No poster said that Margaret's life was not shaped by being a royal. But I personally don't find her all that interesting because I was around when all this stuff was taking place & to me she seemed like a royal spoiled brat who wanted to have her way but not suffer any of the consequences... Since she had to know that she would never be queen, I guess her love/obsession wasn't all that strong..."
Well, it seems for sure that Margaret was "a royal spoiled brat" who wanted and often got her way. But yet, I go beyond that assessment to understand how that came about. To some degree probably our personalities are set at birth, however we are still also shaped for better or for worse by our environments, upbringings and interpersonal relationships. Margaret's personality perhaps might have been directed into a more fulfilling and purpose-driven path had she not been so spoiled by her parents (particularly her father) and overprotected by her sister. No one seems to have detected and tried to correct the petulant, overbearing aspects of her behavior growing up. They simply laughed at her gift for mimicry, petted and made excuses for her. So Margaret's faults apparently only became increasingly worse after the forced split with Townsend. Perhaps marriage to Townsend might have tamed Margaret. It's really hard to know for sure at this point. In any case, instead of the hard luck of the broken love affair helping her to grow up and change, Margaret's indulgent behavior patterns and character faults worsened as she faced a purposeless life as the younger sister of the Queen of England.
I think Margaret's parents, being mindful that Margaret was the second child, apparently overcompensated to a fault in trying to make up for the fact that Margaret was not the anointed one like her sister, Elizabeth. Britain and the world are fortunate that Elizabeth's personality was more calm, dutiful, and no-nonsense.
Great that you were around to witness some of the events of Margaret's life in real time
@taf2002. I gained a high level of interest in and knowledge about the British Royals and about the history of the British Monarchy in the late 1970s and 1980s (via reading books and viewing documentaries). Margaret's marriage to Antony Armstrong-Jones was disastrous aside from the two creative and productive children they brought into the world.
I disagree that giving up her title would have been such a small thing for Margaret. At a very young and vulnerable age, Margaret was forced to choose between giving up the only identity she'd ever known or giving up the man she loved. Her father likely never had a harsh word to say to Margaret, but he needed to. Unfortunately, George VI's untimely death only exacerbated the problems that both Elizabeth and Margaret experienced in their early adult years (Elizabeth from having to assume the throne so early in her young married life). Let's also not forget that King George VI and his brothers experienced a terrible childhood, suffering from physical and mental abuse meted out by their nanny that was not discovered before great damage had been done to their psyches and their constitutions. Queen Mary was joyless, stiff, dutiful and set in her ways (as formed by her strict Victorian upbringing). King George V was temperamental, overly strict and regimental toward his children. Even after they discovered the nanny's abuses and got rid of her, the parents weren't able to comfort or show demonstrative love to their children. King George V had received over-indulgent affection from his mother, Queen Alexandra, but his father (King Edward) was distant, self-indulgent and philandering. And King Edward's problems extend from his mother's (Queen Victoria's) neglectful and overbearing behavior toward him. So obviously a lot of family dysfunction, which fortunately for William and Harry was not passed down to them by their parents. For all intents and purposes of course Elizabeth and Margaret enjoyed a charmed and loving childhood. However, they were both very sheltered and Margaret was overly pampered and indulged in, which seemingly unintentionally aided in the nurturing of her worst character faults.
BTW, the Townsend character in
The Crown seems rather miscast, since Peter Townsend was tall, long-limbed, youthful looking, and quite dashingly handsome. Margaret was much shorter in height than Townsend. I wonder why they cast an actor who appears almost shorter than the actress who portrays Margaret.
I doubt that Margaret set out to nab a married man. She lived a very sheltered existence in royal palaces growing up. The young-looking Townsend, a well-respected and admired war hero, was thrown into Margaret's path domestically when she was only 14, a very impressionable period in her life. After all, her sister had fallen in love with a dashing, older military man when she was 13. Likely subsconsciously Margaret was somehow following in her sister's footsteps. There were some objections initially to Elizabeth's choice of husband, but she eventually got her way. Of course Philip was not as old as Townsend, and Philip also was not married, and he had the advantage of his Uncle Dickie Mountbatten going to bat advocating for his betrothal to Elizabeth. Fate handed some difficult cards to Margaret OTOH, and she didn't play those cards well.
And here is this passage from the biography,
Snowden, by Anne de Courcy, describing the early love affair that preceded Margaret's marriage to Snowden:
"Despite his record as a courageous fighter ace, [Townsend] was gentle, sensitive, and intuitive, qualities that appealed to the vulnerable core hidden beneath Margaret’s willful, confident exterior..."
[Discussed in this recent article:
http://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood...garet-peter-townsend-affair-the-crown-netflix]
I think the qualities attributed to Townsend are similar to some of King George VI's personality traits too. So, Margaret may have been responding to the qualities in Townsend that she sensed in her own gentle and loving father. While you feel that Margaret is not all that interesting or worthy of admiration herself, the circumstances of her life and the experiences that sealed her fate I personally find vastly interesting. She is very much a tragic figure. Of course her vanity, her willful, insatiable personality, and her bitterness contributed to the debilitating downfall she suffered in her later years.
http://www.kungahuset.se/royalcourt...eexpectingachild.5.73a5feee15af50049ffd2.html
This is hilarious ... Duke and Duchess of Cambridge let their hair down with the hosts of Radio 1, as they promote their charity Heads Together. William is so funny and down-to-earth. 
(We need much more of this cuteness. 
)
At first I thought you were referencing the former King Edward VIII, who was called David by his family. He never lost his hair. 
