Hilary Mantel makes a good point

[juneau]

She shouldn't have said it, since it's bitchy and uncalled for (and I actually find HM rather odd, if I'm honest), but after a good couple of years in the media spotlight I struggle to think of one thing the Duchess of Cambridge thinks or believes in. She never gives an opinion, she barely speaks, she just looks pretty and smiles.

Evelyn Waugh and Jilly Cooper in the same breath?

Yep. Both excellent on the English class system. Decline and Fall and Riders will tell you everything you need to know. A Handful of Dust and Rivals will fill in any gaps.

seeker You should get the social climbing app

russians I don't think Kate or the Middletons are role models, I would worry much more about Made In Chelsea on that front. Isn't that what HM is saying though, that between the Middletons and the press there now exists a construct of what a royal princess should be, and like all marketing constructs it is without soul or even relevence to real lives, which is OK if it is Barbie but not if it is a real human being, whether or not she is actually intelligent and has a personality. In fact Zara Phillips who doesn't appear to let the press define her to the extent it gets in the way of her life, actually calls William and Kate, Ken and Barbie.

I would also worry much more about the identities that part of the press offer to women generally.

I suspect that an iPad is irredeemably déclassé whatever!

I suppose Kate would be a better role model than Tulisa. :(

We really do need some proper female role models other than the sportswomen in this country, don't we? :(

Might I suggest Hilary Mantel? I've heard she's a really intelligent thoughtful woman with sound instincts.

There don't seem to be any shortage of role models for our DDs to uncover in the course of their studies and reading, I kid myself they watch MIC ironically. The problem is for the girls who don't get to serious study, or Booker prize winning books and take their identities from femail.

I don't think Hilary Mantel is very nice at all, sorry. Her article made good arguments about the way in which we objectify people, but the bitchy comments she made about Kate while prima facie relevant could very easily have been replaced with non dailymail friendly criticism.

I also find her books turgid.

@copthall Exactly. My girls have adopted all sorts of role models (some of them fictional. Some of them dubious. Few of them having wide application, I'd've thought) but I was thinking about popular ones, not ones for my own daughters. The thought was prompted by the mention of Kate as a role model and then my own statement that I supposed she'd be better than Tulisa (just).

I think one of the saddest things about the Middleton sisters is that we are occasionally allowed hints of their abilities and talents (e.g. Kate was "athletic and sporty" at school, Pippa has "business skills") but of course thats all their public image of non-threatning, support to the man in their life ever allows. Neither of them have ever achieved anything much in any field, outwith socialising. They are hangers-on, and of course most hangers-on rarely bag a prize as big as Kate has. The fact that most women wouldn't even want that prize any more is overlooked.

Unfortunately the dinner parties of Edinburgh and St Andrews University students, the Eventing world, etc are full of these hangers-on.

It really is depressing that KM's sole goal of bagging a weathly husband precluded her from doing anything which is deemed risky, such as having a career, competing in sport, being interesting in any way.

I think there was a bitter undertone but so what, the points were well made. You don't have to be nice to write good books, in fact it probably helps if you aren't. I love reading about E. Annie Proulx's bad tempered responses to her fans (she has a lawyer engaged full time issuing cease and desist writs to anyone attempting fan fiction sequels to brokeback mountain with happy endings )

I actually enjoy HMs books because she so successfully captures the spirit of the eras she writes about but I think it is the use of the present tense makes them turgid, caught in a neverending present.......

Less - that is completely wrong, you know. Pippa has achieved lots of sporty things - marathons, triathlons etc. I don't like her, but come on, be fair.

Indeed you don't have to be nice to write good books. But I wouldn't accept a role model who wasn't nice. Being nice - or, as a minimum, being not horrible (a yardstick I think she fails) is an incredibly important thing. Underrated, mocked, even - but incredibly important, to me anyway.

Having said that you don't need to be nice to write good books (and I know a few decidedly not nice authors who have written fairly successful books. And one who is very very successful) the writers I know who are nicer write, to my mind, much better books (and scripts etc).

Do you have to be "nice" to be a role model? Interesting. I don't think, for example, Germaine Greer is "nice", but in many ways she's a fantastic role model. Whereas, for example, Holly Willoughby seems very "nice" but is a disastrous role model.

Probably depends on your definition of nice, Seeker. If you insist on sugar & spice, you'll end up with Holly Willoughby - her screen persona, at any rate. If you look at whether someone appears to be kind to those less fortunate, has reasonable social aptitude, some likeable qualities and is not known to act with selfish malice - then I'd say Greer is a nice person. I'd just as soon have her over to supper as Willoughby.

I've been quite surprised by the degree of conflation between private and public personalities on this thread.

That is the point isn't it garlicbreeze, that Mantel was addressing Middleton's public personality. As a result many are trying to attack Mantel's personal one.

I once shared a flight with GG to Australia. She is most definitely not a role model AFAIC.

If you want young people to model themselves on nasty people then sure, have unkind, ungenerous, cruel role models.

I'd like better ones though.

What I object to is Mantel addressing Kate's size.

Neither of them are good role models.

Disappointing to hear one of my idols is unpleasant company, Russians! I'll get over it, I'm sure

Tend to agree that I wouldn't be in a hurry to put HM or KM forward as role models.

Don't we normally have different role models for different things? I aspire to Joanna Lumley's poise, for eg, and Whoopi Goldberg's wits. (Never going to have either, but old gimmers can dream too ... )

Germaine Greer's role model qualities don't extend to niceness. She once said that niceness is the most overrated virtue and tends to illustrate her opinion through the way she deals with people. And if the company didn't suit She would be a terrible dinner guest!

Pofaced, many on this thread have tried to attack Kate's private personality - or, to support it/her - when we don't really know anything about her. Mantel, by contrast, butters all her words and deeds with a thick layer of private thoughts & feelings. As such, the author has made her character available for criticism while the duchess has not.

I got the feeling Mantel resents this, but that's just me reading between the lines she wrote.

It might be quite funny to let Greer & Willoughby loose on each other.

Garlic it is possible that none of us were at our best on that flight. I regard her as a bit of a hero (for what she has achieved) but I wouldn't model myself on her.

I think you are right about the filleting of characteristics to be modeled. In that case, I'd say that Kate's perseverance might actually be a role model worthy trait (although not the object of her perseverance). And Mantel's ability to win prizes when much better books were overlooked is also clearly a useful trait (hypnosis, perhaps?)

A lot of the people I like the most are in fact terrible 'role models'. The person whose maxims have had the most influence on my life was actually a bitchy old cowbag in many ways.

I have to say were I still at the coalface of marketing I might well regard the Middletons as role models, but then the reason they would be role models is the reason I am not still at the coalface of marketing

I think not nice people can be role models in terms of their achievements providing their achievements have made a difference to the world in a good way whilst nice people can only be a role model if their achievements have made a difference to the world in a good way, so we can dispense with Holly Willoughby / Tess whatever / the other blonde ones...

GG turned up at DDs school to talk, she sells herself to raise money for her rainforest, and actually whilst the mums were looking on in awe the DDs found her very interesting. Her response to a question implying that DDs were turning their backs on feminism and she was needed more than ever as a role model she said "Good god no, they need their own role models and ideas, it would be very sad if they were still clinging to the ideals of a 60 year old formed in response to a different era"

No, she doesn't 'butter' her writings in a thick layer of her thoughts and feelings. She makes observations whilst being aware of her own role as observer, something I think you said earlier she didn't do. This does not invite personal attacks. The personal attacks have come from people either not reading her essay or completely misinterpreting it as a 'bitchy' attack on Middleton.

The current assumption that Mantel is not 'nice' kind of buckles under its own irony. How do you define 'nice' anyway? And Mantel is addressing Kate's size as it is the required media norm for beauty and perfection. That is why she addresses it. Why are you saying Mantel is not a good role model? She has suffered health problems that has affected her weight and has written about them extensively. why does this mean she is not entitled to talk about Kate's public personality, which includes the way the media views her size as perfection?