The Obama ladies tour Buckingham Palace
They say women do things differently. That is amply proved by the blossoming relationships between the Queen, Sarah Brown, and Michelle Obama, wife of the US President.
By contrast, Barack Obama and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown have often seemed icily distant.
Andrew Alderson is reporting that the Queen agreed to a request from Mrs Obama for a rare guided tour of Buckingham Palace during a visit to London last week with her two daughters, Malia, and Sasha.
They were shown around the Palace and its 40 acres of gardens on Wednesday, their final day of a sightseeing trip to the capital.
The Obamas were also shown around 10 Downing Street, historic home/office of British Prime Ministers by the PM’s wife, Sarah Brown. Michelle is said to have established a close friendship with both Sarah and Her Majesty during the G20 summit held in London in April.
The tour of the Palace was believed to be a birthday treat for Sasha Obama, whose eighth birthday it was. Reports say they were warmly greeted by the Queen at the end of their hour-long visit.
“According to insiders, the Queen and Mrs Obama have become confidantes after finding they share a number of interests, including a fondness for the countryside, gardening and clothes. The Queen and Mrs Obama hit it off when President Barack Obama and his wife were on an official visit to Britain for the G20 summit.”
Apparently, the two women affectionately hugged each other during a photo call.
“Such intimacy from the Queen towards a foreign dignitary is believed to be unprecedented. … Before saying their goodbyes in early April, the Queen was overheard telling America’s First Lady: ‘Now we have met, would you please keep in touch?’ ”
Reports say the Queen and Michelle have exchanged letters and spoken by phone.
“… informed sources are convinced that the friendship will be lasting, despite the significant age difference between the two women, the Queen is 83 and Mrs Obama is 45, and their very different levels of experience and backgrounds.”
Despite the view that the Obama Presidency would be distinctly anti-British, it’s actually turning out to be very different. We excuse the President’s natural distaste for Gordon Brown, of course.
Thanks for the new post, John. Scrolling through the 300+ comments on the last one was giving me tendonitis.
I’m glad to read that the Queen and Mrs. Obama saw each other again last week and that they were able to make it a private visit. I look forward to their first State Dinner together. I believe it is the Queen’s turn to host, as the Bushes did so last time at the White House?
Trooping the Colour was a great occasion, as always. The fly-past is always impressive, though there were a few Family members on the balcony that I didn’t recognize.
By Dan on June 14th, 2009 at 5:21 pm
Trooping the Color was simply wonderful, exquisite pageantry! I love it! I am still scrolling through the pages of photos on Getty Images, thanks to Arthur’s guidance. Someday I hope to visit England to see Trooping the Color, but until then, I shall be content with beautiful photographs.
By Gigi on June 14th, 2009 at 5:53 pm
I hope your tendonitis improves, Dan. Naturally, we disclaim all liability in case you intend to sue.
I keep hoping to get back to normal but new demands limit my time. The summer solstice may be the turning point.
Good news, though, of the new raprochement between the White House and Buckingham Palace.
By John on June 14th, 2009 at 6:26 pm
I have been diagnosed with tendonitis, too, John, and have to wear a pressure bracelet prescribed by my orthopedic surgeon. It is almost surely due to my daily scrolling through Royal Anecdotes, but I am telling everyone that the tendonitis is a result of too much arm-wrestling.
That’s my story and I am sticking to it! (I have actually never arm-wrestled in my life!)
By Gigi on June 14th, 2009 at 7:58 pm
Cindy Adams from NY Post has a rather malevolent article on KM and PW…
“Is Prince William going to ask girlfriend Kate Middleton to marry him? “He has to,” explains Cindy Adams today, who also says that Middleton is both very dumb and very crafty. “
By Cristina on June 15th, 2009 at 1:37 am
Who would’ve thought this relationship would grow so fast? Once again, Ms. Obama shows herself to be an extraordinary asset to her husband. And what a present to Sasha! My daughter better not find out, or I will never hear the end of it…
By sojourner on June 15th, 2009 at 1:40 am
That Cindy Adams piece in the NY Post was a throwaway. She probably made it up. She clearly isn’t up to date on Royal Family matters.
By Dan on June 15th, 2009 at 4:57 pm
I confess, Cristina, that I place little trust in anything Cindy Adams says, in or out of print. I also dislike her negative and catty characterizations of Kate Middleton, whom she has never met and of whom she can know nothing. Further, it is sophomoric for Adams to declare that Prince William “has to” ask Kate Middlton to marry him. Indeed he does not! However, I hope and trust that he will, and harbor a fond thought in my mind that he already has proposed to her and that they are already secretly engaged.
By Gigi on June 15th, 2009 at 5:52 pm
Was there no sign of Kate Middleton at the Garter Service over the weekend? Perhaps she stole too much of the spotlight last year.
By Dan on June 15th, 2009 at 6:44 pm
who is cindy adams to suddenly come out of left field and comment on william and kate… ! what the heck does she know about anything…
saw that the queen and camilla had similar outfits on – do we think that really causes a twirl as the press made it out to be?? as i believe i read the queen’s office commented when she and margaret thatcher had on the exact same dress “her majesty doesnt not notice what others are wearing”
By coni on June 15th, 2009 at 8:47 pm
Coni, where did you see photos of the Garter Ceremony? I am dying to see the Queen and Camilla in similar outfits!
By Gigi on June 15th, 2009 at 10:21 pm
Gigi, the old reliable “Getty Images” has some very nice pictures of the Garter Ceremony.
Also, I believe coni is referring to the Trooping of the Colour, at which the Queen and Camilla wore similar color outfits. It seems the press is trying to make an issue out of the incident; however, I’m sure Her Majesty could care less.
By Arthur on June 16th, 2009 at 12:54 am
During the Trooping the Color ceremonies, Camilla and the Queen wore beautiful hues of blue that were extremely complimentary to both. At the Order of the Garter, I would have to say the Queen’s dress resembled Prince William’s more than it did Camilla’s (and let us be thankful for that!)
By sojourner on June 16th, 2009 at 1:11 am
Harry’s outfit looks the most striking to me, I wonder what Chelsy thinks…
By Cristina on June 16th, 2009 at 3:27 am
Thank you, Arthur! The photos by Getty Images are splendid! I must say that I believe that, while the Queen and Camilla are wearing vibrant shades of blue, the Queen’s ensemble is much more striking, a particular hue that is incredibly becoming to the Queen. Camilla’s outfit is more aqua in tone, and while she looks nice in that color, the Queen looks far more spectacular, which is only proper. The Getty Images are truly wonderful for both Trooping the Color and the Order of the Garter Ceremony.
By Gigi on June 16th, 2009 at 3:40 am
I quite agree with you, Arthur, that the Queen would neither notice, nor mind, what color another person wore. Such competitive behavior for the lion’s share of the attention is petty and sophomoric, the last two things I should say the Queen is! The Queen is so gracious, possesses such a nobility of spirit and is so secure in her role that she is quite above such thoughts and concerns. I would appreciate it immensely if the media could endeavor to drop this absurd fictional story, for all our sakes.
By Gigi on June 16th, 2009 at 3:46 am
Beautiful photos, Her Majesty looked lovely in blue at Trooping the Colour. I especially enjoyed the photos of Harry talking to his young cousin, Lady Louise. There are some charming shots of Sophie and Louise, clearly they dote on one another.
By Leslie on June 16th, 2009 at 1:33 pm
I thought the same thing, Leslie. The more I see of the Countess of Wessex, the more I like her. She certainly is a devoted Mother and she is always smiling and gracious, a positive influence. I have heard that she and Prince Edward, Earl of Wessex are quite close to the Queen and Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, and are thought to be their favorites. I also loved the photos of Prince Harry talking with cute little Lady Louise. What a charming, jolly fellow Prince Harry is! His personality is so positive.
By Gigi on June 16th, 2009 at 2:01 pm
HELLO Magazine, in an article detailing a gap year trip to Kenya for Princess Eugenie of York, affirms that the Princess will attend Williams College in the Fall. I guess the matters involving accommodations and security details has been settled to the satisfaction of the Duke and Duchess of York!
By Gigi on June 16th, 2009 at 3:51 pm
The Daily Mail has some lovely photos of the Royals in all their Ascot finery – each and every one of them looks fabulous, even Princess Anne. I do wish people would quit sniping at Camilla – her head-to-toe beige outfit was very nicely cut and she looked very fashionable in an understated way.
The Queen, as usual, looked resplendent – this time in yellow.
By NCKat on June 16th, 2009 at 4:04 pm
NCKat,
I have to disagree with you about Camilla. She needs a stylist ASAP!!! The clothes she chooses do not work for her at all. Occasionally she gets it right but very rarely. Her jewels are nice, but everything else is just off. Cute story about HM and Mrs. Obama.
By Lizzy on June 16th, 2009 at 4:37 pm
I agree with Lizzy. Camilla looked fine at the Garter Ceremony, when she wore the lovely, well-tailored outfit she wore at her wedding (the civil ceremony.) At Ascot, however, her outfit looks dowdy and it doesn’t fit her properly. The fabric looks tired and the color is dull. The Queen, as usual, looks delightful in yellow, and Sophie, Countess of Wessex, looks svelte and chic in her black and white. Princess Anne looks startlingly citrus in electric orange and I love the fact that Princess Eugenie of York’s hat features white roses, which are the symbols of the House of York! In addition to needing a stylist, and a really skilled tailor, I would once again venture to urge, in the most veiled language I can adopt without sacrificing clarity, that Camilla purchase and wear appropriate and properly restrictive foundation garments. I assure you, it is the only thing for her to do and will work wonders in achieving a more finished look and a proper fit to her clothing. If I have made anyone uncomfortable by writing this, I apologize, but at my age (61 years), I felt I might be forgiven for offering motherly and even grandmotherly advice!
By Gigi on June 16th, 2009 at 5:21 pm
Gigi,
But Camilla *is* a grandmother and I don’t think she really cares about looking a bit pudgy. I have often heard that Camilla’s disregard for fashion is one of the things that attracted Prince Charles to her. Now that’s not to say I like her (far from it) but I do think that her dress sense is the least of her problems in dealing with the public.
I loathe the restrictive undergarments myself and can see why she doesn’t wear them. But you two are right – she needs to find a good dresser and stick with them. A good tailor or designer could adjust her clothes to hide her flaws better. I’ve wondered if she just wears what she fancies that day.
I must say I was pleasantly surprised at Princess Anne’s outfit – I thought it added a nice bit of color – wonder if she stood next to Camilla and Prince Charles at all? That would have made for an interesting snap!
By NCKat on June 16th, 2009 at 11:13 pm
Gigi, Getty Images has some great photographs of the Garter Ceremony, 2002, featuring European Monarchs who are Garter members. King Juan Carlos, King Harald, Queen Beatrix, Queen Margrethe and Grand Duke Jean attended the ceremony in tribute to Queen Elizabeth’s golden jubilee. I didn’t know so many European Monarchs are Garter members.
Type in Garter Ceremony 2002 in the Getty Images search box and enjoy the photographs.
By Arthur on June 16th, 2009 at 11:22 pm
Thanks, Arthur! I will definitely check those out!
Beautiful summer day here, although hot. Our garden is in full bloom, laden with butterflies.
By Gigi on June 17th, 2009 at 4:07 pm
Arthur – thanks for the info about the pictures!
John – thanks for the very enjoyable article. It is stories like these that make me adore the Queen even more than ever. How incredibly kind of HM to befriend Mrs. Obama. As a woman who was relatively unknown a year ago and who has now has her every move (and outfit) put under a microscope, I am sure that it has been a tremendous value to Mrs. Obama to receive guidance and friendship from the Queen on how to gracefully live life in a fishbowl while remaining some semblance of family privacy, particularly with young children involved. I can think of no better mentor than the Queen when it comes to maintaining one’s dignity and knowing how to gracefully handle being on the world stage. Plus, what a very special birthday to 8-year old Sasha – clearly a glimps of the Queen’s kindhearted, grandmotherly side.
I keep hearing rumors about PW and KM house hunting in the U.S. Any idea where these keep coming from? I agree that they sound preposterous/completely untrue.
By Lisa on June 17th, 2009 at 6:07 pm
Heard the house hunting in CA was due to someone who “looked” like Prince William and had a girlfriend by his side. Hence the story evolved into it was Prince William with Kate Middelton…just another crazy story.
Have you seen the pictures of Kate and William at a recent party from the weekend? More evidence they are very much on.
By American Cousin on June 17th, 2009 at 6:36 pm
American Cousin,I also saw the pictures of PW and KM looking cozy at that party you mentioned and was very happy to see them!!!
By Claudia on June 17th, 2009 at 10:16 pm
I will try to get the scoop on Eugenie attending Williams in the Fall. I know someone there who is directly involved with the incoming Freshman class.
Since I am sure the Palace is monitoring this site,
I won’t give away my sources.
(John, don’t let Palace security drag my identity out of you!)
By Dan on June 17th, 2009 at 10:50 pm
Finally saw the Ascot pictures; its been busy being me …
LOVED Princess Anne’s — she looked younger, slimmer, just plain ol’ prettier than I had seen her in a while. Orange might be her color.
I also liked Camilla’s very much, specially next to Charles. She is also looking very attractive in her old age (something to look forward to…)
And, dare I say this, did not like sunflower yellow on the Queen.
Sophie and Bea… hum hum
By sojourner on June 17th, 2009 at 11:26 pm
Word on the Williams campus is that Eugenie is NOT coming, but nothing has been confirmed. The college doesn’t offer summer classes and the town fills with celebrities for the Williamstown Theatre Festival over the summer months. But there is a cadre of Junior Advisors who will have to be told if one of their incoming Freshmen has “special security needs.”
I’ll be interested to see if confirmation leaks to the media that she is attending before the students who will be charged with her well-being are fully briefed.
At present I don’t believe Hello! has that confirmation.
By Dan on June 18th, 2009 at 3:21 am
There is a really cute almost 4 min. PW/PH interview on the BBC web site called ‘Prince Harry-I’m Better than William’. Also you can see the pictures of PW/KM cuddling at that recent party on the Britishroyalwedding web site. The BRW posters are devoted KM fans who can sleuth out some of the most amazing stuff! The postings are not usually as well rounded as what we have here but are fun to keep up with.
By Claudia on June 18th, 2009 at 2:44 pm
Forgive me for focussing on the Duke of York’s daughters for now and ignoring the hats at Ascot, but a question has arisen in my mind. When Beatrice and Eugenie marry, and most likely marry commoners with no titles, will they lose their own Royal titles?
Princess Anne is still an HRH, but she is the daughter of a Sovereign. She remained “HRH The Princess Anne, Mrs. Mark Philips” after her first marriage, then was created HRH Princess Royal four years into her first marriage (she rejected a title for her husband and thus also her children.)
B&E York are grandchildren of a Sovereign and daughters of a second son. What becomes of their HRH Princess titles when they marry?
I suppose Princess Alexandra is the model: granddaughter of a Sovereign and daughter of a Sovereign’s fourth son, who kept her title upon marriage to the Honourable Angus Ogilvy (himself the second son of an Earl.)
But given Andrew’s pretensions about titles for his children, is it likely he will ask (perhaps beg) his mother to make Earls out of B&E’s husbands, in order that HIS grandchildren will be titled also? I believe that would be unprecedented: for a Sovereign to title a granddaughter’s husband.
These are the things that keep me up at night.
By Dan on June 18th, 2009 at 3:25 pm
Link to the BBC clip of William and Harry talking about their training. They’re charming young men, and clearly close brothers.
http://tinyurl.com/harrywills
By Leslie on June 18th, 2009 at 3:45 pm
Great video! Thanks for sharing
By Julie on June 18th, 2009 at 3:52 pm
William and Harry are appearing in front of video cameras more than any of us would think comfortable for them. (William spoke little and seemed quite stiff in the above linked video.)
Do we think this is because they come off better when speaking for themselves than they do in still photos in the newspapers? It is harder to deny their charm when they appear in motion and in their own voice.
Speaking as an American, I must say that their proper English wins them half the sale. When a 20-something Briton speaks, every sentence is not interrupted with “like, you know, like, I mean totally, like, whatever…”
Britons everywhere should be insulted when America claims to be an English-speaking country.
Of course, we RA’ers are the exception.
By Dan on June 18th, 2009 at 4:19 pm
As my English husband would say, we’re 2 peoples separated by a common languge!
By Leslie on June 18th, 2009 at 4:21 pm
(John, don’t let Palace security drag my identity out of you!)
Dan, a squad of Yeomen of the Guard (Special Forces) are already on their way.
By John on June 18th, 2009 at 4:24 pm
I’ll charm the guards with my Queen’s English, although I can’t profess to “animate” the Mother Tongue as well as William and Harry.
(Not even a flight suit would help in my case.)
Leslie, I love your comment. That is precisely what I meant by my comment, but yours has brevity and wit to match.
By Dan on June 18th, 2009 at 4:42 pm
Just spent 1/2 an hour on the phone with a Brit and it was tons-o-fun
Surely that is another language? Beautiful! Plus, he was quite amusing telling a story about a cross dressing executive that he did seccurity for recently. The story came out of left field…a bit like this post 
By Julie on June 18th, 2009 at 5:31 pm
So, Dan, am I proving your point about RA’ers being an exception to the American “english” debacle? Or am I the exception that proves the rule?
Ha!
By Julie on June 18th, 2009 at 5:33 pm
Dan,
Both Princes are a joy to listen to . But you know very well that only a few UKers speak as PH and PW do. And the point of being young is creating your own space and making your own way, which includes, for better or worse, disastrous language experiments.
But hey, I am one to think that a brogue from County Cork has its own beauty
By sojourner on June 18th, 2009 at 9:26 pm
I am very much in agreement with you, sojourner! I love hearing the accents of Wales, Scotland and Ireland, no doubt because my ancestors came from those countries. I also love the ‘Queen’s English’ spoken by most of the members of the Royal Family. Every spoken language has it’s qualities. Here in America, English is spoken with so many different accents and colloquialisms that it very nearly sounds like different languages! We manage to cope most admirably.
By Gigi on June 18th, 2009 at 10:52 pm
You know, after reading the interview and watching the video clip, I got a bit of an insight as to why both men signed up for RAF training – I’m wondering if because they lost their mother so early on and had to depend on each other growing up, that they really don’t want to go their separate ways. Perhaps they want to delay the inevitable as long as possible? Maybe that’s one of the main reasons William is delaying marriage as long as possible – marrying Kate would mean a irreversible shift in his life that he may not be ready for.
Just a rambling idea after a long week at the office!
By NCKat on June 18th, 2009 at 11:24 pm
Warrens Folklore Party… William and Kate pics! ok…maybe I missed the part where someone mentioned this… but i am excited. The pics show them looking happy : ) discuss!!
By london4704 on June 19th, 2009 at 3:43 am
London, in my opinion, he is always happy with KM when he is not at the verge of a wedding announcement. At least, that seems to be what has happened in the past. I think that after his announcement last year and her “short, shorts” incident they parted ways yet again. I think this because her family opened their mouths (something they never do) and I also think this was a threat of sorts.
I suspect that his daddy negotiated new terms with a “keep your mouth shut and stay out of the way” clause during the Christmas break. I think the deal involves a new wedding date deadline.
Does he love her, does she love him, is he too comfortable, is she a social climber questions will always be there. The real question is:
Will HE actually DO IT this time around?
By Cristina on June 19th, 2009 at 8:19 am
I agree with a lot of that, Cristina, although I’m not sure that “this time around” is going to be any time soon given his RAF commitments and his new ambition to go to Afghanistan.
Say he does three years in SAR, then transfers to mainline fighting operations, as Harry has done, that will be another three years at least, possibly serving abroad. Is Kate going to hang around for that?
Realistically, I don’t think he’s got a chance of getting the go ahead for that, but the fact that he wants it shows marriage is the last thing on his mind for years ahead.
I was disappointed with William’s performance in the interview. It showed he hasn’t moved on from boyhood fantasies and is still resisting his future role.
By John on June 19th, 2009 at 9:37 am
Well, if he does get his wish, William will be the most closely guarded pilot in British military history. We would hear nothing of him for months, just like Harry.
He’s been chafing at the bit for a long time now, it seems. I think that if they do let him go, it won’t be into the main battlefield. And like John, I don’t think it’d hurt for him to face the disappointment and accept his real job, which is the future King of Great Britain.
By NCKat on June 19th, 2009 at 11:24 am
I thought PW looked uncomfortable during the whole interview whenever he was not the one talking. He clearly is not fond of these “meet the press” type interviews. But they both seem to genuinely be nice young men who love each other.
NCKat there may be something to your theory. Christina, your comments make sense too. Hmmm…more to ponder.
By Julie on June 19th, 2009 at 12:40 pm
I agree with John and Christina.
I did notice the body language in the pictures show Kate as a bit more of the aggressor… she plays a very passive public role.
By london4704 on June 19th, 2009 at 1:54 pm
London, Kate was quoted recently as saying, “I just want to be an image.”, which means she doesn’t want to be a personality in the sense of someone who speaks occasionally in public and has her own, non-controversial, views.
My guess is that she is still unsure about her future, which is not good for her sense of stability. It’s time she gave him an ultimatum.
By John on June 19th, 2009 at 2:04 pm
Did we see the whole interview, or just the questions for Harry? The questions seemed mostly directed at him, not William, which seems odd given their vastly unbalanced fates.
It may be the interview was longer, but William never said anything worth broadcasting.
If not, how to explain why the reporters were so interested in Harry’s test-taking ability when there are more important questions to be posed to William?
Either such questions were ruled out before the cameras rolled, or William’s cold and repeated “no comment” was not worth posting on the web.
By Dan on June 19th, 2009 at 2:07 pm
I just watched it this morning, John, and I also was struck by Prince William’s uncomfortably guarded attitude toward the interviewers, especially compared with the ease and confidence Prince Harry demonstrated. I was utterly dismayed to hear Prince William actually express a hope for battle experience. Surely, surely he must know that such duty can never be. How is it possible that Prince William is so unaware of his duties and obligations as the future King? I thought the banter between the Princes was charming, but even then, Prince William’s body language did not relax, while Prince Harry was clearly quite comfortable with the media, just being his charming, disarming self. Regarding battle experience for either of the Princes in the future, someone must put a stop to this dangerous premise before something dreadful occurs. It is nothing short of a miracle that Prince Andrew escaped unscathed during the Falklands War and even more of a miracle that Prince Harry survived his forward area duty. Does no one recall how Prince George, Duke of Kent was lost during WWII? For heavens’ sake, let us make an end to this and have a firm understanding that Royal Princes who are near to the throne in the line of succession may not and will not serve in forward areas. The Queen and Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh must be absolute about this before we have another tragedy.
By Gigi on June 19th, 2009 at 2:51 pm
Gigi, I agree. There’s an element of “anything you can do, I can do better” between these brothers, and it doesn’t bode well.
By John on June 19th, 2009 at 2:57 pm
Knowing is one thing, accepting is another. I’m sure the Queen and Prince Phillip and Prince Charles are all too aware of what happens when a dissatisfied Prince is forced to do his duty – a PR disaster for the Royals could be in the making. I’m not saying that William should be allowed to go to the front lines; merely that they have to be very very careful here. Push William too far and he could abdicate his place in line to the throne. I’m not saying he’d do it but as strongly as he seems to feel about dealing with the public and his stubbornness, I wouldn’t put it past him to do it in a hasty fit of anger. William is not as outgoing as Harry and keeps his emotions close to himself but I’m sure his anger can boil over when provoked enough.
Frankly at this point, I’m seeing Harry as a more popular choice for the throne, sort of like King George VI. I know I’m speaking heresy here but I do have my moments of wondering if William will ever make it to the throne.
By NCKat on June 19th, 2009 at 3:10 pm
Know the feeling, NCKat.
I’m sure he will, but there’s a cause for doubt right now.
By John on June 19th, 2009 at 3:12 pm
All the more reason, my dears, for neither Prince William nor Prince Harry being permitted duty in forward areas. If the scenario NCKat suggests does, in fact, occur, and Prince William resolutely refuses the Throne (horrid prospect), then shall and must Prince Harry be ready, willing, able, and most importantly, alive, to rule in his brother’s place. This Russian roulette they are playing with the line of succession to the throne of Great Britain makes me a nervous wreck! I cannot express with adequate clarity the singular importance of the Heir to the Throne being supported by his siblings and other close members of the Royal Family. The Throne must come first in the Royal Family, even though the Princes’ longing to serve in forward areas is tremendously courageous, gallant and commendable. Charles understood and understands the priorities (and limitations) of his birth and position, and I do beg that he find some means of making these priorities clear and palatable to his two golden sons. It might not go amiss for Prince Philip to have a word, as well, for if anyone understands military prowess and endeavor juxtaposed with Royal Duty, it is surely the Duke of Edinburgh. Where is all this leading, John? Does the Queen sense that there is a problem in the Line of Succession, if, indeed, there is a problem?
By Gigi on June 19th, 2009 at 4:12 pm
If neither of the two princes want to ascend to the throne, what can the Queen do about it? I mean, realistically speaking, they don’t seem to care about the prestige of the office, and they do have money of their own via their mother. But I don’t think it’ll come to that, just that they don’t want to do it yet.
By NCKat on June 19th, 2009 at 4:27 pm
Didn’t PW say in the interview “as future leader of the armed forces…” PW knows his role and probably feels that for him to be an authentic leader of the armed forces when he becomes King, he would like to have some actual background in the armed forces. Look at his grandmother, she served during WWII. How would it look to his subject, if their King never served and yet he is the leader of the armed forces. I’m sure for his own ego and the soldiers he leads, it’ll feel somewhat misleading to put the uniform on as the leader of all armed forces, when he is King
Unless Kate is actually interviewed or caught on tape, at this point I can’t believe anything that is said from second hand sources, no matter how relaible.
By American Cousin on June 19th, 2009 at 4:41 pm
There may be another possibility, which I would understand completely, and therefore hope it is true.
William and Kate may have decided that there’s little point in pressing ahead while this ghastly Labour government, and Gordon Brown, are in power.
They may have calculated that things will be much better all round under a soon-to-be Conservative Government, which will be much more in tune with their hopes for the future.
Let us wish that that be true.
By John on June 19th, 2009 at 4:51 pm
There’s an element of “anything you can do, I can do better” between these two brothers
This type of bravado between John F. Kennedy (later President Kennedy) and his older brother, Joseph P. Kennedy, Jr, ultimately cost Joseph Kennedy his life during World War II! It’s admirable to want to serve one’s country in the military, but Princes William and Harry must recognize there are limitations to what they can do, given their positions within the Royal Family.
By Arthur on June 19th, 2009 at 4:57 pm
I’d forgotten that incident, Arthur, and you’re right. It’s a very similar situation between William and Harry. But they will grow up some time.
By John on June 19th, 2009 at 5:04 pm
Well JFK had to step quickly into his brother’s shoes to fulfill his father’s expectations. I can see Harry doing the same.
By NCKat on June 19th, 2009 at 5:07 pm
Well said, Arthur! As for Prince William wanting to serve in the Armed Forces, he is doing so and has been doing so for some time now, simply not in a forward area. The Queen served in the military during WWII, but she never served in a forward area, and neither should Prince William nor Prince Harry. Princess Margaret never served in the military at all, if I recall correctly. John, your theory is an interesting one and it gives me hope! When the engagement is announced, as is supposed, the great social calendar in London will explode with events honoring the engaged Prince and his intended, leading up to the magnificent Royal Wedding in all it’s splendid tradition. Naturally, the high officials of the British Government will be included in these events, and I would not be at all surprised if the Powers that Be in the Palace preferred not to extend the limelight to the Labor government in general and Gordon Brown in particular. Let us all wait and hope for happier tidings and better days. My dear John, what is the delay? Why must the Labor Government linger maddeningly, as they are doing, to the exasperation and detriment of so many?
By Gigi on June 19th, 2009 at 5:15 pm
That’s very true, NCKat. It’s another example of the second son stepping in to fulfill the destiny of the first born, which is why both William and Harry must be kept out of harms way.
By Arthur on June 19th, 2009 at 5:20 pm
Gigi, the Prime Minister uses the Royal Prerogative to name the date of the election, however soon or later it may be.
The last date in this 5-year Parliament is early June 2010, although he may go in May. My tentative guess is that he’ll choose October this year because the economy is going to get much, much worse.
By John on June 19th, 2009 at 5:20 pm
So is the maximum term 5 years, then? I’m a bit hazy on this part of British parliamentary procedure. Is there a maximum to the number of terms a PM can serve?
By NCKat on June 19th, 2009 at 5:31 pm
Oh, dear.
I had not realized that we might have to endure Gordon Brown, his ineptitude and his spendthrifts for yet another year. 
What a depression-inducing nuisance. It appears that the only avenue left to us in this matter of Gordon Brown is to pray for patience (ours) and resignation (his.)
By Gigi on June 19th, 2009 at 5:39 pm
There’s no limit to the number of Parliaments a PM can serve for, NCKat.
Some PMs have served for a couple, then come back for more, following another PM. The only requirement is that they can muster a majority of MPs in the House of Commons to pass their legislation. It’s very different from the American system.
By John on June 19th, 2009 at 7:25 pm
I hope Gordon Brown isn’t hanging on, hoping to bask in the glare of publicity during a Royal Wedding, John. I truly would not put it past him. He is entirely out of hand.
By Gigi on June 19th, 2009 at 8:14 pm
I believe Gordon Brown will cling to power as long as he can, but I do NOT believe W&K are keeping their lives on hold simply because they don’t want to invite Gordon Brown to the wedding. Let us not forget that younger people tend to be more liberal than us olde folks. They may actually admire Mr. Brown!
By Dan on June 19th, 2009 at 8:33 pm
I finally found some time to view the photographs from the Warren Folklore Party. Prince William and Kate are dressed in matching outfits, definitely together, arms around each other. I saw Chelsy there, too, but did not see Prince Harry, although that doesn’t prove he wasn’t there. Prince William and Kate evidently have their own timetable for their future life together. The problem (for us, at least) is that only they know what that timetable is! Well…” patience is a virtue…(possessed by few.)”
By Gigi on June 19th, 2009 at 8:37 pm
Sorry, I pressed SUBMIT before I was finished. I meant to add that protocol will demand that Mr. Brown be invited to the wedding whether he is still in power or not. His dark cloud will not be so quick to pass.
Speaking of dark clouds, William’s demeanor in that video clip, however brief it was, belies a troubled nature that is not at peace with anything his future holds for him.
By Dan on June 19th, 2009 at 9:10 pm
We are reading too much into an interview that lasted at most 10 minutes!!!
Yes, William looked uncomfortable when Harry was speaking. Well, by golly gee, he might just be a reserved type of guy. I strongly suspect his father wasn’t a barrel of laughs at his age, and while many might disagree with me, I think he has grown into his role admirably, indeed blazing new ground. (I am a Charles fan, so shoot me
) He also might have been remembering his brother’s previous instances of “foot and mouth” disease. PH has done wonderfully in recent interviews, but we know this hasn’t always been the case.
Furthermore, he might be eminently sensible and recognize that being the leader of the armed forces while having no actual battle experience might become problematic down the road. He also might be a truly patriotic Briton.
So let’s lay off the boy, ah? For all we know, he had a conversations with Kate’s father right before the interview, and was already feeling under the gun, so to speak
By sojourner on June 20th, 2009 at 2:13 am
The Sun says that Prince Harry was at the party with Chelsy, as well as Prince William & Kate. It sounds like PH&C had a good time together. There is speculation that they may renew their relationship. Since it’s obvious that Harry loves Chelsy, and that Chelsy misses Harry, I hope that they come to terms with their roles and careers, and figure out a way to make the relationship work long-term.
By Evelyn on June 20th, 2009 at 2:50 am
Well, lot’s to debate, isn’t that great? We had quite a dry spell for a while…
I am very much excited about the prospect of Harry and Chelsy. It is so comical to see them send each other messages through the media. Loved the reaction that had on the “Gladiator” woman!
Another idea: It is possible that William and Harry may see that the monarchy is at risk of ceasing to be in existence (at least in its current form) or that it will be such a long time before they are required to really and seriously participate. In both cases they may be looking at what they are to do with their lives now and in the near future. Toys for boys and warfare, isn’t that what boys like best?
John, I don’t think PWs military prospects would stop KM from marrying PW. I think it will be he who prevents this, and the fact he is still with her makes the situation more plausible for her aspirations. Public expectation and the pressure that will bring on him and the royal family is what I am referring to. I expect she is counting on this and will hang on even if marriage is not on the cards for now.
Sojourner, under the gun indeed! You are so funny.
By Cristina on June 20th, 2009 at 8:56 am
Cristina, if we blank out what went before and imagine our reaction to William and Kate’s appearances over the past year and a half, what would we conclude?
Wouldn’t we see two old uni friends occasionally meeting up at parties and summer events and showing fondness for each other? Given the length of time between sightings, I doubt we’d be discussing their marriage prospects.
By John on June 20th, 2009 at 9:01 am
Dan, it’s not just about inviting Brown to the wedding, it’s the whole atmosphere of society under Labour. It’s very bloody and hostile to anyone who stands out from the “brotherhood”.
When the Conservatives get in again the entire country will be transformed psychologically, practically and socially. Lots of people who have been keeping their heads down will pop up again. It will indeed be a different country.
By John on June 20th, 2009 at 9:05 am
John, I meant to say that I don’t think PWs military plans and prospects would NOT STOP KM from marrying PW.
Woops.
By Cristina on June 20th, 2009 at 9:12 am
John PW takes KM to private functions. Eg. the recent, intimate wedding of his cousin. One does not take a casual friend to such an event. Naturally, that does not guarantee marriage or indeed infer that it is the plan, however he is the prince and they have been together for a very long time. To me this suggests, and very strongly, that they are back together.
The best scenario I can see that does not take the marriage course is that he has been up-front with her regarding his intentions and that she is willing to go along with that. Again I say, I would suspect that it is in the hope that he will bow down to public expectation or hope that there is no other “out there” for him. This would not surprise me in the least.
By Cristina on June 20th, 2009 at 9:19 am
Christina, as much as i would like to see them get married, I find that scenario sad – settling for someone because you need to bow to pressure or feel boxed in is never a good thing. Remember what happened to his father.
But if he were serious about marriage and doesn’t want to settle, he need to be visibly dating other women at least once in a while and let poor Kate off the hook, which is what we’ve all been saying.
By NCKat on June 20th, 2009 at 11:40 am
John, I must say, having married my best friend…BEST decision of my life! As for their actions seeming friend like? I don’t know many friends who touch each other in public like they do or hang out together as often as they do to the seeming exclusion of others. As the term goes today, here in the US anyway…they are at LEAST “friends with beneifts.”
In the interest of fairness however, we seem to get a few photos from each event. It could be that they don’t stand near each other for the rest of the event, or that the times that they touch each other are limited to the few seconds it takes to get the photos. But I’m thinking of the trip to the car the other week…with their arms around each other for a while (time limit undetermined.) I don’t usually walk around that way (and I sure would not if the press were watching!) unless I want people to know that I am connected to a person. Sigh! I don’t know…and I wish we did!
By Julie on June 20th, 2009 at 2:36 pm
I am with Julie on this one… nothing in William and Kate’s relationship would be in the least bit eyebrow raising where he not the future king. And maybe that is his point: until he gets closer to the throne, he will not submit to the duties and constraints.
By sojourner on June 20th, 2009 at 4:43 pm
I know it’s not a great source but the NOTW just put something out that says W & K will go to Balmoral together for the bank holiday at the invitation of the Queen. Is this likely true? If so I would say we’re certainly a step closer, right?
By Julie on June 21st, 2009 at 12:25 am
Julie, I saw that a bit ago – not sure I’d believe that until I see it in more reliable sources such as The Telegraph. They’ve been known to be wrong before.
By NCKat on June 21st, 2009 at 12:44 am
I figured as much but I get excited
John, you’ll have to keep your ear to the ground or eye to the key hole or whatever it is that you do to keep us informed…LOL!
By Julie on June 21st, 2009 at 1:33 am
Well, they must be trying to one-up the Sunday Express, which has PW and KM getting engaged and moving to Malibu
http://tinyurl.com/m9jpb4
By sojourner on June 21st, 2009 at 2:10 am
Julie, every year Kate is supposedly invited to Balmoral and Sandringham for Christmas.
I’m sure Kate has stayed at Birkhall and Teapot cottage, but there’s no record, that I know, of her staying at Balmoral Castle. I suspect this is yet another punt by a news source desperate for news.
By John on June 21st, 2009 at 10:13 am
Sojourner, how would William fulfil his military obligations if he lived in Malibu?
By John on June 21st, 2009 at 10:15 am
John, he couldn’t. I think it was a made-up story – it’s been embellished to add that William wants to invest a quarter of his inheritance from his mum in Malibu property, which I find highly unlikely. Even if it were a safe investment (not in these times!), don’t you think there’d be a backlash about the future King buying non-Commonwealth property?
All so very silly and illogical.
By NCKat on June 21st, 2009 at 6:05 pm
I’m guessing with the recent story that PW and Kate checked into a rental under the name Mr & Mrs Smith, probably means John is going to chalk that up to “two college friends, who are trying to do a mini vacation with a group of friends and they were the ones that organized it.”
Just teasing you John…but what is your spin on this development? How can they NOT be together.
No way it’s two friends who use to date, planning big events together.
By American Cousin on June 22nd, 2009 at 6:18 pm
You knoiw, I could’ve sworn we’ve seen this exact same thing before – Kate’s or Willam’s birthday comes up, a whirl of speculation arises regarding chance of engagement, then a news item or two about vacation, and then some news about Kate getting a job in fashion (which I’ve read just a few minutes ago).
Didn’t we hear all this two years ago and last year?
By NCKat on June 22nd, 2009 at 6:53 pm
I agree…I’m ready for the is she expecting and is it going to be a boy phase
By Julie on June 22nd, 2009 at 9:05 pm
Oops! (With a Wedding first OF COURSE!)
By Julie on June 22nd, 2009 at 9:06 pm
Ah, Julie, for a minute there I thought you were reading an Australian Rag by the name of New Idea! Last year they reported that KM had been pregnant.
By Cristina on June 22nd, 2009 at 10:31 pm
Ha! No, just ready for the next phase of this saga…I did mean wedding then baby
I’m an old fashioned girl.
By Julie on June 23rd, 2009 at 1:12 am
John,
.
The Malibu story was clearly laughable. And to keep the laughs going I will say it was started some desperate real estate agent trying to move some property by creating interest in a unusual, as in unusually desperate way
Mr & Mrs. Smith: Brilliant! PW gets to live out his battlefront fantasies, and KM gets to gratuitously beat him up (for being so slow in the we know what department
By sojourner on June 23rd, 2009 at 2:15 am
I’d like to beat THEM up.
By Cristina on June 23rd, 2009 at 4:18 am
Well, I can tell you that close friends of William and Kate are still being very tight-lipped about them tying the knot.
“You probably know more than I do” is a typical response.
However, I’m still keeping ears to the ground and eyes on St James’s.
By John on June 23rd, 2009 at 10:48 am
Thank you John! I was hoping that you were keeping your “ear to the ground,” so to speak!
What we need is someone on the inside, a palace cleaner, perhaps, who has superb hearing and is willing to share. I doubt the palace staff will talk, however, due to their loyalty to the Queen. Even in America, the domestic staff at the White House are resolutely close-mouthed about the Presidential families. Several post-retirement books have been written and published, one by Chief Usher J.B. West and another by a former White House chef, but I wouldn’t characterize the contents of either of those books as “hot news.” 
As for the non-response response of close friends of Prince William and Kate, I again quote the well-known wisdom, “Those who speak do not know and those who know do not speak.” I really think something is about to happen in the near future!
By Gigi on June 23rd, 2009 at 4:26 pm
Gigi -If we had some of your lovely tea, I would propose a toast to you being right! – which, by the way, I think that you are.
By Lisa on June 24th, 2009 at 1:12 am
John,
The way things have been progressing, I could almost settle for a report on the sounds of princely footsteps headed in any clear direction — in addition to Shorpshire, as worthy and important as that destination is. Balmoral would be the cherry atop of my sundae — a good place to start.
By sojourner on June 24th, 2009 at 3:23 am
I would be grateful if the Times and the Telegraph would be so kind as to print a few POSITIVE articles about the Royal Family, instead of being so hyper-critical. Today there were articles about Charles’ expenditures (of taxpayer funds) rising nearly 25 percent, while his taxes decreased to a significant degree. Evidently, the increase is due to overseas travel, for trips which his staff say were requested by the Government. If this is true, and I cannot possibly imagine that it is not true, why is Charles being criticized for this? The Times and the Telegraph are beginning to annoy me, John. They appear to have an anti-Royal agenda, or, to be fair, let us characterize this as an anti-Charles agenda. If there are things Charles does or has done that are truly inappropriate, then all well and good. However, it is bad form for the media to shriek about his spending increases when those increases funded Government-sanctioned trips. I would be grateful if the media could return to the hallowed journalistic traditions of fair play, balanced commentary and, above all, honest reporting of actual news. Since I prefer not to expire, I shall not hold my breath!
By Gigi on June 24th, 2009 at 5:15 am
THAT story has made it to all the Australian morning shows and now news bulletins.
By Cristina on June 24th, 2009 at 6:50 am
I think PC does get fair treatment in both the Times and Telegraph. How else would we know about all his courageous efforts concerning the environment? Anytime a royal and the word ‘spending’ can be included in the same sentence, it’s just going to be an automatic story the papers are going to print.
By Jan on June 25th, 2009 at 4:14 pm
Regretfully, I think that the MP spending scandals saw a significant increase in media readership, and the newspapers were simply looking to extend the streak by dragging PC into it. Too bad really, but not surprising.
By sojourner on June 25th, 2009 at 9:33 pm
I agree with you, sojourner. Even with the Times and the Telegraph, it is all about money and market share. It is no different here in America, where the NY Times and Washington Post, who were once as reliable as the World Almanac, also play that unprofessional game of paper-selling headlines. The media (not unlike my typos) will be the end of us all, I shall swear.
By Gigi on June 25th, 2009 at 10:20 pm
By Gigi on June 26th, 2009 at 12:27 am
Unfortunately, Ed McMahon and Farrah Fawcett’s deaths were no surprise as both had been ill for a long time with cancer. However the news about Michael Jackson was a complete shock and I wasn’t a very big fan of his. Fifty is too young to die.
By NCKat on June 26th, 2009 at 12:31 am
It is rather a sureal day!
By Julie on June 26th, 2009 at 2:35 am
I think the reporters had not read the facts in detail so assumed it was similar to MPs’ expenses. In a way, it is — it’s all the government’s fault.
By John on June 26th, 2009 at 10:01 am
In the checkout line yesterday, I read on the cover of an American tabloid that W&K will marry on July 1, 2010 (Diana’s birthday!) and Camilla is going nuts over it.
How did an American tabloid get this scoop of the century?
Who says the media can’t be trusted?
By Dan on June 26th, 2009 at 2:32 pm
They obviously watch the blogs, Dan, and mine that priceless seam of inaccurate information.
I suppose St Paul’s is mentioned as the venue?
Somehow I don’t think Kate will want to be reminded of his parents’ disastrous marriage. If it happens, I think this couple will do their own thing, with more than a few surprises thrown in.
By John on June 26th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
If, on any given day, any American tabloid ever gets anything even remotely right, you can be certain that it is an unexpected and extraordinary accident. What utter rubbish they print! Their presence in the grocery check out lines ruin the restorative experience of replenishing foodstuffs, one of life’s greatest joys. That said, I will be thrilled if Prince William and Kate marry on July 1, 2010, a very appropriate day which is sacred to the splendid memory of Princess Diana. Let’s face it, I’ll be thrilled if Prince William and Kate marry on ANY day, including Lammas!
Let us hope that when wedding plans are being formulated, Camilla and Charles are wise enough to be kind, generous, completely supportive and not obstructive in any way. I hope, rather than believe, that such will be the case, but let us wait and wish for better days.
By Gigi on June 26th, 2009 at 2:42 pm
as the saying goes – the famous always die in threes…a sad week -may all rest in peace…
By coni on June 26th, 2009 at 9:36 pm
By Gigi on June 26th, 2009 at 11:03 pm
There are plenty of parallels with Diana in Michael Jackson’s untimely demise:
The God/Goddess-worthy adulation, the microscopic attention of the media, the mental anguish, the public spectacle, the resort to mental and physical (and metaphysical) crutches, the attempts at public redemption through good works, the obvious need for legitimate medical/psychiatric therapy, and finally the graceless, tragic, untimely end.
To make ourselves feel better after a decade of ridiculing their every public misstep, we’ll forget how far they fell (and how hard we kicked them on the way down) and celebrate the days when they filled our lives with joy and we paid them with love and respect.
The early years of the reciprocal relationship revealed them at their best, and us at ours.
How ugly lost-love gets!
By Dan on June 27th, 2009 at 5:28 pm
Well, Dan…that’s a downer! I know I look at everything from a pretty positive view but I certainly did not view Diana as quite as messed up as Michael.
Maybe it was a matter of time but I thought she would come out of it (“it” being not in a good place but not too messed up either.) I always thought that when her son’s becamse adults they would have been there for her in a way that would have helped her.
But there is certainly some truth in your views.
By Julie on June 27th, 2009 at 6:18 pm
There are no valid nor significant comparisons between Princess Diana and Michael Jackson that I recognize. Michael Jackson’s tragedy compares to that of Marilyn Monroe, Judy Garland and Elvis Presley.
By Gigi on June 27th, 2009 at 6:31 pm
Precisely, Gigi – Diana’s lifestyle, as glittering as it was, was far removed from that of Michael Jackson’s. I am convinced had she not been in that car crash in 1997, we would see a person more like her sister, Lady Jane Fellowes, living a quiet life with her sons supporting her every step of the way.
One of the most tragic aspects of Michael Jackson is that he never wanted to grow up and take responsibility for his actions. I definitely did not see that in Diana.
By NCKat on June 27th, 2009 at 6:36 pm
Ladies…you said that much more nicely than me
thanks!
By Julie on June 28th, 2009 at 3:13 am
Dan, excellent description of the rise and fall of mega-celebrities.
There are many parallels between Diana and Jackson, not least that they understood each other. Celebrity — the obsessive need for attention — is always rooted in psychological deficiencies, and usually ends tragically. Sad, but inevitable.
By John on June 28th, 2009 at 9:14 am
Exactly, John. Both shone brilliantly in the spotlight at first, then withered in it’s relentless glare.
To cast Michael Jackson’s rise-and-fall as entirely distinct from Diana’s would seem ridiculous, even to her. Perhaps especially to her.
By Dan on June 28th, 2009 at 8:11 pm
It is not ridiculous, John and Dan, nor is it accurate. Your assumptions are based on comparisons which are simply inaccurate. Michael Jackson’s tragedy began when he was a small child, his insecurity fueled by the abuse heaped upon him by his father, and his despair born of his being forced to rehearse and perform almost constantly and at the highest levels, also by his father. He had no childhood, no self-esteem and felt unloved and unsupported. The injuries he sustained while performing (a broken leg and a cracked vertebrae) caused him to take large amounts of pain killers, in such large amounts that these pain killers eventually killed him. Princess Diana’s story is different because when she felt abandoned and betrayed, she reached out to others with compassion and purpose, reinventing herself after her marriage failed. Both Michael Jackson and Princess Diana understood loneliness, both were victims of persons with agendas, but Princess Diana was far less of a victim because she persevered with intelligence, courage and a deeply caring heart, which she employed to help others. Princess Diana didn’t wither in the glare of publicity, she was still a shining light at the time of her death. I think that neither Prince William nor Prince Harry would appreciate your assessments of Princess Diana. Neither do I.
By Gigi on June 28th, 2009 at 8:31 pm
Gigi, You miss my point(s) entirely. But by all means, carry on in your own inimitable way.
By Dan on June 28th, 2009 at 11:18 pm
Neither was Diana a black man in the United States. I do not wish to offend, not be overly controversial, but simply remind us of that important distinction. Let us remember the best in both, and hope that the worst in them, if not forgotten, will at least be recalled for good purpose.
By sojourner on June 29th, 2009 at 1:06 am
It’s often forgotten, but when Diana came on the scene in the 1980s, she was regarded as more American in her behaviour than British.
The “let it all hang out” attitude of Oprah Winfrey and Jerry Springer was unknown here until then, and highlighted by Diana, who lacked the Queen’s self-discipline and, yes, stiff upper lip.
It was British stoicism that built the biggest empire in history and even conquered the Wild West.
Diana led the charge away from all that. Britain has declined rapidly ever since. She would certainly regard Jackson as a soulmate.
By John on June 29th, 2009 at 8:58 am
I hate to interrupt this jolly conversation, but it appears time has come yet again to pick over the Queen’s expenses.
Is there a Latin term equivalent to “annus horribilis” that we could ascribe to this dreary annual teapot tempest?
By Dan on June 29th, 2009 at 2:17 pm
Well, one way to look at it is that the yearly cost of the monarch to your average Briton is less than many caramels, and the sweetness much longer lasting.
By sojourner on June 29th, 2009 at 10:55 pm
I should have said
“less than the price paid for many a caramel” — as in many candies cost more…
Premature submit = affront to English language + confusion
By sojourner on June 29th, 2009 at 10:58 pm
John, what are you saying with your vast simplifications? (“It was British stoicism that built the biggest empire in history and even conquered the Wild West.
Diana led the charge away from all that. Britain has declined rapidly ever since. She would certainly regard Jackson as a soulmate.”)
Do you mean that if Diana had a more stoic personality and was less a soul mate of M. Jackson that England could still be the world’s leading colonizer? Surely not.
By karen on June 30th, 2009 at 3:31 pm
Karen, I agree. John should clarify his last statement.
I’m a little offended by it personally. I can’t stand it when others try to blame the US for their shortcomings. Besides I thought we all adored Diana and her sons here???
By Jan on June 30th, 2009 at 8:53 pm
I agree with both Karen and Jan. I am disappointed in and offended by the tone and content of John and Dan’s Diana-bashing posts. The latest attempt to cast aspersions on America in this matter is even more disappointing. I am an American citizen who deeply loves her country and also deeply loves Great Britain and the British Royal family. I thought that this website was dedicated to support and celebration of that Royal Family, and that it was lead and frequented by persons also loyal to the British Royal Family. If such is not the case, then I shall withdraw rather than risk guilt by association. I also prefer not to be mired in the negativity.
By Gigi on June 30th, 2009 at 9:45 pm
I think whatever we think of Diana, we can all agree that she is still generating spirited conversation over ten years on after her death. I have no doubt that Charles and Camilla will have to deal with her shadow no matter how long Charles lives – I mean, she definitely lives on in her sons.
I don’t think John was bashing Americans, and you know, I happen to agree with him regarding the fact that I think we all talk too much about our feelings. I long for the days of reticence but I honestly don’t think Diana was anywhere nearly as bad as all that, and even if she hadn’t come along and married Charles, the British public still would have been influenced by the wave of American “tell-all” culture.
By NCKat on June 30th, 2009 at 11:25 pm
This lack of royal news is to blame for this current “discussion”, I think.
Please, do let us enjoy each other’s views, information and differences without taking offense, please??? After all, isn’t it why we post here?
Thank you Gigi for you fabulous contributions and marvelous teas. Thank you Dan for your hilarious input and excellent information. Thank you John for your “behind the scenes” scoops and management of this wonderful site!
God bless America, the UK, Australia and the rest of the world.
By Cristina on July 1st, 2009 at 10:10 am
Thank you, Cristina.
No one is more pro-American and Atlanticist than I am. But, just as I often criticize my own country on my political site, so I occasionally point out a perceived weakness in the U.S.
NCKat made a good point, and it was certainly reflected in the wall of sentiment this week about Michael Jackson, a child/man with disturbing psychological tendencies who is not revered by most people in Britain, especially anyone over 30.
We shall just have to agree to disagree about this one.
By John on July 1st, 2009 at 11:56 am
I am not its creator and arbiter, but I don’t believe this website was ever intended to perpetuate a blind hagiography of the Princess of Wales. She was not a Goddess or a Saint; she was a human being.
To deny she had problems is not only to live in denial, but also to avoid learning from her example. I believe her boys are doing that by facing the truth, not living in fairy tales.
Oddly enough, my earlier comments were largely in her defense. She was an insecure person done brutal harm by the public and paparazzi which first adored her, then exploited and exaggerated her every weakness to tear her down. Michael Jackson, a uniquely troubled soul in his own right, endured much the same. Like Diana, he may have been about to emerge from his depths just as his life ended. Hence the tragedy.
I never suggested they were two of a kind. Please read my posts before launching harangues against them.
By Dan on July 1st, 2009 at 9:37 pm
I think for me the issue with the comparison is maybe too personal. I liked and admired Diana and felt empathy for her situation which was often similar to mine, we married the same year, had babies the same years, divorced the same year…it was oddly parallel. I FELT that I understood her. One can rather feel like we’re losing our minds when we divorce and lose faith in our spouses etc. This I understood and believed that there was grace and goodness in this person even at her worst and comparing her public situation I was impressed with how well she withstood so much, just my opinion of course. And yes, she was very much human like the rest of us. Loved and respected as well by many.
I don’t understand MJ! I DO have empathy. His life was crazy from day one and he was never allowed to be “normal” in any way. I respected his talent but did not feel that was for the person which is why it’s difficult to hear comparisons. But as I said before there are parallels between their trajectory of their lives if not how they were lived.
I pray that both will forever rest in peace.
By Julie on July 2nd, 2009 at 4:15 pm
i’ve been off line for a few days and trying to catch up on everyones posts – good grief…..! i hope we’re all at peace now…
happy weekend to all!
By coni on July 2nd, 2009 at 5:35 pm
Carrie Garrad from the Cornish Times says that KM was not seen at PWs 27th birthday celebration at the beach. She has included comments by the young man who charged the princes entry to the beach.
Interesting…
By Cristina on July 3rd, 2009 at 7:34 am
I’ve just been clicking through the photos from Holyrood Week, and am cheered by how happy the Queen looks. I would never accuse her of picking favorites among her territories, but she always appears more at ease and seems to smile more brightly whenever she is in Scotland.
By Dan on July 4th, 2009 at 4:31 pm
In the Mail Online, Katie Nicholl says that Prince William will be moving at the end of the month to Wales for the next phase of his search and rescue training. She also reports that Prince William & Kate will spend a long weekend at Balmoral in August, Kate’s first visit to Balmoral while the Queen is in residence there.
By Evelyn on July 5th, 2009 at 3:36 am
The Telegraph has an article about a “behind the scenes” interview with The Queen. Very interesting!
http://tinyurl.com/m4ce28
At the age of 83, she has not slowed down, except to tone down her trips abroad – what a busy woman she is! John, I think this would be a great subject for a new thread.
By NCKat on July 5th, 2009 at 11:41 am
We were talking a bit ago about the “letting it all hang out” mentality. Well, there’s a huge loopla over the M16 chief’s wife’s making public details about her husband and family on Facebook, and all I could think of, where has common sense gone?
John, do you think the government’s going to crack down on the families of the M16 employees? As I understand it, their jobs used to be so hush-hush that not even their wives knew their true jobs.
By NCKat on July 6th, 2009 at 12:55 am
Evelyn, looks like more separation is on its way.
Let’s see if KM does go to Balmoral and if she does finally do something with her life besides wait!
Has anyone read PWs 1st published article?
By Cristina on July 6th, 2009 at 6:22 am
Cristina,
Your post made me think …
Are we sure KM would be doing something different with her life if she where not dating Prince William? Is there something objectionable about working for the family firm?
If KM were already married to Prince William, what would she be doing? With all the bad publicity about Prince Andrew and his brood lately, I wonder if she would be seen in anymore of a positive light.
There is no other way around it: there is a bit of a glut of Royals right now. Do we really need any more?
By sojourner on July 6th, 2009 at 2:13 pm
Sojourner,
I do believe (and I hope I am right) that KM would indeed be doing something entirely different with her life where she not so determined to wait for PW.
If the family firm was what she really wanted to do why get a degree in Art History, then work in the fashion industry? I believe she loves fashion, but I also believe that she asked her employers for flexibility in order for her to be available whenever PW wanted her. Is this the attitude of someone who is serious about her career or serious about catching her man? Haven’t her friends been quoted as saying that she wants to do photography? And thus far, she has not allowed herself the time to pursue this avenue seriously. Why? The reasons as you quote perhaps, but I believe PW is the real issue here.
There is nothing wrong with working for one’s family firm, quite honorable, I am sure, but I think, in this case at least, it is just for convenience and under pressure. And there again, there is nothing wrong with that. The trouble here is that, if she does marry PW, she makes a poor role-model for women.
One could argue that she is doing it for LOVE but her obvious enjoyment of the public attention she was getting makes me very skeptical, cynical in fact. That and the reoccurring rejection she gets from PW without it having any obvious impact on her determination to being with him makes me believe that they are also not a good match. By that I mean a good match for a couple destined to be King and Queen of England.
I guess I would prefer him to be dating Condi Rice!
By Cristina on July 7th, 2009 at 9:57 am
It’s being reported in several places that while Prince William was at an official engagement, he mentioned casually to some tourists from Australia that he would be making an official visit there sometime in 2010, during a break in training. Clarence House and St James won’t confirm that– the Daily Mail points out that such state visits usually are announced by the palace and the host nation simultaneously, and planning has not gotten to that stage yet.
That made me wonder if the trip might be planned in connection with PW&KM’s wedding, much as Prince Charles & Diana visited Australia as part of their honeymoon. Maybe that’s to become a new tradition.
By Evelyn on July 7th, 2009 at 1:41 pm
That certainly sounds like an option, Evelyn. However, it may also mean yet less time for them together, given the amount of training he’s now undertaking.
By John on July 7th, 2009 at 1:55 pm
Evelyn,
many in other sites, including myself, have jokingingly speculated about it. However, it could have also been a throw-away comment, simply small talk. Or even a deeply ironic put down on his long term RAF commitments. We don’t know, as usual.
Cristina,
I simply suggest that we hold KM at unreasonably different standards than other young women. Again, JMO.
How does this sound for a script? A young woman knew her parents had expectations of her carrying on with the family firm. When time came to go to college, she discovered she loved Art History, and decided to pursue her interest. She finishes college, wants to hang around London, cause her guy is around. Family goes along, lets her spread her wings a bit. But eventually, she decides it is time for her to give the firm a try. And she starts working for them.
I am simply saying that this pattern is very, very common in children of business owners. KM’s family business is less than prestigious, true, and thus we — I include myself here, btw — tend to look down on it. (If her father were, say, Richard Branson, we might not be having this conversation; her joining the firm would seem more attractive, thus more legitimate).
As to her enjoyment of public attention, for I agree that she might have at first — but really, who wouldn’t, a little bit. I would say that her enjoyment is not so great these days, or else we would still be seeing her around.
But obviously, agree to disagree and all that.
By sojourner on July 7th, 2009 at 1:59 pm
A degree in art history is equally fine preparation for a future in fashion, photography, website and catalog design, or presiding over one of the world’s finest private art collections.
It’s a little like a law degree: endlessly applicable. Keep in mind that Prince William began his college career intent on the same subject. Ultimately a degree in geography made more sense for him, since one day the globe will be his dais.
By Dan on July 7th, 2009 at 2:52 pm
Well, I confess I am not very familiar with Art History. I am more familiar with Fine Arts and Visual Arts. I studied Fine Arts – Photography so I could be a commercial photographer and I know that I could have chosen to be an artist or do what KM is doing at the moment, If I were inclined to do so. My sister has a Law Degree and she too has many options. So I guess Dan, I expect you are right and so is Sojourner…
I just don’t buy it. It all seems to contrived to me, and yes Sojourner, my expectations of both are clearly too high. In the end it doesn’t matter, they will do what they will do and I will most likely remain skeptical and cynical, unless of course they end up doing so much good work for the disadvantaged that will render my current thoughts irrelevant. That would make me happy.
I can’t imagine why PW is coming here. I would be surprised if our government is behind this visit as talk of a republic has resurfaced hereabouts again, and again most don’t want it to happen while the Queen is with us. Another issue would be who is paying for it? Australia is not officially in a recession, but paying for a royal visit would not be well received when so many are loosing their jobs or cutting costs. The girls might be out in force though as PW is a hot, young celebrity, although I expect Britain’s Robert Pattison (from Twilight) would be more welcome!
What a disappointment this will be for our girls if it turns out to be a honeymoon. Ha! Ha!
By Cristina on July 8th, 2009 at 2:50 am
I have just checked our morning papers and the Melbourne girl (and mother) are telling our reporters that William said that he would be visiting Australia later this year, not early next year. Our spring not UKs it seems.
I thought he was too busy training?
By Cristina on July 8th, 2009 at 4:23 am
Could it be that the Foreign office just thinks it’s time for a senior royal to visit Australia? That the Queen and Prince Philip deem the trip too strenuous for them anymore? That everyone has decided that it would be better to send Prince William than Prince Charles?
Maybe PW was off a year, and the visit is being discussed for Australia’s spring of 2010, more than a year away.
By Evelyn on July 8th, 2009 at 12:41 pm
Cristina,
LOL
Wow! Can you send us a link?
Spring in the Southern Hemisphere would be anywhere mid Oct to mid Dec, am I right? To make it this year then would be terribly rushed indeed… No time for a wedding announcement prior, but just right for an announcement upon his return.
By sojourner on July 8th, 2009 at 5:54 pm
Here is one of the articles:
http://www.theage.com.au/lifestyle/people/prince-william-spills-melbourne-visit-plans-20090707-db0n.html
Don’t get too excited, it seems our government is not in on this trip and being a pro republic Labour Party, it will not be their priority. This must be a UK government initiative and I expect they will be footing the bill, that being the case William is very welcome.
Sojourner, you were close. Our spring is 1st of September to the end of November.
By Cristina on July 9th, 2009 at 1:56 am
John, there’s a lengthy profile of David Cameron and his potential effect on American conservatism in the coming Sunday’s NY Times Magazine. I haven’t read it yet but am immediately forwarding it to you. I hope the link works.
http://tinyurl.com/nyopyn
By Dan on July 9th, 2009 at 3:05 am
The future King will make an official trip to Australia on his own; not, as JFK famously said, as an escort for his wife. Charles and Diana went to Australia (with William, we recall) and she and her infant stole the show. The Palace will not allow William to make such an official trip only to repeat his father’s experience and end up second fiddle.
It’s best he make the trip soon, while his bloom (and hair) remain, and then go again later as a married heir to the throne, with his bride (and perhaps his own heir) along for the ride.
By Dan on July 9th, 2009 at 3:42 am
True enough Dan but in PWs case, I don’t think he would be playing second fiddle to KM. Prince Charles is ugly and conservative.
There would however be less interest in him (think girls turning up to see him) if he is married. If the Royals want good photo ops they should send him solo and as hairy as possible, as you say.
But what is the purpose of this visit?
By Cristina on July 9th, 2009 at 10:11 am
Dan, that’s a very good article, thanks for the tip.
By John on July 9th, 2009 at 11:24 am
I am with Cristina on this, because
1. PW is much younger and interesting at this point than his father (ironically because he did NOT start his RF duties at 19)
2. KM is not Princess Diana — hers is no whirlwind romance/ fairy tale story. We admire KM for her poise and her persistence, as we might a long distance runner
3. There would be no baby (one hopes!)
By sojourner on July 10th, 2009 at 12:53 am
Cristina, why do you accuse KM of “obvious enjoyment of the public attention” when she has hired lawyers to keep the media away from her? What makes you believe she has been subject to “reoccurring rejection….from PW” when they have obviously been together for 7 years? Finally, why do you feel that you will be “skeptical and cynical” unless PW & KM do “so much good work for the disadvantaged”. KM, especially, is a private citizen, and as such has no obligation to reveal her private life or work for the public good. If she becomes a Royal, part of the job description involves public service – but that’s certainly not part of her job now!
By Amity on July 10th, 2009 at 12:26 pm
I agree with Amity. I have long thought that a big reason for the delay is that PW and KM dread the blinding media spotlight that will immediately descend on them. As soon as they announce their engagement, their life takes a huge turn.
By Karen on July 10th, 2009 at 1:56 pm
Strictly for Laughs (for many different reasons)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3mbrgCDRkE
A demo recording that claims KM as one of the singers
By sojourner on July 11th, 2009 at 1:10 am
Amity, are you saying that as private citizens we have no social obligation to help others in need? I believe that we do and if one aspires to be the Queen I confess that I would expect that compassion to be on offer. However, I think you are right when you say that it is not part of her job. Most people I know who are involved in helping do so out of the goodness of their heart not because it is their job. I hope she does do something behind the scenes but I doubt it. People who are recipients of kindness tend to be very grateful and will usually let others know of it, especially if that person was getting bad press.
If KM did not enjoy the spotlight, why the smiles? And why the shortening of the skirts and the immediate appearances at endless parties when she slit with PW? Even when she did “charity work” she had bright short shorts, if that is not liking media attention, I don’t know what is. Undoubtably the media does not know where to draw the line and so she was harassed hence her complaint. But I am also sure the royal family was not happy about the attention she was getting and I suspect that they have had something to do with her laying low now.
There have been numerous reports of leaks in the media about wedding arrangements in the past (including that of a British designer being asked to submit some ideas for wedding gowns as well as John obtaining some confirmation of the plan) that PW walked away from. That, his hand on the breast of a girl, the split, and now the change of his career all signal rejection to me.
A man running away from a promise, a woman who will seemingly do anything to keep him… I hope you are right and I am wrong.
By Cristina on July 11th, 2009 at 9:30 am
Well, Cristina, here’s some people who are actually betting that you are wrong
Introducing
the William and Catherine Swan’s by Royal Dalton!
http://www.goviers.co.uk/rcd/rcdswans.htm
By sojourner on July 11th, 2009 at 5:24 pm
Sojourner, all I see are male and female swan at 50% off. Nothing about W&C, did I miss something?
Anyway, swan or not, it would be nice to be wrong.
By Cristina on July 12th, 2009 at 4:27 am
If you click on the link (or photo… I did it yesterday but forget the particulars), then more text comes up saying the swans represent William & Kate. And, if you buy both, you’ll be able to get first dibs on cygnets, when they are offered.
By Evelyn on July 12th, 2009 at 12:29 pm
Cristina, you understand that it was all said in jest? I found this link at another site, and hoped we could all have a good laugh over it. Because, after all, if my mother had decided to order a pair of swans for my wedding, I might have never forgiven her!
By sojourner on July 12th, 2009 at 3:00 pm
The Telegraph is reporting that William and Harry want to do another bike trip for charity. One wonders, where on earth would they find the time?
By NCKat on July 12th, 2009 at 10:34 pm
Well, combining business with pleasure is an old tradition… However, I seem to remember from last year that the amount of funds they actually collected/donated to charity was rather paltry? Even with their father footing the security bill (I am still not clear about that) it seemed like a rather expensive way to contribute to charity. But perhaps I am remembering incorrectly.
By sojourner on July 12th, 2009 at 11:31 pm
Sojouner (and Evelyn), I get it now! Thanks.
I think you are right about your recolection of W&Hs last trip, not much was raised and a lot was exposed! Poor William. I don’t think this report is accurate and I also question another that states that KM has been invited to lunch with the Queen to discuss life as a Royal should William propose later this year…
By Cristina on July 13th, 2009 at 9:52 am
There is word from Hello magazine that KM has been invited to have lunch with the Queen alone at Balmoral.
True? Significant? Who knows!
By Dan on July 14th, 2009 at 9:50 pm
This has appeared everywhere for the past few weeks. I’d bet even if this does happen, we aren’t going to know too much about it, just the bare facts.
By NCKat on July 14th, 2009 at 11:42 pm
Hello all! I don’t know if you have seen this yet, but Kate was at the Online Marketing expo in London a couple of weeks ago, and you can hear her give a brief opinion of the exhibition in their promotional video: http://tinyurl.com/m9rqzx. It’s in the first video that plays on the site, from about 00:34. Exciting!!
By Lauren on July 15th, 2009 at 11:49 am
Thanks for the tip, Lauren! Isn’t this the first time people (beyond those who actually know her) have heard Kate’s voice?
Interesting that all the other people who speak have their name and company appear, but not Kate.
By Evelyn on July 15th, 2009 at 12:59 pm
That is exciting…it’s quite clearly Kate as well.
By Julie on July 16th, 2009 at 12:28 am
Cristina, as private citizens what we do stays private – that’s the whole point. I definitely don’t think KM “aspires to be queen” – she has been with PW for 7 years, lived with him in college, and is too integrated into his life for her to think of her life with him in such simplistic and superficial terms. Furthermore, if she did do the types of things you describe (flamboyant acts of public service or allow others to talk about her or what she does) then I would suspect her of questionable motives, as she would then be flagrantly pandering to appease people such as yourself.
By Amity on July 16th, 2009 at 12:20 pm
I am so excited to finally hear her voice! I posted many months ago a question to the board if anyone had ever heard her! I felt silly asking at the time but I was also shocked in our youtube/internet crazy world how she had not been filmed talking until now! Good for her to be sly so long. She sounded nice when speaking.
By dally on July 17th, 2009 at 7:38 pm
The Daily Mail is reporting that Princess Eugenie will attend university in Newcastle starting this autumn… not in the U.S. as had been previously speculated.
By Evelyn on July 18th, 2009 at 1:10 am
There have been a few new salacious stories about Will & Kate: first her crazy uncle, and second Will & Kate were spotted, make that videod and snapped, making out in the parking lot of a pub. I understand your exasperation with the wait for an engagement announcement from this couple, and can appreciate that you are not picking sides by airing one-sided articles, but why the total embargo of all news about them?
By Positive on July 20th, 2009 at 11:38 am
Positive, I’m setting up a new business, involving four supersites, plus trying to get a holiday. Besides, I’ve heard all these stories countless times. They come round like buses time and again.
If I see something really new, be sure I’ll report it.
By John on July 20th, 2009 at 11:46 am
Positive, why on earth would you want us to rehash these stories? Kate can’t do anything about her uncle (and frankly, I can think of equally bad characters in the Royal Family). As I mentioned earlier in this thread, I believe, William will do what he wants to, and if he wants to mary Kate, he will. The Royals are all too keen to avoid another abdication scandal or another Diana scandal.
By NCKat on July 20th, 2009 at 4:35 pm
Uncle is an awfully close relationship for such an odious character to have with a Queen.
I was beginning to think Kate might pull it off, but the Queen would not want this character turning up to a Royal wedding and other events.
This could finally signal the end of this 8-year affair.
By John on July 20th, 2009 at 4:40 pm
Possibly except for the fact that the pair are now seen all over the internet in a passionate embrace! Surely the wacky uncle can be kept away from the wedding.
By claudia on July 20th, 2009 at 7:16 pm
I imagine the wacky uncle is bound for jail, and probably won’t be receiving any wedding invitations regardless. The Royal Family has turned a blind eye to other black sheep in the past. I hope they wouldn’t banish Kate for this, knowing full well how badly their marital interventions can turn out.
They mustn’t micromanage William’s marriage as they did his father’s.
By Dan on July 20th, 2009 at 8:06 pm
It has been busy with Kate’s news of her first voice, watching polo, wacky uncle and kissing video. Are these just coincidence or some kind of conspiracy?
By Mikado-watcher on July 20th, 2009 at 10:01 pm
Dan – Exactly my point.
Mikado-watcher – There are people who certainly don’t wish her well.
By NCKat on July 20th, 2009 at 11:33 pm
Well, given that
Andrew’s shady business deals and feckless offspring continue to be considered newsworthy
Sophie Wessex has now stiffed several business for millions
Freddie is marrying a soft-porn/high art actress….
the Queen’s quota of unsavory relations is now too full too add one more. But then again, the Daily Mail has just printed a piece that seems intent on the rehabilitation of Uncle Unsavory — included repeated mentions of his business acumen, but more importantly
, his £275 million fortune, KM may outlast this one as well.
By sojourner on July 21st, 2009 at 12:49 am
Yeah when compared to the Royals …! But I have a question – the DM (I believe) was saying that PW had disowned Kate’s uncle – how can you disown someone who’s not related to you and has no chance whatsoever of inheriting something from you? I think they meant to say “disavow.”
I just think that this will all bring things to a head very soon. Either William will need to step up to the plate to protect her from further slings or they will break up. I imagine he must be beside himself with fury at the moment.
By NCKat on July 21st, 2009 at 12:59 am
Why are my comments not posting?
By sojourner on July 21st, 2009 at 1:33 am
Try again.
John,
The DM has posted another piece worthy of note, if only because it demonstrates that a very well connected PR machine is working tirelessly to tidy up this mess.
I do hope they succeed. After all, if one wants the RF to be more relevant and less boring, one cannot wish their consorts to be free of sin. Such sentiment, aside from probably being somewhat papist
would be counterproductive.
By sojourner on July 21st, 2009 at 1:36 am
As of now, sympathetic articles have appeared in
The Independent
The Guardian
The Daily Mail
and if you want to count the voyeuristic PDA video as support,
The Sun
By sojourner on July 21st, 2009 at 1:38 am
At least the popular press pundits are attempting to put a positive spin on it. I wonder if anyone at the Times will write an opinion piece about it.
In any case, it looks as if CH’s formidable PR machine is going into overdrive which indicates something may be happening behind the scenes. I wonder if William is going on the offense.
By NCKat on July 21st, 2009 at 2:26 am
And I just saw this in the online edition of The Times:
http://tinyurl.com/mfmyef
It would seem that the initial reaction is to support Kate.
By NCKat on July 21st, 2009 at 2:29 am
If anything, this incident must appeal to our sense of compassion. I feel sorry for KM, this is an uncle, and I suspect a loved uncle regardless of his faults. I saw the video and most of the bragging came from his girlfriend. Clearly he is making some bad choices and as Dan said, he will most likely end up in prison.
This is not a good connection for the royal family but it will be a good test for PW. As others have said, there is one of these “uncles” in everyone’s family let’s see what PW will do. If he loves her he will stand by her and we would all be impressed with that I think.
Amity, I am starting to understand your point of view.
By Cristina on July 21st, 2009 at 11:27 am
I suspect that PW & KM may have been planning to announce an engagement as early as at their meeting with the Queen at Balmoral. Obviously, it’s impossible to do this in a news cycle dominated by stories that make KM look bad or undesirable. Thus, many in the press who may have better relations and sources may have been looking forward to the release of the long-awaited news (and the end of the tortured waiting for everybody!) but the sensationalist and ill-gotten story by NoTW poses the danger of derailing that. I think that is why reporters who may have better relations with the Royal Family may be working to minimize the story (all the “I have black sheep in my family too” stories) so that the larger and more important narrative (that we all have been waiting for) can be moved along. Finally, I think that the timing and circumstances of any announcement will have been carefully planned long in advance, given the limitations of PW’s military schedule. Thus, if the engagement is not announced according to the present plan then it may be a long time before a
another opportunity becomes available.
By Amity on July 21st, 2009 at 11:33 am
I think everyone seems to realize that all families have a “black sheep” in their midst – it’s pretty much universal however some in the Royal Family might like to deny it. I don’t think the royals can afford to cut off Kate without warning in this instance; it’d be too old-school and would be out of touch with today’s concept of tolerance. I’m sure they’re thinking of the backlash after Diana’s death, when the Queen was seen as cold and uncaring.
And really, as Sojourner pointed out, can they afford to do so when Charles had an affair while married and then married his mistress?
By NCKat on July 21st, 2009 at 11:36 am
Thanks, Cristina – that is very gracious. Of course, none of us can claim to know the true goals and dreams of either PW or KM – my thoughts are my perspective and guesses, really, only. That said, I also suspect that some of the better-connected newspapers may be vying and hoping to be the one to get an exclusive scoop of some sort, which may explain why they’re all falling over themselves trying to outdo each other in trying to minimize the damage – trying to prove good behavior to the Royals and thus worthiness to be the one to receive first news of any possible royal engagement.
By Amity on July 21st, 2009 at 12:05 pm
Well, Amity, perhaps the editorial boards are allowing journalist greater independence to publish their own views.
Nahh. What was I thinking?
By sojourner on July 21st, 2009 at 12:30 pm
Sojourner, you could be right too. If I were a royal reporter, however, I would want to keep my eyes on the prize. And that would be a scoop on the engagement. I can’t think of another reason why all the papers aren’t piling up on KM and Uncle Gary – an otherwise spicy story complete with video – if it was an otherwise ordinary boring news period. Remember how everyone piled on when the short-lived split was announced in 2007? NoTW cannot hope to get any type of exclusive scoop, since their reporter was previously arrested for wiretapping PW’s voicemail, so they must know they are on the outs. The only way for NoTW to gain any traction as a non-contender for an exclusive is via something like the Uncle Gary story. Anyway, only time will tell. I’ve noticed Daily Mail has been particularly aggressive in trying to outdo the others in minimizing the damage – I wonder if such efforts will win them an eventual exclusive???
By Amity on July 21st, 2009 at 2:34 pm
Amity,
I agree with you; I was making fun of editorial boards.
By sojourner on July 21st, 2009 at 2:48 pm
Yes, sojourner, I think you were the first one to point out that the wheels of the CH PR machine are clearly in gear! I just can’t help myself – it is so fascinating to see NoTW try to “get back” at PW for giving them the cold shoulder (one must assume, given the wiretapping incident). It seems to me to be a play by NoTW to gain control of the narrative – what bragging rights to be able to say that your newspaper derailed an announcement or even an engagement altogether! One also has to feel somewhat sympathetic to Uncle Gary, who was obviously an unwitting target and pawn. Despite his shortcomings, he was clearly well-loved by all, including PW, but unfortunately, for the time being he has made his own bed. Hopefully, he can drop the talkative girlfriend and turn his life around – it may not do any good in the immediate term, but if somehow he can use this incident as a catalyst to become a major force for good he may be able to rejoin respectable society (if that’s even something he wants). Like all of us, his destiny lies in his own hands. It sounds like he had a former life where he was savvy, creative, and intelligent, perhaps it’s time for him to draw upon those resources and turn lemons to lemonade.
By Amity on July 21st, 2009 at 3:20 pm
check out Kate speaking at Marketing event. Go to You Tube and type in kate middleton, most recent. It is under Kate Middleton speaks. first time i have heard her voice : )
By london4704 on July 21st, 2009 at 4:16 pm
Seems like everyone must be waiting for Kate and William’s Balmoral visit for the next chapter in the ongoing saga.
By Karen on July 24th, 2009 at 1:41 pm
Indeed, the only news seems to be William’s hair falling out. We seem to hear about Every. Single. One. Of. Them.
As if no one on the Daily Mail editorial board is thinning a little up top!
Of course, it’s what’s under their hair that I worry about.
By Dan on July 25th, 2009 at 1:09 am
Indeed Karen. Waiting for Balmoral is better than dwelling on the current trash accross the media… And counting falling hair, much like watching paint dry…
By Cristina on July 25th, 2009 at 1:55 am