|
Post by bellabunny on Dec 9, 2011 1:27:32 GMT -5
The blue dress would be okay if it wasn't brunched up and wrinkled. The other one - a seminar about Serious Issues and she shows up in a cocktail dress. A one-sleeved, shoulder-baring, shortie-short. badly constructed cocktail dress, looking hungover.
Her wardrobe looks like a mobster girlfriend turned trophy wife. Seems Albert learned to appreciate that sort of woman and see her as an asset from hanging around shady people who show off women as sexual conquests and property, otherwise he would make damn sure she had some clue on how to look polished and appropriate for the nature of the event.
|
|
|
Post by bellabunny on Dec 5, 2011 12:59:20 GMT -5
A similar picture to this was out a few weeks ago, only they had their hands folded, paying respect at the village shrine. Only 1 picture then, same limited view.
And no, it didn't make much sense then either, usually the press can't get enough pictures in "unusual" outfits (the flowers) and doing charity work when it comes to princesses - around the same time Mary of Denmark visited a refugee camp and there was much more coverage.
|
|
|
Post by bellabunny on Nov 22, 2011 13:33:14 GMT -5
Anybody can go onto a Wikipedia page and change the text, that's the purpose of Wikipedia. They do try to keep a certain level of quality in the writing and have editors to go around and take out the nonsense like this. It should be reported.
.... and I see someone already has cleaned it up.
|
|
|
Post by bellabunny on Nov 18, 2011 2:26:06 GMT -5
With royal titles, it's passed through fathers, not mothers, unless that mother is the monarch.
Queen Elizabeth's 4 children - Charles, Anne, Andrew, Edward - are all HRH
Her sons' wives - Diana, Sarah, Sophie - were all made HRH (but NOT Princess) when they married. Diana and Sarah were stripped of the HRH when they divorced. "Princess Diana" was only a nickname people called her, she was never entitled to be called Princess.
Charles and Andrew's children - William, Harry, Beatrice, Eugenie - are all HRH. Edward and Sophie's children - James and Louise - could also be HRH but their parents chose not to accept the titles for them.
Princess Anne's children - Peter and Zara - never had titles or HRH because their father never had a title.
The Queen's sister Princess Margaret was HRH because her father was King George VI, her children are not HRH because she married a non-Royal.
The Queen's cousins - Duke of Gloucester, Duke of Kent, Princess Alexandra, Prince Michael - are all HRH because their fathers were the sons of King George V. The wives - Duchess of Gloucester, Duchess of Kent, Princess Michael - are HRH because they married princes. None of their children or grandchildren have, or will ever have HRH because they are too distantly related to the throne.
This was all laid out in the 1917 laws that changed the British royal family's name to Windsor and took away German surnames and titles from British royals.
The Hanover's are the descendants of Queen's Victoria's uncle the Duke of Cumberland who inherited the Hanover throne from his elder brother - Victoria's uncle William IV - because Hanover law didn't let women inherit the throne. They lost the kingdom of Hanover when Germany was unified and lost the Duke of Cumberland title because of WWI. They lost the Prince of Great Britain title at the same time, but got it back through a loophole in succession law dating back to when the UK throne went to the Hanovers in the first place.
It seems to be more ego and PR to play up the relation to the Queen than anything else, since from what I can find, Ernst didn't ask her permission to marry the first 2 times, only when he was marrying Caroline, and that had something to do with property the family owns in UK (to make sure that Alexandra would be able to inherit her share no problem? Not sure here)
The Commonwealth countries have all agreed to accept changes to the succession laws so women are not secondary to men in birth order, and so royals don't lose their place in line for marrying Catholics. The changes haven't been passed into law just yet, it will be interesting to see if any other changes are made as part of the new law.
|
|
|
Post by bellabunny on Nov 15, 2011 21:47:07 GMT -5
Alexandra's HRH has nothing to do with the British royal family, it comes from her father's family the Hanovers. In Britain only the children and children of sons of the monarch can use HRH - and only William's oldest child will be HRH until he moves up in succession.
The Hanover succession is a strange, remote thing, she's currently 431st in line because she apparently is being raised Protest. Her father lost his place when he married Caroline because she is catholic.
|
|
|
Post by bellabunny on Nov 15, 2011 10:34:38 GMT -5
I read somewhere that it was a dream of Grace's for them to be HRH instead of HSH. I don't know how they would pull it off - but I'm sure if they wanted to they could. The religion thing could cause a bit of a blip - but they could work around that. Then Monaco would be very closely aligned with the English Crown. (Ernst is the Queens cousin - 1st or 2nd - therefore so is Alexandra.) Just a vague thought I've had.[/quote]
The short answer is - Serene Highness is for families where the head is a Prince, Royal Highness is for families where the head is a King or Queen. So the only way would be for Albert to somehow gain the right the be called King of Monaco - probably requiring recognition from the Pope - although it's obviously way more complicated.
|
|
|
Post by bellabunny on Nov 13, 2011 14:27:55 GMT -5
Caroline's daughter in her red coat is adorable. So is the elderly nun. Charlene's dress is another off choice - terrible colour, bad cut, hangs very strange, also kind of short for church.
|
|
|
Post by bellabunny on Oct 22, 2011 23:57:02 GMT -5
Oh. Um... yay? All the cool royals that we could get and this pair are coming to TO OTOH, Charlene, in the same space as Rosie Dimanno could be fun (bitchy reporter who wouldn't be afraid to write about C saying something incredibly stupid) We didn't get much coverage of the runaway bride wedding fiasco because at the very same time Will & Kate were making their triumphant first official visit to Canada, you can expect the media coverage to trot out comparisons.
|
|
|
Post by bellabunny on Oct 14, 2011 12:31:51 GMT -5
More tone deaf marketing. People who collect royal wedding books want full colour pictures of the happy bride and handsome groom looking thrilled to be getting married to each other while crowds cheer and family smile.
B&W photography fans - I don't think many of them would find a royal wedding book in any way interesting. All I can think of is this is a sad attempt to invoke the 50's and the Grace-Rainier wedding, which people have mostly seen through B&W news photography of the time.
|
|
|
Post by bellabunny on Oct 13, 2011 3:23:20 GMT -5
(new board member, delurking) I voted for combination, I think Albert really did think it was about time to start a family and people convinced him to marry Charlene, rather than risk him changing his mind again, or looking for a more maternal partner who might come between him and his hangers-on.
|
|