Untitled

[Teddytoenail]

Having seen the programme, last night, regarding Prince Harry's 30th, I was impressed by his devotion and reality which is more than can be said for the rest of the Firm! The exception being the Duke of Edinburgh who,alas,was thrust into the position of being Consort to Her Maj regardless of his desire to continue his Naval activitiess but was obliged to adapt to a lesser role i.e. Patron of the WWLF.

What then of the other members? Do they really earn their salt or are they over- privileged, over-indulgent and of no practical use other than as objects paraded to ensure their existence as 'Royals'! A parallel being freaks in a sideshow held in awe by a curious public !!
A topic worthy of discussion--or of no consequence. What sayest thou ?

[judylow]

I didn't see the programme but I quite like what I see of Harry (Nazi uniform fancy dress apart).  The Royals are something that very few other countries have and are therefor a tourist attraction and a status symbol.  Most people agree that the Queen has never let the side down and as for the rest, I don't believe that Charles even wants to be King, but no doubt will feel it his duty and William and Kate will probably be far more relaxed and less 'royal' if and when their turn comes.

I don't think they are a freak show as the more peripheral members seem to keep a fairly low profile and all as patrons of charities do a lot of good as people are impressed by royalty.  I wouldn't call myself a royalist but have no objection to their existence as I do think their presence gives us a sense of stability that other countries lack.

[Londoner]

I have mixed feelings Teddy, so sit on the fence a bit here. 

If I'm honest, I'm not exactly a royalist and object to all the "hangers on". 

Good comments Judylow.

[Teddytoenail]

G'day, Judy and Londoner. Whether you agree or not, it is nice of you to respond and for me to  learn 'how the other half'' ticks.

To continue, herewith a further couple of 'bones' to chew on :-

a) The Royal freak show ! Maybe not but explain, to me, the mysterious public curiosity which I define as misguided judgement and mass idolatry !

b) Status symbols--of what?   In my view--affluence, pomposity, nonchalance,etc !

c) Stability ! This I question as we are on the threshold of a divided realm over which the Monarchy has no power-- also, the enigma of EU membership and cotrofversial immigration. All these causing concern over which the Queen has no control or the ability to stabilise.

[judylow]

a)  I have no idea but people seem to need someone to idolise whether it is royalty, film, pop or sports stars  and yes, I know the latter do something to inspire it but certainly out of proportion.

b) Status symbols - see above.  The younger royals seem less pompous.

c) I only said 'sense' of stability and we must blame history for her lack of real control.

I often annoy people by always seeing both sides of a question and am accused of 'making excuses' for people!

[Londoner]

Judy and Teddy,

I'm exactly like Judy and tend to "sit on the fence", seeing all sides.

I'm not a royalist and my mood / views changes daily with them.  

Really....I'm pretty useless ! LOL, LOL

[Londoner]

Thank you Teddy, you're very kind.

[Maryemm]

The Queen has been a good Queen and will be a hard act to follow.

I do feel that some of the "peripherals" should go! Princesses Eugenie and Beatrice come to mind as they are forever partying. What sort of employer do they have?

Royal occasions do help our tourist industry. Can't imagine people arriving in droves to see Clegg, or Cameron!

Teddytoenail: People like colour, rituals, tradition. I don't think for a moment that they "worship" Royalty.

  

[Londoner]

Have to agree with everything that Maryemm has said here.

[Ted.com]

Her Maj "a good queen" ! It's only proper that she should be an example and "a hard act" but please, don't put her on a pedestal ! In this country there are countless mothers of the same calibre who deserve credit but are never mentioned ! Blue blood--never ! Her attributes are identical to those of the female gender but, perhaps, with an additional suggestion of aplomb.
So! No more of this idolatry !

Peripherals! Time that lot were weeded out and disposed of as befits !!

Royals/Tourism ! Agree to somde extent--so does Wimbledon, Edinburgh Tattoo, Grand National/ Derby,etc . Public curiosity of the 'royals' is beholden by the mystery that is generated by the the Unelected Few(!)to ensure their continued existence and that they are 'worshipped' by the misguided.

We agree !! Folk are attracted to and like the 'bizarre!! I rest my case !

Been nice knowing you, M&M. May we meet again. Your profile appeals.

Regards. Teddytoenail.
aplombaplomb

[Maryemm]

Oh dear! I certainly do not place the Queen or anyone else on a pedestal. However, we are stuck with Royalty and, for what my opinion is worth, Elizabeth II has done her job well. In so doing I am not denigrating the countless mothers in the world who are never mentioned..

Wimbledon? Never watch it. .

Edinburgh Tattoo? Occasionally.

Grand National? My one flutter every year though I never watch it as I hate to see horses falling .(So, I'm a hypocrite!)

Attracted to the bizarre? Prefer bazaars!

I suspect you are trying to stir up a hornets' nest, Mr Teddy. What do you think, Judy and Londoner? Shall we send him to the Tower?

..

[judylow]

Off with his head!

 I do suspect we're being wound up.   I don't however think the Queen was ever known for being a good mother, duty first, so I fail to see what it has to do with unsung mothers.

[Londoner]

Maryemm and Judylow, I'm with you girls on this.

Come on now Teddy, let's all be nice. LOL