94 thoughts on “Royal Round Up: Sofia, Victoria, Charlene”

1. Charlene is an elegant woman. Her dress sense is impeccable. Hair, make-up, coat, scarf, shoes, and most of all demeanour, are exemplary. She looks healthy; she looks comfortable with her 39 years.

   Compare that with the frumpy, prissy, all-over-the-place costumes of Kate, wiglets breeding wiglets, manic grinning, all manner of teeth, hair, face treatments etc. Despite that, Kate looks closer to late 40’s+ than 35.

   One thing I wish these royal families would not do is bring out very small children to events. The child is clearly overwhelmed and there is just no need. It is a distraction for the parent who is there to work. By all means, release photos as the Swedes do, but unless it’s a kid-friendly event, wait until the child has better control over themselves.

   Are Sofia and Carl-Phillip officially working royals? I thought it was just the king/queen and heir, with an occasional per diem arrangements with the others. Is it that S+CP are in paid roles or are they hanging on, ignoring the directive that they fund their lives independently?

   1. Oh yes please, let’s drag the Duchess of Cambridge into the mix for another insult. Charlene is perfect – she even “looks healthy”, while Kate is a complete mess who can barely dress herself. For goodness sake!

      1. I didn’t say Charlene was perfect. Get it right.

         In my opinion, Charlene dresses appropriately for the occasion, for her age and as her position demands. I do not believe Kate Middleton’s choices hit those points well or often enough. Witness gynocologically-explicit jeggings, failure to wear underwear on occasion with too many opportunities to provide us with that unwanted knowledge, butchered designs, poor tailoring.

         Every person has a right to enhance their physical selves for reasons ranging from health to vanity to desperation. However, it can tip over into grotesque farce – excessive wiglets, enlarged teeth, the exaggerated facial expressions due to treatments – as it so often does with Kate Middleton.

         I wouldn’t care if Kate Middleton wore a sack or indulged in endless treatments had she demonstrated any work ethic over the past 12 years, genuine empathy and interest in the people she has the honour to meet, and generally, persevered with the role. But since she hasn’t made many, if any, inroads into developing her job, the default position reverts to commenting about the expensive empty shell she presents.

         1. +1 I would like to add, Jen was expressing her opinion within the guidelines set up by KMR.

      2. I think it’s funny to read certain comments, and then read the Comment Policy of this blog. We must have very different understandings of what it means to “Be courteous to the royals. This is a critical blog and criticism of the royals, both positive and negative, is welcome. But do not attack, demean, or insult the royals.”
         At some point either this Comment Policy, or the comments themselves may need to be revisited ; )

         1. +10000

         2. Agree also. Can we criticize them, or can’t we? Makes for too many bitchy comments to each other

      3. +1

   2. I agree, Charlene is a very elegant woman, but I don’t know if she’s really comfortable with her age because in close ups I’ve seen from this event, she looks like she’s had a lot of plastic surgery done to her face.

      1. Charlene has had a lot of work and Botox and treatments.

         1. yeah, I wish she hadn’t; she was very pretty and alive-looking before them

            1. +1

      2. I hadn’t really paid attention to her face until you mentioned this. It’s sad. Unfortunately most of the celebs don’t know when to stop and they end up with the frozen, unnatural look. I hope she doesn’t get that far.

         1. I think that peak surgery for charlene was the years immediately after her wedding.

            She’d already had work done, but that’s when she really piled on. She has a completely different face from her original face.

            It’s sad because when i see her children, i see the strong resemblance to her old face, but you wouldn’t see it so strongly in her new face,.

            http://stylesweekly.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Charlene-Wittstock-Short-Bob-Haircut-for-Thin-Hair.jpg

            https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/9f/69/a7/9f69a73a2e19d45c5b896201fd4f9728.jpg

            And this when she was a teen/ young adult

            https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/ec/3e/3f/ec3e3fc971fe9e66e2d0288421386cb7.jpg

            http://www.hellomagazine.com/imagenes/royalty/2015012523042/princess-charlene-37th-birthday-facts/0-120-144/charlene-4–z.jpg

            This around the time she moved to Monaco after meeting Albert
            https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/12/a4/45/12a44540d32a6f9819204d08bb42363e.jpg

            1. Charlene was beautiful! She didn’t need any surgery done to her face. That makes me sad that she felt she needed work done.

            2. Charlene is beautiful & Kate is pretty but I think we all fall for that I’m getting older syndrome so i need to pile on the work. I know that around my early 40’s I started with botox & fillers. Not a lot because I’m cheap, but i was self-conscious & Danny was quite a lot younger than i was. It last for about a year before I decided i had better use for my money.

               Kate would be a very pretty woman, but i think she got caught up into the more is more and will make her feel better. I wish she had embraced Charlene’s short hair while her children were young and went low maintenance. Many young mom’s do, but then again they have other things to take care of besides the way they look.

               I have absolutely no problem w/teeth whitening, hair coloring, botox & fraxel because I think those are just basics that those in the spot light have, but when it interferes with your ability to do your “job’ because you’re afraid for anyone to see who you really are then it isn’t doing anyone any good.

               I think Charlene is very elegant. She has that mystique that I like in my royalty, as if it matters what I like, but always put together and never flashing. That is my whole issue. Kate seems to spend a lot of time trying to be extremely thin and adding on enormous amounts of hair. I would have extreme respect for her if she came out and said that she adds the hair because it thinned after having children. Instead it seems like she’s trying to trick people into believing something she’s not.

               I will certainly own up to any work I’ve had done and I think we all should. If someone says that I look refreshed I’m the first to say yes, botox has done wonders for my eyes! Or if they comment on my hair I will say that my hairdresser was on point with this shade this time. I think that’s all we are really thinking. 🙂

            3. Oh my! Its like looking at 2 different people. Charlene’s definitely had her lips plumped up- that;s the most obvious one. Her face has changed so much too due to surgery, botox…?

            4. Red Tulip, i think there is proper cosmetic surgery here. Lips, botox, filler and some degree of surgical intervention to make her look so different. Randomly, i see a different nose, chin, jaw. Currently, her face has the puffy swelling that goes with filler application. So much filler that her naturally big eyes are disappearing into her filler filled cheeks.

               Around the time of the engagement, the gossip was that she’d had surgical intervention to make herself look more like Grace Kelly. Don’t know how true that gossip is, but lots of people tended to describe her as having a passing resemblance to Grace Kelly.

               After the wedding, she added a tonne of filler and botox to her face. That was part of the reason she looked sad in those early days. She couldn’t move her face, and unfortunately it was frozen in a sad expression.

               The saddest part of all is that her face has never settled or perhaps she keeps going back for top ups. It’s always puffy which is indicative of filler application.

               In any case, her old face is completely gone except in the faces of her children.

   3. I would say that Carl Philip and Sofia are officially working royals since they have profiles on the official website for the Swedish Royal Family, although as I stated on another post, I don’t consider them full-time working royals.

      I am unaware of a directive that Carl Philip and Sofia fund their lives separately, there was a poll a few months ago where a significant number, but not a majority, stated that Carl Philip and his sister Madeleine should not get an apanage but they don’t get apanages, they are funded out of the King’s apanage. Nevertheless the King does not fully fund Carl Philip and his family, Carl Philip generates income from outside sources, namely a design business, race car driving and inheritances.

      1. Thanks for that explanation, aaa. I was unclear as to how funding was distributed and how many of the SRF were required vs number of annual engagements, state and other.

         1. You’re welcome. 🙂

   4. The royals profiled today inhabit their roles. I have to say that I am impressed with Sofia’s appearances and how she seems to understand what being a royal patron is about, at least in the photos that we see. She is a quick study and presents as very focused, prepared, and polished.

      In contrast, KM plays at being royal or whatever she thinks she should be pretending to be. Her stabs at being a royal patron often include some sort of childish behavior–flyups, short skirts, excruciatingly tight pants, inappropriate for the event dress, mentioning how important it is to be taken care of, mention of her child’s bunny named Bun Bun, her strange inappropriate facial movements, her lack of any effort to understand other people or cultures, and her retreat back into herself once she thinks the appearance is over.

      Ironic, because the British taxpayer is providing her with what she prizes the most–being taken care of. It’s not asking much that she learn something about the culture and people who give her give her homes, clothes, food, and other extravagances.

      1. +1

      2. Sofia has done really well adjusting. Props to her. She has the confidence to take on royal duties. Everyone in the SRF is a great role model on how to behave at public functions and they do seem to have welcomed Sofia so I think she gets a lot of support. I wonder if Kate would have blossomed if she had married into a royal family like the SRF.

         1. KM has been raised to be looked after as long as she fulfills the bargain (implied or specified) that she acts as her mother’s surrogate in gaining access to status and wealth. She was never taught to consider others or to recognize how hard others work to provide her with total care and tending to. I don’t think she would be different in another environment.

         2. I think Carole and now William are the two biggest reasons why Kate has not blossomed. Her mother held her back to secure the wedding. Her husband kept her from a respectable role model afterwards. I don’t think Kate would ever have lit the world on fire, but she could have been so much more.

         3. I don’t think so, Sofia is a confident and strong-willed woman, she would have thrived and found her place in any royal family. Kate is an insecure woman that still heavily relies on her mother’s support for everything she does. Kate needs to grow as a person, then she may begin to make a difference and do her job well.

   5. Jen, they are hangers-on who are clinging to being funded by the taxpayers. Every time they show up at an “event” I’m reminded of it.

      Traditionally, the Swedish spares go into private life and disappear. They show up at occasional big events, but are to support themselves and not live off the taxpayers. These two, along with the sexist king, are going for being supported by the taxpayers. The king even handed a title (that comes with luxury house on pennies of rent) to their son, instead of rightfully giving it to Oscar who is 1) the heir’s son and 2) was born first.

      Politicians from 5-6 factions have banded together to call for elimination of funding for anyone but the monarch and heir. They’re demanding full access to the monarch’s financials, so they can make sure he doesn’t sneak any money to people who aren’t supposed to be funded by the taxpayers.

      CP owns three properties in Sweden plus they have the luxury apartment in S.A. He has millions in the bank. They have more than enough to fund themselves. If they want to do charity work, they can do it on their own time while supporting themselves.

      CP has been caught stealing other people’s designs for his “work”. He has also violated building code several times, thinking an entitled prince doesn’t have to pay attention to laws. She has founded a “consulting business” using the Palace address and palace staff as advisors. The future Inaki and Cristina of the Swedish Royal Family.

      1. Thanks, nota. I had read about CP’s plagiarism of design work; not sure whether he finished his degree from RISD – I thought he left after a year. But appropriating someone’s work is not on at all, prince or not.

         I realise the King is miffed that his son will not inherit the throne but assumed he would have to comply with Swedish law. Has there been any further response to the politicians’ demands, especially the financials? Swedes have a right to know who they are funding. Royalty seems an odd concept for egalitarian Sweden to embrace, though Victoria seems very low key and accessible.

         1. I will reply here but it is to both your comment and notasugar’s comment:

            – I don’t get how it is a bad thing for a Prince, who supposedly has millions and could spend his time racing cars, attending trade shows and scrathing his butt, to do royal work like visiting troops, participating in state visits, and criss-crossing the country represeting the monarch .

            – notasugar, I suspect that you are conflating two different things. An individual member of parliament called for Carl Philip and Madeleine to not get apanages stating that the Swedish taxpayers should not pay for shopping sprees, by the way Carl Philip and Madeleine do not have apanages. The banding together across political parties relates to the elimination of the monarchy not just removing money from spares.

            – Swedish royals who transitioned to “private life” tended to do so because they were stripped of their HRH title and succession rights.

            – I don’t recall there being any great demand for Oscar to be named the Duke of Södermanland and many seemed pleased when he was named Duke of Skane whose previous Dukes were future monarchs.

            – The most serious controversy involving Carl Philip and design came from another designer who claimed he, not CP, designed a fireplace screen, this revelation coincided with the designer releasing a book. IIRC the designer was vocal until Carl Philip rebutted the accusations and after CP’s rebuttal he stopped talking to the media.

            1. Thanks for our thoughts, aaa.

               I had read this, hence my questions:
               http://lovelolaheart.com/?tag=prince-carl-philip-design-scandal
               And this:
               https://www.thelocal.se/20131016/50832
               The csacthing editorial by the former editor of Form magazine has disappeared. no longer accessible.

            2. Not conflating one person, aaa. It was a group of 5-6 political parties banding together to demand change. The change they demanded was removing all but the monarch and heir from the taxpayer dole, not removing the monarchy completely. And getting full access to the records, so the king cannot sneak money to people on the side. Although that may come. Having royal hangers on doesn’t help.

               They are welcome to do charity work on their personal time, as long as they support themselves. Work representing the monarch should only be done by those who are officially designated, in this case the wife, heir, and spouse of heir. Like Felipe offed both his sisters from the working line once he became king.

               CP and Sofia do not support themselves and they live full-time in the Palace. “But their house is being renovated” might be an excuse. Then they can live in the luxury penthouse apartment he owns in Stockholm or in the country house. No reason or justification for full-time in the palace.

               The king even tried to sneak Sofia onto the Palace staff for awhile, with statements that she was going to be working as an assistant to the king. Desperate to keep his sonny boy and his line on the dole.

               It isn’t a question of demand, it is the fact that the king handed a royal-associated property to Alexander. When it logically should have gone to Victoria’s son, the spare. Instead it went to the son the king still thinks is the rightful heir. It would be like HM handing a royal property to Peter Phillips. Another example of his sexist behavior, and negative behavior towards the rightful female heir and her line.

               More than one occasion, not the fireplace screen, but multiple designs by multiple people. So easily forgotten when fans want to wash it away. That’s why it is always smart when, if you think an article is important, you save a copy to your computer. When the whitewashing comes, there is at least some evidence of what was once written.

               The monarchy in Sweden is increasingly on shaky ground. There was plenty of anti-monarchy sentiment around the wedding, and people continue to mock the idea that they should be calling Daniel by a title. Unfortunately the king (and CP and Sofia) cared more about themselves and the royal dole then the monarchy.

            3. I think that there’s a distinction between liking or disliking a royal as a person or even having character issues with that royal versus accusing a royal of bleeding the taxpayer dry, dictating who should or should not be working royals and claiming that there are proclamations (above and beyond the typical anti-monarchy stuff that gets tossed about) that certain royals not do royal work and that those directives are being ignored.

            4. There is clear and accepted evidence that Prince Carl Philip did not design objects that he claimed as his. The offending work – the firescreen – had Carl Philip’s name scrubbed from the design by the interior design company who marketed it. A carefully worded statement accompanying articles states that although Carl Philip did not commit plagiarism, it was another designer who did the actual work for which Carl Philip claimed the credit. (Potato, potarto, tomato, tomarto). The other designer was instructed by his company to act as a ‘ghost designer’. The matter was resolved in 2013 which is presumably why the real designer, Eric Ericson, has no further need to speak about it.

               This example (the firescreen) was uncovered by Form: Magazine for Nordic Architecture and Design, a reputable Swedish publication, published since 1905. Even in their current advertising of the quality of their design journalism, on their home page no less, they point to this example:
               “A well-known example [of feature journalism] from autumn 2013 is the unveiling of the “ghost designer” of Prince Carl Philip. The article aroused nationwide debate and highlighted abuse of power in the world of design.”

               Abuse. of. power.

               Quotes from further articles:
               “I thought I was to supervise him, but then it then turned out that I was to do his work for him.” (Eric Ericson, designer)
               http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2013/10/16/did-a-swedish-prince-lie-about-his-design-work/

               “In hindsight, it all really feels bloody wrong. It wasn’t a serious collaboration but I don’t want to blacken his name. He has only studied (design) for a short time. He can become a designer but it takes a lot of hard work and you must enter the profession to be successful. He might be world’s nicest guy but he doesn’t have to get up at five in the morning and slave to pay the rent.” (Eric Ericson, designer)
               http://tiptoppr.blogspot.com.au/2014/06/design-scandal-tarnishes-swedish.html

               The incident points to poor character, a sense of entitlement, wanting the prestige of being a designer and trading on his title to do so, but not the guts or work ethic to put in the years of hard work in order to become a professional. Those traits sound familiar – ‘pilot’ William and ‘photographer’ Kate – don’t they? And this:
               http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1489700/Teacher-did-Prince-Harrys-exam-paintings.html

      2. I can’t stand Carl Philip and Sofia- I find them both greedy, vile and Sofia in particular is a gold-digger extraordinaire. They need to disappear and make their own living already. Heck, I’d respect Sofia if she even did exotic modelling as her current occupation-at least it is her own career.

         1. Why do you find them “vile”?

            1. KMR: I find anyone who would rather feed off of others when they are capable to work, to be vile. I can’t abide by laziness Mixed with greed; I find that vile. CP and Sofia aren’t some busy bee full time working royals. There is no need of them to swan about being “working royals” and I’m not the only one that thinks that- some Swedish parliamentarians think so too and and are trying to limit the amount of working royals and Royal funding.

            2. But that’s true of all royals – that they take money from the taxpayers when they are capable of getting an honest job, and don’t work half as hard as any average person does. Why is it that only Carl Philip and Sofia and Kate are the only ones who get called rude names?

            3. KMR: I think it’s no secret that I find the whole monarchy to be a big joke and I am one of the more critical commenters here of various members of monarchy exploit their unearned power and privilege, including the well respected QEII. I comment here though because I respect the research and the hard work that you do, I have learned a lot of info from many knowledgeable people here and I admit it, I’m fascinated by the lovely clothes and jewels that some of the Royal ladies wear.

               And synonyms for vile among others include: disagreeable, bad, unpleasant, horrible- all words used in everyday speech and hardly rude names. And we all heavily criticize on WK all the time that they take up resources and don’t put in the hard work (hard work in the Royal sense). I could say the same for CP and Sofia too, they may be more attractive than WK, more personable and actually enjoy a happy marriage (it seems from pics), but that doesn’t mean that they get a pass from some of their questionable actions.

            4. UK is possibly moving to 6 working royals for 67 million people (plus the 15-16 country subset within the Commonwealth).

               Spain has essentially moved to 2 working royals for 47 million.

               Denmark (5.6 millions) oddly still has Joachim and Marie working (holdover from Alex being so popular before Mary arrived?). He was meant to go off and be a farmer, but that didn’t work. The royal house has already announced that only Christian will be a working royal in adulthood. The other three kids will go into private life and earn a living.

               Sweden has 9.5 million people and a rising Republican movement.

               CP and Sofia are clearly surplus to requirement, as the adults spares in Sweden have always been. We can say all royals are, but the 4th in line to the throne of a small country and his spouse? They’re definitely surplus to requirement. Madeleine gets this and is making a life for herself elsewhere.

         2. Red Tulip, I have noticed that you “can’t stand” and even “hate” quite liberally, so I cannot take your comments seriously. What exactly do you find “vile”? You must be very unhappy.

            1. BethNY and you’re just a presumptuous and arrogant person who seems to know whether I am happy or not with my life. I have noticed that you like Kate- that says enough about you, my dear.

            2. Please stop attacking each other. Let’s keep the discussion civil.

            3. BethNY: And I would ask that you don’t attack me or my opinions in the future.

   6. “Grotesque”. A most apt word for what Kate has become.

      Charlene looks lovely. I love her coat which she wears very well.

      1. gro·tesque
         ɡrōˈtesk/
         adjective
         1.
         comically or repulsively ugly or distorted.
         “grotesque facial distortions”
         synonyms: malformed, deformed, misshapen, misproportioned, distorted, twisted, gnarled, mangled, mutilated; More

         Hardly a way to describe Kate. Jeez, Maven. Really???

   7. Do we have to bring Kate into every discussion even when she has nothing to do with it? We can complement other royals without insulting Kate to do so. The other royals, if they are so great, should be able to stand on their own without us needing to insult Kate to make them look good.

2. Thank you for this Royal Round Up. Just a quick comment: I thought Sweden was supposed to be one of the world’s most egalitarian democracies (although with royalty), so it really bugs me that at the Global Child Forum meeting that Sofia was seated in a chair unlike any of the others and that this special chair was centered, by itself, on an Oriental rug. Like they were creating a sort of throne for Sofia. It looks absurd, especially since this was a meeting and not a ceremonial event of some sort.

   1. The Global Child Forum was founded by the King and Queen of Sweden, it’s a guess but maybe this charity is more inclined to perform certain niceties for royals than other Swedish charities because of its strong royal ties.

3. Now THAT is a Chanel sweater. You can tell just by looking at it. Tailored but feminine. Nice contrast. It is a classic piece that is eternally wearable. Unlike that boring grey coat Kate wore and tried to pass off as a dress.

   1. So agree. Kate would look amazing in something like that!

      1. I don’t think Kate would look that great in a Chanel jacket like the one Victoria had on. Kate doesn’t seem to be able to wear clothing well. Everything just wears her. I hate to be cruel, but that is what I think when i usually see her all dressed up and ready to go! Rarely, do her ensembles spell fashion to me.
         I know I commented on the other thread that I would like to see her in a traditional Chanel suit, but as I look at the photo of Victoria, I just think that Kate is not made for such clothing. To be honest, I think she looks better in more casual clothes — expect for jeggings.

      2. I agree! A coat like this would look amazing on her and would be appropriate for a number of her engagements. She would just have to have the appropriate accessories to slay.

         1. She has a Channel jacket that she owned before she married (or her mother did) and she wore it on the first tour of Canada, I think. It didn’t have any distinctive design features to it, but she looked nice enough. https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/5e/ff/29/5eff294ac6a7ecbcdadf171024028500.jpg

            1. That is a lovely jacket! Thank you for sharing!

   2. That’s a classic Chanel how I like it. I have to say, I also love the Bernadotte library. Is Marianne Bernadotte related to the swedish royal family?

      1. Marianne Bernadotte is related to the SRF by marriage, she married the current King’s uncle. She is not a princess because the uncle lost his title and succession rights when he married (a previous marriage) unequally. The marriage to Marianne was also an “unequal” marriage.

         1. Thank you!

         2. Hi aaa, what exactly is an “unequal” marriage?

            1. Queen Lauri, if I may jump in, I think aaa is refering to what used to be called a morganatic marriage:

               https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morganatic_marriage

            2. Thanks LizB, but if I’m reading this correctly then most royal marriages are “unequal” ie, W&K, CP & S, Maddie and Chris but these couples didn’t have to give up their titles or succession rank. I am curious as to why some couples have to give up titles and such but others don’t.

            3. @Queen Laurie
               Nowadays they don’t have to give up their rank, etc., but it wasn’t that way just 2 generations ago. Things have changed.

   3. +1

   4. Looks like Victoria borrowed the Chanel from her mother, at least from NewMyRoyals and other sites.

      http://www.newmyroyals.com/2017/03/princess-victoria-visited-marianne.html

      She does have another Chanel jacket (blue or gray tweed), which she has altered to change sleeve length.

      1. Thanks for the link, notsugarhere. Imagine going shopping in your Mom’s closet and finding Chanel, tiaras, and huge diamond earrings among the various figure skating costumes? Gotta love Silvia!

4. I have noticed that Princess Gabriella must be very shy around crowds. I think it was on National Day last year when Gabriella had to be brought inside while Charlene, Albert, and their son walked through crowds. She seems to be very scared by them.

   1. This has not to be something bad. Sometimes it’s better for a child if it’s not so open up, staying at her mother’s side especially in Gabriella’s position. It’s not so easy to live in this family, I hope Charlene can give her daughter(and her son)a secure home.

   2. I like that they bring her out to events but when she starts to exhibit signs of problems bring her back in. Let’s her get use to it in small doses

5. Little Gabriella is adorable, Charlene dresses her really elegant.I have the feeling that Charlene is a really nice woman.
   I like how Carl-Philip and Sofia work together, she always says something. I could not imagine her just standing by and let the man talk(like Kate does). It’s much more easier for them.

6. The way Victoria wears Chanel is the way to do it, she looks elegant. Not a fan of Sofia’s jumper -sleeves & colour.

   1. Ah, yes, Cat, I agree. Victoria looked so elegantl. I didn’t even mind the pussycat bow, when I saw the jacket. She looked amazing.

      I love Charlene’s style, too. She is so darn beautiful. Exquisite, actually, imo. I have seen her make a few mistakes, but she usually just radiates style! I loved the photo of her holding Gabrielle and the tyke leaning in to her mother. She is an adorable little girl and I think she is overwhelmed by the crowds, but Charlene made her feel secure.

      I agree with Jen, these events may not be the best for the children to attend. Perhaps, the nanny took Gabrielle away after a bit?

      P.S. The Swedish Library is so beautiful. I would love to curl up with a good book there! Just read my way to serenity!

7. Charlene! I love her style: classic and clean lines. I’m not a short hair person for myself, but I love to see someone rock a short ‘do. I think it her look stunning. Gabriella is adorable and agree, she might have been better off at home. You don’t want her to be traumatized and have to pay for it later.

   CP and Sofia make a good working couple. I appreciate the fact they are doing their part. Imho, it’s hard to determine who is and isn’t a working royal. However, I feel if the taxpayer is paying your way, you need to work.

   Thanks for the round up KMR!

   1. Agree rhiannon, Charlene is very classy. I saw other pictures of Carl Philip and Sofia and the way he looks at her is everything. It scream LOVE. It’s amazing.

      1. It’s beautiful that he loves her so much,isn’t it? 🙂

8. I’m not sure about the up-down hem on Charlene’s coat. It gives it more interest, but I think it dates it as well. I’m on board with the rest of the coat design, just not that annoying hem.

   1. I didn’t notice it until I read your comment. I agree, not a fan. I always think it looks weird when you can see the lining of the longer part.

   2. I think Charlene rocked that coat. I can’t imagine anyone else wearing it quite so well.
      She is so elegant and a loving mom, too. Little Gabrielle is a beautiful child and while she seemed to be shy around the crowds, I think Charlene was very relaxed with her and made the child feel comfortable. Charlene is always very relaxed with her children, The Swedish Royals are, too. Kate seems more relaxed with Charlotte than she does when with George.

      Victoria looked amazing in the Chanel jacket. Just beautiful. Now, to me, that’s what Chanel is. Not that horrible coat/dress Kate wore in Paris. It did nothing for her.

   3. It’s probably pretty easy to cut it shorter at a later date, though, if she wants to change things up a bit. I think she wears this (odd) look well and I love the shoes! Would a broach be against her minimalist principles?

      1. I agree that Charlene is always elegant, but I also wish she would add a little jewelry.

         1. But when she does bring the jewels boy does she bring them!! She has a couple of Graff pieces that I covet =) heck, I ? Most of her jewels!

9. Why didn’t charlene bring jaques? He is the heir, for him it is even more important to get used to public appearances than for gabriella.

   1. I wonder if their son had a cold or had not slept well. As for Gabriella, she seemed like she did not want to be there, but children can change very quickly when it comes to their desires. One minute she may not have wanted to see her parents walk out the door and the next she may have not wanted to be there. It looks like the bright sun may have been in her eyes and she was trying to hide her face towards Charlene’s coat.

10. Charlene has done something different with her hair I don’t like. I can’t decide if it’s the color or cut that’s bothering me. I loved it before
    I want to know more about the purple shirt Victoria is wearing! All I can see the is the sleeve but I love the color from what I can see.

11. Official tour portrait*.

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C7dwMjHX4AAEtHe.jpg

    I think Catherine is very pretty and certainly has the right look.

    *Upon further inspection I’m not sure if this is for the Paris trip or not.

    **Yep it’s from the India/Bhutan visit.

    1. That picture is from 2011. I believe their first Canadian trip. She looks nothing like that now.

       1. Thanks! I did a google search but couldn’t find the original usage. I definitely wasn’t paying attention in 2011 (I was in basic training).

          1. You can tell how old some of these photos are by how much hair Will has.

    2. That portrait was released ahead of their first Canada tour in 2011.

    3. That portrait is photoshopped within an inch of life.

       Back in 2011-12, the media tended to overdo the photoshop.

       These days when they photoshop her photos, theg remain within realistic range, not the hyper reality they used to do.

    4. Why must she constantly “touch” herself?

12. I must disagree about Charlene. I think she’s a piece of coal that through pressure has been made into a diamond. She looks like a well-preserved 60 year of Upper East Side doyenne. She looks very cold. She looks like she’s playing a role.

13. Charlene is so lovely, I find it sad she’s resorted to so much plastic surgery. They have a lovely family and Albert from all I have heard is really a wonderful guy. I find it interesting she doesn’t have much to do, per se, as the Princess of Monaco. It’s such a wealthy, tiny nation, so it’s nice she found her niche in promoting swimming. It’s such a great hobby and sport!

    I like seeing Victoria out and about; she stood in for her mother at the Stockholm Peace Talks today as well, which is great.

    Sofia looks nice enough. As y’all know I cannot stand her, I think I dislike her even more than Kate, so I’ll say I like her hair and her makeup. Wish she didn’t wear a white bra under that top, which I like, you can see the bra in some pictures, but green is a nice color for her.

14. Sofia Hellqvist is pregnant again

    1. Is it sad that I immediately thought of the Swedish babies corralled by Estelle at the christening? Leonore being Leonore!!! It will be a delightful scene.

Comments are closed.