Wednesday, July 24, 2013

I like Camilla...

There, I said it.  I like Prince Charles's second wife.  She's the one he should have married in the first place.  She has the right temperament to be his wife and frankly, they look like they belong together.

Granted, if Charles had married Camilla, Prince William and Prince Harry would not be the handsome blokes they are.  And Britain's royal family would not be as interesting as it has been.  Diana was an amazingly charismatic woman and very beautiful.  She was a breath of fresh air.  People loved her.  But-- I think a lot of people forget that Diana was human and had her faults, just like anyone.  She and Charles were both unfaithful in their marriage.  Diana had a love/hate relationship with the press.  And while she did appear to be a warm and loving woman, there have been reports that if you got on her bad side, she would cut you off without a second thought.

A lot of people have written about how Diana has missed the birth of her grandson and how sad that is.  It is sad, because Diana should not have died when she did.  On the other hand, if Diana had borderline personality disorder, as has been reported, it's likely that she would have had a hard time letting her sons go.  She might not have gotten along with William's wife, Kate.  A lot of women with BPD have a hard time relating to their children's spouses because they see them as a threat.

At least Camilla seems to be fitting in decently enough.  She and Charles have had a drama free marriage thus far and seem to be very happy together.  I have a feeling if they had been allowed to be together from the start, they would have had a long marriage.

I'm a little sad about all the crappy comments about Camilla.  I know people think she's a homewrecker, but the truth is, no one in that story was totally innocent.  And she makes Charles happy.  I, for one, wish her well... even though I do wonder how Diana would have celebrated the birth of her grandson.  I'm sure it would have been beautiful...  but how could the world deal with glamourous Diana and dazzling Kate at the same time?  It might have been more than we could have handled.

Down with Camilla hate.  She's alright.



11 comments:

  1. I share so many sentiments in regard to Damilla and Diana. Diana would not have gone down without a fight in terms of aging. And to be somewhat demoted by a beautiful and younger Kate might have been more than she could have handled. She might have been a real trouble_maker in their relationship.

    There are so many reasons she and Charles should never have married that they couldn't be listed in one reponse. Yet they did make beautiful babies . . .

    And perhaps I've read her incorrectly; maybe Diana would have aged gracefully and might have gotten along with Kate, although it's hard to see it. Her jealousy of Tiggy Legge-Bourkes, the nanny of sorts that Charles employed after the separation, was something of a glimpse as to how she might have taken to the loves in her sons' lives. I can easily see her playing one biy's wife against the othrs once they were both married. (I find it heart-warming to see the brothers' relationship and the obvious mutual fondness between Kate and Harry.)

    I like Camilla as well. I don't know what kept s her Charles apart in the first place. I think she brings out the very best in Charles. They're obviously fond of each other's offspring and grandchildren. They're good people who were caught up in a bad situation.

    Yet there's something to be said for beauty. Charles was very jealous of Diana because the public was more intereested in her than in in him during public appearances. The same isn't true of William and Kate. First of all, people ARE interested in William,in part because he, too, is one of the "beautiful people," and also because he's so genuinely fond of his wife that he's proud when people take notice of her. Also, somewhere dwn the line, he developed coping skills that neither parent had. (Charles may since have developed them in his reltionship and obvious happiness with Camilla.)

    Diana, despite crying and making herself throw up behind the locked bathroom door as little Willim handed her tissues under the door, was a pretty good mother - certainly she raised her children in the amount of time she had far better than she was raised. Charles was obviously a great father,(Diana even admitted it after thr divorce) especially considerig royal protocols that had to be followed.

    This baby is lucky, if it had to be royalty, to have been born in the current generation.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'm writing this from a phone in a restaurant, so I don't have the ability to check, but I think Charles and Camilla couldn't wed because she was a commoner. Then she married Tom Parker Bowles.

    I think I read that she helped pick out Diana for Charles. Diana ticked all the boxes... Pretty, young, virginal, and aristocratic.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Er... Andrew Parker Bowles was her ex. Tom is her son.

      Delete
  3. On further reading, it turns out Charles and Camilla have known each since before I was born. They met in 1971. They dated, even when Camilla was married, and her husband was okay with it, because he was having affairs too. Charles was sad when she married.

    But... It looks like back in their day, she would not have been royal material.

    Diana was a good a loving mother and she was a great princess. But she was not suitable for Charles. It was an unfair situation all around.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Charles never should have married Diana in the first place. How incredibly sad that during their engagement interview, Diana said they were in love and Charles said "Whatever 'in love' means." Gee, glaring red flag anyone??

    So yeah, it's long past time to move on from the Camilla hate. Let's face it, the same scene has played out millions of times around the world since time began - A loves B, A marries someone else, A cheats with B, eventually A gets divorced and marries B or someone else altogether.

    It happens. No one is going to say affairs should be accepted, but there is a point where you need to move past how a couple got together and just let it be what it is. In this case, there was a long shared history between the two, Charles married a woman he never should have married in the first place, and now in his golden years he's happy with the woman he always wanted. More power to him.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes. And their eight years together have apparently been pretty drama free. They should have been together and now they are. I wish them the best.

      Delete
  5. kate's a commoner. Did the rues change?

    P.S. My cousin is in the Navy and was contracted out to the Army because the Army has some trouble keeping techie positions filled. he was sent to an army mobile hospital in Kuwait (Camp Arifjan, I think). he was an IT2, whatever that is, but because of the nature of his assignment with the hospital, he had to be trined as a medic as well. A, Camp Arijan was shared by multi-national groups, incuding
    but not limited to Australians, Brits/ United Kingdom citizens or subjects or whetever they're considered, Polish, and Australins. My cousin was there during the royal wedding. Whenever the topic of the royal wedding came u, the Brits would almost universally make some reference, my cousin said, to Wiliam's bride being a "filthy commoner." He was marrying a perfectly lovely lady whose family was wealthy but had earned their wealth as opposed to being born into it, but because they held no titles, in their minds William was marrying a "filthy" commoner. Diana, with her possible borderline personality disorder, which no one knew of at the time of her wedding, was even after the fact, perfectly acceptable marriage and future queen material (in retrospect, she would have fit right in; frsgile mental health status ran rampant in the British monarchy) but older, educated, stable Kate Middleton was a "filthy" commoner. As my cousin [and any others] said [he didn't invent the sentiment or the saying], we fought the revolutionary war so we wouldn't have to care about this crap.

    Still, I care about this baby. I care about the babies I see on the street in strollers whose parents I've never seen before, either in real life or in the newspapers. (some of their parents find my attention strange and stalker-like. Others are flattered at the attention. Others still understand a very young woman's fascination with babies. I love babies and get excited about them.

    And it boils my blood that her compatriots would refer to Kate Middleton as a "filthy" commoner. They're damned lucky to have such a lovely and level-headed woman as future queen consort and as the mother of their future king.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Evidently, Kate's status as a commoner is a non issue. In the 80s, it apparently still mattered if someone marrying the heir apparent was from the "right" family. It's ridiculous and I'm glad the royal family has evolved.

    Of course, Kate is a natural and I think the royals noticed how Diana breathed life into the monarchy. That may be why they evolved. Kate was an excellent choice for the duties she handles now... And she's very stable, by appearances, anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Alexis, it sounds like your cousin is in Kuwait under a program one of my officers manages. When the Army is unable to fill a position coded for an Army billet we have an agreement with the Air Force and the Navy to cover the gap. Often the Sailors lack groung combat training, and so my staff arranges that for them.

    ReplyDelete
  8. D-503, what you describe sounds very much like what my cousin did. Everyone going over had to be assigned a weapon. I thn it was a rifle, but gun, rifle, whatever, they're all the same to me. They had to name their weapons. His rifle (or whatever) was named Teresa.

    Because it was a hospital and his medical skills were limited even though he had received some training, his skills were minimal, as he was a techie. One of his jobs, which he had to do only a few times, was, once triage had happened and it was determined someone had no chance of making it and medical personnel were spear so thin that it wasn't worth it to waste the limited resources on a person who had no chance of survival, was that he had to talk to the wounded serviceman until he passed away. While I'm glad the military thought it was important for no one to die alone, I still feel terrible for my cousin for having to do that job.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh man. That must have been wrenching for him.

      Delete

Comments on older posts will be moderated until further notice.