Royalty Thread #7: Do They Get Frequent Flier Miles?

[mag]

William was still in the military and based in Wales when he & Kate were engaged. He was doing far fewer engagements himself at the time. Harry is done with his military service, living in London and a full time royal carrying out engagements now. That's the difference. Not any lack of enthusiasm by Kate or sanctity on the part of Meghan. Kate did not do solo engagements for several months after the wedding and it is unlikely that Meghan will either.

I think there was also a great deal of caution with Kate. Not because they thought she couldn’t handle it, but because her life path is one that will keep her firmly in the spotlight until she dies. It seems to me that there was a deliberate decision made to pace her entry into royal life in order to try to avoid some of the pitfalls experienced by Diana. Making sure the marriage and partnership between William and Kate had every opportunity to grow a really firm foundation seemed to be the primary goal. They have years of public service ahead of them and there was no need to rush. For all the criticisms of Charles (many, IMHO, unwarranted) he clearly learned from the mistakes of his first marriage and wanted something different for William.

For Harry and Meghan, first they are older, second Meghan has already lived a very public life and is more accustomed to media attention, and finally although they are popular members of the Royal family, their time in the spotlight will decrease as they age and as William and Kate’s kids grow up and take on more responsibility. I think the concern about burn out is not as pressing.

 

[MsZem]

Very nice of Madeleine and Chris not to keep everyone waiting for a picture of the newest princess

 

[PDilemma]

I think there was also a great deal of caution with Kate. Not because they thought she couldn’t handle it, but because her life path is one that will keep her firmly in the spotlight until she dies. It seems to me that there was a deliberate decision made to pace her entry into royal life in order to try to avoid some of the pitfalls experienced by Diana. Making sure the marriage and partnership between William and Kate had every opportunity to grow a really firm foundation seemed to be the primary goal. They have years of public service ahead of them and there was no need to rush. For all the criticisms of Charles (many, IMHO, unwarranted) he clearly learned from the mistakes of his first marriage and wanted something different for William.

For Harry and Meghan, first they are older, second Meghan has already lived a very public life and is more accustomed to media attention, and finally although they are popular members of the Royal family, their time in the spotlight will decrease as they age and as William and Kate’s kids grow up and take on more responsibility. I think the concern about burn out is not as pressing.

Actually, Diana was eased in to public life. There is reality and mythology when it comes to Diana. The mythology was invented by Diana for her own purposes during the breakdown of the marriage.

She did not do events during her engagement. She was eased in very slowly in the early months of her marriage and did not have solo events early on. She had more time off during and after her pregnancies than Kate had for any of hers. Yet Diana is depicted as being thrown to the wolves and working more than the Queen from day one and Kate is called lazy for taking time off with HG and to spend with her children. And now Kate is accused of not being as "enthusiastic" as Meghan Kardashian because, like her dear departed sainted mother-in-law, she did not immediately do solo engagements prior to the wedding. And because as active duty military, William was doing very few at the time, they would have been solo events for her.

Kate will never win with the public and I don't get why.

 

[clairecloutier]

And now Kate is accused of not being as "enthusiastic" as Meghan Kardashian because, like her dear departed sainted mother-in-law, she did not immediately do solo engagements prior to the wedding.

Meghan Kardashian??

I am sorry that I compared Meghan with Kate in my last post. I think that came off in a way I didn't intend. I did not mean to ignite a Meghan vs. Kate flame war. I was just honestly impressed by the number of appearances Meghan has already made, supporting charities and good causes. When she and Harry did their engagement interview, she had indicated she was interested in helping others through charity work, etc., and I was just noting that her activities thus far suggest that she's serious about this, and that it was not just lip service or PR.

I happen to be a fan of both Kate and Meghan. I admire the way Kate has conducted herself in a difficult position that involves a great deal of public scrutiny. And I like the different vibe that Meghan is bringing to the royal family.

 

[once_upon]

Wow that's a LOT of disdain of Meghan did she pee in your cheerios or what??!!

 

[ballettmaus]

Kate will never win with the public and I don't get why.

Jealousy? Markle is already a celebrity but Kate is this girl who went to the same university as William like many others in England did and she got the prince. Only reason I can think of.

That said, I was under the impression that Kate was well-liked?

 

[mag]

Diana, Kate, and Meghan were/are three different women with different life experiences prior to becoming members of the Royal family and different roles within that family. I really don’t think there is a need to compare them for the purposes of propping one up over the others. In my initial post I was simply pointing out that it appeared to me that the Royal family, and Charles in particular, may have learned some valuable lessons from the way Diana adjusted, or didn’t adjust, to the family firm.

Diana was something totolly new and unexpected. I don’t think anyone in the family could have predicted her initial popularity or her continued popularity. That, coupled with the age difference between Charles and Diana, and the fact that Charles appeared to think that Diana would just fit in with his schedule and take up Royal duties and tours as well as having a baby at 20 years old, was a recipe for disaster. I firmly believe there was enough blame on both sides for this one. I tilt the initial blame more toward Charles because Diana was very young and I suspect suffered from post partum depression, but I think the tables turned as the kids grew and Diana’s power with the media grew and she began to believe her own press. I also think both of their upbringings fed into their problems. The fact that they stayed together as long as they did and it appears that, for the most part, their kids are well adjusted, is really a minor miracle.

I will give Charles credit though for recognizing that it really doesn’t matter who was to blame, there were things that could and should be done differently to help William and Kate get off to a better start and build a stronger foundation. For Harry and Meghan there situation is different again so their engagement, wedding, and early married life will be different. I don’t see it as a case of better or worse, just different. I certainly don’t think we will see Kate and Meghan competing with each other. I don’t know a lot about Meghan, but Kate certainly comes across as a very caring and mature person. I would be shocked if she did anything other than welcome Meghan with open arms and do everything to help make her transition to Royal life a success.

 

[Lorac]

Jealousy? Markle is already a celebrity but Kate is this girl who went to the same university as William like many others in England did and she got the prince. Only reason I can think of.

That said, I was under the impression that Kate was well-liked?

I don't get any impression that Kate isn't well liked at all. I do wonder if PDilemma is referring to some royal message boards as the press and public seem to adore Kate.

 

[taf2002]

I think using the term Meagan Kardashian is an insult that Markle has done nothing to deserve.

 

[vesperholly]

Kate will never win with the public and I don't get why.

People don't like Kate?? I get the impression that she was very well-liked among the general populace of GB. Are you talking about tabloids?

 

[Jenny]

I also thought Kate was generally very popular. There will always be a few haters, but I haven't seen anything to indicate that there is a general issue with her. Most media seem to be gushing over the new friendship with Meghan right now, and the new baby on the way, as well as the joint work they are doing with the princes.

 

[MsZem]

Princess Adrienne Josephine Alice, Duchess of Blekinge - plus siblings Leonore and Nicolas.

I have no thoughts to share about the Duchess of Cambridge or about Meghan Markle. But Princess Eugenie recently joined Instagram, so that should be fun

 

[aftershocks]

Pictures and videos of Commonwealth Day Service in London:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=flJifIuyrMk arrival of Queen Elizabeth
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gq2xuiOi3pQ arrival of W&K with H&M
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3k1GBjIZ2wg shots of H&M outside the church; shots inside church of the ceremony, with H&M standing in the second row next to Prince Andrew, and behind the Queen, Prince Charles & Duchess of Cornwall
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOgUSwIt-1o Departure of W&K and H&M after church service
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWPLrFkBmFQ shots from Time coverage

Details on Meghan's outfits, with pictures arriving and leaving the church:
http://meghansmirror.com/royal-style/meghan-markle-commonwealth-day/
http://madaboutmeghan.blogspot.com/
It looks like Kate and Meghan are wearing the same Manolo Blahnik navy stiletto heels; Meghan is wearing a white coat and navy dress by Amanda Wakeley (one of Diana PofW's favorite designers); also Meghan's white beret is by milliner Stephen Jones, who also designed hats and berets for Diana

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bhSgO9EPd8
Discussion of rumors that Meghan's Dad is too sick, overweight and reclusive to travel to London, and thus will not attend his daughter's wedding. There are rumors that Prince William may walk Meghan down the aisle! I think Meghan should have her dear friend, Markus Anderson walk her down the aisle, or her mother.

 

[taf2002]

I like the white coat except for the stand-up collar. Every time I wear a collar like that I get make-up on it.

 

[mag]

There are rumors that Prince William may walk Meghan down the aisle! I think Meghan should have her dear friend, Markus Anderson walk her down the aisle, or her mother.

I agree, I think Meghan’s mother should walk her down the aisle even if her father is an attendance (or they both can!) I believe Meghan was raised mainly by her mom, why it needs to be a man is beyond me.

“It looks like Kate and Meghan are wearing the same Manolo Blahnik navy stiletto heels”
Kate’s shoes are the Malory pumps by Rupert Sanderson.

 

[aftershocks]

There's more about the Commonwealth Day service in London at this link:
https://www.royal.uk/commonwealth-day-2018

Scroll down to see the brief clip of the presentation by spoken word artist, Jaspreet Kaur. Her words are profound and thought-provoking:

"The moment that you are more concerned about learning to love than to be loved, positive emotions of oceanic depths will engulf you. And the moment that you are more concerned about understanding others than to always be understood, that's when your mind will truly begin to learn. And the moment that we realize that our enemies are not physical flesh & blood, yet they are our own thoughts, peace will begin to conquer. And the moment that we overcome those inner enemies rather than deflecting them onto others, merriment will come find you. And the moment that you are more concerned about learning to listen rather than to always be heard, you will hear languages that you thought your mind could never fathom."

Here's more from Jaspreet Kaur:
www.behindthenetra.com/ She has an interesting background re gender, history, decolonisation and mental health issues
www.youtube.com/watch?v=mlc9knF6bo8 Fall In Love With a Lion by Jaspreet Kaur
www.youtube.com/watch?v=xD11Lf_OV1A Ted Talk by Jaspreet Kaur


The entire brouhaha over Harry's raised evebrows and Meghan's giggle after singer Liam Payne's performance is silly. There have been all kinds of speculation over what it meant and characterizations that their behavior was rude toward Payne. Actually, how would we know whether it had to do with Payne or with something else?

However, after listening to royal journalists Omid Mio Scobie and Emily Andrews on their recently launched On Heir podcast on I-Tunes, I believe the mystery of the raised eyebrows and the giggle has been solved. Scobie and Andrews were discussing anticipation of Commonwealth Day services in advance of the event. They were both scratching their heads over why Liam Payne had been selected to perform, since he's a former One Direction singer known in his solo career for songs with such titles as: Strip That Down, Bedroom Floor, and Get Low. Payne also performed the song, For You, with Rita Ora for the Fifty Shades Freed soundtrack.
Ora wears a gorgeous red dress in the opening scenes of the video (which might make a lovely wedding dress in white): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQUuqbzQVsY

Long story short, possibly both Harry and Meghan are familiar with some of Payne's lyrics and videos. Maybe they were relieved that Payne performed a cover to John Mayer's Waiting for the World Change, instead of whipping out one of his own steamy bodice-rippers in Westminster Abbey. Some people have also remarked that Payne's fist bumps with his accompanists was not good form in such a venue. I think H&M's reaction under the circumstances was rather mild. And it's cool to see H&M being natural and not boringly stiff in such surroundings. The fact that camera lenses are trained on H&M to catch every nuance of their public interactions is a bit much. Cool that Meghan can stifle a giggle (which means to me she's in awe at the same time she's able to be at ease and react naturally as herself). At least H&M are showing that they can enjoy having fun together while still respecting Harry's family's historic position and traditions. The important thing is that H&M are in love, and they are both so committed to giving back to others and making a difference in the world.

 

[AxelAnnie]

I agree, I think Meghan’s mother should walk her down the aisle even if her father is an attendance (or they both can!) I believe Meghan was raised mainly by her mom, why it needs to be a man is beyond me.

“It looks like Kate and Meghan are wearing the same Manolo Blahnik navy stiletto heels”
Kate’s shoes are the Malory pumps by Rupert Sanderson.

Actually, the reason (historically) it has to be a man is because the bride was the father's property. Hence---"Who gives this woman to be married to this man?" And them the bride became the husband's property.

Jews don't do that, and never have. The mother and the father walk the bride and groom down the aisle. There is no giving away. I am a Jew, and I can say that none of it "makes sense"....it is TRADITION!

 

[mag]

Actually, the reason (historically) it has to be a man is because the bride was the father's property. Hence---"Who gives this woman to be married to this man?" And them the bride became the husband's property.

Jews don't do that, and never have. The mother and the father walk the bride and groom down the aisle. There is no giving away. I am a Jew, and I can say that none of it "makes sense"....it is TRADITION!

Yes, I know about the property part which is all the more reason to break with that tradition!

 

[aftershocks]

Who knows? We may be surprised to see both parents walking Meghan down the aisle. They certainly both nurtured her and adored her and encouraged her that she could do whatever she dreamed. I think she got a lot from both parents, but especially from her mother. If her Dad is unable to walk her down the aisle, due to health reasons, hopefully he will be in the church to support his daughter on this most important day of her life to this point.

Maybe we will be surprised. But honestly, Meghan has a lot of friend and relative options: either one or both of her parents, Markus Anderson (friend & Soho House executive), Alvin Joffrey Ragland (two years younger uncle on her mother's side), Ben Mulroney (Meghan's friend & stylist Jessica's husband who is the son of former Canadian Prime Minister Brian M), Christopher Hale (nephew of Meghan who was fortunately raised by his paternal grandparents and not by his mother Samantha Markle Grant)! Or, even Prince Charles, but not Prince William who will surely be serving as Prince Harry's best man.

To commemorate the Commonwealth Day service attire of Meghan and Kate, artist Adrian Valencia drew this lovely drawing:
https://www.instagram.com/p/BgRYy-oF5fy/?hl=en&taken-by=drawadriandraw
https://www.instagram.com/p/BgT_ZAtFDOL/?hl=en&taken-by=drawadriandraw

I posted yesterday in the Prince Harry engaged thread the wording of Queen Elizabeth's formal approval for the marriage of Harry and Meghan to proceed. It's just a formality and it reads similarly to her previous permission for William and Kate to marry. The exceptions are that Prince Philip has retired from public life, so the Queen stated "My most dearly beloved grandson," instead of "Our most dearly..." And the Queen did not refer to Meghan as "trusty and well-beloved" as she did for Kate, probably because she and Prince Philip had known Kate very well by the time William proposed. They've known Meghan for under a year (it was recently reported that the Queen had lunch with Meghan last Mother's Day, in addition to having tea with her twice last fall). Surely all the Queen needed to know is that Meghan has made her grandson Harry the happiest and settled he's ever been. And of course, the Queen's temperamental corgis are completely charmed by and accepting of Meghan.

 

[Lorac]

I posted yesterday in the Prince Harry engaged thread the wording of Queen Elizabeth's formal approval for the marriage of Harry and Meghan to proceed. It's just a formality and it reads similarly to her previous permission for William and Kate to marry. The exceptions are that Prince Philip has retired from public life, so the Queen stated "My most dearly beloved grandson," instead of "Our most dearly..." And the Queen did not refer to Meghan as "trusty and well-beloved" as she did for Kate, probably because she and Prince Philip had known Kate very well by the time William proposed. They've known Meghan for under a year (it was recently reported that the Queen had lunch with Meghan last Mother's Day, in addition to having tea with her twice last fall). Surely all the Queen needed to know is that Meghan has made her grandson Harry the happiest and settled he's ever been. And of course, the Queen's temperamental corgis are completely charmed by and accepting of Meghan.

I read somewhere - and I can't remember where now - that the 'trusty and well-beloved' language is formal language used by the monarch when referring to citizens of the UK or the Queen's other realms. Therefore Meghan could not be accorded that phrase whereas the Duchess of Cambridge could.

 

[aftershocks]

I read somewhere - and I can't remember where now - that the 'trusty and well-beloved' language is formal language used by the monarch when referring to citizens of the UK or the Queen's other realms. Therefore Meghan could not be accorded that phrase whereas the Duchess of Cambridge could.

That's pretty interesting if the document is composed mainly in keeping with formalities. I'll have to check that out over on the Royalty forum. I would have thought that the Queen truly trusts and loves Kate since she did know her fairly well to some extent by that point, and even better now of course. I read that the Queen has regularly spoken with Kate and given her advice on the future role that lies ahead of her.

It seems strange though if only UK citizens can be referred to as 'trusty and well-beloved.' I should think that if the Queen had more opportunity to know Meghan well, perhaps she would have included an endearment, if she wished. In a certain number of years in any case, Meghan will become a British citizen.

 

[Lorac]

That's pretty interesting if the document is composed mainly in keeping with formalities. I'll have to check that out over on the Royalty forum. I would have thought that the Queen truly trusts and loves Kate since she did know her fairly well to some extent by that point, and even better now of course. I read that the Queen has regularly spoken with Kate and given her advice on the future role that lies ahead of her.

It seems strange though if only UK citizens can be referred to as 'trusty and well-beloved.' I should think that if the Queen had more opportunity to know Meghan well, perhaps she would have included an endearment, if she wished. In a certain number of years in any case, Meghan will become a British citizen.

The document is 100% composed in keeping with formalities as accorded the Monarchy and years of tradition. And it seems to imply not just UK citizens but citizens of wherever the Queen in still head of state whether it be literally or ceremonially - which I suspect includes Canada and Australia amongst others. I very much doubt that the phrase would have been included unless Meghan was a UK citizen regardless of how long she had know Harry or been acquainted with the Queen as tradition is very important to the Queen and always has been. It really doesn't seem strange to me at all that the phrase was not included for Meghan but doesn't mean that the Queen thinks anything less of Meghan.

 

[aftershocks]

... I very much doubt that the phrase would have been included unless Meghan was a UK citizen regardless of how long she had know Harry or been acquainted with the Queen as tradition is very important to the Queen and always has been. It really doesn't seem strange to me at all that the phrase was not included for Meghan but doesn't mean that the Queen thinks anything less of Meghan.

Of course the lack of inclusion of "trusty and well-beloved" doesn't mean anything in regard to how the Queen feels about Meghan. In fact, that was the point of my original post! Your pointing out the 'tradition' aspect in the phrasing of formal royal documents is fine, and thank you. I can still go to the Royalty forum and find out more about it there from other 'experts' who know a lot about all kinds of stuff regarding European royalty, and especially British royal protocol, customs, traditions, etc.

What I referenced in my previous post is that if the Queen had known Meghan (as Harry's girlfriend) for as long as she knew Kate, then most likely Meghan would be a UK citizen by the time marriage was approaching. Obviously, W&K and H&M have had different romantic trajectories, and of course the other differences are Meghan being American, divorced and a woman of color.

It's also interesting to find this out about that phrasing, because being American I read the words differently when I first saw the document in 2011 for William and Kate. It seemed like wow, Kate is held in very high regard. Of course, Kate was and is held in high regard anyway, but to learn that the phrasing is just protocol for UK and Commonwealth citizens is somehow a downer.

Maybe if the corgis had a say in the wording of H&M's traditional marriage approval, we'd see doggie speak instead.

 

[aftershocks]

An interesting analysis of Diana PofW's impact on the British royal family, and her lasting legacy. I agree:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/25/opinion/sunday/princess-diana-britain-monarchy.html

It's not saying Diana was perfect of course. But it does tell the truth about the cold practice of how she was chosen as a virginal bride for Prince Charles, who did not have the determined backbone of his parents. Both Princess Elizabeth and Philip Mountbatten were each also manipulated during their 1940's courtship, but they both ultimately knew their own minds and held out for what they wanted, which in the end and essentially from the very beginning, was each other.

I've recognized for some time that Prince Harry and Prince William, through the love they received from both their parents, have managed to survive the griefs of their childhood and in the process they have overcome some of the shortcomings of the institution into which they were born. They are Diana's lasting legacy, and (as the writer aptly observes) "her gift to the family who made her and helped to destroy her. The popularity of her sons, their honesty, their ethic of service, Harry's impish ease and William's gravitas ... offer hope for the future [as they assist in] refashioning [the mystique] of the British royal institution for the modern age."

The writer thus proclaims that Diana "is the ultimate victor." That's a nice sentiment, but I wouldn't put it quite that way because although Diana was engaged in a war for her own survival, sanity, and happiness, I do not think she was against what the royal family stood for. She was just unwittingly caught up in it's old-fashioned strictures and it's chaotic lurch into the modern age. She coincidentally ended up paying the ultimate price with her life. Fortunately, it is the better angels of Diana's nature that she succeeded in passing onto her sons. That inheritance of love, caring, vulnerability, and rebellious grace is coupled with Harry's and William's filial sense of duty and respect for ancient family traditions. Seemingly then, it is the offspring of the Wales' volatile union who embody an inheritance that will be the boon and salvation reckoning the probable survival and refashioned relevance of the British royal institution in our changing times.

For her part, I think Diana would simply feel relieved, proud and at peace to see her sons genuinely and happily in love, well-adjusted, and carrying on her work of reaching out to others and trying to make the world a better place. And she might well ruefully chuckle at the ironies involved in how her relationship with Prince Charles led to freeing current young royals from the stultifying traps of old-fashioned regal attitudes and expectations.

 

[taf2002]

Good grief, let the poor woman die already! It's been 20 years & people are still coming up with what she would have thought or done. Three times this week my news feed has shown pictures of her wedding to Charles. Is there anyone on the planet who haven't seen them? Or wants to?

 

[aftershocks]

I'd say there are plenty of people on the planet who still care about Diana PofW. If you don't get the point of why William and Harry publicly honored their mother on the occasion of the 20th anniversary of her death last year (when the article was written), so be it. William and Harry are a huge reason why Diana will always be remembered. She was a flawed human being but she gave so much to her sons, which is an important reason why they are the outstanding young men we see today. It is Diana who is largely the impetus behind Princes William and Harry, and Duchess Kate launching the Heads Together mental health campaign as part of their Royal Foundation charity.

The royal family is just a family of course, but also uniquely a family that is larger than life whose stories and dramatic history down through the years we can all glean lessons from, if we are open to doing so. If you aren't interested at all, I don't see the point in your even commenting. Just ignore. And skip the upcoming royal wedding too, so you won't have to hear anyone alluding to Diana, who is after all, mother in-absentia of groom, Prince Harry.

 

[taf2002]

I'd say there are plenty of people on the planet who still care about Diana PofW. If you don't get the point of why William and Harry publicly honored their mother on the occasion of the 20th anniversary of her death last year (when the article was written), so be it. William and Harry are a huge reason why Diana will always be remembered. She was a flawed human being but she gave so much to her sons, which is an important reason why they are the outstanding young men we see today. It is Diana who is largely the impetus behind Princes William and Harry, and Duchess Kate launching the Heads Together mental health campaign as part of their Royal Foundation charity.

The royal family is just a family of course, but also uniquely a family that is larger than life whose stories and dramatic history down through the years we can all glean lessons from, if we are open to doing so. If you aren't interested at all, I don't see the point in your even commenting. Just ignore. And skip the upcoming royal wedding too, so you won't have to hear anyone alluding to Diana, who is after all, mother in-absentia of groom, Prince Harry.

I wasn't alluding to why William & Harry publically honored their mother. The point of my post was your surmising what Diana felt & thought then & what she would feel & think now. Also, there's no doubt she loved her kids. I don't find her unique in that respect.

I'm looking forward to seeing Harry & Meagan's wedding. I watched Diana's on TV & Kate's too. I don't need to see the photos of Diana & Charles another million times. 999,999 will suffice. And I don't need to see stories like "oh Kate wore blue today, she must be copying Diana". Puke!

 

[clairecloutier]

Kate is becoming an official patron of the Victoria & Albert Museum in London: https://twitter.com/KensingtonRoyal/status/978255287214858240

 

[Vagabond]

Queen Letizia and Queen Sofía Face Off, and Spain Is Aghast





It makes one glad to be a commoner, with a modicum more privacy when it comes to family crises.

Your thoughts?

 

[Alixana]

Very thankful there were no media at our last family wedding! Two uncles got drunk and started a fight, police were called.