Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Cambridges' Family Christmas Photo + George to Go to Westacre Nursery

Friday, December 18, 2015

Christmas has come early for royal watchers as the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge released a family Christmas photo to the public this morning! This photo was taken at Kensington Palace:


Last year, William and Kate gave us a Christmas picture of George, which was obviously very exciting, but at that time I think we had all hoped to see William and Kate in the picture, too.


The Cambridges released a family shot from the christening, but Charlotte was quite small, and frankly in comparison to this vibrant photo today, that photo feels a little stiff:



Today, Kate has dressed Charlotte in the same ensemble that the little princess wore for her solo shoot. The dress is by Spanish label m&h and reportedly cost only thirty-some-odd dollars. Kate probably kept Charlotte in the same dress because she looks nice in it, but very possibly also to minimize the rush to ID more baby clothes.


I love the casual but put-together atmosphere of the photo. The whole family is nicely coordinated wearing cozy autumn sweaters in tones of blue and grey and pink. Charlotte's little left shoe has fallen off and sits in the grass next to a toy train that provides a pop of color and classic element in the green grass. 


Kate is wearing soft skinny/leggings with a light button down and a grey pullover. She is also wearing new sneakers in a deep navy. This photo appears to have been taken before she had her hair trimmed and the long layers frame her face and blow aside just enough to give us a glimpse of her sapphire and diamond drop earrings. This is a stunning photo of the whole family. George is his usual bubbly self,  and William looks handsome and debonair as he glances at Prince George. Speaking of the little man who will be king, the Cambridges have released news on that front:

Westacre

William and Kate have announced today that George will start at a Norfolk nursery in January. The precocious toddler will join twenty other youngsters at the Westacre Montessori School where his tuition will likely be £5.50/hour.  
West Acre Montessori School has been established for 21 years. In 2001 it moved to the village of East Walton to the south east of King's Lynn. It operates from the main hall and associated rooms of a converted chapel. A maximum of 20 children may attend the setting at any one time. The school is open each weekday during school term times, on Monday and Friday from 9.00 to 12.00 and on Tuesday to Thursday from 9.00 to 15.00. All children share access to a secure enclosed outdoor play area.
Kate and William have been keen for George to interact with other children his age, and we have seen Kate take George to play with others his age in London, Norfolk, and Bucklebury.  



Final verdict is overwhelmingly positive. I think today's photo has really solidified for me that I miss Kate's longer hair. I hope she grows it out quickly, it is just too beautiful to wear short. This photo continues to balance the contemporary and classic which seems to be the Cambridges trademark. That bodes well for future family photos and for the institution of e monarchy. This couple obviously understands measured modernization. 

134 comments:

  1. Beautiful picture! It looks like she may have on a dark blue pair of her Plimsoll shoes from Mint Velvet? I do miss the long hair too.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This photo is so lovely, a classical christmas card photo :) The colours coordinate well and I really like the blurred Background.
    I read that it was taken in October -> that's why her hair is still longer.
    They all look so beautiful and are such a cute little family! And I love the details on George's sweater! Wish Lupo jad been in the photo... Hopefully, they'll release a christmas picture every year!

    I can't believe that George is already going to nursery school - it seems very early to me as he is only 2 1/2 years old. (But maybe that's just because of my surrounding society?)
    Great for him to meet other kids and make friends :)
    And interesting that they chose a Montessori school... I wonder if we'll see 'first day arrival' photos like with William/ Harry and Diana when they were kids or like with princess Estelle of Sweden?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think 2.5 is too young. I went to preschool at 4, three afternoons a week. In the US, they are starting them earlier and earlier. What I think is really horrible is the everyday ones or all day long. It is because no one is home to take care of their children and the schools see $. I think, depending on the structure, it is a lot of stress for a little child.

      Having said all that, I think George's preschool looks to be a few hours for a few days a week, which is the best of the worst. And he won't attend when they are in London.

      Delete
    2. Anon 7:52, I tend to agree. I think it is too young, as well. As you say, though, because he won't be full-time, perhaps it will play more the role of a playgroup for him. I hope they use it minimally while he is still so small.

      Delete
    3. Children are ready for nursery school at different ages. Obviously the Duke and Duchess think George is ready and they know him best.
      The school is very small, so he probably won't feel overwhelmed.

      Delete
    4. Not sure if my phone lost the first post, or if it did make it to moderation. Can you delete this one if the first made it?

      My daughter started full time nursery at 1 when I went back to work and has been an excellent option for her. I think it is a personal decision based on child and family needs. 2.5 is perfectly normal in the UK, and indeed free funding is available in deprived areas from age 2, and for all children from 3.

      Delete
    5. I didn't go anywhere but stayed at home with my mom until the age of 4.5 when I started kindergarten, nd that only 3 to 4 hours monday - friday (and most other children here do so, too, the mothers enjoy staying at home). My mom said it broke her heart leaving me and especially later my younger sister at kindergarten after she brought her because my sister didn't want to stay there without our mom at all. But, as jane and the first anon pointed out, I agree that it might be a rare opportunity to socialize for him.

      Delete
    6. I had to be in daycare as soon as my.moms maternity leave was over..I was about six months old and I think I turned out OK lol

      Delete
    7. I agree with Jane on this one - I'm pretty sure they decided on preschool simply to give George some playmates his same age. They may just be panicking that he hasn't developed the same social skills due to his very private lifestyle. Plus, it may give Kate some one-on-one time with Charlotte that she might be craving. Who knows! You're right though - it is young, and would probably be too much if it were all day, every day. But Montessori school is great, so it will hopefully be a good thing for little George :)

      Delete
    8. Someone made the good point to me that William and Kate probably want to start him meeting other children before any of them really understand the hierarchy, if you will. None of his playmates will know him as a celebrity--as others will later in his life.

      Delete
    9. I think nursery is good for children, but in any case it is a necessity for working mothers. For many it is not a matter of choice, it is inevitable. I assume this is true everywhere in the world.
      My eldest went at 8 months, and my youngest at 10 months, every day 9-15. I like it that they get an opportunity to play with other children, and to start experiencing diversity, and mothers can work.

      Delete
    10. I'm uneasy here that there seems to be disapproval for what amounts to sending George to a playgroup a few hours per week. Perhaps it was my upbringing with both parents working but it is not unusual for infants to go into day care very early on, particularly if they have no paid maternity leave (which is not uncommon in the US).

      Given his extreme wealth and privilege I would consider it almost necessary in this day and age to ensure that he has meaningful exposure to all sorts of "normal" kids and grownups that will treat him like a normal kid.

      I think this is a very wise choice by the Duchess.

      Delete
    11. I should have said, "by the duke and duchess"

      Delete
    12. The Montessori method is very different from other nursery schools which are mostly play time. There is a specific plan for the kids that is based on encouraging the freedom of expression and the children working together. They aim to educate the whole child and not just teaching them a rote education. There are some great things about the Montessori method and a couple I'm not fond of. In our area at least, the tuition is very expensive. Their approach is something that would really resonate with Kate as she is so interested in the psychology of children.

      Delete
    13. I just want to jump in to be sure this doesn't take the wrong turn. I have not noticed anyone suggesting disapproval in some negative, or judgmental sense. These sorts of decisions vary based on numerous factors and it is legitimate to chat about them. To me, the consensus seems to be that Kate and Wills have opted for a playgroup for George and my impression is most are pretty on board with it, particularly with the qualification of time and the nature of eh activities. So, I wouldn't worry. Nothing here has been hostile.

      Delete
    14. For a royal child, especially, I think this is more about social interaction and exposing him to life beyond their own four walls.

      And, IMO, George is not too young. He appears to be a very confident and happy little boy and the stimulation will be a good addition to his routine. Children can act out (be "stressed") if they are *not* challenged and stimulated. Bottom line...parents know best.

      Delete
    15. To jump in late, it sounds young compared to what I did and what some of us did. However, things are changing. A lot of daycares in Canada offer preschool programs for 2.5. Some stay at home parents will put their kids in preschool for 1-2 years before kindergarten.

      In Iceland I believe children start a government created nursery school/preschool program at 1 year of age, typically when their moms return to work. I've read about it, and discussed it with locals when visiting Iceland - they are really proud that they start educating their kids at an early age.

      I can't recall the countries, but I've heard some (possibly like Sonja from Bavaria) European countries don't really do nursery school at all - they put more focus on basics like riding a bike without training wheels, motor skills, etc, and don't believe in starting formal, structured education until kindergarten.

      I think these programs know how to balance young children who need playtime, with early education. Should be fun for George!

      Delete
    16. He will be going for a few hours a few days of week when they are in town, much less than the co-op baby siting many do with Moms in the neighborhood where you drop you kid off with a friend while you go out grocery shopping and in exchange you watch their kid. There are not any close neighbors with kids that George can go an be around and play with. George may well be helped by being in an environment where he is not number one:) Every child is different. I also actually think that George may find it very very difficult to go to the Montessori school and not be with Catherine or the Nanny. This is very speculative but he strikes me as one of those kids that is very advanced and independent but also very very needy, it can be a very hard child to raise, especially when very young. I think it is a very wise choice.

      Delete
    17. I don't think George has a "private" lifestyle like some think. William and Kate have many friends with children, we have also seen that he goes to parks and public playground regularly- with the nanny, with Kate, and with Carole. It makes me laugh when people worry about his "social" skills!! I have heard many parents defend daycare or this crazy early preschool using "social skills" are needed. Many times, these places are a more Lord of Flys type environment and not good for developing social skills.

      I think George is a very well adjusted little boy who receives a lot of good adult attention.

      Delete
    18. Anon 11:54, I don't know where you live but here in the Northeast U.S., most children attend two years of preschool before going to kindergarten. Most begin at two and a half or three years of age. Also, I've never heard of a nursery
      school that is set up like a free for all. There are some rules and structure plus a lot of supervision. The children learn to share, take turns and be part of a group. Any" Lord of the Flies " nursery schools aren't doing their job correctly.

      Delete
    19. I live in the US, Faith. And your explanation of preschools is not accurate IMO. Most children with SAHMs don't go to preschool until older. Studies have shown that children with well educated SAHMs actually do better than those in early preschool or daycare. These places are not bastions of wonderfulness. And yes, Lord of the Fly situations abound. Children get bullied, picked on, etc., yet aren't old enough to verbalize this. It is not a good situation.

      I think George will be fine because he will be well looked after simply because of who he is. But 2 1/2 is too young for preschool.

      It sounds like you might have experience in this field and take your job very seriously. You are the exception to the rule.

      Delete
    20. 11:13

      George's needy?? Ouch. I think from his very self assured behavior in Australia at the playgroup, I think he is fine.

      Interesting that anyone would call a 2 1/2 year old needy? I think we want children to grow up faster than they should so we as adults can get on with our lives. Kids today are stressed and overwhelmed, with a lot of social and mental issues. Kate seems very plugged into this and I think George and Charlotte are lucky.

      Delete
    21. Having lived in two countries, attending pre-school at age 2-3 years was more the norm than the abnormal. Nevertheless it's a parents private decision to make. Also their upcoming tour could be a factor. It will be at least a week or more that they are away and maybe they view this as stability for George. To insinuate that he will get preferential treatment Anon 10.22 is not fair to the educators at that school. Any educator worth their salt view their students as equal irrespective of their background.

      Delete
    22. Hi anon 10:22, no, I'm not in the field but I was a SAHM until my youngest started first grade. Each of my three children attended two years of half day preschool
      before starting kindergaten as did the children of everyone I know. All of us had great experiences and feel it was only a positive experience for our children that put them ahead of the game in kindergarten. Kindergarten is no longer a strictly socializing program and they are expected to already know how to sit and listen. Every mom I know has at least a bachelor's degree and many have higher but we all opted for those two years of preschool even though most of us were home during those years. I think people have to keep in mind that daycare and preschool/ nursery school are two different animals although I know people enamored of tbeir daycare providers as well. Of course, I'm lucky to live in the Metro Boston area where educational opportunities for all ages abound but I do realize that one needs to shop around for exceptional programs as well. I do think that two and a half to three years is the norm now for starting an early childhood ed. program and that children of that age are able to verbalize their feelings well.

      kindergarten.

      Delete
    23. Of course George will get better treatment! Seriously? To assume he WON'T get better treatment is crazy. Do you think in almost every situation royals get better treatment? YES.

      That is just a reality.

      Delete
    24. Hi Faith,
      I'm sorry if this question might seem funny, but what IS the difference between daycare and nursery school? I'm from Germany so I don't know about the American system. Curious about it, though. :)

      Delete
    25. Hi Sonja, there are a lot of variations depending but daycare is usually childcare catering to working parents for babies on up to preschool ages. They are open from early in the morning until early evening. They are not government run. All are private. Some of the better ones do have a curriculum for the 2,3,and 4 year olds and bring in specialists.

      Traditional neighborhood preschools or nursery schools are typically what is being described for Prince George. Several mornings or afternoons in which the children play, cook, do art, music and movement etc. All sorts of fun and amazing things. These are private as well although some public school
      systems do have limited preschool classes usually just for four year olds. This is a big country so I'm sure it varies from region to region as well.

      Delete
    26. Thank you for clarification, Faith :)

      Delete
  3. Love this newsy and photogenic post! Some news outlets are reporting this is their photo Christmas card, but I remember early on (maybe 2011?) the Cambridges said they had never sent Christmas cards and didn't intend to start now.

    So (not for the first time) I congratulate you on getting it right!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Is this true, Jane? Do they not send out Christmas cards??? Really surprised if true. I bet they send to their personal friends??

      Delete
  4. I'm surprised no one is angry at the fact that they continue to base themselves at Norfolk when they had the public spend millions for KP renovations. It's unbelievable that they think that's OK. I still don't get why 5 million pounds was needed and they are in no way justifying the cost

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Gosh, I am frankly surprised you are surprised! Of course the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge will have a stunning London residence. They are the future king and queen of England. What do you want their residence in London to be? A two bedroom flat? They are royalty. Kensington Palace is the ideal and obvious place for them to set up house in London for the foreseeable future. It has both security and privacy. The cost of the renovations of an apartment of that size would be expensive in general, but you have to factor in that the building is an historic one and requires additional care and detail. It just isn't that shocking. As to the Norfolk move, this too was entirely obvious. They want as normal a life as possible. Kate was raised away from the city and as the most sought after royals in the world, a country house away from the bustle of London is just what they need if they want to shop and play and live in relative normalcy.
      Frankly, when I still read these unqualified complaints, "no way justifying the cost" I only hear unbridled envy.

      Delete
    2. I agree with you Jane. Anyway as long as there is a monarchy, I believe Will and Kate will continue to use Kensington Palace as their home and will probably not use Buckingham Palace. Better expense spent now than in years to come when it would have been more expensive.

      Delete
    3. When William finishes working with the Air Ambulance, I suspect they will spend the weekdays in KP and Weekends and holiday times in Norfolk
      Anyway KP did not cost the taxpayer any money, as it was payed for from the Crown Estate profits. The taxpayer gains about 200 million pounds from those revenues--or half if you subtract the cost of security-reported by the Met Commissioner as costing 100 million--including protection of ambassadors; some Cabinet Ministers and numerous others).

      Delete
    4. William and Kate are not personally responsible for the renovations in KP. Whether now or later KP had to be renovated unless the government was willing to allow the palace to become ruins.

      Look at what is happening with BP, (is it 5 years of renovations???) everything is falling apart and it's going to be more expensive to fix now because they hadn't fixed anything in decades and all the damage just accumulated.

      Delete
    5. The only reason it cost so much to renovate is that Princess Margaret didn't do anything to keep it updated. She occupied that apartment from 1960-2002 and she was a chain smoker. My aunt, who was also a chain smoker, recently passed away and my cousin is going to have to have the house gutted inside and rebuilt because the smell from 25 years of smoking in it is so bad it has seeped into the wood cabinets and the dry wall - not to mention the carpets and drapery. Nobody could have occupied W&K's KP apartment until a full reno took place. It costs £17 to visit KP and there are thousands of visitors all year long. They also hire out rooms for weddings and all sorts of other events. I don't think we can accuse the Cambridges of bilking the tax payers. If you want to complain about something, complain about Her Majesty not updating and properly taking care of these historic palaces. She's one of the richest women in the world. Then again, if she spends a penny the anti-royal groups cry foul. Nobody is over-thrilled with Charles so hopefully he'll just get BP taken care of no matter what. Unfortunately, he seems to have inherited his mother's penny pinching habits.

      Delete
    6. The apartment was full of asbestos too, so all if that had to be removed.

      Delete
    7. The asbestos removal was apparently responsible for most the cost. I agree with Jean, as the kids get older and they take on more royal duties and William no longer works for the air ambulance, KP will be their main residence. I don't think Will and Kate have ever said it was not. The media state that and are again saying so because of Georges part time schooling near Anmer.

      Delete
    8. It's interesting that this issue is always about the Cambridge's and I agree with Jane's take on it.

      Does anyone wonder how much time the Queen spends at BP vs. Windsor, Sandringham, Balmoral, etc? Or how much time Charles and Camilla spend at CH vs. Highgrove, Birkhall, (or Camilla's private residence), etc? Like the Cambridge's, they have a residence in London and a country home(s). With the exception of Diana, I believe most of the Firm stays in London if/when they need to do so, but they prefer the country over London.

      When the time comes, I don't know about C&C (I could see them wanting to live at BP), but I wouldn't be shocked if the Cambridge's continue to call KP home and leave BP to the official part of the job.

      Delete
    9. I agree with most of you posters - they are royalty and William (and George) are directly in line to the throne. Although, I will say that I can see it partly from Anon 7:52's perspective. They enjoy a lot of perks, while also demanding a lot of privacy and "normal" life. While I love royal families and the Cambridges, the odd time it does rub me the wrong way. So I won't flat out criticize and judge the original poster.

      Delete
    10. royalfan, I agree that it seems odd that the Cambridges always seem to get the short end of the stick; Charles, for example, had Clarence House overhauled before he married Camilla and owns homes in Wales, Cornwall, Gloucester, Transylvania (getting crazy, here)--and of course. in Scotland, Birkhall, ALL of which he has had completely refurbished. I don't closely follow Charles, but as far as I am aware, there has never been much angst about any of the money he has spent.

      @Anon, Dec. 18. 7:52AM. You and I differ in our POV. I was concerned that not enough had been spent on Apt.1A, when the final amount was made public; for instance, I am not big on roof *repairs.* If repairs are required, the sensible option is to replace the entire roof, before more repairs are needed, making it a constant money-pit. Etc.

      I very much enjoyed this latest photo of the Cambridges. Have always thought that George is a mini of Grandpa Mike (sans the blonde hair, altho, of course, Mike might well have begun life as a blonde), and still think so. I would go so far as to say that George looks more like Mike than does son James. As for Charlotte, every time I see her I get a different impression. This time (sans the protruding ears) she looks like a dead-ringer of Carole. It will take another 20 years to be sure, but I rather think that the Middleton genes have trumped the Windsors. Finally!

      Like the notion that George will be attending a local Montessori nursery school. My son attended one, and very expensive it was. He loved it. He began at age 3 and remained for two years. Do I think 2.5 is a tad young? No, not in this case. Charlotte is too young to be an effective playmate, and Mum, Dad and Nanny are too old. Which leaves George in no-mans-land. He needs friends of his own age; he needs to begin to test himself and find out if he can hold his own, just where he naturally falls in the pack. All kids do.

      As I see it. JC

      Delete
    11. I agree completely, royalfan, that it seems to only be the Cambridges that are criticized for where and how they live. I don't know what the big deal is if they want to live in the country for their family time - especially since it's where William is working. They have a London residence for their jobs as royals and it's completely appropriate that they do. I don't understand following them so closely and resenting them at the same time.

      JC, I see Carole every time I see Charlotte. It does seem that those Middleton genes are very strong and that's a good thing. Carole or the Princess Royal? Yeah, I'd rather look like Carole any day!

      Delete
    12. Anon 7:21, I think too much is made of W&K's desire for privacy. What do we know or see of the Queen when she is off duty? Or other royals? From my perspective, William simply wants to protect his family from the sort of media frenzy that surrounded his mother and I cannot blame him for that.

      And as far as the "normal" issue is concerned, I see it as refreshing and, frankly, necessary in this day and age. Stiff and formal can be seen as irrelevant and out of touch.

      Delete
    13. It is the size of the apartment that really got people. And yes, they are royal, but reality is reality. Even they can overspend. It is not simply unlimited funds.

      BTW, the Crown Estates.... Those were taken from the public. Recently, the Estates were adjusted to even include much of the shore line and water off the coast. Any money made from that land, 20% will go to the royal family, the rest to the government. That's why the comments about what they spend. They are supported with public money.

      Delete
    14. Following 12:08 am's reasoning to its logical conclusion: therefore,everyone in the
      USA is profiting from or living on land taken from the Native Americans and/or Spanish etc.If you are a US citizen living in the USA,you are, according to your logic, being supported by Native American money and should be told what to spend and when and how to do it by the original owners of the land.
      So, before you buy that new car or big screen tv, be sure to check in with your
      nearest tribal authority.

      Delete
    15. Anon 1:42

      Native Americans actually have a trust fund established by the government because of the land that was taken from them and the treatment they received. It is now worth billions of dollars and there have been ongoing court battles over the money. AND Native Americans do not have to pay any taxes, nor do their businesses. Hence the large sums the casinos make and give to their tribe members. Kudos to them for all the suffering they have endured.

      Will and Kate can be the most wonderful people on earth. But they are fully supported by the taxpayers.

      And over the last year, more government land was turned over to the "Crown Estates" for additional financial support.

      Delete
    16. Are you referencing the Dawes Commission from over 100 years ago?
      Yes, Native Americans and their businesses most certainly do pay taxes.
      The casinos are located on Tribal land.It would be like the US government taxing
      Mexico.
      Your reasoning was that hundreds of years ago the bulk of properties owned by the
      royal family once belonged to someone else so therefore those people, or their
      descendants have a right to tell the royals how to spend their money.
      That was the apparent premise of your argument and your conclusion.

      Delete
    17. OK, this is a silly argument that has nothing to do whatsoever about the initial post at all. But, take Jane's example and read the law. American Indian tribes are tax exempt. All of the money they make in their casinos is tax free. The only time taxes are paid is if the tribe hires a tribal member to work; then that person, as an American citizen, pays taxes on that money UNLESS that person lives on tribal lands. Then they cannot be taxed. If the money a Native American has is given as a welfare payment and is not a compensation for services rendered, that is also completely tax free. Trust me, I live in California. The reason Schwarzenegger was elected was because he promised to collect taxes from all of the casinos. Them paying state taxes for just one year would bail CA out of debt. Turns out, it couldn't be done.

      That being said, GB is not set up with the same type of governing system we have here in the US. If you go back far enough there was no such thing as lands owned in GB and the people lived on their land at the grace and pleasure of the King. Apples to oranges because a government set up as a republic and a government set up as a constitutional monarchy are two entirely different creatures and we cannot expect one to act the way the other is set up.

      Delete
    18. Now, today, more government land is being added to the Crown Estates to increase the money that supports the royals. A huge increase in fact. This is not an issue from hundreds of years ago. This is taking place today. So people commenting on money spent on KP is a legit concern. I don't understand why it upsets some to hear that W&K are supported by the taxpayer. That's the truth. Therefore, people will comment on how they spend that money.

      Delete
    19. Sillier than whose eyebrows an infant's resembles?

      The discussion was directly related to the post and the ongoing debate about "where
      and how" the family live, which was an outgrowth of one of the post's topics-
      where George would attend nursery school.Some sources have implied that his going
      to school in Norfolk meant that was considered the primary residence, which led to
      (of course) remarks about tax-payer spending. I was disagreeing with those remarks.
      Which was certainly as debate-worthy as a few other topics that regularly get
      aired, without being labeled "silly."

      Delete
    20. My use of the word "silly" was with regard to comparing the laws in GB to the laws in the US.

      Delete
  5. I love everything about this photo. The only thing that makes me sad is that we have never seen William interacting with Charlotte. He always seems to be glancing at George, he always has him in his arms. I mean, very likely he sees himself in his toddler and knows what the future has in store for him, but I wouldn't mind seeing him interacting with his princess... Just saying of course.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I wouldn't read this as him not interacting with Charlotte, just that in public/photographed situations, George needs that little bit of extra attention not to create a disaster. I have a rambunctious young man and a more sedate little lady who gets doted on by daddy, but in public he tends to grab daddy's attention simply by virtue of needing to be contained!!

      Delete
    2. ahahah that could very likely be the case! thanks for sharing this lovely bit of your own family :)

      Delete
    3. My son-in-law was sure our granddaughter hated him when she was the age Charlotte is now. She only wanted Mommy. Now, at three, she is a total daddy's girl! It was the same with my daughter. I don't think we can read anything into a baby being on her mother's lap at this age. Perfectly normal and William will have his time with his little girl.

      Delete
    4. When she's a bit older, daddy will probably be her hero to take her on ecciting excursions, explain things to her,...
      But babies at such a young age just realky want and need their mommy all the time -she is only 6 mths old! A mother is just the most important person for a little baby and also the person who takes care of her most/spends most time with her so it's totally normal :)

      Delete
  6. How adorable is it that Charlotte kicked a shoe off?? Oh I love it!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Hmm i love the picture the new phots there i just love the Cambridges of four now and prince george going to school now he a big boy

    ReplyDelete
  8. What an amazing picture! Absolutely gorgeous
    -Ruby

    ReplyDelete
  9. Lovely! So happy they released this photo. Its nice to see them all together as a family. This is the first time George looks more like William to me than his maternal grandfather. I miss Kate's long hair too. When you have hair like her's, its a shame to cut it short.

    Can I be a little greedy and say I would have wished to see Charlotte in a dress we haven't seen?

    The two year old group at the Montessori will be mainly play and I think he will enjoy it. From what we've seen, he's a friendly, outgoing and independent little boy, so he should take to it well. He appears to be extremely active and curious, and it will be great for him to be exposed to new things outside of his home.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I love everything about this photo. And like you, Jane, I miss Kate's longer hair. I always have liked the fringe and here it frames her face nicely. This photo is the best they've taken as a family of three when they just had George, and is nicer than the christening photos with Charlotte. There is a warmth to it and the casual flair is relatable and in keeping with the lovely new photo of Charles and Camilla. Just gorgeous!

    ReplyDelete
  11. I am willing to bet that the reason Charlotte is in the same dress, is because they likely took the pictures the same day. I imagine Kate reasoning, after the family shots were done, "well, she is already dressed ... Wills, grab my camera!!"
    And, as for George being young to start school, we have to assume that, for security reasons, he does not get a LOT of opportunities to be social. And he is an active little boy! This will probably give him opportunity to be both social and active. I think it will also give Kate (and Will) some time to devote to Charlotte on her own.
    Just my two cents ...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That was my first thought, too, but the photo of Charlotte was taken at Anmer and this photo was taken in London. At least, that is what we have been told.

      Delete
    2. I wonder if it was taken at Anmer but it was released by KP so the media is assuming that's where it was taken. Just a thought.

      Delete
    3. Robin I think KP said it was taken in late October at KP, and they even shared the photographers name (who was referred privately).

      Delete
    4. Thanks, Anon. 8:58, I hadn't seen that. So, there must have been a conscious effort on Kate's part to dress Charlotte in the same outfit, as suggested. Still, cute, cute, cute! The outfit, the kicked off shoe, the family interaction with William keeping an eye on their rambunctious boy - adorable!

      Delete
  12. I love this photo! What a beautiful family. I love that little George looks like he's ready to take off. Little Charlotte is beautiful. I think keeping the dress the same was a smart idea. Thanks Jane for a great post.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Is it possible that this photo and the earlier photo of Charlotte were taken on the same day? That's the first thing I thought when I saw the same dress on her. If I were Kate, I'd want to get all the photo shoots done in one day!! :) This is a beautiful photo - such stunning, vibrant colors. Thanks for keeping us updated, Jane!

    ReplyDelete
  14. Oh my goodness, what a lovely photo! Absolutely adorable family. George looks so grown up! And what a little lady Charlotte is. Love how George has the blonde hair and Charlotte's is brown. A great mix of them both and I think Charlotte really does look like her mother.

    I also think that the nursery school for George is more about play. My kids went to school even younger than that and they really just got to socialize with other children, something I'm sure William and Kate want. I think it's great!

    Merry Christmas to you Jane and a very happy new year!

    ReplyDelete
  15. I love the lovely photo of this family of four! Merry Christmas one and all! As for the debate on George attending nursery school- it's the best way to wear out a toddler and to get some social skills! The more he interacts with people out in the "real world" the better equipped he'll be in the future. William and Harry were able to set up life long friends from their school days- something that Charles did not have. George is spending a lot of time among adults-- it would be nice to have a couple of hours to do some painting of block building with some other boys and girls! He'll have a lot of fun!

    ReplyDelete
  16. Beautiful photo of the family-George and Charlotte are adorable.

    On the preschool issue-I went to preschool for about 3 hours a day, twice a week, at about 2 1/2 years old. This was in the early 1970s and allowed my stay-at-home mom a chance for a rare break. I apparently loved it and it allowed me a chance to meet other children and learn how to share, work together, etc. So, it's a great age for George to go. As I remember, I think William and Harry were about the same age when they first went to preschool.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Lovely photo, so glad we got Christmas pictures of the whole family this year.

    I hadn't realized how dark Charlotte's hair was. In last months picture I thought her hair was light brown. But not compared to George's blond hair it looks really dark.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Agree about Charlotte's hair. I was also surprised as I had thought it would be lighter. She seems to take after Kate (regarding hair) :)

      Delete
  18. I love this photo! It's so sweet. I love that William is looking at George. I love how beautiful and happy Kate looks, she obviously is very proud of her family, and rightly so! I love how Charlotte's shoe has fallen off. What a great picture of them all. Very sweet and lovely.
    And I too, really miss Kate's long hair. It's so pretty long.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Lovely family photo, and that school looks like it will be a wonderful place for George. Montessori schools are play-based, so don't worry about his age. He won't have his ABC's drilled into him or anything like that. He'll just be able to make friends with children his own age in a fun, relaxed setting.

    I have to disagree with you, Jane, about Kate's hair. I'm sorry, but she's too old to pull off such long, thick locks. They just dragged down her whole appearance and made her look even older. If she pulled her hair back most of the time, it'd be a different story I guess.

    I think her short hair would look better if she either cut off a couple more inches (collarbone length) OR really went for it and did a sleek, just below the ears bob. Oh, and I'd nix the bangs. The bangs do not help.



    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And I have to disagree with you Am. There will never be a consensus on this because we all have different tastes but to say she is too old for long hair is rather an extreme statement. There are a lot of gorgeous women over the age of thirty three out there who pull it off every day. Actually, I think the shorter cut ages her. I will say that her long hair did look better when it was styled more
      rather than just blown dry straight and left
      at that.

      Delete
    2. I do like the shorter hair. Don't get me wrong, her hair looks great in this photo; it really does and I even like the bangs here. But this is a causal look and the long hair did tend to overwhelm her when she was "on duty."

      Delete
    3. I guess it just really comes down to preference. I did not like the long hair with the fringe but I liked it best about the length it was on the Australian tour. I never found it overwhelming then.

      Delete
    4. Never a fan of the fringe which she keeps trying, prefer a longer length, just a better cut than she has had.:)Ali

      Delete
    5. I agree, Faith. When the long haired was styled, she was a show stopper! And she is not too old for it! Lol That's crazy! This new short hair does make her look staid and boring. Looking at the new style makes me sad, really.

      Delete
  20. I think this is a darling photo and I'm glad we got a photo of the whole family (minus Lupo) before Christmas. Hooray! On the nursery school/preschool front, it sounds like George will only be part time and only when they are in Norfolk, so it sounds like they are going to be using it to help George socialize and get to know some other kids, as opposed to actual "school". My twin boys are about four months younger than George and will probably start attending preschool part time next fall (closer to three). I think it's a good time to start him with something like that-- plus structured activities out of the house are a god-send for parents AND nannies! =)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think you hit the nail on the head. Even with a nanny, I think Kate is overwhelmed with two kids, a toddler and baby. I think she will use these hours during preschool as a breather!

      She has never worked full time and experienced the "hustle" that most everyone goes through on an everyday basis. Her life, even while dating, has been very relaxed.

      Delete
  21. What a lovely surprise to see this photo today! Beautiful family. I like Kate's hair longer as well, but SE LA vie.
    Montessori school is great for youngsters at George's age (I started preschool @ 3) and will probably help socialization for bouncing George:) the photographer was quite skilled - it seems George is always in motion!

    ReplyDelete
  22. What a fabulous treat to see this today! They all look so happy and healthy. What an adorable family! George is turning into a little William mini me! I'll bet this photo was taken the same day Kate took the previously released photo of Charlotte. The leaves were turning in the background but still on the trees. Super win all the way around!

    I love their approach to raising their children with as much normalcy as possible. I remember what a scandal it was when Diana sent William to such a school. Bravo, Diana! You're still bringing the monarchy into the future!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I couldn't agree more, Robin. The day to day reality behind this photo is Diana's legacy.

      Delete
    2. The Montessori part? Yes, but Will and Harry always went to very posh schools. I see Kate in this decision. I see her choosing a school that is warm and friendly. If Will had married a different kind of girl and she wanted a posh school, Will would have agreed.

      I am sure, for their later education, it will be high caliber schools, which it should be. Different goals then for education.

      Delete
    3. Anon 12:23 Agree. This to me is a decision in part due to the schools closeness to home, the desire I assume to have George learn how to deal with other adults and children, and both William and Catherine probably like the Montessori approach for the very young ages.

      Delete
  23. I am thinking of skipping the comments in the near future.. they make me quite angry sometimes. People will never stop complaining about others' lives while they are too unhappy about theirs but also too lazy to change their own. You're great in handling them, though, Jane.
    Beautiful photo! Not to complain, it's just that the setting looks so much more autumn to me, with all the leaves ..Not so much christmas-y.
    I am quite delighted that Kate is trying to hold the kids' clothes ID-ing to a minimum, it is so down-to-earth!
    They look like a happy and healthy family, what more can one wish for at life?

    Alice

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Alice,

      Happy with my life but also enjoy talking about the royal family. We keep them in business! Haha They need blogs like this to keep people interested.

      I also miss her long hair and think George is too young for preschool!:)

      Delete
    2. There is nothing wrong with being interested in the royal family or to have another opinion about any subject whatsoever. I point out that I said 'complaining' and not 'talking about'.

      I also am quite positive that neither the Queen of England nor any other Royal family 'needs' a blog about theirselves. They are heads of state or representatives of countries and are perfectly capable of existing as much as any politician without the 'need' to have their private lives criticized, scrutinized or discussed to the smallest detail. They also don't need to be kept in business, their roles are written down in state law.

      The 'need' you are talking about is coming from the other way around: the interest and curiosity of the people. The royals simply obey the role when making private decisions public or showing us private family photographs. Some use of that to gain popularity may occur, though it's not a must.
      The media on the other hand is playing with the phenomenon altogether, often rather carelessly, and making a fortune out of it.

      So, when I say people only complain because they're unhappy themselves, I mean that if they would rather discuss any matter in a respectful, open and interested way, I could believe that it was not from the need to make themselves feel better about theirselves in comparison.

      Alice

      Delete
    3. I beg to differ. Blogs, newspapers, paps, all help the royal family and they do need them. The laws can easily be changed to kick them out and they know that. Keeping the public's favor is the Royal family's real job.

      Delete
    4. If the majority want to "kick out the royals," and if this can be easily done, why hasn't it happened? The last time that was tried, the new non-monarch leader made his son his successor.
      How does photographing a couple's or a family's private
      moments without their permission help the royal family? Ask them if they find that behavior helpful.It helps sell papers and pay photographers and reporters.That's who
      it helps.

      Delete
    5. The BRF has been around a wee bit longer than blogs, no? And with social media they are not as dependent on newspapers.

      Alice, for what it's worth, I do understand the point you are trying to make. :)

      Delete
  24. Just perfect. Thank you Jane.What a delightful family photo.

    ReplyDelete
  25. A very cute photo, shows a very happy family. Shame that William is not looking a the camera. The adults aren't posing in a very comfortable position!

    ReplyDelete
  26. Here Charlotte looks so much like Carole. :) But I think both children are a good mix of mom and dad.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Are there any of Carole's baby photos out there so we can compare? I did look at one point but couldn't find any.

      Delete
    2. Faith, I'm not aware of any baby photos of Carole, but if you put this photo next to the Christmas photo, you may see the similarities. Right down to the ears. :)

      http://goodtoknow.media.ipcdigital.co.uk/111/000013491/8e72_orh412w625/Carole.jpg

      Delete
    3. Thanks for the link royalfan. I see what you are saying. The shape of the face, the wide forehead and the ears (funny!) are similar to Catole's. Perhap's the mouth as well. The nose, the eyes and the eyebrows are completely different though, I think. .

      Delete
    4. Funny, I think the eyes and eyebrows are identical. :)

      Delete
    5. Lol! That's the way it goes :-) We all see something else in the same photos.

      Delete
  27. Adorable, relaxed, normal family photo! I hope this is the beginning of them embracing an annual Christmas card, and realizing the public wants photos! I know this is a Kate blog, but Princess Estelle of Sweden's Christmas video is adorable and sweet! I love how that family strikes such a great balance, in my opinion. Granted, they aren't as popular as the BRF, but I think there are many positives there.

    As for George's nursery school, why not?! I believe it is mostly for George's benefit, although it will give Kate and Maria a little break to focus on other things. I have heard many loving parents say it turns into a nice "break" where the kid benefits and the parent gets some free time for errands, cleaning, time with the other child(ren). Beneficial for all!

    ReplyDelete
  28. I read in a news article that this new family photo was taken at the same time (end of October) as the two previously released of Charlotte. This is why Charlotte is wearing the same dress.

    Little Charlotte sure does resemble her Grandma Carole--as well as her Aunt Pippa. She also has William's blue eyes.

    I never understand why people feel obligated to comment on the parenting choices of others. Just....no.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, I suspect they were taken around the same time, but certainly not the same day.

      Delete
    2. Agree, it is possible they drove back to their country home and Catherine looked so cute and was calm so Catherine snapped some shops at home in the afternoon, or it was the other way around, started at home with some of hew own private snaps then drove into Londo for an afternoon of formal snaps. I assumed different days but who knows. Ali

      Delete
    3. Well, they are probably wondered about the children! Just because you are a parent, doesn't mean you make good choices. It is a job pretty much anyone can have!:)

      Delete
    4. They are probably "worried" not wondered?! Auto correct problems, perhaps?? Lol

      Delete
  29. Well the more I look at this fabulous family picture the more I am back tracking on the new haircut. Not sure why but I am loving the longer hair on Kate. It just seems to suit her better. I really really liked the shorter hair but now? Not sure.
    Maybe it is use the beauty of this great family picture. You can just feel the happiness and joy that is oozing out of them. Surely Diana is looking down and smiling. Tad painful at times to see these milestones and know that she is not here. William must be so acutely aware of those moments. I believe this is why he continues to be protective and at times indifferent. He must move forward and he does it seems. But how can he not have moments that seem bright and happy and then he is ..reminded.

    As to Montessori. . Perhaps George is a tad young for this? He does seem quite bright and active so maybe while his age is young is mind is ready. I doubt Kate would place him in a situation that would be traumatizing. He seems very social so Montessori is perfect for him.

    What a great few weeks this has been with engagements, tiaras, clothes, haircuts and photo's!

    ReplyDelete
  30. Gorgeous photo! George has such pinchable cheeks. And I imagine nursery will be just as beneficial to him as it was to me. I went at his age out of necessity (our household required 2 incomes), but I had an amazing time and 30 years later, I have fond memories of it. We had a bunny, and a rice table! I also was ahead of my peers when I started school, since the nursery had given me a jump on many things. I imagine George's parents are hoping to give him a headstart on social skills, love of learning, etc. Seems reasonable!

    ReplyDelete
  31. This is not a good phase for Char, bless her heart! Reminds me of when Harry said baby George looked like an old man. Char looks like a little monkey. She will grow up!

    ReplyDelete
  32. It seems that just about every comment Kate and William have made publicly about George recently relate to his high activity and noise level. I suspect he's becoming a bit much for one nanny to handle now that she is also responsible for Charlotte. That's not meant to be a criticism but it makes sense to me he will benefit from outside activity. I also remember reading (at the time) that "Wills" had some adjustment issues when starting nursery school (not playing well with others) and they may be trying to avoid that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. William was hell on wheels when he was little.

      Delete
    2. Lizzie & Anon ~ because William was spoiled, or just boisterous?

      Some parents will do nursery/pre school, not because of education or socializing with children, but also to teach children structure and how to listen to authority that isn't your family. So many reasons and benefits to nursery school, so for three half days a week, we shouldn't be too obsessed with George's age (as other posters have been) :-)

      Delete
    3. George's age isn't an issue for me Anon2. Plenty of kids much younger than 2 1/2 go to daycare in the US and studies have shown their development is equal to or above that of children who are cared for at home. I'm not sure though how much adult "authority" is provided at montessori schools. And I don't know if William was spoiled or just boisterous but from all reports he acted differently from other young children his age when he started nursery school. And genetics DO affect behavior..not just nurture.

      Delete
    4. That is not true, the studies you suggest. Studies have actually shown the opposite. Sorry.

      Delete
    5. Sorry but you are wrong. When other relevant factors related to child development are taken into account (SES, level of parents' education, number of parents and other children in the home, quality of daycare and so on) well-done SCIENTIFIC studies do show exactly what I said.

      Delete
    6. When other factors are adjusted for, you mean? That is not what you said before, lol.

      All children do not benefit from daycare. It is only children from poor backgrounds with uneducated parents that benefit from daycare, that is what studies prove. Basically, if there are quality parents, children DO NOT benefit from daycare. Only if the daycare provides better parenting than the actual parents is there a benefit to a child being there.

      Daycare only benefits children who have very bad parents.

      Delete
    7. It simply is not true daycare only benefits children with bad parents! And yes, I said things in my second post I didn't say on the first one--otherwise there would have been no need for a second one. But I think you're misunderstanding what I mean by taking other factors into account. Of course economic factors matter. A poor child whose single parent who did not graduate from high school and who works two jobs can hardly be compared to a child from an upper income two parent home unless those things are taken into account. You are correct parenting matters but it has also been shown that children who go to daycare--controlling for home circumstances-- have stronger language and math skills than children who-regardless of circumstances-- stay home with mom or a nanny. Of course each child is unique but there are some pretty strong research findings gained from studying thousands of kids. At any rate, I am pretty sure George won't be harmed by his experience!

      Delete
    8. The fact of the matter is that a "scientific study" can be conducted in such a way as to reflect exactly the answer they wanted when it is done. In other words, they are skewed to a particular point of view and the outcome can support both sides of the argument depending on what the group wanted the outcome to be. It's the same with every study or opinion poll. The "scientists" only look at the facts that support their opinions. That's why you two are each arguing about which is better. You've both read studies to support each side. True, there are such things as very bad parents but I don't think the tens of thousands of children who thrive in preschool all have very bad parents. And, before you argue with me, I am not a big proponent of pre schooling. See? Both sides of the argument!

      Delete
    9. Anon 3.35: Are you saying then that two working parents who put their children in daycare because of work commitments are "very bad parents"? That is what you seem to imply and I am sure many would challenge you on that. I know of so many professional parents who want to keep abreast with their careers after children, who make use of daycare facilities. I would not call them bad parents.

      Delete
    10. Robin..I would agree that "scientists" (intentional quotes) may search out only confirming data but I don't think that's true of peer-reviewed Science (capitalized) But certainly this issue is one that parents must ultimately decide for themselves (although it doesn't hurt to be informed about current studies) Staying home if economics permit is fine but so is daycare! Using daycare doesn't make someone a bad parent and staying home doesn't make one a good one either.

      Delete
    11. I think there is misunderstanding of what constitutes "nursery school" and what constitutes "daycare". Enrolling your 2 1/2 year old in a Montessori preschool is NOT the same as daycare. George will probably be at school 2 or 3 times a week for 2 to 3 hours each time. That is what my kids did at that age.

      Delete
    12. Anon 5:30

      No, I was saying children with "bad" parents benefit from daycare because they are getting better care at daycare than they would at home.

      Lizzie

      NYT article "Three New Studies Assess Effects of Child Care" Nov. 1, 2005 by T. Lewis

      This article discusses the study that you cite. As you will read, it also cites your study as showing higher behavior and social problems in kids from daycare in every category regardless of the child's background, family stats, etc.

      AND the group of children that are most harmed by daycare are from households making $66,000 or more. Those children, when compared to their economic peer group who are home with a parent, are less engaged, had social/behavior problems, aren't motivated to participate, are more aggressive, etc.

      And those children were considered "high income" at $66,000, which I think most would not agree with. So their definition of high income would include a lot of regular households.

      All the children in the study from daycare had higher rates of aggression, social problems, etc. Daycare is socially a hard environment for children and brings out the worst in them.

      Parents that understand the importance of reading to their children, teaching them their numbers, colors, etc., engaging with them.... Their children are not going to benefit from daycare. And, in fact, it will socially and behaviorally hurt the child. Especially in the $66,000 and up income range.

      Barbara
      Yes, I am talking about daycare not preschool, which is just for a few hours, a few days a week.

      Delete
    13. Hi anon 12:51, I believe the same study or one that came out around the same time also showed benefits to daycare which are better academic performance in all areas than children who did not attend daycare. They consistently out preform children who stayed at home with moms who gave them a lot of one on one time. Also, the social and behavioral issues that you are talking
      about are not permanent. They tend to
      resolve themselves by second grade. I
      can't find those studies right now
      because I'm in the midst of holiday
      preparation/ panic mode but I will find
      them when I have the time. From
      personal experience, my adult neice and
      nephew were daycare babies from three
      months on and one is a bankruptcy
      lawyer and the other is an emergency
      room /trauma physician, so they turned out just fine. The are still picky eaters which their mom does attribute to daycare :-)

      Delete
    14. Only a person with a hardcore liberal agenda would actually believe that daycare centers do a better job of raising children than parents.:)

      Delete
    15. I don't think this is a politically motivated discussion anon 12:49. Nobody would say daycare does a better job than parents but there are sone positive's to it. It isnt all bad news. I will find the data when I can but it is out there. My step daughter did a paper on this recently for one of her early elementary ed classes.

      The issue is not that daycare is a replacement for parenting or the family but many families have to use daycare and the good news is that it isn't all bad news. There are excellent daycare providers out there.

      Delete
    16. The arguments you have all made point to why they chose Montessori. It's a mix of the play found in day care and education found in pre-school. They put several age groups together and teach the kids to work together and mentor each other. While at play they are learning. There are some things about the Montessori method I don't care for but I also don't know how the international Montessori differs from the American method. Overall, George will learn how to work with, play with, and help others. Given his role in the future these are valuable things for him to learn. Given Kate's interest in early childhood development, I'm sure this was a very conscious choice. They know George's personality and what type of environment will be best for him. Again, I'm not promoting pre-school since my preference is for SAHMs to be the early education their kids need, if it's financially possible, but for those who choose otherwise it is essential to find a program that fits your child's abilities and personality. Since George's life is quite different from kids who play with their neighbors, join play groups, or frolic in the park, this seems to be a good move for him. He can never be anywhere without a protection officer so being in a private (the term we use in America) school with a locked campus is the best way to protect him.

      Delete
    17. 12:49- quibbling a bit. All day care centers are not bad nor are all parents good.For
      that matter, not all children are suited for the experience.

      The discussion needs qualification and defining of terms. Which day care centers? Which parents? Which children? A study is not a scientific one, in the strictest meaning of the term, if it cannot be replicated.This is the proof. If an alternate, independent source hasn't varified a study, it has no credibility.

      "Hardcore liberal agenda.?" Spoken as a true extreme right fundamentalist.Tit for tat.
      At any rate, the subject was George spending a few hours a few days of the week
      with children near his age in an educational environment. I don't think socialization enters the picture at this point.. Children his
      age are not usually ready to share, with the favorite words,after Mummy, being "Me! Mine!" I do think, judging from his behavior at the New Zealand play date, the zoo, and the play park, he is more than ready by now for the hands-on experiences
      offered in such an environment.There will be older children whose interactions he
      can stow away for future reference.

      Delete
  33. Why the same dress on the baby? We know she has a lot of other beautiful clothes. But we can't see them?

    I bet William hates the new haircut. The longer hair was stunning. She has a hairdresser any time she needs one. That's the biggest problem with long hair, upkeep. She has that covered in spades.

    I am placing my bet, we will see the return of long hair.

    Shop Girl

    ReplyDelete
  34. I think I have seen it confirmed that both outfits are from the same Spanish store. As with Charlotte's hospital outfit, I believe this is Kate's way of publicly thanking and memorializing Maria. How flattering for Maria to see her gifts to a rich, royal family immortalized like that. Even though we rarely see the two interacting, there is obviously a lot of trust and thankfulness there.

    ReplyDelete
  35. This is a very nice photo, although I have to say that it doesn't seem very Christmas-y to me. But the children are gorgeous and they do seem like such a happy family.

    For years now, I’ve been hearing that Kate's hair is too long and that she should cut it, but I knew that if she ever did, people would say they missed her long hair. She can't win! Personally, I like her new haircut. She only had a few inches cut off--it's not as if she went for a dramatically different look. But it seems to me that her hair isn't as glossy as it used to be. Maybe the color is slightly different? I'm not sure what it is, but I always loved Kate's glossy hair and it doesn't seem as silky or shiny as it was just a couple of years ago.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It could be that she had more grays. The grays color differently unfortunately.

      Delete
    2. It is a different color. When her hair was darker, it was shiny and great. Her first hairdresser had a falling out with her salon. Her hair has never looked as good as it did with him.

      Delete
    3. She has had two babies. Everything in or on your body changes with each pregnancy. My thick, naturally curly hair got thinner and straighter. I'm guessing she's just had a more drastic trim to get unhealthy ends completely trimmed off. I'm also supposing that she could get her hair done anywhere she wants so she could still hire her former hairdresser.

      Delete

The rules for commenting are simple: be polite. Please be respectful of the BRF/Middletons, even in criticism; please be respectful of your fellow readers, even in disagreement. Vulgarity will disqualify a comment.

Debate is welcome, direct and personal insults are not. Topics we tend to avoid here: "does Kate work enough?" and "Is Kate too skinny?" Everything is subject to approval.

I (Jane Barr) moderate all comments. If a comment is live, I approved it. If you find something offensive, or think my approval was an error, please email me at princesskateblog(at)gmail.com.

At times, an acceptable comment just goes missing. If you felt your comment should have been approved, but did not show up within five hours, again, pop an email to the above address.

Happy chatting!