|
Post by kueifei on Dec 6, 2020 18:47:48 GMT
Probably. She would have also still be heiress and therefore a great catch.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 6, 2020 20:48:29 GMT
Sorry, I'm not following this - who would have had an easier time getting PP down the aisle?
|
|
|
Post by kueifei on Dec 6, 2020 20:58:24 GMT
HM, before she was Queen, she was HRH Princess Elizabeth and she might have been able to marry Phillip without there being too much drama.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2020 21:42:50 GMT
Sorry, I'm not following this - who would have had an easier time getting PP down the aisle? IMO, no one if Wallis was queen consort. Elizabeth would have probably married English and never even have met Philip.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 6, 2020 23:15:48 GMT
Sorry, I'm not following this - who would have had an easier time getting PP down the aisle? IMO, no one if Wallis was queen consort. Elizabeth would have probably married English and never even have met Philip. I see. Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 7, 2020 0:05:26 GMT
Hello,
I am going to move a couple of comments to the QE and Duke thread.
Let's keep discussions on topic, please!
Thanks! Admin
|
|
|
Post by kueifei on Dec 7, 2020 0:24:11 GMT
I think Wallis would have been a better Queen Consort mainly since she had the grit needed to prop up a king and keep him functional. She would have kept things going and would have provided a valuable bridge between the US and Britain by the time that WWII came around and Britain needed the US to intervene. In fact, ti would have strengthened ties considerably and likely Wallis would have influenced HM to be more assertive and in charge rather than meek and a doormat. She would have been a wonderful example of assertive, regal authority rather than a frightened doormat.
What makes the overthrow of Edward VIII worse, is that he did refresh the monarchy with new energy and zest and it is clear that he was bringing a lot more sophistication and a cultural connection to the outside world. She could have ended up bringing new zest, a higher standard of intellectual expectations, and she might have been an amazing addition that the UK should have embraced. There is no reason that she was terribly unsuitable and it is so insulting that there was something 'torrid' about a king marrying an American. As if there is something horrific about an American. I 'get it' that certain types think Americans are boorish or savages, but we have a kind of class that simply cannot be replicated.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 7, 2020 0:46:03 GMT
I think Wallis would have been a better Queen Consort mainly since she had the grit needed to prop up a king and keep him functional. She would have kept things going and would have provided a valuable bridge between the US and Britain by the time that WWII came around and Britain needed the US to intervene. In fact, ti would have strengthened ties considerably and likely Wallis would have influenced HM to be more assertive and in charge rather than meek and a doormat. She would have been a wonderful example of assertive, regal authority rather than a frightened doormat. What makes the overthrow of Edward VIII worse, is that he did refresh the monarchy with new energy and zest and it is clear that he was bringing a lot more sophistication and a cultural connection to the outside world. She could have ended up bringing new zest, a higher standard of intellectual expectations, and she might have been an amazing addition that the UK should have embraced. There is no reason that she was terribly unsuitable and it is so insulting that there was something 'torrid' about a king marrying an American. As if there is something horrific about an American. I 'get it' that certain types think Americans are boorish or savages, but we have a kind of class that simply cannot be replicated. Yes, every country has it's ways and traits that are beneficial to the world. The best of the best of any country should be encouraged and respected. But those were different times, and there was a concerted effort, I feel, to oust David.
|
|
|
Post by kueifei on Jan 16, 2021 20:39:50 GMT
Yes there was. The courtiers from the reigns of previous monarchs didn't want to accept that the Victorian era was over and didn't want to accept that as King, Edward VIII had every right to change things that he didn't like. No courtier had any right to actually disrupt his way of wanting things done and no one had any right to present themselves as the better option (as Bertie/Elizabeth did), and Wallis would have made an amazingly pivotal Queen Consort. She would have made sure that Lilbet and Margaret were both properly educated and it is clear that the Queen Mother would have undermined anyone that Edward wanted to marry if it had been either an aristocrat or a foreign princess. If Edward had married a foreign princess, the QM would have made it clear that she is SO British and therefore entitled to be loved as a fully native British; if it had been an aristocrat, the QM would have ended up doing all she could to find some way of being antagonistic or alienating or hostile. It's not like anything Edward ever did would have been good enough for that viper of a consort mainly since QM didn't want to bend the knee to anyone. There was no way that Edward was going to be given a fair shot at kingship and it's not like Edward ever meant QM any harm. If the Vice President of the US EVER tried to present themselves as a 'better' alternative to the ruling President, said VP would get into serious trouble and would get investigated for possible treasonous activities. What the Queen Mother did was treason, undermining the Crown and she used it as a justification for terrible decisions that were later made. The QM actually believed her own demented, self justifying narrative that she made Edward VIII suffer for something, for the rest of his life, for a position that the QM wanted for herself.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jan 23, 2021 15:44:51 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jan 23, 2021 15:47:09 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jan 23, 2021 15:55:50 GMT
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8933031/Letter-Edward-VIII-lays-bare-Royal-rift-sparked-marriage-Wallis-Simpson-81-years-on.htmlExplosive confidential letter from Edward VIII lays bare the Royal rift sparked by his marriage to American divorcee Wallis Simpson 81 years on - detailing fears Queen Mary would shun US socialite during visit to BritainEdward VIII's romance with Wallis Simpson was a 20th century Royal scandal The King abdicated the throne in 1936 and married the twice-divorced American A previously undiscovered letter shows the scale of the Royal rift it caused Edward VIII wrote of his fears that his family would shun Ms Simpson By ANTONIA PAGET FOR MAILONLINE PUBLISHED: 05:37 EST, 10 November 2020 | UPDATED: 07:33 EST, 10 November 2020 An explosive personal letter penned by Edward VIII that lays bare the scale of the Royal rift provoked by his marriage to divorcee Wallis Simpson has come to light 81 years later.
Twice-married Ms Simpson was at the centre of one of the most scandalous love affairs of the 20th century when she entered into a relationship with Prince Edward, who went on to briefly become King Edward VIII.
Their romance led to the Edward VIII abdicating the British throne in 1936.
The former king, who became known as the Duke of Windsor, wrote of his fears the American socialite would be shunned by his mother Queen Mary and sister-in-law the Queen Mother during a planned trip to Britain.
|
|
|
Post by kueifei on Jan 23, 2021 16:59:40 GMT
They were a good couple and quite honestly, it would have been better to just fire the other courtiers and arrest the Duke and Duchess of York for treason for attempting to overthrow the Sovereign. Wallis was from the American upper class and she would never have had a chance at being around the future king otherwise. I am sick of her being described as some climber, as if self made millionaires/billionaires were beneath respect or consideration. It was American bucks that propped up those stately homes and filled the bank accounts of aristocrats who were too lazy to work (or snotty actually) and I cannot get over how Wallis was fundamentally given welcome, received, and eventually accepted. She would have been a perfectly appropriate Queen and her lack of conventional good looks is not something that should have been expected to work against her. Royals aren't supposed to market their looks like some starlet.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Mar 7, 2021 17:47:36 GMT
|
|
|
Post by kueifei on Mar 7, 2021 18:08:49 GMT
Amazing how uppity the then Duchess of York was; had serious issues knowing her place and it is clear that Elizabeth (Not "HM") would have been chronically antagonistic and jealous. The Duke and Duchess of York were not living lives of austerity and were not overburdened with showing up and cutting ribbons and waving to the crowd. This isn't and never will be slave labor. As for Wallis, she was RIGHT to make a break from a wife beater who would have eventually beaten her to death and ended up being happy about it. Wallis (like many women) have a right to make a life for herself and continue on. My grandmother made a break from my grandfather due to his abusiveness.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jun 2, 2021 23:06:17 GMT
|
|
|
Post by india on Jun 3, 2021 20:34:33 GMT
The QM was a vindictive old fat bitch.
|
|
|
Post by kueifei on Jun 20, 2021 17:16:31 GMT
She might ave had an easier time getting Prince Philip down the aisle. Truth be told, I think Philip would have still married her because she still would have been heiress presumptive and been able to be viewed as unofficially the heiress to the Crown and had a good life. It was that insane vanity of her mother that messed everything up. Would they have even met in that timeline?
I have no idea. I just dislike the idea that Wallis and Edward were somehow failures since they enjoyed the good life. Most, if not all, people do not work hard to live a miserable life. The (then) Duke and Duchess of York were not living austere lives and it is clear that the Queen Mother was just as financially feckless as her successor and it is clear that this was about more than just Edward's partying or his relationship with Wallis. I read in the Lady C. book about royal marriages that the Queen Mother did not like how Wallis was neither impressed or intimidated by the (then) Duchess of York and the Duchess' overweening arrogance only made a mistress tolerable if Edward's mistress was deferential to the Duchess.
Second, it wasn't just the fact that Wallis was involved. There was also the fact that Edward wanted to change how things were done. As king, this was in fact his right, but the courtiers who were a holdover from Edward VII and Queen Victoria were outraged at the thought of changing around the clocks (making them accurate instead of off by a half our) and wanted the courtiers to serve rather than push him around. Then there is the fact that the Duchess did not want to bow to anyone at all and it is clear that Wallis was not allowing herself to be pushed around by the palace staff (who were in fact there to serve, not condescend their employers). Throw in the delusion that a royal princess would be shipped in and it is a recipe for disaster.
I sincerely believe that after each reign, the courtiers and staff of each newly deceased monarch should be dismissed and the new Sovereign should of course have things done their way, not subjected to control or challenges by their staff. The courtiers were out of line and so were the palace servants who for some delusional reason believe that bosses should defer to them, not the other way around. I also think that it is a huge slap in the face for anyone to believe that a king (if that title is going to MEAN what it is supposed to mean) is supposed to put up with anything from anyone other than a fellow head of state. There is no way that a SERVANT should condescend the person paying their wages. Not at all, ever.
As for Wallis, she should have been treated with more respect. She had been through an abusive marriage, left her husband, and wasn't in a position to make a living since women, particularly society women, were disapproved of if they worked and made a living. She was NOT a climber, she was part of the American upper class and the American upper class is even more impenetrable than the British upper class since the American upper class is so actively secretive and they do not stand out, in fact, they actively downplay themselves to avoid hassles.
|
|
sanka
Count/Countess
Posts: 295
|
Post by sanka on Aug 15, 2021 3:10:18 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Aug 15, 2021 14:04:57 GMT
|
|