Queen Elizabeth Platinum Jubilee

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone else feel like the Queen has been holding on to meet Harry’s new baby and then… It’s the end?

More likely holding on for this platinum jubilee.

I wonder if she abdicates after this.

I think it will be an unofficial regency, with Charles (who is already at reirement age) doing most of the work.

+1

That’s what it already is. But she has been quite clear no abdication.

[Anonymous]

Londoner here!

That is not a solid gold coach. It lives permanently in the Museum of London if any of you want to check it out.

Generally the attitude to the Jubilee has been an eye roll and shrug. We all got a 4 day weekend out of it so happy for that, but most Londoners I know have given central London a wide berth and either gone on holiday or stayed home and done normal things. I have no idea who all these true believers are in these huge crowds!

I did a walkabout and London looked amazing all decorated. There is union jack bunting in all the high traffic tourist areas.

There is definitely a sense that a reckoning in near for the monarchy, if not here already. The Caribbean tours have been disasters, there are a lot of calls for apologies and reparations that the BRF are silent on. They need to make an attempt to reconcile their racist and colonial past with modern sensibilities. I don't know if its possible but they for sure have to try.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone else feel like the Queen has been holding on to meet Harry’s new baby and then… It’s the end?

More likely holding on for this platinum jubilee.

I wonder if she abdicates after this.

I think it will be an unofficial regency, with Charles (who is already at reirement age) doing most of the work.

This. I can't imagine her abdicating. Too many memories of her uncle wrapped up in that.

[Anonymous]

Londoner again. The Queen will never step down while she is alive, nor officially appoint Charles as regent. The reason for this is she truly believes she has been appointed by God to be the Queen and takes that responsibility very seriously. Charles is unofficially acting as regent already as some have noted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Londoner here!

That is not a solid gold coach. It lives permanently in the Museum of London if any of you want to check it out.

Generally the attitude to the Jubilee has been an eye roll and shrug. We all got a 4 day weekend out of it so happy for that, but most Londoners I know have given central London a wide berth and either gone on holiday or stayed home and done normal things. I have no idea who all these true believers are in these huge crowds!

I did a walkabout and London looked amazing all decorated. There is union jack bunting in all the high traffic tourist areas.

There is definitely a sense that a reckoning in near for the monarchy, if not here already. The Caribbean tours have been disasters, there are a lot of calls for apologies and reparations that the BRF are silent on. They need to make an attempt to reconcile their racist and colonial past with modern sensibilities. I don't know if its possible but they for sure have to try.

Interesting. Kind of hard to reconcile when they're completely mute on their own family. Unfortunately for them the entire world watched and judged and found the remaining royals wanting.

And William looks like he has an ulcer. Camilla looked STUNNING today. Best I've ever seen her though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone else feel like the Queen has been holding on to meet Harry’s new baby and then… It’s the end?

No. Have you seen how many great grandchildren she has? Twelve maybe. She gained 3 or 4 more in the past year. I think the death of Philip is probably more of a factor. And being 96. My parents and grandparents died well before that, and were wobblier with greater cognitive decline.

Like it or not, she and Harry have a special relationship. And this child is named after her.

She is also supposed to have a special relationship with Anne's kids, and Sophie and Louise.

A couple of hundred years ago, she could have arranged for the family tree to curve back in on itself, now they're destined for irrelevance

Sure. Most people here going "Why isn't Beatrice there?" probably wouldn't be able to identify Viscount Linley or Sarah Armstrong Jones today, and have no idea who that older man standing with the queen was. By the time William is king, and his children are married with kids, people will be saying "who the heck are Archie and Lilibet?" This is probably why Charles wants to streamline the firm, to make cousins get real jobs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Londoner here!

That is not a solid gold coach. It lives permanently in the Museum of London if any of you want to check it out.

Generally the attitude to the Jubilee has been an eye roll and shrug. We all got a 4 day weekend out of it so happy for that, but most Londoners I know have given central London a wide berth and either gone on holiday or stayed home and done normal things. I have no idea who all these true believers are in these huge crowds!

I did a walkabout and London looked amazing all decorated. There is union jack bunting in all the high traffic tourist areas.

There is definitely a sense that a reckoning in near for the monarchy, if not here already. The Caribbean tours have been disasters, there are a lot of calls for apologies and reparations that the BRF are silent on. They need to make an attempt to reconcile their racist and colonial past with modern sensibilities. I don't know if its possible but they for sure have to try.

Interesting. Kind of hard to reconcile when they're completely mute on their own family. Unfortunately for them the entire world watched and judged and found the remaining royals wanting.

And William looks like he has an ulcer. Camilla looked STUNNING today. Best I've ever seen her though.

Wow, hate the hat (I hate most hats) but the dress and bag are lovely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone else feel like the Queen has been holding on to meet Harry’s new baby and then… It’s the end?

No. Have you seen how many great grandchildren she has? Twelve maybe. She gained 3 or 4 more in the past year. I think the death of Philip is probably more of a factor. And being 96. My parents and grandparents died well before that, and were wobblier with greater cognitive decline.

Like it or not, she and Harry have a special relationship. And this child is named after her.

She is also supposed to have a special relationship with Anne's kids, and Sophie and Louise.

A couple of hundred years ago, she could have arranged for the family tree to curve back in on itself, now they're destined for irrelevance

Sure. Most people here going "Why isn't Beatrice there?" probably wouldn't be able to identify Viscount Linley or Sarah Armstrong Jones today, and have no idea who that older man standing with the queen was. By the time William is king, and his children are married with kids, people will be saying "who the heck are Archie and Lilibet?" This is probably why Charles wants to streamline the firm, to make cousins get real jobs.

Its Sarah Chatto. Why would you refer to her by her maiden name when she's been married for decades?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Is this supposed to be the outfits that look the same? Different cut completely, not really the same color. And honestly both are hideous but Meghan’s is worse.

Most of the outfits are hideously matronly and Kate looks semi-fine because she's rail thin. MM has a wider waist after the kids and that dress?coat? Is not flattering at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone else feel like the Queen has been holding on to meet Harry’s new baby and then… It’s the end?

More likely holding on for this platinum jubilee.

I wonder if she abdicates after this.

Have you ever listened to her? She's never abdicating and there's no reason to spend $1 billion on a Jubilee and then turn around and do the same billion for a coronation within 6 months. Especially when the Brits can't even afford to heat/cool their homes.

[twitter]. https://twitter.com/devisridhar/status/1532261042750988289[/twitter]

I doubt Charles will do a big coronation.

I bet once she’s dead there will be a lot less grandeur. This was the last big hurrah.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone else feel like the Queen has been holding on to meet Harry’s new baby and then… It’s the end?

More likely holding on for this platinum jubilee.

I wonder if she abdicates after this.

Have you ever listened to her? She's never abdicating and there's no reason to spend $1 billion on a Jubilee and then turn around and do the same billion for a coronation within 6 months. Especially when the Brits can't even afford to heat/cool their homes.

[twitter]. https://twitter.com/devisridhar/status/1532261042750988289[/twitter]

I doubt Charles will do a big coronation.

I bet once she’s dead there will be a lot less grandeur. This was the last big hurrah.

Big or small its still expensive - with multiple celebrations across the (remaining) realms. The little book the palace put out just for the Jubilee cost $12 million by itself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone else feel like the Queen has been holding on to meet Harry’s new baby and then… It’s the end?

No. Have you seen how many great grandchildren she has? Twelve maybe. She gained 3 or 4 more in the past year. I think the death of Philip is probably more of a factor. And being 96. My parents and grandparents died well before that, and were wobblier with greater cognitive decline.

Like it or not, she and Harry have a special relationship. And this child is named after her.

She is also supposed to have a special relationship with Anne's kids, and Sophie and Louise.

A couple of hundred years ago, she could have arranged for the family tree to curve back in on itself, now they're destined for irrelevance

Sure. Most people here going "Why isn't Beatrice there?" probably wouldn't be able to identify Viscount Linley or Sarah Armstrong Jones today, and have no idea who that older man standing with the queen was. By the time William is king, and his children are married with kids, people will be saying "who the heck are Archie and Lilibet?" This is probably why Charles wants to streamline the firm, to make cousins get real jobs.

Its Sarah Chatto. Why would you refer to her by her maiden name when she's been married for decades?

I realize that. Her brother is also called the Earl of Snowdon now. My point is that most people here have no idea who these people are as the family tree continues to expand, whether they are called Sarah Chatto or Lady Sarah Armstrong-Jones or the queen's niece. People magazine had to explain who the Duke of Kent is. When William is king, the magazine will probably have to explain who his cousins are (eg Peter Philips, Princess Eugenie, James etc). When/if George is king, people will be confused about these people at a fancy wedding called Archie and Lilibet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone else feel like the Queen has been holding on to meet Harry’s new baby and then… It’s the end?

No. Have you seen how many great grandchildren she has? Twelve maybe. She gained 3 or 4 more in the past year. I think the death of Philip is probably more of a factor. And being 96. My parents and grandparents died well before that, and were wobblier with greater cognitive decline.

Like it or not, she and Harry have a special relationship. And this child is named after her.

She is also supposed to have a special relationship with Anne's kids, and Sophie and Louise.

A couple of hundred years ago, she could have arranged for the family tree to curve back in on itself, now they're destined for irrelevance

Sure. Most people here going "Why isn't Beatrice there?" probably wouldn't be able to identify Viscount Linley or Sarah Armstrong Jones today, and have no idea who that older man standing with the queen was. By the time William is king, and his children are married with kids, people will be saying "who the heck are Archie and Lilibet?" This is probably why Charles wants to streamline the firm, to make cousins get real jobs.

Its Sarah Chatto. Why would you refer to her by her maiden name when she's been married for decades?

I realize that. Her brother is also called the Earl of Snowdon now. My point is that most people here have no idea who these people are as the family tree continues to expand, whether they are called Sarah Chatto or Lady Sarah Armstrong-Jones or the queen's niece. People magazine had to explain who the Duke of Kent is. When William is king, the magazine will probably have to explain who his cousins are (eg Peter Philips, Princess Eugenie, James etc). When/if George is king, people will be confused about these people at a fancy wedding called Archie and Lilibet.

So you're worried about something a couple of decades from now? Margaret and her children were the height of society in the 70s and into the 80s. Really it was only the 90s when William and Harry actually started to have personalities and a star like Diana was on the scene that made a difference.

[Anonymous]

Sarah Chatto is the Queen's niece, said to be her absolute favorite in the extended family. She is a humble woman by royal standards and regularly arrives to Buckingham Palace in a black cab. She is a core family member invited to everything.

Londoner again

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sarah Chatto is the Queen's niece, said to be her absolute favorite in the extended family. She is a humble woman by royal standards and regularly arrives to Buckingham Palace in a black cab. She is a core family member invited to everything.

Londoner again

But Americans who discuss the royal family in the entertainment and pop culture forum generally have no idea.