Page 2 of 24 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 240
Thanks Tree209Thanks

Thread: British royals.

  1. #11
    Veteran Member cpicturetaker12's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    27,595
    Thanks
    19723

    From
    Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by Paris View Post
    Sure.

    Yep and he caught HELL for that.

  2. #12
    Radical Centrist BigLeRoy's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    30,672
    Thanks
    25831

    From
    Colorado
    Quote Originally Posted by Arkady View Post
    I never feel more out-of-step with the American people than when subject turns to the British royal family -- an endless source of fascination for millions of Americans, for reasons I cannot even begin to fathom. On the front page of CNN.com, a quarter of the stories in the "Top Stories" section, at the moment, deal with a royal family wedding.

    If you're unfamiliar with the story (hard to imagine, since it's been covered by screaming headlines in every major news outlet), here's a quick summary: a guy who is sixth in line to inherit a meaningless figurehead position for a once-important country is engaged to marry an obscure character actor. That's it. For some reason, this is a major story requiring hundreds of articles over the course of months, even from hard-news outlets.

    Now, to be fair, I don't understand celebrity culture in general. Although I enjoy movies and TV shows, I'm only mildly interested in talents behind the camera, and not interested at all in those in front of it. In fact, I prefer to know as little as possible about such people, since knowing a lot about an actor colors how you see a character (try watching the Cosby Show these days). But as un-engaging as I find regular celebrity gossip, gossip about British royals is ten times worse. At least most celebrities are famous because of something interesting about them -- incredible beauty, great talent, etc. I find it a lot harder to understand why someone would care about a homely aristocrat whose only interesting feature is inbreeding.
    Americans don't read 'Common Sense' by Thomas Paine much anymore, do they?

    But they should.

    They should.
    Thanks from Arkady, Ian Jeffrey and Friday13

  3. #13
    Radical Centrist BigLeRoy's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    30,672
    Thanks
    25831

    From
    Colorado
    Quote Originally Posted by cpicturetaker12 View Post
    Yep and he caught HELL for that.
    As well he should have.

    Sensible people don't go around dressing up as Nazis, you know.
    Thanks from Arkady, bajisima and Friday13

  4. #14
    Dick with my Buzz...Try DebateDrone's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    35,291
    Thanks
    29979

    From
    SWUSA
    Harry and Meghan are getting married. What the US and other press is doing is not Harry's and Meghan's fault.

    CBS started coverage from London last week.

    This morning I was on NBC, the reporter said he had to report on Meghan's father's difficulties.

  5. #15
    New Member
    Joined
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    735
    Thanks
    999

    From
    Massachusetts
    Quote Originally Posted by Babba View Post
    For me, the British monarchy is a curiosity completely removed from my experience. Also, I admire the queen. She's done an amazing job. It's also interesting that a biracial American is about to marry into the family.
    I guess I get the concept of having curiosity for things removed from one's experience but, for me that would be something like immersing myself in the world of wreck-divers or LARPers or some other intricate sub-culture. The British royal family is far removed from my experience, but just seems stuffy and dull.

    In what sense do you think Elizabeth Windsor has done an amazing job? In my view, hers seems like a pretty trivial and self-serving job of trying to prop up the prestige of the decaying institution of the monarchy. And she doesn't seem to have done a very good job of that. You'd be hard-pressed to find a period of time when the royal family lost as much dignity as during her rule.

    As for a slightly famous American marrying into the family: meh. It just seems like a tackier rehash of Edward marrying American celebrity Wallis Simpson, only without the drama of it actually impacting the succession. The bi-racial aspect seems to have some people excited, but I'm not clear on why that matters, either.
    Thanks from Friday13

  6. #16
    New Member
    Joined
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    735
    Thanks
    999

    From
    Massachusetts
    Quote Originally Posted by TNHarley View Post
    I find the last part interesting. But the monarchy? They dont even have any real power anymore. They just get paid to live in luxury.
    Hek, they dont even own the countries "assets" anymore.
    That's my view. The monarchy was interesting up through about the reign of Victoria, since she was the last to have any kind of meaningful power, culturally if not politically. These days, though, they're basically just the Kardashians but stuffier.
    Last edited by Arkady; 15th May 2018 at 10:48 AM.
    Thanks from BigLeRoy and Friday13

  7. #17
    New Member
    Joined
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    735
    Thanks
    999

    From
    Massachusetts
    Quote Originally Posted by syrenn View Post
    I love the royals. The history alone is compelling.
    I'm a total nut for history, including the portion of British history leading up to and through the era when they were an important world empire. But caring about the monarchy, now, just because the monarchy of the past was interesting, to me is a bit like sailing off Cape Trafalgar today and watching the waves because there was once an important sea battle fought there. There's not much to see. At this point, we're talking about a completely powerless figurehead institution of a nation that becomes less consequential each passing year.... and with this particular wedding, we're talking about something that isn't, in a million years, going to matter for purposes of determining the monarch, since the guy getting married is already sixth from the throne and only likely to get farther in coming years. It's like Andrew marrying Sarah Ferguson. It simply didn't matter.
    Thanks from Friday13

  8. #18
    New Member
    Joined
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    735
    Thanks
    999

    From
    Massachusetts
    Quote Originally Posted by cpicturetaker12 View Post
    A--"White European", our 'first cousins' so to speak (English, Irish, Scottish). ANGLOPHILES are everywhere here.
    Yes. I don't get that.

    B--1 billion people watched Diana and the Ears get married 30+ years ago. Watch parties at 8 or 9 in the MORNING. Something is fascinating.
    I was a kid, at the time, and one of my cousins obsessed over the Diana wedding. I couldn't imagine why it was meant to be interesting. Even if they were interesting people, the idea of watching the wedding of strangers would have seemed odd -- for example, if I were offered the chance to watch a film of the wedding of Pierre and Marie Currie, two fascinating people, I'd decline, because as interesting as they are, seeing them get married wouldn't be. Yet millions found it interesting to watch two deathly dull people like Charles and Diana get hitched.

    C--She's American. She's well educated, having gone to one of the top US colleges.
    She went to my wife's alma mater. I suppose that makes her vaguely more interesting than the majority of no-name Hollywood actresses. But barely.

    She's 1/2 black with an interesting yet ordinary American background.
    I guess I don't see why that's meant to make it more interesting.

    D--She and he are 'celebrities'.
    Understood. And, as I said, the whole fascination with celebrities is something I don't get. But I could at least understand a little if we were talking about people famous based on extraordinary accomplishments.... like Lebron James marrying Emma Stone. Then we'd have the most successful basketball player of our time and a commercially accomplished and Oscar-winning actress. But instead we have someone whose only claim to fame is being born in the right family marrying someone I'd never even have heard of if she weren't engaged to someone who was born in the right family.
    Thanks from Friday13

  9. #19
    Member tnbskts's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    3,459
    Thanks
    4524

    From
    British expat in USA
    Personally I prefer a system of constitutional monarchy where the head of state is separate from party politics. But the celebrity aspect of royalty is unfortunate.
    Thanks from Leo2 and Friday13

  10. #20
    Radical Centrist BigLeRoy's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    30,672
    Thanks
    25831

    From
    Colorado
    Quote Originally Posted by tnbskts View Post
    Personally I prefer a system of constitutional monarchy where the head of state is separate from party politics. But the celebrity aspect of royalty is unfortunate.
    Um, why do you need monarchs, at ALL?!??
    Thanks from Arkady and Friday13

Page 2 of 24 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 50
    Last Post: 10th April 2018, 02:12 PM
  2. Russian TV mocks Brit Royals
    By The Man in forum Current Events
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 15th March 2018, 03:43 AM
  3. KC Royals clubhouse hit by chickenpox
    By bajisima in forum Current Events
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 2nd September 2015, 07:21 AM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed