While we continue to wait for Kate Middleton, Duchess of Cambridge, to make her first appearance of the year, Katie Nicholl has provided a nice PR piece for us to roll our eyes at. There’s also The Crown trailer to watch, which is causing a bit of eye rolling itself (in royal historians). King Harald is celebrating his Silver Jubilee; pregnant Crown Princess Victoria had her first engagement of 2016; and Queen Letizia continued to chug along at her engagements.
[Kensington Palace @KensingtonRoyal]
To recap: KP has not announced any engagements for Kate for January; KP usually announces her engagements two weeks in advance, though sometimes they announce only one week in advance; Kate usually goes on the Middleton Mustique vacation at the end of January and stays on vacation until early February; there are two weeks left in January. Unless Kate makes a surprise appearance this coming week, or KP announces an engagement one week in advance and Kate does not go on her Mustique vacation, it looks like she will not be making any appearances in January and her first engagement will be the “guest editing” in mid-February.
So while we wait for Kate to actually do something, Katie Nicholl has written a new propaganda piece for the Daily Mail in which she talks about how Kate is super keen to, like, totally to do lots of stuff this year. I’m pretty sure my eyes hurt after rolling them so many times while reading this.
“It is a significant step forward for the Duchess who has just returned from maternity leave after the birth of Princess Charlotte in May last year.
“With her seven-month- old daughter now settled into life at Anmer Hall and two-year-old Prince George starting nursery in Norfolk this month, she has been able to carve out more time for work.
“As a result she has ordered aides to fill her diary for 2016 and is keen to demonstrate an increased commitment to the charity sector. […]
“And in a move that will draw further comparisons with Princess Diana, it seems the Duchess has been making private off-camera visits to meet children and organisations affected by the issue. […]
“A source said: ‘From her own research, meetings and visits to a number of charities over the last couple of years, one message has always stood out to her – that early intervention can dramatically change the likelihood of poor life chances further down the line.’
“While the Duchess has pledged to continue her work on behalf of her other charities, which include The Art Room, SportsAid and East Anglian Children’s Hospice, she is determined children’s mental health will be her focus.
“An aide said: ‘The Duchess spent a large chunk of last year on maternity leave. She will continue to focus on her family but this year she will be doing more engagements and mental health is going to be a big cause.'”
The article also reveals that, like last year, Kate will make a video in support of Children’s Mental Health Week – which starts on February 8. So maybe this video will be Kate’s first “engagement” of 2016.
Some quick thoughts: 1) I don’t think returning from maternity leave four months ago counts as “just returning”; 2) Charlotte is eight months old now, not seven months; 3) “Fill[ing] her diary” apparently does not include adding any engagements for January; 4) Sadly, due to Kate’s actions and PR lies over the years, I don’t believe Kate has been making “private visits”; 5) STAHP with the Diana comparison, let Kate be her own person; 6) Kate spent about five months of last year on maternity leave (April to August – though she did do a couple engagements during that time); 7) Apparently “doing more engagements” than last year includes taking all of January off (to compare, Kate did five engagements in January 2015).
As a writer, I’ve heard over and over the phrase “show, don’t tell” – it’s a staple of every classroom and writing conference. Show the audience the action, show the audience a character’s personality; don’t just tell the audience what is happening or that a character has a certain personality.
This same phrase can be applied to Kate. If Kate is truly “keen” on doing more engagements and being more involved with a cause: show me. Show me by having Kate actually visit places, talk intelligently to people and about the cause, give speeches, write articles if that’s what she wants to do. But don’t just tell me she’s “keen”. The time for telling is over. It’s been almost five years. Show me Kate’s “keen”. Show, don’t tell!
I want to be positive, I really do, but you have to work with me here, Jason / Kate.
In case you haven’t seen it, the above video is the trailer for The Crown, the new Netflix series about Queen Elizabeth II, starring Claire Foy (Wolf Hall) and Matt Smith (Doctor Who).
This trailer was brought up in the comments and I said: 1) It looks like Netflix has thrown a lot of money at this series; and 2) Philip looks like a d-ck.
According to reports, Netflix has shilled out about $156 million for 10 episodes – it’s Netflix’s most expensive show to date. The trailer looks good, and given Netflix’s history of producing great original series (House of Cards, Daredevil), I can’t wait to watch The Crown.
By the way, I was not the only one to notice Philip’s d-ckishness. The Daily Mail has drummed up a bunch of royal historians to say how wrong the portrayal of Philip is in the series. Also, Dickie Arbiter, former press spokesman for HM, is not a fan, saying (via Twitter): “Seems the upcoming Netflix/Peter Morgan TV series The Crown will be fat on innuendo & to hell with the facts,. Anything for a fast buck” and “This one will be short on fact & high on myth and innuendo”.
Eh. The series still looks good and I still want to see it. I even like Matt Smith a bit which is odd since I really hated Smith as The Doctor.
[Jørgen Gomnæs/The Royal Court]
King Harald is celebrating his Silver Jubilee (25 years on the throne) today, January 17. The Royal Court released new official portraits of the King and Queen Sonja, as well as Crown Prince Haakon and Crown Princess Mette-Marit. They also released a photo of the King, Crown Prince, and Princess Ingrid. They also released a new photo of the Royal Family.
[Jørgen Gomnæs/The Royal Court]
Crown Princess Victoria and Prince Daniel joined King Carl XVI Gustaf and Queen Silvia for a meeting with the Foreign Minister to discuss planning for next year’s state visits and official trips.
Victoria repeated her Seraphine Maternity “Bubble Print Maternity Dress” (£59.00) she first wore on November 18 in Värmland. Victoria is due in March, and her last scheduled appearance has been set for February 10.
On January 12, Queen Letizia attended a meeting with the Foundation Against Drug Addiction (FAD) – whose objective is the prevention of drug use and other risky behaviors that prevent or hinder personal and social development of adolescents. Leti became Honorary President of FAD in September 2015, taking over from Queen Sofia.
FAD was created in 1986 on the initiative of Manuel Gutierrez Mellado – president of the institution until his death in 1995 – with the support of companies, institutions, and professionals, and operates in collaboration with other civil society organizations who understand that drug problems require a joint response, which is mainly in the area of prevention.
Leti wore lots of Hugo Boss. She wore a new BOSS Hugo Boss “Cosyna” Cashmere Double Face Cocoon Coat in light pink/purple. Leti repeated her Hugo Boss aubergine “Jamayla” blazer and “Valessima” skirt, as well as a white Hugo Boss blouse. Leti also wore nude Magrit pumps, ruby cabochon dangle earrings, and carried a burgundy clutch.
I’m not too keen on the coat, but I love the color of the skirt suit.
126 thoughts on “Royal Round Up: Duchess Kate, ‘The Crown’ trailer, Norway royals, CP Victoria, Queen Letizia”
Good morning KMR. Thank you for the round up. The drama showing Claire Foy and Matt Smith looks interesting. It is a period in history that always finds new material. Claire Foy actually looks like HM.I thought Claire Foy didn’t quite fit Anne Boleyn and Lydia Leonard did.
The photos of the Norwegian family are good to see as the kids are growing up. Ingrid looks like CP Victoria or is that me. Ingrid definitely is a serious looking girl. There was some footage of CP Victoria with one of her godchildren and Prince William and even then Victoria looked a natural. The Norwegian family is good allowing the public to see the kids. Just enough to get them used to the public eye.
Victoria looks radiant. Doesn’t look like long now though I wouldn’t have a clue in the topic. It is good to see Victoria still working and with Daniel there to
ps Congratulations to King Harald. I don’t really hear much about the Norwegian family living in the UK. Queen Letizia definitely is getting stuck into work. I guess Letizia is choosing charities she cares about. It must be hard to join a Royal family and start caring for certain things that never crossed her mind before or if it was personal for her and hard to express it. Kate does try but there is no direction. Amanda Platell, got a telling off from an inside source for being too critical of Kate. This was just before they married. I don’t trust her now.
“It must be hard to join a Royal family and start caring for certain things that never crossed her mind before”
That’s why for any royal I think it’s good they pick things they actually have a personal connection to. That’s the problem I see with Kate and all of her charities is that none of the causes are ones that she has any sort of personal connection to. Except the sports ones since she genuinely loves sports.
I think Claire Foy does a good HM, at least from the little I’ve seen of her in this trailer.
There’s a video of Victoria and William? Do you have a link?
Just a clip in a film about William and Harry of Victoria and fifteen year old William at the Christening. It was on youtube.
Prince William:Behind the headlines.
First of all, I hate the term “maternity leave” for Kate. She does not work like other women to have right to maternity leave. By law this is not possible for Kate, but I think she deserved a “break” from her engagements like any othe mother. Second Kate Nichols is assuming that Kate will leave her children in Amner Hall and spend much time in London doing engagements. KMR you are right, I really rolled my eyes. It is to see to believe.
Why should she be expected to make more public appearances? I am American, and I may not grasp the nuances here, but she has two very young children; why shouldn’t she be spending the bulk of her time with them?
Kate Middleton wasn’t born into this life, she married into it. That doesn’t give her tremendous obligations as i see it. She has a brother-in-law who is capable of doing more of this kind of thing.
As wife of a direct heir, Kate does have obligations to the British public. The modern Royal Family serves the nation, usually through working with charities. In return she gets her status, respect (ideally – if she earns it), and a lavish lifestyle. True, she married into this life, but so did Philip and Diana. They both understood the role and responsibilities, even when they had small children. As a Brit who dated Wills for years, she most likely knew exactly what she was getting herself into. She now has a national role, and like it or not, she has to live up to it. Or she will suffer the consequences.
I hear so much about how Brits want to modernize the monarchy, but how far do they want to go. I think the spectacle and pomp makes it special. But then again, as an American I am not paying for it. You do get my tourist dollars, though. Having a front row view of the Trooping the Colour parade was a lifetime dream, as was my tour of many royal palaces. I have a huge respect for the Queen and for Charles. Don’t know if I will pay to fly across the pond to see Bill and Katie Middleton drive down the mall in a minivan.
The spectacle, pomp, and history are what makes the monarchy the monarchy. Why should a bunch of average, middle class people be given hundreds of millions of pounds per year and live in giant palaces over all the other average, middle class people?
I don’t believe there are any plans to get rid of the pomp, just to reduce the numbers acting on behalf on the Queen/King. It makes everybody’s lives easier if the demarcation is clear. Problem with this as mentioned many times that is that it would require the new P and P of Wales to stand up to the plate and do a lot of work, for which on current form they will be very poorly prepared.
Exactly. And thanks Birdy for the explanation. Wills has a problem. If he seems uncomfortable now just wearing a normal suit and talking to people how is he going to pull off the robes of state?? Thank God he feels ok in a military uniform.
Great insight Birdy!
Lacey, thanks, I tend to think similar.
Kate’s most important job now is to birth healthy heirs and raise them to be decent human beings. Once they go to school, the priorities should shift.
That said, going out to see a charity for 2 hours once a week would not kill her. Surely, that can be managed. The staff would help her prepare, and it is only once a week. Not hard.
She does not owe it to anyone, no. After all, lots of stay-at-home wives are supported by their husbands (how that husband earns his money is his business, not the wife’s. She is not responsible for him.). But going out even once a week, every week, would really help with the PR and do lots of good in the world, without harming her priorities of raising children.
She could even stay in Anmer Hall all the time. It is only 2.5 hours driving from London (lots of time to read the briefing notes!). The hair dresser and secretaries etc. could come to her, get her ready in the morning, then she is at the charity by noon, get done by 2 or 3, and be home by 5 for dinner with the kids.
One engagement per week, every week, is 4 engagements per month. 48 engagements per year. This is on par with what she is doing now, but the regularity shows commitment better, and soothes the hunger pangs for those who need to see her glowing countenance. If she added an extra engagement once in a while, she could easily get the numbers up to 60-70 without breaking too much sweat, neglecting the kids or losing the beauty sleep.
just want to add one thing
I used to think “well, maybe Charles does not want Kate to outshine him and the Queen, so maybe he insists hat she does not work very much”
but really, is it so hard to schedule one appearance a week, and coordinate with his staff so the timings and locations do not overlap? not hard at all, that is what the personal secretaries are for
one appearance a week will not undermine Her Maj or Prince Charles
so why does she have to go for months without visiting charities? if she were employed in any organization other than “The Royal Firm”, she would have been fired long time ago.
I don’t know, maybe there is more politics going on under the surface than we can even imagine, but I struggle to think of what that might be; what would prevent the woman from taking a break from nappies once a week to spread the awareness of a worthy cause?
But she is not supported by her husband but by her father-in-law AND the British tax payers! Her security, her work clothes, transport, etc. – all of that is payed by the British government, which in the final degree means the public. Furthermore, she has married into a family that has ceremonial and public obligations – those obligations are hers as well due to the fact that she’s married to a future King.
Arguing that she’s a stay-at-home-mom like any other is a false equivalency. My cousin stayed at home when her children were small but she was not supported by the state. That IS a crucial difference.
Kate’s work clothes alone run up in thounds of pounds – even for one single tour, her wardrobe cost the taxpayers an enormous amount of money. Her wardrobe for the Australia/NZ tour (19 days) cost £55.000!! Charles foots the bill and then get a tax write off (because it is for “work”), so it is essentially the British public that pays for very expensive clothes that she wears once or twice.
ArtHistorian, you are right. I should not have said that she owes nothing to the public.
But even if she didn’t, doing the bare minimum I outlined would not have been out of place. In fact, many of those stay at home moms I mentioned, do engage in charity work, out of their own volition. Because it is the right thing to do.
So of course, in her position, not doing so is not okay.
Ecelos, change the once a week to two or three times a week and I’m with you.
Bluehare, of course! 2-3 times a week is not unreasonable at all! It’s like going to a class: Mon, Wed, Fri for 1 hour – or Tue, Thu for 2 hours. People all over the world do it all the time.
But let’s say we want to be really generous, and accept that she wants her kids to grow up in the countryside, and she wants to be there present for them, because it is so important when growing up.
OK. How about Monday and Friday? With travel to London or York or anywhere within 2-3 hours driving distance, it’s a day: by the time you get there, spend a couple hours and get back home, it’s a full day. But we can make it reeeal easy for her: two pair of black slacks, one blue blouse, one green one. Both colors look good on her. If she wants them to be silk, fine, it’s a good fabric. Maybe a blazer. Countess Sophie wears that black blazer to almost every engagement. OK, she could wear those things for a week, then send them to cleaners, and by next Monday she is good to go again. With the aids at her service, she can easily get the work+traveling done, and be home for both breakfast and dinner with the kids on the same day. Then she would have – let’s see – Tue, Wed, Thu, Sat, Sun to be a full-time Mom. How is that not a workable schedule?
Look, my family lived in the country for a few hears when I was in high school. Dad worked in the city, and I went to school there. It was like this. Dad would get up at 5 AM and wake me up at 5:30. I could not wake up by myself, because I stayed up late studying. Mom would have breakfast on the table by then. At 6 AM we would be outside, marching to the train station together. For 30 minutes. Then train ride for 1.5 hours. Then we would part, and he would take a bus to his work, and I would take a bus to school. Another 20 minutes. I’d be in school at around 8 AM. In the evening, around 6 PM we would meet up again at the train station in the city and take the train to the country, then walk from the train station to the apartment. We lived in a cold climate, so winter lasted October through March. It was cold, it was snowy. But we strapped on our fur coats and our fur hats, and our boots and gloves, and we would march out every day to take the train to get to work.
It was hard. Kate would never have survived. I would not expect her to do this. But I think it is not unreasonable for her to do something a lot easier once a week, at least, with the help of her aids and servants and drivers and nannies. Doing it twice a week would be a bonus. Three times a week – oh my god I think I might cry if it happens.
I frequently read the argument about Kate having two young children and should be free from criticism to stay home to be with the two cuties.
I don’t live in England, but when I read this argument about the amount of time Kate works as a member of the BRF, I wonder how many women (and men, for that matter) would love to stay home and be with their children. How many really dislike leaving their children in order to work part or full time, but must to financially support their families. Some may be the sole supporters or may need to work in addition to their partners. These families don’t have the choice to stay home. Budgets can only stretch so far. They pay taxes and help fund the lifestyle the Cambridge’s enjoy.
I just don’t get the Kate has two young children argument. If NONE of their lifestyle was paid for by hard working people, it would be a different story, but if you are ‘taking’ something from others, shouldn’t they receive ‘fair’ compensation.
G, I totally agree with you. I am so sick of that argument too. I hear it all the time . . . just think of the CHILDRENNNNN. I have a counter to that, although her kids are a smidge too young yet, but it is good to model behavior you’d like to see in your kids for them. Let them know that there are children not as fortunate as they are who she has to go help a few hours a week. I cannot for the life of me see what’s wrong with that.
There is a huge difference between Kate and all the other stay-at-home wives/mothers. Kate is supported by the taxpayer, while all the other SAH wives are supported by their husbands. William is not paying for Kate out of his EAAA salary.
An analogy for Kate’s situation would be the unemployed SAH wife of a man living off welfare.
I made a comment down thread to Lacey about the math behind Kate doing 200 engagements a year and still being able to spend the bulk of her time with her kids. Kate could focus the majority of her time on her kids *and* do 200 engagements a year.
That is an excellent analogy, KMR.
Ecelos and KMR, thanks for your comments. I have never in my few months staying home with our baby thought of myself as being financially dependent on my husband. If that is hard for people to understand, so be it. As I said, we have an understanding about money. What he makes is ours. What I was making when I had an outside job was our money, too. I know many others who have similar relations with their spouses. If I was working and my husband was home, I would feel the money was his, too.
When I hear the words financially dependent it smacks of someone who is weak. Who wants to be dependent, right? To me, anyway. I know there will come a time when I am earning money again. Right now, I am busy and feeling fulfilled. Financially dependent smacks of a different century in my mind. It is my hope that any woman who is staying home caring for a family would have a similar arrangement with her spouse. That the spouse’s earnings are her earnings, too.
At any rate, thank you.
Wow, I am not too pleased with the statement that many of stay-at-home wives are supported by their husbands (how that husband earns his money is his business, not the wife’s…)” What, exactly does that mean, if I may ask?
Currently, I am a stay-at-home mom, but trust me I am not sitting on my duff, watching television, eating bon bons and just waiting for my husband to get home with his money — some of which I just hope, he may pass off to me, shall I add?!
I take care of our child, I clean the house (not as much as before the baby was born, I must admit), I shop for groceries and cook dinner. So, I’m working — even though, it’s in the house. So, I do have a job, so to speak. I’m just not earning a salary for all that I do.
I really resent such comments if I understood them correctly. By my staying home, is it being suggested that I am really doing so little of any merit at all?
Some women are married to very wealthy men and the families can survive on one salary. Other women have to go back to work as soon as maternity leave is over. Still others choose to cut back on expenses so that they can stay home for a while. That is what we are doing currently in our household. I guess I am a novelty among many of the moms in my neighborhood. But, I resent the thought that I am not working. Just living off my husband’s income, of which I have little right to know how much he makes and what he does to earn it.
Kate has plenty of help around her “house”, so she isn’t living the life of the typical stay-at-home mom. I don’t begrudge her for wanting to spend time with her children, but with all the help she has and with all the money coming her way, I don’t see why she isn’t doing more appearances on behalf of charities, etc. To me, that is downright lazy and not a very good example of what her role as a Duchess is. It should be much more — especially, now that Baby Charlotte is older.
Just needed to vent. If I hear one more woman ask me when I am going back to work, I think I will scream. I doubt the hours I have spent since my daughter was born could be defined as “leisure.” It’s work, people. Tons of work, but more worthwhile than any job I was ever financially paid to do.
And, so says a woman who has a “baby-sitter” available today to give me a chance to have a little quiet time of my own.
I don’t think any offense was intended, Jenny. I also don’t think anyone was saying that the average SAH wife/mom doesn’t work in the home cleaning, cooking, etc.
What was said and meant was that a SAH wife/mom is financially supported by her husband as she is not bringing in an income. Which is true. If a woman is not bringing in an income she has to be financially supported by her husband, in the same way a man who is not bringing in an income would need to be financially supported by his wife.
Kate is not in any way the average SAH wife/mom as she is neither being financially supported by her husband nor working inside the home.
Jenny I fully understand your need to justify your decision to be a full time mum, while the reality is you don’t need to justify your decision to anyone. We too made the decision to cut back on spending so I could bring up our children. I had very little support with no family nearby and it was tough. Being a full time mum is incredibly rewarding, incredibly hard and incredibly undervalued by a few. KMR is right, I don’t think any insult was intended. My advice is always be like a director of a company – your company is your family. Do what is in the best interests of your family – all of you, and each individual , and then don’t worry about what others think. I’ve been in your shoes, I understand the feeling of being undervalued by some people, but honestly don’t stress. Be happy, enjoy your choices and feel grateful for what joy you have from your family. I didn’t ‘work’ for 20 years, now I have a full time paid job and yet my kids ( adults) still think I am there for them whenever they need me. So I have two full time jobs!! It was the best decision for me and my family, others chose to make different decisions and that is fine too. I’m sure you are short on sleep so enjoy having family to help you this evening. Big hugs.
Wow, I seem to be posting like crazy, today. I have tons of laundry begging to be washed, but I just sit here at the computer delighted to have time to get over the KMR withdrawal I have suffered the last few months. (I have my sister here again, today to babysit).
Birdy, I appreciate your thoughtful comment and I guess I was pretty sensitive when I posted yesterday. It’s nice to know that another woman, whose opinions on this board I admire, stayed at home with her children, too!
KMR, it was thoughtful for you to reply, but frankly, it would have meant more to hear back from the person whose words set me off. If I took them in the wrong way, then, I will know for certain.
I don’t feel that a stay-at-home is dependent on her husband for money. That’s a rather antiquated look at the situation, if you ask me. As far as I know, it’s both of our money, not just his. My husband thinks that way, too. Oh, and for the record, when I was drawing a salary, it was our money, not just mine, either.
The home environment I provide is not just for the baby or my husband and stepchildren, it’s for all of us. That’s how I think of it. Others may feel differently, though I can’t imagine why.
Often, I read of feminist ideas that women have every right to be as assertive as men. That women can be the aggressors in relationships, etc. That’s fine. Every woman should do and be what makes her comfortable. What I am trying to point out is that some women really do want to stay home with their kids and if they can afford to do so, or if they agree to cut back on spending so that they can do so, then that is a feminist issue, too. It’s a woman with a different slant on life asking that her ideas be given respect. And, the post I initially replied to was my attempt of pointing that out.
I hope you didn’t think I was judging you, Jenny. I wasn’t at all.
In my mind, I was just stating a fact: if a person is not drawing an income, they are financially dependent on someone else for income – be that a romantic partner, a parent, a friend, or whoever.
In my mind, whether two people in a relationship agree the income is joint income is a separate issue because it’s a personal opinion about how to look at income.
I actually think two people thinking of the income as joint income is a better way to look at it because it eliminates some issues over money that I’ve seen arise in relationships.
I am sorry to hear that my comment offended you. Please be assured that the matter is only in semantics. Stay at home wives do a lot of work, and frequently participate in community events and charities on top of that. It is truly a full-time job. I suspect that once we sum up all the renumeration that would have been due to a housekeeper, a nanny, a cook, a teacher, an accountant, a personal shopper, the total salary due might be higher than some husbands bring home.
However, linguistically, the phrase “being supported by husband “, literally means that the wife does not bring money into the family (or at least does not bring enough to support herself). This responsibility then falls on the husband. They might share those money, but if the husband becomes unemployed, then the money influx will cease, there will be no money to buy food with.
You say in one of your posts “I don’t feel that a stay-at-home is dependent on her husband for money.” What happens if he stops working? Where will the money come from, to buy the food and clothes for everyone in the family? Some women save the money by wise spending. They squirrel away “for the rainy day”. This has been the good practice for generations. In that case, when the husband becomes unemployed, the family still has money to live on. But where did the money come from? If he did not bring in the money to begin with, she would not have been able to save it. A stay at home mom *who does not bring income*, is in fact financially dependent on the husband. Some wives stay at home with children, but the earn money from home, for example by running an in-home nanny business, or by selling their sewing on Ebay or translating literature for money. That makes them less financially dependent on the husband, or even completely independent, depending on how much they earn.
When a person earns income, then depending on the amount, he/she may or may not be supported by someone. For example, the person might earn $100 per week. That is not enough to live on, and therefore the person needs to be financially supported by either husband, wife, family, friends or the state. This applies both to husbands and wives, whether or not they have children.
I hope this explains my comment. I certainly did not write it to denigrate the women who choose to be home makers. But I would also prefer that you read the words as written, not reading into them more or less than they actually mean. My exact words were “After all, lots of stay-at-home wives are supported by their husbands”. This is a truism, and does not encompass *all* stay-at-home wives. Don’t take any of it personally, please.
This can be potentially a touchy subject, and I will refrain from m making more posts about it in this thread.
Please accept my goodwill, and best wishes.
She is a future queen of England she has tremendous obligations. She doesn’t have to do any of the chores that other full time mothers have to do, she has staff. So she should give back to the nation that is supporting the royal family. No one expects her to work full time, but she has the power given her by her position to make a difference to many people’s lives, and it is frustrating to British tax payers that she consistently promises to do more, but fails to deliver.
it is frustrating, yes
especially because it would not be so hard for her to do
and the consistent failure to deliver on the promises is especially unprofessional
If I read one more time about Kate being keen to fill up her diary and get back to work…
Well, I’m going to start calling her “Keenie”.
Another argument often being mentioned in favour of Kate (except of the one mentioned upthread -mom with two young children) is that she’s not a queen nor princess of Wales therefore shouldn’t work as much But: she’s a senior royal. IMO she should do more.
Well, she needs to learn so she’s prepared when she becomes Princess of Wales and then Queen. She needs to start now so she won’t make a complete ass of herself when it really counts. Experience requires work, it doesn’t come via a download.
Exactly. Kate needs to get out there and practice. Make her mistakes now – like giving crappy speeches – so that when she is Princess of Wales she won’t make those mistakes. Some people think that Kate will automatically have it all together and step up to the plate once she’s Princess of Wales but if she does not practice now then she won’t. Both Princess Anne and Prince Edward have said they were crap when they started doing engagements but they kept getting out there and learned by doing.
Her brother-in-law is not the future Queen.
Even if Kate did 200 engagements a year, she would still be able to spend the bulk of her time with her kids. It’s not like she’s working a 9-5 job**. She “works” for about two hours per engagement (including travel time). There are 8,760 hours in a year. If you minus 8 hours per day for sleep, there are still 5,840 hours a year of awake time. 500 hours a year for engagements (including prep time, travel time, and time spent actually there) is not much at all (and leaves 5,340 hours to spend with the kids per year – that’s over 14 hours per day). Kate could still be a fully hands on mom and do 200 engagements a year.
Kate is the wife of the heir’s heir and will one day be Queen. That gives her a tremendous amount of obligation to make herself seem worthy of living the high life off the backs of the taxpayer.
William and Kate are above Harry in the line of succession and *should* be doing more than him.
** There is nothing wrong with a mother working a 9-5 job while she has kids.
I hear about 300 to 400 engagements/year leading to a very busy, tiresome workload. Typically, how long does one engagement last? 3 hours?
For a total of 400, if you pack 2 engagements/day 5 days a week, you still have the weekends and 12 weeks for vacation. Remember, they have nannies, domestic workers to shop, cook and clean for them….All they have to do is to look nice, show up and be pleasant. I suppose there will be people doing research, writing speeches and rehearsing them before they go to the engagement.
I work 12 hour/day 3 to 4 days a week and only have 6 weeks of vacation after 20 years with the company. No one to cook and clean..Only thing is I don’t have 2 children to take care of so I shouldn’t cry…:))
Kate usually does not stay at an engagement longer then 1 hour. Plus prep time and travel time it’s probably 2-3 hours tops depending on the event and where it is.
Will the ‘secret visits’ be counted towards Kate’s engagement total and if so, how do we know she has attended if they are secret?
Is the organic produce thing still on? Remember, she had to bag walnuts for staff. That would take time.
I don’t think Kate’s “private visits” count toward the year end total.
Lol, nut bagging must take all the energy out of Kate.
OOH I had forgotten about that – how will she fit that in to her exceptionally busy new schedule of charitable visits! I think that is probably another idea that got leaked to the press to see how people thought of it, and has quietly been shelved. It was never going to be her anyway, setting up a new business even with the huge profile of her name, would be extraordinarily hard work in the early years.
Count me in among those who forgot about Kate starting her business.
I think the Cambridge PR staff throws a bunch of crap out hoping to confuse many in the public to believe the couple is busy.
IMO, it really comes down to two things. First, Kate promised in the engagement interview to “work hard” and we all know how that promise turned out. Why didn’t she say family was her primary focus and once the family they planned to have were in school, she would turn her focus to royal duties. SHE is the one to place expectations on what we would see after the marriage. Secondly, if Kate met a reasonably consistent schedule of appearances (people at KMR are expressing 1-3 days/week), I bet much of the criticism would die down. If Kate worked consistently, I could start to overlook the bad posture, clutch in the same mid-line below the waist position she favors 98% of the time, the manic grin ect.
The issue is she stated she would work. Even before the children she didn’t work much for her five charities she picked as patronages. PR doesn’t work for the intelligent readers of KMR.
Before the wedding Kate didn’t work, do charity or volunary work. She didn’t prepare for her future role in any way. The only preparation for the marriage was that she lost weight for her wedding.
What was her excuse before George was born, her numbers were really low even then.
Finally her luxury life is paid by the British taxpayers. It’s her duty to do engagement.
Kate’s engagments usually last for one hour. She has enough time to do couple of engagements every week. Her children wont notice her absence, even she wont notice that work load. But that would shut her critics down. Why can’t she do it? Most people put that same time each week to voluntary work, on top of their actual work, household chores and taking care of kids. Kate has none of those issues.
I love Leti’s involvement of FAD. This sounds like a good organization. Drug prevention is key. I like the idea that the business sector gets involved in prevention. This normally falls.to the parents and individual. She looked amazing. This is what a “normal” working woman wears. A smart skirt suit, appropriate accessories, and a killer smile. Now most don’t wear Hugo Boss or the higher price tag, lol. Leti nailed it.
King Harald’s celebration is nice theory see. His story with Sonia (?) is just as sweet as Haakon and Mette-Marit. Congrats on a wonderful reign.
Vic looked pretty. I would wear that dress but I’m not pregnant, lol. I’m happy that she will get some rest prior to Bernadotte 2.0 is born. She worked, I believe, the day or days before Estelle was born.
Kate, I can’t. I will believe it when I see it. It’s sad that her other organizations are going to the wayside. They are all just as worthy and are in need of support. Can she not balance it?
Great post, KMR!
Rhiannon: I am sure she can balance them, and should; it is a simple matter of management.
She only has – what, like ten of them? Set up a rotation. Visit a charity once a week, and in under 3 months they all get attention. Then start over again. This way in a year, each charity would get 4 visits. The pre-recorded video messages are nice, but don’t count. The letters of support are nice, but don’t count. Visit each charity 4 times a year. That’s only 40 visits total, for 10 charities. Not hard, but that would show the “focus” that she is supposedly giving the charities by taking on fewer patronages than expected.
In other words, I agree with you. 🙂
Oh but she can’t just show up without them having an event for her to go to and invite her. That’s the real reason why she barely visits them dontcha know? 😉 It’s not HER fault they rarely have anything going on.
but she can always go back to “learn more” 🙂
whatevs, you know I get the sarcasm, but even, Even if it were true (in some sick universe), even if they be small events because charities cannot have big ones for her every 3 months – fine, let’s invite a couple of photographers (just two, okay? Kate, you can set up a rotation for them too, if they really make you so uncomfortable in large numbers), then say a couple words, hug some kids, heck – even recycle an outfit, she can be as boring as she likes, even wear a dowdy Michael Kors suit if that works for her, but if amidst all that she says one phrase “this is a worthy cause, and donating $5 today would make the world a better place” – I feel like that already would be a step up. Then do the same next week at a different charity. And again, and again. One small bit at a time, it really accumulates.
She does not have to get up at 6AM to arrive to a boring 8 AM board meeting that lasts forever and have to type up the minutes for it, only to be followed by an equally formal and unhealthy lunch that she cannot leave to go pee, because some big wig might say something important while she is away, and her missing it will have negative consequences down the road; she does not have to then deliver an hour-long slide presentation (that she made herself) during which she would have needed to appear put-together, AND actually be competent and make sense. She does not have to answer pointed and sometimes undermining questions from the audience after that presentation, she does not have to then sit in the audience and ask questions to other speakers herself, she is not expected to then show up to a business dinner looking fresh, feeling perky and ready for more intellectualizing, decision making and occasionally hardballing after all this. And when she gets home she is not expected to stay up until the wee hours digesting all that happened that day, processing 100 emails that arrived while she was in meetings, and preparing to do it all over again tomorrow.
Literally, all she needs to do is show up. This is so true in all endeavors, and it is so simple — although not always sufficient. For her, at this point, actually it would be sufficient. Just show up and don’t flash anyone!
I once read this article on Cracked:
I think they repeat it every year, so there is a new post out now, but it’s the same contents every time. On the second page, under item 3 they have a video of a guy singing on the street in a g-string, jiggling his balls. And the article says: “Everyone who watched that video instantly became a little happier, although not all for the same reasons. Can you do that for people? Why not? What’s stopping you from strapping on your proverbial thong and cape and taking to your proverbial stage and flapping your proverbial penis at people? That guy knows the secret to winning at human life: that doing … whatever you call that … was better than not doing it.”
That’s all, really. For Kate to just show up at an engagement every week, regularly, is better than not showing up at all. She should just do it. I don’t care if she wears the same thing to all engagements (grab that teal suit she wore recently, that looks fine and put-together; better yet, find a pair of black trousers and you are good to go for a full year), or if she stops plucking her brows, or dying her hair (a ponytail is fine, I don’t need her to look fancy), or – much would be forgiven if she just makes one meaningful contribution at a time. Because why not?
Wow, I am really venting something today. It’s like an avalanche!
May I just say you had me at g-string wearing ball jiggler. 😀
Oh, while I am venting – you know I used to buy into those “oh she is going on a grueling tour, she must prepare” and “the tour was so grueling, she must rest” or even simply “the grueling tour”
and yeah, I sympathize. Social anxiety, pressure to do well under scrutiny, early rise, tight schedule etc etc. Yeah, I feel it, it’s tough, for sure!
But having written my previous post, I realize – that’s like every working day for most people! Do we take 2-week vacation on paradise island before we are scheduled to go on a week-long business trip? Do we take another 2-week vacay after that? No! An anal tart that I am, I do spend 2 days packing, and another 2 days unpacking – but I launder, press and buff every item of my clothing and shoes (well, my black slacks get dry cleaned because I cannot get my cat’s hair out of them otherwise), in addition to preparing slides, running background checks, like actually producing meaningful content, you know! And most people don’t have even that luxury – they’ve got kids and parents to look after.
And as to the trip being grueling – that’s like every single conference and business trip I’ve even taken or seen people go to! I know people in advanced positions who can only affords to come home for a day or two, to be with family before they must depart for another end of the world. Some have to hop from one country to another in a span of a month without being home, because that’s how the schedule of meetings and people’s availability worked out. Where they do laundry – I know not. My boss says he packs enough to last the entire trip. What about women? Things get lost in travel, things get wrinkled and ripped. There is no staff to straighten this out, you do it yourself, and then you have to deliver something meaningful and make an actual difference the next day. You are lucky if your department has a decent secretary to at least book the flight for you, otherwise you do everything yourself.
And yeah, it’s tough, but we do it because it’s life, and it’s necessary, and that is how the world works.
+1. And +5 for the cat hair comment! Is their hair part glue?? Just impossible.
Re Harald and Sonja: Sonja was a commoner and Harald’s father objected to the marriage. Harald told his father that he would remain unmarried and childless unless he could marry Sonja, which would have ended the line of the royal family and most likely ended the monarchy in Norway (Olav V had no other male children and no siblings and would have had to choose someone from another royal house to take over the throne). Harald and Sonja dated for nine years before they were allowed to marry.
Such a sweet story. I had no idea. Thank you KMR.
That Daily Mail story not only had me rolling my eyes, but it also left me gagging. Ugh…as you said, show don’t tell!!
I’m so glad there was so much more good stuff after that. If we had to live on the scanty “keen” crumbs that are thrown to us by Kate we’d die of starvation.
Absolutely can’t wait to see “The Crown”. Love that period stuff, but wow someone really doesn’t like Philip. Comes off more like Henrik of Denmark rants. Either way I’m watching, it looks gorgeous and I’m a sucker for period pieces.
I was hoping you’d write about King Harald’s 25th. Wonderful photos but I noticed they didn’t include Marius. I know he’s not blood, but they’ve included him before and this is a big anniversary.
Somehow I think that although Victoria may not be making any public appearances after February 10 she still will be very much involved in her work in some way. Can’t wait to see the new baby. Estelle will probably be besides herself with joy.
Now when I look at the photos of Leti working, this is the kind of image they are trying to put into our minds about Kate. Substitute Kate in that photo at the table and ask me if it feels real. Leti worked before her marriage and she continued to work afterwards. Coming from a news background she knows how to do her research and probably comes to the table well informed in any engagement she undertakes. On a lighter note, I do love the color of her suit as well. Looking forward to the state visit to England. Tiaras are coming out to play!
KMR, I’m trying to stay positive about the possibilities with Kate this year, but when they assault us with the dreck they printed today in DM it makes it really, really hard.
I agree, Lisa. Kate ended the year, professionally, with a lot of momentum. We were even singing her praises. But then stopped. All of her charities are deserving and should not be treated as the “flavor of the month.” That’s what they have been relegated to.
yeah, I bet the charities did not stop their work, did they?
That’s what’s so crappy about the total lack of anything in January. Kate was actually look up toward the end of 2015. Then that ground to a halt when she decided to seemingly take all of January off.
Hi Lisa, I too was very surprised that Marius wasn’t included in either the family photo or the larger group photo. I wonder how he felt about that, perhaps it was his choice as he’s at the age where being around one’s family is certainly not cool.
I noticed that Marius was missing too and I am hoping that it is because of the family not being cool at his age issue.
I am sure that I have seen in him in other pics with the King and Queen so I hope that this is all there is too it.
I wish that they had of had Princess Ingrid sitting between the King and Queen, where her younger brother was sitting and that someone had of told the King that his Jacket was not quite right. But I am a perfectionist when it comes to pics LOL.
Marius was there ato the church service today. I saw them on Tumblr and Twitter. He even wore some sort of medal.
I’m going to cover Harald’s Silver Jubliee more later in the week, too.
Re not including Marius: It’s possible that for that particular photo, Harald only wanted to include his blood descendants, people who are actually in the line of succession. He had his wife, his son and his wife plus their kids, and his daughter and her husband plus their kids.
Such a good point Lisa about picturing Kate at that conference table. It would look beyond ridiculous. Which is a shame.
I can’t even really see Kate “ordering her aides” to do anything – let alone add more charity visits. That’s way too executive for someone who needs their Mommy to come over and run the house.
I once had to work with a man in a similar situation. He was several years older than me, married with two kids (3 and 6). And yet at work he was like a baby, seriously. No decision making ability or competence or direction. Kate is starting to look that way too. Hopefully she will mature over time. Some people are late bloomers.
Also, I want to say that it is very difficult to get out of the clutches of a mother who is an engulfing narcissist. Maybe Carole Middleton is not like that, but from their family dynamics, and behavior of the three Middleton kids, the signs seem to be there.
If that is the case, then Kate has her work cut out of her, in terms of breaking the smothering embrace of her mother, finding what she wants for herself, and then asserting that in a productive way.
All I can say is, good luck Kate. Just keep putting one foot in front of another. One small step at a time.
Ecelos you’re right about Carole Middleton. As others have commented it shows bad parenting. A strong minded and dominant mother can lead to dependent and immature children.
Kate seems she has to break free of the smothering in order to take her life in her own hands.
That being said, so far she seems to choose to remain in her comfort zone. But hey, so many of us do just that, right?
I doubt that Kate has the mental fortitude to fight free of the smothering embrace of Mother Dearest. The only thing she has ever fought for is landing and keeping her prince.
It is dreadfully hard to fight free of a smothering parent. I don’t know if you can call my mother a narcissicist but her mental issues are numerous and very severe. I’ve had to fight tooth and nail for every scrap of independance. It is hard, it wears you down emotionally and it doesn’t end until death claims one or the other. Sad but true.
Good for you ArtHistorian. I agree and fully understand. It’s a life struggle. I too had/have issues with my dad’s strong ego. Kate may be weak right now (actually I think the same applies to William, in a way) but she doesn’t only owe her mental emancipation to herself and her family but also to the people she will serve one day.Great privileges come with great responsibility and accountability.
I agree, AH, though fighting for her prince was also Carole’s desire too, so not an independent move on Kate’s part. As for keeping him… hmm, I think that is premature. William will do what he wants and Kate, ever the doormat, will accept it. I perceive him as emotionally abusive. Her price for being a metaphorical punching bag is the title and privilege. William has an ugly soul.
I don’t see the siblings as wanting to challenge Carole; life’s too comfortable and it is all they have known. Plus they all like the media attention.
Genuine question – how many times have we had this “Kate is keen & will start working” rhetoric? It seems to be every few months. Does it come from Jason? It’s a short sighted tactic as the constant promise/fail/promise/fail just makes Kate look bad. Better to promise nothing than to do this.
Another article yesterday slamming William whilst praising Kate. Weird.
I need a Dictionary so I can look up the word “keen”.
Maybe it means something different to what I thought it did?
adjective: keen; comparative adjective: keener; superlative adjective: keenest
having or showing eagerness or enthusiasm.
“keen believers in the monetary system”
synonyms: eager, anxious, intent, impatient, determined, ambitious, champing at the bit; More
informalraring, itching, dying
“his publishers were keen to capitalize on his success”
enthusiastic, avid, eager, ardent, passionate, fervent, impassioned;
conscientious, committed, dedicated, zealous
“a keen birdwatcher”
antonyms: reluctant, apathetic, halfhearted
interested in or attracted by (someone or something).
“Bob makes it obvious he’s keen on her”
synonyms: enthusiastic about, interested in, passionate about; More
attracted to, fond of, taken with, smitten with, enamored of, infatuated with;
informalstruck on, hot on/for, mad about, crazy about, nuts about
“they are keen on horses”
antonyms: indifferent, unenthusiastic
sharp or penetrating, in particular.
The antonyms apply more to Kate than the definition does.
No, Kate does not fit the dictionary definition of ‘keen’ as applied to her charities or work, though most certainly in terms of personal pleasures (holidays, shopping).
If you quit your one and only job you hardly did anyway on the day you are dumped by a prospective husband, abandon the charity rowing event on the day you are picked up again by prospective husband, do very little work for your charities in five years, then the die is pretty much cast, isn’t it?
I’m not sure Kate knows she is under qualified to guest edit. She and William have healthy egos bolstered by stupid articles such as the one in the Daily Mail. Should she harbor any doubts, they will be soothed away by flattery. Always dangerous to believe your own publicity.
Here’s a challenge for Katie Nicholls and anyone else writing puff pieces about Kate.
“Try to write your article without using the word keen?”
Haha. So true. If I never read the word “Keen” again it will be too soon.
Countless times over the years.
The article in DM is just nauseating. Kate is just “keen” on Kate but maybe she has been told it is time to get serious about a cause due to all the negative publicity that just keeps rolling in about her. On another note, I cannot help comparing the way Kate looks and the way Diana looked when doing an engagement. Kate just looks so messy for some reason, just can’t put my finger on it.
“maybe she has been told it is time to get serious about a cause due to all the negative publicity that just keeps rolling in about her.”
That’s what we were told last fall. It seemed to be true until the start of 2016 when it all stopped.
I’ve been to a long yoga session so am trying to maintain my calm zen like state! Stopped off and bought the Mail on Sunday. It is a two page spread but on pages 10-11. I think that says it all.
The whole thing is ludicrous and as said up post we’ve had so many broken promises about her work. Diana lived and worked in London in the week, Kate simply can’t live in Norfolk and fulfill a diary of engagements in London.
Does the DM or BRF really think we are that stupid.
Stop comparing her to Diana its unhelpful on every level.
Both the Norwegian and Swedish royals seem to be happy, united and hard working. Well done to all of them.
And I love Leti, her clothing is professional and appropriate often with a little twist and she works very hard, doing more than just turning up and looking pretty.
That drivel took up two pages??? Had to be an obscene amount of pictures.
Comparing Kate to Diana just makes Kate look bad. KP, especially, and the press should stop the comparisons if they want Kate to actually look good.
Agree. Kate does not have the empathy for people that Diana had. It seems that way, to me. She also does not have the “star quality” that was innate in Princess Di.
Comparing,Kate to Diana will continue to drag Kate down. It also makes some peope dislike her (Kate) even more. People are expecting something of Kate that she cannot deliver. Kate needs to find out who she really is and be comfortable with that person! She needs to think more about others and let that show. She does not need to re-create Diana. She does not need to dress like Diana, or do so many of the special things that Diana did which made people love her so much. She needs to present her true self to the world in a positive, caring way. She needs to be more comfortable in her own skin and then others, I think, will begin to see a “real” person and begin to like that person more.
Absolutely Mary Elizabeth – she needs to be her own person but a person who appreciates how fortunate she is and uses her position to help those less fortunate. Diana had a very privileged upbringing, despite deep unhappiness with her parents situation, but whatever her problems and issues she knew how to care about others. Kate needs to learn where she can make a difference following her own interests and instincts.
In an effort to keep with my NY’s resolution of trying to be positive about Kate I can only add the following comment. I’m positive that the royal reporters hate having to write obvious PR articles like this. I’m pretty positive that they feel as though they are watching their careers head down the drain.
I’m pretty positive that we won’t see a significant increase in Kate’s engagement numbers this year and I’m positive that we won’t for some years to come (if ever).
See I didn’t say anything negative about Kate, only positive thoughts! Whew, it feels good to be so positive 🙂 !
Yes, I’m pretty positive that you’re right in every respect Lauri.
Haha Lauri that’s so funny. This is what it takes to be positive about Kate! Would you guys think that she’s already on Mustique vacation hence the silence?
Lol, keep those thoughts positive, Lauri!
I wonder how much Katie Nicholl gets paid to write the stuff she writes about Kate. Like, do you think the Middletons pay her?
And yeah, the royal reporters must hate having to write what they write about Kate. I’ve seen Palmer complain about finding something new to say about Kate when she’s doing engagements. There is only so much to say about a certain topic when Kate gives them nothing new.
I’ve felt it myself. I’d love nothing more than to quote Kate, but she doesn’t give me anything. And there is only so much to say about talking to staff and patients or about watching rugby. That’s why I love Camilla’s lunch at Clarence House with the Helen & Douglas House kids so much. She always gives great quotes and there are great stories about the kids to write about. Kate needs to either give speeches, say a few words, or at least talk loud enough for the reporters to hear her so they can quote the things she says. That way it would give us something to write about.
The article is as empty and vapid as Waity.
“As a result she has ordered aides to fill her diary for 2016….”
What work scrounging ‘aides’ does she have? What this really means is, “her PR team continues to try to fill up a couple of hours a month with fluff to make sure she meets some baseline quota for the year and cements her place as a towering icon of keenness”.
Jason and the Dolittles have opted to sell themselves as a brand (so ‘keen’ on family and work) and with all the snake oil advertising that entails.
What I don’t understand is how reporters can be such willing and shameless lying mouthpieces for the lying Dolittles.
Hahahaha! I almost spit out my tea! ” towering icon of keenness”. You are too funny Maven!
+1. Brilliantly said.
+1 here too. She should be called as Her Keenness!
I actually thought the article was meant to be largely ironic. On the surface, it reads like flattery, but it’s pretty insulting once you scratch the surface. The comparison to Diana (which increasingly makes Kate look bad), the use of the word “keen” (which is now a joke when applied to Kate), the idea that she’s ready to get going (which we’ve been told repeatedly for almost 5 years). Honestly, I think KN might be taking a giant pot-shot at Kate while making it look like they’re fulfilling the UK press’s obligation to speak positively about her.
Yes, and the british press excels at hit pieces written as puffery!
Two Kitchens Kate is now Keen Kate.
Memo to Kate: Business 101, OVER deliver on promises.
promise less than you are able
deliver more than you have promised
Mette-Marit looks beautiful in the first picture. Her simple and regal gown is really becoming on her although I would prefer it in a different colour than white. I love the detail of her holding hands with Prince Haakon! They seem a loving couple.
Leti and Victoria look amazing and they both started work for the new year. Who knows when Kate will ‘be keen’ to start working at all.
I agree with you Elina, Mette-Merit looks stunning in the sleek and simple gowns, although I have to say I love her in all white.
She looks really great in ice-blue!
I agree with you, Elina, that Mette-Marit looks fantastic in that white gown. Her Orders and such really pop against the starkness of the white.
Leti is a fine example of hard work and solid work ethic. And, she looks smashing, too.
Nice to see what she is up to these days and want to thank you, KMR for showing us so much about the other European Royals.
The Nichol’s article is nauseating. Kate the work horse making quiet appearances that the press doesn’t know about. In her dreams, I believe!
You are right, KMR. She should begin to show us not tell us what she plans to do.
Of course, is not much is being planned, what can she talk about?
Note to Lauri: Did you notice Leti’s posture? Especially, when seated at the conference table?!
Now, there is someone who really has great presence!
Everyone here seems to like Leti. I know she was unpopular in Spain but does anyone know if her work ethic and clear devotion to her family are turning that around? I think she is an amazing modern queen with brains and beauty, and of course fabulous posture.
From what I understand, given my limited knowledge as an outsider, is that the monarchy approval was in the toilet when Juan Carlos was King, but since his abdication the approval rating has gone up. So people seem to like Felipe and Letizia.
Hi Mary Elizabeth, yes I did notice Leti’s posture and had to adjust my own as I was slouching on the couch 🙂 I just read a bit in a women’s magazine that stated that good posture increases levels of testosterone and decreases levels of cortisol, there by reducing stress and making that person feel more confident. How nice to have science on my side 🙂
Good for you, Lauri. You are definitely on to something. Proper posture adds to one’s image and I think builds self-esteem. It’s like getting dressed for work even if your office is as home. When I first started working from home, I didn’t stay in my PJs when I headed to the “office,” but I often wore jeans and t-shirts. Now, I put together a more working casual look and feel better about myself as I sit at the computer. When I am on the phone with a client, I feel like a woman who goes out to her office, because I am dressed more appropriately. May sound silly to some, but it works for me.
You are so right. When I have a difficult or stressful day ahead I ‘dress up’ , spend a little more time on my hair and make up ( a little not a lot!) and help myself feel powerful. It works!
I am so excited about the upcoming birth of Victoria’s baby! And doesn’t she look radiant! I hope Estelle takes well to the new arrival and rival of her parents attention, some older children don’t handle the competition all that well but Estelle seems to be a bright and affectionate child so here’s hoping all goes well.
Thanks for including Leti, my posture guru!!! Just seeing her sitting straight backed makes me adjust my posture just a bit 🙂 I have to agree KMR this isn’t my favorite coat on her, at least not paired with this outfit. I have to say the way Leti holds herself in public speaks to me of a woman who is strong and confident, who knows who she is and what is expected of her and raises to each and every occasion.
I’m so excited about Vic and Dan’s baby too! It will be one of the highlights of the year. I predict another girl for them. Does anyone think that Kate will get pregnant again this year? After all it’s another way to avoid work via ‘maternity leaves’.
Yes, Leti is the posture guru. I think as Birdy mentioned, used to be unpopular for being strong minded or bossy -even in front of Felipe- but doesn’t this show that she has a strong personality and independent views for having been an accomplished career woman in the past? I think Leti won the public opinion when she became a hard working and devoted queen. Together with Felipe they have turned the Spanish royal family’s scandalous fame.
She was a divorcée and that was rather frowned upon in Catholic Spain. I got the impression that she was seen as undesirable because of that. Mette-Marit faced similar adversity because she had a son from a previous relationship and because she had been associated with a rather unsavoury environment (where a lot of people did drugs) when she was young. Victoria’s husband Daniel was also seen as unsuitable because he was a gym-owner.
I think that the idea that a royal spouse should have a spotless (or no) past is an untenable position these days. No one is flawless and it is so much more difficult to keep things secret in today’s media culture. Furthermore, the idea of a spotless past (no past) is also a deeply sexist one since it is generally only applied to female royal spouses – an antiquated remnant of an outdated mindset where a woman had to be a virgin when she married.
I believe the the Japanese royal establishment requires the future crown princess not to have dated anyone never mind being a virgin. In asian countries, you may be able to find virgins but never had a boyfriend is quite difficult.
I think Leti was firstly married with a civil ceremony. In the eyes of Catholic Church this didn’t count as marriage therefore she could marry Felipe, as not having been divorced. She also comes from a family that critised monarchy and her past as a journalist revealed a similar feisty personality. Mette-Marit’s case was more difficult to accept as she had a child outside marriage and was associated with drugs.
Anyway I agree that the royals should be free to choose their own spouses and that there’s no such thing as a clean past. Times have changed. The last time I know of an arranged royal marriage -with a so called virgin- was between Charles & Diana and we all know how that turned out.
Yes, Letizia’s first marriage was only done via civil ceremony and only lasted a year. Because it was a civil ceremony the Catholin church did not require an annulment before her marriage to Felipe.
The idea that people didn’t like Leti because she was confident and dominant in front of her husband is an incredibly sexist one.
Oh I agree 100%. I’m not a spanish subject so I’m not an expert but I have the impression that because she was feisty and dominant her loyalty and devotion to Felipe & the royal family used to be questioned. I think that stopped altogether when she became a queen.
I went to bed a little worried that there might be an overnight dust up so glad it didn’t happen. Ecelos you have some interesting ideas for Kate why don’t you apply to be her Private Secretary? You clearly have an astonishing work ethic, and you have some ideas as to how she can simplify things to achieve more. I don’t go with the two pairs of black trousers, but she could certainly dress more like Leti, who looks amazing when doing her ‘business’ meetings but not in a way that detracts from her role in the organisation she is visiting. She can bring out the big guns Queen look when appropriate, but it is not needed on each outing. Kate has a cupboard full of coats she should not need to buy any more this year.
In my eyes, she is obscenely spendthrift when it comes to her wardrobe. How many bespoke coats does a woman need? Furthermore, her wardrobe isn’t built up of separates that can be mixed and matched but on one-piece outfits. She also pays no attention to how an outfit can be changed with clever and varied accessorizing. Hence, she constantly buys new one-piece outfits – and she very rarely recycles. It would be interesting to know when her wardrobe hits the £ 1 mill. threshold, if it hasn’t already.
She has never made her own money but lived off other people’s money her ENTIRE life!!! She has no work experience and hence no idea to put together a professional wardrobe – and she, for reasons unknown, won’t use a professional stylist.
So true ArtHistorian. I can’t imagine why a woman of her status and public profile denies having a professional stylist.
Oh, I think a deadly combination of Kate’s well-tended ego and excessive personal vanity is the reason she does not have a professional stylist. As you highlighted, Kate has never earned her own money, nor has respect for how hard it is to earn.
Kate has been kept her entire life – how incredibly embarrassing – and things are not going to change for her. She seems to live in her own little bubble of privilege; why be mindful of spending others’ money? I think she channels her mother’s brass in demanding whatever she wants.
If the numerous coats provide any message, it is that she is a very spoiled, entitled woman, with zero awareness and empathy of the effects of austerity measures on her fellow citizens.
Enough of this excuse that being a Mother stops her Royal work.
She finds time away from the kids to work out.
She finds time away from the kids to get her hair regularly cut, coloured & treated.
She finds time away from the kids for facials, dental veneers, manicures, pedicures.
She finds time away from the kids to go to dinner & ballet with her family.
She finds time away from the kids to shop, to order unnecessary new outfits.
The only thing she doesn’t find time for is WORKING.
“Kept her entire life.” You nailed it!
Giant +1 to Art Historian! And a +1 to the other ladies as well.
Kate has gone from her parent’s home(s) to her husband’s home(s). She’s never paid rent, had to wonder where the money would come from for food, utilities, clothing and transportation. She doesn’t have to think about the little perks she got (and gets) constantly that involve shopping, getting her hair done and those spray tans. Then let’s talk about all of the paid for vacations.
Heaven forbid if she ever finds herself on her own having to take care of things for herself. Carole will not live forever and if she’s not with William when that happens she will lose her mind.
It’s not good parenting (IMO) to keep your adult children helpless, and worse, entitled. Or to not let them grow, find their passions in life (and I’m not talking about stalking a well-heeled man) and be independent. The Middleton parents have failed all three of their children in a quest to heal their own feelings of inadequacy.
Jen, You are SO right! The Middleton children may have received a great deal of love, but in terms of good parenting the Middleton parents have failed.
Kate needs to change. She better smarten up or she will be a poor role model for her children. Will and Kate are not modern young royals, but seem to have taken steps backward a generation or two.
Of course, we owe a real debt of gratitude to the women who were pioneers in the working world and made it much easier for all of us who followed. We owe them our respect and admiration.
Amen. That is so true. Contrast these three with the Middleton cousins, who are professionals. I cannot imagine that the three Middleton children grew up like that, either — Pippa won an all-rounder scholarship to their boarding school. It appears like it was all about ensuring Kate’s access to William.
I’m really excited to watch The Crown! Even if it’s slightly inaccurate/portrays anyone differently I will probably still enjoy it.
Comments are closed.