Double, double toil and trouble; Fire burn and cauldron bubble: "Royal Protocol"

[queentim]

Often in threads about the royal family, the issue of 'royal protocol' is discussed.

This thread is one where we can discuss (the ridiculousness of) protocol and how people have noticed how it has been used to control and abuse those (women) marrying into the family, and the double standards leveraged against members. If you feel that way of course. Views on the benefits of it would also be interesting if that's your take!

Discussions should be about how it has been used, why, etc., and not to attack the subjects themselves.

Both light-hearted and serious discussions will be welcomed here.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/04/politics/michelle-obama-queen-royal-protocol-scli-intl-gbr/index.html
I would like to think that the late Queen used a stronger term than "rubbish"!

(on a completely separate note, how fabulous does Michelle Obama look here?)

Agree @Maireas . Really like MO .

I'm a huge fan. I loved her book.

(Michelle looked divine! I loved so many of her formal gown looks!)

I remember the time when Michelle put her arm around QE and a meltdown ensured. That's likely why Michelle told that story in the first place.

I'm glad Michelle told everyone the QE said to "shove it"

I do think protocol has eased greatly but bearing in mind what it was like for Queen Victoria it's hardly surprising. Victoria was prevented from meeting other children, due to 'protocol', because everyone was basically 'undesirable'. She had a very lonely childhood, shared a bedroom with her mother, and the only contact with outsiders was her tutors. Of course all that changed when she became Queen at 18.

Protocol still exists to a ridiculous extent. How you sit (legs and knees together!), pale nail varnish, not using certain words that the Queen disliked ('pregnant' for instance, it's 'vulgar' lol). Maybe that's changed now she's gone. Walking behind the King or Queen, curtseying.... I think if women have to do it, men should too!

I honestly think if they ditched a lot of the ridiculous stuff, they would come across as less elevated and more human, and surely that would be a good thing?

Meh, a lot of "protocol" is made up on the spot by journalists or courtiers to either as an invented reason badmouth someone they dislike, or because they have an agenda in wanting to portray that person negatively and want to make up as many reasons as possible to cast them in a bad light, or as a form of hazing for newcomers to make sure they know their place.

There's loads and loads of stuff Meghan did that the press claimed was against protocol, that Kate and other royals did regularly without anyone ever claiming it was against protocol. Things like wearing black. It's only breaking protocol when Meghan does it. When Kate does it, she's an elegant and regal fashionista.

How you sit (legs and knees together!), pale nail varnish

Surely the sitting one is common sense rather than protocol. I cant imagine Kate & Camilla sitting with their knees apart infront of photographers

The nail varnish rule, if there was one, doesn't seem to apply now as Kates been seen with red nails

I wonder how often protocol is used in place of guidance

I've seen a photo of the late Queen in the 1950s sporting coloured nail varnish.
A lot of it is common sense, though.

Meh, a lot of "protocol" is made up on the spot by journalists or courtiers to either as an invented reason badmouth someone they dislike, or because they have an agenda in wanting to portray that person negatively and want to make up as many reasons as possible to cast them in a bad light, or as a form of hazing for newcomers to make sure they know their place.

So agree with this. So much protocol is used as a means to play one woman against another... Diana/Sarah, Kate/Meghan

Surely the sitting one is common sense rather than protocol. I cant imagine Kate & Camilla sitting with their knees apart infront of photographers

It's not about knees apart !! I wouldn't sit like that when on show or on a stage! It's not being able to cross your legs at the knees, a very normal stance.... but having legs and knees together and the royal slant.

The nail varnish thing is the perfect example (like the garlic eating one) where a personal preference of the late Queen was mentioned by someone in an interview and then it gets turned into a ‘rule’.

If I remember correctly the Queen liked a particular pale pink shade of varnish for herself. And she seemed like a slightly conservative, no fussing type of older lady who wasn’t that into making any changes to her makeup style etc.

I can see the value of not having a strong colour on during royal tours / engagements where there are multiple stops because if you chip them there’s no time to fix it, and poor Kate gets whole articles written about why she has a bandaid on her fingers so imagine chipped nails wouldn’t go unnoticed.

But the idea that it’s protocol is ridiculous.

Agree with this. Most of it is made up by the tabloids and very little by the RF (most of their protocol is that The Crown takes precedence over all other members).

Tabloids use it to criticise members they currently choose to, Republicans and anti-Momarchists use it to criticise the RF.

And Catherine was criticised for "breaking protocol" plenty of times before and during the early years of their marriage.

The sitting with knees together isn't specific to the RF, it's how all etiquette teachers will advise women to sit.

Also it’s sloppy sensationalist writing to confuse specific written or common knowledge verbally exchanged guidelines for behaviour with personal sartorial preferences.

So for example there are written guidelines for how to use titles and forms of address, who walks where into formal events.

There used to be specific written guidelines for everyone interacting with the royal court in past times. One of the most famous documents was created during Henry VIII time - I can’t remember the exact name now - it’s something like the Elthram Papers (can’t switch to Google right now on my phone or I lose all my text)

That laid out exactly which members of court were allowed to touch the King and how and when that was appropriate. And it gave very detailed rules about how courtiers and servants were to live their lives. The King’s barber had to live a ‘clean’ life and not associate himself with any loose women - presumably so that he didn’t bring any diseases into the King’s presence when he was up close and personal with the King.

Those were the days when breaking protocol could get you beheaded though so worth making it very clear!

I assume some of the current ‘protocol’ issues such as not touching the monarch comes as a hangover from the days when it was to protect the monarch’s health and when they didn’t know as much about how diseases were transmitted.

Looks like Charles isn’t bothered - he’s quite tactile with people and doesn’t seem to be bothered when people grab his hand on walkabouts - and his security people don’t react either so he’s clearly not issued any rules or guidance around it.

I remember the time when Michelle put her arm around QE and a meltdown ensured

A meltdown in the wretched media perhaps, but considering the Queen also put her arm around Michelle's waist I doubt she was too horrified herself - even if she just did it so her visitor wouldn't feel awkward about what she'd done

I'm reminded of an interview with some royal flunkey (can't remember which) who said "Actually we don't have protocol here; we just have good manners"

Works for me

we just have good manners
Exactly. I remember reading about King George VI who would always watch what cutlery people used at big dinners, and used the same so that people wouldn't feel awkward about using the wrong knife or fork.

And there’s also different ways the monarch in the past has influenced what women at court and further wore.

George IV didn’t like the big hooped dresses which was the Court dress style for women at the time and he made his feelings clear about it and they stopped wearing them.

Queen Victoria influenced fashion just with her own choices - she made a cultural change by her own choices being copied rather than insisting on others wearing specific things. Most famously white wedding dresses and black mourning outfits.

It's bullying/harassment. And it gets repeated so much that it becomes the truth.

Like when Meghan didn't wear a hat on her first outing with E2 and people called it disrespectful

My problem is that, while few people know there may be no protocol, the number of people who do and swallow it and then bash people is horrible.

And then of course the double standards.

I don't see Charles caring for much of this stuff, but it will be interesting to see what new protocols come about

One example of a protocol that I think is made up as it applies to men is one between current and potential future monarch

When Will didn't go to Australia for the WWC, there were some who said that it would have been against protocol for him to travel to a Commonwealth Country before Charles had a chance to visit as the new monarch.

I am actually interested to see if that will hold up or is true. I don't see Charles flying around to all these countries before William is allowed to do work

Thanks @wordler ,very interesting!

I like that Maireis and there's a similar story about the Queen, who was said to have drunk from her finger bowl to save a guest who'd just done the same feeling embarrassed

Ditto Laura Bush, who reportedly came down to a White House reception, saw a lady guest had come in the same outfit ... and went back to change

The definition of good manners is often said to be "trying to make sure others don't feel uncomfortable", and that sounds about right to me

Those examples are all really lovely, @Puzzledandpissedoff . It's about making people feel comfortable, welcome and at ease. I really like the Laura Bush story.

There's some rule that guests at a dinner cannot begin to eat until a royal has begun, and I think the dinner ends when their meal ends. Princess Margaret used to infuriate her hosts by arriving late and leaving early

I think that used to be a rule, @Lalgarh , and Margaret was selfish enough not to realise the impact. Fortunately now there's a bit more consideration for dinner guests, also I suspect that other members of the family are less self absorbed.

It's not about knees apart !! I wouldn't sit like that when on show or on a stage! It's not being able to cross your legs at the knees, a very normal stance.... but having legs and knees together and the royal slant

when you cross your legs at the knee you lift one thigh off the seat and potentially risk exposing yourself all the way up to your backside. Fiddling with clothing to make sure you’re not flashing anything is gauche and distracting. Sitting with both thighs firmly on the seat makes absolute common sense when you could be photographed from any angle.

The definition of good manners is often said to be "trying to make sure others don't feel uncomfortable", and that sounds about right to me

I know Prince Philip isn't t everyone's taste on here, but after he died Norman Tebbitt made public an anecdote about a royal banquet he and his wife were attending. She was very badly injured in the Brighton bombing, and found eating and manipulating cutlery difficult so used her fingers to eat. Tebbitt phoned the palace, explained it, and was told not to worry.

Come the night of the banquet and Margaret's sitting next to PP. The minute the first course arrived, he handed his cutlery to the footman and ate the entire meal with his fingers, so Margaret could do the same. It turned out, all the food was geared around this easy-to-handle idea.