He looked like a sad old man...
...playing dress up. Royalty doesn't have to do much in England, but Charles is the Joe Biden of Windsors.
share...playing dress up. Royalty doesn't have to do much in England, but Charles is the Joe Biden of Windsors.
shareNo "playing dress up".
He IS King of the United Kingdom and the 14 other Commonwealth realms. His official Coronation was today. A grand event!
Who are you?
Jealous much?
He looked depressed and as though the clothes didn't really suit him. He is the King of England and the Commonwealth because he inherited it. I used to think it was nice that he took an interest in gardening. Not enough of an interest, unfortunately, to pay attention to the cycles in the weather. So if you tell someone who doesn't know much that there really is an impending Ice Age, and switch from that to Global Warming, and switch from that to Climate Change, and just like in Barney Miller each and every one is an "existential threat," the the poor, sad fellow is going to believe it. Now you've got a King that was mobbed up with the WEF sitting on the throne instead of the irreplaceable Queen Elizabeth II. And yes, a Coronation -- particularly of the oldest monarch ever crowned -- is an historic event. But this sad, old man doesn't seem up to the task.
Lovely to see his bit on the side finally elevated to Queen. Nothing trailer trash about that at all. 🙄
You are "trailer trash".
What does "Climate Change" have to do with the Coronation of the King of the United Kingdom and the 14 other Commonwealth realms?
Jealous little man.
I'm laughing about what you posted about Queen Camilla. In case you don't know- she is is Queen of the United Kingdom and the 14 other Commonwealth realms as the wife of King Charles III.
Who are you?
Camilla IS his "bit on the side," which is trashy, not something to brag about. Remember how he'd told Camilla he wanted to be her underwear or her tampon, or something that would make a person heave, in his attempt at a love letter?
And the Climate Change thing comes into play because that's the hook the WEF has in him. I suppose you like Klaus, the sinister Teutonic megalomaniac hiding in plain sight as a sinister Teutonic megalomaniac? Most of the rest of us von't eat ze bugs.
Who's the jealous little man? "Destinata" -- the a on the end is feminine. Biological female, here.
But, no, I wouldn't be jealous of those pair. I think most of the Brits and the Commonwealth would like to see Wills on the throne. Rumor was, years ago, that Charles would simply step back and let Wills have it, that it would pass from Queen Elizabeth II -- beloved by almost all -- to his son, and Charles would just garden and live at taxpayer expense.
Who am I? I'm nobody, which trumps a bootlick like yourself.
So, Destinata, you'd like to be William's "bit on the side", eh? What's your problem, anyway? Having a spew about a man you don't know personally, and spewing to other people you don't know personally?
For all his shortcomings, Charles is a better person than you, any day of the week.
(Quote) "a man you don't know personally"
Followed by:
(Quote) "Charles is a better person than you"
Oh the irony...
I'm baffled as to your loyalty to someone *YOU* don't know either?
So, you need to be personally acquainted with someone famous, before you'll make civil comments about them??
Obviously your target is a better person than you, since he's not known for that crap behaviour. You are.
You're not acquainted with seagal72 or myself, and you're hardly civil. Borrow a ladder and climb down from your high horse.
shareI'm very civil. But I give as good as I get.
shareWhat's your dog in this fight, then? Because YOU'RE getting nothing. Do you think Charles is his mother's equal? I doubt there's a person in America that thinks that, once they see her in her WWII uniform and learn she was a driver/mechanic during the War.
shareIntersting that you call this a "fight". You're the OP who claimed that King Charles III was merely "playing dress-up". Did you think that wouldn't provoke a defence from people who respect the Royal institution, and know how to express it?
And to answer your question; no, I don't think Charles is the equal of his mother. We could hardly expect to have two Monarchs of her quality in one century.
Where do you get that I'd want to be the "bit on the side" for any of them.
Good grief, talking to some of you is like talking to the Meghan devotees -- "You're just jealous!" "You wish you were her!" "You're just a racist!"
There are some legitimate reasons to be concerned about or to even criticize the royals. Being mobbed up with the WEF is deeply concerning. If, like his mother, he keeps completely out of politics and does not comment yay or nay, it shouldn't matter. But he's been somewhat outspoken in the past.
Thank you, however, for admitting the man does have shortcomings. We can agree on that. I guess we disagree about whether someone can comment on what they've been begged to set their alarm for so they can wake up early and catch all the pomp and pageantry of blah, blah, blah. Whether you want to admit it or not, there's a lot of spectator sport to this.
Well, you're obviously for getting rid of King Charles and replacing him with "Wills", as soon as possible. It's certainly a spectator sport for you, isn't it. Getting to perve at young men in uniforms, and scorn old men in robes.
Everyone has shortcomings. Even me. But the genuinely regal are able to overcome them in situations like getting crowned in front of billions of cynical people.
Oh! You think Charles is nothing short of miraculous because he didn't mess up with the ceremony. He's had to meet heads of state, sit down to multi-course meals with them, and use the proper utensils while always saying the "right" thing. That's far trickier than going through the motions at a coronation.
You have a lovely day. Every day wake up knowing that Charles is on his throne and THEREFORE all is right with Great Britain and the Commonwealth.
Bitter, eh? Never mind, you'll get over it.
Now, among all the nonsense you've written in this thread, the only thing I've really taken offence to is the post where you compared me to a "Meghan devotee". To quote Vito, "That I do not forgive."
"Who's the jealous little man? "Destinata" -- the a on the end is feminine. Biological female, here."
Ah, so that explains your strange animus towards Queen Camilla.
"But, no, I wouldn't be jealous of those pair."
You are jealous. Common too.
And you are of the sort all too common on social media who screech, "Jealous!" when anyone criticizes your precious. Mrs. Biden walks out embarrassing all of America in those horrible dresses that look like they've been cut from shower curtains, and her claque scream, "Jealous!" as if anyone with a sewing machine and some ugly cloth couldn't look just as bad. Or if all the people who criticize Trump for any reason are told they're jealous of his hair, as if anyone could be.
Well, think whatever you have to in order to feel superior. 🙄
"in those horrible dresses that look like they've been cut from shower curtains, and her claque scream, "Jealous!" as if anyone with a sewing machine and some ugly cloth couldn't look just as bad."
Hahaha, Destinata, you're being a typical woman!!
I know,he looked depressed. Maybe he was thinking about his parents, or other family issues. Maybe it dawned on him all the pressure he will face. That cannot be easy at his age.
shareHe looked very old and frail, barely able to walk under all that regalia. Neither he nor Camilla look healthy, I mean I see far healthier-looking people in their seventies every time I go for a walk or a hike!
Hell, look at Princess Anne, who at age 72 marched out of the church, got on a horse, and joined the horse guards by the royal carriages! And she wasn't noticeable, because she blended right in with the fit young soldiers.
You're right, and I thought the same thing. He couldn't even muster a tiny smile when his son kissed him on the cheek? I just shook my head when the lyrics turned to "may he live forever." I sort of wondered if he'd live through the ceremony. I'd be surprised if he makes it another five years. That man is burned out, mentally and physically.
And I have to laugh at Callahan above. It means absolutely nothing that he's "King of the UK and the Commonwealth". For many years of his life his conduct was a disgrace. He did nothing to earn that position but be born and outlive his mother (no mean feat there anyway). And for Americans, who threw off the concept of royalty 250 years ago, it's an outdated and rather useless tradition.
We owe Charles III not the least measure of respect. If he'd led a responsible life and done something positive and noteworthy with his position and fame, we could respect the man. However, he has not. And I believe this was the attitude of his mother, as well. She hung on as long as she could to keep her dud of a son off the throne.
Otter, that robe is made of gold threaded silk, and weighs, (figuratively), a ton. That's why the two clerics on either side of him held the edges of it when he walked.
And the reason he looked "old and frail" was very likely because he knows very well that the public today doesn't understand concepts like regality and majesty. His restrained demeanour was the effect of his downplaying his role in the ceremony, to placate the noisy whiners who love to bleat about Royalty being "too self-important", and "pompous". Ridicule and mockery is all they know how to do. And they're even a bit clumsy at that..
I quite like Princess Anne, but it's a bit much to compare her vigour on the day to Charles' seeming fatigue. She was only a spectator among many others. Charles was the one who had to do it all, and get it right.
And he did.
.
Yes, he did it right, but he let the strain show in a way his mother never did. I suppose that's why his demeanor didn't feel regal to me, but what do I know, I'm an American.
But as to his physical condition, well, there are a lot of real-life reasons I might have an opinion on why or how one person in their seventies might look healthier or more energetic than another, and well. To my experienced eye, Charles doesn't look outstandingly healthy, to put it politely.
Yes, Otter, but if you can empathise with a 74 year-old man, then you'd avoid making pointed online comments about his age and health. From your post, I'm guessing you're in the same age group.
He had just lost his very beloved mother, nine months ago. And he was 74. And he was sitting in the chair which his recently-deceased mother had sat in for the very same ceremony. And he was burdened with the certain knowledge that in this age, unlike in 1953, he was "performing" in front a largely cynical, jaded population who wouldn't hesitate to belittle him and anything he did. Bit of a burden, that.
He played it absolutely straight. He gave them nothing. No hint of emotion, nothing for the cynics to grab onto, to sneer at him.
He did extremely well.
.
If you're a citizen of the UK or commonwealth, and he impressed you, then he did it right! The opinions of Americans and other foreigners don't really count here.
As for his health, well, he's just now been stuck with a job he can't retire from, at age 74!
I think he can, if he wanted.
shareHe impressed me because he flawlessly performed a set, rigid routine requiring concentration, cues, practice, and mental acuity. All this, while he knew that many billions of people, friends and foes, were watching every tilt of his head and blink of his eye. And while he tried to ignore his own age and fitness.
Cf this to gigantic moron footballers who stumble and fall over at stupid bloody football games, and then lie on the ground sobbing.... and afterwards get feted by TV reporters.
Beats me why the public can so readily scoff at substantial people, yet they'll fall down and worship "sportsmen".
Though for the best of his country & British monarchy in general he probably should have passed the throne to his son, who is likely better received by the public, and in better health and age to handle the royal duties.
But I do understand it is not something so easy to give up.
I think if he had done that, fc, he would have been absolutely blistered by all the sarcastic attacks from the anti-royalist tossers. They attack the Royal Family for anything and everything. They'd have called him a weakling and a deserter, and any other insult they could think of. It's a hobby with some of them.
And of course there would even be some otherwise-allegiant people who might think he had reneged on his duty. No doubt he wouldn't want to be likened to Edward VIII, backing out at the last minute and letting people down. And it would probably give silly Harry a reason to gloat at his family some more...
Actually, I don't think it would be terriby hard for him to give it up, if he thought he had a good reason. It's been more of a burden than a blessing to him.
.
I think he would have been better perceived if he did that, then again the move is not really about him.
shareAfter putting up with nearly 50 years of mean spirited criticism from media outlets, and waiting until his mom sadly passed, Charles wants his day in the sun! He finally got it! Now the hard work begins. Good luck to him. I hope he finally gets the respect he long deserves.
shareOne reason to have monarchy as head of state I think is about respectability, which is supposed to be a part of nobility. So we don't have to endure the politicians, who more often than not bring shame to the country, if not humanity.
The controversial relationship between Charles and Camilla did not reflect well on him, especially when Diana was so universally beloved.
Anyway I think it could be a risky move, there might be implications to commonwealth and Scottish independence movement, etc.
But we will see.
Most folks at seventy are not doing as badly as our American President. I fully expected him to do well.
shareYes, he did it right, but he let the strain show in a way his mother never did.
His mother was out making public appearances without letting the strain show into her mid-90s, so that's what I've come to expect. It's what I've come to assume a monarch does.
I have no idea if the old gal was still out performing hour-long ceremonies when she was over 70, but she was still opening Pariliament in heavy ermine robes and a five-pound crown, at an advanced age.
Actually, for opening parliament, Elizabeth always wore the Imperial State Crown, which is much lighter, at 2.3lbs, than the St. Edward's Crown that Charles wore at his coronation (which is 4.9 lbs). And in 2021, Queen Elizabeth broke tradition and wore no crown at all, nor did she wear the ceremonial robes. Also, for opening parliament, I believe she spent much more time seated. It was, on the whole, a less taxing ceremony.
shareI had a quick look at pics of Elizabeth opening Parliament before posting above, and saw at least two different crowns. But this one looks like the it's huge heavy one Charles wore on Saturday, it's definitely got the ruby and diamond that are the size of baseballs in the front.
https://th.bing.com/th/id/OIF.tYrLtbhtdUZ0epFPsQVAfg?pid=ImgDet&rs=1
So here's a picture of her wearing that massive crown, a heavy ermine cape, and 15 pounds of jewery at an obviously advanced age, it's possible when this was taken she was older than Charles is now. Maybe she started using a smaller crown when she got really old, like 90.
No, that's the lighter Imperial State Crown. You can see it side by side with St. Edward's Crown here:
http://orderofsplendor.blogspot.com/2011/10/royal-splendor-101-crown-jewels.html
The Imperial State Crown, which is on the far left, has a structure that is a lace-like tracery of gems, and a very squarish cross on the top, and you can clearly see this is the crown Queen Elizabeth was wearing in the photo you you linked. You also see no gold color in that photo. Also note the large red ruby on the front of the Imperial State Crown, clearly visible in the photo you linked. St. Edward's Crown, shown second from left, which is made of solid gold, is clearly gold in color, no red ruby in the front, and with a more open cross on top. The St. Edward Crown is massive, and I am not sure Elizabeth ever wore it after her coronation. Some monarchs, like Queen Victoria (who was eighteen when she took the throne, and nineteen at her coronation), didn't even wear it then.
Charles wore St. Edward's Crown for part of his coronation, then switched to the lighter Imperial State Crown. Elizabeth did the same, and it's the lighter Imperial State Crown she's wearing in her official coronation photo.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coronation_of_Elizabeth_II#/media/File:Queen_Elizabeth_II_on_her_Coronation_Day_(cropped).jpg
No, here's the picture I used, of Elizabeth opening Parliament in the crown with the square thingie on top. the fleur de lises on the band, and the huge ruby and diamond in front.
https://th.bing.com/th/id/OIF.tYrLtbhtdUZ0epFPsQVAfg?pid=ImgDet&rs=1
And here's Charles wearing the same thing on Coronation Day. Same ruby, diamond, fleur de lises, and square thingie on top.
https://th.bing.com/th?id=OIF.9frfiLE5mXZvZKcD7s3l%2fA&pid=ImgDet&rs=1
Do you post on the Datalounge, by any chance? That's the only place on the internet where I've found people who are knowledgeable about crowns!
And here are photos and video of Charles wearing the heavy, solid gold St. Edward Crown during the actual coronation ceremony.
https://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Culture/5-best-moments-coronation-king-charles-iii/story?id=99042389
You can clearly see it's the gold St. Edward Crown, without the large ruby and the large diamond at the front.
The same site also shows that after the ceremony -- for the photos on the balcony of Buckingham Palace for example -- he had switched to the lighter Imperial State Crown, which has the ruby, and the diamond.
No, I'd never even heard of Datalounge to be honest. I just have a keen interest in history, and knowledge in general (won me some money on Jeopardy with it in 2014), a keen eye for detail, and I know how to research things I don't already know.
It seems he wore both.
https://th.bing.com/th/id/OIF.sUA02WDPgmUI7f6aEokrgA?pid=ImgDet&rs=1
And having two massive crowns and two scepters is THE very definition of overkill!
Here is a video of Queen Elizabeth herself (looks like it was made during late 60s or the 70s) explaining some of the details of the Imperial State Crown, and stating that she has it at the palace because she had just worn it earlier that day for the state opening of Parliament. At the end of the video, she explains that this crown is worn at openings of Parliament, and after a coronation, while the heavier St. Edward's Crown, is only worn once, at the moment of crowning.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t57tnNXNNCU
"Yes, he did it right, but he let the strain show in a way his mother never did."
Um, Otter? Elizabeth was 25 when crowned Queen, and Charles was almost 75 when crowned King. Does the concept of youth, fitness and health escape you at such a large age gap?
Charles is not a young man and just because his mother was remarkably fit at that age does not mean that he will be or live to be nearly 100 years old.
shareHis sister, who is a couple of years younger, was up riding with the household cavalry while Charles was staggering under the weight of gold and ermine.
She's the one who's going to live to be a 105, like their grandmother, not Charles.
As someone else said, those robes are BLOODY HEAVY. Why else would he get two people to help him up on either side?
Oh yeah, those robes are bloody heavy and the crown officially weighs five pounds, and I would seriously like to see all the aging royal siblings in a crown-and-ermine-robes race!
Edward has the advantage of being only sixty, but I still think Anne would win! Charles would come in last, he's the oldest and looks the least healthy. And Andrew wouldn't finish, he'd dodge away and try to sell the crown to some foreign oligarch.
Yeah, his mother died recently, so him looking like what he is, a sad old man, kinda makes sense.
shareMaybe it's just because he's so old.
He's finally got what he's been waiting for his entire adulthood - let's not forget the Queen's actions in not stepping aside to enjoy a reasonable retirement - but now it's come, he probably just feels deflated that it's happened too late and probably appreciates that it will be his turn to meet his maker in the not too distant future.
Maybe he just isn't happy...
The poor man has been though a hell of a lot in 30 plus years! Good luck to him.
shareI don't think you are in a position to pity a king, or a president for that matter.
shareAnyone's in that position. I hope he's breathing easier and feeling better today, and more able to smile.
Now, what an American ISN'T in a position to do, and what I see all too often, is tell you that you shouldn't have a monarchy, or that there's something wrong with you for even wanting a monarch. You have a rich and amazing history that you're justifiably proud of.
I noticed that he attempted to be humble a few times which is something his mother didn't need to do at her coronation. Different times when more people are questioning its existence.
He gave a slight smile to guests as he walked in making sure to look them in the eyes. Then, when he walked out, he mouthed "thank you" to the guests near the exit. Much more inclusive, too. Even the attire worn by guests was more modest - no tiaras nor tuxedos.
He looked old, but not sad to me. To be fair, Charles recently lost his mom, dad, son and two grandchildren. But, Camilla was beaming. She couldn't help smiling throughout the ceremony. Ditto little Charlotte. They should allow a choice for heirs. Charlotte looks like she would enjoy being a queen and has confidence and poise. Her brother George looked scared or bewildered half the time.
Charles has not lost his son and grandkids, there is a bond, albeit an ocean away.
shareNobody trusts Harry since he and Meghan plan to write a few more books. He spent months disparaging his family including his father. He didn't stay to be with his father and rest of the family even though he rarely sees them now. Harry allowed his wife to wreck his relationship with his family.
shareHopefully in the future,things will get better.
share