Queen Elizabeth

[Nono22972]

No disrespect to her but people and the media often talk about her sense of duty, her stability and professionalism but what would would say are some of the things in her last 15-20 years on the throne that you would criticise her for?

My obvious response is how she handled the Prince Andrew situation and staying on the throne as long as she did. She should've abdicated 10 or 20 years before her death, in my opinion

Several bits of the documentary have cropped up in other programmes. It was a very dull documentary. considered ground breaking at the time, but hasn’t aged well. The Queen learned from that mistake, locking it away was the best thing for it.

Entirely wrong the royals can pressurise the public service broadcaster paid for by the public into 'retiring' footage they don't like. See also Willy and the Diana interview.

Yes, agreed, of course it's wrong that they can do this.

Why? Why can't we see it? Perhaps the Queen calling the US Ambassador 'a gorilla' didn't help. And plenty of PPhillip 'gaffes'.

If anyone think the RF don't manipulate what is shown and what isn't, perhaps it being banned will prove otherwise....
I think it's wrong - the BBC is paid for by us, yet the RF used powers to ban this.

Andrew will stay close to Charles for the rest of his life. I do wonder if William will offer him the same protection if he is monarch while Andrew is still alive

That could easily depend on whether or not Andrew has anything to spill about William; as Roussette said, it's noticeable that things went very quiet about the alleged move from Royal Lodge once more interviews and books were mentioned

And sorry, but I don't personally believe the late Queen deserved "the benefit of the doubt" over her choices around Andrew. Even if she believed and wished to support him it could have been done privately, but instead she - who'd know the power of such images better than most - chose a very public display which effectively said "Don't you dare to criticise my son"

By the way, if anyone wants to watch the 1969 Royal Family documentary in full it's linked below
Apparently it occasionally gets posted on YouTube and then deleted, but for whatever reason this one doesn't seem to have been

https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=bfjLvUs7nYY

Totally agree. Much was said of messages she sends with her jewellery. She sent a message with that public outing with him and it reflected very poorly on her, both as a person and a monarch. I think it was appalling. I think the way the entire family has handled the situation reflects poorly on them all. Sadly I have a sex abuser in my family, most of the family wouldn't be caught dead in public with him. I don't even talk to him. He makes my skin crawl. I honestly don't get how they could watch that interview, see how he lied since and still maintained contact with Epstein, and actually want to be around him. I think the family looks dodgy with two of the brothers associating closely with abusers after people have accused them and even after conviction. One of them of course, is now our King. Yuck.

By the way, if anyone wants to watch the 1969 Royal Family documentary in full it's linked below

Thanks, Puzzled

Far better than being limited to pre-approved snippets and definitely better for the historians and researchers who were having to cough a fee to view it in the Windsor archives back in the day 😡

I watched some of it. Before it's deleted!

All I can say is... it's of it's time

such bowing and scraping and tiaras

I'm currently watching having had to figure out how to split the screen in my new browser 🙄

They've just said Charles might have to wait until he's over 70 for the job but I don't suppose they really believed it 😁

Strange to say, I bookmarked the documentary some months ago, and was surprised myself to see it's still "live"
I was honestly sure I'd read that "they all get deleted" - which would make sense since it's known the late Queen had it withdrawn - so why it's still there is anyone's guess

What an unpleasant way to talk about anyone.

What a society we live in, that this (and worse) has become an acceptable way to speak about people.

She seems to have e spent a lot of time successfully lobbying for changes to the law to increase her families wealth.

I watched most of the documentary last night - just couldn't get to sleep and hoped it might be anodyne enough to help me drop off (although I know screens are supposed to be bad for insomnia).

I agree it was "of its time", Roussette, although I expected that. There was indeed bowing - also expected. I'm not sure about "scraping"; I know they go together but I'm never sure what's meant by the latter bit. Curtseying, maybe, because one's skirt might scrape the ground? There were definitely curtseys/bobs (though no ballerina-like, arms wide out at the sides ones which might make a longer skirt brush the ground).

I'd expected a few more tiaras from your post. The queen wore a nice one at the big reception and at the ROH and I think princesses Margaret and Anne and the QM sported them at grand occasions, but they do/did, don't they?
Mind you, I did love the bit where the queen casually picked up a tiara and then a necklace (rubies?) and said "Mmm...perhaps I should get something made to wear with that?". That was a good bit of gratuitous jewellery.

Anyway, it did the trick and I fell asleep before the end. Did have an odd dream about being on the royal train, though...

@LaMarschallin

I was only having a joke about it all. I didnt mean it literally!

Forget the scraping, just a phrase, but I did see a courtier walking out the room backwards!

The tiara at the theatre was something else, it almost glittered with the lights down!

I was only having a joke about it all. I didnt mean it literally!

I know! I knew I should have put "lighthearted" somewhere in my post. I was attempting to joke too.
You were the only person who'd commented on it, so I was partly replying to you, I suppose, as you'd know what I was talking about. And, yes, I also saw someone walking out of the room backwards - again, I'd read about that before so it didn't come as an moment to me.

The tiara at the theatre was something else, it almost glittered with the lights down!

Absolutely! It was even better as the lights went down, I thought, because it became even more noticeable. Perhaps I was greedy to want more tiara action...

@LaMarschallin 👍👍

I just wanted one of those diamonds off that tiara, , I'm not greedy, but the biggest one please!😊

Roussette

I think that's a very modest request

Just a quick deviation as I'm interested in language, so looked up the derivation of "bowing and scraping".
Wiki says this:

"In Early Modern European courtly circles, males were expected to "bow and scrape" (hence the term "bowing and scraping" for what appears to be excessive ceremony). "Scraping" refers to the drawing back of the right leg as one bows, such that the right foot scrapes the floor or earth. Typically, while executing such a bow, the man's right hand is pressed horizontally across the abdomen while the left is held out from the body. Social bowing is all but extinct, except in some very formal settings, though hand-kissing of women by men, which of necessity includes a bow, lingers on in some cultures."

To me it sounds like a combination of a bow and a curtsey.
Anyway, that's what I learned today

I've watched it now and agree it was very much of its time.

The train though and the yacht 😮and the 100 or so staff decamping to Windsor😮and the two to three month summer break in Scotland (still continuing 😡) for the poor overworked dears.

So much waste.

Personally all I really want is an hour in the jewellery vault among that lot ...
I wouldn't nick anything (honest!!) but would just like to see it all up close

CathyorClaire

and the 100 or so staff decamping to Windsor

Ah, yes... but that was a money-saving exercise, otherwise they'd have to keep staff there all the time (I perhaps need to point out I'm being sarcastic there).
I did notice that - despite the late hour and being sleepy - as an interesting bit of spin.

It was very much of its time, I agree (as things tend to be, of course). The RF was much more popular, it was expected that people would bow and curtsey and the most minor sign of being human (eg being seen to take time to read citations for honours) was supposed to show how much the family loved their subjects and we were supposed to feel flattered such beings would come amongst us.

I suspect, however, that the reason the queen may have wanted it suppressed was precisely because it showed them as just human, no blue blood etc.
Whereas the whole idea is that the RF are somehow different from the rest of us and very special.

Nowadays, obviously, the main reason for wanting it not to be seen is the luxury, the expense, the soft-soled shoes and hand signals used on Britannia so the RF wouldn't be disturbed etc

(Another deviation - I went on a tour of Britannia when on holiday in Edinburgh (think it was there), so had heard about the hand signals etc Would recommend it as a day out - it was very interesting)

Apparently it was David Attenborough who said "The whole institution depends on mystique and the tribal chief in his hut … If any member of the tribe ever sees inside the hut, then the whole system of the tribal chiefdom is damaged and the tribe eventually disintegrates"

And given what's happening in these days when we see and hear much more of what goes on "inside the hut" he may well have had a point

Mass media - especially the social version - undoubtably offers opportunities for the RF to get their message across, but how they must wish it could be put back in its box

I had never heard that quote before, its very apt isn't it?

It certainly is, Iwantcakeeveryday, and says so much about the "them and us" situation - something I can understand the RF wishing to preserve, no matter how much they pretend otherwise with silly stunts and claims that they want to be treated like everyone else

I don't care much about wearing or owning jewellery. (I manage a string of beads every now and again.) In 2012 I went with a friend on a day trip to Buckingham Palace. It was Diamond Jubilee year and the special exhibition that year was the diamonds. It was crowded and as we shuffled our way through I felt I really wasn't sure if I wanted to go into the smallish exhibition room. I was tempted to miss it out. However, I went in with my friend and I was quite pleased I did because they were impressive. I can't remember anything specific, but I did think, "Wow." Now someone will shriek at me that they were all stolen. If QE2 inherited a diamond something-or-other from her grandmother or from further back in the family would it be possible to know where the gem started its life?