Self pitying, angry hoarder - King Charles

[DessertsForAll]

An article in The Times has a lot of revelations about King Charles, including that he is prone to melancholy and self-pity, indecisive and stubborn, with an explosive temper - he would kick furniture in rage. He had no interest in hearing criticism, and sought out people who agreed with him. One dinner companion realised that he became actively annoyed if challenged. Charles’s homes are cluttered, with one friend calling him an outright hoarder. And unlike the Queen spends lots of money on himself.

Many agree that what Camilla, excels at is managing him: cheering him up when he’s glum, indulging him when he needs it, geeing him up when he doesn’t and knowing how and when to persuade him of a particular course of action when his staff have tried and failed. “Leave it with me,” she says to courtiers, with one press secretary describing her as “the final court of appeal”.

“If the Queen had taken half as much trouble about the rearing of her children as she did about the breeding of her horses,” a private secretary remarked drily to Robert Lacey, “the royal family wouldn’t be in such an emotional mess.”"

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/king-charles-coronation-camilla-william-harry-uk-hilary-rose-2r0k2g53t

"a complete nut job"
I bet you are the kind of person who shares on facebook mental health campaigns.
Absolute disgusting thing to say.

She had a job.

She also did the classic aristocratic "it's 5pm, time to see the children for an hour" and they came with their Nanny.

I don't think the Queen was really interested in children, even her own. Charles seems the same.

I don’t think any of them are normal. I can tell you Anne certainly doesn’t like hearing “no” either. If you are brought up as royalty, of course you think you are more important than the peasants, and of course you expect to get your own way. Look at Andrew ramming the gates at Windsor with his car because he didn’t want to drive around.

The whole Royal Family is fucked up. And honestly this sort of article is exactly what Harry has been talking about; “anonymous sources” who may or may not exist, or might be another RF member’s press officer, dripping poison to sell newspapers.

Everything in this one article has been published before over the years, sometimes from a number of sources.

“He had no interest in hearing criticism, and sought out people who agreed with him.”

Isn’t that most people? I can’t say I seek out people to criticise me, I’d much rather hang out with people who have similar views, and everyone else seems to do that too.

News flash: old people are grumpy and they hoard shit. Plus, starting a long hours new job at age 75 when you just lost your mum is going to put anyone in a bad mood. And he can’t quit because then his currently happy son would get stuck with the shit job instead.

I’m sure, because I’ve read the same stories over the years as well. But why are all of these sources apparently queuing up to talk to the Times right now?

Reminds me of how the press behaved with Diana as well. Half-truths twisted to look far worse than it is, buoyed up by made-up quotes from “Palace sources”.

In essence this boils down to “old man who is used to being pandered to by lackeys, is petulant and set in his ways”. I bet you could write a very similar article about any of Rupert Murdoch, Donald Trump, or Putin. Or indeed any rich old man with in a position of power. It’s kind of a cliche isn’t it?

I'm guessing the whole 'head of state' thing might have taken up some of her time?
My paternal grandparents were hands off parents because of their roles. My dad & his brothers were very much brought up by nannies, presented to their parents for half an hour in the evening, and that was as much interaction as they got. Sent off to boarding school, etc. Pretty grim, but Dad was the same age as Charles is now.
I actually think that article linked up thread is pretty fair to all sides. I read a book years ago that said essentially that you & siblings might have the same parents, but you don't have the same parenting. So one can't say 'I turned out alright', when a sibling didn't.

Well wouldn't you be spoilt and used to getting your own way if you were raised knowing that one day you would be the most important person in the country head of state? His father was well known for his explosive temper and it seems that both william and harry have inherited it as well! None of the royals are " normal" because they are not raised in normal circumstances and they don't live a normal life. As for the pp saying Diana was a nut- job, well lets be honest she was!!! Just because she tragically died it doesn't change facts and it doesn't make her a saint! Before anyone say that she was driven mad by Charles and Camilla please remember that's absolute rubbish. Do some research and reading and you'll discover she was unhinged way before charles came along and her " mental fragility" was covered up by her grandmother and father so that the royals didn't really know what she was like!

I think she spends a lot of time there (disclaimer... I don't know) but I always remember on a thread about the Queen's funeral, someone posted that their DP was a traffic policeman and escorted her back to Wiltshire after the funeral straight after.
(As I say... disclaimer... no idea if that is true)

It's true. She passed DH on the M4.

I've just finished the biography by Christopher Anderson and it paints a very similar picture.
He's also very mean despite his great wealth and that surprised me but perhaps makes sense of some of his behaviour towards Harry requesting money from him.

He will be kicking chairs again.

Andrew is in competition with Harry and the frost bote & doing a USA interview like the Mathias one!

Completely agree with the remark of the private secretary to Robert Lacey.

Yes, people who behave like this are usually brought up by parents with the emotional intelligence of a garden spade.

It's not The Institution.

I think the habits and behaviour described in the article are the habits and behaviour of many decades, not newly developed since the death of the queen.

What I do not understand is, IF this reported behavior is true, how NO ONE ever reported Charles for bullying employees or a violent workplace.

In fact, based on reported behavior of several members of the RF, why was Meghan the only one who was reported?

That was rhetorical, I already know the answer.

Maybe I'm just unusual, or secretly a king!, but I've thrown things when I get annoyed.or frustrated. I don't do it in public, nor do I do it anyone, but I do in the privacy of my home. I doesn't hurt anyone else. I didn't realise it was such a big no-no.

I've never pulled a basin off the wall with my bare hands, though. I think that's quite masterful, especially without getting water everywhere.

My mum and dad were loving, quite tactile and ever present in my life.

It’s interesting that his early life and struggles and how he spent his time, us really similar to Harry. Heir or spare. No criticism of either, just an observation.

They did. There's stuff out there. It gets bushed up pretty quick though

Thanks Rousette for the token. What a fascinating article.

The one thing I’ll take away from it is how damaging the institution seems to have been for the people in it - in this case Charles - parented by nannies, sent to schools where he was bullied for who he is, indulged by staff but lonely and isolated, learned that trying to find a wife wouldn’t be easy because of the heaviness of the role, married someone suitable and then realised that they weren’t compatible, had an extremely unhappy and unhealthy marriage, had children who were in tears with the fights and started acting up (bashy wills?), got involved in issues and not always succeeding in not annoying people and getting mixed up with controversial characters (the cash for honours thing and Dumfries House), tried to rehabilitate his mistress but then his ex wife died, had people openly wanting succession to skip him in favour of his son and now losing both his parents and dealing with the enormity of the institutional aspects of their lives.

I think all of them have acknowledged just how odd their (family) dynamic is in one way or another - I think that, especially for William’s children, they need to work on how to improve - less isolation - integration with schooling, less intrusion by media, more hands on parenting, more exposure to a variety of people and places. I think for the most part they’re doing a great job and hopefully- the toxicity has stopped at William and Harry and the children now will have the benefit of parents who don’t want to perpetuate that for them.

All in all - I can only wish Charles the best on a human level - but I will continue to criticise the institution in the years to come.

So well said @skullbabe What a balanced post.

What a good post @skullbabe I don’t always agree with you but excellent analysis.

I felt very sorry for Charles reading that article. The bullying at school & loneliness he must have felt. I think I read somewhere that Edward was also bullied? My youngest was terribly bullied & moved schools so for me that stuck at the most.

The Queen might have been good at her public role but she was a terrible mother.

@skullbabe

One pro-republic argument you rarely hear, but has always been there , is removal of monarchy for the good of the 'royal' family members themselves