Only good enough to be a mistress

[ProfessorDavey]

The two boys have already made it clear that as HM the Q and Nick the Greek power down they are going to be taking a far greateer active part in promoting those things, like the Invicta (?sic) games, that they are interested in.

I don't see why this will change when Liz and Phil die. I think currently they already have free reign to support causes that interest them. And this is hardly new - Charles has been doing it for decades - indeed he has had a lot of flack for pursuing his own interests and agendas and interfering when perhaps he should not have.

The have also made it clear that they do not intend to sit back and get paid for doing diddley-squat.

Well now that's an interesting comment. The question arises whether Royals should effectively engage in public duties, in effect full time, or whether they should have their own career and do the occasional public duties. This is where there have been issues in the past, and I see history repeating itself. Think back to the 70s and 80s - both Charles and Andrew had 'careers' in the armed forces, but both gave them up to become 'full time' Royals, in part linked to being of an age where they should be settling down, marrying and starting a family.

Sounds familiar doesn't it. Now I think most people might accept that Charles (as directly in line to the throne) could perhaps be justified in being a full time royal. But Andrew - I think with hindsight he would have been much better off perusing his own career throughput his working life. And I think the same is true for William and Harry - the former (directly on the line to the throne) is perhaps justified in a full time Royal career - the latter, well I think not.

And actually given the longevity I think it is rather better even for the person directly in line for to the throne to spend their working life in a broadly normal career, given that they are likely to be in their 60s or 70s before becoming monarch.

They, if no-one else among the Royals, seem to realise that they live in the 21st century and the 'times they are a'changing'.

Sure they have somewhat different personalities compared to earlier Royals, but other than that the approach is identical to the last generation - think 1987 - peak Charles & Di, Andrew & Fergie - all that 'It's a Royal knockout stuff'. It's basically Will & Kate, Harry & Meghan but perhaps with somewhat poorer PR advice back then.

[Gordon]

They, if no-one else among the Royals, seem to realise that they live in the 21st century and the 'times they are a'changing'.

In which case they should voluntarily disenfranchise themselves with immediate effect.

[Owlswing]

I don't see why this will change when Liz and Phil die. I think currently they already have free reign to support causes that interest them. And this is hardly new - Charles has been doing it for decades - indeed he has had a lot of flack for pursuing his own interests and agendas and interfering when perhaps he should not have.
Well now that's an interesting comment. The question arises whether Royals should effectively engage in public duties, in effect full time, or whether they should have their own career and do the occasional public duties. This is where there have been issues in the past, and I see history repeating itself. Think back to the 70s and 80s - both Charles and Andrew had 'careers' in the armed forces, but both gave them up to become 'full time' Royals, in part linked to being of an age where they should be settling down, marrying and starting a family.

Sounds familiar doesn't it. Now I think most people might accept that Charles (as directly in line to the throne) could perhaps be justified in being a full time royal. But Andrew - I think with hindsight he would have been much better off perusing his own career throughput his working life. And I think the same is true for William and Harry - the former (directly on the line to the throne) is perhaps justified in a full time Royal career - the latter, well I think not.

And actually given the longevity I think it is rather better even for the person directly in line for to the throne to spend their working life in a broadly normal career, given that they are likely to be in their 60s or 70s before becoming monarch.
Sure they have somewhat different personalities compared to earlier Royals, but other than that the approach is identical to the last generation - think 1987 - peak Charles & Di, Andrew & Fergie - all that 'It's a Royal knockout stuff'. It's basically Will & Kate, Harry & Meghan but perhaps with somewhat poorer PR advice back then.

Care to comment on Prince Edward?

[Nearly Sane]

Care to comment on Prince Edward?

No man is an island, but he is.

[ProfessorDavey]

No man is an island, but he is.

[ProfessorDavey]

Care to comment on Prince Edward?

In what respect?

[Harrowby Hall]

In what respect?

You ignored him in your appraisal of the activities of the royal family, despite the fact that he has followed a totally different way of life from his siblings.

He is the son of the monarch but is not - it appears - a member of "the firm". He has followed a career in theatre and tv management (not paticularly successfully).

[Humph Warden Bennett]

Care to comment on Prince Edward?

He is OK, he brought back Wessex after 1000 years, I look forward to him bringing back Middlesex, Huntingdonshire, and Westmoreland, too.

And why are those historic counties showing as spelling errors on this site?

If he becomes King Edward IX (OK he should really be Edward XII (I am sure that he appreciates the same), I will take any Earldom that he offers.

[ProfessorDavey]

He is OK, he brought back Wessex after 1000 years,

He didn't bring it back at all - he was offered the name as a title. I guess no other suitable title was available.

I look forward to him bringing back Middlesex, Huntingdonshire, and Westmoreland, too.

And under what authority would be able to 'bring back' those counties. And actually the names still exist and are prominent - it is merely that they aren't administrative regions any more. Perhaps you are unaware that Middlesex, for example, has its own cricket team, and a University as examples.

I like the names, and we should ensure they still are recognised, but not as formal administrative counties - we've move on.

If he becomes King Edward IX (OK he should really be Edward XII (I am sure that he appreciates the same), I will take any Earldom that he offers.

He won't - he is currently 9th in succession (soon to be 10th).

[ProfessorDavey]

You ignored him in your appraisal of the activities of the royal family, despite the fact that he has followed a totally different way of life from his siblings.

He is the son of the monarch but is not - it appears - a member of "the firm". He has followed a career in theatre and tv management (not paticularly successfully).

He is different to William and Harry, as Edward is a 4th child so was already a much more 'minor' royal, even at the same age William/Harry are now. He is much less a full time royal than the others, but actually his upbringing was identical - top school, university, the military (albeit he didn't last). Since then he has effectively used his contacts to 'play' at being in theatre/tv - being serially unsuccessful, and without the safety net of the money he gets as a royal would be effectively bankrupt.

[Harrowby Hall]

I agree with your characterisation of Edward, Prof, but the significant point, surely. is that he has been allowed to be "different".

[Rhiannon]

The Philips children seem to have done reasonably ok.

[Owlswing]

The Philips children seem to have done reasonably ok.

AS has Anne who works away without reams of publicity (good or bad).

[Humph Warden Bennett]

He didn't bring it back at all - he was offered the name as a title. I guess no other suitable title was available.

That is incorrect, he told his mum that was the title that he wanted.

And under what authority would be able to 'bring back' those counties. And actually the names still exist and are prominent - it is merely that they aren't administrative regions any more. Perhaps you are unaware that Middlesex, for example, has its own cricket team, and a University as examples.

I lived in Middlesex (Harrow) and joined the Middlesex Society as a gesture of solidarity.

I like the names, and we should ensure they still are recognised, but not as formal administrative counties - we've move on.

We have moved into the era of regions based around cities-like a mini version of Putin's Russia!

He won't - he is currently 9th in succession (soon to be 10th).

Every Man Must Have a Dream (Liverpool Express, 1976)

[Rhiannon]

AS has Anne who works away without reams of publicity (good or bad).

I’ve met her a handful of times. She’s a good egg.

[Aruntraveller]

I’ve met her a handful of times. She’s a good egg.

Of all the royals she is the one I like most.

She has clearly inherited her father's way of saying things but somehow without the controversial element he sometimes supplies.

I liked her approach to her work with children - can't remember the exact quote but along the lines of:

You don't necessarily have to like children to want to help them.

[Rhiannon]

Of all the royals she is the one I like most.

She has clearly inherited her father's way of saying things but somehow without the controversial element he sometimes supplies.

I liked her approach to her work with children - can't remember the exact quote but along the lines of:

You don't necessarily have to like children to want to help them.

I met her through her work with the Spinal Injuries Association.

And I once queued behind Zara Philips in the Winchcombe Co-Op. She was buying cigarettes.

[Nearly Sane]

I quite fancy having a King Xan - in Kind Hearts and Coronets terms I only have to remove 25 people and a foetus to get there.

[Shaker]

I once queued behind Zara Philips in the Winchcombe Co-Op. She was buying cigarettes.

The Lame Claim to Fame thread is still around here somewhere.

[Rhiannon]

The Lame Claim to Fame thread is still around here somewhere.

I didn’t mention that Richard Johnson was waiting outside for her.

[Rhiannon]

I quite fancy having a King Xan - in Kind Hearts and Coronets terms I only have to remove 25 people and a foetus to get there.

Would King Xan thank you for it though?

[Nearly Sane]

Would King Xan thank you for it though?

I sincerely doubt it but if my inner Dennis Price (who was apparently blessed with the full name Dennistoun Franklyn John Rose-Price, if wiki is correct - King Dennistoun would be good as well) -  took over, he's my choice.

[Nearly Sane]

Harry might have to do a prince Michael of Kent thing and give up a claim to the throne, then (which wouldn't be a bad thing)
Or they could abolish the daft Act of settlement and disestablish the CofE - which would be an added bonus.

Just to note that Prince Michael of Kent is back in line after the Perth agreement - she's at number 45 currently

[ippy]

Their's nothing particularly wrong with any of these so called royals, no doubt some are better than others but beside all of that the principle of having a royal family in the first place, yuk!

ippy

[Owlswing]

Their's nothing particularly wrong with any of these so called royals, no doubt some are better than others but beside all of that the principle of having a royal family in the first place, yuk!

ippy

Apart fron the Royals, Buckingham Palace and various other Royal connected buidings what else do we have  to bring in millions of tourist dollars from the States?