Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Ill_handle_it

Are You Being Served? William And Kate's Modern Mask Slips ~ Guardian.

Recommended Posts

" In the runup to the royal wedding we were repeatedly presented with an image of William Wales and Kate Middleton as the "modern royals". The media and "royal sources" alike presented them as just a normal young couple and, as such, part of a new generation of royals who would usher in an age of renewal for the monarchy. A sign of their new approach to royalty was that they had no domestic staff at their cottage in Anglesey, and it was officially announced that they would not be employing any after their marriage either. But this carefully constructed image of William and Kate as the progressive face of the monarchy has been compromised by the news that they are advertising for a housekeeper and dresser to serve them in their new home of Kensington Palace. The mask of normality has slipped." - Taken from LINK

I saw this linked on the Republic website. I go there sometimes but more often come away with depressive realism. I'd like to think that one day we'll get a referendum - dream on huh.

As for the news article,I couldn't agree more. The whole of the build up the the wedding was sickening. Naturally I didn't watch the "big event". I saw a clip on You Tube where an American TV channel asked several wedding organisers to estimate costs (they can't believe the taxpayer pays for this stuff over there). They came up with various figures,I think the top end was 120 million ish,I forget now. Anyway they put this to the palace and credit where it's due,they responded with something like "we do this hospitality all the time and are very efficient,those estimates are wrong". So the TV station said "hey that's just great,so how much it cost then ?" The palace said "we don't comment on these matters". Fkcngiu priceless. The truth is they don't comment on any costs at all,period. Interesting that the last two labour prime ministers didn't get a golden ticket,nothing to do with certain labour pm's requesting transparency over costs I'm sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's a bit of a non-story. There's nothing more modern than aspirational middle classes employing gardeners and nannies - not to mention the legions of dog walking services etc. etc. if anything the servant role has become more common.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The dresser will be Welsh, presumably.

One will ask one's butler to pass one one's coat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no, no, a President Blair, Brown, or Major would have been SO much better.

Jesus wept.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no, no, a President Blair, Brown, or Major would have been SO much better.

Jesus wept.

Strawman. Seeing as the royal family do bvgger all constitutionally, what would we need a president for?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" In the runup to the royal wedding we were repeatedly presented with an image of William Wales and Kate Middleton as the "modern royals". The media and "royal sources" alike presented them as just a normal young couple and, as such, part of a new generation of royals who would usher in an age of renewal for the monarchy. A sign of their new approach to royalty was that they had no domestic staff at their cottage in Anglesey, and it was officially announced that they would not be employing any after their marriage either. But this carefully constructed image of William and Kate as the progressive face of the monarchy has been compromised by the news that they are advertising for a housekeeper and dresser to serve them in their new home of Kensington Palace. The mask of normality has slipped." - Taken from LINK

I saw this linked on the Republic website. I go there sometimes but more often come away with depressive realism. I'd like to think that one day we'll get a referendum - dream on huh.

As for the news article,I couldn't agree more. The whole of the build up the the wedding was sickening. Naturally I didn't watch the "big event". I saw a clip on You Tube where an American TV channel asked several wedding organisers to estimate costs (they can't believe the taxpayer pays for this stuff over there). They came up with various figures,I think the top end was 120 million ish,I forget now. Anyway they put this to the palace and credit where it's due,they responded with something like "we do this hospitality all the time and are very efficient,those estimates are wrong". So the TV station said "hey that's just great,so how much it cost then ?" The palace said "we don't comment on these matters". Fkcngiu priceless. The truth is they don't comment on any costs at all,period. Interesting that the last two labour prime ministers didn't get a golden ticket,nothing to do with certain labour pm's requesting transparency over costs I'm sure.

Doing their bit to reduce unemployment, spreading the wealth.

They haven't employed any minions for their cottage in Anglesey, so what's your problem?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doing their bit to reduce unemployment, spreading the wealth.

They haven't employed any minions for their cottage in Anglesey, so what's your problem?

My problem isn't what servants they have where or doing what - the problem is that we can't find out how much these people cost. And it recently just a got a whole lot worse HERE

I don't think it's a big surprise these people are going to have servants,after all Charles has 150 full time servants - it's known that someone squeezes his tooth paste and more intimate bathroom responsibilities are delegated according to internal sources. What I object to is the pre marriage portrayal of the Wills & Kate being so normal and grounded. I could go on but I just get wound-up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bet none of you have a problem with renting servants for a few hours at a restaurant or a hotel.

Few would have a problem with renting a secretary to do your typing should the need arise, or a taxi driver to take you somewhere.

So what is the problem with having your 'own' Butler, Housekeeper, Cook, Personal Assistant and Driver?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kate Middleton would have married a leprous pedophile if she got to become Queen in waiting and all of the priviledges and adulation that she now enjoys from the fawning masses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its probably better to look at the cost to the taxpayer http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/7872052/Cost-of-Royal-Family-drops-7p-per-person.html

Lets say about £40m but thats without taking into account the money the Royal Family as a brand brings into the UK through tourism et al.

The myth of the Royals bringing in tourist dollar as been debunked. I'm not even going to give credit to your argument at least to say the palace of Versailles has millions of visitors every year who can view all of the palace,not merely those parts deemed fit for commoners. Even if it were true that they are tourist magnets as opposed to the buildings etc we have a right to know how much they cost - The 40 million (from your link) is just the tip of the iceberg and as I said in my previous post (you might want to actually read the content rather than licking-up) the possibility of us finding out has become even more unlikely. For example the wedding - how much did this cost ? They say they don't comment on these matters. I'm sorry but these people are beyond contempt and they pathetically try to delude the public into thinking they are normal. I'm getting wound up now ! Grrrrrrrrr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some religions dont condemn paedophilia for starters, but personally I wouldnt want to be famous and a target for nut jobs and jealous types.

Religions are ancient relics of the first civilisations. Though many people (perhaps most?) still look to them for their behaviour, I believe we should use alternative methods for morality.

So do the benefits of being a royal outweight the freedoms of being anonymous in society?

That is difficult to judge, however I would say that there are by far more people who would like to be treated like a royal than there are positions available. These positions come either from birth or marriage. It is not really fair to 'choose' people for such deferential treatment in such a non democratic manner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The myth of the Royals bringing in tourist dollar as been debunked. I'm not even going to give credit to your argument at least to say the palace of Versailles has millions of visitors every year who can view all of the palace,not merely those parts deemed fit for commoners. Even if it were true that they are tourist magnets as opposed to the buildings etc we have a right to know how much they cost - The 40 million (from your link) is just the tip of the iceberg and as I said in my previous post (you might want to actually read the content rather than licking-up) the possibility of us finding out has become even more unlikely. For example the wedding - how much did this cost ? They say they don't comment on these matters. I'm sorry but these people are beyond contempt and they pathetically try to delude the public into thinking they are normal. I'm getting wound up now ! Grrrrrrrrr

Cost? Cost who? The dressmakers? The florists? The coppers? The cleaners, guards, guides, shop assistants, shop suppliers, carpet makers, curtain hangers?

Oh no, they received income. Presumably taxable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The myth of the Royals bringing in tourist dollar as been debunked. I'm not even going to give credit to your argument at least to say the palace of Versailles has millions of visitors every year who can view all of the palace,not merely those parts deemed fit for commoners. Even if it were true that they are tourist magnets as opposed to the buildings etc we have a right to know how much they cost - The 40 million (from your link) is just the tip of the iceberg and as I said in my previous post (you might want to actually read the content rather than licking-up) the possibility of us finding out has become even more unlikely. For example the wedding - how much did this cost ? They say they don't comment on these matters. I'm sorry but these people are beyond contempt and they pathetically try to delude the public into thinking they are normal. I'm getting wound up now ! Grrrrrrrrr

You should have paid more attention to the YouTube video mate. The streets were thronged with well wishers at the wedding, all spending hard earned cash to get/be there.

Comments such as "parts deemed fit for commoners" leads me to think you may have a teensy-weensy chip on your shoulder....hmm?.....just....a...wee...one?

You should have listened to the glowing praise heaped on the Duke today from Cameron and Miliband, brought a tear to my eye it did!

Of course, I don't care that much, they're your royal family ya sassenach, not mine!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cost? Cost who? The dressmakers? The florists? The coppers? The cleaners, guards, guides, shop assistants, shop suppliers, carpet makers, curtain hangers?

Oh no, they received income. Presumably taxable.

It cost the taxpayer and we aren't allowed to know how much. What is your point ?Is it that we should fund this extravagance on the grounds that the people who provide services to the royals pay tax ? In all honesty a lot of these people you speak of are just as good at tax avoidance as the Royals.

I can't be bothered to quote the other guy with reference to the crowds lining the streets - I'll just say you strengthen my argument not weaken it. The public are deluded and press releases by Wills &Kate (seriously does anyone call someone called William,Wills ffs) giving the illusion they are normal and modern royals are at best misleading.

I have a chip on my shoulder apparently ? Righty-ho. Or is just that I'm awake and fed up with being constantly shafted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It cost the taxpayer and we aren't allowed to know how much. What is your point ?Is it that we should fund this extravagance on the grounds that the people who provide services to the royals pay tax ? In all honesty a lot of these people you speak of are just as good at tax avoidance as the Royals.

Pretty much, just like any other government spending.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't be bothered to quote the other guy with reference to the crowds lining the streets - I'll just say you strengthen my argument not weaken it. The public are deluded and press releases by Wills &Kate (seriously does anyone call someone called William,Wills ffs) giving the illusion they are normal and modern royals are at best misleading.

So pointing out the income generated by these crowds, who are there to witness the marriage of two people, strengthens your arguement that it is the property (such as Buckingham Palace)rather than the royal personages that attracts the crowds? Are you serious?

I don't think anybody in their right mind (or with no chip on their shoulder) imagines that these two are trying to suggest they are normal, just more normal than the last generation. They are, by definition, modern royals. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bet none of you have a problem with renting servants for a few hours at a restaurant or a hotel.

Few would have a problem with renting a secretary to do your typing should the need arise, or a taxi driver to take you somewhere.

So what is the problem with having your 'own' Butler, Housekeeper, Cook, Personal Assistant and Driver?

I've tried this argument on lefties and most don't have an answer, though the only objection seems to be that there's something inherently morally wrong with having a personal, full time servant. I suspect it's just the old dislike of the master/servant relationship.

As for the OP....lefty newspaper gets sniffy about royals...hardly earth shattering news is it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So pointing out the income generated by these crowds, who are there to witness the marriage of two people, strengthens your arguement that it is the property (such as Buckingham Palace)rather than the royal personages that attracts the crowds? Are you serious?

I don't think anybody in their right mind (or with no chip on their shoulder) imagines that these two are trying to suggest they are normal, just more normal than the last generation. They are, by definition, modern royals. :rolleyes:

Okay that's fine - you're right, people come to the UK just because of the Royals and generate billions of pounds as a result. Let's assume that's true. We would then need to consider why France has more visitors to its Royally vacated buildings but that aside. My argument which I believe is valid,is that they have intentionally used the media to manipulate their image and make them more attractive to younger people - the spin was 'we are normal' there's clearly no doubt of that. People went and watched - can't argue with that, absolutely. Expertly constructed farce. Irrational behaviour beyond explanation by people the Royals consider as nothing more than cannon fodder. They (the royals) would at least have some respect for a republican who realises how he or she is being screwed - what must they think of the people on minimum wage spending money for flowers and waiting in line to watch a carriage drive by,or even perhaps the pathetic loyal subjects on the internet that fight their sordid corner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They (the royals) would at least have some respect for a republican who realises how he or she is being screwed - what must they think of the people on minimum wage spending money for flowers and waiting in line to watch a carriage drive by,or even perhaps the pathetic loyal subjects on the internet that fight their sordid corner.

Genuine question..

Would you want their "privileged" life style? Honestly?

I certainly wouldn't. I don't think you should ever have to manipulate people to think you're normal. ALL people are normal people.. we're basically the same.

I wouldn't like being forced to behave properly all the time, live up to expectation, put on a public face, be judged by the media. I'd go bonkers like Harry and start kicking back.

I really don't think you need to be jealous of their life style. I really really don't :unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Genuine question..

Would you want their "privileged" life style? Honestly?

I certainly wouldn't. I don't think you should ever have to manipulate people to think you're normal. ALL people are normal people.. we're basically the same.

I wouldn't like being forced to behave properly all the time, live up to expectation, put on a public face, be judged by the media. I'd go bonkers like Harry and start kicking back.

I really don't think you need to be jealous of their life style. I really really don't :unsure:

Okay,I'm not at all jealous of their life style - what I object to is the fact we are not able to see how much they cost. Here's a quote taken from theIndependent link

Ian Davidson, a former member of Parliament's Public Accounts Committee (PAC), told The Independent: "I'm astonished that the Government should find time to seek to cover up royal finances. When I was on the PAC what we wanted was more disclosure not less.

"Every time we examined royal finances we found extravagance and indulgence as well as abuse of expenses by junior royals.

"Everywhere we looked, there were savings to be made for the Government. This sends the wrong message about public disclosure and accountability."

Paul Flynn, another member of the committee, described the special protection for the Royals as "indefensible". He said: "I don't think it serves the interests of the public or the Royal Family very well."

Mr Frankel said he believed that Prince Charles was the driving force behind the new law.

"The heir to the throne has written letters to government departments in an attempt to influence policy," he said.

"He clearly does not want these to get into the public domain."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 312 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.