Is it okay to put family first? (Response to royal family stuff)

[person]

I think they may have gotten scared, not just overwhelmed by the press but actually frightened for their safety. Harry is thinking about what happened to his mother and he is a new father, and Meghan probably got frightened not used to it thinking it was going to be really glamorous. So for safety I get it kinda maybe i dont know

I think also over there in the UK you are either in or out of the Royal Family; they quit, so it's a wholly different scenario now for them. (It's not like being part of a continuum, like permanent pressure groups in the Beltway, publicity around Hollywood, etc.) While they can pursue the Andy Warhol 'famous for 15 minutes' type of publicity now, they didn't want the special rules that go with being part of the Royal Family and the constraints about what must be avoided as tax-supported representatives; they wanted to quit, so they are out, and are evidently having to learn to adapt to an in some ways very different environment.

 

[donaldbuzz&minnie]

Nobody's business but their own, IMO. It's their life. Harry and Meghan need to live their choices just like the rest of us. I imagine that there will be advantages and disadvantages to the choices they've made. I just choose to believe that they know more about the ins and outs of those choices than I do, and I wish them a good life..... and just leave them to it.

 

[neverlandsky]

The new set up is dubbed 'The Magnificient Seven". The senior royals are: Prince of Wales (Charles), Duchess of Cornwall (Camilla), Princess Royal (Anne) Duke & Duchess of Cambridge (William & Kate), Prince Edward and Sophie Wessex.
Most likely: Edward will take over The National Theater, Anne will take over Harry's military ranks, William the Rugby charities.
There are only not enough senior royals to take over all patrons, so maybe juniors like Beatrice and Eugenie will step in?

Christmas 2020, socially distanced.

The Queen (soon to be 95), Prince Charles (72), Dutchess Camilla (soon to be 74), & Princess Anne (70) can't go on forever. The littles are well way too little. Will be interesting to see how the future will be.

What about Master Archie Mountbatten-Windsor, Does the exit affect him? Could Archie exit his parents and rejoin The Royal Family in the future once he's 18?

 

[TLSnell1981]

The Queen (soon to be 95), Prince Charles (72), Dutchess Camilla (soon to be 74), & Princess Anne (70) can't go on forever. The littles are well way too little. Will be interesting to see how the future will be.

What about Master Archie Mountbatten-Windsor, Does the exit affect him? Could Archie exit his parents and rejoin The Royal Family in the future once he's 18?

I think it would be very hard for Archie to rejoin a family he never sees. M&H didn't visit the Royal family while living in the UK. They are strangers to him.

 

[Turn the Page]

The one I have noticed a lot lately is Sophie—married to Edward. Since the Sussexes have been gone it seems that she has been taking on a bigger role, but possible I just missed her before.

Sophie, the Countess of Wessex, is a very hard working member of the family. We just don't see as much of her on this side of the pond as she and Edward aren't tabloid fodder like other senior royals. They aren't totally without scandal. There was a dust up ealy in their marriage, something to do with using his title to promote business dealings or some such. But after becoming full time royals they are much more stable and dignified than Chuck and Andy.

 

[person]

Sophie, the Countess of Wessex, is a very hard working member of the family. We just don't see as much of her on this side of the pond as she and Edward aren't tabloid fodder like other senior royals. They aren't totally without scandal. There was a dust up ealy in their marriage, something to do with using his title to promote business dealings or some such. But after becoming full time royals they are much more stable and dignified than Chuck and Andy.

Sophie comes to Toronto quite frequently but is associated with medical/charitable events rather than pursuing the 'glamour publicity' type of event; the question is, really, what sort of publicity.

 

[ronandannette]

Anyone else think Princess Beatrice & Princess Eugenie due to The Duke and Duchess of Sussex exit will become senior members of the royal family?

I'll say it's doubtful. Prince Charles has already made it clear he's looking to downsize the number of people compensated by incomes earned by the Royal holdings. Since these patronages are mostly honorifics and the "work" involved is basically ceremonial, I'd imagine it wouldn't be all that hard to spread them around amongst the existing Seniors.

 

[VandVsmama]

I remain totally unimpressed with Meghan. I wish her, Harry, and their growing immediate family a life of peace and quiet. However, it's hard to have peace and quiet when you're running to the media saying, "Look at me! Look at me!"

 

[person]

I wish her, Harry, and their growing immediate family a life of peace and quiet. However, it's hard to have peace and quiet when you're running to the media saying, "Look at me! Look at me!"

Excellently put.

 

[person]

The Queen is.

The British Royal Family are.

Being royal is being.

Pursing glamour publicity would be something totally different.

In a sense, the British Royal Family occupies the space that the Star Spangled Banner has in the United States: they are really like an animate flag, with a series of needed etiquette, that rises above the nation in universal respect.

 

[person]

I think it would be very hard for Archie to rejoin a family he never sees. M&H didn't visit the Royal family while living in the UK. They are strangers to him.

There is also the vaguer but real point that it would be hard also suddenly to start behaving in a way in which it may not - by one's family nurturing - have been customary to behave .

 

[Cheburashka]

Prince Charles has already made it clear he's looking to downsize the number of people compensated by incomes earned by the Royal holdings.

This is a bad idea imo, and the departure of Harry & Meghan demonstrates why. When the working royals are limited to just a few key players, if one or two of those players is taken out due to death, desertion, health or scandal, that deals the royal family a huge blow, both in terms of the unique personalities left to engage the public, and in terms of weighing down the already busy working royals with even more work. It just exposes how vulnerable the royal system is to the caprices of individual personalities.

Whereas, when you have a sizeable royal family, a lesser royal can always step up and take a bigger role. But if that person is busy leading a fully non-royal & privately employed life, they won't be in a good place to step up if needed. British society will have to adjust to having less of a royal presence at public, sporting, cultural and charitable events, and the royal family will gradually become less relevant.

The royal balcony looks anemic with only a small handful of people standing on it. I think it's fine for the royal family to be and look like the full family they are, and not limit it to a few figureheads, which is what Charles basically plans to do. He should re-examine that policy after witnessing the departure of his son and daughter in law, who were supposed to be two of the few key players.

Anyone else notice a bit of self-interest in Charles wanting to slim the monarchy down to basically him & his direct heirs after the queen dies?

 

[person]

This is a bad idea imo, and the departure of Harry & Meghan demonstrates why. When the working royals are limited to just a few players, if one or two of those players is taken out, that deals the royal family a huge blow, both in terms of the unique personalities left to engage the public, and in terms of weighing down the already busy working royals with even more work. It just exposes how vulnerable the royal system is to the caprices of individual personalities. Whereas, when you have a sizeable royal family, another person can step up and take a bigger role. But if that person is busy leading a fully non-royal commercial life, they won't be in a good place to step up if needed.

Plus, the royal balcony looks anemic with only a small handful of people standing on it. I think it's fine for the royal family to be and look like the full family they are, and not limit it to a few figureheads, which is what Charles basically plans to do. Downsizing will be the beginning of the end of the monarchy, really.

The question also arises, Would H&M have been willing to play ball by the British Royal rules in any case?

 

[TLSnell1981]

The question also arises, Would H&M have been willing to play ball by the British Royal rules in any case?

I don't think MM follows rules. She expects to be the one in control. JMO

 

[mamamia2005]

The Princess Royal is reported to be one of the harder working royals. Sophie Wessex apparently gets on very well with the Queen, so I'm wondering if Lady Louise, Edward and Sophie's daughter will come up through the ranks so to speak and join the firm rather than having a "proper" job outside. Maybe her brother James will too. As far as I know Beatrice and Eugenie have been in employment, and I can't see them being promoted to be within the inner working firm.
By the time Prince Charles takes over as King, Prince George could be nearing or even be in his teenage years, so the slimmed down monarchy may not stay slimmed down for long with the Cambridge children growing up.

 

[mom2rtk]

There is also the vaguer but real point that it would be hard also suddenly to start behaving in a way in which it may not - by one's family nurturing - have been customary to behave .

People who marry into the royal family find a way to do so.

 

[Karin1984]

I think we should be more concerned that Archie in these very formative years probably never or hardly has interacted with other children for the first two years of his life. He doesn't have siblings (yet), didn't interact with cousins, Meghan felt she was too famous to go to a mommy class and there is a pandemic. He probably only has seen his parents and his maternal grandmother for 2 years for 99% of the time.

The tabloids do report that they have zoom calls, so I guess Archie does know what his family looks like, but is too young to understand what's going on in this pandemic. He probably thinks that everyone's family lives inside a computer.

But then again, that's probably the case for most babies/toddlers born in the past two years.

 

[mom2rtk]

I think we should be more concerned that Archie in these very formative years probably never or hardly has interacted with other children for the first two years of his life. He doesn't have siblings (yet), didn't interact with cousins, Meghan felt she was too famous to go to a mommy class and there is a pandemic. He probably only has seen his parents and his maternal grandmother for 2 years for 99% of the time.

The tabloids do report that they have zoom calls, so I guess Archie does know what his family looks like, but is too young to understand what's going on in this pandemic. He probably thinks that everyone's family lives inside a computer.

But then again, that's probably the case for most babies/toddlers born in the past two years.

Not every young child goes to daycare or "mommy and me" class. Even outside of a pandemic. He's on par with many non-royal kids his age in that regard.

How he'll navigate the entitled attitudes he's grown up around is another matter (an issue for all young royals).

 

[cabanafrau]

This is a bad idea imo, and the departure of Harry & Meghan demonstrates why. When the working royals are limited to just a few key players, if one or two of those players is taken out due to death, desertion, health or scandal, that deals the royal family a huge blow, both in terms of the unique personalities left to engage the public, and in terms of weighing down the already busy working royals with even more work. It just exposes how vulnerable the royal system is to the caprices of individual personalities.

Whereas, when you have a sizeable royal family, a lesser royal can always step up and take a bigger role. But if that person is busy leading a fully non-royal & privately employed life, they won't be in a good place to step up if needed. British society will have to adjust to having less of a royal presence at public, sporting, cultural and charitable events, and the royal family will gradually become less relevant.

The royal balcony looks anemic with only a small handful of people standing on it. I think it's fine for the royal family to be and look like the full family they are, and not limit it to a few figureheads, which is what Charles basically plans to do. He should re-examine that policy after witnessing the departure of his son and daughter in law, who were supposed to be two of the few key players.

Anyone else notice a bit of self-interest in Charles wanting to slim the monarchy down to basically him & his direct heirs after the queen dies?

I believe the numbers standing on the balcony has gone through its ups and downs over the past century. The Queen's own father had several siblings, yet the norm when he was on the throne was "just we four". For a period of time his mother made appearances with the family, but overall the King's immediate household were the four that were the focus. The Queen's sister went through phases were she was and was not willing to shoulder some of the burden prior to the Queen's children coming of age.

 

[Cheburashka]

I believe the numbers standing on the balcony has gone through its ups and downs over the past century. The Queen's own father had several siblings, yet the norm when he was on the throne was "just we four". For a period of time his mother made appearances with the family, but overall the King's immediate household were the four that were the focus. The Queen's sister went through phases were she was and was not willing to shoulder some of the burden prior to the Queen's children coming of age.

That was back in the 1940's - 1960's, when the value and continuation of the monarchy was generally unquestioned. Now, it constantly is being questioned, and the royal family is expected to be very public and involved with many aspects of British life as a justification for the monarchy's existence. That's why keeping a strong public presence is important for it to continue.