We're back with very interesting news! The Duchess of Cambridge has recorded a tribute to the Queen as part of an upcoming documentary by ITV to mark the monarch's 90th birthday. The programme entitled The Queen at Ninety will also feature tributes by Prince William, Prince Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall.
 |
| Peter Hunt Twitter Feed |
This is very much unexpected news. When a recent documentary aired focused on the work of the Prince's Trust and featuring interviews with William, Harry and Camilla I was told we shouldn't expect to see Kate involved in a televised programme for some time. It's quite similar to the assumption in the media Kate wouldn't wear the Cambridge Lover's Knot Tiara for possibly decades - this is another instance where the Cambridges have surprised us. We haven't seen Kate interviewed since the royal engagement in 2010, so it promises to very exciting for royal fans and of course it will be fascinating to hear her tribute to Her Majesty. It's also very fitting for William and Kate, who will one day be king and queen to participate in celebrating the monarch's landmark birthday.
More on the documentary from the ITV press release:
'The Queen's 90th birthday will be celebrated on ITV with a new landmark programme on her life and reign.There's no broadcast date for the documentary yet but it will be shown "at some point this spring". It is understood the producers have had fantastic access and described how "fortunate" they were to have the participation of so many members of the Royal family to mark this historic milestone in the life of the Queen. "It's a remarkable story of an extraordinary life which in so many ways reflects the changing face of the nation," noted Nick Kent, executive producer for Oxford Film and Television.
The film, to be shown this spring, will include individual contributions from many key figures in Her Majesty's life, including Their Royal Highnesses the Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall and the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. In addition, leading national and international figures will feature as well as material from the most comprehensive international film archives.
The Queen at Ninety (WT) is commissioned for ITV by Jo Clinton-Davis, Controller of Factual and Richard Klein, Director of Factual. Jo said: "When the Queen was born 90 years ago, there was no hint that her life would go on to be so profoundly significant in our history. As she reaches her 90th birthday, this film aims to offer a fresh insight into our monarch's life and work."
To coincide with the news, it was announced Ant and Dec (the duo who presented the documentary on the Prince's Trust to the...ahem...disappointment of a few of our readers :)) will host the Queen's 90th Birthday Celebration which is to be broadcast on ITV later this year. More from ITV:
'The national event, hosted by Royal Windsor Horse Show in the presence of the Queen, will see a host of British stars join the celebration. It will tell the story of the Queen’s remarkable life from her birth in 1926, through World War Two, to her Coronation in 1953 and a reign spanning more than 60 years.
We are honoured to be hosting this special celebration of Her Majesty the Queen’s 90th birthday. This spectacular evening will bring together some of the best-known names in the entertainment world who will perform with 900 horses and 1,500 participants to mark this very special birthday.
The event is set to feature more than 900 horses and 1,500 participants including performances by the Oman Royal Cavalry, Chilean Huasos, the New Zealand Army Band, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, Azerbaijan Cossack Riders, State Carriages from the Royal Mews, 100 Military and Commonwealth Pipers and the Household Cavalry Mounted Regiment.'
Meanwhile, The Sunday Times' Roya Nikkhah reports the Queen will celebrate her birthday with a private party for family and close friends at Windsor Castle on 21 April. "The Prince of Wales and the Duke of Cambridge are expected to give speeches and pay personal tributes to the monarch." This would suggest William and Kate's tour of India will take place in early April, and there's talk it will be quite a short tour - roughly a week long.
 |
| Wikipedia |
It's excellent news. As the monarchy strives to modernise with the changing times, I can see more televised documentaries being produced. It offers a fantastic platform for members of the Royal family to connect directly with the public and enables us to see another side to their personality. I hope this heralds the start of a new chapter for Kate, as it would be so interesting to hear more from her. Are you looking forward to the documentary?
************
In other news, The Sunday Times reports the Queen is to hand over her patronage of the All England Lawn Tennis and Croquet Club, which hosts Wimbledon, to Kate. There's been talk of this for years and as Her Majesty approaches her 90th birthday and reportedly plans to reduce her workload, it seems an ideal time for the handover.
More from the Mail Online:
'Meanwhile, sources suggest Prince Harry, 31, is poised to take over as patron of the Rugby Football Union (RFU) who governs English rugby, a title that the Queen has held for 65 years. It has been rumoured that Prince William, 33, will take over as patron of the Football Association, while the Countess of Wessex will also share the load with a major new role.
A source told The Sunday Times: 'The Queen is mindful that she does not want organisations with which she is associated to think that when she turns 90, that's it - it's goodbye. That will not be the case at all.'
While Kate is a regular face in the royal box at Wimbledon, the Queen has attended the championships just three times since her first appearance in 1957.'
The Duchess, a lifelong tennis fan and keen player, will no doubt be delighted with the patronage. We see Kate in the Royal Box cheering on British number one Andy Murray almost every year and it's clearly something she's passionate about. It's a perfect match!
With the Queen and Prince Philip approaching their 90th and 95th birthdays respectively, this year it makes perfect sense to pass some of their patronages down to younger royals and to decrease their workload. It's really incredible how much they do for their age.
It's reported the news will be announced officially during the championship this summer.
************
Next, we have updates on restocked and updated items worn by the Duchess. First, we have news on the L.K. Bennett Lasa and Detroit dresses.
The Bree Floral Dress is the new season update for the popular poppy print Lasa. The £250 dress is described: "knee-length silhouette-skimming style features a floral brushstroke print arranged on a crisp black backdrop." It comes in red floral and lime floral.
 |
| L.K. Bennett |
The tailored Amy Dress is very similar to Kate's Detroit dress. "A beautifully tailored dress is a wardrobe essential and Amy won't disappoint. With a classic shape designed to flatter, we love the artfully placed seams and the fold-over detail on the neck."
 |
| L.K. Bennett |
Kate's popular Beulah London Brisa scarf has been restocked for a limited time only. The modal cashmere shawl comes in a playful print.
 |
| Beulah London |
Kate's elegant Roland Mouret Ella Gown is back in stock in most sizes at Net-A-Porter. I was chatting about this on Twitter and one lady noted it's interesting to see a high-end piece available again after all this time. It's a favourite of mine and I hope it gets a third outing. :)
And last but not least the US version of Kate's Russell & Bromley Half N Half boots, the Stuart Weitzman Mezzaluna tall suede boots, are discounted from $625 to $399 at Saks off 5th.
************
It appears the Cambridges didn't join the Middletons for their annual holiday to Mustique, but perhaps they will take a trip for their fifth wedding anniversary instead. Looking ahead to this month, there's talk Kate has recorded a video message for Children's Mental Health Week, and if so, we should see it over the next week. The Duchess has an engagement with the RAF Air Cadets on Sunday. I expect we'll see an engagement announcement or two during the week too. :)
Except for the Dec and Ant part, it is all good news. Hope Kate wears the Ella gown again with her hair in a different updo and with some dazzling new earrings. The Queen sure does get to enjoy a lot of celebrations and rightly so.
ReplyDeleteWhat an AMAZING life she has had.
So glad Kate gets to do the tennis thing. Hopefully stabilizing to some extent,considering the recent tensions in that sport. I wonder if Andy Murray baby has arrived yet. And, no offense to anyone who likes Serena, but I am so glad someone else got a chance to win the Australian Open. The semi-final prior to that was more like a heavyweight boxer fighting a delicate little lotus flower, or banty weight. It was pathetic. The girl didn't stand a chance. Perhaps they should refine the tennis categories more like they do in boxing. Heavy weight against heavy weight, light weight against light weight. Make it more of a level playing field. (And NO I am not calling Serena fat or heavy.) I think everyone knows what I mean. (sorry, I digress.) It will be nice to see Kate enjoying her new position in tennis unlike the Queen who wasn't so keen on it. Love, love, love tennis.
I agree with you about having a different outcome this year at the Australien Open. I think both played well, Serena is a very tough opponent even if she is what like 34. I enjoyed Angie's stamina and she fought bravely which paid off.
DeleteI am not surprised that it was not the queen's fave sport, lots of people find it boring. Me myself love it though!:-)
The Queens father king George VI was a tennis player. He played at Wimbledon when he was the Duke of York.
DeleteI'm sorry but I truly don't know what you mean. Why exactly should there be different categories?
DeleteThe girl who played Serena in the women's final was a slip of a girl. Serena is beautiful but certainly not a slip of a girl. Serena's muscle mass in her arms and leg, density wise and circumcumfernce wise designate a huge a advantage over those dimensions on the other girl. In boxing, you wouldn't put those stats together in the ring, for obvious reasons. You have heavyweight against heavyweight, lightweight against lightweight, etc. In the semi-final, it was heavyweight against banty weight.
DeleteAnd again, I am not calling Serena fat or the other girl a wimp. They are both fit and trained.
Just to two different categories as I explained.
If you watch the exit interview by the slip of a girl that I am talking about (sorry, I don't recall her name), she pretty much says exactly what I just said.
15:05,
DeleteIt seems playing tennis heavenly and for long span of time and frequently enough ( typical of the professional players) affects some muscle mass in arms and legs for some of the women. Many people find Serena's body beautiful in consideration of the sport she plays,her own body and personality, and the fact that she won several times. If she did not play tennis, her body may not have looked built the way it does. If she was not a tennis player, some might have found her body built more on muscular side.
It would be interesting to see Serena play an exhibition match against a man (but a bit younger than Bobby Riggs was, ha) Anika Sorenstam played a golf match against men pro golfers and did okay.
DeleteI think that would be a good thing Barbara. A fairer fight for sure. And what a box office draw that would be also.
DeleteThis is a pretty messed up discussion given that Serena is black and it's a common stereotype that black people just have an unfair physical advantage that discredits their intelligence (and is actually very similar to the stereotype that began/justified slavery). I realize no one has talked about it in terms of race, but it's still important to consider that when talking about these things. There's nothing "unfair" about that matchup, unless now we are calling it "unfair" when one player is one of the greatest of all time because of working incredibly hard. Lets not forget that there are some disadvantages to larger muscle mass. And muscle mass is, to a certain extent, the result of training. Serena is a very very very good tennis player. She has a great tennis mind. Its not her body that gets her success.
DeleteGiven in the context of boxing it isn't messed up at all. And I didn't sense one iota of racial slur.
DeleteI think Serena's talents and efforts were nicely stated. The points brought up were logical ones.
Yes I wish that this discussion would be shut down. Somehow I don't recall anyone having this kind of discussion when Monica Seles was destroying every game in sight and crushing people left and right with her "muscle". In fact, then she was being lauded for being so strong ! No won ever suggested that she should only play men.
DeleteTo the original poster who alluded to the fact that Serena is too beefy to play other women, I would really urge you to try and answer to yourself whether you would ever say this about a white person. Your idea may be coming from a place that is quite... problematic.
I think that you are also going by false assumptions. Tennis is won through strategizing and skill in placing the ball. Quick thinking and anticipation. Just hitting a ball hard won't win you a game. If that were the case then the heavier person would always win. Then men would always win over women etc. etc. That is not always the case, as you must know.
I am really surprised that this discussion is being allowed on this blog. Cruz and Trump must have fans who think along similar lines. Makes me wonder about who are these people that are fans of the royals.
Tbh I think some of you take things way too seriously. Just my two cents
DeleteAnon 19:59, I totally agree with you. The comments were fair, logical, even gracious. There was no hint of anything inappropriate, and certainly nothing as personal as Anon 20:31's own closing remark.
DeleteI have to jump in here. While I have no thoughts at all on tennis I have to defend the original posters. I, personally, had no thought in my mind when reading those comments on anything other than her body type. Her colour had not even entered my mind. So I think the discussion about bodytype can be totally separate from her colour. I mean... yes, it's possible that some racial thoughts might be behind some people talking about that... But for me, personally, her colour didn't even enter my mind reading those posts.
DeleteSigh! I haven't posted in almost a year, but I just had to say this. As a black woman myself, having to live with the suggestion that our bodies are threatening or monstrous in comparison to other women's -- the "delicate little lotus flower" -- is not new; it's just really tiresome. For black women in the limelight like Serena or Michelle Obama, constantly being referred to as masculine and monstrous is part of the norm for them. For the latter, comparisons to other first ladies, such as Jackie Kennedy, are usually constructed in terms that ascribe masculine qualities to Michelle and feminine ones to Jackie. The racial implications are quite clear. And, yes, at times the comments are excused and explained away and as being kind and gracious to Michelle for being strong and assertive or to Serena for having a powerful body. The trouble is that today much racial prejudice is masked or unconsciously articulated even. Some people making these remarks about black women are unaware that in their subconscious minds black bodies are already associated with the monstrous, the threatening. Just my two cents.
DeleteCee
Huh?, I totally disagree Cee and am sorry you feel that way. Nice to hear from you though.
DeleteCee, nice to „meet“ you and thanks for commenting! I would very much appreciate if you commented on the following statements. Do you find any of them not to be true or to be offensive, unkind, hurtful, politically incorrect, racist, too much information, etc.?
Delete1. I find it boring when in a sport, for several years in a row, I know in advance which team or player will probably win most of the competitions.
2. As role models I prefer people who do “normal” sport for fitness to people who harm their bodies through professional tennis, Olympic gymnastics, body building, etc.
3. I prefer how the bodies of people that are doing sports with moderation look.
4. My friend exercises more than I. You can see it in our bodies.
5. Angela Merkel’s body looks like she exercises less than Barack Obama.
6. Females in general have lower total muscle mass than males, and also have lower muscle mass in comparison to total body mass.
7. A person’s body type has nothing to do with the ethnic origin of the person.
Hi Charlotte! I am so excited for this upcoming documentary. I still watch the first interview with William & Kate on occasion, and I think Kate's natural inclination toward one-on-one conversation will shine in that setting. Thanks for another great post!
ReplyDeleteLacy, I am so glad you said you watch the engagement Interview from time to time. I was beginning to wonder about myself, lol. That's okay though, I guess, as I have watched "Gone With the Wind" more than once for sure. ah, romance......
Deleteonly W/K's will have the happiest of endings.
Haha, I also watch their engagement interview from time to time when I have a bad day or need some distraction. It's like "visiting an old friend" :P
DeleteThat it is, Rebecca. I do the same thing. Funny, I wonder how many of us here do that.
DeleteSuch a delicious, newsy post, Charlotte! What a treat after such a quiet month! Thank you:)) Cannot wait for the documentary:)
ReplyDeleteWhat exactly is involved when one assumes a patronage?
ReplyDeleteGert's Royal provided this link to me on Twitter. It explains what a patronage is.
Deletehttp://gertsroyals.blogspot.com/2016/01/dictionary-of-royal-terms.html?m=1
Barbara, that was addressed in either the post before this one or the one before that. And I think the duties, protocols and responsibilities vary with each different patronage.
DeleteThank you both!
DeleteIt's great to hear the news!
ReplyDeleteDo you know what channel the Queen's birthday will be on in the U.S.?
It's good to hear all this news! Especially that the clothes are out new. Thank you so much for this post update! Have a great afternoon!
Hello,
DeleteIt will be broadcast on ITV, there's no word on plans to broadcast it in the US, however I'm certain it will be uploaded on YouTube within a day of airing :)
Thank you!
DeleteI will be sure to watch it. I wish it was on TV in the U.S., but I will be sure to look it up on YouTube
Also - Royal events usually air in Canada, so if you happen to live in part of the US that gets Canadian channels (some of my friends in Michigan do) you might find it on our CBC or CTV Networks :) :)
DeleteI'm waiting for Queen's 90th birthday with impatience! And of course, for Cambridges tour to India & Bhutan. It will be really amazing months for us, the Royal Fans! :)
ReplyDeleteI'm glad to see Kate taking over Wimbledon! This certainly isn't meant as a criticism of the Queen, but it's always been clear that QEII wasn't keen on tennis, so it's nice to see the patronage go to someone who has a genuine interest in the sport.
ReplyDeleteI am very glad too!
DeleteExactly. This seems like a perfect fit for all. Wimbledon finally gets a patron who actually wants to be there, Kate get's a seal of approval of being there and the Queen gets one less thing to worry about :) It makes sense that the patronages she is letting go of first is the sports ones :)
DeleteCharlotte I am beyond excited at this news. Catherine is the perfect ambassador for this. This shows that we have to wait for the Royals to set the tone and not for us to speculate so wildly sometimes. The Queen knows the right moment to give up some charities. Thank you for this news. It's the best way to wake up to on a Monday morning.
ReplyDeleteI love these new L.K. Bennett dresses, I think this snorkel blue is my all time fave. Thanks for the update!
ReplyDeleteFrom the documentary I do not expect a lot, I was a bit disppointed with the last Ant and Dec docu. I think their engagement interview was really honest. The rest is all about smiling and general statements.
Finally, I suppose they either took into consideration this awful virus or simply they did't find the time or the energy to start a journey with 2 little ones.
Or (don't shoot me :P ) since William had time of during Christmas and Will have engagements and the India tour and the Queens celebrations and such this spring, he's working. Maybe not because he wouldn't be "allowed" to take extra time of, but because he really wants to do a good job and be one of the gang as much as he can.
DeleteIf the multiple reports of William taking three weeks off at Christmas are true, then I don't think it seems like he wants to be one of the gang and do a good job. But I hope that you are correct, Rebecca!
DeleteWhy do we speculate on things we have no firm confirmation of. Whether or not William had time off at Christmas is no concern of mine. I enjoy seeing them when they "appear" at a function. I think they are a charming couple, and an asset to England. That's it, and cheap at the price. Just go hire a PR firm to do what the RF does, and then talk to me about the cost. William and Catherine are the greatest asset, along with the Queen and Prince Philip, that England has.
DeleteWhy indeed, Tedi.
Delete: ) royalfan
DeleteI rather think both Annet and Rebecca are correct (which speaks so well of TRHs'), and I quite agree with Tedi. What a lovely post - so much more to look out for than usual this spring. Many thanks as always, Charlotte.
DeleteThis past weekend, I was window shopping in Palm Beach Florida and noticed a couple of dresses in the Escada store window that would be perfect for Kate. Has she ever worn this brand in public? If only I could figure out how to add links from their site...meanwhile, check out their site and see what I mean. The Glamana and Gertrude gowns, with their lace accents, would be beautiful for her rare dressy evenings. The Datjana has her silhouette and the longer length she's been favoring lately.
ReplyDeleteI think Lilly Pulitzer would be a nice brand for Kate also, speaking of palm beach and dresses there.
DeleteI would like to see Kate design some dresses for herself. I think she has once or twice but the dresses were very similar to each other. I would love to see the Ella gown on Kate with the Cambridge livers knot tiara. And I want to her to wear Beulah brand often. Clothes that help people.
oops, let's make that "lover's" knot. much better.
DeleteKate would rock Lilly Pulitzer.
DeleteI love Lilly Pulitzer. So feminine, fresh and bright.
DeleteLilliy's family is the "Pulitzer" prize family so there are more nuances than just sartorial that would be good for Kate wearing the brand. Lilly's designs are so fun.
Diana wore Escada - maybe not my favourites of her outfits but they have some lovely things now. It does seem possible Kate might too.
DeleteAnon 17:16, it's fascinating you mention the Escada evening collection. I personally quite liked the Garosa and Gabalu numbers for the Duchess (and I normally lack the imagination to say 'oh, this would look so lovely on this or that lady'. Julia, am I incorrect in thinking that the late Princess wore mostly day numbers from Escada? I think Escada day numbers are far more appropriate for elderly ladies like myself. But a few of the evening gowns this year look almost made for the younger generation, and several are ageless, in my opinion.
DeleteYes, I only remember day clothes - and yes, they did seem at the time more suited for eldery ladies such as - well, myself right now, but not then! I'll have to take a peek at the evening gowns.
DeleteI can't wait to see the documentary. What a lovely and fitting tribute to Queen Elizabeth. The spring promises to bring an abundance of events. It will be an exciting time in the UK. I think Kate is a perfect choice for the tennis patronage. Considering HM has only attended Wimbledon three times, it's a wonder it took this long.
ReplyDeleteYes, Tedi, Kate is an excelling choice. Considering some of the royal tennis fans in the RF, I'm surprised it took the Queen this long to hand it over.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI look forward to the documentary, and am especially interested in Kate's contribution to it.
DeleteAs far as Ant and Dec are concerned, well, it does make sense. The humor has a place in setting the tone and making the RF appear more human and relevant.
If you can sort through all Ant and Dec's chaos it might make sense. But why should it take the extra effort? There are a lot of capable, entertaining people who could do it better perhaps. Just have to make the most of it I guess.
DeleteI see your point Royalfan, and there certain;y is a place for humour and relevancy, but I can't agree on Ant and Dec. They are best know for the worst sort of undignified reality TV - for "I'm a celebrity"! Humour is one thing, but mugging at the expense of your subject is another.
DeleteWhile William and Harry came off well enough, Charles frankly looked a proper fool and hopelessly staid, with Ant and Dec's larking about.
Everyone who saw that programme that I know felt the same - I have no idea why the palace thinks it was a success - numbers alone mean people wanted to see about the Prince's Trust - not that they liked how the show was done.
The hundreds of horsemen and women, all those who support them, the forces, the horses themselves, and the pageantly of the Queen's birthday celebration deserve far more dignaty than that pair will offer. There are plenty of other popular people that could have chosen.
The muck-up Simon Cowell made of his meeting with Charles and Camilla last night - being hours late and inappropriately dressed, should show how badly fleeting pop culture and royals mix. Even DM readers didn't like that type of conduct mixed with royalty - and abhorred the lack of respect.
Thank goodness Ant and Dec aren't involved in the interviews - I have to say this is once where I think Camilla and I agree- she wouldn't even sit down when she spoke to them.
I just hope it doesn't turn into an Ant and Dec show off - look how adorable I am - fiasco - leaving the queen and family saying on what should be a celebration of her ninety years- "I'm a royal, GET ME OUT OF HERE!"
Julia, we may not agree on the final product, but perhaps we can agree that A&D were asked to do the program. In my mind, the choice reflects a recognition of what is missing/needed as Charles presents himself to the public. And I have a different view of Camilla's brief interview; I don't believe the length had anything to do with her personal feelings regarding A&D. I do believe that the documentary was intended to highlight Charles' role and his contributions, while downplaying her royal rank and putting her in a more supportive role. If I had to come up with one word to describe the overall presentation, I would say it was strategic.
DeleteAMEN AND AMEN TO THAT JULIA. I AM IN FERVENT AGREEMENT.
DeleteYou could be right, Royalfan, although lately Camilla has been taking a very assertive royal role of her own - her numbers in the Hello! poll were abysmal as usual - and there seems to be a campaign on the part of Clarence House to umm - rebrand her, so people will want her crowned.
DeleteSince she's always Charles' best little cheerleader (sarcasm intended - that play on Charles had her pegged correctly in my mind as more a gushing yes-woman than a thoughtful partner) I don't think she would have drawn too much attention away from the subject matter.
So it remains uncertain why they picked a time to speak to her when she was clearly in a hurry to get to another event - her choice, Ant and Dec's choice, or, as you suggest, the director's choice and whether that was to highlight Charles' contributions or because she wasn't seen as an likely asset to the show but Charles wanted her to speak.
I do seem to be playing the cat here - Bluhare where are you for a more thoughtful response.
Julia, given how long it took to produce the documentary, if the powers that be wanted Camilla to be featured for more than 3 minutes (literally), it could have been arranged. I truly believe the intent was to highlight Charles while keeping Camilla in a purely supportive role. I also do not think she objected to their humor. She seems quite capable of enjoying, and benefiting, from such a presentation.
DeleteAs Buckingham Palace pointed out, the Queen's 90th birthday will prove to be a game changer. Not that she will give up all her patronages, but certainly start allocating some to different members of the RF. William and Harry's are a perfect fit too. Fun post.
ReplyDeleteLove that photo of the queen in black and white - the brooch is perfect with that outfit - but then I'm brooch-obsessed.
ReplyDeleteGood news about Kate's part in the documentary on the queen. It is a very safe forum for her to speak out - royal arranged, with many other interviews and with the safest of all topics - but delightful regardless.
Bad news about Ant and Dec - with their mugging, their calling attention to themselves at the expense of their subject, their emphasis in that last documentary on all the the things -the fancy houses, the lifestyle of royalty that shouldn't be emphasised - well, if this is the face of the "new" monarchy, it's enough to make this old royalist turn republican. In fact, they are a gift to the repubcans - and when there are so many other perfectly acceptable modern choices - well, I'll stop ranting, but don't know that I can bear to watch either - as much as I love horses.
As for horses, unless they started playing tennis on horseback, I don't think it would be the queen's favourite sport. No wonder she has only attended three times- Kate will be an excellent replacement. I always suspected they meant for Diana to take it over, except the marriage went wrong so very quickly. She loved tennis. Possibly, Sophie may take over from the Duke of Kent sooner or later as president.
While Charles may want to streamline the monarchy, I suspect Sophie and Anne will be kept active for some time - they are both quite popular and hard-working.
I always suspected the Indian tour would be reasonably short as they won't want to leave the children too long. But a week seems very short indeed - maybe ten days.
I think it was quite wise if they didn't go to Mustique. Even if there was no danger, there would be talk. They might go skiing or to the Maldives instead.
I don't like that floral dress at all - too garish, but the others are nice. That white is a classic - I remember Carolyn Kennedy wearing a very similar one - she had a slash of red lipstick and looked fabulous. I loved her unique style.
Julia, you summed up my critique of Dec and Ant precisely. With "friends" like them the RF doesn't need enemies. I wanted to box those boys ears and set them down in a corner and tell them not a peep until they could straighten up and fly right. :)
DeleteAnd your comment about the Queen not fancying tennis as much unless it's played on horseback was approp and funny.
SO exciting! Thanks for the great post- again:) The tennis patronage and the interview for the Queen's documentary are both great Kate stories to wake up to on a Monday morning. Also excited to see the Countess of Wessex included more!
ReplyDeleteWhat a lovely post and surprise! I'm sure the program will be wonderful and full of great moments over her 90 years. What a sweet gift to have the tributes from her family members. The ITV program will definitely be something we can all look forward to. There will be many events over the coming months to celebrate HM, so I guess there will be many tributes and events to look forward to! When you stop and think of her life all she has seen and done, it really is amazing. I had not commented on the last blog post, Jewels with Connections to India, but the pictures of the Queen in her younger days were stunning. She really is beautiful. Looking at the picture above, she still has the same sweet smile. She has had a marvelous reign and life and definitely one deserving of many celebrations!
ReplyDeleteI love that Kate will be taking over the patronage of the All England Lawn Tennis and Croquet Club. It has been mentioned several times in the past that this could happen and as Charlotte mentioned, I think one that Kate will be excited about and definitely enjoy. I think we can all safely say Kate will be making many appearances as patron.
I read on another website that William and Kate will be undertaking the tour of India in late March. Charlotte, could that be a possibility? As for the interview, I do hope this is the first of many opportunities to hear from Kate. Maybe a documentary on the Cambridges will come in the future. :) So much to look forward to this spring! Thanks for the post!
I think Kate's probably feeling a bit more confident speaking publicly, or in an interview, and didn't want to miss the opportunity to be part of this. It's something she would probably have regretted not being part of in the future, moments (and monarchs!) like this do not come around often. So I'm glad she will be part of it.
ReplyDeleteI already commented on the patronage in the last post, so I'm repeating a little, but clearly it's an obvious choice. The Queen was not one for attending Wimbledon and Kate is an admitted tennis enthusiast. Also it's a high profile patronage so a high profile royal is appropriate. I'm sure there will be more "hand-offs" like this in the near future, I think the Queen wants to have some input while she can.
It's been reported that Sophie was interested in the patronage as well, of course the position of club President will be available when the Duke of Kent steps down. That's maybe more high profile and public.. given the President awards the trophies.
It's certainly interesting to watch the changing of the guard play out! And Roya Nikkah is another great royal correspondent, has some great sources.
Kate taking on Wimbledon is very welcome news and you are right, the perfect fit. There were some earlier this morning that said it wasn't true so I hope it holds up. Going only 3 times in almost 60 years is so few and Kate seems to be there every year so her being patron would be a point, set, match. (LOL, think that how it goes in tennis :-)).
ReplyDeleteHarry taking on Patron of the English Rugby team is also a great fit as he was tremendously active in the games this last year. I thought William was president of FA so would he serve in both or would someone else become president instead of William if he turns to patron? Why not make him Patron of Welsh Rugby? Isn't that held by the Queen too?
Exciting times it seems this year. I can't imagine going all the way to India for just 1 week, that would be a fast/exhausting trip. And to try and fit Bhutan in there as well...
I can't wait for this year to get started already!!
Yeah, the India and Buthan tour sounds like it will be intense! To try fitting in 2 countries and multiple fields and engagements during a week or some days more. Makes very much sense not to bring the children since it will probably be an unusually packed scheduel!
DeleteI hope it won't just be a week...India is a very, very diverse country, and you cant really get a feel for it until you go to several different cities in the north and south.
DeleteI think it's important to remember that this particular trip is being undertaken at the request of the British government and not a BRF trip. So the length of stay and engagements scheduled will be set by the government, with likely input from W&K, but definitely a working trip. So only going for a week or so and not taking the kids fits in perfectly with the purpose of the endeavour.
DeleteThat is it, Marny.
DeleteHi Marny, I don't consider it personal travel as in vacation and know from experiences that working trips are slammed with activities and very tiring. A week doesn't seem long enough to travel all the way to India from the UK, to really get a feel for the country (quite large and diverse, visit Bhutan at the same time, and then travel all the way back to the UK. The travel to and from probably takes a day itself. Very exhausting in deed if it is only 7 days long.
DeleteI do agree that it is a business trip.
DeleteAnd it may be W&K's first trip to India, but it will not be their last. They have a lifetime of royal tours ahead of them and I'm sure they will visit other cities, etc.
It will be a working trip - not even a busman's holiday but there always is some showing off of famous sites - and William's and Kate's Australian tour did include a lot of fun things for the royals - it was a bit light weight. I'm thinking India will be more serious. The country is so diverse that I hope there will be visits to various areas.
DeleteI don't know about the Taj - there will be certainly pictures put next to the one of Diana alone - (It seems Charles was meant to go with her and backed out.) But it would seem too bad for William and Kate to miss it just because of a photo. Their love can stand triumphant before it.
I am so excited for the new patronage!!!! I love tennis. Do you think we will get to see the Duchess engage in the sport herself a little at events?
ReplyDeleteOooh! Can't wait to see the documentary!
ReplyDeleteAnd can anyone tell me what a royal patron actually does? What little I've seen doesn't look too taxing!
Charlotte,
ReplyDeleteWe should all get together on The Duchess Kate Blog
and send The Queen an electronic "Happy 90th Birthday" card from you, your hubby and all of us.
Is that even possible????????
Your hubby could help you with the tech stuff and even maybe with the design and then we could all somehow "sign" it and send it forth with lots of xo, xo, xo's. :)
Can we huh, can we? :)
THAT IS SUCH A GOOD IDEA. BRAVO, 22:00.
DeleteCAN IT BE DONE? IF SO, I'M IN.
I wouldn't send a digital one. As far as I've understood it, all posted messages get an answer from someone at the palace. But I've read (I think on their own sites) that they don't answer emails from the public because they get so many.
DeleteOkay. That's good for thought, thanks.
DeleteLet's NOT give up on the Idea though okay?
I think the Queen would be very blessed by our Birthday wishes, and so fun for us to do as a group/community, and so it is worth "brainstorming" to try to get it done. The Queen is going to be 90. It IS worth the effort.
Charlotte, what are your thoughts on this?????
I love the idea!!!! We really should try to think of something!
DeleteI think it a good idea as well. Doing it in a format that will increase the chances of it being read and acknowledged is best. On the actual birthday it might be nice to post messages to HM on this site. Maybe she doesn't see them; however, I'm sure some of the Palace PR people will see it and perhaps draw her attention to it. HM is very tech savvy. It's worth a well thought-out shot.
DeleteI'm sure Charlotte could figure something out as there is lots of lead time.
Yay. Let's do it. somehow. Techies where are you?
DeletePhilly,
DeletePosting LOTS of them on this site sounds like the most viable option and would be even more highly successful if we could all agree to not post any other unrelated comments except Birthday Wishes on that day. If we could post little flowers and balloons with our wishes that would be so pretty but I do not know how to do that.
Philly, I think it might just work as I am convinced that Kate's PR team reads this blog on a regular basis and that some of our thoughts and comments have actually been conveyed.
What do ya'll think about that? Is everyone game?
I think a post dedicated to happy birthday wishes is a lovely idea!
DeleteI like the idea! Is the plan that we will do one post saying Happy Birthday? I am a little confused. Although, I still like the idea of getting the "Happy Birthday" message to the Queen somehow. :)
DeleteAnonymous 1 February 2016 at 22:00, what a fabulous idea. I’m in, too.
DeleteWe could have a “Many happy returns, Ma’am” post with all of us signing, writing a birthday wish or expressing gratitude in the comments section (even adding a little something in all the languages from our different countries). Once the post is closed, Charlotte could have it all printed out and send it through snail mail to the birthday child.
As a Big Thank You, we could also choose 90 of the charities she is patron of, give to them and publish in the comments section how much we gave.
We could have a post now where everyone can post one favourite something about the birthday girl: a photo, an outfit, a piece of jewelry, a deed, a speech, … This could be added to the birthday letter or become part of the birthday post content.
We could even design 90 new dresses, coats, hats, pieces of jewelry, … for her, her corgies or her horses. :)
Francis, how fun.
DeleteI will gladly participate. Instructions, for this gal will have to be specific and clear though as I am not as much of a techie as some of ya'll.
I think she would enjoy that all very much, particularly the little addition of greetings in the various languages.
DeleteLove the idea!
DeleteLet's do it!
How are we going to do this?
DeleteA lovely idea - however it is done - I do think a on-line response from a blog like this would be noticed - but written would be fine also.
DeleteI prefer doing it on the blog, but written would be okay too.
DeleteWhat does everyone else think? Charlotte??
DeleteAnd speaking of taking care of business as she turns 90, I wonder if the RFO is going to be continued or just left as a practice that was done in history now. I think if it is going to be an ongoing heritage one might appear for Kate even redone without Ivory. I pray this doesn't start the futile debate on whether she has filled her quota to "earn" one. That was not my point nor my intention. Will the RFO survive as a distinguishment.
ReplyDeleteI hope it will continue! Ofc not on ivory. That's why its hard with Kate. If she gets one in ivory of the queen, that's just wierd and openss up alot of ccritisism on William. But if she gets a new material one (while there still exists old ivory ones) it will be seen as wasteful and will also shine a light on the other ladies wearing ivory. I'm not jelaous on their position on that one. And it would be sad if Kate doesnt get one at all because of that. I hope Charles and William will continue it (and also set up some kind of formula for it so it doesn't get as much speculation. Like getting it on marriage/birth or like 3 years after coming of age/getting married in or something) on a different material.
DeleteI don't know if Kate getting it on different material would call attention to the other ladies having rfo's on ivory...the palaces are already full of ivory artifacts, and no one thinks that is wrong considering William's conservation work except for William himself haha. And given that they have managed to handle the perceived hypocrisy of Prince Harry and Prince Phillip hunting endangered species, I highly doubt that Kate not wearing ivory would bring too much attention to the others wearing it. I just think that there is an understanding that there are many royal family traditions and norms that may contradict some of the younger royals' thinking, and that people generally tend to not compare the two much. I do agree that Kate absolutely can't get it on ivory, but I really do think new material wouldn't bring negative attention to the others. Now of course, there is still the question of whether or not the Queen would want it on any other material, but I can't imagine why she would have an issue with it.
DeleteI was wondering, wont she get the RFO that was Princess Diana's? seems like there would be one lying around? then the whole new set for when charles becomes king could be done on something else??
DeleteGood question. What do they do with the RFO's when someone passes?
DeleteWhile orders are preserved and have been resused - I think the ivory issue will preclude the use of Diana's - that Kate's when it comes will be made of something else like enamel - there is no reason not to - orders have been made in the past of different materials. And if it was debuted on a tour - there would not be the comparison with other royal ladies.
DeleteThose variables sound reasonable, Julia. I hope they do continue that as a tradition. What else are they going to put on those sashes? :)
DeleteWith no offense to Rebecca, or to Sweden, I was just noticing how Sofia was immediately given the royal family order and ribbon when the sheen of her glamour model days was barely off her - pun - well, not really intended. I do like the fact the royal family doesn't rush to hand them out immediately - there is some sense they are earned, although there are aspects to the Swedish royal family - such as their open family feeling and christenings that I prefer.
DeleteAnd I should add those who read here regularly will know what I said about Camilla getting the Royal Victorian Order, when Diana, who did so much more, never did. I've meowed enough today to alarm the spaniels already. so I won't repeat it.
I get it Julia. And I kind of agree. I was jsut saying that because it leaves no room for speculations. It's more of "now you're a part of the royal family" and not anything more than putting the name on the website and giving a princess title. I agree that there are some "issues" with it but I like that there are no speculations around it that can amount to people putting thoughts into the queens mind that she doesn't have.
DeleteI am glad that Kate will be taking on the Patronage of Wimbledon With her love of tennis she is the ideal person. It is also pleasing that she has taken part with other Royals in a film of the Queen It will be interesting to see what she has to say.
ReplyDeleteAnother Kate site reports that W & K were seen in London on 27th Jan. does anyone know anymore It would seem only Carole and Mike went to Mystique this year.
On another topic a DM article on Prince Harry and friends implied that Tom van Straubenezee and his wife are divorcing. Does anyone know if this is fact or gossip. Tom is one of Princess Charlotte's godfathers.
I am looking forward to Kate's appearance on Sunday
The more I study the marriage photo of Peter Middleton and his wife Valerie, the most I am convinced that Kate looks more like them than like Michael and Carole. Not unusual genetically speaking I guess.
ReplyDeleteShe does look alot like them from the photos that are available. You would think that with high school year books etc. there would be more photos available, not just the ones that are personal family photos.
DeleteI read where Kate's paternal grandfather, Peter Middleton, retired in 1974. Then he avidly pursued sailing as a hobby. That may be where Kate acquired some of her sailing skills.
So thankful that Dorothy, Peter, Valerie, and perhaps even Valerie's twin sister, most likely knew about Kate being with William and perhaps may have had the opportunity to meet him. Hope Dorothy's family stopped calling her snooty after that just like "waitey katey" got the last and best laugh, I hope Dorothy did also.
DeleteThis might be a dumb question, but Will and Kate did an interview (or at least I considered it an interview) when they went to Denmark for UNICEF. It was only a few minutes long but...is there a reason that isn't counted as their first interview since engagement? Great news about the possible Wimbledon patronage!!!
ReplyDeleteGood for Kate for doing the interview. I wonder when the Queen will give one....
ReplyDeleteHaha, if she hasn't done one by now I highly doubt she will ever do one :P
DeleteIn lieu of "interviews", I think the Queen's Christmas messages speaks volumes about the Queen. The theme of her message is pivotal to every other thing she does in her life. It is her foundation. It is the only message that she gets to write and deliver without any review or censorship from the government.
DeleteExcellent point, Anon. @ 14:36,
DeleteAnd she accomplished all that without all the media circus misconstruing what she meant, what she said, etc. etc. I think you are right, the Queen's Christmas message is her "interview" to all of us. And, what a beautiful one it is. The Queen is one smart cookie.
I do think the queen's Christmas messages count as her "interviews." I think it has to do with a certain aloofness the queen has cultivated that won't really work for the new generation - but certainly works for her. She belonged to a generation - as did my mum - where feelings weren't meant to be shown openly - I remember how stiff she was at the BBC when Philip was in hospital and someone asked her kindly about him - yet we all knew she must be worried to death. While I do deplore a lot of modern culture, old lady that I am - I think the willingness of the younger royals to show their feelings more is a positive thing.
DeleteHow exciting!! Kate's first interview! I feel like i've been waiting forever for that! Lol! I'm looking forward to seeing the documentary! I would love to hear Kate talk about her relationship with the Queen...but i think what i REALLY want to hear about is the Queen's relationship with George & Charlotte. Fingers crossed that either Kate or William will talk about that!!
ReplyDeleteRandom sweet comment about Kate from the man responsible for the trees in the Abbey on the wedding day:
ReplyDeleteIt was a huge honor and an even greater pleasure. HRH was a joy to work with. One story I will share is very typical of her attitude. We had planned an avenue of white blossom trees for Westminster Abbey, but we had to choose instead the very beautiful English field maples. When I told the bride she simply said, “Field maples are so much more English than blossom trees anyway!” I wish that all brides could be so accommodating, calm and aware of nature.
http://www.jacksonsun.com/story/life/2016/01/30/antiques-garden-show-nashville-feb-12-14/79435774/
Thanks so much for posting that, Rebecca. It's a wonderful confirmation of how she comes across.
DeleteI agree, it shows what a lovely person she is.
DeleteWhat a lovely compliment! William found a gem in Kate and it's so nice to hear and read of how sweet she truly is. As you said Royalfan, it's confirmation of her genuineness. Thanks for sharing Rebecca! :)
DeleteI think Kate was made in heaven for William. She fits in so seamlessly into the family.
DeleteAmen, 9:55. Amen.
DeleteWhat a great find Rebecca, glad you shared. Thanks. Most of us know she is a very neat person, but so nice to have some outside verification
DeleteHow many patronages of the queens have been passed to Camilla? Helen-Indiana.
ReplyDeletegood question, 02:02.
DeleteYes 02:02, I wonder how many?
DeleteMy feeling is Camilla doesn't want to take on a whole lot more - she often speaks of how exhausted she is - and she will have a lot of duties to assume when Charles becomes King - no matter what we end up calling her.
DeleteI think you are right about that Julia. I think being a mom and grandmother are her first goals right now.
DeleteWow, Her Majesty is an amazing Lady and an example to us all. I'm so glad Kate and others can fill in her shoes, I believe they will do a brilliant job!
ReplyDeleteI very much enjoy your posts about the Duchess. They are informative, tasteful and thankfully, without media influence. Looking forward to hearing about the Queen's birthday and the Cambridge tour of Bhutan.
ReplyDeleteduchess Catherine first solo interview I think that last interview that I remember is their engagement way back 2010 when she joined her prince joint interview im looking forward to that the duchess and her prince reported miss the annual gateway hmm the new patronages a pefect one for the duchess she love tennis looking forward too that is prince harry dating American socialite
ReplyDeleteWonderful news about the documentary. I truly enjoyed the documentaries for her diamond jubilee, I remember the one where Prince Charles showed old videos and commented them. You could truly sense how much he respects and loves his mother. It will most certainly be interesting so see what the Duchess of Cambridge has to say although somehow I am almost more interested in the interview with Camilla. Quite a history those two have together.....
ReplyDeleteApart from that I will certainly just enjoy watching a documentary about a truly amazing lady who, even at the age of 90, still manages to have an impact even so her role itself is quite limited (remember her speech last year in Germany when she certainly made HER opinion regarding Europe well known - although the Palace quickly confirmed it was an altogether "non-political" speech - haha...).
As far as the passing on of the Wimbledon-patronage is concerned, well that is a no-brainer! Kate loves tennis and will surely be pleased to take a more active role as she loves the game and she loves Wimbledon (which I can totally understand... ;-))) )
I can understand William and Kate not desiring to be away from two very young children. However, how can one take on and enjoy India and the beautiful happy Bhutan. It would make for a very rushed trip. I was looking forward to seeing this unique trip and touring along with them.
ReplyDeleteIt would be really nice for them and everyone else if they took George and Charlotte with them on this tour.
DeleteTo be honest though, they are not there for their enjoyment. They are not there to see the places. That is a bonus thing. Prince Charles used to take time to draw and sketch the places he visited but since the scheduels are getting heavier (the last 15-20 years or so) he doesn't have time for that so brings different unpaid british artists to paint from the tours. So while they get to do fun things and see great places, that's not the purpose or something they can take too heavily into consideration.
DeletePlus I'm also sure the times frame doesn't favour them. Unless the tour is pushed to summer or autumn. Which for some reason I do not see happening
DeleteRebecca is exactly right. It's a business trip. And I can fully understand the children being left at home. For many reasons.
DeleteI bet they will still enjoy the trip even if it's a short one. In any case, they can always go back in the future if they want a more leisurely stay.
DeleteJulia, I agree.
ReplyDeletewhen I heard about the upcoming interview I was so excited, just like a little puppy. I had a smile on my face, my ears were all perked up and my tailing was definitely wagging. Then, I heard about Dec and Ant and the smile left, my ears dropped and my tail stopped wagging and I felt like going over to my comfy corner cushion to sulk and purposefully destroy a doggie toy or two, lol.
Sorry, but those men are not on teen tv anymore and they need to grow up. If the PR team thinks that those two are the way to bridge the RF with the "common" man they are grossly mistaken and not just a little trapped in their own arrogance. People are way more sophisticated these days. It is not the Middle Ages or even the 50's. Another opportunity missed.
Anon 2 Feb 2016 15.43
DeleteThere are two TV events that are being discussed.
First TV Event- The Documentary by Oxford Film and Television, producers of The Queen At Ninety - with the Royal Family interviews (including William and Catherine). This documentary includes other interviews with significant individuals and is to be two hours aired sometime this Spring 2016. There is no notice of Ant and Dec hosting this program
Second Event TV Event- The The Queen’s 90th Birthday Celebration which is a 90 minute live show that will performed for her Majesty's birthday celebration May 12-15, 2016 from the private grounds of Windsor Castle. Ant and Dec are the television hosts for the show that will be aired sometime during 2016. The Queen is scheduled to attend the last night of this event.
You can perk back up - it appears that no Ant or Dec (so far?) on the program you were looking forward to with the Catherine interview.
I didn't know about Ant and Dec before the Prince's trust interview, and while I agree that they're not my taste, there's no denying that they're popular. On the "already royalist" forums they don't seem to hit the right note (but forgive me for saying, we are more traditionalist) but it seems they are reaching a new audience for the royals and that is probably the whole point. So while they are not resonating with the already "coverted" royal following, they are reaching new people that generally are not drawn towards royalty. For example, I saw alot of people congratulating Ant and Dec on twitter on a great show but also throw in a line of "I had no clue Charlie had done all that" so in that case his work did actually get new spread. That + them originating from the princes trust makes them a "clever" although a bit irritating choice. In my opinion ofc!
DeleteThanks, 20:57
DeleteAs an American, I too did not know Ant and Dec before the recent Prince's Trust interview. But over the years, I have watched Charles in other documentaries and he *can* come across as being stuffy and out of touch, almost Edwardian at times. I think Ant and Dec absolutely served a purpose. If two versions of the interview were available (one with them and one without), I think more people would appreciate their input. I would have watched the interview anyway, but for others A&D may have been "the spoon full of sugar to make the medicine go down" as Mary Poppins would say. :)
DeleteIt was more like salt to me RF, no offense.
DeleteNo offense, Anon. :)
DeleteThey aren't there as tourists. It is business. They have their political agendas for being there and will accomplish those, God-willing, even if it is just a goodwill visit, which is a powerful thing in and of itself.
ReplyDeleteI think it would be a disservice to the children to take them so far for such a short junket. Children need their regular routines. There will be time for touring in the future. They have their nanny to be with them at home to help buffer their parent's brief absence. Carole and Michael will most likely help fill in also. Yes, they did take George before but two children make the task a little busier to say the least about that.
That puppy analogy was sooooo cute, lol. I could soooo relate. I wanted a good interview before and I wanted a good interview this time. Dear heavens, I would get a new PR team if I were William and Kate and for SO, SO, SO many reasons. Any extra doggie toys left? :)
ReplyDeleteEveryone here is alive and hopefully healthy as is the RF. No one is being slaughtered in coffee shops, etc.(knock on wood), so can we just have some kindness and peace and enjoy each other and enjoy being alive.
ReplyDeletewell I think they will let princess charlotte to the royal tour then leave prince George to his grandparents and his nanny since prince George is in the nursery or maybe they will take their children in tour
ReplyDeleteI hope we get to see more photos of George and Charlotte again soon.
ReplyDeleteHello everyone!
ReplyDeleteLove the ideas about HM's birthday. I'll look into the best way to do it :)
Also, Kensington Palace has confirmed Kate will edit the Huffington Post on the 17th February.
And for those asking about the duration of the India tour, I'm told it's going to be relatively short with one reporter hearing it will be just six days long, however, with Bhutan I'd be surprised if it's less than eight days.
Thanks Charlotte, :)
DeleteHere's a Kate tidbit in Ephraim Hardcastle's column - though he didn't mention when this happened. From column:
ReplyDelete"Sir Roger Moore, 88, and wife, Kristina, were bumped out of their front row seats ‘for operational reasons’ on a London-Glasgow flight. ‘They wouldn’t say why,’ he says. ‘Just then, HRH The Duchess of Cambridge boarded, with her protection officers, and all became clear. Happily she spotted us and had a little chat.’"
For security reasons, most likely. Last on, first off, and if she is seated in the front, no one is walking back and forth during the flight.
DeleteCharlotte,
ReplyDeleteHave you ever gotten The Duchess Kate Blog logo and format copyrighted? Or is that automatically done upon publishing the blog? Perhaps when TDKB t-shirts, etc. are available that might be necessary?
Hi Charlotte, I found this article on line that gives a lot of details regarding the Huffington Post edit on 17 Feb. Thought it would be good to have if you do another post on this engagement.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.ibtimes.co.uk/kate-middleton-launch-new-hashtag-raise-awareness-childrens-mental-health-issues-1541731
Thank you for the link, Julie. I do agree with you about highlighting the engagement.
DeleteWhat I did not like about the article was the references to Kate Middleton, especially in the headline. Ironically, it was almost as if the journalist isn't recognizing Kate's role/status, which is precisely the reason HP wants her onboard. Five years (just shy of it) and two children later, I think it's time to let go of Kate's maiden name, and the name recognition argument just doesn't fly at this point. Sorry to go on :) but it did strike me as being somewhat disrespectful.
Well I did point out that the day the guest editor engagement was announced, the Huffington Post themselves tweeted "Kate Middleton to guest edit for us" ... not exactly an auspicious start to a royal engagement, but no one seemed to be troubled by that :)
DeleteOf course the HuffPost is notorious for click bait, and a recent article found the most searched name for Kate is still "Kate Middleton" and the name "Kate Middleton" still gets the most clicks in links etc, over an identical article with name "Duchess of Cambridge" (article from last year, worth reading) I do think the Duchess title isn't headline friendly, which is why the American People magazine push "Princess Kate" to death!
And as you all keep reminding me, the internet and online sites dominate right now. Just as the tabloids dominated in Diana's day and so the tabloid favorite "Lady Di" hung around for years after the wedding.
I'm sure the "Kate Middleton" headlines irk William more than anyone, but I think it's also a sign of the times. Women today don't readily change their names with marriage and often keep their maiden name for professional reasons, so maybe don't see it as that disrespectful at all. Calling her Kate Middleton is maybe more respectful to some, if that makes sense.
I personally think in time it will change, especially after the Queen's reign and maybe if/when she has the title "Princess of Wales"... but who knows, it's a new world and maybe Kate Middleton will stick to Coronation Day!
You are spot on royalfan. She hasn't been Kate Middleton in 5 years. Time to refer to her by her royal titles.
DeleteRF, I have not liked such references these past five years. Thank you for mentioning it.
DeleteI agree with Claudia. I see nothing disrespectful calling her KM. Times are different and changing. On the other hand, as she is an asset :-) and their rel.ship was made in heaven :-), does anybody truly care what her name or title is? I think what she does in her position will define her and not the labels.
DeleteFor all we know, she may be referrred to as Kate Middleton in her personal life. I kept my maiden name both personally and professionally, and consider it my true identity, who I really am. I'm offended to be referred to as Mrs. ( my husband's last name), actually. I understand that Kate has a title but she may not be as offended by the Kate Middleton appellation as some think. She was Kate Middleton for a long time and, I believe, proud of it.
DeleteAlso, in the U.S., many people would not know who the Duchess of Cambridge or Catherine Cambridge is. However, they do know who Kate Middleton is.
Claudia, I have friends who kept their maiden names for professional reasons, but Kate married into the BRF and will be Queen one day. In her case, I do believe it's disrespectful to ignore her status. And quite frankly, "Duchess Kate" is as easy on the headlines as "Kate Middleton", no? :)
DeleteSorry, but I think Kate Middleton sticks because she hasn't taken on a full royal role yet. Let's face it, whatever the reason, it's been the slowest entry into royal life!
DeleteNot trying to start something but if she did more royal work people would see her as a royal. They still see her as a Middleton. She's been off for forever, seriously, when was her last royal engagement?
You can raise children well and still do an engagement or two, many women raise children while working full time!
Erika, I'm sorry, but I will disagree with you here... :)
DeleteI too have an issue with a woman being referred to as "Mrs. John Smith" (trust me...lol), but I think it's worth pointing out that Kate is NOT one of us. When she makes the headlines, she does so as HRH The Duchess of Cambridge, and not as Kate Middleton. When Kate signs her name as "Catherine", without a surname, she does so as a member of the BRF because her marriage and status is a given. Unlike the rest of us, her marriage DID give her a rank and status. And continuing to refer to her as KM *is* disrespectful.
Do people discuss Mary Donaldson, Maxima Zorreguieta, Mathilde Ghislaine, Sophie Rhys Jones, or Camilla Parker Bowles? Or refer to Letizia by her maiden or the surname from her first marriage? NO.
Many people may disagree with me, and that's okay, but my take on the continued reference to KM reflects a certain unwillingness to accept her royal status. And I have my own headline for the journalist who are allergic to the idea ... "Breaking News: The Gal Made It!" ;)
Welll, Huffington Post does use Kate Middleton - so one must think it doesn't bother the lady herself too much - nor the type of gossip they spread.
DeleteI do agree that it's time to use her proper title but the lack of personality in it - and the closeness to the Duchess of Cornwall - is why I think it is often not used. Say just Duchess and we aren't sure which royal lady is meant and William is still most often called Prince William and Charles Prince Charles. Camilla does seem to have lost her old surname for the most part but that was her ex's. Sophie doesn't get her mainen name used - but she was never as much known in the press before her marriage - and her title isn't much used either.
I took my husband's name for convenience but was still proud of my maiden one - but I do think in this case, it is time for the press to use the correct title for royal ladies - although since Kate doesn't like being called Kate - she may not like Duchess Kate any better.
Newswriters and such call her Kate Middleton because that gets more attention than "Duchess of Cambridge". Claudia is right that many people don't know who the latter is. And the media likes to portray her as normal and easygoing, which Kate Middleton says more than her new title/name. My guess is most Google searches of her are with her maiden name too and not her married name, so Any blogger or newswriter or whomever else is hurt in terms of getting their media out there if they don't use her maiden name. It's all about what sells. Sure it would be better if everyone respected her new name but it's not really about that at all.
DeleteRoyalfan I do agree it's as easy to write "Duchess Kate" as "Kate Middleton" or "Princess Kate" but for some reason virtually no one does it. I'm not sure why, but was trying to identify possible reasons in my previous comment. I think the most likely reason is websites go by "clicks" and visits and "Kate Middleton" draws more than "Duchess of Cambridge". Just business.
DeleteIt may be that they think "Duchess" is too old fashioned, conjures images of a Camilla rather than a Kate? (I know you'll like that!) I remember reading (from I think a couple of good reporters) that Kate herself was disappointed with the title, thinking it not youthful enough, was hoping/expecting to be styled publicly as "Princess".
So it's certainly possible she has no problem being referred to by her maiden name, the first point I made was that she chose an outlet that has constantly referred to her as Kate Middleton, that may say something.
And not to be as blunt as Anon, but maybe as she takes on more duties it will change. Again, I personally think it will happen naturally after the Queen's reign when there's no putting off that William and Kate are senior royals.
Hi--look time reader; first time commenting. I think the Kate Middleton usage is because the British Royal Family does not allow "married-ins" to be Princess First Name. All the ones that royalfan mentions immediately became Princess First Name. In our more casual world, to have someone lose her first name and become only the Duchess of Cambridge without a first name just feels off. And of course, even though royal dukes/duchesses are an honor and a higher title than prince/princess who is only child/grandchild of sovereign, it doesn't sound that way to our ears. Just think: Princess Michael (who allegedly hates that she doesn't get to use her first name) and Princess Mabel of the Netherlands are both dubbed princesses but their spouses were outside of the line of succession, but they are dubbed princesses while the D of Cambridge, who will most likely be queen, doesn't get the princess title now. I wonder if King Charles will loosen these rules so that they accord more with what is done in other royal families in Europe and Asia.
DeleteI agree, RF @ 17:03. Although, I do not mind being called by my husband's name. It is an honor to him and he has sweetly kissed my hand more than once in his appreciation of me being "Mrs. .........". Our children also appreciate that I gladly carry the name of their father everyday. Not to start a debate. Just sharing.
DeleteAnon 16.12 I don't agree at all. I think it has 100% to do with online searches, clicks and sellability.
Delete16:12, Kate became HRH The Duchess of Cambridge on her wedding day. That is reality, and it isn't up to journalists or critics to decide whether she is deserving of the title. Although I do think your comment supports part of my original point.
DeleteClaudia, I appreciate the "conjures up" reference. LOL. And no worries, I take something for that. ;)
DeleteI understand what you are saying royalfan :-) I think it goes back to what you often talk about- intent. Do the KM headlines stem from disrespect or something else, such as the business angle that Maggie and Rebecca brought up. It is so hard to speculate on intentions. I will say that most articles will refer to her as the DoC at least once in the body of the article even though the headline says Kate. I never thought the press showed disrespect towards Diana's status but she was often "Princess Di"which wasn't her correct title either. I think what readily identifies Kate to the greatest number of people from various walks of life is probably most widely used. She is primarily identified as KM in American news, don't you think? - and I don't think we have a lack of respect for her position in the RF.
DeleteErika, I really appreciate your comment, including the suggestion that considering intent is not unreasonable.
DeleteRegarding references to KM in American news, no, I do not see it as an unwillingness to recognize her royal title, nor do I believe any disrespect is intended. (Although it *is* incorrect and can be seen as such.)
And yes, "Princess Di" was in the headlines countless times over the years. Correct? No. But it did reflect a recognition that she was a member of the BRF.
I have a very different take on it with Kate. I honestly do. And one just has to browse through some of the unkind, personal comments in the DM, for example, or consider some of the horrible headlines pertaining to Kate or the Middleton family over the years to perhaps see where I am coming from.
I wonder why the ink-blue Jenny Packham gown sees so many outings, but not the other lovely gowns Kate owns. I would love to see the Ella gown again.
ReplyDeleteWe all have our own opinions, and I do not like the Ella gown. The slit is too high, the bust is too tight, the neckline is not flattering for her, and Kate looks best in bright colors. I did not care for her hair or the crystal necklace, either. While I don't think she has to dress as if for a state event if she is going to a film premier, I thought this was a miss.
DeleteAs for L. K. Bennett, the Lasa is one of my least favorite, and the Detroit is maybe my most favorite, of Kate's day dresses. I am underwhelmed by both of the replacements, which seem rather bland versions.
For the Ella gown, it is not one of my favorite outfits the Kate has worn, but I still like it. :)
DeleteThere is a wonderful video of the Queen, reflecting on her life. Most of you have probably watched it, but I thought it was worth mentioning. She is so charming, and there is a poignancy to it.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lh1-9ww_HmM&sns=em
Thank you for posting the link, Tedi. I will check it out... :)
Deleteare Carole and Michael still on Mustique?
ReplyDeleteI know that this will be perceived as negative but please understand that I'm not out to cause trouble. I realise that January is traditionally seen as a quiet time for the Royals but it will be something like six or seven weeks since Kate has had any engagements ,next Sunday will hardly be taxing.I know people will say that there is probably a lot of work going on behind the scenes preparing for the upcoming tour but I imagine most of that is done for her and just needs Kate to O.K the details.Even Charlotte alluded to the fact in her post that she was expecting more engagements to be announced this past week.There is no denying that there is very little going on the moment,between the tour and the Queens Birthday celebrations it will be a busy time for the couple but I guarantee there will be a few weeks off again after the tour.Am I the only one who thinks they need to seriously up the ante or risk a major backlash ?? My other concern is they seem to be becoming more and more reclusive as time goes on, and one can only wonder if long term this is going to be a massive issue as the general concensus is that when they become "full time" working royals this will all just go away and they will suddenly relish the prospect of public life !!!!
ReplyDeleteI agree. I find it disappointing as well. I was expecting her to be out regularly. I think that she may be wanting to cluster her engagements again, although one engagement on the 7th and another "editing" gig on the 17th is hardly a "cluster". I guess that I just don't know what to tell you. If she had engagements between 7th and 17th I expect that they would have been announced by now. So I am letting go of any expectations of seeing her much this month. Perhaps March will be busier? April will have the tour at least.
DeleteI feel like maybe the royal life just has a different cadence than ours and they feel that they need many breaks between events? For example, they are given several weeks to "settle" in to Christmas and have their family time. That is described as a "flurry" in the media. It is strange to me because they do roughly what the entire population does around Christmas - I mean it's a flurry for all of us and they usually don't have to cook a large meal, set the table, and then clean up spotlessly afterwards ! Then they are given another few weeks to get George to "settle" in to nursery. And so on. They just need many breaks between each new thing that happens in their life, I guess.
Trust me. You are not the only one concerned. It amazes me more people don't think Kate's light schedule is not ok. It seems people think Kate can't be a good mom and work hard (which is insulting) and they attack us for wishing Kate worked more as if she had to chose between work and her kids when she can certainly do both
DeleteI'm amazed more royal reporters aren't calling them out for it..especially Richard Palmer
Well, there seems to be plenty of spare time to go around. But on a serious note, I believe HMTQ is on top of it.
DeleteAnonymous 5 February 2016 at 19:40, I don’t perceive what you write as negative. However, my perspective on the current phase of Catherine’s life seems to be a bit different to yours.
DeleteWith most members of the BRF having a rather slow schedule in January, I am comfortable with Catherine having her first public engagement tomorrow. Especially as she & William were the only family members joining the Queen and Prince Philipp to mark the 100th anniversary of the First World War Gallipoli campaign at the Sandringham war memorial on January 10. (Publicly commemorating historical events is one of the most senior things there is in terms of Royal engagements, I suppose.)
As William's back at work, I imagine Catherine to be the one doing the nursery school runs. I would be happy if she was spending quality time with Charlotte while George is with other children at school. Having witnessed quite a few young childrens’ reactions to their parents not being available to them for various reasons, I am glad for George & Charlotte to have rather hands-on parents. In my opinion, it is a very good investment in their future relationships as a family. I see it as an “early intervention” that helps to establish a firm and secure foundation for living more prominently in the public eye in the next phase of their lives.
William went to have tea with the Queen at Windsor Castle when he was boarding at Eton (once a week if I remember correctly). So I wouldn’t be astonished if William & Catherine have taken their children to see the Queen and Prince Philipp at Sandringham as often as possible, too, before the Queen will leave for London (next week, I suppose).
Having been spotted in London (on January 27 ?), I think that Catherine might have recorded her message for Childrens’ Mental Health Week that day. A number of the #youngmindsmatter tweets seem to suggest that the commissioning of the articles, blogs and videos for February 17 has mostly been done by now as well. So that will also have taken some time.
I don’t perceive Catherine & William as being more and more reclusive, when they are not on public Royal duty or having public charity engagements. I consider them working as, in my opinion, family work, home office work and non-public charitable work is work. I don’t make a difference whether the person doing this kind of work is Royalty or not in order for it to quafify as work.
From what I have seen in the past, I suppose that Catherine is not the type to have preparations for the upcoming tour mostly done for her. I rather imagine her having started her reading (history of India and Bhutan, etc.), to look for a sweet gift for the newborn baby prince, to get vaccinations, etc.
If I was a betting kind of person, I would surely bet that by tomorrow she will also have read huge chunks of her copy of "Horizons - the history of the Air Cadets". :) https://www.facebook.com/comdtac https://twitter.com/comdtac.
Beautifully expressed, Francis.
DeleteTo be honest,I would have always had a high opinion of Kate and high hopes that she would have used her position in the best way possible to do so many good things but the reality is at this stage she has had five years to prove herself and settle in and if anything she seems to be doing less.When I wrote the original post I knew I would get a mixed reaction .I'm not totally laying the blame with Kate herself I actually think a lot of it lies with William,I firmly believe he does whatever suits him and she just supports him in whatever he chooses, the problem with this is that it reflects badly on her and leads to her looking lazy.I honestly believe he doesn't ever want to be King and unfortunately our beautiful Kate may never be Queen.
DeleteFor the last time. She can still spend quality time with her kids and do more than two engagements a month
DeleteSince this topic of William being reluctant has been up from time to time I have saved one of my prior posts I made on the subject (it get's so tiering to rewrite stuff :P):
Delete"I understand.. I myself am worried sometimes... Not if they will be able to do enough.. Yes Kate haven't done very much, but William have shown no signs of not being able to hold a job. I mean, he's done Uni, military training and jobs and now doing a 2/3rd job scheduel while still doing engagements so I have no doubts that he will be able to handle it (and since he will be the one who has to do the most in terms of constitutional stuff) I belive there's no reason to worry. I don't worry so much about how they will be able to handle it in the future, I think they'll do rather well. Maybe not go down in history, but well enough (they could surprise me both ways). I am a bit worried how the perception of them will be, if it will stick (like airmiles andy) and become lazy and waity and stuff like that or if the collective mind will be as forgetful as it usually is. I mean.. Charles and Camilla are accepted and rather liked so I think that if in 30 years William and Kate are doing good enough and George and Charlotte are OK adults etc that them having a few years to themselves will just be a talking point in documentaries and have no weight on their perception more than a line similar to the one we hear in documentaries of the queen. "She and prince Phillip spent 2 years on a naval base in Malta, in what would later be described as some of the happiest years of their lives". That is what 2 whole years are summed up to. No mention of the people that grumbled because she left the kids at home. Just a small line about those years. And that iss what I think this time will scuffle up to. "The 5-10 years they had in Norfolk, raising their young family as a relatively normal family was a happy time in their life that gave them much joy enjoying the normal family things in a place away from the spotlights". But that is just me. Everything seems so big and long when you're in the middle of it, but the BRF are very good at looking at the big picture and I think we sometimes forget how short our collective minds are. Do I think she will change the world? No. But not everyone has to! She could absolutley chock me and do alot for the world! Or she might not. I won't hold it against her."
Kate strikes me as someone who focuses on what she cares about and is confident enough in herself to do what she wants, notwithstanding criticism. After college, when she was made fun of endlessly in the press for not having a job, she merely smiled at the photographers, partied often, and took numerous vacations with William. Things are no different now - people comment often on her low number of appearances, but she's doing what she wants, which appears to be living life as a stay-at-home mom and wife. As much as some people want her to be a person who cares about charities and making a difference in the world, she's just not. If she was, I think we'd see a lot more appearances from her, given all the resources she has to help take care of her children and her home (and given that even a "full time" royal schedule would still give her more time with her kids than the average working parent has!). I don't think this will ever change. And I'm guessing that's okay with some of her fans, who seem to like her almost entirely because she's *not* Camilla than for any other reason
DeleteRebecca, I admire your "library". Good idea indeed. :)
DeleteAnon 23:18, you must be bluhare's soulmate.
In the spirit of Rebecca, I'll repeat something from a couple of postings ago:
Delete"I'm concerned about this 'two engagements a month' position. I'm not British, so I won't make a statement about what I consider appropriate or not--it's not my business. But the fact is that last year Catherine had 62 engagements, even though she had some months without any engagements because of pregnancy and post-pregnancy priorities. That averages a bit more than 5 engagements a month. People may still think that's not enough, which is their right, but their arguments need to be based on what she actually did. And even if you just count days rather than engagements, she's still in excess of two a month."
Has society really devalued stay at home moms to the point of ridicule? If that it is what she and William want for their children/marriage who are we to criticize? Isn't it preferable to an unhappy family?
DeleteThose of us who remember the Diana era, and even the early adulthood of Princess Margaret, know that a beautiful royal woman can so easily become a media celebrity. The Queen was speaking of lack of security and questionable safety (If she was quoted accurately) during Kate's years as a royal girlfriend when she said, "We don't want another Diana." She may well have strongly advised Kate to work privately. But she surely also prefers that one member of the royal family not receive all the public attention. Fortunately, Kate generally lives her life carefully and does not seek the lmelight. Given her looks and personality, she certainly could, and she would succeed. Charities were one of Diana's paths to stardom, along with her beauty and sense of style. The only way to prevent Kate from becoming a royal celebrity is to schedule her activities judiciously. Of course she has plenty to do, and she is in no way lazy. I happen to think that she is being coached very carefully. She wore the Queen's wedding bracelet to her first state banquet, obviously a mark of real appreciation.
DeleteAnon 4:16, I fear you may be correct and how sad because, if you look at the world we live in, it should be valued more than ever.
DeleteAnon 4:57, I wholeheartedly agree. Kate is criticized without the consideration of recent BRF history.
Since Kate lives in publicly funded housing suronnded by publicly funded protection officers we have a perfect right to say something
Deletegood question. Any news of the Middletons on the move from Mustique to bucklebury?
ReplyDeleteI think that Catherine is doing exactly what she and William have determined is best for them and their family/marriage. Perhaps William knows a little bit more about being raised in a royal family than most of us and we should trust that he is doing what he thinks is best. I applaud his and Catherine's efforts.
ReplyDeleteJust my point of view on Catherine's work schedule....If I received as much criticism as she does, I would dig my heels in and not allow myself to be dictated to. Perhaps Catherine feels the same way. Doing things differently is not always easy or popular but is needed.
ReplyDeleteThey might have taken a private flight home. Otherwise, the media surely would have been there for a photo of them at the airport.
ReplyDeleteI know that this is a weird request but I was wondering if anyone happens to have a single Hope Egg earring? I just found out that lost one and I am heartbroken. They were my favorite pair right now. If you are/have been in the same situation I would love to see if we could come to some sort of an arrangement so that one of us has a pair. Can you please comment if you do?
ReplyDelete