Royal style & gossip: from christening gowns to tennis lawns

[QueenOfTheAndals]

Previous thread

And I think we all can agree that it's much more fun if we stick to critiquing the clothes rather than the women!

I love a pussy bow. Must wear mine more often...

The detective aunt Jane Fellowes, is married to the Queens former private secretary.
I think she must have been in such a difficult position during the affair with Camilla / breakdown of Charles and Diana's marriage and all the intrigue, shenanigans and subsequent fall out that ensued, when all the time her husband had to work with the Queen everyday and probably often have to either ignore the elephant in the room occasions or discuss them!!!

I would have liked to see more of Meghan's dress and shoes. She does look lovely though. Really radiant.

Hmm not sure Diana got a lot of support from her sisters tbh. Didn’t she tell them she wanted to call the marriage off but they told her it was too late & to carry with the marriage?

Agree with back door feel to the group photo.
An odd group and a sense that they are all feeling the oddness, W&K most of all.

There is such a contrast between today's photos and the family focus of the W&K christening photos, even without HMQ present for all of them.

Lovely to see the Spencer ladies there. They are clearly not women who are all about the clothes, and making no effort to pretend to be. I always think they look lovely - a little weather beaten, and dignified.

William looks as if he is about to spit out the lemon he is sucking on.

Love MM, KM and Doria's outfits, and William's suit looks sharp.
I love the pussy bow and shorter length dress on KM. Camilla might be wearing one of those dresses that looks better standing up than sitting down - her style is kaftan-like dresses, nothing very fitted.

Harry should have worn a dark suit.

The staged black and white photo leaves me with a cat's bum mouth. The closest I can come to putting my finger on why I don't like it is that is smacks of a movie poster for 'The Drama That Is The Harry and Meghan Story', part 2, 'The Baby'.

The Mail have really over-egged the pudding with today's story, all about how H&M run the risk of "alienating the people who love them the most".
I don't think they are over egging it. Yes, most people are interested only out of idle curiosity, but there is an idea behind the dismay at being shut out that is valid - can you be a private citizen to the extent they want to be private citizens and still enjoy the financing that comes with being members of the RF? There is a conflict there that has come into focus. It's not a written rule but it is customary that the position they enjoy is part of a 'pay per view' dynamic, for want of a better word. W&K have struck the right balance. H&M have not.

love Kate's outfit

I think the point the Mail are failing to grasp is that Archie is a private citizen. His parents aren't so they'll do the royal engagements, work with charities, show up at opening nights etc but they want to keep his life private.

not sure Diana got a lot of support from her sisters tbh. Didn’t she tell them she wanted to call the marriage off but they told her it was too late & to carry with the marriage?

I read that too. They allegedly said her face was on millions of tea towels so it was too late to get cold feet and she couldn't back out. Which is terribly sad.

I think even as late as the early 80s, in the social milieu they occupied and in the completely dysfunctional family they were brought up in, marriage was seen as more of a bloodstock / breeding arrangement than a union of two real people, exclusively, and for life.

My grandparents who were very hoity toity married (in 1906) after being introduced (by arrangement between their families) six weeks previously. Both came from 'suitable' families. The aim of their marriage was to produce children and maintain a certain lifestyle among a certain social set and to occupy a certain position in society. Personalities, individual taste or even individual sexual orientation, or the likelihood of attaining personal happiness were not important elements to what was considered a good match. Marriages were to all intents and purposes, 'arranged'. Love matches were very much held in suspicion.

I agree math. We find it shocking in 2019 that they didn’t marry for love. Even Charles knew that wasn’t what it was about in the 80s and before.

Over the last 30-40 years society has changed hugely and our expectations and personal freedoms have massively shifted. That’s why there have been so many divorces in that period, Charles and Diana were not unique.

Although TBH even now in the days leading up to a royal wedding a non-royal bride experiencing doubts would likely be told to suck it up. It’s just (hopefully) the process is better thought about from the beginning.

Some of the comments on the Sussex and Cambridge Instagram/Twitter accounts are beyond vile and repulsive. Mostly aimed at DoS. Am not one but surprised that they want to protect their child.

Yes indeed, Archie is a private citizen while his parents are not, but an occasion like his christening means he appears with his parents in the bosom of his extended family. His first day of school, etc, can be completely private.

The identity of his godparents shouldn't be private regardless of their alleged wishes, because they are obviously not friends of Archie yet. They are apparently close friends of H&M and the public has a right to know who these people are, because H&M are not private individuals and it would be nice to know if, for instance, they are the purveyors of the really expensive bath H&M recently installed at the taxpayers' expense. If you agree to the role of godparent based on the friendship with or relationship to someone in the RF then imo you should have to accept the conditions that come with it.

I tend to agree, @mathanxiety. Archie isn't any kind of citizen yet, he's barely more than an accessory. This is all about the privacy his parents want for themselves. There's plenty of time to manage media coverage of him as he grows up. The Cambridges are handling things just fine.

And come to think of it, they could have just released a few photos of Archie after he was born instead of the public introduction and photo op/interview they carried out if his privacy is paramount. I suppose my point is that when they appear for a formal occasion with Archie and he is the focus of the occasion the line between private citizen and RF member is very much blurred.

When you think about the complicated relationships in that room, it's no wonder they all look so uncomfortable.

and the public has a right to know

Oh give over. Who the hell are these "public". If you mean you, and people like you, just spit it out.

Kate looks amazing. I don’t think William looks sour; more like he is struggling not to giggle! Meghan looks radiant and Archie is a cutie. Harry however.. the suit.. the shoes.. the socks... an official photo... just NO.
I hate those stylised b&w pics. They're horrible!

Thanks for new thread Queen.

Haven’t rtft and only just seen the photos.
No.1, Archie is so cute. Although he has brown eyes, there is something of Harry about his eyes too.
Definitely some odd dynamics going on
Why is William smirking?
There is some subtle upstaging going on by Kate.
It is quite a bright colour to wear to a christening. ( thinking of what Pippa, Carole and Camilla wore to the Cambridge christenings)
Quite a short skirt and high red heels < clutches pearls>
To top it off she is the same earrings Diana wore to Harry’s christening.

Lady Sarah is wearing the same outfit she wore to her daughter Celia’s wedding. Lady Jane looks cool in the Panama. Dgaf.

Harry Meghan and Archie look United in their light clothes.Harry’s black socks and brown shoes are a little odd. Too dark for the suit.

Doria looks great in the peach colour. Her turban hat is an interesting choice. Homage to HM in the 1970s?

The trouble with the way H &M are doing things is that it draws more attention to them and their baby, not less, and that attention isn't positive. That's not the way to secure privacy for anyone, and actually I'm afraid I don't think anyone as close to the throne as they and their child/ children are is a private citizen.

I thought Archie had Harry's eyes at first but now I think Meghan's. He has the same shape head as Harry. I don't see any sign of red hair.
He is a very nice looking baby, they aren't always!😁

The aunt in the fedora looks like Fiona Shaw . She's just a small cigar away from camp.

I wonder what they had for lunch afterwards. I presume the lunch would have been a more breezy affair than the photo suggests as all the other guests and mystery godparents would have been in attendance. The last christening I attended had excellent posh sausage rolls and bbq lamb. I doubt that is what constitutes a royal christening menu though!

The aunt in the fedora looks like Fiona Shaw . She's just a small cigar away from camp.

Already noted upthread @LenoVentura! 😁 It's quite a striking resemblance, I wonder if she gets that a lot? The Panama was a bold choice. A proper dgaf move!

To top it off she is the same earrings Diana wore to Harry’s christening

I'm kind of in awe that people can recognise earrings like that! I'm so not a jewellery person.

Could've been worse, Harry could've gone for loafers and NO socks!