Today Kensington Palace shared a statement on Twitter confirming the Cambridges' plans for 2017. As expected, Prince William has decided not to renew his contract with the East Anglian Air Ambulance and will take up full-time duties in support of the Queen when he finishes his role this summer. The Palace said: "Their Royal Highnesses have loved their time in Norfolk and it will continue to be their home. From this autumn, however, the Duke and Duchess will increasingly base their family at Kensington Palace. As they have in recent years, Their Royal Highnesses are keen to continue to increase their official work on behalf of the Queen and for the charities and causes they support, which will require greater time spent in London."
 |
| Kensington Palace |
More from the Telegraph's report:
'The Duke of Cambridge is to quit his role as an air ambulance pilot this summer so he can take up full-time royal duties in support of the Queen, Kensington Palace confirmed today.
The Duchess of Cambridge will also step up the number of royal engagements she undertakes, and the couple will move back to London with their children Prince George and Princess Charlotte.
With the Duke of Edinburgh in his 96th year and the Queen preparing to celebrate her 91st birthday in April, the onus has been on the Duke and Duchess for some time to take on a greater share of royal engagements.'
Undoubtedly a range of factors came into plans when making this decision. One of these was likely the fact Prince George begins school in London. I suspect it seemed like the best time to make the transition. The Palace confirmed George will begin school in London in September (the choice of school was not revealed), whilst Princess Charlotte will also go to nursery in London.
Prince William thanked the people of East Anglia for their support and said his experiences "will add a valuable perspective to my royal work for decades to come". The statement continued: "I would like to thank the people of East Anglia for being so supportive of my role and for letting me get on with the job when they have seen me in the community or at our region's hospitals. I would especially like to thank all of my collegues at EAAA, Babcock and Cambridge Airport for their friendship and support. I have loved being part of a team of professional, talented people that save lives every day. My admiration for our country's medical and emergency services community could not be any stronger."
ITV News deputy political editor Chris Ship noted the timing of the release coinciding with the presidential inaugartion in the US.
 |
| Chris Ship Twitter Feed |
We recently discussed the topic following The Sunday Times' Roya Nikkhah report. As I said at the time, I think this was a huge discussion for the couple. As in Anglelsey, they have loved their time in Norfolk and the privacy they enjoyed. Anmer Hall will continue to serve as a country home for the family, likely at weekend and school holidays as schedules allow, but their primary home will be Kensington Palace. With George starting school in September and HM approaching her 91st birthday, it very much feels like the time is right to make the transition. We will reportedly see William taking on a full-time schedule of duties; whilst Kate will continue to focus on George and Charlotte, we're certainly going to see a marked increase in engagements.
William and Kate make a fantastic team, they represent the monarchy with aplomb at home and abroad, and are fantastic ambassadors for Britain. I believe they can achieve so much not only for causes close to their hearts, but in modernising the monarchy while staying true to its traditions. The next couple of years are going to be particularly interesting, during which we will gain an insight into the paths they wish to carve for themselves within the Royal family. It's a period of big changes for the family, and it's also an exciting time full of opportunity.
************
Best Separates Look
In today's poll, we're asking you to vote for 'Kate's Best Separates Look of 2016'. Pairing a skirt with a jacket or blouse can provide a relaxed, chic look and we saw Kate opt for smart skirt suits and stylish separates on a number of occasions in 2016. It's amazing to see how a simple piece can be elevated when paired with the right item. We're looking back on ensembles the Duchess put together for official appearances. With that, let's take a look back through Kate's looks...
In January, the Cambridges and the Middletons joined the Royal family for the 100th anniversary of the First World War Gallipoli campaign. Kate repeated her slate/claret Michael Kors suit. The Virgin Wool Plaid Blazer is described as a "vintage-inspired equestrian silhouette" with notched lapels, long sleeves, four-button closure and plaid knit print. The Guncheck Wool Trumpet Skirt is crafted from heritage guncheck wool with the trumpet silhouette offering a flattering feminine fit. Kate teamed the suit with a black turtleneck and her trusty Aquatalia Rhumba Boots.
For Kate's video message in support of Children's Mental Health Week, the Duchess wore her blue Rebecca Taylor suit. Kate first wore the jacket and skirt in April 2012 for the Scott-Amundsen Centenary Race to the South Pole, and more recently in New Zealand in 2014. The suit is from the designer's Pre-Fall 2012/2013 Collection. Both pieces are crafted in heavily textured melange weft. The jacket features frayed trim and sequin floral embellishment at the neck.
The Duchess was stylish in the Reiss Vinnie High-Neck Shirt - cut from a lightweight chiffon with a textured stripe design - and the Dolce & Gabbana Boucle Wool Blend Skirt. I loved the pairing of both these pieces and thought it a lovely choice for the day.
The Duchess debuted a gorgeous look by Kensington-based label Eponine London for a visit to the XLP mentoring programme in March. The red and white skirt suit is from the brand's Spring/Summer 2016 Collection. The top features a boat neck and three-quarter sleeves while the skirt is A-line. It's a beautiful outfit and I love the silhouette, the lines, and the gingham pattern.
HRH combined high street and designer for the Heads Together launch in May. Kate chose the cream Goat Binky Blouse with full sleeves and the Blue Geo Jacquard Midi Skirt by Banana Republic.
The Duchess spent a rainy day on the Isles of Scilly in September and surprised us all when she chose print trousers (rather than her favoured skinny jeans) for the event. Kate teamed the GAP Bi-Stretch Skinny Ankle Pants with her navy Smythe Blazer and an Off-the-shoulder top by H&M.
An elegant Kate hit all the right style notes in a pale blue bespoke Catherine Walker skirt suit for her first solo overseas visit to the Netherlands. The belted jacket features large buttons and peplum detail, whilst the skirt falls to just above the knee. What I love about many Catherine Walker designs for Kate is the feeling of timelessness - this suit could be worn in a decade or two and still exude classic style.
Kate wore her Dolce & Gabbana Boucle Wool Blend Skirt again for unannounced engagements in November to a women's prison and the Nelson trust. The Duchess completed the low-key look with a black turtleneck.
At a fun pre-Christmas engagement with the scouts, the Duchess debuted a new brand - Iris & Ink - wearing their Grace Cashmere Turtleneck Sweater with jeans believed to be from Zara.
An excellent selection, I think you'll agree! I love the pale blue Catherine Walker skirt suit and the Eponine London look in particular. Which look got your vote? Do let us know in the comments section. :)
************
Finally, a couple of sales opportunities to share with you. The updated version of Kate's much-loved Aquatalia Rumbah boots are currently discounted by 30% ($750 to $524) at Nordstrom.
 |
| Nordstrom |
Kate's Preen Finella Dress is significantly discounted from £1,126 to £450 at Boutique1.
Kate's Temperley London Desdemona Dress is reduced by 50% at Net-A-Porter in black. The jade version Kate wore is available in limited sizes (reduced from $1,395 to $837) at Avenue32.
 |
| Temperley London |
And Beulah London are offering readers an additional 10% off sale items with the code HRH10 throughout the weekend. Sale items include the pretty Pink Wool Coat, the Black Devore A-Line Dress and the Alice Print Shirt Dress.
 |
| Beulah London |
Wishing you all a lovely weekend and thanks for reading as always! :)
Hello,
ReplyDeleteJust a quick note to say a number of readers have been experiencing issues posting comments and with the 'Load More' button in recent days (there's even been a couple of instances where comments are going under different posts than intended). The issue appears to be mostly resolved now and should be back to normal within 24 hours. Apologies for any inconvenience caused.
Thanks, Charlotte. :)
DeleteThanks Charlotte but I am curious--I wrote two lengthy (maybe too lengthy) comments in the last update and they have never appeared. Did comments get lost during this period or maybe they were just too long?
DeleteI'm afraid so. I'll check for them again immediately though. I'm very sorry for the inconvenience Valerie. It should be sorted now.
DeleteCounting the hours! ;+) Still having posting issues.
DeleteI don't suppose Valerie missed the load more button?
DeleteI'm a little bit sad that William is giving up the EAAA.
ReplyDeleteMe too! As much as I appreciate the royal family and how much they do, I find it strange how people would rather see him increase royal duties than save lives doing a job he obviously loves.
DeleteAlexandra and Denise- I'm sorry. too; but without William and family in the succession there would be Andrew and ,considering the passage of time, possibly Eugenie. Duty is the key word. At least he has tried not to sacrifice his marriage and family. The comparison between what Charles experienced his first four years and the experience William and Catherine were able to provide for George is remarkable.
DeleteAlexandra,
DeleteIt is because he is not paid what he is paid to do that job. People would be fine if he did the job he loved, so long as he dropped the perks of being a working royal. The flying job is admirable, I have never seen anyone deny that part.
William isn't paid to do royal engagements either.
DeleteHe leads the luxurious life he has due to being a working royal, not for being a co-pilot. You know what I meant.
DeleteWilliam's lifestyle (including two rent-free homes) is because he's royal. He may not get a paycheck but he certainly is compensated. Very well, too.
DeleteMy only question is: if he loved this job so much, why not work more, why not work at holidays? He could prove his words even more. I hope one day we find out how much time he really spent there..
DeleteAnd I agree Bluhare about the paycheck, well compensated indeed!
William has been doing royal duties and working as a rescue flight pilot. People are making it sound like he has been doing no royal duties. He has been doing both. Both in proper amounts given his position. I find it strange that these same old criticisms are the topic when it has been announced that the man is officially transitioning to full-time status. I think we will continue to see good things from William.
Deletep.s. After all the time and effort and training in the military to become a pilot, it is a good thing that William was conscientious to continue to use of those skills for as long as possible to help people via both sectors, in Anglesey and Norfolk. Good stewardship. Again, William is using his time and resources, not wantonly and unproductively has have many of his ancestors and a lot of "celebrities" these days. I personally think that that is a studied thing for William also and part of "lessons learned from the past", not just concerning his parent's experiences but even in a broader historical scope. His thoughtful consideration of "things not to do". Instead he has chosen to fulfil his role with a better moral compass.
DeleteHis being allowed to live on Sandringham Estate at Amner Hall is a family consideration, not a Royal one. He is the Queen's grandson. Kensington Palace is the Royal residence.
DeleteHe did work holidays.
DeleteI loved this "better moral compass".
DeleteI wonder what happened to this compass when one day he does some conservation work, the next he goes shooting birds for fun!?
Just curious:)
Think you are comparing apples to oranges Anett, lol. no offense.
DeleteHi surfer girl,the situations may be apples and oranges but the compass is not. For example, my moral compass tells me it's OK to post on blogs as long as I'm not rude even if my opinion is not popular. My moral compass also says I should not kill people. Apples and oranges for the situations, but same moral compass making a judgment.
DeleteSG, absolutely lessons have been learned from the past (whether the chapter of history is recognized or not!)
DeleteI was speaking of William choosing not to follow
Deletecareless and wanton living as have some of his predecessors and social contemporaries have. That is the moral compass perspective that I was referring to. A King George IV, or Fergie and Andrew, etc., they are not. And, I believe that is, in large part, due to studied choices and goals. I never thought that could be misconstrued. Who knew? lol
Thanks for a new post! I knew you were going to have one today. I was very happy when I saw on Twitter about W&K going full time. I loved that it distracted me from politics!
ReplyDeleteCharlotte, you are going to be busy once Kate goes full time. You work so hard on this blog already. Once she goes full time, you may not have as much time for your self.
Great post, thank you.
ReplyDeleteTo avoid followers being disappointed in the future, I think the use of the term "full-time" can be misleading. It isnt used in the briefing from KP. I think royal reporters are using it as a future stick to hit them with.
The reason I say that is there is no definition of "full time royal duties". Those currently undertaking the work do between 80-550 a year. These refer to public engagements, and exclude the background work required.
No royal undertakes public engagements5 days aweek unless on tour. Normally its Tue- Fri, but with obvious exceptions such as TTC and Garter Day.
IM not being negative because the Cambridges have a lot to offer their causes. Just being realistic.
Agree CP. if they don't do what reporters think they should do, they will be labelled again. I do think that Williams time in SAR and the air ambulance will turn out to be very beneficial to him and the Royal Family in the long run.
DeleteCP- my 22:29 reply again mis-placed and is found below under Trixie's comment, for some reason. :+0
DeleteThe Cambridge's timing could not have been better to release this statement from KP. At least it gives us something positive to think about, instead of the inauguration. I agree with Emily J that your workload will certainly increase, Charlotte, and I thank you - as always, for the prompt updates and informative posts that you provide for your readers here. I look forward to what this transition will bring.
ReplyDeleteAs for the separates poll, your two picks were definitely my preferred options as well. The Eponine was my overall favourite as I thought it was different, fresh and professional. I too, like the gingham pattern and hope to see a re-wear soon. The CW light blue suit was nice, but the wrinkles in the skirt and the matronly hairdo let this look down a bit for me. I also liked the D&G skirt and the houndstooth kilt paired with the black turtlenecks.
Kiwi Gal
DeleteThis statement and the inauguration are BOTH positive events. Even if one doesn't support President Trump, as you apparently don't, the peaceful, transparent transfer of power is clearly positive. I have watched the last five inaugurations; regardless of party or how I've voted, it's always a positive event to witness.
For the record, while I appreciate having *both* positive events to consider, I would prefer this remain a place free from political sniping and commentary.
I respect your wishes/views, Johanna in FL, I will refrain from posting anything political in future.
DeleteI hate to see political things on this blog. This is about Kate not the new President to the U.S. Or his wife.
DeleteLet's keep the Trumps off this blog if possible.
Thank you Johanna. I very much appreciate your post.
DeleteThis is why I love following the BRF. Letting our friends across the pond hash out their views on the monarchy so I can get a break from our politics :)
DeleteI did have the inauguration streaming while I was at work today. The tradition and elegance of the day reminded me so much of W&K's wedding. The events are simply remarkable.
Thank you for the post Charlotte! For us in the US, it is a lovely distraction from politics. I am excited that we will be seeing more of W&K and hearing about the causes they support. I'm sure for them this transition is bitter-sweet. I also think that they will not add baby #3 to the mix. I think if they were Kate would be pregnant already, and they would have the pregnancy and arrival of the baby play out in their country home where they have more privacy. Plus, I think Kate's pregnancies take a huge toll on her. She is just now starting to look healthy again after Charlotte's birth. Sad for us because they have such cute children! This feels in many ways like a new chapter for them.
ReplyDeleteWhat exactly does full time duties mean? are they going to carry out engagements every day of the week. Or are they just not going to have long breaks between engagements?
ReplyDeleteHello,
DeleteThat is a good question! As CP said the term "full-time" was not included in the statement. Royal work isn't defined in terms of hours worked or days put in at the end of the year. In 2016, The Times reported William and Kate carried out 188 and 140 engagements respectively. Are we going to see those numbers shoot to 400? I would say absolutely not. We are likely going to see a marked increase (particularly for William) but I imagine the increase will be a gradual one. The statement was carefully worded stating the couple are "keen to increase" their duties without clearly defining the level of an increase. Simon Perry is a very reliable reporter and a source told him Kate's primary focus will continue to be motherhood. It's tough to measure royal work because for example 30 engagements could be carried out over a one week tour. Equally another 30 could be carried out over 30 days in the UK.
We saw an increase in overseas trips last year; it will be interesting to see if that trend continues. As we've seen with Heads Together, there will be a larger focus on selected areas. We won't have a clear view of what the plan is in terms of an increase until the autumn.
I hate when I hear the sentence " Kate wants to focus on motherhood" because it makes it seem the mothers who work full time (like my mother did from the time I was three months old) aren't focused on motherhood
DeleteYou can still be a great mother and work full time or at least more than the 60 odd days Kate worked last year
Whoever came up with the phrase from the palace needs to stop using it because it is so offensive in my opinion
Sarah, just a couple of points, if I may. First of all, where int the KP statement did you see the phrase about Kate wanting to focus on motherhood? I didn't find it there. It was in Charlotte's paragraph after the pictures where I read "...Kate will continue to focus on George and Charlotte".
DeleteI'm sorry you find the sentence about focusing on the kids offensive. I don't, and I think it is all a matter of interpretation. By saying this, no one says mothers who work full time can't be great mothers. No one belittles them. If I say "Kate wants to focus on motherhood" I'm saying exactly this - that it's her priority, her choice, her preference. I think she should be granted the right to this. IMO, to say she wants to focus on motherhood means nothing more and nothing less than that she feels it is her main responsibility now. Hers. Not everybody else's. Main, not the only. And now, not for ever. In the following years she will undoubtedly take on more and more responsibilities outside her own family but at present this is her main responsibility. Nothing wrong about that and no harm done do anybody else.
I think it's their way of saying that she's support for William and his consort. The fact that he is focusing on his royal duties doesn't translate to Kate increasing engagements at the same pace. Her focus is her family and ensuring the family unit remains strong and the foundation for the future. She's not going to all of a sudden increase to Ann levels. It is their attempt at setting the expectations for her work for the foreseeable future.
DeleteBut I'm sure it will get lost and we will have the same media reports as we do now about her work and how much she is doing / not doing next year. Managing a household and raising kids is a full time job. Lots of Moms juggle that with a career either because they have to or want to. I don't think it casts shade on them because then you are comparing them to an impossible standard. I also have plenty of friends that have left work to be full time Moms. I don't think any less of them or myself because I still work.
I don't fault her for wanting to focus on her family because she has the opportunity to do so. The choices W/K are making are ones that will continue to serve them and the next generation of royals well. And that's what it's about, the future and ensuring it's better than today.
I agree, Sarah. Being away from the children for a few hours a couple of days a week still allows her to focus on motherhood. In my opinion anyway.
DeletePlease refer to Zora's comment at 19:49
DeleteSurely you don't actually believe royal engagements involve just a few hours, as though she were popping over to the local little league game to sell refreshments at a concession? Besides, this is a well-worn theme here. No one is going to have a sudden epiphany and change an opinion. Much like the argument that the cousins, Anne, Sophie etc. do X number of engagements. Most of the persons repeatedly cited either have adult children or children who are well beyond the feeding, nappy, stage. Just compare Charles's first four years to George's. With the past and recent rocky history of the BRF, one would imagine taking some time for the early years couldn't hurt.With a little understanding it should be apparent that engagements aren't a matter of taking off the apron, jumping in the car, and taking off. A few hours indeed.
DeleteWell I'll drop a comment here. Perhaps the proper phrase is "care giving". Perhaps Kate is caring for her children, rather then delegating the task as working mothers do. Because if you are working, you aren't the one providing care for the children. There's really no way around that.
DeleteWait a minute... we see all those photos of Nanny Maria with the children when Kate isn't working. This is so confusing!
Being a stay at home mother is a fully time joke b when you have small children. But Kate has a nanny and a housekeeper and tax payer funded homes
DeleteShe is also trailed by tax payer funded security and I think we have a perfect right to express that more of her time be spent in public
You seem all to be thinking we are asking her to do 300 engagements a year. Not at all. Just working more than 60 days a year would be enough
And bluhare is right even if she wants to spend time with her kids spending three or four days a week doing engagement shouldn't be a hardship
I hope once George starts school in the fall and Charlotte starts nursery school Kate will spend that time out doing public engaments
I agree Sarah and Bluhare. George goes to school, Charlotte probably to nursery. So what will Kate do at home alone? She has plenty of time to do something...
DeleteSarah - can you explain your first sentence? I don't want to misinterpret your comment.
DeleteI agree Zara with your comments. That is how I understood the language as well from KP.
Actually, the photos with Maria have been few and far between. So much so that I was going to ask if she is even with them anymore but then remembered that she would have to be, or someone would have to be with the children, when William and Kate are at engagements. I have seen many, many more photos of Kate with the children than of Maria and the children. Many of the photos of Kate with the children were candid photos taken by the public and not photo op ones. So, in all fairness to Kate, I think she is diligent with giving her children plenty of her time and affection.
DeleteAs a mother of 2 young children I find all of these comments offensive. By the time the kids get to school, mine go 2 days a week for 5 hours, get home, move laundry, dishes, grocery list, grocery shop quickly eat, it's time to go get the kids. I am a wedding coordinator. It is impossible to work while the kids are home. Being on the computer is very appealing to an 18 month old and 3 year old. Phone calls are impossible. A housekeeper comes to clean but I do not allow them to do my laundry. Have children is a full time job, 24/7. Kids are up at 12 or 2am with a bad dream, runny noses. All the other tasks of wife and career outside of the home are ADDED to an already full time job of being a mother. It is in our nature to put everyone else first. I am so glad she can afford a housekeeper and nanny. Several of my friends have full time nannies and are still stressed out with life. I wish everyone could give moms who stay home credit and have a little grace. Our children are young once. The royals will work for the rest of their lives. Our husbands will retire at 60, 65, 70 and they will still be working for another 10 to 20 years. Comments like "what did you do all day" are the most hurtful things to say to a stay at home mother. Nothing we do is recognized as work because "we stay home all day". Please be a little more understanding, which it seems like you all are not. Because you justify your judgemental comments by saying they are royals. So incredibly disappointing to see what people think of mother's who do not have a job outside of the home.
DeleteHalleluYah and Amen to your every word there Jessica. I went from a professional position outside the home to being a "stay at home mom" and experienced the denigration just as you say. It was an emotionally and socially traumatic transition for me at that time. But I was determined and persevered and am so glad I did.
DeleteWho do you think will be taking and picking up the children to their few hours a week "school?" Kate, as she did in Norfolk. Good grief! They will only be 2 and 4 years old. It's not as though they are going away to boarding school or even will be attending 8 hours a day or daily, for that matter.
DeleteSorry, typo: I meant to say if you have small children it is a full time job (not joke) because most people don't have any extra help
DeleteJessica
DeleteWith all due respect, your comment is as disappointing. No one belittle mothers who choose to stay at home. If this is all you drew as a conclusion, there is nothing else to say.
I have no issues with people who choose to stay home and raise their children. I didn't say I do. However, Kate is different than you and me. First of all, she has a lot more help than you do, and does not have to clean and run after the children -- if she doesn't want to or has other things to do. She has a live-in nanny and household staff. However, even then I wouldn't care if she wanted to be a stay at home mother and raise her children. Her husband can carry the outside workload. But her office keeps telling us that she's keen to make a difference, and it doesn't happen. That's my beef, not that she stays home with the kids.
DeleteWomen have fought long and hard to be able to enjoy certain rights and privileges, so how/when did this include telling other women how to lead and prioritize THEIR own lives?
DeleteIf the Queen could turn back the clock, I suspect that she would want to lead a more balanced life between duty and family life. Diana understood this obvious deficit in the BRF and fought against the Establishment to be more hands on with W&H (and she was criticized for it!). Surely, one generation later Kate can follow her own heart given that she is not yet in Diana's role/position as the next Queen.
Also, not seeing Kate in public while the children are seen with Maria does NOT add up to Kate not working; it simply supports the idea that behind the scenes meetings or other tasks are not recognized as work.
Thank you, royalfan 21:32.
DeleteUmm royalfan I think William put to rest he idea that he or Kate so work behind the scenes when he said he didn't leave his briefing
DeleteAdditionally, if prince Charles worked as much as you think William and Kate did behind the scenes he would get zero sleep because he does 400 engagements a year
Again I say what in Kate's work history gives you any idea she would do a lot behind the scenes. It isn't an insult to say she has never held a full time job in her life it is just fact
I would expect the internal pressure (keep in mind that Will and Kate still don't have the final say on what and how much they do royal engagement-wise) to undertake more royal work on a more regular basis has increased on Will and Kate, especially since some of the recent high-profile stories surrounding William and what would seem his reluctance to overdo (putting it politely), not to mention the obvious concerns with the queen's age and health along with concerns over how Brexit will impact the UK and its budget and citizens.
DeleteIf it's Charles's intent to scale back the Royal List and to decrease the security expenditures for working members of the royal family (including Edward and Sophie), then William and Kate and Harry are going to have to step up and get to it and stop with the 110 excuses for why they are not doing as much as others.
They may have the best intentions in the world and they may (or may not) do "work behind the scenes," but without actual public work and engagements, nobody cares, especially the members of Parliament who vote on the budget that includes security services for the royal family.
And can we lose the quaint fiction that Kate is a stay at home mom balancing housekeeping, child care and all the other duties all on her own? That is an absolute slap in the face to the millions of women, both stay at home mothers and those who hold jobs outside the home, who actually ARE balancing all of that, some by themselves, others with the help of a spouse, few to none with a team of staff and servants, chauffeurs and personal assistants.
It is admirable that she is focusing on making sure George and Charlotte have a relatively "normal" childhood but she's not doing it all on her own.
I agree Sarah. I don't know why people think they do everything themselves. That's why they have the 30+ staff. They do the background work and provide the executive summaries so their bosses know what's expected. Am I saying they do nothing behind the scenes before someone brings that up? No, I'm not. But Kate had 9 meetings in 2016 that were recorded in the Court Circular. That is fact. And, in my opinion, that's not a lot.
DeleteI hope she is keen to get cracking. And if she isn't, I wish her office would just stop putting that out.
Charlotte, any headway IDing people who post under multiple names, agreeing with a comment, perhaps their own? I know you said that was one of your primary concerns. I do see names pop up out of nowhere to agree, never to be heard from again,
DeleteWhat types of meetings and with whom are those recorded in the CC? Charities where one is not the official royal patron are usually not listed. For example, Kate's work with the scouts-I believe HM or Alexandra is still patron and her attendance at Wimbledon-the Duke of Kent's attendance would be listed, not Kate's...any meetings with any of the charities and activities beyond her patronages would not be listed in the CC. Charities, as a rule, are considered private activity, as far as the CC is concerned. Queen Elizabeth and others have their names listed on so many, (whether or not they are ever visited)it is likely anything they do will be counted on the CC. Actually, the KP statement said..." TRH are keen to continue to increase their royal duties..." That's what her office is saying.
DeleteSarah, just because Kate does not have a traditional 9-5 job where she is taking the train and grabbing a Starbucks on the way to the office, does not mean that her time is spent filing her nails or eating bonbons. No one is suggesting that she runs around KP or Anmer with a mop and broom, or that she doesn't have access to a nanny when she needs it, but to belittle or completely dismiss her responsibilities does come across as, well, a tad simplistic. Also, a person CAN have a nanny and still choose to be as hands on *as possible.* Heck, if she used a nanny as often as some would suggest, surely her hair would up to everyone's standards. :)
DeleteRoyalfan, with all due respect, I wish you would stop belittling the work of all the women who have fought for equal rights for women. The idea that they fought to give someone like KATE the right to be a stay at home mother is both historically inaccurate and just insulting. No one fought for the right for a woman in her mid-thirties to shirk her duties. If Kate did not receive taxpayer-funded protection and taxpayer-funded housing, then sure, she has every right to CHOOSE to be a stay at home mother. But the fact of the matter is, she knew what she was marrying into. She had a choice. She is not just another mother with the choice to be unemployed. She IS employed, but not necessarily fulfilling the duties of that employment as a senior royal and future Queen. Please stop acting like she is any other mother.
DeleteAnd actually, feminism has a lot to do with why I wish Kate would do more. Someone mentioned Diana - yes, Diana tried to be a more hands-on mother. But my gawd lets not reduce Diana's legacy to just that. She also showed a lot more initiative and gumption than most significant royal spouses, i.e. mostly females. Diana was incredibly modern in the way she carved a role for herself independent of her husband. Kate is the exact opposite. That's what makes me sad, tbh. Kate DOES have every right, absent her royal role, to choose to be a stay at home mother like every other woman. BUT....let's be honest, a woman has never had to FIGHT for a "right" to be a stay at home mother. We've had to fight much more to be anything but. So Kate - someone who has the opportunity to break many glass ceilings much like her mother-in-law - even if she has a right to be a stay at home mother, has chosen instead to be incredibly old-fashioned. She may have a right to do that, but I certainly have a right to be disappointed by that, as a feminist. And not just as a feminist - think about the issues she could so hugely be impacting...it just seems like a waste to have a homebody in her role, when someone actually wanting to use that role to its greatest extent could do it instead.
I know it's hard to tell lol, but I've tried actually to be less blunt in my opinion until now. But this discussion has just been bothering me. The idea that criticizing Kate, a future QUEEN with so much privilege, for not doing more, might go against the tenets of feminism is just too frustratingly inaccurate for me to resist being honest.
I agree with Royalfan, I consider myself a feminist and I believe that feminists fight for women to have a choice in life. There is no choice if you are being told the choice you have to make!
DeleteI gave up a good job after the birth of my third child and I am so glad of that time I had with my children. Kate's children will be under pressure in their lives that we have never experienced and I suppose that William and Kate see her role as giving them consistency and security while they are still very young. I think that the difference between my life then and Kate's life now (on a day-to-day basis, not including security and private jets!) is that her much bigger house is much cleaner than mine ever was, everyone's clothes are ironed, there is no take-away dinner evening and she has lots of time to spend working out every day. Other than that, the impression I get is that she does childcare and cooking. Nanny Maria works huge hours when William and Kate are on tour, so I would imagine she works some sort of a part-time arrangement outside of that.
When my youngest child started school I went back to college and retrained, I am now on the bottom rung of my new career, about 25 years older than most of my colleagues and I am grateful to be able to make choices about how I spend my life.
RF, I agree so very much with what you said. Again, Kate's critics (and William's) make it sound like neither one of them do anything at all.
DeleteAgain, we are not privy to all of their intineraries.
I do not perceive either one of them as having any sense of entitlement or being lazy.
AMEN Maggie!!!!
DeleteAnd Tara- the difference between kate and people like you is that kate is trailed by publicly funded protection officers wherever she goes and spends the money that comes from the fact that she married into the royal family.
That is why kate needs to be more accountable for her time.
Well it appears that Melania Trump is taking the same stance as Kate regarding their family. Just read an article that says that their 10 year old son is her first priority, she will remain a full time mother to him and will more often than not, not be at the presidents side. Melania is apparently quite and independent person, and intelligent. Maybe family stability is just more important to these high profile women.
DeleteI don't know what the meetings are. The topics are not discussed as you know, annie. But we are talking about facts, no? And there were only 9 recorded meetings for her last year. Whether her prep meetings for visits counted on the circular are listed I could not tell you. All I can tell you is there were 9. You are extrapolating based on the fact you think she works more than I think she does. And I think we should stick to facts. And the facts are there were 9.
DeleteDo I think she has email with staff about patronages? Yes, I do. Do I think she discusses what the visit is about in emails with staff? I think that too. But meetings with the charities themselves? No, I don't. And I think her staff gives her notes for each engagement just like the time William admitted he had not bothered to read his.
And I'm telling you the Queen virtually attends only CC-counted patronage meetings; not only that, duties performed in her name or at her request often are credited as Queen's activities on the CC.I am saying Kate has both publicized and unpublicized meetings with charity boards and leaders that are not of a designated patronage. These often do not appear under her name in the CC. I am basing the unrecorded meetings on statements made by multiple staff members who have commented in informal remarks that Kate shows up. She is informed-no matter who gathers the info; she has to be ready to converse intelligently with staffers, family members, and recipients. Her staff aren't doing the one on one conversations.And finally-something that will never be logged into the CC, she is kind and compassionate. From the mouths of those in a position to know. Numbers are meaningless if one does not consider what they represent.
DeleteI'm not belittling anything, Maggie. But I am sorry if I fail to see the progress women achieved if we have gone from MEN telling us what we should or should not do to WOMEN telling us what is or is not acceptable. Kate IS performing royal duties and supporting the Queen; she is simply doing so while making motherhood a priority while she has two very young children to raise...and under incredibly unique circumstances, as Tara pointed out. As far as accountability is concerned, Kate is accountable to the Queen and me thinks HM signed off on the arrangement for the reasons I have stated here before.
DeleteI do agree that Diana's legacy is greater than her desire to be a hands on mother, but let us not forget that she was married to the next in line AND she had no choice but to carve out a role for herself as her husband was not the partner that William is to Kate. W&K are a team; sadly C&D never were.
Considering the marital success of the Queen's children and the circumstances that W&H faced as children, perhaps we should remember that "Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it”. Well, the Queen and William have learned and history is NOT being repeated. How about a hearty Amen!! to THAT?
Kate's role in the monarchy cannot, and will not, be defined by a few years when her children are young (and her husband is NOT the next in line). God willing, Kate will have another 60+ years to leave her mark on history. Frankly, I see no reason for some of the doom and gloom analysis that is so focused on a handful of years as it pertains to the BRF. And wouldn't it be lovely if women could support the choices of other women.....dare I dream of such a scenario.
SG - thank you :))
JN - what a concept, eh? ;)
Si many comments! I believe the keyword here is choice. I sincerely hope we are going towards a society where every mother has the possibility of making personal choices about her family. Those choices are individual and deeply personal and doesn't reflect on other's choices. If a mother decides to stay at home, that doesn't make all working mothers bad mothers and if another chooses to work, that doesn't make all stay at home mothers lazy or stupid.
DeleteI believe, Kate, as a mother is entitled to that choice. The fact that sadly not everyone has that possibility yet, doesn't mean one should deny it to does who have. Some argue she is different from the average mother. She is, but all mothers are different. If we start deciding who is or isn't entitled to choose, there is no choice anymore.
Some argue she is accountant to the public for what she does because of the privileges of her position. Well, I'd say the privileges come to her indirectly. Her husband has an instructional role. If she has one, it is to support him. In what way she does, taking care of the family or carrying royal duties it is for them to decide.
There is also the argument that Kate is trailed by publicly funded protection officers wherever she goes...
Think about it. The UK is a state. One of the obligations of a state is to protect its citizens. A state who doesn't is a failed state. The amount of taxpayers money that is put in the protection of citizens at large is a huge part of the budget. Think police, defence, justice. So every British citizen costs a lot in security. A lot of taxpayer's money. In some particular cases the security threat is more definite and the state offers particular protection. Here it is about protecting an institution. Like protecting parliament. The BRF is an hereditary institution, so that the life itself of its members is important for the country. They aren't trailing a citizen, they are protecting an emanation of the UK.
We aren't talking about the Queen, annie. We're talking about Kate. Kate had nine recorded meetings last year. You can choose to think she had more if you like, but the facts say there were nine.
DeleteAgain, numbers are meaningless if one does not consider what they represent. There is one yardstick used to measure the Queen's activities and another to measure those of some other royals. That is why the Queen's activities were mentioned- for comparison, which, I think should be quite obvious; but I thought I might point that out,anyway.
DeleteLoved the fact that they compared Kate to Melania! https://www.yahoo.com/news/melania-trump-wears-ralph-lauren-on-inauguration-day-145650676.html
ReplyDeleteMelanie looked exquisite in the Ralph Lauren monocratic blue. Loved, loved, loved, everything about it. Cute way to keep her neck and upper torso warm with the styled bolero without the bulk of a regular coat. Clever. The dress looked good without the bolero also. I loved, loved, loved her hair. And the earrings were brilliant and beautiful. The gloves, the shoes, beautiful. When she first got into the beast, she touched up her lipstick. No one (that I know of) reported on that but I saw it. She didn't waste a second after they closed the door. The compact and lipstick came out immediately. :)
DeletePlease I am begging everyone no US politics here!
DeleteI agree. That dress was absolutely gorgeous! It would look beautiful on Kate!
DeleteMelania nailed it, without a doubt. I knew she would look good, but WOW, just WOW. Sheer elegance.
DeleteI also loved Melania's outfit today, with the custom wrapped coat over the dress. I would love to see Kate in a similar piece in the future given how often she goes inside/outside on her engagements. People seem to have such strong opinions on when Kate does/doesn't wear coats.
DeleteI also think that Mrs. Pence looked very beautiful in her blue gown. It would have been a little daunting for anyone choosing a gown to wear for that occasion and to wear along side the Trump women. Mrs. Pence did it graciously and beautifully. I liked the red, white and blue them of the gowns, ties and suits. Of course, the Trump gold made it to the stage. (no surprise). :)
DeleteI also liked how the young military man she danced with was twirling her on the dance floor. :)
sweet. :) and, how Mr. Pence looked at the soldier and said hey, wait minute there. :) and, how President Trump very directly, but kindly, handed off his sweet soldier dance partner to the soldier that was dancing with Melanie. The way he did it, you could tell he wanted to be the one dancing with Melanie. men. :) I was glad that the President and Vice-President had their children with them for the first dance.
Is it Kate's favorite color? I didn't know that, They gave a brief association may be to draw more fans from the world of Kate.
DeleteI agree that was an excellent choice. The way she carries her style, her modeling carrier must have helped. The fun part about this world is individual uniqueness. I admired Mitchell in so many ways including style as well as Hillary’s tireless perseverance and courage. This first lady is also another individual of her own. Laura Bush has her own strength and so did the preceding first ladies. The difference for all of them is the form they get on world stage and the opportunity to bring out the best in them.
DeleteMelania looked stunning. We now have our own Kate (fashion wise).
DeleteIt's fashion commentary, not politics Tammy. Just like we discuss other prominent ladies in other countries and their outfits. And simple social dynamics between them and their spouses, children from time to time.
DeleteOops. That comment was for anonymous, not you Tammy. I was hurrying through the comments. (sorry).
DeleteAnonymous,
Delete(You are not even supposed to be posting under that anymore). Relax. We aren't "bringing US politics" here. The comments on this blog often mention other women in high-profile positions and their style from all around the world. As long as we are not offending anyone, I don't think you get to decide whose style we are allowed to comment about.
Whew! Thank you N from USA. Now we can't even mention melania because it is political? We are not talking politics as this isn't what this blog is about. It's about fashion.
DeleteYes, Melania did not disappoint. Perhaps being a photographer's model better prepares one for being FLOTUS than practicing law or working in children's concerns and being a Governor's wife. Ha! I really think praising the wife of a politician, especially in the political context of a much debated election is political content. I won't start a detailed commentary on Michelle's critically lauded fashion if remarks about the new FLOTUS are also avoided.
DeleteDisussing fashion is not politics, Anonymous! I doubt that everyone who likes Mrs. Trump's blue dress agrees politically. :-)
DeleteI don't see why the Trumps and/or their clothing need to be discussed on this blog. He is offensive to a lot of people and I don't know why I would need to read about him here, where I come to read about people who know how to behave gracefully and appropriately.
DeleteIf the Trumps were to meet W&K as the Obamas have, I could see why that would be a matter of discussion but as it stands, I really don't.
Someone had mentioned here that Kate had been mentioned in an article about Melanie's outfits. And, like mentioned by others, we have previously discussed here the sartorial choices of prominent women, including Jacqueline Kennedy, Michelle, Obama, etc.
DeleteHello,
DeleteI understand this is a hugely emotive topic and yes it's best to refrain from political discussions on the blog. As I was writing this, I was reading the Telegraph who are reporting the President and the First Lady will be making a state visit to the UK this summer. The article reports the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge will be participating in the visit. Buckingham Palace said they "would not comment on speculation about future plans". Heads of state are normally hosted at Buckingham Palace or Windsor Castle but the possibility of Balmoral is reportedly being discussed.
Nothing official yet, however the story was written by the Telegraph's chief political correspondent, Christopher Hope.
The full article is available here:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/21/donald-trump-plans-new-deal-britain-theresa-may-becomes-first/
Thanks, Charlotte. :)
DeleteA wife of a politician is her own God given person and identity at the end of the day. I don't know about this FLOTUS politics and this election had been what it is. Style and fashion wise, if people from different countries discuss Kate's style, now and then on turning points in history, why not discuss other women's fashion and style independent of the politics? At least every four years in USA intro to a FLOTUS style is harmless to discuss here IHO.
DeleteIt is a matter of the boundary between interest in fashion and politics. Some can separate that; others might be inclined of fashion review from a political stand. It is only if it gets out of control and too politically motivated, the restriction can be understandable.
I'm pretty sure Trump has property in Scotland (Golf courses in Aberdeen and Turnberry) -- a visit to that area would make sense.
DeleteAs far as gowns go, Ivanka was the winner IMO. And I'd love to see a similar style on Kate.
Deletehttp://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/ivanka-trump-and-her-husband-jared-kushner-arrive-at-the-news-photo/632256294?#ivanka-trump-and-her-husband-jared-kushner-arrive-at-the-freedom-ball-picture-id632256294
The fashion at the inauguration was lovely and beautiful. That comparison article is a bit of a stretch to me in order to sell papers/magazines.
DeleteCharlotte thank you for posting the link to the article about the state visit. To me, the way I interpreted it, it seems like a lot of one sided demands or expectations that I hope are just that. I don't think any head of state should be demanding the tone, type, activities of a visit to another country. Who wouldn't want to be invited to a state visit in the U.K. with all the pomp and circumstance!?!? But they are an invited guest and I hope the Queen decides to stick to the way state visits are conducted now.
They may be a reliable reporter but I heard a lot of speculation. If it turns out to be true and a state visit happens in the Summer with all the trimmings at Balmoral, I'll be the first one to stand up and point back to this comment admit I was wrong.
As one CNN reporter said, Ivanka had on what was in essence the real "First Lady" style dress.
Delete(She was not saying Ivanka was trying to present herself over Melanie, btw.) I think Melanie wanted to go with a more uitilrian look that was in keeping with the let's get to work theme. Let's face it that was about as pared down in glamour as she could get and still be appropriate for a ball, in my opinion. She could have knocked it out of the park for sure, but I don't think that that was her goal. I thought Ivanka's dress was beautiful but not all that unusual as far as evening gowns go. While the gowns were all pretty, none of them really wowed me.
Was my comment about the Telegraph article lost? I will repost, if necessary.
DeleteSG 14:13, although I was wowed by Ivanka's gown, I do agree with the rest of your comment. :)
Deleteroyalfan, I quite agree. Ivanka was classy and glamorous and I thought her gown absolutely won the night (it reminded me of Kate's sleeveless sequined gown she wore on her first public engagement after giving birth to George, I think she accompanied William on one of his events). I did think Mrs. Trump's powder blue ensemble was better than Ivanka's white pantsuit (I'm just not a fan of all-white or all-cream on anyone) but all the ladies looked lovely.
DeleteRF, just pictured Melania in that red gown you chose for Kate. wow.
DeleteLucy, Ivanka's pantsuit was definitely more fitting for her role at the Inauguration than it would have been for Melania's. And I must admit that Melania's outfit continues to take my breath away.
DeleteI think I can imagine the Queen's reaction to being told how and where she should entertain a head of state! Surely it is enough that she has to host whoever the government decides on, and as a result she has entertained some unsavory heads of state. I believe her cousin King Olav was entertained officially as well as privately at Balmoral, and maybe King Gustav of Sweden, also a distant relative. But state visits traditionally occur in state owned venues. I have a feeling that will not change.
DeleteSecond attempt to comment on Telegraph article-FIRST, summer State visits are virtually unheard of, as are State visits to Balmoral or the Queen's return to London before Fall. In view of the sharp exchange between Ms. May to Mr. Trump as well as previous comments of some high in the British government about Mr. T's lack of welcome in GB, I would doubt such an unusual departure from custom, if not protocol. On the other hand, since the article was written by a political reporter for a fairly respectable forum, one has to give the story some consideration. I would suggest that no such plans have been formalized, but that there was possibly a well-placed leak of possible plans. The reason for the leak would be as a trial balloon to see if the idea floats or gets shot down- or bursts. The purpose of such an unusual Summer audience with HM (probably not a State visit) would be damage control after a few people opened their mouths and inserted feet. IN my previous, lost comment on this subject I made a comparison to a regrettable past event in BRF-US President relations. This may have been what caused my comment to go astray and I left it out this attempt. Full disclosure: I am responding to Charlotte's comment on the article. I have not read the article. Yet.
DeleteOK- read the Telegraph article. Surely it was tongue in cheek. 'My Maggie?" The "full Monty' state visit=better than Obama's? play gulf at Balmoral with the Queen watching? While it is true politicians make strange bedfellows in the name of expediency, HM, although a skilled diplomat and quite capable of letting her wishes be known-would she yield to government pressure and take part in an activity that was undignified at best and possibly humiliating? How desperate is the British party in power and its PM to woo US trade and economic considerations to more or less stick a finger in the leaking Brexit dam?
DeleteSG, wow indeed. You never know... 😊
Delete- my words, also, CP. I have sometimes felt as though I were shouting into the wind. The words increase and increasing were used in the statement. The term "full time" has never been an official term. Senior royal is and the Cambridges have always been termed senior royals officially. This has not changed and will not change.Full time royal and full time duty is indeed a stick that some of the press have produced out of thin air and wielded ,unfortunately,by those dedicated to and earning their keep from the royals. William and Catherine have had to carve out an heir to the heir niche for themselves, as there has not been an adult in that position within the modern context. Instead of whining about the wait or feeling useless, William took a job that by his words gave him useful lessons for the future. He continued to assist his Grandmother in her duties and to take over some of her foreign travel. He attended royal family historical events. He helped develop a foundation, a charity umbrella organization, a humanitarian as well as an international animal rights campaign. All the while, learning the ropes as a husband and father.That actually sounds pretty full-time to me.
ReplyDeleteMy 22:29 comment is a response to and originally posted under CP's 21:30 comment.
DeleteWell put, annie.
DeleteEveryone always talks about William's position being unprecedented. And I suppose it is in a way. But there are others, even further down the line than he is, who manage to carve a niche and role for themselves. I really don't know why that is so hard for William.
DeleteI don't think it has been hard for William at all, Bluhare. I agree with Annie at 22:29 about that.
DeleteHe's had a plan. I think it has been a good one and that it will only get better and is getting better.
A nice person doing good things.
I don't think it is hard for William to carve out a role for himself. It's just that he is doing it differently from the norm,and the public and media are having a hard time accepting it. Although, with info from family in the U.K. and from things I have read, there is quite a big sector who have applauded his working in the private sector. Of course there are those that don't. However as I said before, personally I think it will serve him well.
DeleteI understand your points however it appears to me that William has carved his niche in a way that distances himself from the mundane duty that's part of every job and in his case that's a duty to the public. But he can't support his lifestyle on what he's been doing either so that's the part I have trouble with. All the perks with only some of the responsibilities. At leastlater this year he will start to pull more of his own weight.
DeleteAnd I don't have any issues with Kate being a stay at home mother either. I think that's a good thing and she certainly has the wherewithal to do it. And I think that's really what she wants to do. So their office needs to stop telling us how keen she is to get stuck in. It sets her up forbad press when she doesn't follow through.
If there were a great many young royals out there actively working, William's private work would be less of an issue. However there aren't. William's job is a worthy one but is not only one that has no requirement of being royal - just a superbly trained pilot or co-pilot. It may actively be a disadvantage to be royal - putting an extra burden on employees who aren't who have to take over work he would be expected to do - on holidays for instance. (William never worked a single Christmas or missed a holiday he wanted to take.) With a friend of William's in charge, it is unlikely other employees have any voice about his conduct.
DeleteBut while there may be a number of qualified pilots - there is no suggestion William took the work due to a shortage - there is only one prince. As a pilot he can help a few thousand in one area - and that's putting numbers greater than rescues he was probably involved with. As a prince, he has the power to work to the good of hundreds of thousands. His reluctance up to now to take on that royal role has - intentionally or not - ended up demeaning it and damaging the work of royals in general by having the value questioned. That's a pity.
William never lived the life of a helicopter pilot. He has always been a prince and if one is to be a pilot, one should live and work as a pilot and he has not. He has expected to have all his princely privileges. So it seems right he take on the work that goes with those privileges and whilst it may not excite his adrenaline quite so much (and there is no way William would have taken on rescue work if it didn't involve flying) there is enormous good that come of it.
Julia, you are always quick to point out that William never worked over the holidays and use that as an example where you feel that he has used his royal status to get special favor. This has always bothered me. I will concede that it is possible that this is what happened. However, isn't it just as likely that he works with individuals that have no kids or family that chose to work so he can spend the time with his family? I have done this myself for my coworkers in the past.
DeleteOr that there is special holiday pay that is given and someone less fortunate than William needs it and chooses to work to support their family?
Now I don't live in the U.K. so I don't see everything or hear everything you might but from what I do see and hear following W/K it appears that they go out of their way sometimes not to use their status to their advantage.
Why don't you give William the benefit of the doubt that there are other reasons for not working the holidays?
Julia, I respectfully disagree.
DeleteAs he has himself expressed more than once, the actual flight rescue experience seems to have proven invaluable to him regardless of anyone else's opinion about it, no offense. Using one's passion and skill set to help others is always a good thing. The broader the area one can help, the better. I certainly don't think an adrenaline rush was William's primary goal but rather a desire to help others. A desire he has expressed even when he was a child. I do not perceive William as selfish or self-seeking in any way or work shy, or responsibility shy in any way. I perceive him to be a nice person doing good things.
I loved the Queen's happy smiles each time she visited William's job, both the military one and the civil one.
Exactly, Julia. They are the ONLY young royals out there. Eugenie is what? sixth in line with two of those ahead of her toddlers and does what? No husband, regular job, or children to take up her time. Then Anne's children-perhaps Anne regrets being away from her children so much for her duties and wants her children to raise their families outside the duty area. AND exactly, they are the only YOUNG royals doing anything; they are young, which means their children are also very young. They are doing duties as the Queen parcels them out, as William has said. Her illness may have caused some second thoughts, but this plan to phase out the air ambulance job when George approached pre-school age and increase duties was stated a year ago.
DeleteWant to point out that William's position IS precedent-ed.
DeleteGeorge V was 36 when his grandmother, Queen Victoria, passed away.
George V was 45 when his father, King Edward VII, passed away.
George V and Queen Mary are Queen Elizabeth II grandparents.
I strongly suspect that if Harry was doing the same balancing act (rescue pilot and royal duties), he would be seen as being a breath of fresh air in the Firm; someone not afraid to get his hands dirty and put himself out there to deal with very real and serious circumstances beyond palace walls. Given William's position behind the Queen and his father, he should be given credit for doing a dangerous job he is not required to do. He could cut more ribbons; would this be more satisfactory? I'm thinking no... :)
DeleteI agree, RF.
DeleteRegrettably, I also agree, royalfan. Harry is seen as the younger, more carefree-perhaps a little bit the underdog, with his brother ahead in the line. Some people just identify with the underdog. The tab correspondents would be falling all over themselves to praise Harry taking on an outside job. Even if that meant fewer "royal duties." Then some people are just partial to Gingers, too. Ha!
DeleteThanks for that perspective, Moxie. I didn't realize George V was that old when Victoria died. So I guess there is precedence!
DeleteAnd who tipped off a photographer to cover Meghan at the airport? Did World Vision pay for her airplane trip, as well as hotel, food? There may be more parallels to some of Diana's not as admired habits-such as press manipulation. It is still not clear to me which of the three gave the story to the press. If that guide has a business with various famous people, he likely would not want to be known as a tattle-tell. That leaves Harry or Meghan. I seriously doubt Harry, who has complained of publicity of his private life, would give the story to the tabs. OR- maybe it was a fabrication.
DeleteGeorge V was heir to the heir for about two seconds, comparatively. He only had that position until his brother, the eldest son, died and he then became the heir. William has been the heir behind his father Charles all his life-34 years. Not actually a comparable precedent. And George V was only next heir for around ten years. Victoria died in 1900, Edward VII in 1910. Charles has been next heir since 1953.
DeleteCorrection: George V was heir to the heir to Victoria from 1892 when his elder brother Albert Victor died until 1901, when Queen Victoria died, his father became Edward VII, and he became the heir. I haven't discovered what actual royal duties he performed in the 9 years he was heir to the heir, but for those few years he was indeed an adult heir to the heir. As I originally stipulated "in modern times," I'm not sure the nineteenth century qualifies as modern. I did read that Edward VII was the first British monarch to perform such duties as official visits and openings and dedications, but by then George V to be was the heir, the Prince of Wales. I also read that Edward VII, Albert Edward, was made POW by Queen Victoria at the age of one month, which makes QEII's waiting until Charles was well into his teens to make him POW rather interesting, I think.
DeleteVery good points about the bear vacay and the airport in Mumbai, Annie. There are not a whole lot of other options about that. Surely she wouldn't be that unwise? Unless, she is purposefully just in it for the short term and PR gain. For Harry's sake, I pray we are both wrong about that.
DeleteYou guys always talk about William's position being unprecedented. Moxie showed it is not, and how many years, months, days and seconds is getting picky, in my opinion of course. The fact is there was someone in his position, and apparently now you've decided that doesn't count as it isn't modern enough.
DeleteCharles was styled Prince of Wales in 1958, prior to his teen years. He did not have the investiture at Canarvon Castle until he was 21. It was a formality, however, as he was already known as Prince of Wales. You don't have to have the ceremony to have the title.
Bluhare, I kinda rely on my fellow commenters to correct any errors I make here. I do try to be accurate, but sometimes Wiki leads me down a garden path. Or perhaps I read it wrong, or forgot. I should take notes. Ha! At any rate, thanks for the heads up. I will offer a few more thoughts. Expectations some here state for William as heir to heir is to work "full time" in royal duties; therefore the precedent would be an adult heir to the heir working full time in royal duties. I don't think that can be proven about George V. I would say, for William, 34 plus however more years Charles will be heir, compared to nine years under the media-manufactured full time duty expectation is a significant difference. Of course,
Deleteroyals before Edward VII, who created his own concept of what duties a monarch should perform, had only ceremonial and quasi-governmental duties-meeting with the PM. OK, Charles was 9-10. Hardly a newborn. There were reasons why QEII delayed his moving into the POW role. Queen Victoria and Albert's being so thrilled to have a son and heir, after their first child was a daughter, may have been a factor. Victoria Jr. was to become a great comfort and credit to her parents. I think she would have made a marvelous heir and Queen regnant.
Floxie 20:24- Just a note- George V was heir to heir from 1892-1901. During the two times you mentioned,1901 when the Queen died, George was the heir to King Edward VII, not heir to heir; secondly, in 1910 when his Father died,George went from heir (not heir to heir) to being King. Just a little fact check. The times you mentioned did not relate to the subject in question: precedent for royal duties of an heir to the heir. George had few, if any duties when his Father was heir to Queen Victoria. The heir himself was barely allowed a voice in the monarchy. Victoria kept a firm grip on the reins of monarchy.
DeleteThank you for the post, Charlotte - another one in such a short time!
ReplyDeleteI think William's decision shows clearly that he knows what and where his main responsibilities are. It really seems to make sense to me.
I'm in the middle of watching a documentary about Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83A93amfXv8). What an amazing, courageous, witty lady! What incredible support for her husband who was in a terribly difficult position after his brother's abdication! And she was also amazing support for her nation during the WWII! I think it must be quite a challenge for Kate, to know her role-models, to a certain extent, are such people as Prince Philip and Queen Mother. From what I've seen, I strongly believe she has embraced her role as William's support. It can't be "measured" but it is very important and I admire her for it.
Zora @ 22:57 Annie @ 22:29 I concur. :)
DeleteI have to admit I am sad to see this change because I feel like it means they will not be having baby #3. The closer it gets to Pippa's wedding with no announcement the more certain I've been they will stop at two. I know that the Duchess had very difficult pregnancies with HG. I am pregnant with my third right now and kept hoping she would announce a pregnancy soon as we have been pregnant at the same time twice before! My nausea lasts until 25 weeks though it's not as severe as HG. But like the commenter above this very much does seem like a new chapter in their lives and although exciting I find myself a little sad, just as I will be sad when my having babies days come to an end. Best of luck to them both. I think it's an admirable step that no doubt feels like and is a significant sacrifice to the life and freedom they've been able to have in Norfolk.
ReplyDeleteThere's no reason why they "won't have" or couldn't have baby number 3 in 2018 after giving Pippa her day. And sometimes babies have their own ideas as to when they will arrive. What will be will be (including the ever-ongoing speculation about pregnancies, likely until she's 52).
DeleteWhy couldn't she be pregnant at Pippa's wedding? She doesn't have to be hidden away because she's pregnant and sartorially speaking, some of her best looks have been maternity wear.
DeleteI believe that if they want to have a third child they will regardless of how involved they are in their Royal duties. In fact, it may be even easier for them to have a third if based primarily in London. No so much back and forth as they are doing now. And it just might mean a second nanny. After all, if they have planned for three children, they did it knowing that they would be juggling parenthood with their work, as most parents do. Also, I know many couples who had their first two children close together, then waited longer to have a third child. Perhaps not realizing in advance how much work it would require, so decided to space additional children further apart.
DeleteI love that the Duchess experimented more with separates in 2016! I really liked the Reiss Vinnie High-Neck Shirt and the Dolce & Gabbana Boucle Wool Blend Skirt together, but I had to vote for the Gap print trousers look as a great alternative to Kate's much-favored skinny jeans/blazer combo. I still remember seeing this look for the first time and feeling pleasantly surprised.
ReplyDeleteI agree. It's a great way to create more fun looks. And I hope she will continue this trend, and also not do many "exact repeats", but rather mix and match pieces :)
DeleteI had a really hard time picking the outfit I liked the most!
ReplyDeleteI have a question: I didn't understand why a journalist said the timing of the news release was purposeful to the US Presidential Inauguration. Did he mean the intent/hope was that the announcement would go a little less noticed?
Charlotte, in the time that I have been reading this blog, I have never known what your thoughts are on the royal family. You do such a good job of being impartial, that at times I wondered if your blog was a university experiment (I really did!). I liked hearing what you think about Kate and William and their representation of your country. You echoed my thoughts about them and I think you said it perfectly.
It's always such a delight to reflect back on her beautiful wardrobe selections across the year. At the time, I had mixed thoughts about shorter hair, I longed for the engagement days of her beautiful glossy blowouts! But, now looking back, as her fringe (or bangs for our US friends) grew a little longer, her hair looked gorgeous a few inches shorter. Somehow, to me it suited her role and position a little better. But, she clearly loves her long hair, so it will be interesting to see if she has the temptation cut it shorter again. She certainly wore some beautiful seperate pieces this year, and I too loved both the Catherine Walker and the Eponine looks. But,honestly she looked gorgeous in all of them. I understand their decision to move back to London, and I'm sure Her Majesty and William have shared many conversations about those previous years that she and Prince Phillip shared together in the early years of their marriage in Malta. Sadly for HM the time is fast approaching to begin to hand over her workload to the already hard working Charles and now to William, Catherine and Harry. I hope she can continue to enjoy bring a young Mum (as you can never get those years back), and I agree, I think William will take the larger load, with Catherine increasing her duties more slowly. It makes me quite sad to think that HM and Prince Phillip are finally starting to slow down ... I dread to read that sad headline. I hope it's still a long time coming. xx
ReplyDeleteI hope it won't be for a long time yet either, Dee. HM & Prince Philip are both amazing for their age. I agree with you on the Duchess' shorter hairstyle, I love her beautiful long locks but a few inches off gives her a lift, I'm torn over both looks.
DeleteAs with the previous polls, I had to think back to which look made the most favorable impression upon seeing it for the first time. So I had to go with the Gap pants. I know she is wearing her ubiquitous dark blazer, but the pants are so "wow" that I can overlook that. The Dolce & Gabbana skirt with the white blouse was a close second.
ReplyDeleteI have to admit that none of the other outfits appeal to me much at all. Boring....and that Banana Republic skirt to me is very unappealing and wears her, rather than she wears it.
The timing is indeed interesting. At least in Monarchy you know what you are getting. America’s “new era” is not quite predictable yet. Is it “royalty”, nationalism, corporate rule, democracy? As new entries are wished well, I wish W&K the insight and blessing to do good as well as the new US presidency. The rest is future, forward.
ReplyDeleteI liked the entire look with the Michael Kors suit. Her graceful up do was the perfect finishing touch, as with the blue CW skirt suit. The pearl earrings-an example of the importance of details. She was truly The Duchess. I also was partial to the D&G skirt, especially with the black turtleneck.
ReplyDeleteThe CW suit was photographed with Kate in various lighting and position changes. In the photo provided above, there is the appearance of wrinkles, termed "creases" by some. It seems obvious that that illusion is merely the result of her being photographed while walking, with one leg forward causing the rather loose material to flex and appear creased. That sounds like a stretch; however, there are also other photos that show her standing still, in the King's home for example, which show her skirt without the claimed 'creases." Unless she was carrying a steam iron in her purse and retired for a quick press, there were no wrinkles.
DeleteNo wish to get into politics anywhere, but the clothes worn yesterday to the inauguration and to the party afterwards were simply lovely.
ReplyDeleteDelighted to hear about the announcement. I don't know how much additional work it will lead to but the most important thing is that there will be a full focus on being royal. I don't believe it necessarily means there won't be a third baby - Kate spent most of her pregnancies in London or at her parents' home, but I do think she will wait until after Pippa's wedding.
As far as part-time, full-time, until recently, there was no need for such a distinction, royals were royals and did royal activities or were in the forces regardless of how many engagements they did.
But the last fifty years have seen changes. First, royals now are expected to attend university (more common for everyone now.) And then royals have taken on private work whilst still continuing with royal duties. These have included Edward, Sophie, and now William.
None of this outside employment has lasted too long but it has created a new meaning for part-time, full-time royals. A royal working privately is not engaged in royal work - he or she is a private employee. If that royal also does royal work, they are essentially, a part-time royal worker, whether you want to call them a part-time royal or not. They are devoting only part of their time to royal work and drawing a salary (regardless of what they do with it) for the rest of their time. So I do believe today, by implication, part-time royals exist whether the palace wants to define it that way or not.
There are lots of changes that have occurred that the palace could probably do without. There are now lists of royal gifts that never existed until recently. There was the fuss - quite overrated on all sides - about the Prince of Wales' letters which were in the end released. Numbers of engagements are being given more and more attention, and this new business of counting private meetings is a response to that, although if there is a sense that numbers are being inflated, there may be even more scrutiny. We are in a time of many changes, we will have to see what these will bring to the monarchy.
As for clothes, I voted for the kilted skirt in honour of my husband. But I liked most of them, although I don't really think very short skirts are appropriate for Kate on her public engagements. The Walker suit was lovely but so creased!
The creases were the reason I didn't vote for that suit, Julia. I kept remembering all your comments about it, so I couldn't do it!
DeleteI voted for the Michael Kors suit, which fits and suits Kate so well, and looks very nice with hat and boots, gloves, and turtleneck for warmth. My second choice is the Banana Republic skirt, no doubt chosen for its colors, and the white Goat Binky blouse. A very nice look for a charity event.
ReplyDeleteI'm glad KP has confirmed the Cambridges' plans. It is not a surprise to me that as the family evolves, they adapt to changing needs and conditions.
I agree, Julia, about the Inaugural attire. I did like Melania's gown for the previous evening better than her ball gown. And I thought her very light shoes were odd for winter. But her blue dress (similar blue to Kate's in Amsterdam) and her stepdaughters' white outfits were lovely. Hillary also wore a nice coat and pantsuit in the suffragette color, white. Whether it meant the same to Ivanka and Tiffany, I have no idea.
The former first ladies were all warmly dressed, having experienced January weather on the west front of the Capitol on several occasions!
I loved the Eponine. I had an ensemble very like it in a soft dusty-green wool in 1968 but with soft pleats, not creased. Made it myself in sewing class at school. Fully lined. Side slit pockets. The Duchess has done a number of things I did once upon a time in a similar style (including the French lace over a contrasting lining which I did for my high school graduation except that I used cotton lace originally intended for curtains--no one guessed and I didn't tell).
ReplyDeleteI also really like her skirt/blouse/turtle neck and kilt/turtle neck combinations. Smart, classic, comfortable.
The description of the outfit you made similar to Kate's Eponine sounds lovely. You must be quite the seamstress to make all those designs!
DeleteYou seem to have quite the sewing talent. As someone who only sews on buttons I'm impressed with creating your own dress for a graduation and you dusty green ensemble sounds lovely. With pleats no less!
DeleteWell, I did a careful and passable job. My mother was even more gifted with her hands. As young girls, both my grandmothers were taught how to draft their own patterns (though mother and I never did). It was quite common for graduation and wedding dresses to be handmade at the time and even for a decade after. With a Vogue pattern you could create a gown that was in all respects, bespoke. Then the wedding/prom industry mushroomed into the marketing mania it is now.
DeleteOut of necessity (as a refugee & immigrant to Canada during the Great Depression) my maternal grandmother would fill a large sack she could get for one dollar at a charity with cast-off clothes. She carefully selected large sizes in high quality wool and other natural fabrics, cleaned them, tore them apart and refashioned them according to what she saw in catalogs. As a result, my mother and aunts were dressed in up to date style in spite of their poverty. That penchant for dressing well went down the DNA line. Clothes are one of the great joys of life (and much less harmful than wine!)
I stopped sewing when all the quality fabric stores closed shop. Once cheaper ready made options from third world sweatshops glutted the stores, sadly, the fabric business dried up. Also, as my career progressed, I had less and less time. I focused on decor instead.
Sorry. I've rambled on down memory lane. But I gasped a little when I saw Catherine in the Eponine and the French lace.
I enjoyed the stroll Philly. I used to sew also. I guess I still could should the notion take hold. Hummm. :) Home Economics was one of my favorite classes in Junior High. I still have some of my patterns from back in the day. I had a sewing machine that I took to college with me. It had a mind of it's own though. It would work for everyone in the dorm but me. I think that is where sewing and I started to part ways. Love your grandmother's creativity. Obviously it is still alive and thriving in your family. Thanks for sharing. :)
DeletePhilly, love your memory lane and you are so correct. The fabric is key and in todays age to get really good fabric at bargain prices one would have to hit the thrift shops regularly and would need to hunt for vintage pieces for good quality fabrics. It is doable but much more work. My Mother did not sew but did make handmade hook rugs from old wool clothes that were sliced into pieces for hooking a rug. She then came up with very creative artistic image that she modified from pictures for her rugs. She would have to boil and re-dye some of the wool. It was a very creative process for her and very economical to do with the result an extremely high quality "bespoke" wool area rug. My Fathers Mother during the depression turned to hand knitting beautiful sweaters, skirts and dresses to keep her own family well dressed and to sell for some additional money.
DeletePhilly and Ali- I enjoyed your stories of family and fabrics. I have one, too. Every Summer before school started, my Mom and I would make a trip to a privately-owned fabric shop. There we were attended to personally by the owner. We would mull through Simplicity, McCall's, and Butterick catalogues. It was better than the Sears "wishbook" because I actually got to choose among the outfits. The attentive owner would find the patterns for us and then the search for the perfect fabrics and notions-buttons and bows. Some of the dresses Mom ran up for me on her Singer sewing machine would fit right in today. I especially remember a black Channel-style suit I wore on airplane trips back to college. One dressed up in a dress, hose, and heels for airplane travel back then. It was actually a sleeveless square necked sheath dress with a matching fitted waist-length jacket that had broad lapels and two large , I think jet buttons. Maybe not Channel. Dressed up with pearls and without the jacket the dress could serve for dinner and early evening events.
DeletePhilly your grandmother sounds lovely and someone I would have loved to have met and watched her process What special memories to hand down a family. Makes me miss my grandmother and our 'cooking classes' we had when I was younger. It's really a great idea and if I could find a good quality tailor (also a dying industry to me) I might follow in her footsteps. So many possiblities!!
DeleteAli those rugs must have been beautiful the way you are describing them. Our society has changed so much and it makes me feel we are very much in a 'throw away' culture.
I chose the Catherine Walker blue suit. Loved several others as well, but in the end that won. It will be interesting to watch the move to London and more royal duties play out. They are doing the right thing for the monarchy, and more importantly, for the Queen.
ReplyDeleteI voted for the Iris & Ink Grace Cashmere Turtleneck Sweater with jeans. I loved the color of the sweater and the simplicity of the outfit. It would be interesting to see the choice of schools for George and Charlotte in London. Thank You Charlotte!XOXO
ReplyDeleteInteresting news re: the Cambridge family moving to London proper. About time!
ReplyDeleteI really liked the Michael Kors suit, but wish Kate had worn a belt with it to change up the proportions. It looked best in the style shots online.
Please, as someone who lives on the other side of the world and has no alliegance to either the UK or the US, please please keep any discussion of US politics outta here. I don't want to discuss Melania Trump or anyone in her family, and while I try to skip it if I see it, no one apart from Charlotte and Julia seemed to acknowledge that other readers had asked for the conversation topic to be stopped. Perhaps if you want to, you could start your own Melania Trump life and style blog?
The comments are more about Ralph Lauren than about Melania! And they are not political. Just some words about an unusual blue dress and a scattering of white outfits. I don't expect opportunities for such notice to continue, since the Trump ladies plan to tend to their children in the near future.
DeleteI find it interesting to read the protests against "political" commentary resulting from posts about the First Lady's *fashion* on Inauguration Day; even more so given that both Michelle Obama and Ivanka Trump were suggested as ideal role models for the Duchess to follow (on more than one occasion here). Surely, an innocent reference to fashion is more fitting on this blog than any comparisons of the role of a member of the BRF to an American business woman or First Lady. Just my opinion as I have read some feedback here....... :)
Deleteroyalfan- I think the difference is the context in which they were made. Perhaps a cooling off period?
DeleteI think Ivanka would be a great role model for Kate to emulate. The two women have a lot in common, being the same age, from similar backgrounds, with similar family and public situations.
DeleteThe one thing that Kate seems to struggle with still is confidence and self-confidence so maybe Ivanka could help her with some tips in that area.
Actually I won't discuss anyone here; it sounds too prohibitive and too exclusive. Perhaps, it is time to be busier on my international blog as a contributing commenter. Fashion alone can get boring. Causes are discussed awaiting engagements/time to move on.
ReplyDeleteCharlotte,
Thank you for two years of your blog I have come to like.
Best wishes
Hello International,
DeleteI hope you will reconsider as I (and many others) very much your enjoy your commentary.
Oh for heavens sake. Charlotte I hope you pay no attention to these absurd "requests", and Int'l if you want to comment you go ahead and comment. It is up to Charlotte to decide what comments she will allow, no one else. And I haven't seen one even remotely political comment.
DeleteHonestly have we really gotten to this point that if we don't agree with someone politically, we can't even make a comment about their fashion? Imagine if we applied that to all areas of our lives? Where does it end? It's insane and the very opposite of tolerance. You will live a very, very lonely life if you only seek out people who agree with you 100% on EVERYTHING.
There was just an inauguration that made front pages around the world. Why shouldn't people comment on what people were wearing, or like royalfan say "this is something I'd like to see on Kate"? I routinely see people comment on Princess Mary or Maxima in comparison to Kate, or, from the political world, Sophie Trudeau when the Cambridges went to Canada.
Is this the result of social media, block what you don't like, only interact with what you do, making us more and more divided than ever? God help us all if this is how our leaders will act. It is ok to disagree with people and still be able to like them, love them, engage with them. My goodness I think of all the fierce discussions I've had in the past and then we've all happily gone for a cocktail together :)
It is the thing that scares me the most for our future. We will turn into a most uncivil society if we keep this up. It is ok to have differences! Thank God for them.
Charlotte,
DeleteIt is nice of you to respond regarding my comment. I have learnt from others, be acquainted with interesting people, get sleeplessly excited on tours, admired your sense of balance, and escaped from some “days” to be on this blog. I have come to reconnect the dots from times of the past, past history, sentiment, also Diana’s days, realize what UK, Monarchy and BRF mean in real time as a “matured” adult. A lot of this was also from the summaries you post; you post new blogs and discussion which ended up on search for other stories.
William’s marriage to Kate and their wedding day was truly a new beginning, a lesson in overcoming and optimism. So much so, continued to follow them. At least I know where to stop by to read about their on-going journey in their undertaking, right here.
In regard to monarchy, I have evolved as neutral; continue to learn more about it. I “knew” it more from environment and conditioning of older generations who favored it, were of service to it (when monarchy used to equal country), but also occasionally questioned it, and as a young person. It has its pluses and minuses. Most of my young adult life to the present, I had lived in Democracy. I longed for it before I lived in it. It also has its plus and minus.
Otherwise, I like to be genuine in most things I participate. It is better to sort out my own attitude in current times to prevent confusion. I am aware several months ago you asked commenters to refrain from politics. I respect that, although the world is full of politics. At times it is refreshing to pause and find something different, and this blog had been that for many of us. There are also times a person realizes, life itself is politics. Then it becomes a transition to focus on other priorities.
I highly value you make exception and let opposing views of the latest world politics topic /US there by Melania’s fashion, for and against be posted. May be once in rare occasion, people should be able to share their views on other people at least in fashion in spite of what this blog stands for/HRHD. In the past they have been able to do so here without other commenters restricting them. This is not about your blog at all. This is about the current mood and its tendencies.
Most likely, it will be a much busier year for you too as W&C move to KP in London. I have discovered a place where to stop by, right here to read your posts and some comments.
Please don't go International, we do value your opinions and like to hear your comments. I mean my goodness I feel like we just met (with actual names instead of anonymous if you used this in the past and if you didn't then forgive me for not paying close attention) and now you want to leave. This isn't what we wanted from the start of the new comments section. This is a moment in time that will past on Tuesday when we have the next Kate engagement post. Please stay and continue to participate.
DeleteBut if I can't persuade you then I understand your reasons for leaving, it will be a big loss if that is your choice but I will support you in that as well.
Julie from NC,
DeleteThere is a reason for every season, and let it be. At present to continue reading than posting fits right. This blog probably has multiple more readers than commenters. I don’t post much any way. Out of good intention people positively reach out to others. The recipient’s set of mind at that given “season” can be elsewhere even beyond the expectation of the same. It is a very thoughtful thing to say to the other person, if that is what you prefer, I support your decision. Thank you for understanding.
quick addendum, :). Apparently Harry and Meghan, before they left Norway during their New Year's getaway, reportedly ventured further into the "wilderness" on a two or three day camping trip, apparently with only one guide. They travelled in heated snow suits on snowmobiles into bear country. Me thinketh Harry may have met his (adventuresome) soulmate in Meghan.
ReplyDeleteAh, surfer girl, don't know if you are old enough but they said the same thing about Prince Andrew and Sarah Ferguson when they went off to the Canadian wilderness on their camping honeymoon ;) There is just something about Meghan (and Harry too) that makes me think she and Harry will have a passionate relationship and it will fizzle out in a few years. I just hope there isn't a royal wedding in the midst of it.
DeleteValerie, I agree. I hope they really take their time also and think things through. How will they get along after the duration openly in the public arena with the media? Have they even had their first fight yet? Can Meghan's penchant and stated desire for political activism mesh with Royal life? There are a lot of important variables involved. They sure make a cute couple though. :)
DeleteI'm 100% with the others who do not wish to discuss the King and Queen of the American Prom on this blog. I'd like us to agree that discussing them should be off limits. I'm sure there will be blogs (like Mrs. O which I followed for a few years but sadly did not last) to fill that gap for those readers who would like to follow other royals, celebrities and world leaders.
ReplyDeletePerhaps it's natural that on the first day after the transition from one leader of a large country to another there might be some spillover mention of it. However, if she would be so inclined, I am asking Charlotte not to post comments pertaining to the wives of any heads of state unless they are in UK and interacting with Duchess in some way (as that time when the Obamas visited Kensington Palace) or if the Duchess is visiting another country like the Netherlands. I believe someone did say something about the King's suit and tie. Fine. Perfect. Enough.
Worldwide, other heads of state have changed (as they regularly do). We did not discuss the leather pants or any other clothing of Theresa May. Canada's Sophie Gregoire Trudeau didn't get a great deal of discussion here when she and the Prime Minister of Canada visited Buckingham Palace. Why should anyone else merit continuous discussion?
This blog's focus is on Catherine. I'd like it to stay that way.
I agree. I would like the blog to continue to focus on Catherine.
DeleteWell, perhaps Canada's First Lady did not get a great deal of discussion because generally speaking, the American head of state and spouse has quite a bit more power and influence in the world than...Canada's.
DeleteIt's one thing to say no politics talk. But arbitrarily limiting the discussion of the clothing choices of other famous women who are in somewhat similar positions to Kate? That just seems silly. But Charlotte knows best and of course I'll respect anything she decides.
We don't use the title"First Lady" in Canada. That is entirely an American term. Sophie Gregoire Trudeau is known simply as " spouse of the Prime Minister. "
DeleteIf you're going to talk about anyone's style in the new US administration, it might be more interesting to look at Ivanka Trump's style, since she has the most (in fact, a LOT!) in common with the Duchess of Cambridge. They are the same age, both mothers of multiple children, both come from wealthy backgrounds, are in the public eye and in public roles, etc.
DeleteI agree with perhaps not getting into political discussions but style and fashion is universal.
Nobody seems to have any qualms about attacking Beatrice or Eugenie, or Camilla, for that matter, about their style or looks so I really do wonder where some draw the line?
Respectfully, Philly, I have discussed Theresa May's fashion here - I hope no one was offended. Whilst I don't believe I mentioned the leather trousers, I did mention her interesting shoes, and observed, if I recall, that is the way a woman who dresses very professionally, could liven up her outfits. I also believe I made note of her showing a bit of leg, again favourably. (She and I are essentially the same age so I take note of her style.) I have also made comments about Sophie Trudeau and the designer she wore to the White House. I've also made note of very royal ladies and in this post very much admired the choices of both out-going and in-coming first ladies.
DeleteI don't believe any of us want this blog to be about politics - because it is not the topic and we also know we have people here we respect - as we do in life - who have differing political views. To me, that's fine, I'm even willing to listen to republican friends (of the anti-royal variety.) Nor do we want this blog to regularly be about anyone other than Kate (when Harry marries, we'll see) but surely on one big occasion, there can be some mention of fashions with the knowledge we will move on the next post - coming in a day or two - without making hard and fast rules.
There will be times our views on fashion and politics may disagree. I'm sure there were many people here who may not be supporters of the President of China - we know the POW felt strongly enough to stay away from the banquet. But we all commented graciously and favourably on his wife's choices - a very elegant lady she is.
Once in a while, politics have come up - with Brexit for instance, and if I disagreed with some of the remarks, I thought best to simply let it go and take it in the good spirit the remarks were offered. And there have been comments on how I've spoken about Camilla - and that's fair enough - but even there, I've been known to say she looks nice. This is another area where we've been able to move on. And I believe we can here - without getting too upset about it or insisting on new policies.
As Maggie observes, it's for Charlotte to say - but I hoe we can just move on.
If the focus is only on Catherine, should Harry and Meghan be discussed? Or Beatrice and Eugenie? I agree that we should not get too far off topic, and I probably sympathize with some of the objections, but most of the comments here have been about clothing.
DeleteCamilla, Beatrice Eugenie etc are all members of the British Royal Family, so I do think discussing them is much more logical. Comparisons between Kate and members of other Royal families such as Mary or Maxima also make sense to me, while the ones with Melania or Ivanka Trump frankly don't.
DeleteTheresa May is not as controversial a figure as Trump and I believe that is why when she has been discussed, there haven't been any complaints. The Chinese President, on the other hand, would be such a controversial figure but since he did meet William and Kate, I wouldn't have opposed to him and his wife being a topic of discussion. Likewise, if there is to be a state visit with Trump or speculation of one, I see why that would be talked about here and I won't oppose.
I believe it's a fine line but for me personally, I didn't as much mind the talk of Melania's (indeed very pretty) dress and the Trump daughters' and Hillary Clinton's lovely white outfits, but rather the talk about Trump himself, his dancing and comparison's between Kate and Melania, which I don't think do her any favours.
I will admit that these are my personal feelings but from certain other comments I gather that there are those who share them. This is not about politics for me per se, I would not have been opposed to talk about the Obamas, the Bushes, the Clintons, the Pences, Theresa May - people on very different sides of the political spectrum. To me it's about manners and a person who lacks them.
manners are a two way street. Censorship is the borderline of tyranny, no offense. Particularly, any censorship based on fear and hatred. Hatred being defined as an intense or passionate dislike.
DeleteThe Express today has an article and photos of the Middleton children participating in their Uncle Gary's
ReplyDelete90's wedding. There is a photo of a very young James Middleton who looks so much like George it is amazing. (to me at least.) If I could get the link here to you I would. You have to see that photo. :)
George does remind me of both Pippa & James when they were young, especially James in Gary's wedding photos.
DeleteCharlotte,
ReplyDeletecan you provide the video from The Daily Star here or a link to it? And the photo of James, ie, twin to George photo that I mentioned from the other article if that is possible? :) If so, that would be so neat to have in the DKB archives.
Today in The Daily Star, in an article by Tom Evans, there is an amazing video of Kate and Pippa in their Uncle Gary's 90's wedding. An amazing video. The family calls her both Catherine and Kate in the video.
That video is too cute, surfer girl :) Pippa is a little charmer & Catherine, such a lady. I love James being picked up & fussed over for the family photo! Carole is almost the spitting image of her mother, Dorothy. So nice to have an insight into their family life when they were younger.
Delete(there's a more extensive video in The Daily Mail.)
ReplyDeleteSurfer girl- only Harry, Meghan, and one other? It begs the question- who broke the story?
ReplyDeleteGood question because I am thinking the third person was a PPO.
DeleteI'm surprised (although I could easily be wrong) that no one here, other than Charlotte in the post, has mentioned the interesting timing of the statement. Releasing it on Inauguration Day? Either the KP PR team is really just the worst ever at their job or for some reason they wanted to hide the statement, which begs the question of why...
ReplyDeleteAnyways, glad to see William won't be testing his theory of being able to continue his Air Ambulance job even as King lol. Now what I'd like to see is William and/or Kate say something positive about increasing their royal duties, so it doesn't continue sounding like pulling teeth, rather than being an honor and a privilege.
The guide was his friend, the guy he worked with, the promoter of the Artic stuff he did before for the soldiers. I don't recall his name. I am assuming that that is who shared the news. Either he or the bears. :)
ReplyDeleteMaggie - not everyone in the world was focused on the Inauguration :)
ReplyDeleteThe Daily Star, Felicity Cross, 1/22/17 originated the story of Harry and Meghan in bear country then Ross Logan, The Express, 1/22/17, ran with the story. They didn't really cite a source.
ReplyDeleteHummm. They only mentioned "an undisclosed source" about a supposed quote from Harry that was sort a kind a related to their story but not exactly. Tacky. So, nm..... :) Sounds like a made up story at this point. Sorry. I usually look for sources right away. Yep, romanticism got in the way, lol. The polar explorer guy they were referencing is Inge Solheim, the man who plans and organizes polar adventures for people, often famous people, apparently, including Harry's event for the soldiers.
Meghan was photographed today in the airport in Mumbai though on return from working with World Vision in India. Apparently, World Vision paid for her to be accompanied by a PPO. I thought that was kind of unusual, albeit it thoughtful and kind. Very nice. They said that Diana also did work for World Vision. Small world.
surfer girl 23:40- Waiting for my reply to you to come through.
DeleteI am with Caroline. Do we really need to discuss American political figures here? It is a polarizing topic and upsetting to many. Your blog offers a distraction from every day life. I hope it can remain that way.
ReplyDeleteI actually agree. I understand that this is just fashion talk. And on the surface that is alright. But I know many many people who are genuinely scared and sick to their stomachs after this change and I think alot of them are trying to find distractions from it. US is such a influential country and this as been a very polarizing and emotional candidancy, so it is not the same to me as discussing less polarizing spouse/politician.
DeleteI deeply understand both sides, but I think that this close to the "core of the emotions" might be better to let that topic not spill over into this blog.
Charlotte has the reigns, and she does a wonderful job. So I'm not saying people are wrong in writing those comments. I'm just giving my own view on the issue :)
Rebecca, as I suggested above-a cooling off period.
DeleteTo clarify my previous statement that was more reactive than responsive and made before I was even fully awake this morning. This is perhaps not the forum for foreign political debates as interesting as they may or may not be. That is not censorship, just a matter of location. This is a forum, location, to discuss fashion, particularly fashion pertaining to a particular event. Yes, we do discuss politics as related to Britain and the Royal family but somehow, to me, that seems appropriate on DKB. But to say that we can't discuss someone's outfit because of such and such is not right, in my opinion. I hope that make sense. lol
ReplyDeleteFor those of us who pray, we need to seek God's face daily and earnestly pray like we have never prayed before that His will be done and that He gives peace and understanding about it so we will not spend our days in fear and hatred. Daily peace and understanding and comfort for each day are available to everyone of us through Him. He's faithful. ❤
I voted for the Le Kilt Houndstooth kilt and Black turtleneck. But I have to say I do not consider the truly separates , skirt and blouse or sweater/skirts the same as the separate designed as a co-ordinated suit by the designer.
ReplyDeleteHi Charlotte, this is my first time commenting under Floridagirl, but second time commenting since inception and I have been following this site since then!! I always enjoy reading your post. It's so difficult to choose the best outfit for these polls. She has worn numerous outfits that I find to be the winner. Is it sad that I pick the ones I like and HOPE that everyone feels the same way???? hehehe.....silly me. Anyways, continue with the updates, I am literally on this site every single day!
ReplyDeleteHa! I've been commenting as florida girl (with a space before girl) for over a year. Hmmmmmmm.....want to fight it out? Where in Florida do you live? Lol!! Just kidding - great minds think alike!
DeleteI think I share the thoughts of more than one American when I say this. I sure wish this election was over. ;)
ReplyDeleteSigh