Mega coronation

[GooseberryCinnamonYogurt]

Do we really need it? My first thought is no we don't, the money would be better spent on the NHS!

Charles doesn't know how I live but whether he cared about anyone or not, he has given fridges and freezers to food banks, if reports are correct, and there was a report, probably on BBC text, a few months ago, which said he was giving up to an extra £600 to some of his employees. I tend to get my news from the BBC headlines so perhaps they were lying.
In the past, when there were disasters in the world, people who actually stopped to listen, will have heard quick little sentences at the end of news bulletins saying things like, " The Queen has sent a private donation".

I don't want Charles to shove the golden coach up his arse. I want him to ride in it to a shorter and more pared down coronation than his mother's in 1953 and I want him to ride back in the new-gift coach which is being built in Australia. I want to see a programme on TV which explains how the new coach is built.
There are umpteen channels on TV. The mean killjoys don't have to watch a single programme about the coronation.

For the people who want to celebrate, a street party doesn't have to be a difficult thing to do, if everyone contributes food and brings a chair or two.

The gap between the well-off and the not-very-well-off in this country can be solved to a considerable degree by politicians changing laws. How do you know what King Charles says to Rishi Sunak at their weekly meetings? You don't know.

every bank holiday costs the economy an estimated £2.3 bn in lost productivity.

It's shocking that people take bank holidays off, really, when there's such a cost. I'm with Oliver Cromwell. Ban Christmas and let's not have any enjoyment in life. 🙄

Although I guess that's why we got a king back. So we could have a good time. 🥳

I'm quite happy to have it for this coronation, although I believe it was created for the 1953 shindig. Dare I say this - I bought a ready-made pot of Morrisons coronation chicken and I thought it was very ok!!

It's shocking that people take bank holidays off, really, when there's such a cost.

Missing the point of the hidden costs of a second extra celebration for an uninspirational yet over-privileged family in a year while the country's on its knees entirely...

The coronation will happen. I am not a fan, so will be out of the country at that time thankfully.

What gets me is not so much the amount of money that is spent, it is the abject cap doffery shite of so many towards this antediluvian entity. If someone can explain why they revere this totally dysfunctional and entitled family I would be delighted to know.

Gold carriages, massive diamond crowns, ermine cloaks, processions up the Mall - are they not mortified with embarrassment having to dress up in medieval gear like that in front of a population that is struggling for the most part? I don't know, maybe I am just a negative nanny or something, but it just doesn't sit right with me that the spectacle is for the peasants who will never be allowed inside the gate.

So I will avoid like the plague, and scoff at those who think this family and a massive coronation are worthy of reveration.

Sign a bit of paper, get a blessing from the Bishop, take an oath, and off you go for lunch. Like a low key registry office wedding, same result as a mega ceremony with hundreds of guests I suppose.

He didn’t actually say that. It’s been twisted.

Why not have the coronation on a Sunday when people wont have medical appointments and operations cancelled and not have a bank holiday made for it

The Archbishop is doing his day job at Canterbury Cathedral preaching the Gospel - same reason it's more difficult to get weddings on a Sunday.

Get over it, so what he said something cringy in private.

Ah yes, Justin Welby who says he won't even bless a same-sex marriage, let alone conduct one, is going to be integral to the sacred moment that kicks off a three day festival of diversity and LBGTQA+ music and cultural joyousness.

I am utterly sick of the lot of them – Megan, Harry, Andrew, the lot. I had a certain respect for the queen, who really did believe in public service. And I've always liked Charles. I mean, if he were my neighbor I'm sure he'd be pleasant, charming, good company, etc. But frankly the institution just embarrasses me.

What really baffles me is the idea that without them we'd be an uninteresting, irrelevant little island. Really? The country that produced Darwin, Isaac Newton, Shakespeare, Jane Austen, Dickens, the Beatles, David Bowie, Harry Potter, Tolkien, Wordsworth, Byron, Shelley, Keats, Milton, Virginia Woolf, John Locke? The country that has not one but two of the oldest and most famous universities in the world? The country in which DNA was discovered and where the atom was first understood! For anyone interested in literature and art and history, this island will always be a mecca. We don't need that bunch of ugly gargoyles.

He lied when he said Camilla wont be queen - it was was all planned

He lied when he said he'd only have a 'slimmed down ' ( define that ) unnecessary coronation .

The 100 million figure is not being contested so the true cost will obviously be a lot more - all for a man child who wants this ridiculous feudal charade .

I know the royalists will want it and rub their thighs over toy soldier parades - have at it -but Charles should pay for it himself instead of demanding this huge expense be borne by the tax payer

The real concern I have is that dissent is oppressed in this country .

Since the egg throwing the police have been setting up ' dispersal zones ' days before royals appear
Protest must be allowed .
In a few years it will be 50/50 re support for the 'royals'
Dissent is being silenced - that's what really concerns me . It's short term thinking too .

@ReneBumsWombats
I don't think you understand that 'royalty ' is not real
Protocol' is made up nonsense

None of it is real . You are worshipping a fairytale

Wake up

@JoonT
Yes . Embarrassing is the word

Novella4 - Camilla is not Queen she is Queen Consort. There is a huge difference.

Yes, but she's getting a CROWN at the coronation, that's all that matters for the peasants surely.

No, there is no difference. The wife of a King is always a Queen Consort. Just the usual title for that position is plain old Queen.

It's as if Scotland doesn't exist.

Of course there's a difference. Her role is defined by marriage. If she was known as the Queen she would be ruling the UK which she isn't, so therefore her title is Queen Consort.

No. That's inaccurate. All Queens whose positions are defined by marriage are, in fact, Queens Consort. A Queen Regnant reigns in her own right. Both positions are titled plain old Queen.

I'm old enough to remember the resentment at the palaver of the Queen's Silver Jubilee in 1977, when I was a teenager. Protest took many forms, including some fabulous British cultural subversion, from the Sex Pistols (God Save the Queen; Anarchy in the UK) and the Clash (White Riot; Police and Thieves) to a widely adopted punk fashion and 'fuck the jubilee' badges. Punk lyrics were in many cases lyrically political and very angry. Even TOTP had to start airing 'punk pop tunes' or whatever Tony Blackburn could force from his mouth to introduce them as.

It was cool to subvert the jubilee.

These days the cool kids will all be playing at the Coronation concert ... but yet I'm the boring old fart with my collection of vinyl punk records

I don't begrudge Charles the coronation that he's waited his entire life for. It will be a global event and attract massive publicity for the RF and the UK.

But the woke stuff can take a hike. That concert for the Jubilee was horrific, and no tribute to HM whatsoever. Most of the artists they found looked like they'd been dug up from Highgate Cemetery...and sounded like it.

Thank you beautifully put.

www.theguardian.com/books/2015/nov/10/lost-shelley-poem-execrating-rruling-class-public-poetical-essay-on-the-existing-state-of-things

Ye cold advisers of yet colder kings,
To whose fell breast no passion virtue brings
Who scheme, regardless of the poor man’s pang,
Who coolly sharpen misery’s sharpest fang,
Yourselves secure. Your’s is the power to breathe
O’er all the world the infectious blast of death,
To snatch at fame, to reap red murder’s spoil,
Receive the injured with a courtier’s smile
Make a tired nation bless the oppressor’s name
And for injustice snatch the meed of fame.

But the royals are them. It isn't for nothing that the older British aristocracy refers to the royals as "the Germans" behind closed doors.

Every monarch reinvents the coronation ceremony to suit themselves - Philip made major changes from the previous coronation for the late Queen, just like George had modified his by comparison with his father's.

The key difference and main reason a ceremony is still held in the UK is because the monarch is also the head of the church and its a religious ceremony - that is the only part which is compulsory, as demonstrated by Charles' dispensing with the vows of allegiance. The hypocrisy of starting out by saying it will be lower key and then promoting a massive circus is staggering.