Why Do Royal Weddings Get So Much Attention?

[Pattonias]

Until I get an invitation, I couldn't give more attention to the wedding than taking the time to post on the internet how little I care about the royal wedding. Enough already.

If they wanted to spice it up a bit, put an American twist on it and have 4 or 5 possible brides and they have to run a gauntlet to see who the new queen will be. That would probably make it the most watched world event in history. Add Snooky as a hopeful and you might possibly set an unbreakable record...

 

[JaredJames]

If they wanted to spice it up a bit, put an American twist on it

Britain has enough "American influence" as it is, let's keep something British (even if I don't agree with the royal family).

to see who the new queen will be.

Well, strictly speaking isn't it going to be Camilla at the moment?

Charles is next in line to the throne. Don't think he'll ever get it, but still.

Add Snooky as a hopeful and you might possibly set an unbreakable record...

Yeah, worlds most unwatched event.

 

[AlephZero]

Well, strictly speaking isn't it going to be Camilla at the moment?

Not unless some of the rules get bent. The view of the established church about marriage may not be in line with the population at large, but it's kind of inconvenient if its own leader doesn't follow them!

Charles is next in line to the throne. Don't think he'll ever get it, but still.

I think there's a fair chance his mom will outlive him. After all, his gran made it past 100.

Still, we avoided the horror story that Queen Diana would have been. Queen Paris Hilton or Queen Amy Winehouse would have been better than that scenario.

 

[JaredJames]

Not unless some of the rules get bent. The view of the established church about marriage may not be in line with the population at large, but it's kind of inconvenient if its own leader doesn't follow them!

Well they're looking to change the rules to allow a daughter to be viewed equally to a son for succession. So who knows (doubtful, but you never know).

Still, we avoided the horror story that Queen Diana would have been. Queen Paris Hilton or Queen Amy Winehouse would have been better than that scenario.

Well I don't know what she was like, but from what I've seen everyone loved her.

Personally, I think the queen will hold on either to beat Victoria's reign or she'll step down after the jubilee next year.

Either way, I think it will go straight to William. It would be quite a nice transition, queen has her jubilee and then on to the new generation - could do a lot for the royals.

 

[cristo]

Well, strictly speaking isn't it going to be Camilla at the moment?

Camilla will take the title "Princess Consort" when Charles becomes king (though I'm not sure this is legally different to Queen).

 

[JaredJames]

I fear that by the time William gets the throne, Kate will no longer be a QILF.

 

[Pattonias]

I fear that by the time William gets the throne, Kate will no longer be a QILF.

Thank you for making my day better

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

Camilla will take the title "Princess Consort" when Charles becomes king (though I'm not sure this is legally different to Queen).

I'd prefer Mrs. King if I were her. Princess Consort sounds like someone the agency sent over.

 

[Office_Shredder]

Camilla will take the title "Princess Consort" when Charles becomes king (though I'm not sure this is legally different to Queen).

There are two types of queens: queen consort and queen regent (I think it's actually a slightly different word than that but I'll leave it as an exercise to the reader). A queen consort is just someone who's married to the king, a queen regent is the head honcho (so Queen Elizabeth is a queen regent).

There's a definite difference between princess consort and queen regent, but I don't believe there is a difference between princess consort and queen consort legally. From a PR point of view, I think the fact that they're divorced means you have to call her a princess instead of a queen or something like that

 

[hypatia]

I love royal weddings, I hope everything goes just perfectly for them.

 

[cristo]

There are two types of queens: queen consort and queen regent

Queen regnant.

There's a definite difference between princess consort and queen regent, but I don't believe there is a difference between princess consort and queen consort legally.

At present, no, there is no difference because she will legally be queen. Whether this will change or not is unclear.

From a PR point of view, I think the fact that they're divorced means you have to call her a princess instead of a queen or something like that

She doesn't *have* to be called princess. This was something that was announced before Charles' wedding to Camilla in order to appease people, in a similar way to Camilla using the title Duchess of Cornwall. Legally she is the Princess of Wales, but in memory of Diana she won't use it.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

I love royal weddings, I hope everything goes just perfectly for them.

I hope it goes off without a hitch.

 

[xxChrisxx]

I hope its a good day for them. They've given me a free day off to play golf.

 

[Jack21222]

I'm a bit confused why some of my fellow Americans give a toss about this wedding.

I wouldn't be as excited about my OWN wedding as people are about this wedding.

 

[AlephZero]

Well they're looking to change the rules to allow a daughter to be viewed equally to a son for succession. So who knows (doubtful, but you never know).

Typical female logic. They have ruled Britain for 125 out of the last 175 years, and now they claim the system are biased against them

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

Typical female logic. They have ruled Britain for 125 out of the last 175 years, and now they claim the system are biased against them

Reigned, not ruled.

 

[Borek]

I wish them best, but I like this idea:

[PLAIN]http://www.brandnewfresh.com/wp-content/uploads/Royal-Wedding-Sick-Bag.jpg

 

[AlephZero]

Reigned, not ruled.

The prime minister of appointed to form a government by the monarch, not by electorate. And parliament can't create laws without royal assent.

Sure, the last time royal assent for a was refused was 300 years ago, but the rules of the game have never been changed...

(The procedure for appointing a PM was not entirely a theoretical matter after the 2010 election, when Brown holed himself up in his bunker rather than resigning)

 

[AlephZero]

I wouldn't be as excited about my OWN wedding as people are about this wedding.

Some people in the UK aren't getting over excited about it. I like this laid-back entry from the RAF Battle of Britain Memiorial Flight flying schedule. (LHS = Lancaster, Hurricane, Spitfire)

 

[AlephZero]

Well I don't know what she [Diana] was like, but from what I've seen everyone loved her.

I think this is a good summing up, by Matthew Engels, Financial Times weekend magazine, 23/24 April.

In 1981, we had the excuse of innocence. We were all in thrall to the Cinderella myth that for any young woman, the jackpot of life's lottery is marrying a prince. But still, it is one thing for the silly social-climbing slattern in the pantomime to snub the loyal Buttons and follower her absurd fantasies. How on Earth was Diana suckered into marrying someone of completely different temperament nearly 13 years her senior - and more like a generation older in attitude? How did Charles, whose prime responsibility was to construct a decent marriage and produce the traditional heir and spare, choose someone so flighty, wilful and unsuitable? Diana was more like his wayward daughter. Except for a shared lineage that, one side of the blanket or another, could be traced back to James I, this was a couple that had nothing in common. He screwed up, as they say, royally.

The resulting disaster was played out at first in deepest privacy but untimately amid unimaginable publicity...

Better luck this time around.

 

[JaredJames]

produce the traditional heir and spare

 

[xxChrisxx]

Better luck this time around.

Luck isn't really needed ths time, and William and Kate actually want to get married.

 

[BobG]

The Crown Prince of Yugoslavia will be attending. How special is that?

Interesting how the rules of monarchy work. Even though his father, the King of Yugoslavia, passed away, the Crown Prince can't ascend to the throne because the Yugoslavia he's Crown Prince of ceased to exist 4 months after he was born. But he doesn't lose his Crown Princehood just because his kingdom no longer exists.

 

[Constantinos]

Oh I have to take it out of my system...

WHY do people get so excited about the wedding of one man? What's the big deal? Its all over the news, all over the world for some reason. I don't understand how people can derive so much joy from the life of another... and most of all, pay TAXES for them!

Seeing the news, the only difference I perceive from a Middle-Ages king's wedding is technology (and perhaps marrying with a commoner), the mentality is almost the same!
This is just... disgusting!

Ok Sorry!

 

[JaredJames]

WHY do people get so excited about the wedding of one man? What's the big deal? Its all over the news, all over the world for some reason. I don't understand how people can derive so much joy from the life of another... and most of all, pay TAXES for them!

Ah, that's right, it's not like they bring in huge amounts of cash to the UK.

You realize this wedding costs less than it brings in? No, because you're completely ignorant of the facts.

Seeing the news, the only difference I perceive from a Middle-Ages king's wedding is technology (and perhaps marrying with a commoner), the mentality is almost the same!
This is just... disgusting!

It's the royal family, when was the last wedding like this? Oh, of course, it was Diana's. So it's hardly a common affair.

This is the heritage of Great Britain. You wouldn't like it if I started ripping into your country and its traditions, would you?

Remember, people like my grandparents have seen a number of these starting with the Queen herself and so it's a very proud and exciting moment for her with a lot of memories and emotion.

 

[Astronuc]

Some people in the UK aren't getting over excited about it. I like this laid-back entry from the RAF Battle of Britain Memiorial Flight flying schedule. (LHS = Lancaster, Hurricane, Spitfire)

I would love to see the LHS flights. Other than that, I can comfortably ignore the wedding. I can't believe the fuss/interest about this relationship.

 

[JaredJames]

I'm only waiting for the fly by too. Couldn't care less about the wedding.

Still don't see why people want to attack it though. You'd swear it happened all the time.

 

[Constantinos]

Ah, that's right, it's not like they bring in huge amounts of cash to the UK.

You realize this wedding costs less than it brings in? No, because you're completely ignorant of the facts.

I fail to see how its profitable, since taxes are being payed over a span of many years, the wedding is just one day. Unless you meant(or I understood) something else

It's the royal family, when was the last wedding like this? Oh, of course, it was Diana's. So it's hardly a common affair.

This is the heritage of Great Britain. You wouldn't like it if I started ripping into your country and its traditions, would you?

I wouldn't really care. I don't feel I have a nationality. It is a random fact that I was born in Greece so there, feel free to rip them, I don't care. I myself find it extremely stupid that we have to pay for military parades of students for the national aniverseries, when most of them don't care (actually do it to lose a day of school) or they are forced to it by threats of noting it as an absence in school (there is a number of absences one can afford before having to retake the same school year)

Remember, people like my grandparents have seen a number of these starting with the Queen herself and so it's a very proud and exciting moment for her with a lot of memories and emotion.

Ok maybe "disgusting" is a bad word and I'm sorry for that. But it is still pretty irrational I believe to still cling to those traditions. How is monarchy something to be proud of and to propagate through time? Why pay so much for something that has no benefit to society whatsoever, unless of coure I'm missing some benefit.

 

[JaredJames]

I fail to see how its profitable, since taxes are being payed over a span of many years, the wedding is just one day. Unless you meant(or I understood) something else

They bring in huge amounts of tourism and the wedding is certainly doing so. Not to mention the other work they do.

I wouldn't really care. I don't feel I have a nationality. It is a random fact that I was born in Greece so there, feel free to rip them, I don't care. I myself find it extremely stupid that we have to pay for military parades of students for the national aniverseries, when most of them don't care (actually do it to lose a day of school) or they are forced to it by threats of noting it as an absence in school (there is a number of absences one can afford before having to retake the same school year)

You're from Greece and speaking of the royal family being a waste? Only one of these countries has wasted tax payer money enough to bring it to the point of bankruptcy.

Ok maybe "disgusting" is a bad word and I'm sorry for that. But it is still pretty irrational I believe to still cling to those traditions.

Irrational, yes. But then why do Americans celebrate 4th July? It's tradition, it's their history.

How is monarchy something to be proud of and to propagate through time?

Again, I don't actually support them but none-the-less they are our history and it's not like they've had no influence on the world.

Anyway, Prince Phillip is Greek.

Why pay so much for something that has no benefit to society whatsoever, unless of coure I'm missing some benefit.

No benefit?

Well for one, look how many people have come together to support it. Again, this is without the money it brings in.

Your statements seem to be rather ignorant and are just striking out. Perhaps reading up on a few things before attacking again would be a good idea?

 

[Constantinos]

You're from Greece and speaking of the royal family being a waste? Only one of these countries has wasted tax payer money enough to bring it to the point of bankruptcy.

Maybe that's why I'm so sensitive :P

I have nothing more to add. And searching the web for answers, I still don't see how all those controversial "benefits" can't be substituted by other means. But maybe that is a discussion for another thread :D

 

[SamirS]

You're from Greece and speaking of the royal family being a waste? Only one of these countries has wasted tax payer money enough to bring it to the point of bankruptcy.

That's kind of an unwarranted statement. Him being from Greece doesn't in any way indicate that he endorses Greece's governmental policies, and it certainly doesn't invalidate him having an opinion on tax policy in other countries. If he's wrong in his views, he's wrong because his views are incorrect, not because he has a passport from a country which has wrong views.

You certainly have a valid point about British tradition, and although I personally find this attention nonsensical, it's for the British to decide upon it. However, your statement I quoted kind of undermines your message. It's a straw man.

 

[Astronuc]

I'm only waiting for the fly by too. Couldn't care less about the wedding.

Still don't see why people want to attack it though. You'd swear it happened all the time.

I don't think folks attack the wedding as much as they are critical of the fuss over the wedding, and part of the criticism has to do with one's perspective on the value (and validity) of the 'royal' family, and their benefit or necessity to a modern democratic society.

My mom still sees some importance, probably because it is a tradition with which she was raised. I was certainly indoctrinated into that tradition in my early years, more so in school with singing 'God save the Queen', etc. But as I matured, I questioned the whole royal thing.

Looking back in my family's history, it seems the royals were more of a liability than a benefit given the wars, particularly the English civil wars, in which they participated and/or instigated.

And I suppose for some, the recognition of royalty reinforces or acknowledges the economic and political disparity and inequity in the larger society.

 

[Pengwuino]

Yah I'm with Jared here, as much as I think the craziness is a bit stupid, what kind of world would this be when nothing like this was allowed to happen? And again, it's not like it happens every year.

Looking at the crowds, how can you really say no to this? There's such an amazing, rich history behind everything going on here. Westminster Abbey is over 1000 years old! It's all an incredible sight. And sure you can whine about the cost and attention it's drawing, but in the end what makes us human is the fact that occasionally we lose ourselves in spectacles such as this.

 

[SamirS]

My idea:
"So it's basically an occasion to be silly in public without being reprimanded, and even more, to be silly as a group. People need a) something they can identify that is larger than their own life (consisting mainly of chores) and b) some reason to justify to their peers to break out of this from time to time. Royal weddings have come, through ages of tradition, to be widely regarded as justified reason, just as holidays do. This is because for most people, the personal judgement of their peers is very important (though professional and personal judgement share some areas) to them."

Would you agree to this? I'm trying to understand the behaviour of people here, without judgement.

 

[cobalt124]

Well I thought I wasn't bothered, but I've ended up watching bits of it. It is an important occasion for traditionalists in the U.K., I thought I didn't have that tradition in me any more, but I was wrong.

 

[drizzle]

The bride's dress is so elegant.

 

[Lichdar]

I tried to care and made some approving noises to individuals around me who did, but in the end, I really couldn't. It was a pretty wedding. I would have watched it if I had the time, in the same way that I would enjoy other pretty things. I had no other emotion to it.

 

[Astronuc]

My idea:
"So it's basically an occasion to be silly in public without being reprimanded, and even more, to be silly as a group. People need a) something they can identify that is larger than their own life (consisting mainly of chores) and b) some reason to justify to their peers to break out of this from time to time. Royal weddings have come, through ages of tradition, to be widely regarded as justified reason, just as holidays do. This is because for most people, the personal judgement of their peers is very important (though professional and personal judgement share some areas) to them."

Would you agree to this? I'm trying to understand the behaviour of people here, without judgement.

Neither 'a' nor 'b' apply to me. If I want to identify with something that is larger than my own life, I only need to go outside and look around at Nature - the land, the oceans, the forests, the mountains, the stars, . . . Every time I fly across the country or oceans to another country, I ponder the world that passes by underneath - each of us is very small and insignificant compared to the world.

I never need to justify myself to anyone, nor do I need or require anyone else to justify themselves to me.

 

[Astronuc]

Well I thought I wasn't bothered, but I've ended up watching bits of it. It is an important occasion for traditionalists in the U.K., I thought I didn't have that tradition in me any more, but I was wrong.

I caught a bit of the streaming video. I didn't care for the gushing commentary from Barbara Walters et al and statements like something to the effect that 'Kate is the most beautiful bride . . .', or some nonsense about fairy tale something or rather.

 

[cobalt124]

I tried to care and made some approving noises to individuals around me who did, but in the end, I really couldn't. It was a pretty wedding. I would have watched it if I had the time, in the same way that I would enjoy other pretty things. I had no other emotion to it.

My experience was the opposite. Most people around me were saying "So what?" and I fell in, but in the end I couldn't. Something I picked up in childhood, which I'm not saying is right or wrong, but possibly I haven't questioned enough, and that is respect for institutions. Something for me to ponder upon.

 

[cobalt124]

I caught a bit of the streaming video. I didn't care for the gushing commentary from Barbara Walters et al and statements like something to the effect that 'Kate is the most beautiful bride . . .', or some nonsense about fairy tale something or rather.

I didn't have the commentary on, I'm assuming that wasn't the U.K. commentary, which is usually all stiff upper lip and formal (makes me smile). What struck me was was there a single place where a camera wasn't positioned. It seemed like they were going to follow them all day all the way into the royal bedroom!

 

[SamirS]

Neither 'a' nor 'b' apply to me. If I want to identify with something that is larger than my own life, I only need to go outside and look around at Nature - the land, the oceans, the forests, the mountains, the stars, . . . Every time I fly across the country or oceans to another country, I ponder the world that passes by underneath - each of us is very small and insignificant compared to the world.

I never need to justify myself to anyone, nor do I need or require anyone else to justify themselves to me.

I fall in the same category as you. I'm also of the type who just stands in awe at the complexity of a simple tree or the vastness of the sky, pondering how this vastness is so insignificant to the vastness of the universe, and the implications of this about us. When I voice this to most people it's either the "you're crazy"-look or the "are you on drugs?"-look.

This is more of a way to understand how the people that do care that much about the wedding and that do create such a fuss about it (without economic intentions) function in this regard!

 

[cobalt124]

I fall in the same category as you...This is more of a way to understand how the people that do care that much about the wedding and that do create such a fuss about it (without economic intentions) function in this regard!

I fall in the same category as well, I just never talk about it. About not killing a creature because it is hideous and you are scared of it. Think about how it was made and how it has survived instead, and leave it be. Look at a blade of grass and see what you have in common with it. Look at all the ways there are to perpetutate genes and see where you belong in Nature (there I've said it now). I can't describle how I feel about a Royal Wedding so clearly, but the two are not mutually exclusive, just different.

 

[qspeechc]

I will say this proudly: I love the royal family, especially Queen Elizabeth, and yes, even Prince Charles. I got up early to watch the wedding, and I enjoyed every bit of it. I even recorded it for posterity. The history, the tradition in that wedding was rapturous. The beautiful uniforms, outfits, carriages, buildings, music...the lot.

I watched it on the BBC, and I couldn't stand those babbling idiotic women talking about fashion though. The one woman even said "bloomin' fantastic", or something like that, and I felt like throttling her. Otherwise it was perfect. And two kisses! They looked rather shy afterwards. Never thought I'd see Prince William blush. Continuing a tradition started by his mother and father (the kissing, not the blushing), very sweet.

If they wanted to spice it up a bit, put an American twist on it and have 4 or 5 possible brides and they have to run a gauntlet to see who the new queen will be. That would probably make it the most watched world event in history. Add Snooky as a hopeful and you might possibly set an unbreakable record...

I agree with JaredJames that Britain has more than enough American influences. And why on Earth should a British Royal Wedding have an American twist? To please you? Who on Earth is this Snooky everyone talks about?

I thought after Queen Elizabeth we will have Prince Charles becoming king, and his wife will be a Duchess (like currently we have the Duke of Edinburgh), not a queen. There is no reason to think Queen Elizabeth will out-live Prince Charles, or that Prince Charles will step down and let William become king. The crown usually only changes when the current king or queen dies or is about to die (learnt that from The King's Speech ;)). I would prefer it anyway if Prince Charles becomes the next king.

I don't really care what people who are not British have to say about the royal family; it's for the British to decide, and most of the British public are in favour of keeping them. Of course it's difficult for Americans especially to appreciate a royal family. The British royal family is a part of British culture, it's a part of Britain. Take away the royal family and you take away a very large part of British history and culture. I don't expect irreverent Americans to appreciate that.

I don't think folks attack the wedding as much as they are critical of the fuss over the wedding, and part of the criticism has to do with one's perspective on the value (and validity) of the 'royal' family, and their benefit or necessity to a modern democratic society.

Looking back in my family's history, it seems the royals were more of a liability than a benefit given the wars, particularly the English civil wars, in which they participated and/or instigated.

And I suppose for some, the recognition of royalty reinforces or acknowledges the economic and political disparity and inequity in the larger society.

Clearly there is a benefit in national pride, as shown by the continuing popularity of the royal family. Some estimates put the number of people who watched this wedding as high as two billion. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

Your comment about the royal family being a liability is a bit off the mark. The royal family today has no real power, it is merely ceremonial, and it has been that way for quite a long time.

And I just find your last comment quite queer and incomprehensible.

 

[hypatia]

What a grand wedding, I thought it was just perfect. I must confess to getting a bit misty eyed, as Prince William looked so much like his mother, in his reserved and shy looks.

 

[Jack21222]

Some estimates put the number of people who watched this wedding as high as two billion. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

I'm HIGHLY skeptical of that number. You're saying a solid 29% of the world's population watched this? According to http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/med_tel-media-televisions which cites the 2003 CIA factbook, you're claiming that more people watched this ceremony THAN TELEVISIONS THAT EXISTED IN THE ENTIRE WORLD a few years ago.

 

[JaredJames]

I'm HIGHLY skeptical of that number. You're saying a solid 29% of the world's population watched this? According to http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/med_tel-media-televisions which cites the 2003 CIA factbook, you're claiming that more people watched this ceremony THAN TELEVISIONS THAT EXISTED IN THE ENTIRE WORLD a few years ago.

No comment on the numbers, but you do realize that more than one person can watch per TV?

 

[JaredJames]

This is where the figures are coming from I think:

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/42454502/ns/today-today_people/I just found this too:

http://foreign.peacefmonline.com/news/201007/65135.php

If that's true, it's a very good reason to keep them around.

 

[Jack21222]

No comment on the numbers, but you do realize that more than one person can watch per TV?

Yes, I fail to see how that matters. What do you think the average will be, 3 per TV? Let's say the number of televisions has increased by 33% in the past 7 years. That makes 1.9 billion televisions. At an average of 3 per television, which I think is very generous, that's about 35% of all televisions in existence were tuned to the wedding.

As a comparison, the World Cup Final was estimated to have only 700 million viewers. The claim is that THREE TIMES as many people worldwide watched some stupid wedding than the world's most popular sport's championship game.

 

[JaredJames]

Charles and Diana's wedding had 750 million viewers, the China Olympics had 1 Billion. It's also estimated that 2.5 billion watched Diana's funeral. So I don't see how it's hard to accept the number.

"stupid wedding", really? How arrogant can you get.