Prince Albert and Princess Charlene give interview about Prince Jacques and Princess Gabriella

Prince Albert and Princess Charlene give interview about Prince Jacques and Princess Gabriella

You know what I love most about Princess Leonore? The fact that she’s allowed to be a baby even at official ceremonies. I love that we get to see her being a squirmy monkey at Prince Carl Philip’s wedding and Prince Nicolas’ baptism. That squirmy quality is what has endeared her to me, and I felt that same magic when I watched this new interview from Prince Albert and Princess Charlene with their kids, Prince Jacques and Princess Gabriella.

Albert, Charlene, Jacques, Gabriella interview Dec 2015

Albert and Charlene gave an interview with Australian journalist Richard Barnes in the Salon de Glaces of the Prince’s Palace of Monaco a few weeks before Christmas. Jacques and Gabriella were playing on the floor throughout the interview and their squirminess was charming.

Of the kids, Charlene said: “They’re very active; they’re very playful; absolutely adorable; and a lot of work.” And Albert said: “They are already very playful. They constantly want to move around, especially Jacques. They are very active and curious, and that’s what’s marvelous at this age it’s an ongoing discovery of many things.”

In terms of who the kids look like, I think Charlene had the best answer I’ve ever heard from a parent in regards to this question, she said: “Personally, I think they change all the time… They’re still babies. It’s hard to say right now.”

Charlene interview Dec 2015

Mixed in to the discussion about the kid’s education was talk of their duties and responsibilities as royals. Charlene had this to say about balancing education and royal responsibilities, and the difference between other kids and Jacques and Gabirella:

    “I think the difference is that they’re born into a responsibility and a duty, which I don’t, obviously it was not their choice, but they do have a choice of their passions, and that would be for them to choose and what field they would like to be educated in. As long as they know that this is the responsibility, the duty, the duty to the population and to their family. And that’s what they would have to pass on to the future generations.”

Prince Albert interview Dec 2015

Albert then offered up his experience coming to terms with the responsibilities and duties of royalty as a child:

    “I think it wasn’t before the age of five, six, or seven that one realizes that something is different, that we are in a family that is not quite like the other ones, that we have responsibilities and duties. But it came gradually. There was not a particular event that did it – except perhaps the first time I had to do an official ceremony. My father left me, not totally alone, to do something by myself. And it was there that I really began to understand that certain things were expected of me, even at that age.”

Albert went on to say:

    “But I must say we will try to prepare them in the gentlest way possible and bring them to understand this reality. I think it’s important that our children follow the path that they themselves decide. We point them in the right direction and do everything for them to have a good education for them to be armed to confront modern life. After, we will try to create an environment that will be as normal as possible, as unconstrained as possible, especially while they’re still young.”

Is anyone else annoyed at the royals’ use of the word “normal”? I don’t want to get grumpy right now since I enjoyed this interview and getting to watch the kids play, but I’m annoyed with royals’ use of the word “normal”. What does that mean!? There is no one “normal childhood”, as every person’s experience is different based on a whole host of factors, including: family dynamics, region, and social and economic status.

I’m sick of the royals using the word “normal” in reference to their desired lives or the desired childhoods for their children because it’s vague and doesn’t mean much since everyone’s “normal” is different. It would be one thing if the royals defined what “normal” means to them and what they are trying to achieve, but none of them have.

Jacques and Gabriella interview Dec 2015

Anyway… Ignoring the detour of my rant, I quite liked this video and I very much enjoyed getting to see Jacques and Gabriella play and interact with the world and be babies. It’s great to see.

I would love to embed the video here for you to watch, but Facebook’s plugin is giving me all sorts of issues right now. If I can get the Facebook plugin to work, I’ll embed the video later, but for now you can watch the video here.


Gabriella interview Dec 2015


Jacques interview Dec 2015

Jacques face interview Dec 2015

There is a portrait of Princess Grace on the wall in the background of the video.

Grace Kelly portrait Dec 2015

Photos: Video screengrabs.

71 thoughts on “Prince Albert and Princess Charlene give interview about Prince Jacques and Princess Gabriella

  1. We’ll certainly not photoshopped and the twins are so cute. I wonder what language they speak to each other? I love that she is ensuring they love swimming as that is something that has been such a big part of her life. Your rants have made me laugh KMR as I have got up to speed with this blog, but I read the ‘normal’ comment a little differently. He says ‘as normal as possible’ – I think he realises that will never be what us mere mortals call normal, I think it means being around for bath time when they can and story time, going to see their animals together ( as we would take our kids to a petting zoo!) . Like the Swedes I just love that they do this and I hope I am right in believing that by opening up a little to their people – and the rest of us- in a manner that suits them and their babies they will not be papped, their privacy will be more respected. I know there have been discussions about Charlene but personally I am a fan, and she looks happy to me. She’s not a big grinner like Kate but she has a gentle smile. IMO anyway. Now KMR as your long time followers have urged you have a rest over the holiday weekend.

    1. I think it’s great that Charlene is so keen on her kids learning to swim early. Her “drown proof” thing goes right in line with her Foundation’s goal. She’s living what she preaches in that way.

      My point in my rant is that us mere mortals all have a different description of “normal”. So I don’t know what “normal” Albert is shooting for with his kids. I do think he understands that his kids will always have the responsibilities as royals and he’s prepared to prepare them for that, which is good. Charlene seems to understand that responsibility as well, which is also good.

    2. From what I know, Charlene speaks English with Albert and the children, and Albert speaks in French with the kids. This is actually the same set up I have in my family.

      1. I wonder if the children speaking french will help Charlene with the language. Does anyone who speaks more than one language know the answer?

        1. At this stage, and into toddlerhood, probabably not… but as they get older, odds are their French will outstrip their mother’s. I’m thinking especially once they start school.

          Speaking from personal experience, having babies in a foreign country did force me to learn and use my French more just because it became impossible to stay isolated like before. Doctor’s visits, random people starting conversations because of your cute baby, needing something from the pharmacist, stuff like that.

          1. LizB, It sounds like you lead an interesting life. I realized some situations would make it difficult to not speak the language of the land. But, I never thought about all the people you interact with after having children and the need to increase your use of the second language. Kind of scary when you think about potential emergency situations and being a mother in a new country.

  2. The word ‘normal’ has been hijacked by the Cambridge’s, but really in their case it is just a red herring to appear accessible and disguise their profligacy.

    I wonder if by ‘normal’ Charlene and Albert mean that, in addition to Birdy’s very good take, the children will be able to be themselves and define themselves through their passions, whatever they may be. I took away that they will be gradually introduced to responsibilities unique to their particular family but that their interests and abilities will also be developed in their family, not defined as a royal family ie what is ‘appropriate’ for a royal and so on. It would be tragic, for example, if Jacques at 30+ defined himself as, “I am a prince”, aka a complete tosser.

    The differences in ‘normal’ seem to be:
    • The kids are seen and heard being who they are eg squirming on the floor, making a noise, whatever;
    • Their identities as children will become clear in time, not manipulated into being;
    • Being royal is a responsibility but does not straitjacket the child. ‘Modern royalty’ is not defined, both parents knowing that this is a fluid concept today.

    • The kids are seen in very controlled situations, with identities already being constructed eg loud George, and ladylike Charlotte;
    • Squirming will be replaced by digitally manipulated images to present a perfect family, as befitting royalty ie better than the rest of you plebs;
    • Being royal makes you ever so special eg you may be ‘lucky’ to meet King George one day. Totally defined by position, which in all probability will not exist or be severely diminished in contemporary society. Only K and W don’t get this.

    1. If what you’ve said is what Albert meant by “normal” then that’s great, because it understands that there are certain obligations but allows for individuality. I just wish one of these days one of these royals would actually tell us what “normal” they are shooting for.

      1. I imagine ‘normal’ is different for each one of them but doubt it comes close to what passes as the reality for many of us. It may be simply being around for routine activities – reading, bath time etc – and gently introducing the children to the ‘family business’ as well as letting them be whatever they will be. Their young lives should be simple and uncomplicated, with family at the centre, rather than pomp. At least this is what I’m guessing.

        The cynic in me still snorts in disbelief at the use of ‘normal’ and ‘privacy’. Where once royalty was steeped in mystery and kept so, the current version is ‘we’re just like you’ (only with squillions). Perhaps it’s just a ruse to keep everyone funding royalty. But it’s becoming old.

        However, I don’t think we need fall over ourselves because Albert has rearranged his schedule to accommodate his children; after all, that’s what any decent father should be doing where possible. ‘Normal’ parents balance all sorts of heavy work responsibilities with family life day in, day out, year in, year out, but without the trappings. Still, it’s good that Albert is, at 57, being a modern father and enjoying his young children. That, and sharing their children as they grow with interested people is a lovely gesture.

  3. Awww, thanks for such a sweet post KMR!! These babies are just adorable. I watched the video yesterday and there were a couple of times that I thought Jacques was going to bonk Gabriella in the head with his toy :), not intentionally mind you but just being a baby flinging things around.

    It seems to me that Albert and Charlene have a pretty good handle on how to raise a royal. Teach them about their duties and responsibilities while at the same time help them to find their own passion, hopefully one that they can incorporate into their royal role. Also, I think it’s wise of them, and the SRF, to introduce their children gradually to the press, cameras, crowds, etc. I think in the long run it will help the child be more confident in his/her future life.

    I agree with you about the near constant use of the words “normal” and “privacy” in regards to the various royal families and I too would love to know what they perceive to be a “normal” life. I imagine that their life is probably the most un-normal life, at least as you and I know life. so they attempt to create some sense of normalcy, at least what they view as normal, to help buffer against the surreal existence that they inhabit. As Birdy commented on above, I think reading bedtime stories, giving nightly baths, etc are things that the royals have to work hard to be able to do with their children. As Albert said in the video, he’s had to rearrange his schedule to accommodate his twins and even then he still has those pesky duties and responsibilities to fulfill. As we all know duties and responsibilities really don’t give a hoot if you have a sick child, need some quiet time or simply want to read a book and I can only imagine that Albert’s time is pretty well scheduled months in advance, with every minute accounted for.

    1. The thing about royals is that, for the royals who grew up royal, they know no other life, so their current lives are what they would consider “normal”. So I’m not sure what “normalcy” they are striving for since their current lives are their “normal”.

      I love getting the video. It’s little things like Charlene rushing to get fur out of Jacques’ hands before he puts them in his mouth that are so endearing. Just normal baby stuff that is so much fun to see from royals when their images are always so controlled.

  4. Such a sweet video! I love watching babies be babies and Charlene and Albert sound pretty grounded in parenthood and the future of their kids.

    Love Jacques expressive face and Gabriella is such a cutie – and she has the same toy as my little son! That made me laugh, because you may be a princess of a fabulously wealthy principality, but at the end of the day, baby toys are baby toys lol

    I think C and A are handling the PR really smartly. People are staying interested in their children – at least here in France.

  5. Those babies!! They are beyond adorable. You can tell that Albert and Charlene are both very much involved with their babies on a daily basis (Albert changes his schedule around when he can – that is so great). The kids don’t seem standoffish or pull that blank staring at the camera because they have been exposed to them since birth. It’s not the “what the heck is this?” stares we got out of George when he went to the hospital with William. The twins have been out with crowds of people and get along beautifully.

    Albert and Charlene get it – their kids are royalty. They are going to give them all of the love and do everything they can to raise them to be happy individuals and encourage them to study things that they love, but at the same time they are making sure they understand that their place in the world comes with some requirements.

    Charlene, Vic and Maddie are my favorite young royal mothers. They are hands on. It’s not just a saying or something to use as an excuse to get out of work. We can see this because of how their children interact with them. But they also continue to work in the position they were born or married into. Which is a great example for their children.

    Then we’ve got William and Kate hiding George and Charlotte away and telling everyone to leave them all alone. Fine, we’ll leave you alone, but don’t blame anyone but yourselves when your children have a fit when they realize that their lives aren’t going to be about sitting around and playing at being normal. George especially, I really feel sorry for this little guy because if William has his way he won’t do anything even remotely royal until he’s done with college.

    As KMR said, I also love they let them squirm and play. No enforced silences, no looks to tamp it down, just happy babies being themselves.

    Sadly, I don’t think we’ll ever see anything like this from W&K. And even if they did let the cameras in for a moment, I have a feeling it would be very beige, very stilted and very scripted. George the Basher would come through and wreak havoc momentarily so they could give us the little “we told you so” nod and Charlotte would appear in her ladylike dresses and cardigans ready to serve everyone tea and engage in polite conversation.

    Thank goodness for the little European royals and thank you to their parents for sharing them!

      1. Haha! Totally. I couldn’t even imagine it, but if they could just do things like some of the European royals do regarding exposing their kids, it would work wonders for them. It’s just really too bad.

        1. + 1

          If W&K could do a cute video once or twice a year (like the kinds Charles & Diana did when Wills and Harry were little), it would do so much for their image and slowly introduce George and Charlotte to the cameras so that, later on, in public (a la, George at the hospital), the children aren’t as frightened of the world’s press.

  6. Republic France’s unofficial royal family!…Seriously I’ll never understand these people. And they are supposed to be a couple but they are sitting on different sofas speaking different languages and not really looking at each other, not very warm. As for the ‘normal’ comments I think this is a PR thing to try and cover up their life of privilege: ‘We’re just like the rest of you!’ so people don’t get uppity about the inequality. It might also be an amusement for them, playing at being ‘ordinary’ ho ho ho!

    1. I agree R. Not too fond of Monaco: I have always thought of it as a useless country (country… more like a bunch of super villas, casinos and tacky shops) made for gamblers and tax evaders… more or less all those people linked to the so – called ” white crimes ” have a house there. I won’t say much about the Royals given my basic distaste of their country but I’ve always thought of Albert as an egg in a suit. :)) probably my partiality speaking!

      1. Neither of you have to like Monaco, but please remember to be civil when talking about the Monaco royals as people.

  7. I just want to cuddle those babies. They are too cute! The best thing about Charlene and Albert is that they are *normal* in the video. Two parents providing safety while allowing their babies to explore. What I got from them is their twins being able to fit in with everyday people going about their lives. There has to be some sort of commonality, like going to amusement parks, sleepovers with friends, swimming, ups and downs where kids have to learn things the hard way. The last point especially (although the others come in too) is where rich kids and royals aren’t normal. They get ridiculous amounts of protection if they make a mistake. They go to the finest schools where they have opportunities to learn from the finest minds. They can travel the world and see things that everyday man/woman can’t. They wear fabulous clothes and have the opportunity to eat healthy. They never worry about being homeless. Stress comes from public duties and inner issues rather than where the next meal is coming from. So I hope that C&A keep on connecting these children and realistic that the closest they’ll come to normal is empathy with those that are. J&G can help lead and bring attention to important issues. They can chose a job but not a regular life without revoking position. It’s interesting to contrast American leadership, where we chose to try and become leaders, with European birth heredity where they have access to the highest levels of education and training for a lifetime preparation. Often personal greed on one side, selfish indifference on the other. IMO Selflessness is the quintessential point of an exceptional leader. Have a great day KMR!

  8. I’m neither here nor there about babies most of the time, so I really enjoyed the bonus Grace portrait, haha! What a beautiful portrait.

  9. What darling babies and how much fun they seem to be having. I like the fact that Albert and Charlene are so demonstrative with them and it was so fun to see such precious photos of babies being babies.

    Also, loved what Charlene said about it being hard to say who the kids take after physically Yes, she is so accurage, babies change every single day.

    The love in the family seems genuine and I really liked Birdy’s take on “normal.”

    It bothers me if a Royal person overuses the word and wants a normal life when we all know that many want the perks, too. But, it does not, or did not bother me to read what Albert said.
    Normal is different things to different people be they Royal, or not. What is the new normal? What’s the old normal? What does normal mean to one person and something else to another.

    Another great post, KMR, Thanks very much!!!

  10. I am a fan of Prince Albert and Charlene, so what I say comes from a biased POV. I think they sat on different sofas so the camera could shoot them on the diagonal. This also gave the parents a better situation to reach toward a child without reaching in front of the other parent and obliterating the viewers ability to see either A or C speaking.

    Maybe, they speak in their native language in order to reach the most people. It seems Charlene is not comfortable speaking at length in French. Some people pick up languages more easily as an adult. It is easy as a child. I could understand what my grandparents and guests were discussing after a week or two at their home each summer. As for now; forget any chance of me understanding the language as an adult. I feel sorry for all the criticism these two have faced. I still read the runaway bride, he has two other children, where are his other kids, he is a horrible father, Charlene is miserable, it is only the children who make her happy, and this is an arranged marriage. Yes, many of us who read KMR speculate about W&K, but never to this kind of discussion.

    As for fashion, I think Charlene looked chic and the haircut looks better on video instead of photos. Albert looks more fit. Good for him! The babies are adorable. I loved them over the summer with their sweet bald heads, but they are completely cute at all stages. I like the way the children are dressed. I think the SRF and A&C dress the children in classic, but not terribly old-fashioned clothing.

    As for how this relates to W&K, I think Jen did a great job of outlining the pro/con issues. W&K have backed themselves in a corner IMO. They have tried to pull all this ‘normal’ and ‘modern’ stuff on us. They are decidedly not normal and they really are not modern. Monaco, Sweden, Denmark, Netherlands, Spain, Belgium and I am sure others, seem much more modern than W&K. They have done some serious backsliding IMO.

    I hope in the New Year (or the next) we see Harry fall in love and make a good choice. Hopefully, this will show more and more people (not just the intelligent readers/followers of KMR) what modern young royals (BRF) really look like to the world.

    1. Just wanted to add, I have to stop being such a dummy and reading the DM article after KMR has written her blog.

      While I stated I am a fan and feel A&C have been harshly discussed, I still cannot believe the comments which come from everywhere in the world, but especially from the U.K. Maybe, someone from the U.K. could explain this to me. For example, why does someone need to comment in a nasty way about speculation about how the babies were conceived? I have not read negative comments about C.P. Mary’s pregnancy with twins. Perhaps, I missed it. Besides, I would think the U.K. (excuse me, I guess it was England) would be proud of the fact they brought IVF to the world and thus, many happy couples who were delighted/overjoyed to conceive.

      Am I getting old and need reading glasses? Some people commented it looked like Charlene was the worst mother who didn’t know her children. I guess everyone sees things very differently.

      This has made me rethink how I comment and will try in 2016 to keep the harshness of my comments to slightly snarky and not downright mean.

      1. While I think it’s perfectly fair to say that both Charlene and Albert appear much happier since the birth of their twins (which does appear to be true and it’s perfectly normal to be happier after the birth of one’s children), and I also think it’s fair to comment on Albert’s other children (since they do exist and he’s recognized them as his and it’s not just speculation), I think some of the criticism leveled at Albert and Charlene is a bit much. It’s fine that A&C spoke different languages in this interview – Madeleine and Chris spoke different languages at their wedding and in interviews since and no one says anything negative. I also think the way A&C conceived their children is personal and should remain private. I understand speculating in terms of the line of succession and genetics and whatnot, but at the end of the day how they conceived is their business alone.

      2. Hi G, I don’t see where anyone here said that Charlene was/is a horrible mother or are you referring to the Daily Mail article, sorry but I’m really not clear what you are referring to.

        1. I think the DM commentators can be really ruthless, but particularly to other families that are not the BRF. It’s almost a snobbish “we are better than you” because we have the best monarchy type of thing. To some degree, it is true because they are the most known and well-off monarchy in Europe. However, bigger and richer doesn’t mean better. A and C obviously don’t merit those comments. I quite like the two of them. I think there was some difficulty in the beginning before they got married and in the early part of the marriage because she found that he had a child with another woman while they were about to get married (he essentially cheated on her), they do seem much sweeter to me as of late. They are totally in love with their babies which is lovely to see. They also seem far more real to me than the BRF, particularly WK obviously..

          1. It is interesting how the comments of DM articles reflect what the general British population feel about the BRF and other royal families. It’s also interesting to see how certain articles are written in such a way to garner negative comments…

          2. Do you think it’s the trolls or how people in the UK feel about WK? Or are they in love with them and the DM comments are not representative of the Brits point of view?

          3. People in the UK are definitely not in love with W&K; in fact a lot of people are disappointed in them…despite the press telling us that ‘they have made the monarchy more popular than ever’ lol. Lots of people have no opinion either way. Only the die-hard royalists support them. Most of Kate’s fans seem to be from the US.

          4. I don’t have a place to put my comment, but all I can say to what ‘R’ wrote is—Wow! I live in the U.S., and have been following the BRF for years along with a few friends, and W&K are not popular among this group.

            I tend to be surprised when I see Kate on a cover. Perhaps, Kate is popular in the U.S. among a specific age group. Maybe, women in the 25-35 age group and young mothers.

  11. I really enjoyed this video and your take on it KMR.

    I especially enjoyed Charlene pointed comment that they would bring them up with Duty whilst letting them choose their passions.

    I think that statement goes to the heart of WK’s failure to understand their position. Or perhaps the failure lies with Charles, Diana, HM, QM and all the parental figures that William had. Harry as the spare was probably allowed to indulge his passions and eventually figure out passions that could inform duty.

    William, aside from having no passions except a fetish of normality, only sees duty. Take away the duty and there is still nothing.

    Kate’s only passion has been William and or housewifery. Nothing beyond that. Since William doesn’t want to pick up duty, he’s let that side of him slide to extent that he can’t define it (see his EAAA interview in which he said let the oldies do the duties whatever duty is). And since he can’t define it, he can’t teach it to Kate.

    And so they will have nothing to teach George or Charlotte on the subject of duty. And given the Middleton way of child rearing – see all 3 Middleton kids, George and Charlotte are destined to be dillettante kids without any definable work ethic or ability or noblesse oblige.

    I wish they’d look to their European Counterparts for some lessons.

    Ps: i’m only annoyed by WK’s definition of normal. It sets my teeth on edge.

    When other royals say it, I take it to mean that they will try to emulate circumstances that are relatable to regular people despite their immense privilege so they don’t spoil the kids rotten. They don’t want #richkidsofinstagram.

    Whereas WK’s version of ‘normal’ is Petit Trianon. Very much #richkidsofinstagram and don’t you dare say anything about that or i’ll sic my scary lawyers and other undefined threats on you.

    Harry’s first interview post Afghanistan gave me hope since fulfilled about this. When he was asked about a normal life, he said he recognised that his normal wasn’t the same as everyone else’s normal and there was no such thing as normal.

    I wish his brother understood this.

    1. Herazeus, very good way of putting the W&K take on ‘Normal’.

      I guess when A&C discussed normal, they may have been referring to something along the line of the childhood Charlene had during her early years. Being a competitive swimmer may not qualify as normal, but closer than the upbringing of Albert.

      Psychologists don’t like or use the term normal, so it does make sense to question the use of the word. If the experts say there is not a normal family; why is this term coming up with some regularity among royals. It may make better sense to say non-royal, but W&K want to pretend they are not royal (except for the good parts).

      1. Well said, Herazeus! I, too, think your understanding of normalcy in comparing A and C with W and K is very insightful. I, too, believe that Harry’s definition of “normal” (which is truly not normal, and what it really means is still quite confusing in the realm of the royals) makes me love Harry all the more. He is real, while his brother and wife are far from understanding what “normal” means and quite fake, unfortunately.

        I also see it as raising your children in a way that they can relate to the general population–trying to be more “real.” The European royals seem far more real and want to connect with their people; they actually seem to love their people. The BRF is a mixed bag; I can’t read them very well. They are far more snooty and want to show the people that they are better than the people–rather than try to relate to them. Some BRF royals seem to want to relate to their “subjects” like HM, perhaps Camilla but not really Charles, Sophie to some extent, and Harry, for sure ( he is seriously the light in that family.) However, WK seem very snobby and want to keep far, far away from the plebs. You can see that their behavior exudes “I am better than you” even though I am normal! Riiight, that totally makes sense. I wish that William would take some criticism (and that he would allow someone to put a mirror in front of his face to show how his behavior is damaging the monarchy.)

        I hope I didn’t confuse all of you. I just think a lot of normal does encompass being “real;” you see what you get, rather than a fake PR made person. I believe that A and C do a good job of this; even her lack of smiling gives her character because that’s who she is; she isn’t going to fake smile to make it seem that things are better than they seem. I appreciate that so much. The same goes for the SRF, particularly Vic and Dan as well as Madeleine and Chris, Queen Leti, CP Mary (I am not completely sure about her), and Max. I also really like Queen Mathilde ( hey, she’s part Polish so I am partial to her; she’s also very beautiful and reminds me of Princess Grace :-)), Mette Marie and Hakoon (they seem real and oh so cute), Marie and Joachim (like them, very sweet couple) and the list goes on. These folks relate to their people far more than the BRF who try to keep their people at an arms length.

        Anyway, very interesting topic. Love their babies and how they are willing to let people into their world. I think Charlene is quite real and very chic and Albert seems real too…

    2. I agree with the entire post, particularly this, re the way that royals view “normal”: “…they will try to emulate circumstances that are relatable to regular people despite their immense privilege so they don’t spoil the kids rotten…”

      Very well put. I concur completely.

    3. You are right to point to the legacies of the three Middleton children. They may have gone to the best schools, but success and education clearly weren’t stressed. The best universities in the world, and not a professional among them. Compare them to the cousins who are a banker and a lawyer. It’s really a disgrace.

      1. I find it interesting that none of the Middleton children have succeeded in business or in their personal lives, given that their mother is quite a savvy business woman and their parents have been married for quite some time. I say this as I don’t believe Kate really “succeeded” in her personal life and we all know she had no career. I wonder Carole spent all of her energy furthering Kate’s relationship with William therefore had nothing left for her other children? I have to wonder if Pippa and James are still close to Kate or are they feeling a bit resentful? After all they have been subjected to much scrutiny, have had failed businesses and failed romances but hey as long as Kate got what she wanted?

        1. Carole alluded to tension with Pippa and James:

          At least, that’s how I read the “I have three children.” line. But even in this — it’s just simply obvious the girls were never encouraged to be professionals or have a career. Even here, everything is geared toward James the Businessman. And admittedly, James is dyslexic and struggles in school — but then, how’d he get into Edinburgh to begin with? The Middletons either truly have so much of Gary’s money as to guarantee each child can be a socialite for life or are truly committed to each child’s potential to “make their own money” — whether through marriage or not, but never by a trade or profession. With absolutely no career among them, I just really cannot believe the waste of education.

        2. I think it is rather sad that Carole has put so much input into making Kate and William that Pippa and James have been left out. I feel their lives may have been easier without that constant media glare. It hasn’t happened with siblings of other “commoners” who married into the royal life so I do wonder if the Middletons (Carole) invited the intrusion into the family?
          After all that was meant to be one of the reasons that put one ex boyfriend off marrying Pippa.

        3. Interesting, Lauri. Just makes one realize that Carole’s ability to move her family up the social ladder is enough for the kids. They obviously are not as taken with hard work and moving their “Careers” ahead as she was.
          TO have an entire family’s focus go into Kate’s landing a future King is sad to me. But, Pippa and James seem fine with their lives. They don’t seem to care about building outside names for themselves. Outside the “We’re siblings of Kate’s,” I mean.

    4. In Australia, those in elite circles often refer to the ‘ordinary Australian’ when trying to convince people of a particular line of thought. It always comes across as condescending and patronising. I am blown away by so-called ‘ordinary’ people who have extraordinary strength of character and resilience to deal with all manner of setbacks thrown at them in life. These go unheralded and unnoticed most of the time, sad to say.

      So the ‘normal’ comment from royals comes across to me as mindless babble from people who just don’t have a clue, and could care less. I think it is trotted out like a mantra so often that eventually we will believe it. Runner put it succinctly when she called the BRF as thinking they are better than, well, everyone on the planet; that attitude appears to be well-entrenched. Unfortunately, WK highlight this attitude. As long as they are never called to account there will be no change in attitude.

      Herazeus’s point about the three Middleton children’s zero achievements to date rings especially true. I am incredulous how this family smugly promotes themselves as ‘lucky’ when their children have been brought up solely to attach themselves to the wealthy, monied and titled; parents as pimps. Just naked ambition of the Becky Sharp variety, pure and simple. No wonder the British people loathe them.

      Sadly, Charlotte and George will most likely be drop kicks like their parents. It’s like watching a train wreck in progress: horrible but fascinating, and we can’t do a thing to help.

      1. Jen, so interesting and very well put. I too, am impressed with people who have been given little in life at the start, but overcome so much. One of my favorite examples from this country was highlighted on a former show in the U.S. Oprah showed a woman who cleaned homes all her life and lived very simply. I think she saved @ $100,000.00 and donated it a university to use for scholarship money. Her only regret in life was she didn’t have more to give.

        With wonderful people like this around the globe, it is rather easy to see why the Middleton’s tend to attract negative comments.

        1. Lovely story! Thanks for sharing. I don’t understand when people who have so much don’t want to give back. So much privilege–and their life is to serve and yet it is such a burden for WK. What an honor to be able to serve; the exposure may be tiresome and difficult but compared with the platform they have, I just don’t get it.

        2. What a beautiful story about an amazing woman, and puts into sharp contrast how those with so much whinge endlessly…

          I don’t get why people with so much need to have more, refusing to see how their position could help others. You are right, it is an honour to serve.

          In the case of W and K, I really hope pressure is brought to bear on them to (a) get with the program, or (b) take their leave from the line of succession, along with their children, and live the quiet, country life they desire, supported financially by their families (they would clearly be incapable of holding down regular employment). I’d be okay with them drifting off into oblivion.

  12. My take away of the word normal being used is essentially that the children have been born not only into fame and wealth but into a position of duty. Most babies wont “normally” be born with a future job title laid out for them.

    To be honest I agree that ‘normal’ is annoying but I also find it very difficult to locate any other word that describes what the royals are trying to say. The issue is when W & K say it I honestly don’t believe them. They are supposed to be a modern/middle class version of normal but they fail to recognize that they just alienate the public with these statements.

    “Look how normal we are! Just like you! But also Kate’s perfect!! Look how set the narrative is for George and Charlottes future-eh hem… I mean look how adorable they are with their personalities we’ve assigned them!” “Now we’re going to spend thousands of dollars of your money on clothes, holidays and houses for ourselves”

    1. I wonder if Will and Kate would like to be normal like Edward and Wallis? I don’t know the story, but didn’t Edward request more money from the King, but still had to have wealthy friends pick up many of their tabs/bills for the remainder of their lives.

      1. Edward was made Duke of Windsor on his abdication and was then ‘kept’ by the rest of the Windsor family until his death but I don’t know about his friends helping him, it’s possible.

      2. He established a yearly allowance of around 75.000 £ if I’m not mistaken with the King and his niece, the actual Queen, kept supporting him with the same money. He, anyway, lived in France with Wallis because he had an agreement with the French establishment that didn’t make them pay taxes; that is how they could allow themselves to live in such a luxurious manner. They always paid their debts to shops and were incredibly punctual and meticolous when it came to money ( which had never been a problem or a worry before for Edward ), however whenever they travelled they were often offered things for free because of their status. That is true. Wallis had been supported for a while by her friends (in particular the Rogerses) because she came from a pretty modest family in Maryland and she had always had a taste beyond her possibility if we can put it that way.

        1. Thanks! I remembered reading something about this, but could not remember the details. I appreciate your filling in the big hole I left with my vague comments.

  13. Those babies are adorable. Such beautiful eyes and curious personalities. They seem comfortable around the cameras. At one point, Albert is talking and has his hands out. Little Jacques took it as his cue to pull up on his daddy. Cute! And Charlene telling us that they know how to right themselves in the water is impressive and in line with her support of water safety.

    I really loved this video. What a great way to introduce your babies in “real time” versus a months old pictures. Call it how you want, these two get it.

    Excellent post, KMR.

      1. +1!
        And Lauri – every time I read your name I sit up straight and pull my shoulders back. I’m even considering putting an alert/ alarm on my phone which will ring every couple of hours saying something like… “Lauri from Ca says pull your shoulders back” or “Lauri from Ca says stand up straight”.
        Is there any readers out there who can write me an app for my phone?
        I feel the need every time see someone slouching along!!!!
        Happy New Year to KMR and all the regulars!!!

        1. Lol and then remember “runner” says, do pilates (you can get some good videos and do them at home). It will do wonders for your posture. The key is your core and sucking your gut in…I was a runner (hence, the runner name), ran competitively from 6th grade through college so posture was important!

  14. This is really nice way to finish the year, reading about these cute babies.
    I can imagine the pressure on Albert to have a “legitimate” male heir. If he didn’t have one then Monaco would be folded back into France. The pressure on Charlene knowing that she had to produce a male heir must have been huge and I wonder if this was the reason for many of the tears at the wedding?
    I would never cut my hair as short as Charlene but I think it looks great on her, very “Jean Seaborg” 🙂
    I do think those kids are very cute and will be even cuter as they grow up, imagine them in the same room as Leonor? I would possibly remove any breakables first?
    They are certainly loved 🙂
    As for the parents speaking two different languages with the children? Many families do that and the kids all grow up bilingual. My brother spoke English to his girls when they were little and my sister in law only spoke Swedish to them. It may have looked funny to an outsider but then it worked for them as my sister in law was more confidant expressing herself in Swedish than English. The bonus is that we have all learnt some Swedish along the way too.

    1. Thanks for the link! It was shocking to me to hear how American he sounds… you’re right, it must be the influence of his mother and his US university time.

Comments are closed.

Back To Top