Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Cambridge Family Featured in GQ

Monday, May 29, 2017

It has just been revealed that Prince William is GQ magazine's July cover feature. The Duke of Cambridge has given an interview to the magazine discussing mental health and the impact that his mother's death has had on him.  Part of the spread features a black and white image of the Cambridge family in a very candid snap relaxing in the grass at Kensington Palace in April:


Among other comments, William spoke about the need for stability in his family, saying "I could not do my job without the stability of the family. Stability at home is so important to me. I want to bring up my children in a happy, stable, secure world and that is so important to both of us as parents." Thus far, William and Kate have been successful in that goal. It is very refreshing to see his priorities are so appropriately focused on the strength of his marriage and the happiness of his children. You can read the full interview at GQ here


Just a little earlier this morning I posted my full report on Pippa's wedding. You can find that post here.

Finally, speaking of families and children, I watched the annual Memorial Day Concert last night and as I do every year, reflected on the impact war has not just on our service members, but on their families. Each casualty is multiplied by the spouses, parents, and children who suffer the loss of life or the pain of a horrifically wounded loved one. It reinforces yet again that freedom and peace are not the products of positive thoughts, but the self-sacrifice of thousands who are willing to put the common good ahead of themselves. To all our servicemen and women, to your families and loved ones, thank you for your willingness to make that sacrifice. God bless you and Happy Memorial Day. 

124 comments:

  1. Lupo is finally seen again! While I know he is still loved by them it's nice to see him again. Those were sweet photos of William kissing Lupo years ago and fun seeing Lupo around at polo games.
    ~ A (an animal lover ;-)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree, it's great to see Lupo running around in the background - that is one happy pooch!

      Delete
    2. Alejandra CamposMay 29, 2017 at 10:25 AM

      Agree! Now we are only missing Marvin the Hamster and the rest of the pack (not sure if they said they have rabbits or other) :p

      Delete
    3. Sonja from BavariaMay 31, 2017 at 1:44 AM

      I'd love to see a photo of george with marvin for his birthday!

      Delete
    4. Yes, Sonja! And it would be such a little thing for them to do.

      Delete
  2. I almost never comment on blogs or articles, but wanted to say I love yours, and thought your Memorial Day comments were right on target.
    Thanks for all the great fun and info!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You should comment more. And I agree.anon1

      Delete
  3. Louise, London, UKMay 29, 2017 at 6:56 AM

    Hi Jane, I wanted to post this on the thread about Pippa's wedding but comments don't seem to be working. You mention the flypast, it was reported locally that it was a 'gift' from a friend of Michael Middleton's who owns a flying school. That changes the whole tenor of the thing for me. Not trying to copy the royal wedding, just a nice addition from a family friend.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That *does* change it significantly. I will update the post. Thanks for the info!!

      Delete
    2. I had read the same thing, from more than one source/article, regarding the flypast. :-)
      ~ A

      Delete
  4. Not a huge deal, but Memorial Day isn't really "happy." It's a rough day for many in the military community, even as we are aware that those who made the ultimate sacrifice would want us to enjoy life and lift a glass to them. Thanks for the nod, though!

    Also, welcome back! I've missed reading it while you've been away.

    ReplyDelete
  5. First, love the article on William. I have always believed that Diana's death was much harder on them than ever previously discussed. After the comments from W&H, I see that it is true. I also think their relationship with their Dad is much more complicated than we think, much more. As a Dad himself now and married, W must look at the choices Charles made and be angry but, at the same time, he loves his Dad.

    I love black and white pics, but for this setting, color would have been so much better. It gives the pic a weird vibe.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, I may not agree with you on the photos, but otherwise I couldn't agree more regarding William, Harry and the unique family dynamics.

      Delete
    2. We don't agree on many things, but Diana & Charles, we always agree. For sure!

      11:26

      Delete
  6. Am I the only one who thinks this pic is weird? Kate looks nice and casual so does little Charlotte but William looks a bit ghoulish frankly. George isn't seen and the dog is a blur. Composition seems way out of whack.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think it is odd too Anon and it seems pretty gloomy to me. Perhaps because it is B&W and looks a little under-exposed (or underdeveloped if the photographer used actual film) most of the shot seems dark and lacking in the tonal range one expects to see (except for the white sliver of sky and part of George) and so it lacks "depth cues." When I first looked at it, I thought Lupo was lying down flat on the side of a hill. In addition to looking more like a black sheep than a dog, at first glance he looked kind of, well, dead. The "floating hand" between W&K also looked odd to me although I now see it's Will's.

      I would have thought a series of photos would have been taken. It's hard to believe this one was the best of the lot. 

      Delete
    2. Lizzie you said it much better and obviously understand the technical terms but yes that's everything I was thinking.
      Anon 1136

      Delete
    3. I don't think it is weird, but I think there could have been better ones. I think they wanted to give us a really natural look and that's what we got. Kids being kids. I do, however, think they could have released a set. Also, I wonder if part of their deal with GQ was use of ONE family photo and they got to choose it.

      In the past we have thought some of their other photo releases were "weird" too. It's always a bit surprising to me, given Kate is into the arts. However, art is subjective and they obviously are giving us insight in their tastes.

      ~ A

      Delete
    4. Changing a color photo to a B&W usually requires quite a bit of adjusting to get the exposure details right. B&W photography is an art form and much harder to shoot than color. It's fun to see the family in a casual family setting.

      Delete
    5. I'm sure there are more pictures in the article. Here's hoping they are better!

      Delete
    6. Here is the other BW photo from the article. The exposure is better so it's not so gloomy but it's still a little odd to me. We do see George's face and Charlotte's not off in the weeds but I think it would have been nice to see interaction with both children (esp since only George's name seems to have appeared in the article, not Charlotte's)

      I like BW pics too. Some of the Kennedys at Hyannis Port taken in the early 60s (the American "royal family" for my generation) are still lovely today but these just seem off to me.


      https://mobile.twitter.com/james_elliott_/status/869327817628102656/photo/2


      Delete
    7. Charlotte off in the weeds - that made me laugh! Yep, pretty much sums up the picture!!

      Delete
    8. I'm sure those photos of the Kennedys were shot on B&W film and developed that way. This digital age makes B&W more difficult.

      Delete
    9. I just saw this one too, Lizzie. To me, this is much better. William looks like William here and the shadow issue seems to have been mostly eliminated.

      Delete
    10. Since I posted my comments, Robin, I've read that this particular photographer shoots film when doing BW, not digital. And the unsettling, shadow-y "Gothic" flair many posters have commented on is his trademark. Fine, but I doubt these photos will "stand the test of time" as well as the beach candids of the Kennedys. In many ways those look as though they could have been taken yesterday. I agree though Faith, this one is better but I still don't think it really looks like Will.

      Delete
    11. This guys shoots B&W on film and makes them look this way on purpose? OK, I have no more excuses for him. This is just bad.

      Delete
    12. I agree that these photos won't stand the test of time either, Lizzie. They are fascinating to look at in a way but they are also uncomfortable. Imo, what is unsettling about this style is the harshness of the contrast in these pictures. That coupled with the image being a very benign, lovely family moment gives the pictures a surreal sense. There is a feeling of foreboding conjured up by the harshness of the color and the very Rockwellian scene being depicted. It could almost be a scene from a horror movie.

      Delete
    13. Foreboding is a good word. Like William knows he's about to chop them all up in his woodshed! It's really macabre. That's the worst of it to me the image of William. Looks like a character in American Horrror Sorry. Terrible job by photographer for such a prestigious man and family.

      Delete
    14. I agree that for some reason William isn't translating well in these images. I was thinking of the stories this photo would generate if it were passed out in a creative writing class. I would love to read them.

      Delete
  7. That's the thing about candid, spontaneous photos. They are rarely perfect. I believe the idea was to capture and share a moment, a feeling-not to create a work of art.
    I think it radiates joy and happiness and family. Details are superfluous.
    If one must critique it as a work of art, think Van Gogh, not a Van Dyke.

    ok-I'm not sure I spelled everything correctly.anon1

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I admit to liking black and white photos, or artwork even. Color can be a distraction, if that makes sense. :-) Without it, you really do see the subject(s) of the photo.

      Delete
    2. I like b&w too but not this particular one. I can see why it appealed to Kate being artsy.

      Delete
  8. Although I like that he is more open I must say two things: 1. Why do you bash the media... When appearing on the media? 2. What's the point of the issue? It's great that they bring the attention of male audiences to mental health - but the interview (or rather, what we've seen) seems a bit pointless, say that you want to break the taboo regarding mental health (something they've repeated like a mantra since May 2016), that you miss your mother, and repeat more about keeping G&C hidden when anyways it's impossible since he will be King one day and she a Princess her whole life. Looks more like a PR move than anything to me

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree and believe it is all PR. BUT talking about mental health is more than a lot of men, particularly BRF men, do so it's still valuable. It's just like I think Kate could go beyond "mothering is hard" and maybe admit to a post-partum type struggle. They're still guarded, but making progress. Harry has been the most honest - I think he wears his heart on his sleeve more.
      ~ A

      Delete
    2. Harry doesn't have to assume leadership the way William does. If something Harry says now comes back to bite him in 25 years it's not big deal. Not so for William who will need to balance the responsibilities of being the King in a constitutional monarchy.

      Delete
    3. Nope, Harry has the love of the people. William has the distain of the people.

      What made Will's growing up torture - Charles' choices. William needs to man up and stop saying that he is protecting his kids... fighting for them. We hardly ever see them now. The battle is in William's head. He is fighting the ghost of Charles' horribleness.

      William wants to feel he is "fighting" something so he doesn't have to look at his Dad's actions. If William starts philandering like his Dad, it will be hell for his kids too. I don't think he will, but he needs to stop blaming everyone and their brother for his painful childhood. His Dad did that.



      Delete
    4. Exactly, anon! It's valuable but more could be done within the platform. And Robin, Harry does not have to asume leadership - that's true, but as future King, it's a good quality when you let your people know more about you. If he didn't want to risk himself then he wouldn't have gone out of the usual comfort zone before (say, when he spoke in favour of LGBTQ groups) and would have been silent instead. They are pursuing Heads Together with the (apparently only) goal of speaking up more about mental health issues, but so far the only one who has really done so is Harry, not the future Queen Consort, and most importantly, not the future King.

      Delete
    5. This all seems so unfair to William. He experienced first hand the press pack of hundreds following his mother around. He was in the house living the nightmare that was his parents marriage. Harry spent years rebelling and acting out but William always towed the line. One cannot just simply be told to "outgrow" the psychological scars left behind from having a dysfunctional family. And, for W&H, their family's dysfunction was played out in front of the whole world in living color. It seems that telling William to "man up" because after 20 years he's finally letting people know how all of this effected him is exactly what Heads Together is trying to combat. William's circumstance with parental relationships is also different than other people. His father is not only his father but his future King. You'll notice they all still bow and curtsy to HM upon first seeing her. It's the role into which they've been born. Someday he will be required to bow to his father - a man I think he probably has little respect for. It is possible to love a parent and not respect them or their choices. Add Camilla into the mix and I think William's torment is ongoing. What a blessing for him to have Kate at his side and two beautiful children for whom he wants a more normal childhood than he had.

      Delete
    6. OK, Robin, you twisted all my statements which I have come to expect.

      First, the "man up" comment was re: blaming the press when the majority of the pain caused in his childhood squarely rests at his Dad's doorstep. He doesn't want to blame his Dad, so he hides the kids to an unhealthy degree and blames the press.

      Two, many adults from divorced families deal have parents who continue to have a lot of power in their lives (family businesses are rife with this) and must look at the parents and deal with them on an adult level. While coming to terms with the truth about those parents. William is CONSTANTLY lashing out at the press and blaming them for his childhood. Thereby, using that as a reason to literally hide his kids. He is almost 35, he needs to man-up.

      Lastly, I think depression, grief, mental illness, all very serious things and bringing attention to these issues are important. But, on a personal level, William's pain won't get better until he is more truthful about the past. He certainly doesn't need to share that with the public. But when he blames the press for his childhood pain, that opens the issue for people to comment on it.

      William, on the whole, complains A LOT. Apart from his Mom's death, he has had an extremely lucky life. This fact generally escapes him.

      Delete
    7. I strongly agree with Robin here. AMEN.

      Also, W&H have two different personalities and I cannot imagine Harry in William's shoes. Harry was blessed with the freedom that comes with being "the spare" while William was being prepared for the "top job" since he was a little boy. Just consider Elizabeth and Margaret.

      Another important distinction... William and Kate were in a serious relationship since their university days and she has been factored in for quite some time. Harry, on the other hand, is enjoying a mature relationship for the first time in his life (IMO). Consider his request for privacy on his and Meghan's behalf within the first year of their relationship. It appears that Harry is in a position where he is in love and wants to protect the lady in his life. We have yet to see how HE navigates this chapter in his life. William is seen as a bad guy for wanting to protect his family and set guidelines, but do you honestly believe that Harry will hi-five papps that hide in his bushes? Or is it more likely that he, too, will become a protective husband and father?

      Delete
    8. I don't think it is useful to compare William and Harry. Nor do I see the logic of the opposition love v disdain. It ought to be respect v disdain or love v hate.
      And nothing in this interview shows William blaming the press. He simply aknowledges an aspect of his everyday life. Blame or no blame, it is a factor that conditions it. And he has to take it into account when raising up his children. Like we have to take into account other external factors in the way we educate them. I think it shows he is mature and responsible for being aware his and his children exceptional circumstances can have an impact on how they develop. If he believes protecting them is necessary, well he should know, he has been through it. I don't think we can have a worthy opinion on this, first because every parent should make the decisions he thinks are the best for his children second because Williams is in an unique position. Nobody shares his circumstances and nobody can give him advice

      Delete
    9. Robin and royalfan: I agree. However, I don't think a calm discussion is possible at this point. It is spitting in the wind because there are those who seem to crave argument instead of rational discussion. Whenever personal insults and references are made about a commenter rather than the objector using reason and sources to back up their statements...well, all friendly discussion goes out the window.
      I assumed Ashly (Ashley? Anonymous?) was discussing William with the reference to LGBT groups. He had an interview and appeared on a LGBT magazine cover long before Harry started on his HIV testing campaign. Apparently memories are short in Blogland.
      The only good news in this very organized focus on William and the press-promoted campaign by news outlets that are trying to satisfy a voracious 24/7 news cycle and are bullying William to feed it--...the good news is that these news outlets have shifted away from getting to William by endless criticism of Kate. She simply was getting too much first hand, word of mouth praise from people and charities who have actually worked with her on a personal basis.
      One can't really blame those who spread the anti-William/monarchy/anyone who has more- type talking points: they are just parroting the celebrity/gossip sites that would praise William endlessly, if that brought more clicks. The words and phrases used are often quotes from those sites, which I do read at times in an attempt to understand the reasoning behind some of the comments.

      Right now, the internet instant communication not allowing for reflection and fact-checking encourages a mob mentality on those sites. The same sort of feeding frenzy that fueled cock-and-bull fighting, public hangings and before Rome's fall, gladiator spectacles. Nowadays, it is the internet, not the village square or a coliseum. The hormones released make such activity habit-forming. Instant gratification of online communication alone promotes the release of chemicals in the body that make it habit-forming. It is the same impetus that drives people to become obsessed with video games. We are now seeing the culmination of a generation that has grown up with "social media." We have teenagers who would rather facetime via internet than walk next door for real face time. We have world leaders sparring with each other on it. It is quite a contrast to read those communications compared to the Jefferson- Adams letters-plenty of time for consideration and reflection then. It took weeks for responses to travel in those days. They were still very spirited discussions. Just well thought-out.

      I think most of the commenters here are aware of the addictiveness and danger to themselves and society that the internet poses and have the sense to back off from time to time when they feel blogging is taking over their lives. I miss their comments but realize it means they are taking a rest or just simply too involved with their day to day lives. I welcome them back as old friends when they return.
      Just as I intend to do. Another respite from which I will probably return, welcomed or not.
      Don't bother flinging personal insults at me in response, because I won't answer. anon1

      Delete
    10. What are you talking about anon1? I don't see any personal insults directed at other commenters anywhere in this thread. I do see disagreement but just because someone has a different opinion doesn't mean that person needs to present sources any more than you need to produce sources to back up your *opinion*. I get the impression some commenters forget that their opinion is not actually the same thing as a fact.

      Delete
    11. Anon 8:25. I totally disagree. "distain" for William? That statement is way, way overblown.

      Delete
    12. Oh, 7:08, aka anonymous poster who hates Robin, you are such a peach. I can always count on you to be right there.

      Delete
    13. I think all of you need to take a deep breath and act like grown women if you don't mind me saying.
      This is silly back and forth and probably draining to poor Jane not to mention the rest of us.
      We're all talking about people NOBODY KNOWS IN PERSON!! Stop taking everything so personally.

      Delete
    14. Anon1, we would need TWO pots of coffee and TWO cheesecakes to discuss this subject. The internet can be a wonderful thing...it comes down to the intent and use of it. Sometimes good, sometimes not so!

      Delete
    15. Robin, I think that's a little much. Maybe some might disagree with you, but hate? Certainly not. This is just a sweet blog, let's leave the paranoia out.

      Delete
    16. Amen 8:28. I sometimes get the impression certain commenters like to feel they are being attacked because they enjoy an excuse to berate anonymous commenters for choosing to be anonymous.

      Delete
    17. 8:28 you are right.We are speaking (anonymously for many of us)to people we don't know, about people we don't know. It can't get more impersonal than that. Yet, it is like the dialogues in a book. They tell the reader so much about the characters. And you like some, dislike others. If this were a book I would dislike the aggressive anonymous that calls poster by their name and makes personal, and sometimes rude remarks. I wouldn't wonder the named and targeted posters took it personally. This is not a book yet the interesting thing is, that a lot of the time the discussion has nothing to do with the people we don't know we talk about, only with the people we don't know we speak to. Anon 5:39

      Delete
    18. And yet this is not a book so sadly you don't get to decide which characters you like and which you don't. You'll just have to react to the content of a comment without knowing if the "speaker" is "good" or "evil"....

      Delete
    19. Exactly 10:11. That's why I think personal remarks should be avoided. And one shouldn't say things like ( a recent example that shocked me) "OK, Robin, you twisted all my statements which I have come to expect". Personal attack levelled at the " speaker " not a reaction to a comment. Some posters are generous enough to expose their personality. They are the ones that can be personally targeted. They cannot answer in the same way to those who cowardly ( I am one of them) remain hidden. And I doubt they would, being from what we can judge, better mannered.6:25

      Delete
    20. "Generous"? Ha!

      Delete
  9. I don't want to comment till I read the whole interview but have to agree, right now it doesn't look great or impressive. Same old same old. He's gonna risk over exposure and his message will just be noise.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Jane, that was a wonderful comment about Memorial Day, and the sacrifices of so many.
    I love this picture, it is fun and relaxed. Not just another posed family shot. I will comment later after I have read William's full interview.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Someone should mow the grass at KP. Otherwise a very relaxed family photo.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Haha! They probably have meadow like areas amongst the more manicured ones. Common in England. We Americans like our yards to look like golf courses, so their grass is a little surprising.

      Wish the shot was in color, would have been beautiful.

      Delete
    2. LOL. And I will take an English garden over an American golf course any day. ;-)

      Delete
    3. This is probably a wild flower meadow. Too early for the flowers to be out ( photo in April}. Probably rather lovely by now.

      Delete
    4. So true!! When I came out to Australia many years ago, I wanted to grow a small meadow with wild flowers and high grass in the middle of my garden, surrounding a tree. It would have looked so pretty... I was told that this was not a good idea, as it would attract snakes. I was SOOOO disappointed. I really needed that meadow. Sigh...
      Marie

      Delete
  12. I love your comments about Memorial Day, Jane, and couldn't agree with you more.

    ReplyDelete
  13. The American GQ is known for using black & white pics. They had Liev Schreiber in b/w and it was smoking! And I remember Diana doing studio portraits with the boys in b/w.

    But this picture is an awful choice in b/w. Someone above mentioned the faces in this pic as being ghoulish - perfect description! I am sure W&K had final approval of all pics used, this should not have happened. Reminds me of the terrible Vogue pictures of Kate. KP's poor press choices strike again!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have to agree! I would have thought it would be terribly difficult to make this attractive family unattractive but it has been done. Especially William! He does not look like that at all. Here he looks slightly undead and evil. I love black and white photography. I love photography as art. This is an interesting photograph but so not nice. I think it would have worked in a grouping of photographs but as a stand alone it is eerie and unsettling, and not at all an accurate representation of the Cambridges imo.

      Delete
    2. I couldn't agree more Faith you said that perfectly better than I could. William, the cover boy should be most upset since his should be the most flattering. It's awful.

      Delete
    3. And what appears to be barbed wire at the top of the fence doesn't lighten the mood!

      Delete
    4. He's very heathcliff in these photos

      Delete
  14. Why must everyone feel so entitled to learn what is in the hearts of the Royals? Their thoughts and journeys are in fact their own and what they choose to share is quite enough. Everyone grieves, grows and travels at their own pace and in their own way. That is quite the point in mental health healing ... to support and encourage, not to imply that they are falling short of your expectations. It is a encouraging to see the strength in these young Royals who are trying to reach beyond the palace walls and invite healing. Bravo to them for their courage.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well said!! TRF is not obligated to share anything personal. We are lucky they do. XX

      Delete
    2. TRF is lucky they enjoy the lifestyle they do, if they double down on privacy and shun traditional royal work they will not last.

      Delete
  15. What's most frustrating to me is I realize we're probably not going to see much of Kate for the next few months. Summer breaks and getting kids ready for school, move to KP etc.
    I think they had the fuller schedule up to the marathon and that was their big ticket thing.
    I'm prepping for a long dull summer for royal watchers. Maybe Harry will get engaged.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Fingers crossed!!

      Delete
    2. Maybe he (Harry) will and maybe he won't. But we CAN count on the summer being a quiet time for the royals. Nothing new here. AND, with increased safety concerns, it makes perfect sense to NOT announce certain events months or even weeks ahead of time.

      Delete
    3. William and Kate go to Poland and Germany in July! We'll have the balcony appearance for Trooping the Colour as well where we'll also get to see the kids. It's not going to be as dull a summer as you're anticipating!

      Delete
    4. The Spanish royals...polo...Father's Day. George's birthday. And likely the continuation of the HT initiative, despite attempts to undermine it, actually originating from palace walls and through lashing out at the GQ article.anon1

      Delete
    5. RF,

      I find it quite rude when you comment "Nothing new here," and "Nothing new to see here," when addressing comments you don't agree with.

      Why be so disparaging to others? You do this a lot when trying to diminish others' opinions. I guess the MM reference set you off this time.

      Delete
    6. Case in point. "Rude," "disparaging-" ,"set you off..." referring to the commenter, not the comment. How about answering the comment instead of insulting the commenter? Explain why your point is the most accurate.anon1

      Delete
    7. anon1, who is trying to undermine HT?

      Delete
    8. Dear 10:12, You're 7:08 from above aren't you? BTW, royalfan likes MM but don't let facts cloud the issue. oy vey

      Delete
    9. RF doesn't like Meghan and neither do you, Robin. So, please, stop.

      Delete
    10. Anon1, you beat me to it. Thank you for pointing out the obvious.

      10:12, perhaps you can pick a moniker and stick with it as Robin and I have done. It would facilitate a fair and far more accountable exchange, no?

      And for the record, I have expressed my reservations about MM, as well as more positive comments which, I believe, was behind Robin's comment. As far as MM is concerned, I am prepared to be in her corner if she is firmly in Harry's. THAT is my bottom line; no chips here, I assure you. As a matter of fact, it seems that the most flippant remarks where MM is concerned have come from her fans.

      Delete
    11. I think RF and I are pretty much on the same page re: MM. Nothing whatsoever against her as a person. She's beautiful, stylish, and does some nice charity work. But, when you've followed the BRF as long as we have you come to know what the establishment (the "men in grey suits" as Diana called them) will and will not tolerate. I think "that circle" will not be as accepting of her as people would wish and she will have a hard time if/when they become engaged. I also, being a realist and not a believer in fairy tales, think they haven't had enough time together to really know one another the way William and Catherine do. So, you can call RF and I whatever names you want and pretend to know what's in our minds but, the fact is, you don't. The only thing you know about us is that, if our opinions differ from yours, it must follow that we are evil/ignorant/just plain stupid - pick an adjective. We do, I am sure, have more life experience behind us than you do 7:08/10:12/6:51 so if you want to tell us what "we think" maybe you should be the one to stop. Marone!

      Delete
    12. Robin and RF, a word of support and admiration from another anonymous poster who always enjoys the agreable way you state your opinion and the fact that you are courageous enough to have a name and stand by what you write.

      Delete
    13. It's interesting, Robin, that you try and cut Meghan supporters down by assuming they are young. I'm 45. Yep. And that's why I know the coded references that you and RF make when discussing her and they appall me. I have also seen quite a few mean girls in my time and you fit right into that too.

      There are many Meghan supporters on here. So, before you assume they are all little girls as yet another way to diminish someone besides Meghan, think again.

      It's interesting to me that you wave your age as a banner to claim knowing the royal family so well. That really makes no sense. Because, if you have followed them as much as I have, you would have see the sweeping changes that have happened - through Diana's time, then onto William and Harry. And of course, the marriage of Charles and Camilla, which everyone for years believed could never happen.

      The RF has changed so much over the years... People who have really watched it know this. Maybe the issue isn't the RF or the men in gray suits. Maybe the issue is people like you and RF? Have your years of wisdom ever thought of that?

      Delete
    14. Those men in gray suits were 30+ years ago and most will go with queen. If they haven't already. There will be a whole new sheriff in town, Meghan will be fine.

      Delete
    15. Oh no anon 9:23, the grey suited men are still there and will be there through Charles. Charles is a firm supporter of the institution make no mistake. Things like that will not change until William is at the helm.

      Delete
    16. The same people working at the palace in Diana's day are no longer there. And what made those "men in gray suits" so mean to Diana was the fact that she had no support from Charles. If anyone tried that on Kate or Harry's wife, all hell would rain down on them. Charles wanted them to abuse Diana, so that's what happened.

      It is a very different time now and W&H are very different men.

      Delete
    17. I am making one LAST comment on this blog and then I'm out of here. I love Jane's writing and the photos she chooses but the personal attacks on myself and some of the others who have been regulars for a long time are not worth my time. My last comment is that I have NEVER said anything against Meghan Markle. I have said plenty about how I believe she will or will not be accepted by Harry's circle of friends. I never even heard of MM before Harry started dating her. I don't care whether you believe me or not. I am the age Diana would have been so I do have a few years on you, 9:39, and that means a bit more experience and a few more years following the BRF. Thank you for thinking me younger than I am. I too thought you were much younger than you are.

      I'm sorry, Jane. This is the only royal blog I read but the habit of some to attack anything someone says because they don't agree has become too much. It is no longer civil discourse nor a productive exchange of ideas. So, like Diane Brown, I'm gone. I miss Diane but she couldn't take it either. RF, good luck with these apparently sainted women who have decided that it is OK to call people out, pretend to know what others think, and accuse them of feelings they never had is appropriate behavior. I'll go and dwell in a more polite society.

      Delete
    18. FWIW Kate and Anon, I think you are both speculating and weaving tales about stuff none of us knows...Both of your views are based on what? News stories, gossip, whispers in the wind:):) Unless you have some very very first hand knowledge then what...it is fun to speculate, but on these blogs and in most news stories, if one reads closely there is very little "factual" information shared. The only truth is that WIlliam, Harry and Charles are all their own persons with different ideas. Which is true of all families:):)

      Delete
    19. Robin, I hope you read this: I believe there is only one anonymous that is,to be frank,simply rude. RF and you were targeted because you have a name. It is the kind of person ( many politicians are like that) that cannot have a rational debate but must use personal arguments. I flinch when I read those comments, but realise it isn't a general thing, that all other posters are more mature and ethical. You are an example of good behaviour, it would be a pity if we passive readers lost you and kept a 9:39...( I have been personal here!)
      I seem to be intruding in Jane's territory...
      But I really feel with you, Robin.

      Delete
    20. Robin I am not the other anons I only made one comment here asking people to take a breath. And I'll say it again. Whether you see it or not or want to admit it or not EVERYONE engaging is contributing to this silliness. If you really are mid-50's this should roll off your back. It's ridiculous. You should be more mature than this.
      And for the record if you're the targeted person ANY of these posts can be read in a very snotty manner, yours too. If you don't like how people direct a comment to you, don't respond in a snotty fashion back. That simple.
      I think some comments directed to you were a bit rude, and I think you can be a bit rude. And RF. As someone just taking them all in, some come off rude, you and RF can come off a bit judgmental and self righteous. No wonder everyone's getting their backs up.
      Again EVERYONE needs to STOP TAKING EVERYTHING SO PERSONALLY.
      Jane doesn't need this, none of us do.

      Delete
    21. I for one am intererested to see where the conversation goes when it is no longer dominated by a small group who are convinced they have an inside line and superior knowledge of all things BRF, and who think their comments are polite discourse (when they are frequently condescending) but anyone who disagrees is making a personal attacks.

      Delete
    22. Robin, I am saddened to se you go, but I understand, too. I felt this thread was getting out of hand, but I have been traveling and scrambling on paperwork for my internship this summer and I just kept thinking I'd sort it "tomorrow." As you know, I have always valued your input and you will always be one of the readers I think back to with a smile when I recall this blog and the past six years of royal watching. I hope you continue to read, even if you don't venture into the comments, but no matter the course you plan to take, I pray many blessings to you and yours moving forward. With much fondness, Jane Barr

      Delete
    23. Hi Robin, I wish you wouldn't leave. I consider you one of the mainstays of this comment section. I think you've been here longer than I have. I love reading what you have to say. You are an interesting lady with a lot of knowledge of and compelling insight into the RF.

      I know it has been difficult on here lately. For some reason, MM has been a dividing factor. I agree with anon 6:44 though, I think there is only one anonymous poster who is being rude and aggressive who doesnt want to see other points of view. So please don't let one person ruin a place you enjoy spending time. I would love it if you could shake it off and watch Kate with the rest of us. I think the fall will be an interesting time.

      Delete
    24. Btw, I usually comment as an anon on here but I am putting my name because I think this anon business is causing dissention although I understand why Jane supports it.

      Delete
    25. I'll miss reading your comments Robin but I do understand your decision.

      Delete
    26. Robin, I regret your decision, but I understand it. In no way did you deserve some of the comments directed at you. I will miss you, as I do Diane Brown. We have in common respect for and interest in the subject matter here and we were able to enjoy mature "conversations".

      I can understand the desire to remain anonymous, but it also makes it very easy to abuse the privilege of posting on a nice blog such as this one. It also makes us (regular posters who stick with a single moniker) the equivalent of fish being shot in a barrel.

      And, in my humble opinion, the busier Jane got with her studies, etc., the more her "absence" was taken advantage of. I, too, believe that Jane doesn't need or deserve this.

      @ Anon 5:34...THANK YOU!! :-)

      Delete
    27. Oh no Robin! Please don't let one or two people bring you down. It won't be as much fun without you here. We regulars are disappearing fast. Always, I count on you to be a voice of reason on these posts. It's good to have long time royal watchers comment because they bring years of perspective and aren't just reacting to topics, if you know what I mean. I hope you will reconsider after a short break maybe. If not, I've really enjoyed chatting with you over the years and will miss your comments.

      Delete
    28. Robin and RF, since I was the one who called out Diane Brown, could I just say one thing about that? This situation is completely different. Someone has clearly targeted Robin here and, for that matter, Royalfan as well for voicing concerns about Ms. Markle, I believe. Diane was making remarks directed towards posters in threads (that included me) that she disagreed with. It happened multiple times before I said anything. I know it is a fine art in this medium to debate the topic without offending the commenter but people have to be careful not to go after people personally. It does create bad feelings.

      Delete
  16. The photo is pedestrian enough to be one of many in a family collection taken by amateur photographers....certainly not what I would expect as a published photo in a national magazine, taken by a professional. Who on earth makes these decisions in the interest of "normalizing" this family? Again, where has quality and expertise gone?

    ReplyDelete
  17. I don't think William has this much hair.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Best comment.

      Delete
    2. Hahahahahaha! All these philosophical conversations going on and you point out it looks like they may have photoshopped a wee bit more hair on his head which, quite frankly, I hadn't noticed but YOU'RE RIGHT! Once succinct but hilarious sentence. Well done!!

      Delete
    3. Thanks all :) I wasn't trying to be mean regarding his hair, btw.

      Has everyone seen the second black and white photo?

      Delete
    4. I actually thought it was because the pics were in black and white.

      Delete
    5. Yes, not as bad as this one. But still, would have been much better in color.

      Delete
  18. I actually like the GQ photo, even though it's a little weird. It captures some of the chaos and fun of having small kids.

    ReplyDelete
  19. This is a really fun compilation of Kate moments.

    http://www.harpersbazaar.com/culture/features/g9555168/funny-kate-middleton-moments/?src=arb_fb_d&mag=har&dom=fb

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Love it! Thanks for posting the link, Robin. :-)

      Delete
  20. Anyone want to talk about Pippa and the honeymoon pics?
    According to WhatKateWore she's been wearing almost exclusively Kate Spade and been photographed in every outfit at very close range. The suggestion: Is it part of a promotion deal?
    I think it's very possible. Seems like James Matthews would be all about that being a deal maker. And Pippa may feel a little braver doing things like this with him encouraging and orchestrating it all.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That is very interesting. I think Pippa almost deserves her own blog atm. She dresses very well, and gets up to exciting and sporty things.
      Marie

      Delete
    2. Pippa's last effort to milk the cow! :)

      Delete
    3. I didn't know others were commenting on it, but I noted that she had on 2 Kate Spade dresses. They were pretty too. Maybe Pip's a brand ambassador for them? It's a good brand.

      Delete
    4. Aw. these comments are no fun. Where has the wit and warmth gone?

      Mistaking FBTB for the Royal Family Strum und Drang blog....

      Delete
    5. That is such an interesting take on Pippa's wardrobe. I have noticed that pretty much every outfit from her honeymoon has been Kate Spade..I'd never considered it to be a possible partnership. Hmmmmm.....

      Delete
    6. Seems unlikely she'd wear KS almost exclusively on her honeymoon unless she was reaping some sort of financial advantage. While she's worn KS before, I'd certainly not call it her go-to brand. I agree many of the pics (not LAX) have been close up and so perhaps were set up. To me, it all seems pretty tacky (especially in the context of the secret-password, extremely private wedding reception) but I guess it's one way the rich get richer. And its not the first time this question has been raised re: the Middleton family (Audi, Issa, and so on) so if it is true, I'm not sure I'd bet it's James's doing.

      Delete
    7. It does seem like a possible partnership and that she knew or arranged to be photographed in Kate Spade. I like Kate Spade stuff a lot, so I don't mind :)

      Delete
    8. The latest report on her indicates she wore a variety of designers... so who knows, but I doubly she worried about getting some Kate Spade Clothes at a discount...

      Delete
    9. Maybe it part of their plan to position the brand after they just got bought by coach?

      Delete
  21. Thanks for you take on Pippa's wedding. I thought the flowers were absolutely stunning. Pippa's dress was so similar in shape to Kate's it didn't reflect Pippa's style. Had the dress been more of a mermaid style I believe it would have been so very flattering & original. the veil again was so similar to Kate's veil, it just appeared as nothing creative. Kate's dress was a complimentary color to her moms dress , the only piece I would share is: I felt the style way more of an older women style & the length was way to long. In fact I noticed it was longer than her mothers dress.
    Another repeat was the departure of Pippa & James in a convertible car, a small two person carriage might have shown some originality. Do wish we could have seen what Pippa wore for the reception. She has a fun sense of style. Absolutely adore your blog!

    ReplyDelete
  22. Several more beautiful dresses on Pippa--all Kate Spade. The floral tile dress is stunning!

    ReplyDelete
  23. William visited Manchester today, but where is Catherine, Kate, the Duchess of Cambridge? Coloring?

    ReplyDelete
  24. Are you doing a post for the Chelsea flower show? :)

    ReplyDelete

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!