully disagree with those of you who say that William will be like Charles and “be tempted by a younger model.” Charles wasn’t tempted by Diana, she was forced on him because she was considered “suitable to be a Queen” and Camilla was not. However, in today’s world, Charles would have been able to marry Camilla, and the Diana fiasco would have never occurred. I think there is hope for Kate if she waits, and I think it will curry favor with the Royals.

    Sorry for the rambling–hope this makes sense. I’m in a hurry, but wanted to weigh in.

    By Kris on January 28th, 2009 at 4:46 pm

38. I’m getting confused…Is PW using RAF to get rid of Kate peacefully or he will keep using her to get away from attention so he can see other girls? After many years of trashing Kate, is there new movement against Prince William?

    By Mikado-watcher on January 28th, 2009 at 4:57 pm

39. Kris, we’re not ridiculing Kate. As you say, her generally relaxed attitude would make her an ideal member of the Royal Family. However, William plainly has no current intention of making her his wife.

    She needs to move on, or the ridicule from many writers in the press will intensify and she will cut a very lonely figure. William can then sort himself out without feeling guilty about the girl endlessly waiting on his favour and command.

    By John on January 28th, 2009 at 5:27 pm

40. Chelsey’s decision was a simple one. She decided the problem is more important than the person (Harry). As I see it, Kate, to date, has decided the person (William) is more important than the problem. Although both decisions require a lot of inner strength, presence, and confidence, they come from different directions which means Kate and Chelsey may not be at all alike regardless of how the press tries to link them. Kate’s decision is bred from loyalty but also trust and faith in a person she cares about. We may feel it’s misguided but her decision seems to be driven by loyalty to a person she cares about and that relationship over outside obstacles. I’m not sure she can behave are act any differently and I’m fairly certain what the press thinks doesn’t drive her decision. Ii think probably, William drives her decisions. That would be an excellent character trait for a royal figure or friend. It’s just sooo hard to accept William may have been lucky enough to have, truly by a fluke, hit gold but is himself like Chelsey, unable to chose the person over …..whatever is happening. If the story of these 4 individuals was a fictional saga it would probably sell millions.

    By lionhound on January 28th, 2009 at 5:36 pm

41. Lionhound, we always have to remember that anything going on in William’s circle is relentlessly protected from prying eyes, so we never really know what’s going on. Richard Kay made this point in the film. Even he, with all his contacts, struggles to make sense of it.

    I use a kind on interpolation method but I’m equally prone to error. I think, though, I’ve got the measure of the characters and I’m working on fitting that with their actions.

    The fact that the RAF decision was such a bombshell to everyone, shows how close to his chest William plays things.

    By John on January 28th, 2009 at 5:47 pm

42. I suppose it’s time to give it up the romantic thoughts and glass slipper. The documentary has such a Machiavellian ring to it in that it suggests people are being used to obtain an end and I’ve always held royalty above politics in our modern age. If Kate is truly a decoy, I suspect William will have to find another decoy before long.

    By lionhound on January 28th, 2009 at 6:34 pm

43. Do you have any indication the press feels they’ve been intentionally mislead? That could have some negative fallout.

    By lionhound on January 28th, 2009 at 6:35 pm

44. The Daily Mail is reporting that Kate is allergic to horses.

    By Evelyn on January 28th, 2009 at 7:08 pm

45. If it’s true that William has rented a house in Shropshire, he’s unlikely to have done so if Kate didn’t intend to make frequent use of it. If that happens, perhaps it was a mutual decision to get out of the Royal limelight while they both can. A marriage now would surely require Kate to become an active Royal while William is tucked away behind the RAF’s closed doors. Remember what the Duchess of York was subjected to while the Duke was off in his helicopter somewhere. They will not want to repeat that mistake with Kate.

    In this regard, I think the house in Shrops and the RAF decision make sense. They’ve decided to have a semi-private life as an unmarried military couple while Charles and Camilla fill the Royal spotlight. If their relationship survives this unconventional plan, they’ll marry when it suits them or when Charles moves up the line. The press and the public will get used to the idea (the “Waity Katie” stories have only so much more life in them) and her reputation will survive.

    Let’s be honest: becoming a Royal by marriage doesn’t exactly guarantee a sterling reputation either! She may be doing the smartest thing by putting it off as long as possible.

    By Dan on January 28th, 2009 at 7:47 pm

46. How on earth can Kate Middleton be allergic to horses when she has been an enthusiastic atendee at the larger horse races in England? Of course, she may be taking shots for the allergy, but still. Regarding the larger issue that everyone has been examined on this thread, I feel very nearly obliged to quote Queen Mary, throw up my hands and declare “This is a pretty kettle of fish!” What a labyrinth we are lost in and what a quagmire! Somehow, I get the feeling that Prince William and Kate are somewhere, reading these posts and rocking with laughter at the lot of us. Phooey!

    By Gigi on January 28th, 2009 at 8:04 pm

47. Wow! It sounds like a good program for me to have missed! How could I possibly be optimistic with that kind of negative attitued? Sigh! Oh, well…one day at a time.

    By Julie on January 28th, 2009 at 8:04 pm

48. Oh, egad, I meant to type “attendee.” My typos will be the end of us all, mark my words!

    By Gigi on January 28th, 2009 at 8:05 pm

49. There’s a short article in The Independent on the break-up in which the writer asserts, “Chelsy Davy, the blonde 23-year-old daughter of a Zimbabwean businessman, who’s been stepping out with Prince Harry for five years, has ended the relationship, in part, she says, because she has been made to feel unwelcome by the Windsors.” I thought Davy’s grouses was with Harry primarily and not his family…do you think there’s any credence to it? The writer gives no source at all.

    http://tinyurl.com/bbklg9

    By Imani on January 28th, 2009 at 8:42 pm

50. I don’t understand the “waity Katy” issue in a country with many young women who are leisurely and wealthy. I realize that the Middletons are not old money, but why can’t their daughter be leisurely if they can afford it?

    I’m curious to know the general impression of young aristocratic women in England these days. Are they all going to law school or developing a career?

    By Karen on January 28th, 2009 at 9:16 pm

51. That Independent “article” is crude, mean-spirited, misogynist, poorly written as well as unsourced. Amol Rajan is no journalist. As for the petty comments about Kate Middleton — well, perhaps it is due to my American eye, but I don’t think fully half of all English women are more appealing than this “middle-of-the-road” example. In my opinion she rises pretty close to the top, but my opinion is as biased as Rajan’s, and diametrically opposed.

    Andrew Morton dismisses her with the same term, which is just more phrase-making with her name, and completely inaccurate. Still, Mr. Morton has credentials to lecture on mediocrity, being such an expert example in his own right.

    Their brand of tabloid blather reads like nothing more than jealous ravings. They knock the Royal and the near-Royal down only for want of taking their place.

    By Dan on January 28th, 2009 at 9:22 pm

52. Gigi, the DM article say that Kate is careful to keep her distance from the horses themselves. Allergies are often only a problem if you get right in with the allergen. She may be okay sitting on the sidelines at polo and in the stands for races. She could take medication (if not a severe allergy) or get injections that would build up her immunity (if more severe). Or she may just watch.

    By Evelyn on January 28th, 2009 at 9:25 pm

53. Karen, I always thought the same thing myself. Frankly, most of the women of that particular stripe (and men too, to a lesser extent) go to university but do things like Art History (which William almost fell back to himself before Kate convinced him otherwise, or so its reported). Geography seems to be a popular choice too after Philosophy, the other old standby. Then they graduate and end up working as SAs at high end stores, or they become “model/actresses”. Maybe interior decorators?

    Kate’s lack of a job never bothered me although it probably would have been prudent to help at a charity/non-profit. As William’s girlfriend she has to give some though to her public image.

    Dan, that’s more or less what I thought but I was curious about the “problems with Windsors” issue since it was the first time I’d ever read anything about that being a factor.

    By Imani on January 28th, 2009 at 11:08 pm

54. I could be entirely wrong about this, but prior to the break up, I sensed little hints that Chelsy Davy was not quite the type of person with whom the Royal Family would wish to include in the family circle. For one thing, she did not go to Balmoral, nor did she join in the beloved stalking pastimes with the Royal Family, as Kate did. Balmoral is sacred to the Queen and her family, and that fact that Kate has been invited there and seen to “fit in” is a huge factor in her favor. Conversely, Chelsy either was never included, or, if she was invited, chose not to go. I know these things may seem shallow or superficial, but these factors do count within the sensabilities of the family. For another thing, the Queen and Prince Philip look askance at those who prefer sun-kissed beaches rather than the climes of their beloved island, Britain. Princess Margaret was one within the family who did not rate the approval of the Queen and Prince Philip for just this failing–her frequent trips to Mustique, where she had a vacation home. Chelsy, a South African by birth, made it plain that she did not like British weather and, moreover, spent many holidays in sunny, sandy climes. That would not have endeared her to most of the senior Royals. I further feel that Chelsy’s determined independence and flamboyant behavior did not bode well for her becoming a part of the House of Windsor.

    By Gigi on January 29th, 2009 at 2:47 am

55. The horse story appeared on the BBC’s Today programme this morning, causing some hilarity among the presenters. I suspect it’s a form of words to explain a general reluctance to get on a horse. I recall Diana had a similar … er … psychosomatic reaction.

    Lionhound, I believe the media in general does think it’s not getting much traction with William, and that “smokescreens” are the weapon of choice against them.

    By John on January 29th, 2009 at 10:10 am

56. Dan, William would want to get off base as much as possible, not only for some peace, but also to party with his mates. Hence the rented house. I can’t see Kate trecking all the way up to Shropshire on a regular basis, though.

    By John on January 29th, 2009 at 10:13 am

57. The Independent article is typical of the snidey pieces you get from the leftwing press over here. Thankfully, the Independent is about to go out of business.

    If Chelsy really wanted “a quiet life” why would she take up with the third in line to the Throne, and remain for five years? It’s true the Royal Family are much more formal than anything she will have known, and if she thought they were all like Harry, she hadn’t read many books on the subject.

    I suspect she’s more intelligent and clued-up than the article gives her credit for. My own view is that the relationship had run its course and had to go one way or the other. Harry’s decision to choose the military was the obvious get-out point for her, just as it may prove for Kate.

    By John on January 29th, 2009 at 10:21 am

58. Has anyone seen this piece in The Telegraph?:

    http://tinyurl.com/b75733

    In summation, it says this could be the year Kate marries William. It’s much more flattering than the items that we’ve been talking about. Just one problem – it’s an excerpt from the Reader’s Digest, a publication I hardly call hard news (well for the most part, anyway).

    By NCKat on January 29th, 2009 at 11:27 am

59. NCKat, the Kathy Lette incident occurred last summer, an age ago, not “recently” as the piece — and the Daily Mail report — says. The rest is just flabby speculation and snippets of gossip.

    Whenever I see the word “insiders” used, instead of “senior Royal courtier” or something similar, my defences are on full alert.

    Airy-fairy, out of date stuff. The world has moved on since then.

    By John on January 29th, 2009 at 11:43 am

60. CD might indeed be academically successful, stellar even. Nevertheless, the kind of privilege she has enjoyed all her life can create strong impediments to being “clued-up” about life.

    By Sojourner on January 29th, 2009 at 2:09 pm

61. Since the beginning of this month we’ve seen the news of two princes and their girlfriends. The break up of PH and CD is big, but Kate’s horse story and wedding speculations etc…
    Something is going on there or the media simply puts the news of young royals whenever they can?

    By Mikado-watcher on January 29th, 2009 at 6:09 pm

62. I think the media knows that stories on the young royals (especially anything connected with their love lives) sells. If they don’t have a GOOD story, they’ll take anything they can find.

    By Evelyn on January 29th, 2009 at 6:27 pm

63. ABC world news is running a very positive piece, though devoid of “breaking news” (or any news whatsoever). |-)

    Perhaps a counter to the Channel 4 broadcast? :- I

    http://tinyurl.com/cl9hct

    By Sojourner on January 29th, 2009 at 7:15 pm

64. The ABC piece is a strange one. It’s a summarization of old news and opinion, not written by an on-camera reporter. There’s no news in it, so I’m curious what prompted it. We’ll see tonight if it actually makes the broadcast. More likely it’s just filler for their website.

    If they had cited this site it would have made more interesting reading.

    By Dan on January 29th, 2009 at 7:26 pm

65. The author of the ABC piece is a staffer in the network’s London bureau who writes a blog for their website. Like I said—web filler, not news.

    By Dan on January 29th, 2009 at 7:32 pm

66. All this speculative media attention directed at the young royals plays precisely to my view of the Prince William and Kate Middleton marriage mystery: I think they are avoiding marriage as along as possible to stay out of an even more frenzied media spotlight. Prince Williams has vivid memories of what it meant to his mother (who admittedly played a game with reporters and photographers, but still it wasn’t pretty much of the time.)

    By Karen on January 29th, 2009 at 8:23 pm

67. That piece in the Telegraph is strange too, although it does cite real human beings, like Miguel Head, who says William’s time in SAR after his 18-month training will likely be 30 to 36 months, not the seven years we’ve frequently talked about here.

    For those of you Reader’s Digest fans, the story appears in the British version of the magazine. In the US version, the stories are all drawn from other publications (hence the name and function of the magazine) but the website for the British version doesn’t say where the story came from. Perhaps the author, Rosie Mortimer, wrote it specifically for RD UK.

    By Dan on January 29th, 2009 at 8:28 pm

68. Is she John Mortimer’s daughter? Just some trivia.

    By Bear on January 29th, 2009 at 8:36 pm

69. John Mortimer (who died this month) had a daughter named Rosie. I can only imagine it’s her.

    By Dan on January 29th, 2009 at 9:23 pm

70. Dan, are you referring to the John Mortimer who created “Rumpole of the Bailey”? I was very sad to read of his death, as I love that series.

    By Gigi on January 30th, 2009 at 1:19 am

71. Hmmn…so where does Guy Pelly lurk with all of this decoy bit?

    Kate needs to move on. The poor girl.

    By Mrs. Peperium on January 30th, 2009 at 1:42 am

72. Gigi, I’m not sure if Rosie is John Mortimer’s daughter, but he certainly wrote Rumpole of the Bailey.

    Coming back to the Channel 4 programme, the three main talking heads, Richard Kay, James “big red tomato” Whitaker, and Ken Wharfe (who practically brought up the two Princes as boys), were all intimately connected to them. What they say now can’t be ignored, unlike hack journalists who have never seen them in the flesh and rely on passing whispers.

    In regards to Kate, my belief is that they will always be good friends. Had he wished to marry her though, he would have made it clear a while back, if only to get her off the hook and give her some protection.

    Think about it.

    By John on January 30th, 2009 at 11:22 am

73. John, did those well connected men mention anything about William and Kate’s relationship in the program? Did they say they are no longer a couple but good friends?

    By Mikado-watcher on January 30th, 2009 at 2:15 pm

74. Richard Kay said that William was using Kate for cover, which doesn’t suggest marriage.

    By John on January 30th, 2009 at 2:59 pm

75. John, I still wonder if PW marrying or getting engaged to Kate Middleton “get[s] her off the hook and give[s] her some protection.” It seems to me (a Texan, looking on from a distance admittedly) that while Kate would be provided with security officers upon an engagement, the frenzy around her would increase exponentially. And she would be in the tabloid headlines everyday with her clothes, her figure, her every glance askance.

    By Karen on January 30th, 2009 at 3:05 pm

76. John, do you think “William is using Kate for cover” as Richard Kay said? Does he USE a good friend who has been loyal to him for long time? Do you think he is such a mean person?

    By Mikado-watcher on January 30th, 2009 at 3:44 pm

77. It doesn’t have to be ‘mean’ it might be an arrangement! agreed on by both parties?

    By london4704 on January 30th, 2009 at 4:57 pm

78. While I don’t fully agree with John on this (with all due respect, of course ) I suppose one could look upon their continued friendship—with no confirmation of a split—as a cover to prevent William from being a target of every would-be Princess on the planet.

    So long as William is perceived as “taken,” it puts down the “most eligible bachelor” frenzy which would ensue if he was officially “available.”

    I could see Kate being complicit in this kind of “cover,” perhaps hoping she will finally get him in the end.

    I still hope this scenario is all wrong, and that they remain committed to each other, simply choosing to wait a while longer before marriage.

    By Dan on January 30th, 2009 at 7:30 pm

79. I agree with you, Dan, especially with the hope that they’re just waiting.

    I could certainly see the sense of not getting the wedding frenzy in full gear while Prince William is trying to focus on his SAR training. Perhaps when he has a year of training under his belt, he could deal with a few months of frenzy before a summer 2010 wedding. Then they could have some newlywed years near a military base, during his 3-years of operational service.

    By Evelyn on January 30th, 2009 at 8:32 pm

80. A total guess which means it’s worth nothing. The decoy aspect evolved very slowly in recent years.

    By Mrs. Peperium on January 31st, 2009 at 2:34 am

81. Latest bit of news from The Telegraph – PW will serve in The Falklands for his first tour of duty:

    http://tinyurl.com/cxa67y

    It mentions that PW and KM have never been apart very long since leaving St. Andrews, and so this will be a good test of their commitment.

    By NCKat on January 31st, 2009 at 9:59 pm

82. I also meant to quote this:

    “Prince William, who holds the rank of Flying Officer in the RAF, decided on a career in SAR after it was made clear to him by defence chiefs that he would never serve in a war zone. ”

    Does this answer any of your questions, John?

    By NCKat on January 31st, 2009 at 10:02 pm

83. I don’t know. If William really is using Kate as a cover — even if she agreed I still think it’s a mean and low ploy to ask in the first place — then his dodge into the military should be enough of a cover, IMO, to make Kate’s current public position no longer necessary. The fact that he hasn’t broken up with her but has gone so far as to holiday with her in Birkhall ( an unusual event in itself) and stay over at her family’s house was very, very ill-conceived to say the least. How far does he want to help Kate in lowering her reputation before he dumps her?

    By Imani on February 1st, 2009 at 12:07 am

84. All I can say is that if PW and CM have indeed broken up, CM is handling it with poise and dignity (as usual). Very different from CD, who seems to be showing her true colors (quite literally).

    By Sojourner on February 1st, 2009 at 3:33 am

85. The Mail on Sunday has an article on Chelsy. It sounds like she’s between a rock and a hard place. She really loves Harry, but doesn’t love the royal life nor the English weather. I think it will take some time to see if their split holds.

    By Evelyn on February 1st, 2009 at 5:04 am

86. In another website, this link was recently posted.

    http://tinyurl.com/b2zyoc

    Have these allegations been heard before?
    This scenario certainly thickens the break-up plot, wouldn’t you say?

    By Sojourner on February 1st, 2009 at 7:51 pm

87. Yes, mention of Mr. Davy’s problems have been seen elsewhere but as I understand it, he was cleared of the charges. (the article date you referance is 2006). But amongst the many stories of the break-up, there was a hint that Harrry’s use of “Paki” jeopardized Mr. Davy’s standing as one of the few white farmers in good standing with the government of Zimbabwe.

    By NCKat on February 1st, 2009 at 7:58 pm

88. I find it hard to believe Mugabe keeps up with the British tabloids on Harry’s antics. (If the Nazi uniform didn’t affect anything…)

    By Imani on February 1st, 2009 at 11:52 pm

89. April 22, 2006, Sojourner. We discussed them here ages ago. Nothing came of them.

    By John on February 2nd, 2009 at 11:11 am

90. Well, dear friends, on a cheery note, my Pittsburgh Steelers won their sixth Super Bowl last evening as I and my family cheered loudly in our den, waving Terrible Towels! It was a sensational game and a terrific victory!

    Regarding comments made here recently, that there are rumors that Prince William does not want to be King in the fullness of time, I shall offer my opinion that such feelings are no indication of anything but Prince William’s feelings. It does not disqualify him from Kingship and it certainly does not mean that he will not excell at kingship. In fact, it seems to me that, in my lifetime, many of the monarchs who have performed to the highest standard did not wish to reign. King George VI definitely did not want to be King, nor did his daughter, Elizabeth, who wished and prayed that her parents would have a son who could step in front of her in the line of succession. To be frank, it makes me uneasy that Charles is so obviously desperate to gain the throne, and, further, that he rages and broods at the delay in a most undignified and unattractive manner. I must wonder at him, even worry that a person so eager to gain power will in the end misuse it. Let us hope, for all our sakes, that when Charles becomes king Britain’s Parliament is united and strong enough to reign him in and not allow him to dictate and intrude. If they lack the strength and the resolve, I foresee troubled times ahead.

    By Gigi on February 2nd, 2009 at 3:59 pm

91. John, do you have any insight into the workings of the Royal website? I check it frequently, because it used to be quite active. But now one sees that the “Out and About” section of Royal Insight has not been updated since October, no new picture of the Queen has been added to the Gallery page since December 11th, and a January edition was never put up.

    Are December and January typically quiet months for the Queen, or is something else afoot?

    By Dan on February 2nd, 2009 at 9:45 pm

92. Ah, I see fro the Telegraph that the redesigned Royal website is being relaunched February 12. Stay tuned…

    By Dan on February 2nd, 2009 at 9:51 pm

93. Gigi, I may be remembering this wrong, but I believe there was a time when Prince Charles was reluctant to accept his future as king, too. I’m sure William will be as ready when his time comes as Charles is now.

    I’m not a big fan of Charles, but I don’t think he’s galloping towards the throne; in fact I’m sure there are times when he dreads it because the Queen and William are so much more popular than he is. Let’s face it – his reign likely won’t be anywhere nearly as long as Her Majesty’s and William may face a far longer reign than his father. We’ll just have to see how things play out.

    By NCKat on February 2nd, 2009 at 11:21 pm

94. Dan, January and February are usually quiet here. A number of our people are off work, so the network operates in slowcoach mode.

    It hasn’t helped that we’ve had an unusually cold winter since November. As I look out of my window right now, it’s snowing heavily with thick drifts all around. Almost unheard of here.

    Also the slump has put a dampener on many activities. The Queen has reined in expenditure as an example to the nation, so that probably explains the neglect of the website.

    By John on February 3rd, 2009 at 10:48 am

95. I wonder what the general opinion of the world would be of any of us, if people had followed our lives in minute detail since babyhood?

    C’mon, own up, would it be any better than Charles’s public image?

    By John on February 3rd, 2009 at 10:51 am

96. Gigi, we’ve had a few reports of the Superbowl over here — a baffling event to most Brits, as, I imagine, a five-day cricket test match is to you.

    It seemed a jolly occasion though, and I’m delighted your Steelers won. Aren’t they from Pittsbugh? A long way from Texas, I believe.

    On a negative note, one American fanatic watched it in Germany where the constant advertising was missing. He said he was astonished how dull and soulless it seemed. So, do you only watch it for the adverts?

    By John on February 3rd, 2009 at 10:56 am

97. Well, if it’s not YOUR team, then the adverts are quite amusing and worth the wait. You can look them up on youtube. I thought the game was rather eventful when you know the stories behind everything. But I have to confess…I am online while I watch.

    And back to the other….I would NOT want my life detailed for the world. I could tell stories…but this is not the place Ha!

    By Julie on February 3rd, 2009 at 4:06 pm

98. Here’s wishing all you in the UK (and Kentucky!) a expedited frost (but slow enough not to compound misery with floods…)

    By Sojourner on February 4th, 2009 at 1:45 am

99. OOOOPS!!!!

    I meant to say and expedited THAW!!!

    Clearly Frosty has overstayed his welcome.

    By Sojourner on February 4th, 2009 at 1:47 am

100. Might be a bit of frostbite on your fingertips, Sojourner!

     By Evelyn on February 4th, 2009 at 4:37 am

101. My dear John, the Steelers are indeed the Pittsburgh Steelers of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 1500 miles from Texas. My husband and I were born and raised in Pittsburgh, will always consider ourselves Pittsburghers regardless of where we reside and we are lifelong Steelers fans! We are also lifelong Pittsburgh Penguins hockey fans!

     By Gigi on February 4th, 2009 at 11:08 pm

102. Hi Gigi!

     I’m another native Pittsburgher. I live in Fort Lauderdale now.

     And yes, once a Pittsburgher, always a Pittsburgher. Although now, we’re from “Six-burgh!”

     By Bonz on February 5th, 2009 at 7:25 am

103. Getting back to the documentary … No surprises here to the denizens of RA.

     There certainly have been hints that William has some very unpleasant characteristics. No wonder the Royal PR group wants to deflect attention and keep him under wraps.

     Nor is it difficult to see what Kate gets out it. Like Mrs. Peperium I agree that the “decoy aspect evolved very slowly in recent years,” so it’s not something she agreed to going in – with all its implications.

     Certainly, Kate’s (and Pippa’s) social ambitions and marital prospects are served by any connection to the Royal family. For all we know, Kate is dating (husband-hunting) in aristocratic social circles away from prying eyes.

     Maybe a win-win-win for all involved.

     By Alicia on February 5th, 2009 at 6:32 pm

104. Regarding the Kate and William’s relationship – I believe it was “real” up to the break up in 2007. The reconciliation was probably genuine as well. Afterwards, they dropped off the radar.

     During this time, the decoy aspect probably evolved, slowly and rather insidiously for Kate. If William is “sly and manipulative,” he may be that way with her and her family.

     As I’ve said before, her entire adult identity is built on being his girlfriend. She cannot be blamed for hanging on, hoping things get better.

     For all we know, she maybe hoping – like John mentioned – “when [Wills] is eventually forced to marry, as his father was, she will be the only one around. “

     By Alicia on February 5th, 2009 at 6:44 pm

105. Regarding the Chelsy/Kate comparisons. I think both girls have the same set information at hand. But their situations are very different!

     1.) Kate is hoping to be crowned Queen and be the mother of future kings; Chelsy can merely hope for HRH, Duchess of Whatever. Her children may not even have HRH titles.

     2.) Chelsy comes from fabulously wealthy, socially secure family. Kate’s family are self-made, middle-class folks, made good. The social rise is much less pronounced in Chelsy’s case.

     3.) Chelsy is from S Africa and can just chuck it and go back. She won’t have to deal face-to-face with any reduction in status. Kate would.

     So, Kate has much stronger incentive to hold on and accomodate the Royals than Chelsy does.

     By Alicia on February 5th, 2009 at 6:50 pm

106. I wonder why I have it in mind that PW has long been said to not want to marry until he is 30, and KM to not want to marry until she’s ready to bear children?

     Perhaps I have dreamed it, as it seems if that were the case they are merely conducting themselves in line with their stated desires.

     By Cindy on February 5th, 2009 at 9:27 pm

107. Well the Super Bowl is just that a SUPER bowl That being said, I am fan of another team who wasn’t playing this year (lost last year BOO!) but we still have a party and a good time.

     We have fun watching the adverts (as you British say) and laughing and booing at them. Some were brilliant and some were horrendous. The half time show as okay, Like The Boss, so it was fine to me…including that lovely slide across the stage, almost into the camera man! HA!

     So any local news there in London on the Royals? Anything interesting at all?

     By MikeH on February 6th, 2009 at 4:24 pm

108. Sure, Mike. I’m preparing a Royal Roundup for tomorrow. Stay tuned.

     By John on February 6th, 2009 at 5:14 pm

109. Cindy,
     I sound like a one-note person, but I still think that PW and KM are simply waiting to marry and have children. It’s their plan, and it keeps them out of the overwhelming glare of the media spotlight. There may be no sense of urgency to marry for the couple.

     Perhaps, it’s all of us speculators who have generated the tremendous sense of urgency and generated odd theories because we crave royal pageantry and soap opera antics of the royals. We can’t accept that perhaps PW and KM are actually doing what other young people their age are doing. They might actually be kind of “normal”–hard as it is to believe.

     By Karen on February 6th, 2009 at 6:27 pm

110. But William is not “normal”, Karen. He needs to produce an heir, and he needs to show he’s being fair to Kate and whoever he marries.

     By John on February 6th, 2009 at 6:30 pm

111. I know I sound like a broken record, but William doesn’t NEED to produce an heir. Obviously it would be preferable if he did, but there’s nothing that says the Crown must pass down his line. The Crown has passed to brothers and their issue before without serious consequence. That’s why we have a long line of succession.

     By Dan on February 6th, 2009 at 9:20 pm

112. Who are we to say he isn’t being fair? They probably have somewhat talked about their future and probably understand the extreme position the two of them are in.

     Just because he doesn’t satisfy our desires to say “yup, she’s my gf” who are we to say they haven’t discussed it. Why does he need to explain that to the press who will only make Kate’s life that more miserable. Normal or not, PW is living like anyone else is in their mid 20s, dating and not worrying about settling down now. We make agruments that the Royal Family needs to adapt to our times, well PW is doing exactly that, people in their mid 20s wait to get married now. If Kate and PW are 34-36 and still not married we should worry, but until one of them hits 30, I don’t think there is any rush.

     As for producing an heir, there is plenty of time and well science can always help…

     By American Cousin on February 6th, 2009 at 9:23 pm

113. We’ve talked about the reproductive science question a bit before. As I remember, someone said that IVF propbably would be out for the heir to the throne. If more than one egg were fertilized, how could anyone (doctor or royal) decide which egg(s) should be implanted and which one(s) not? Too many ethical questions would arise.

     By Evelyn on February 7th, 2009 at 1:23 am

114. Dan, I understand your point, which, taken at face value, has some validity, however I must offer some support for John. In the eyes of the Royal Family and their circle, the orderly and traditional progression of the Royal Line is extremely important. This is why the breeding and continued strength of the Royal Bloodline is so zealously guarded by the Royals and the Nobility. Seen in this light, while you and I and other lesser mortals (i.e. not Royals) may feel that there was nothing amiss when King Edward VIII chose to abdicate and the kingship was thrust into the hands of his younger brother, the Royal Family would not want a scenario to develop yet again where the heir to the throne was anyone other than the eldest son of the reigning King or Queen. The stability of the throne is, in part, determined by the faithful and strict adherence to orderly tradition. I assure you that Queen Elizabeth II, despite her unusual path to the throne, expects her first born son to be King upon her death and also fully expects Prince William to succeed his father as King in his turn. Remember that one of the failings that sank the aims of King Edward VIII was his refusal to choose a consort from among the various European princesses who would have been good partis for him. Further, as a courtier wisely commented, a King who does not marry and have children and, as is hoped, an heir, fails to fulfill one of his main duties as Monarch. The people of the United Kingdom, he said, hate having no family life at Court, and I believe that his sage comment is as true today as ever it was. If Prince William is to fulfill his destiny–to reign well as King in the fullness of time–he must, indeed, marry someone who is good partis for him and they must provide the United Kingdom with an heir. From earliest childhood, Prince William has been trained to fulfill his destiny, has known where his duty lay. To resist this trust by obfuscation or evasion now is ignoble.

     By Gigi on February 7th, 2009 at 1:42 am

115. First, I think William is far from having made a decision to not have children. He just doesn’t want them now, nor, evidently, does Kate. And if they wait until their 30s, as William apparently has indicated, it does not automatically mean they will have to resort to space-age baby production. My mother had me when she was 34, and that was….well, it was a long time ago.

     Haven’t you all heard that 30 is the new 20?

     At the same time, I think the potential of William never having children pales in comparison to the crisis of Edward VIII’s abdication. They are two different things entirely! Should William go childless, I don’t believe the people would revolt at the concept of Harry or his children taking the throne.

     Incidentally, if Harry’s line does prevail, it is no different than William’s. The Windsors will go on.

     But I think we’re getting ahead of ourselves in the zeal for something new to occupy our minds!

     How about the talk of Prince Philip’s health? John, what do your sources say?

     By Dan on February 7th, 2009 at 5:08 pm

116. Dan, we believe he had a carriage accident which strained his back. He is said to find it difficult standing.

     The Queen has also cancelled a State visit to Dubai and the UAE at end March. The line is it’s because of Philip’s health, but it’s more likely to avoid being seen in luxurious surroundings in the present economic conditions.

     By John on February 7th, 2009 at 6:11 pm

117. Dan, I agree with “30 is the new 2o” !!! Other crown princes of European royals got married in their 30′s and their brides were in late 2o’s or 30′s. No wonder William feel he is “too young” to get married.

     As for the cancellation of the state visit, if PP’s health is the reason, why can’t PC and C go? I guess it is very difficult to ask Dubai and the UAE to scale down the receptions.

     By Mikado-watcher on February 7th, 2009 at 9:14 pm

118. Mikado-Watcher, no matter who would go to Dubai, it’d be a PR mess, IMHO. This is a country that caters to the rich and it’s a time of money worries and austerity in Britain – such a visit would not go down well with the public.

     By NCKat on February 7th, 2009 at 9:46 pm

119. IMHO, There’s a bit of relieved exhaling going on behind the scenes at Buckingham Palace over the cancellation of this trip.

     Has anyone seen the skyline of Dubai lately? Has anyone compared it to the skyline of Las Vegas? There’s not much there to meet the wise and practical thinking of the Queen.

     By Dan on February 8th, 2009 at 1:31 am

120. the latest timesonline article speculating if Kate is good for William, is to say the least, to the point! She doesn’t seem to be get much good press lately. It makes me think after the long seclusion what was the point of the two questionable choices of appearance…hunting and going to a party!? I’m going to miss chelsy! i hope the break is not for good

     By london4704 on February 8th, 2009 at 4:44 pm

121. Prince Philip attended a church service with the Queen Sunday morning. The Telegraph has an article with photo.

     By Evelyn on February 9th, 2009 at 12:30 am

122. I enjoyed the discussion about the urgency of PW producing an heir to the throne and sustaining the stability of the monarchy. There’s no question about that urgency from many vantage points. And no doubt PW plans to fulfill his duty.

     The burning question is what does PW’s behavior in the last six months mean? He seems be taking the risk that he can produce the heir later after he enjoys a few more years of avoiding the white hot glare of the media spotlight, letting Prince Charles have his time on stage, pursuing his own interests, and keeping Kate on hold. Perhaps she agrees with the plan.

     If PW were next in line to the throne perhaps things would be different. He apparently feels he has some wiggle room just now.

     By Karen on February 9th, 2009 at 3:01 pm

123. Well said, Karen. I believe the answer to this mystery is probably a scenario as simple and as straighforward as the one you have stated.

     I was also glad to see Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, apparently on the mend and well able to speak to some of those who had come to greet him and the Queen at church. That is a great relief, as he is the Queen’s main support and it would be very difficult for her and for the entire country if he were to become disabled. He is a miracle man to be carriage driving at his advanced age! That generation was (is) quite remarkable in so many ways. Here we have the 41st President of the United States, George Herbert Walker Bush, who is in his 80s and still parachutes out of airplanes on his birthday!

     By Gigi on February 9th, 2009 at 6:06 pm

124. Interesting that the Queen has cancelled her trip to Dubai. The Dubai development company, Nakheel, which bought the QE2 ocean liner with plans to convert it into an “ultra luxury” hotel, has announced that the plan is on hold. In fact, it is now not clear whether it will ever be carried out.

     Two cancellations almost simultaneous. Coincidence?

     By Dan on February 10th, 2009 at 7:19 pm

125. Clarification:
     In fact, Nakheel has NOT made an announcement. The halt of the QE2 project is currently “word on the street.”

     Sorry for jumping the gun. We’ll see what happens.

     By Dan on February 10th, 2009 at 7:27 pm

126. Dan, I highly doubt that the cancellation of Her Majesty’s trip to Dubai would be the main reason to put the conversion plan on hold; I think Dubai is feeling the effects of the worldwide economic downturns, just like everyone else.

     By NCKat on February 10th, 2009 at 10:33 pm

127. Maybe the connection is the other way around. Perhaps Nakheel invited the Queen to be present at the opening of the QE2 (or something connected with it), which would necessitate a state visit. Maybe the Queen decided to cancel the trip because the project is being put on hold.

     By Evelyn on February 11th, 2009 at 1:40 pm

128. Evelyn, it may be there are a number of reasons for cancelling: Philip’s health, confliction with the budget (although I would think Brown would welcome that , didn’t want to be seen in posh circles etc.

     There’s so little Royal news of note now that we’re reduced to endless speculation. Maybe Zara will announce … no, I’m not getting started on that again.

     By John on February 11th, 2009 at 1:49 pm

129. That is an interesting topic, John. What IS going on with Zara Phillips and Mike Tindal? First, they were thought to be waiting until the Olympics were over before they would announce an engagement and marry. Then, Zara’s horse fell ill and she had to withdraw. Then, they were purchasing a house together and the plans were so well advanced that the media published definitive photographs of the place. Then, evidently, they withdrew from the purchase. Since then, we have heard nothing to indicate that they even plan to marry in the foreseeable future! It is all very odd. While we are talking of estates that were put on hold, what ever happened with that lavish estate that Charles was building a few years ago, which the media surmised was to be a coountry home for Prince William? There seems to be a remarkable amount of indecision going on within the Royal Family.

     By Gigi on February 11th, 2009 at 3:27 pm

130. Gigi, I think that like all long-term relationships there’s a tendency to say, “No hurry, we’re okay as we are for now, aren’t we?”

     In other words there’s no incentive to go through all the hoohah of a Royal wedding when things are quite comfortable as they are.

     William and Kate have probably gone through that stage too.

     By John on February 11th, 2009 at 5:26 pm

131. I check every now and then for updates on the Duchy website about Harewood Park, the estate once assumed to be a country home for William and bride, but there have been no updates.

     There seems definitely a plan in place on the part of the entire family to recede from the public eye. We see and hear little news of them anymore. It could be the economy, or the advancing age of the Queen and Prince Philip, or perhaps the whole family’s wish to put distance between itself and the celebrity culture that is becoming the hallmark of the early 21st century. They don’t want the spotlight on their lives that Diana brought; as in Charles’s case, he wants publicity only to promote his political and social agenda.

     None of them realizes the danger of having a public that doesn’t care (or is not encouraged to care) about them as human beings. If they shut the public out, the public’s support for them will continue to dwindle.

     They appear increasingly dismissive of public affection, which will finish them.

     By Dan on February 11th, 2009 at 5:39 pm

132. Dan, the Harewood Park house was scheduled for completion in 2010. As far as I know, that’s still the target. What can you say about a house under construction?

     In terms of general publicity, the public has a lot on its mind right now. According to Gordon Brown’s right-hand man for the past 12 years, we face a depression worse than anything for 100 years, and worse than the Great Depression, of which Britain had a mild version, unlike the USA.

     It’s hard to focus on the fripperies of young Princes and Princesses when financial Armageddon beckons.

     This is good psychology by the Palace and Clarence House, but not much fun if you write about the Royal Family.

     By John on February 11th, 2009 at 5:54 pm

133. I am not sure that such is the case, John. During WWII when London was being smashed to smithereens by Nazi bombs and people were crawling out of the rubble and subsisting on very little, Queen Elizabeth (as the Queen Mother was then) made the savy decision to always be well and fashionably groomed when she and the King visited the sites of the devastation, knowing, as the Queen did, that seeing the Monarch and his consort looking well-groomed would boost the spirits of their subjects. When, after WWII, decisions were being made about the wedding of the Heiress Presumptive, Princess Elizabeth, a greatly scaled down wedding was considered, due to the hardships still being suffered by most Britons and the still-intact wartime rationing. Fortunately, cooler heads prevails (I am certain it was the Queen’s cooler head), and they hosted an elegant, regal, entirely appropriate Royal Wedding which tremendously bolstered their people and the entire world.

     In hard times, people who are suffering strive to “get away from it” in any way they can. During the Great Depression, Hollywood moguls made sure that the movies they made were merry, filled with beautiful stars dressed elegantly. Believe me when I tell you that those movies helped a great deal to lighten the sadness and despair of the country. I think a semi-royal wedding (as Zara and Mike’s wedding would be, as they are untitled) would be just the ticket to dispel the gloom. I also agree with Dan that if the Royals are assuming an isolationist policy and choosing to hide away from their subjects, that way lies disaster. It is amazing how swiftly someone who was once an adored figure in the public eye can become superfluous due to mismanagement of public relations.

     By Gigi on February 11th, 2009 at 6:20 pm

134. I agree with a lot of what you say, Gigi. But we’ve not reached the really bad stage yet, unlike America, which is six months to a year ahead of us in the business cycle.

     When the time comes, I’m sure the Royal spectacle will unite the nation again as it has done for centuries, especially under this Queen.

     By John on February 11th, 2009 at 6:25 pm

135. As for news, Harry’s latest “race row” has made the American media with a short piece in the Associated Press.

     By Dan on February 11th, 2009 at 8:24 pm

136. John – It’s very interesting for those of us on the left side of the Atlantic to hear your analyses about not just how the Royal Family is adjusting and dealing with the current economic crisis, but the reasons or logic behind their decisions. Even if a person is quite familiar with Britain and its people, culture, etc., it’s easy to not be able to appreciate current conditions in a society, particularly with things changing so quickly.

     By Lisa on February 12th, 2009 at 11:29 am

137. Thank you, Lisa. You’re right things are changing rapidly. We’ve just heard the Bank Governor say the economy will fall of a cliff this summer.

     We’ll have to dig out the absailing gear.

     By John on February 12th, 2009 at 12:08 pm

138. Richard Kay is stating in his column that there is a whisper that KM may be joining PW in Shropshire as there is a large house senior officers house being refurbished for a couple. Apparently it is quite grand….fit for a Prince….and Princess?

     By james on February 12th, 2009 at 1:03 pm

139. James, or anyone else, can you include the url of the Richard Kay column? I have been looking, but cannot find the reference

     By Sojourner on February 13th, 2009 at 1:37 am

140. For those of us who haven’t seen “What Happened Next” it’s up on Youtube. Everything becomes available eventually everywhere and there are few secrets anymore which makes me admire PW and KM’s ability to keep whatever they’ve got going on a secret from the world.

     Richard Kay seems willing to pass on any drop of news whatever no matter how contradictory it may be to what he may have said in the past.

     By Claudia on February 13th, 2009 at 2:38 am

141. Sojourner, this links to his latest column. LINK.

     By John on February 13th, 2009 at 10:08 am

142. I saw that column but did not see a reference to anything in Shropshire…was I reading too fast???

     By Julie on February 13th, 2009 at 2:38 pm

143. As I said before, it’s natural that William would take an officer’s house rather than stay in barracks. That doesn’t necessarily mean it’s also for Kate.

     By John on February 13th, 2009 at 2:50 pm

144. I do not see anything in Kay’s latest column about the Shropshire house being readied for Prince William, either, John. I spent a frustrating evening last night reading all of Kay’s recent columns trying to find the reference, and found nothing pertinent. Will one of our dear RAers who has actually read the referenced column with the Shropshire data be good enough to provide us with a link?

     Claudia, I agree with your assessment of Richard Kay. I fear if I must peruse large numbers of his columns yet again to find the desired tidbit, the exercise may prove unendurable!

     By Gigi on February 13th, 2009 at 3:07 pm

145. Really? My impression was that he was trying to be one of the guys…which to me would mean that he would need a pretty good reason to trade up in the housing department. No??

     By Julie on February 13th, 2009 at 3:07 pm

146. Gigi, I have yesterday’s paper edition to hand and will type out the relevant piece verbatim here:

     “For years gossips have hinted that if and when Prince William marries Kate Middleton, their first home will be a Duchy of Cornwall property in Herefordshire [on the Harewood Park estate]. But all the talk in the Shropshire village of Shawbury, where William is learning how to be a search and rescue helicopter pilot at the nearby RAF base, is about another property.

     ‘One of our senior officers’ houses is being done up and the talk is that it is being made ready for a couple,’ I am told.

     ‘It’s quite grand and convenient for the officers’ mess and sports ground.’

     Pip! Pip!”

     That’s it. Lots of speculation. How many times have we heard this before?

     By John on February 13th, 2009 at 3:19 pm

147. Re: Prince Harry & the race row can someone please enlighten me? Is this kind of stuff viewed as okay in his social circle? He keeps saying or doing racially insensitive things. I was stunned when I saw him dress up as a Natzi with the swastika! Then there was something about the Pakistani soldier & now he thinks black people all sound/talk a certain way. It’s just unbelievable to me to hear a young, well educated person- a prince no less- keep saying such ignorant things. I’m not accusing Harry of being racist. He’s spent time with his charity in Africa. No die hard racist would do that. But he clearly needs to be exposed to different races, classes, and cultures. This is 2009.

     By Lizzy on February 13th, 2009 at 9:40 pm

148. Well it sounds like he will have to go through sensitivity training…mandated in many companies here in the US even if there is no “problem.” I have to say it is surprising that he is not worldly enough to understand that these things are just NOT DONE! Could be that he’s seen his grandfather say whatever he thinks and has decided that he can as well.

     Over the years, I’ve often wondered how the Queen can always get it right and be married to someone who often gets it wrong?

     It is a conumdrum! But that’s just my opinion.

     By Julie on February 13th, 2009 at 10:34 pm

149. Thank you John for the link. I enjoyed a good laugh while reading it and imagined PW having one too. The idea that a simple residential renovation is considered news because it occurs somewhere in his vicinity is simply ludicrous.

     Of course, if CM is spotted shopping for curtains, well then I might have to reconsider…

     By Sojourner on February 13th, 2009 at 11:51 pm

150. And also… I finally read the “race sensitivity training” story in the Guardian. What would that entail? How is success assessed in such programs in the military?

     While finding PH comments and behavior utterly reprehensible, I am not one to buy into the idea that racism is caused by ignorance. PH knows exactly what he is saying and is expressing a belief in his superiority by saying it. (Very uncool; I mean, how much more secure in his power can a person be?) Unless there is serious consequences (which I cannot easily foresee) the whole process seems deeply disingenuous.

     By Sojourner on February 14th, 2009 at 12:00 am

151. Thank you, John, for the specific details regarding the Richard Kay piece on the Shropshire property. I agree that this is hardly “stop press” news. In fact, the entire things seems to me to be pretty half-baked. Once again, we shall have to bide our time and see what transpires.

     Regarding Prince Harry, I realize very well that I rarely am able to see this golden Prince through other than rose-colored glasses, but I do not for one minute believe that he is racist, or even intentionally insensitive. Prince Harry is one of those people who have the happy trait of saying whatever comes into their mind. He is refreshingly candid, disingenuous and I frankly adore him. All right, he may not be politically correct, but he doesn’t have a mean bone in his body and there are very few people one can catergorize with that quality these days. I am sorry, but this is a tempest in a teapot. Further, I cannot help but feel that it is just a wee bit convenient that everytime Prince Harry opens his mouth, it gets reported in the media. I believe he is being targeted, and I must admit, this brings out my most fierce maternalistic defensive instincts. (My blood is up!)

     By Gigi on February 14th, 2009 at 2:16 am

152. I hate to be the bearer of glum tidings, but Drudge has the story about Charles chartering a private jet to take himself, Camilla and a number of staff to South America to the tune of $300,000 pounds sterling. I fear the story has stated the case in terms which are scathingly critical of Charles, to say the least. His aides and staff have mounted a spirited defense, but the timing of this is very bad. Is ANYONE at Clarence House mindful of apropriate public relations?! The management of this trip has been anything but skillful and entirely lacking in tact.

     By Gigi on February 14th, 2009 at 2:49 am

153. I agree with you, Gigi, the whole “political correctness” thing is just another way of forcing a left-wing agenda down our throats.

     The British have always had a penchant for nicknames, some of them very personal. Mine was Quilby — I’ve no idea why, but I’ve been called worse.

     Prince Harry is not racist, he behaves like any British bloke does and gets pulled up by the prim puritans who make the laws. The sooner a Conservative government strips them off the statute book the better.

     By John on February 14th, 2009 at 10:17 am

154. Another thing: sensitivy training for soldiers? What’s he supposed to do on the battelfield? “Excuse me Sir, do you mind if I shoot you?”

     By John on February 14th, 2009 at 10:19 am

155. Hmmm… I would want those trained to kill to be the most rational. And racism is not rational. I also firmly believe that wielding epithets that are meant to demean or ridicule physical characteristics or national origins is not cute or funny. Furthermore, when did civility become a bad thing? Why is being kind and courteous so problematic? When did we decide that only offensiveness is funny?

     Which is not to say that those who expose PH comments have themselves pure motives. However, there is no incentive to seriously challenge their claims of racist actions or words, since the consequences for PH’s behavior, whether real or simply imputed, are quite silly.

     In the end, the sensitivity training is probably the only joke to come out of this, and it is also a bad one.

     By Sojourner on February 14th, 2009 at 5:45 pm

156. Sojourner,

     I completely agree with what you said here “I also firmly believe that wielding epithets that are meant to demean or ridicule physical characteristics or national origins is not cute or funny” And can you imagine if Queen Elizabeth II were to say something similar to what Harry said to that comedian after she meets President Obama? Would she ever call the Prime Minister of Pakistan a ‘Paki’? Or not even a VIP but a musician or an actor? Fortunately, the Queen seems to know she represents all her people.

     By Lizzy on February 14th, 2009 at 7:39 pm

157. As I sit here enjoying the heavenly scent of the pink roses from my children and the white roses from my husband, I want to wish all our dear RAers a very happy Saint Valentine’s Day!!

     By Gigi on February 15th, 2009 at 12:52 am

158. That was yesterday for us, but I hope everyone had the date of their dreams.

     By John on February 15th, 2009 at 3:51 pm

159. The love of my life gave me tulips and took me out to dinner, it was wonderful

     So, Charles is winning points…what is UP??? Sigh!

     By Julie on February 15th, 2009 at 8:17 pm

160. I think tulips are lovely for Valentine’s day too. They remind me of Kate while Princess Diana was very much the lady of rose. Though their color is pink with a hint of blue. The Queen is a lady of orange rose and Princess Anne is red. I think she is a passionate person.

     By Mikado-watcher on February 15th, 2009 at 10:11 pm

161. As I write from my beautiful new valentine’s lap top it seems Gracie’s and John’s wishes came true for many of us !!!

     By Sojourner on February 16th, 2009 at 1:27 am

162. Valentine’s Day did see a minor Royal engagment: Freddie Windsor, son of Prince and Princess Michael of Kent, got engaged to his girlfriend, Sophie Winkleman. No word on when the wedding will take place.

     Here’s the URL to the DM story:

     http://tinyurl.com/ao8wdl

     By NCKat on February 16th, 2009 at 12:05 pm

163. Lovely news about Lord Frederick Windsor getting engaged! I am delighted and am eagerly awaiting more news about the wedding!

     By Gigi on February 16th, 2009 at 6:20 pm

164. It will be interesting to see where they marry. His parents, Prince and Princess Michael, married in Vienna in a civil ceremony. It seems unlikely Lord Frederick would marry at Westminster Abbey or Windsor Castle. Either would have to be granted by the Queen, would they not?

     By Dan on February 16th, 2009 at 7:25 pm

165. Oh, THAT would be a disappointment (civil ceremony)! It would be lovely to have a nice royal wedding to get excited about. Even if it were to be a low key event. Just not THAT low key if you please!

     By Julie on February 16th, 2009 at 7:35 pm

166. Prince Michael of Kent is very traditional so I imagine he will encourage a church wedding, but, as ever, the wedding belongs to the bride’s family. My guess is the wedding will be in a small church somewhere in Kent. The reason Prince and Princess Michael of Kent married in a civil ceremony was, I believe, because Princess Michael is Catholic. If Ms. Winkleman is a member of any faith other than the Reform tradition of the Christian faith, that may also mean something other than a church wedding.

     By Gigi on February 16th, 2009 at 7:51 pm

167. I imagine we’ll get word of her religious affiliation soon, as we did Autumn Kelly’s. If she’s Catholic, there will be more adjustment to the line of succession, unless the government is successful in overturning the law against Catholics taking the throne.

     By Dan on February 16th, 2009 at 9:27 pm

168. Ms. Winkleman is not a Roman Catholic. She is of Jewish heritage.

     By Bear on February 16th, 2009 at 9:55 pm

169. Call me negative, but I’m not fond of the redesigned Royal website, and at the moment, it’s down. Click on anything and you get “page not found.”

     By Dan on February 17th, 2009 at 5:03 pm

170. I haven’t seen it yet, but it may just be down for repairs or the server capacity may need tweaking. Perhaps the courtiers who work most closely with the Royal Family have been told to trim their budgets and guard their expenditures closely, so needed repairs may not be a top priority right now. It is my belief that when the Queen tells her team to trim their sails, she expects to be obeyed. Evidently Charles does not feel the need to bring himself into compliance, but everyone else, I am sure, is being frugal.

     By Gigi on February 17th, 2009 at 7:29 pm

171. Richard Kay did not say that Kate was being used as a decoy. What Richard Kay actually said was, ‘Some cynics might say that Kate is being used as a deco’. Subtle difference.

     By Hale on February 18th, 2009 at 9:18 pm

172. Hale, As I said at the time, I wrote up the notes next day. After I’d watched the show again, I corrected it in the comments.

     By John on February 19th, 2009 at 5:24 pm

173. Watched it a few times what John has written is correct. Richard Kay did say those things.

     By Belinda on February 19th, 2009 at 11:54 pm

Leave a Reply