|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 3, 2020 14:13:54 GMT
A Royal Life: Mary of Teck, Queen & Mother (1953) | British Pathé
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Apr 20, 2021 0:42:43 GMT
Ch5 Queen Mary How She Saved the Royals
255,661 views•28 Nov 2020
|
|
|
|
Post by kueifei on Jun 22, 2021 17:39:26 GMT
I really admire how Queen Mary introduced the concept of being a working royal; if only to get out of the house and out of her husband's boring strictures.
|
|
|
|
Post by india on Jun 22, 2021 18:17:52 GMT
^ I mean really
|
|
|
|
Post by kueifei on Jun 22, 2021 23:05:52 GMT
I sometimes think that the concept of working royal ended up democratizing the monarchies. They got out more, connected better, but on a whole, I think it was a brilliant idea. I honestly do believe that Mary did herself and other future royals a HUGE favor by creating the concept and structure of charitable works and if not for her, Prince Charles would probably have not at all become the charitable powerhouse he is now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jun 23, 2021 12:32:04 GMT
I sometimes think that the concept of working royal ended up democratizing the monarchies. They got out more, connected better, but on a whole, I think it was a brilliant idea. I honestly do believe that Mary did herself and other future royals a HUGE favor by creating the concept and structure of charitable works and if not for her, Prince Charles would probably have not at all become the charitable powerhouse he is now. She knew what it was like to be poor; marginalized in the family structure, and had a high sense of duty. She was a Queen through and through, but seemed to know how to relate to the working man. By some accounts, she was a classic flirt. Maybe I only see it, but those royals whose ancestors had morganatic marriages seemed to be a tad more democratic. |
|
|
|
Post by kueifei on Jun 23, 2021 14:55:19 GMT
I sometimes think that the concept of working royal ended up democratizing the monarchies. They got out more, connected better, but on a whole, I think it was a brilliant idea. I honestly do believe that Mary did herself and other future royals a HUGE favor by creating the concept and structure of charitable works and if not for her, Prince Charles would probably have not at all become the charitable powerhouse he is now. She knew what it was like to be poor; marginalized in the family structure, and had a high sense of duty. She was a Queen through and through, but seemed to know how to relate to the working man. By some accounts, she was a classic flirt. Maybe I only see it, but those royals whose ancestors had morganatic marriages seemed to be a tad more democratic.
I never understood why royals mistreat their fellow caste members just because they are either dethroned or poor. Charles II, while being a wandering monarch, was not treated as a member of the club despite his lineage and his sister Henriette ("Manette") was in fact seen as not good enough for Louis XIV despite being the sister of a king. I mean really, that is just out of line. Then Philip (Duke, consort of HM) was derided despite being fully royal and an amazing, dedicated war veteran and sincere military careerist. He was just poor and had bad family problems and it wasn't his fault that his father was a wastrel and his mother suffered a terrible breakdown. It is clear though that Philip made an amazing consort and I find it disgusting that somehow her financial circumstances were held against her despite the reality that women were not allowed to make a living of her own. In that era, being a working woman was a sign that she had fallen in the world. It was not a sign of progress, but a sign of being almost on par with a prostitute.
|
|
cheryl
Baron/Baroness
Posts: 66
|
Post by cheryl on Nov 21, 2021 23:51:20 GMT
George was a dull man who spent more time with his stamp collection than he did with his children. Mary was engaged to his brother Eddy, who died of pneumonia and she promptly married George. He frightened his children but would get teary eyed when talking of them. Mary was not a maternal woman, she was happy to let a cruel nanny raise her children. Mary was driven by duty and taught the present Queen well. It was Queen Alexandra who started the habit of charities .. including one for for John Merrick.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 22, 2021 4:16:31 GMT
George was a dull man who spent more time with his stamp collection than he did with his children. Mary was engaged to his brother Eddy, who died of pneumonia and she promptly married George. He frightened his children but would get teary eyed when talking of them. Mary was not a maternal woman, she was happy to let a cruel nanny raise her children. Mary was driven by duty and taught the present Queen well. It was Queen Alexandra who started the habit of charities .. including one for for John Merrick. The "Elephant Man" - I remember that. From the movie. Don't know why George V was such a hard-line father - his parents were fairly indulgent with them. |
|
cheryl
Baron/Baroness
Posts: 66
|
Post by cheryl on Nov 22, 2021 6:06:27 GMT
Exactly he was indulged by both parents, but he was sent off to the navy when he was only 12 years old. I think that changed who he was. Even when Queen Mary spoke to him she called him '' Your Majesty'', Books on John Merrick are very interesting. George V wouldn't allow Mary to wear shorter skirts, she only raised her hem after he died. She loved the musical hall songs and could belt them out with the best of them, but not until George died.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Apr 25, 2022 4:07:44 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Apr 30, 2023 1:12:38 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Apr 30, 2023 1:14:13 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Apr 30, 2023 1:18:38 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Apr 30, 2023 1:19:39 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by kueifei on May 4, 2023 15:07:38 GMT
I'll never understand their negligence of the Romanovs; they could have put the Imperial Family in any corner of the British Empire, they didn't have to be brought to the UK directly. All they had to do was send a gun ship and bring the relations off on a boat and drop them off in an area where they would be away from the UK, but would have been easily sent to a prominent family in any area of their empire where officials would welcome them and provide support while likely acclimatizing them to the new post-reigning life. They could have been safe and out of the way.
I sometimes wonder if that marked the beginning of the downfall of the House of Windsor. If the grand duchesses could have been saved, even if dethroned they would have made fantastic wives for the Princes Edward and "Bertie" and I am certain that it would have been better for everyone if they had been at least saved. It's not like the BRF didn't have limitless resources. Imagine of Olga or Marie or Tatiana or Anastasia would have married Edward VIII or Bertie, it would have prevented the advent of the late Queen Mother and would have admittedly prevented Wallis from gaining entree to Edward as a possible wife.
The main reason Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon and Wallis gained access is because there was a complete lack of non-German consorts. Just four grand duchesses would have provided a successful distraction from Wallis and Lady Elizabeth.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on May 4, 2023 16:11:00 GMT
I'll never understand their negligence of the Romanovs; they could have put the Imperial Family in any corner of the British Empire, they didn't have to be brought to the UK directly. All they had to do was send a gun ship and bring the relations off on a boat and drop them off in an area where they would be away from the UK, but would have been easily sent to a prominent family in any area of their empire where officials would welcome them and provide support while likely acclimatizing them to the new post-reigning life. They could have been safe and out of the way. I sometimes wonder if that marked the beginning of the downfall of the House of Windsor. If the grand duchesses could have been saved, even if dethroned they would have made fantastic wives for the Princes Edward and "Bertie" and I am certain that it would have been better for everyone if they had been at least saved. It's not like the BRF didn't have limitless resources. Imagine of Olga or Marie or Tatiana or Anastasia would have married Edward VIII or Bertie, it would have prevented the advent of the late Queen Mother and would have admittedly prevented Wallis from gaining entree to Edward as a possible wife. The main reason Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon and Wallis gained access is because there was a complete lack of non-German consorts. Just four grand duchesses would have provided a successful distraction from Wallis and Lady Elizabeth. More from me about this later but so glad you brought this up. I could agree that it was maybe the beginning of the end when they had to scorn (for obvious reasons at that time) german relations but scorning the Russian (actually just as German) ones as well. There was a concerted effort from at least the Battenbergs to get their relations out of Russia but to no avail. |
|
|
|
Post by kueifei on May 5, 2023 3:36:34 GMT
I'll never understand their negligence of the Romanovs; they could have put the Imperial Family in any corner of the British Empire, they didn't have to be brought to the UK directly. All they had to do was send a gun ship and bring the relations off on a boat and drop them off in an area where they would be away from the UK, but would have been easily sent to a prominent family in any area of their empire where officials would welcome them and provide support while likely acclimatizing them to the new post-reigning life. They could have been safe and out of the way. I sometimes wonder if that marked the beginning of the downfall of the House of Windsor. If the grand duchesses could have been saved, even if dethroned they would have made fantastic wives for the Princes Edward and "Bertie" and I am certain that it would have been better for everyone if they had been at least saved. It's not like the BRF didn't have limitless resources. Imagine of Olga or Marie or Tatiana or Anastasia would have married Edward VIII or Bertie, it would have prevented the advent of the late Queen Mother and would have admittedly prevented Wallis from gaining entree to Edward as a possible wife. The main reason Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon and Wallis gained access is because there was a complete lack of non-German consorts. Just four grand duchesses would have provided a successful distraction from Wallis and Lady Elizabeth. More from me about this later but so glad you brought this up. I could agree that it was maybe the beginning of the end when they had to scorn (for obvious reasons at that time) german relations but scorning the Russian (actually just as German) ones as well. There was a concerted effort from at least the Battenbergs to get their relations out of Russia but to no avail.
One thing I notice about Germans is how they leave even their own kind behind when the chips are down. They have a particular brand of narcissism and I find it disconcerting that Germans royals refuse to stop living in a mindset of grandeur, but seem sincerely surprised that their subjects get fed up. Then even when their own royal and aristocratic kind are down, they do nothing to help and even kick dirt in their face, kicking someone when they are down and making it worse. the German Hohenzollern and Austrian/Germanic Hapsburg dynasty and Germanized Romanovs started WWI and got tossed out and their descendants get nostalgic about their past glory, without realizing that their acts were the reason that they lost all that they had. Even now the Windsors and other Scandinavian royals are bewildered by bad press and bad poll numbers and do not connect their refusal to do their jobs and their refusal to start making genuine sacrifices.
The real problem is that while the 'empire' is shrinking, the attitude remains and the real failure of Mary and George VI was their refusal to accept that 'eligible' (i.e. German) princesses were beginning to die out and so were the dynasties that used to supply them. If they had relaxed the restriction on Catholics (no longer needed since no monarch can order someone to be burned at the stake) and had decided to drop the imperial attitude, I am certain that better consorts than the under-educated Lady Elizabeth and badly behaved Mrs. Simpson would have been avoided. I have been supportive of Wallis, but if she had been avoided, Edward VIII might have been able to have enough prominent support to maintain his throne. Point being, that if Mary and George had rescued the Romanovs, even if the (fundamentally deferential still) civil government had been against it, it would have been a show of family and imperial strength and the Romanovs would have been spread a bloodbath that did lead to Communism crossing a line that can never be fixed.
Then there is the fact that a rescue would have provided a way out for others to leave the Soviet Union with no harm/no foul perspective. Imagine if a situation had been set up for people who were against the Soviet Union to leave a live outside of all of that. George and Mary chose to be helpless doormats and that mess has been reverberating for generations. It also caused Edward VIII to be disillusioned with his won family and the monarchical way of life, leading up to his abdication.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on May 5, 2023 4:27:49 GMT
More from me about this later but so glad you brought this up. I could agree that it was maybe the beginning of the end when they had to scorn (for obvious reasons at that time) german relations but scorning the Russian (actually just as German) ones as well. There was a concerted effort from at least the Battenbergs to get their relations out of Russia but to no avail. One thing I notice about Germans is how they leave even their own kind behind when the chips are down. They have a particular brand of narcissism and I find it disconcerting that Germans royals refuse to stop living in a mindset of grandeur, but seem sincerely surprised that their subjects get fed up. Then even when their own royal and aristocratic kind are down, they do nothing to help and even kick dirt in their face, kicking someone when they are down and making it worse. the German Hohenzollern and Austrian/Germanic Hapsburg dynasty and Germanized Romanovs started WWI and got tossed out and their descendants get nostalgic about their past glory, without realizing that their acts were the reason that they lost all that they had. Even now the Windsors and other Scandinavian royals are bewildered by bad press and bad poll numbers and do not connect their refusal to do their jobs and their refusal to start making genuine sacrifices.
The real problem is that while the 'empire' is shrinking, the attitude remains and the real failure of Mary and George VI was their refusal to accept that 'eligible' (i.e. German) princesses were beginning to die out and so were the dynasties that used to supply them. If they had relaxed the restriction on Catholics (no longer needed since no monarch can order someone to be burned at the stake) and had decided to drop the imperial attitude, I am certain that better consorts than the under-educated Lady Elizabeth and badly behaved Mrs. Simpson would have been avoided. I have been supportive of Wallis, but if she had been avoided, Edward VIII might have been able to have enough prominent support to maintain his throne. Point being, that if Mary and George had rescued the Romanovs, even if the (fundamentally deferential still) civil government had been against it, it would have been a show of family and imperial strength and the Romanovs would have been spread a bloodbath that did lead to Communism crossing a line that can never be fixed.
Then there is the fact that a rescue would have provided a way out for others to leave the Soviet Union with no harm/no foul perspective. Imagine if a situation had been set up for people who were against the Soviet Union to leave a live outside of all of that. George and Mary chose to be helpless doormats and that mess has been reverberating for generations. It also caused Edward VIII to be disillusioned with his won family and the monarchical way of life, leading up to his abdication.
I find Germans to be some of the most privately nice and helpful people out there. If anything, I find that when they (Windsors) scorned their German roots they were giving valuable family relations. I could see things being tense around the last half of the last century, but surely relations had to change. I think most European royals and/or nobility (with some exceptions of course) evolved as they needed to do to cope in their post-royal world. The Windsors got more set in their ways, as having been the ruling family on the winning side in both WWs. Ironically, the one ruling family supposedly built or found on democratic principles is imploding from the weight of their own short-sightedness, pigheadedness, and arrogance. |
|
|
|
Post by kueifei on May 5, 2023 15:00:01 GMT
What makes me frustrated is how the Windsors adopted the mindset that you can have a middle class mindset/habits and at the same time, responsibly handle vast privilege. Middle class types (and I speak from experience) prefer to turn inward and prefer to insulate themselves from the wider world, while still trying to be cared for a protected and coddled. We see how on uni campuses the middle class students demand safe space (for themselves), demand 'nice language' and prefer to sit around getting drunk instead of exploring the wider world while at uni and demand taxpayers pay their student loans instead of adulting up and working on paying their debt to society off. They prefer to shoot their mouths off rather than learn and maintain a good vocabulary. We see this in young women who get a degree from a prominent university, but prefer to not use it and land a man and give up on going any further in life.
Royals these days do not 'see' why they should date/marry their own kind and do not 'see' why they shouldn't get a four year degree and stop growing. They marry men and women who are no good, bring nothing and are not motivated to contribute anything. When royals were properly raised, they SAW that there were places where they did not belong and they stay away from places like public parks, or universities/living on campus, doing waitress (therefore taking a job away from someone who needs it) work, and partying in public clubs where it makes it harder for security to protect them. I hold Diana and Charles responsible for exposing their kids to not just to a mindset, but a way of life that has no place for them in it. It's not like William needed career advice and Harry turned out even worse, throwing away a career in the military because he didn't want to get further qualifications and would not be willing to do desk work for a handful of years so he could move up to the Admiralty.
Much of 'modern monarchy' has nothing to do with improving their academic qualifications, or improving their sense of responsibility, much of this is just taking more of what they see and want and making the taxpayer pay for it. Royal idiocy is funny in good times, but in times such as these they should have matured and been prepped to be of sincere help. They talk about needing more time to have freedom and be young, despite the fact that they have had a ton of freedom and fun in their youth. In my view much of this has been largely about fun on everyone else's money and a delusional refusal to grow out of the 80's and 90's when that era is over and now dying out (long overdue). The entire dream of royalty is a fixation with the boomers mainly since boomers just LOVE money and status and royals epitomize all that. That is why Diana was portrayed as the feminine ideal and why there are twenty Diana documentaries a year or month and it is clear that coming from as high a level as possible is the ideal and has been shoved down our throats for decades.
Queen Mary was the first modern royal of her era to focus on more than partying and frankly put, it gave royals a new place and royals these days are too stupid to see and appreciate that. If I were in such a position, I would have gotten as many qualifications in the area of social services and would have done my best to delve into finding a position in the area of social services/social work and I would have insisted on doing all I can to make sure that things were running smoothly and marshaling my vast resources to make sure that gaps were filled and made arrangements to secure better salaries and pension money. Regrettably the Brits decided to just marry mediocrities and fall apart from there. Royals aren't failing because they ares stupid, they are adopting attitudes and behavior that is messing up the lives of people who rely on them to do their jobs. Politicians and diplomats used to be able to count on royals and now they can't.
|
|
tale BS.
Oct 20, 2024 18:30:58 GMT
Oct 20, 2024 18:30:58 GMT
#JamesMiddleton