Why Do Royal Weddings Get So Much Attention?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pattonias
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The discussion centers around the royal wedding, with participants expressing varying degrees of interest and criticism. Some participants show indifference, questioning the significance of the wedding and the public's excitement, while others defend the royal family's cultural importance and the wedding's potential economic benefits through tourism. Suggestions for making the event more entertaining, such as introducing American-style competition, are met with resistance, emphasizing a desire to maintain British traditions. There is also debate about the titles of royal family members, particularly regarding Camilla's future title when Charles becomes king. The conversation touches on historical perspectives of the monarchy, with some arguing that the royal family has been more of a liability than a benefit, while others highlight its ceremonial role and the national pride it fosters. Overall, the thread reflects a mix of skepticism, nostalgia, and cultural pride surrounding the royal wedding and the monarchy itself.
  • #61
lisab said:
Some of the guests needed remedial lessons on how to wear a hat.

And they had etiquette lessons.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #62
lisab said:
Some of the guests needed remedial lessons on how to wear a hat.
Some needed to be told what a hat is.

http://royalwedding.yahoo.com/photos/sets/1087/Best-hats-of-the-royal-wedding-guests.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #63
qspeechc said:
...it's for the British to decide, and most of the British public are in favour of keeping them...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.

Too right.

hypatia said:
...Prince William looked so much like his mother, in his reserved and shy looks.

He has the Windsor features though

Jack21222 said:
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.

Yes, if not more.

Jack21222 said:
When Marie Antionette said "if they can't afford bread, let them eat cake," the French people at least had the common decency to behead her. Confiscate the nice cash reserve and kick the queen to the curb.

It's different, and No!

lisab said:
Some of the guests needed remedial lessons on how to wear a hat.

And in the opinion of a mere man, how to choose one! (Evo beat me to it)
 
  • #64
I heard that the middletons are paying $100,000 of the costs, the Royals the balance, and tax payers transportation and security.

At least Kate had a beautiful, elegant dress. That fiasco Diana wore was the ugliest wedding dress I've ever seen. I was shocked and disappointed when I saw the thing, I was expecting something elegant, instead it was a gawdy creation of huge poofs on her arms and a tacky neckline.
 

Attachments

  • princess_dianas_dress.jpg
    princess_dianas_dress.jpg
    9.9 KB · Views: 380
  • kate dress.jpg
    kate dress.jpg
    21.1 KB · Views: 268
Last edited:
  • #65
Evo said:
I heard that the middletons are paying $100,000 of the costs, the Royals the balance, and tax payers transportation and security.

At least Kate had a beautiful, elegant dress. That fiasco Diana wore was the ugliest wedding dress I've ever seen. I was shocked and disappointed when I saw the thing, I was expecting something elegant, instead it was a gawdy creation of huge poofs on her arms and a tacky neckline.

So true, but that lady's beauty and shy looks wasn't letting anyone to take their eyes of off her.
 
  • #66
I don't think it's easy to calculate viewership based on the number of television sets in the world. For instance, we have 2 televisions sets and there are 3 people living here. This complicates matters. But you're still not done. QEII didn't watch it on TV so you have to subtract 1, but Kate and William brought a small portable and watched most of it before he turned it to the cricket game so you have to add 2. Anyway, in order to make a stab at a scientific number, I surveyed the members of my household, a typical family and then extrapolated to the population of the world. It turns out that nobody saw the wedding.
 
  • #67
Congratulations to them both, and best wishes to them.



lol
I surveyed the members of my household, a typical family and then extrapolated to the population of the world. It turns out that nobody saw the wedding.
In my survey, 100% watched :)
 
  • #68
its just a wedding why the big fuss?
 
  • #69
God this royal wedding crap reminds me how backward we are in Britain compared to many other parts of the developed world. Yanks and other foreigners might have been watching in large numbers, but they sure as hell weren't going "hey look, this Britain place looks like a really good example of a modern democratic country". It's all a bit of a novelty to them.
 
  • #70
Shaun_W said:
God this royal wedding crap reminds me how backward we are in Britain compared to many other parts of the developed world. Yanks and other foreigners might have been watching in large numbers, but they sure as hell weren't going "hey look, this Britain place looks like a really good example of a modern democratic country".

What you mean by the fact we removed any power they had and replaced it with what has been one of the worlds best governments, all whilst not having to resort to wiping them out in some way? Yep, stinks of bad example...
It's all a bit of a novelty to them.

And it wasn't to us?
 
  • #71
I want a fairytale wedding... I want a prince! and ride in a carriage... and a pretty dress... sooo jealous...
And William has such a regal nose! its probably the best looking nose I have ever seen!
 
  • #72
lisab said:
Some of the guests needed remedial lessons on how to wear a hat.

The essential characteristic of the British upper class is that you behave at all times as if nobody except oneself exists. Therefore, the concept of "lessons" is meaningless, since by definition teachers do not exist.

Miss Manners is only for the peasants.
 
  • #73
xxChrisxx said:
Luck isn't really needed ths time, and William and Kate actually want to get married.

So did Charles and Di. The only problem was that they got married to each other.
 
  • #74
AlephZero said:
The essential characteristic of the British upper class is that you behave at all times as if nobody except oneself exists. Therefore, the concept of "lessons" is meaningless, since by definition teachers do not exist.

Miss Manners is only for the peasants.

LOL! Well said!
 
  • #75
BobG said:
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.

But given the political (in)stability of Eastern Europe, it's quite possible he will get a chance before he's too old to care either way.

Whatever, I'm farily convinced that the law of conservation of nonsense is just as fundamental to the way the universe works as conservation of energy. So by the same sort of argument that predicts the existence of the Higgs Boson, there must also be a "nonsensical" equivalent to black holes. That would explain the stable existence of things like crown princes of nonexistent countries quite neatly. (It might also explain things like the Tea Party, if a mini-nonsenical-hole starts to grow...)
 
  • #76
elabed haidar said:
its just a wedding why the big fuss?

Well ... your wedding and my wedding is 'just a wedding' ...but this one ..IS a BIG deal.
An election for another President in the United States ...big deal .. it's just an election.




I'm SO glad no a$$hole group made it a problem for the happy well wishers.
 
  • #77
AlephZero said:
So did Charles and Di. The only problem was that they got married to each other.

Exsqueeze me! Di was the real deal AND she was a wergin... echem. And she loved :!) Charles in her little girl way.
 
  • #78
JaredJames said:
What you mean by the fact we removed any power they had and replaced it with what has been one of the worlds best governments, all whilst not having to resort to wiping them out in some way? Yep, stinks of bad example...

The queen is still the head of state. We had a massive ceremony today to celebrate the marriage of someone who will probably be the next head of state solely due to bloodline. A lot of fuss was made that one of the partners in marriage is a "commoner".

Now I don't think that they should be killed or any harm committed towards them but I think that we should do away will all of this nonsense and become a republic.

And it wasn't to us?

A hell of a lot of people in Britain take this stuff very seriously.
 
  • #79
I just can't get over the woman who quit her job to fly out to Great Britain for this. I don't think she was even invited to the wedding either.
 
  • #80
Shaun_W said:
The queen is still the head of state. We had a massive ceremony today to celebrate the marriage of someone who will probably be the next head of state solely due to bloodline. A lot of fuss was made that one of the partners in marriage is a "commoner".

Now I don't think that they should be killed or any harm committed towards them but I think that we should do away will all of this nonsense and become a republic.

They do no harm and bring in a lot of tourism. Do away with them and you lose a lot.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/apr/29/royal-wedding-tourism-boost

The UK has little going for it so far as tourism goes, they are one of the major attractions.

Besides, they still have no power. It's all ceremony and ritual.
A hell of a lot of people in Britain take this stuff very seriously.

Doesn't change the fact it's a novelty event. If it happened often, it wouldn't get anywhere near the attention.

The fact one of them was a commoner really is something new and a major novelty.
 
  • #81
JaredJames said:
Doesn't change the fact it's a novelty event. If it happened often, it wouldn't get anywhere near the attention.

The Royal wedding ... reduced to a 'novelty event'.

Without actually knowing ... just let me guess ... JaredJames is an American.

I'll let him back up his 'fact' in any way he can.
 
  • #82
Alfi said:
The Royal wedding ... reduced to a 'novelty event'.

Without actually knowing ... just let me guess ... JaredJames is an American.

No, Jared isn't American.
 
  • #83
lisab said:
No, Jared isn't American.

I'm surprised. Perhaps my prejudice is showing. My apologies.
 
  • #84
JaredJames said:
They do no harm and bring in a lot of tourism. Do away with them and you lose a lot.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/apr/29/royal-wedding-tourism-boost

The UK has little going for it so far as tourism goes, they are one of the major attractions.

Besides, they still have no power. It's all ceremony and ritual.

I didn't say that they should have their wealth and assets stripped from them. I would like them to be divorced from the state so that we have an elected head of state, and that they no longer receive taxpayer money. They can keep everything they own. They could whore themselves out for tourism. Hell, I don't even mind paying for them if it brings in revenue. As long as we are a republic.

Doesn't change the fact it's a novelty event. If it happened often, it wouldn't get anywhere near the attention.

The fact one of them was a commoner really is something new and a major novelty.

I know. It is why many (rightly) consider us ... less socially advanced than other countries. Class is a pervading issue throughout Britain and was brought to the forefront today again.
 
  • #85
Alfi said:
I'm surprised. Perhaps my prejudice is showing. My apologies.

...but I'm sure he was using "novelty" to mean "rarity".
 
  • #86
Alfi said:
The Royal wedding ... reduced to a 'novelty event'.

Without actually knowing ... just let me guess ... JaredJames is an American.

I'll let him back up his 'fact' in any way he can.

I'm Welsh.

Check the definition of 'novelty' in a dictionary.

These are one off events that don't occur often. It's something of a novelty for the British public to celebrate this.
 
  • #87
lisab said:
...but I'm sure he was using "novelty" to mean "rarity".

Correct, a 'one off' or particularly rare event.

My gran has been around nearly 80 years and has witnessed three big marriages like this (Queen, Charles and now William).

Hard to consider it anything else.

Aside from the Jubilee next year, we rarely, if ever celebrate anything about them.
 
  • #88
JaredJames said:
I'm Welsh.

aww JNJ, I commend your efforts to stick up for old Blighty.
 
  • #89
nucleargirl said:
aww JNJ, I commend your efforts to stick up for old Blighty.

I actually have something of a dislike for the royals and a class system such as we have.
 
  • #90
JaredJames said:
I'm Welsh.

Check the definition of 'novelty' in a dictionary.

These are one off events that don't occur often. It's something of a novelty for the British public to celebrate this.

Here! Here! To the Welsh :!) And just a spot more Champaign please... {hic} :redface:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
11K
Replies
29
Views
5K
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
8K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 109 ·
4
Replies
109
Views
64K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
10K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
7K