Royal Gossip
July 20, 2017, 11:38:41 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: George VI & Queen Elizabeth  (Read 4275 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Snokitty
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6377



« Reply #20 on: October 08, 2012, 10:04:31 pm »

Yes she is the one who created the spoiled child that is Charles.
Logged
Alexander
royal watcher

Offline Offline

Posts: 99


« Reply #21 on: October 09, 2012, 04:59:12 am »

i have to say aren't we being a bit too hard on the poor woman. This was a woman who at a compartively young age lost her husband and fell into quite a depression. Charles was what cheered her up and made her feel like she could face the world again. Grandmothers already have a very special bond with the first grandchild, especially if it's a boy as he will carry on the family name, they look a like someone in the family, there adorable or a host of other reasons. A lot of people are responsible for Charles and the way he is today; but i would place the lion share of the blame on handlers, the earl of Mountbatten, hangers on, and in a way the world in which he was raised.This woman also did a lot of charity work throughout her life, more than any of us i would bet, she brightened the spirits of a whole country during and after a major war. She represented her country near perfectly for almost her whole life. She guided HM, for her whole life, and would do anything to help her daughter. What's more to say George VI could never have been the good king he was without her. That's the kind of woman i think we should remember as it's certainly much closer to the what she really was rather than 'the woman who spoiled charles'.
Logged
fyeah_harryshotabs
courtier
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 245


Iz ther sumfin in muh teef?


« Reply #22 on: October 09, 2012, 05:24:43 am »

Richard Kay, Daily Mail
Quote
She was the last Empress, with palaces, planes and the world’s largest diamonds at her disposal. Yet it would appear the Queen Mother had to wait until a ripe old age before she achieved a lifelong ambition —  to own a fur coat. The newly released collection of her letters, edited by William Shawcross, includes a thank-you letter to her daughter for her 80th birthday present. ‘My Darling Lilibet,’ she writes to the Queen. ‘How can I ever thank you sufficiently for all the wonderful arrangements that you made for my birthday. And now the FUR COAT![sic] Never in my wildest dreams did I think that I would actually own one!
Logged

MiniMidds OrganiSSr...pm meh 4 A nUmbA iFz uz LuV pinkheart DuCheSS CaTheRinE pinkheart pinkheart

BElievE ThA Pr...itz 4reeL. ShEz STUNNING..Uz jUz JeLLuS!!
Snokitty
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6377



« Reply #23 on: October 09, 2012, 05:39:09 am »

The PR machine had it very easy in her day. The papers didn't print any of the bad things and the letters that were burnt are probably the ones who let people see who she truly was. She was a drunk and she blamed others for things that weren't their fault.

I disagree she is the one who made Charles believe he was the most important because he was born first. Then when Charles grew up he surrounded himself with people who would feed him the same crap she did.
Logged
Alexander
royal watcher

Offline Offline

Posts: 99


« Reply #24 on: October 09, 2012, 05:45:23 am »

Sno, i'm sorry but i think it's just wrong to believe that it was 'just her' as so many of us here like to think. I think she probably did spoil him because she had just lost the love of her life and here was this adorable grandchild who looks a bit like him. I think were all a bit too cold when we think about that. Plus there are so many other forces at play here to act like it's all the fault of a single woman is just unbelievable. He was surrounded with people like that from the beginning.
Logged
Snokitty
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6377



« Reply #25 on: October 09, 2012, 05:48:49 am »

So her ambition was to wear a dead animal on her back, she should have just picked an animal from the Hunt and slung it around her shoulders.   tehe
Logged
Snokitty
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6377



« Reply #26 on: October 09, 2012, 06:00:48 am »

I said he surrounded himself with the people who told him the same things she did.

I can't assume she did it for the same reasons that you do though. I lost my husband long before I should have and my first Grandchild looks like him but I do not treat her any better or any different than I do her Brother. They are both my Grandchildren and I love them both.

She started the ball rolling and made sure everyone else played along IMO.
Logged
Kuei Fei
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 35746


Moderator/I'm so royal I piss blue


WWW
« Reply #27 on: October 09, 2012, 08:50:48 am »

I think that someone who stayed in her country during the Blitz, pushed her husband into the success that he became and all the engagements she's done (instead of retiring from public life) I would have to state that she's more than done her part. She wasn't a sort of New Age type, she was an aristocrat with a hugely prestigious upbringing and she was a realist, not an idealist. She also was stuck in a position of doing only so well as her husband did, so really, no wonder she got the highest title she could.

The PR machine had it very easy in her day. The papers didn't print any of the bad things and the letters that were burnt are probably the ones who let people see who she truly was. She was a drunk and she blamed others for things that weren't their fault.

She didn't drag her personal drama into the public sphere.
Logged

To receive regular news, go to "@gossippsychotic" to get updates from various other gossip websites such as "Downtown Chatter" or "Royal Gossip Psychotic" and end up reading all about all sorts of peccadilloes.
Alexander
royal watcher

Offline Offline

Posts: 99


« Reply #28 on: October 09, 2012, 01:39:17 pm »

It was a very common thing for women of her day and age to dream about having/want. They were associated with elegance, wealth, comfort. It was a big deal and i think its adorable.
Logged
Snokitty
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6377



« Reply #29 on: October 09, 2012, 02:44:17 pm »

She did not go through what the people did during WWII. It was good PR for them to stay and most wives stayed by her husband back then. I never understood this saying of they served their country throughout their lives because in reality the country serves them.

Her husband is the one who did the things he did not her. As for pushing there has been new evidence that she was instrumental in helping get rid of Edward VIII by pushing her husband into taking his place. Another royal coup just not the same kind that history records.

Her stubbornness is also the reason that the Brothers could not reconcile properly. I don't know why but she was jealous of Wallis Simpson and that is what drove her anger.

We shall have to disagree about the Queen Mother (who even invented that name for herself so she could remain Queen in a way) because I believe the more that I learn about her the less I like her.
Logged
True Brit
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4434


« Reply #30 on: October 09, 2012, 02:55:59 pm »

Always remember that they went to Windsor each night and avoided the air raids and there was a plane fully crewed and equipped and on permanent stand by to evacuate them all to Canada in the case of invasion.

Remember the QM's words when the palac took a direct hit "At least I can look the East End in the eye now". That was becae she knew they were not facing the terrible dangers that rained from the sky night after night.

I think the QM was quite a dangerous woman and got exactly what she wanted. On the other hand at least she had an excelent sense of humour and represented the monarchy in style.
Logged

" Kate, Pippa and Carole Middleton seen at Manolo Blahnik today.. overheard asking if they carried shoes for cloven hooves. "
Alexander
royal watcher

Offline Offline

Posts: 99


« Reply #31 on: October 09, 2012, 03:36:25 pm »

'Invented the title'? Maybe she was the first to formally use it and the reason she used it was to avoid confusion with her daughter as they were both Elizabeth. They could have left and no one would have blamed them, they went through rationing as all employees of the time will attest to, they sheltered soldiers at the palaces. Yes he was the one that did those things but he could have never done them without her, she gave him strength, support, and a calmness he wouldn't have had without her.
Logged
Snokitty
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6377



« Reply #32 on: October 09, 2012, 03:51:15 pm »

I believe he would have done the same things no matter who he was with because he had advisers and he listened to all they said. The Monarch doesn't make the decisions they sign off on what decisions others make, he listened to Winston Churchill. If he had to have her push him into everything then he was one very weak man with no spine.

We can't really say how he would have done without her because they were married and together. Of course she gave him care and concern that is what a wife and husband do for each other but that is no great accomplishment, even the common people do that.

I have also read that the Queen was able to relax more after her Mother died because she wasn't around to nag her any longer. Although I have no doubt she loved her Mother it would be hard to have your Mother questioning every move you make.

We shall disagree because we have different views on the woman and since we will not change each others mind we should just agree to disagree.   flower
Logged
berlin
Countess
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1985



« Reply #33 on: October 09, 2012, 06:08:47 pm »

I have about 58 more pages to read in her official biography by Shawcross but I can't bring myself to finish it.  Even though the biography is supposed to represent QM in a more positive light I can't but help to see her as spoiled, conniving, and living in a dream world.  With what I've learned about the royals, especially with the Middleton saga, such sugary representation does not satisfy me anymore.  Just look at the personal transformation we've seen in QEII.  I don't think we would've seen it with QM still around.  I also blame her for not allowing her daughters to have any suitable education to prepare them for the world they would live in.  If only Margaret had been better educated, marriage would not have been her only option.  She could have done so much more than rush into romances.  I think in some ways QM was jealous of her daughters as with other women.  (Perhaps a similarity with Kate?)  If she had had boys then they would have received far superior education.  I respect QM because I think she did an excellent job as royal and representative but she did not prepare her descendants well at all.
Logged
Kuei Fei
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 35746


Moderator/I'm so royal I piss blue


WWW
« Reply #34 on: October 09, 2012, 08:13:37 pm »

I have to agree with you there; as for jealousy, it happens when a lot of women 'marry in' and resent daughters who don't have to marry to get what they are born into. So go figure, they sabotage any growth to keep them down at their level. I do believe that Margaret had a lot of potential and it was wasted.

As for authors, you should try the one by Lady Colin Campbell.
Logged

To receive regular news, go to "@gossippsychotic" to get updates from various other gossip websites such as "Downtown Chatter" or "Royal Gossip Psychotic" and end up reading all about all sorts of peccadilloes.
Alexander
royal watcher

Offline Offline

Posts: 99


« Reply #35 on: October 09, 2012, 08:37:39 pm »

Wasn't it just what was done in that day and age? Women in Margarets social class finish basic education and are then made to go out and find husbands? As for education i wouldn't say QM knew much about as hers was so horrible i doubt she had any clue about what constituted a good one.
Logged
Spice
Countess
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1874


William and Lupo: the real royal love match


« Reply #36 on: October 09, 2012, 09:43:09 pm »

The more information that comes out about her, the more I dislike her.  Yes I acknowledge the good things she did.  But IMO they are outweighed by the negatives.  She was quite vitriolic and hateful about any politician or community leader who threatened the status quo.  Something I particularly dislike is the way she controlled and bullied the Queen, and through that, the entire family and the institution.

A young boy needs proper parenting and experiences designed to further his development, not to be used as some kind of comfort for a grieving relative.  Just like PW and PH needed to have a healthy childhood instead of being used as sounding boards and confidantes for their stressed out mother.  This family needs to start respecting children's rights.
Logged

Citizen not subject - I support the Republic UK and Republic NZ campaigns for system reform.
Snokitty
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6377



« Reply #37 on: October 09, 2012, 10:05:45 pm »

 thumbsup

The Windsor Family treats their children as a means to an end and the end is the continuation of the Monarchy.  Look at what they have done to William & Harry. William is filled with *despise* because he doesn't want to be King. Their solution was just to spoil him and let him have his way about everything. Harry wants a career in the military which he will never have because his Dad wants to cut out the rest of the family thereby forcing Harry into doing what he wants. It all comes back to how the Queen Mother spoiled Charles. His decisions stem from the things that she told him about his importance. That attitude is also what ruined his marriage and made him think it was acceptable to keep Camilla.

On a side note their name is really not Windsor but Saxe-Coburg-Gotha/Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg. I don't think the Monarchy would have continued if the name had not been changed. Everything they do is about keeping their lifestyle going no matter who is sacrificed in doing so.
Logged
Kuei Fei
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 35746


Moderator/I'm so royal I piss blue


WWW
« Reply #38 on: October 09, 2012, 10:44:10 pm »

I myself never understand why the Windsors think that the monarchy would never be able to continue without them; they are just another dynasty, not the institution and for the life of me, I will never understand why on earth the Queen Mother never leaned on Charles to get rid of Camilla. The Queen Mother was the only one who could get through to Charles and who would have been effective at dealing with the whole issue. If she had taken Diana's side, certainly Camilla would have been out of the picture and ended up with a fully secure straightfoward life and no complications.

The QM's biggest fault is that she didn't understand that during the Eighties and such, women who porked married men decided they didn't want to face the consequences of sleeping with married men and mistresses were no longer content to be just mistresses, they wanted to now be wives as well. Even if it meant wrecking a solid marriage and family life. She (QM) didn't change her viewpoints with the changing times.
Logged

To receive regular news, go to "@gossippsychotic" to get updates from various other gossip websites such as "Downtown Chatter" or "Royal Gossip Psychotic" and end up reading all about all sorts of peccadilloes.
berlin
Countess
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1985



« Reply #39 on: October 09, 2012, 11:46:39 pm »

As far as QM's large role in Charles' life I have to put more blame on QEII and Phillip for not raising Charles the way he should have been and for not setting appropriate boundaries on other people's influences. 
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines | Imprint Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!