Royalty Thread #4 Nappies and Nuptials

Discussion in 'Off The Beaten Track' started by taf2002, Dec 3, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. AxelAnnie

    AxelAnnie Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2002
    Messages:
    5,929
    Although that is lovely....and about time.........but they already know the gender........or could know if they wanted. So, it was either a safe bet (cause it is a boy) or a big deal (knowing it is a girl) :)
     
  2. liv

    liv Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2001
    Messages:
    1,670
    I am saying now it will be a girl. Just a feeling I've had since the beginning...we'll see if I"m right!!
     
  3. avivadawn

    avivadawn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2005
    Messages:
    1,028
    I'm also thinking that she's carrying a girl.
     
  4. *Jen*

    *Jen* Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Messages:
    11,557
    I think it's time for a girl too - but that has nothing to do with this legislation, which had actually been proposed well before the pregnancy was announced :) They pushed through similar reforms in Denmark and then Prince Christian turned out to be a boy!

    But...there are odd coincidences and patterns in my family regarding gender, so I'm using the pattern for the royals. The Queen had a sister - two girls. She had 3 boys and a girl. Charles had 2 boys. It's time for some girls!
     
  5. PDilemma

    PDilemma Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2008
    Messages:
    4,835
    William and Kate may know, but that doesn't mean the Queen or anyone else has been told. Just saying.
     
  6. *Jen*

    *Jen* Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Messages:
    11,557
    I doubt they already know the gender. She was well under 12 weeks when the pregnancy was announced and the baby is rumoured to be due June/July, putting her at 12 weeks now. I don't think you can know so early?

    And anyway, like I said, this change was proposed long before the pregnancy was announced.
     
  7. Jenny

    Jenny From the Bloc

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2001
    Messages:
    17,512
  8. my little pony

    my little pony snarking for AZE

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2005
    Messages:
    30,860
    i dont like it at all. it looks like someone did an age progression to show what she will look like in 30 years after an all night bender.
     
    IceAlisa and (deleted member) like this.
  9. Jenny

    Jenny From the Bloc

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2001
    Messages:
    17,512
    That's what a lot of comments are saying on Facebook - perhaps in an effort to make it timeless, they made her look older, and slightly plumper. Maybe it's better in person, but her most important attribute - her natural radiance - is sadly missing.
     
  10. skatesindreams

    skatesindreams Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2002
    Messages:
    14,195
    That portrait doesn't capture "her" in any way.
    How in the world could the artist make her look "matronly" - at 30!
    She is a beautiful, charming young woman.

    Better to have enlarged and displayed one of the very fine photographs which have been made instead.

    The worse thing is that "smirk".
    Who thought that was a good idea?
     
  11. Jenny

    Jenny From the Bloc

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2001
    Messages:
    17,512
    Some have compared it to Mona Lisa's smile, but I think it does look like a smirk, which is uncharacteristic for her. She usually smiles with her mouth open, much more engaging.
     
  12. skatingfan5

    skatingfan5 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2002
    Messages:
    10,787
    I'm afraid the portrait doesn't seem to capture any of Kate's vibrant personality and does make her look older than her 31 years -- although I certainly wouldn't mind looking like that at age 60! :p The "Mona Lisa smile" is indeed much more like a smirk. When I saw a brief glimpse of it on TV, I thought why is Kate doing the "McKayla is not amused" face?!? Oh well, this is only the first official portrait -- one can hope that future ones are more flattering.
     
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2013
  13. professordeb

    professordeb Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2001
    Messages:
    3,816
    I absolutely HATE the portrait. It just isn't the Kate we have come to know/admire/love. It's just one big whopping UGH!
     
  14. danceronice

    danceronice Corgi Wrangler

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Messages:
    6,476
    Question: If the Commonwealth has agreed to the change in succession rules, have they also agreed to Cameron's proposal to rescind the Settlement Act provision that bars the heir from marrying a Catholic? Considering the heir is free to marry anyone else of any other religion or lack thereof, that one is as outdated as the male primogeniture laws.

    And of the subject of multiple titles and ranks, besides William using a lesser title, there's always that third rail of titles--Camilla is really entitled to be known as Princess of Wales and the only reason they don't use that one is the Diana-fanatics flip out over it.
     
  15. milanessa

    milanessa engaged to dupa

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2002
    Messages:
    18,917
  16. PDilemma

    PDilemma Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2008
    Messages:
    4,835
    Why does she have bags/dark circles under her eyes???? Did the artist hate her????
     
  17. Garden Kitty

    Garden Kitty Tranquillo

    Joined:
    May 26, 2002
    Messages:
    25,137
    That's what struck me too. I'd say the artist was trying to be "realistic" except I've never seen pics of her that look that bad.
     
  18. Jenny

    Jenny From the Bloc

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2001
    Messages:
    17,512
    Exactly. I've never seen her look anything but flawless, in a nice, natural and approachable way. If the artist wanted her to look "real" he should have worked harder on her smile, because that's what does it. In one squib I read that he changed the colour of her eyes to match her blouse, which is all fine and dandy if you are doing an interpretive image, but not if it's supposed to be a realistic portrait. The very idea that he thought he might improve her look! Centuries from now scholars will argue that this portrait was done when she was much older - although my bet is that she ages a lot more gracefully than this.

    Every time I look at that portrait, I hate it even more. :(
     
  19. Skittl1321

    Skittl1321 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2007
    Messages:
    11,430
    I don't like the portrait. She looks like she is smirking, not smiling, and her eyes look like she is glaring- as if she is plotting something, or mad. It just doesn't fit her personality at all.
     
  20. skatesindreams

    skatesindreams Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2002
    Messages:
    14,195
    This "official" portrait painter hardly seems an "artist" to me.
    He certainly didn't "serve" his subject.

    Is this person the best the UK has to offer?
     
  21. skatingfan5

    skatingfan5 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2002
    Messages:
    10,787
    Agreed. Here's what the artist had to say about it:
    I think the portrait is an epic fail at portraying an "enormously open, generous, and very warm person." And also an epic fail at representing her smile.
     
  22. Skittl1321

    Skittl1321 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2007
    Messages:
    11,430
    According to the article I read, they did a search and Kate was part of the committee that selected him. (It also said she "loved" the painting, but I can't imagine her saying anything else unless she was going to force them to destroy and redo it.)
     
  23. skatesindreams

    skatesindreams Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2002
    Messages:
    14,195
    Of course, she would say that, publicly.
    She's too tactful and well-bred to say anything else.

    I don't know if I could have "held my tongue"!
     
  24. Fergus

    Fergus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2006
    Messages:
    7,586
    I once did a Google search for "Queen Elizabeth II paintings" and may I say there are some FUGLY paintings out there of the Royal Family made by artists from across the globe. :yikes:

    Ah, for the days of royal portraits by Philip de Lazslo!

    The one successful aspect of Catherine's painting is the hair. :)

    Maybe this is gonna sit in an attic and turn decrepit whilst HRH stays young and fresh forever. ;)
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2013
  25. skatesindreams

    skatesindreams Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2002
    Messages:
    14,195
    Perhaps, it can be hidden behind a door in some Royal gallery, if it must be displayed.
     
  26. Alixana

    Alixana who is on vacation!!

    Joined:
    May 1, 2004
    Messages:
    1,266
    Hair looks great; skin looks good. But if that was my portrait, I'd make him re-do the baggy eyes and pursed lips. And I wouldn't pay for it!! :mad:
     
  27. Jenny

    Jenny From the Bloc

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2001
    Messages:
    17,512
    And I'd want my own eye colour. If he wanted it to match the blouse, why not change the blouse, instead of the woman?
     
  28. skatingfan5

    skatingfan5 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2002
    Messages:
    10,787
    I guess it's a good thing she wasn't wearing green or grey .... or red. :eek:
     
  29. centerstage01

    centerstage01 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2002
    Messages:
    2,046
    In exchange, the first child will be named Dorian. :p.

    I know the guy was trying for "natural" but what woman wants bags under her eyes even if she might have had them the day she sat for the picture? And why would he change her eye color to match her blouse?? I'm not impressed.
     
  30. nubka

    nubka Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2006
    Messages:
    7,806
    I don't think the portrait is so awful. It does look like her. My only complaint is that it's just so drab and faded looking...
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.