I am getting fairly bad vibes from Waity Charley and gollum-eyed Camilla. About seven adjectives too many in his statement of bereavement, and now he's out gladhanding.
In about a week, the more sober news commentators will start talking about whether or not a monarch almost as famous for being "a world class whinger" as he is for being royal, can pivot his character to one more stoic and king like. They're already talking about whether or not he can be, as the law commands, less meddling as a monarch than he was as Prince of Wales.
I've admired his work on the environment (totally ganked from Prince Philip) since the '70s.
But I think the answer to the question is no. He will finish as he as become, Charles the Petulant, petulance enabled and impelled by his conniving partner. And the UK will move further toward the end of the constitutional monarchy. I think this is a shame.
Long before Prince Harry penned his highly anticipated memoir, Prince Charles took aim at palace life with a TV special and a tome of his own.
www.vanityfair.com
@billybudd Thank you for the article. I have never been keen on Charles, and the article reminded me why.
This morning, I watched Charles’ bereavement speech, his dedication to Her Majesty, and his introduction to his reign. I thought that speech was quite poignant, but also somewhat unsettling. There was definitely a great deal of “filler” in the form of superfluous adjectives, as you so rightly pointed out..
Further, I’m unsure if it was necessary to use that speech to mention Harry and further for Charles’ to express his love for Meghan. I find that immensely difficult to believe. The Queen would never have said “my darling Philip” in public, so I found it unnecessary for Charles to use that term about Camilla, after he had just vowed to follow in his mother’s footsteps.
He has often seemed to have used speeches to foist Camilla onto us by singing her praises, and extolling her virtues, which is ironic to say the least. I have always seen her as “conniving” too. That was certainly the case with her pretend friendship with Diana, before and after the wedding, whilst it seems she and Charles had no intention to end their affair.
I agree with you that the reign of Charles could be the beginning of the end of the monarchy, and that would be a great shame. I’m sure there are many of who would agree that Charles’ tenure should be brief and the mantle passed to William, who seems to be the only truly “steadfast” member of the monarchy. It does seem the he and Catherine are the only possibilities available to save the monarchy.
Dear Tattlers, I do not want to offend or cause any unrest here. The loss of Her Majesty id still very raw and will remain so. This issue of the accession of Charles has been on my mind for quite a few years. Billybudd’s post reminded me of the why of my feelings and thoughts.
In Australia, Charles has often been the butt of jokes, which is often a cultural reaction, however he has expressed some controversial and inappropriate words, his personal thoughts and beliefs that have no place in monarchy. It certainly doesn’t help that Diana was adored by Australians, and that Charles was a poor second.
Her Majesty was always going to be a hard act to follow, and I doubt Charles can begin to fill his Mother’s shoes. She really is absolutely irreplaceable.
At the same time, the prospect of a republic is somewhat unnerving also. We shall wait and see.
for me), the enhancement of Commonwealth bonding ( not you, you narc creeps Nutmeg and Ginge) and a huge focus on youth and opportunity growth.
