?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Eroticdreambattle [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Tony Grist

[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

Charles And Camilla [Feb. 13th, 2007|09:18 am]
Tony Grist
I had a dream that Charles and Camilla had been busted for cocaine use and everybody was tip-toeing round the story.

I know why. There was an item halfway through last night's news bulletin about Camilla going into hospital- only she's not called Camilla any longer, she's called the Duchess of Cornwall. The establishment has taken her to its encrusted bosom and the rest of us are expected to meekly follow suit. 

I hate the way the media- after despising the woman for decades- is now giving her respect. Look, she's the same person she always was. Calling her Duchess doesn't change the way she treated Di.

Remember?  Remember how that young girl was tricked into an empty marriage, how she was manipulated, neglected, cheated on? Charles and Camilla engineered that- as cynically as the lovers in Les Liasons Dangereuses. Time doesn't change any of that- and neither of them has ever said they're sorry. This Darby and Joan act of theirs shouldn't fool anybody....

And here's footage of the Duchess of Cornwall making like a favourite auntie at some photo-op in a primary school.

Oh, what's the use...
linkReply

Comments:
[User Picture]From: aellia
2007-02-13 10:26 am (UTC)
What really annoys me is the way that comedians are satirists feel it's acceptable to make jokes about Diana's death.
And reading you subject line quickly I had Chinchilla from somewhere
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: poliphilo
2007-02-13 12:28 pm (UTC)
Did you ever read Julie Burchill's book about Di? She really gives Charles a hard time- and quite right too.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: pondhopper
2007-02-13 01:10 pm (UTC)
Sad, but true.
I am so happy that Spain has a respectable and respected royal family. Even the anti-monarchists think they´re fine people who know how to be discreet and keep their private lives well, private.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: poliphilo
2007-02-13 01:55 pm (UTC)
I used to be an out and out anti-monarchist, but I've mellowed. These days I'd be reasonably content with a European-style royal family which kept out of the tabloids and didn't cost too much. We need a head of state and better a dutiful, inexpensive monarch than a presidency filled from the ranks of super-annuated politicians.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: rosamicula
2007-02-13 01:38 pm (UTC)
I was in my teens when Charles and Di got married, but even I knew that a royal marriage was not like a normal marriage and that there were expectations and obligations a royal marriage would carry. I canb only assume she entered into that marriage in a state of near-cretinous naivety not to have realised that it was NOT a fairytale wedding.

I find it very very hard to see Diana as a tragic figure and it disgusts me to see her held up as some sort of role model of sweet-natured suffering. She had a very good line in public displays of empathy and a usually well-concealed line in private manipulations. When she wore a plain old puffa jacket and took the two princes to McDonalds in Kensington she complained afterwards that all she had wanted, was to do something normal and ordinary and everyday - to give her sons a taste of what being ordinary citizens was like, but that somehow the press managed to find her and it ws splashed all over the papers. Cue lots of bleating in the papers papers about poor Diana and her desperate attempts to give her sons some sense of normality to contrast with Windsor Mediaevalism. Except that she had personally contacted the paper taht scooppe dteh story to let them know what she was doing.

I think both Charles and Dian are pretty contemptible specimens, but he at least has endeavoured not to use his sons as pawns to garner public and media sympathy. She got a pompous, coinceited and arrogant husband jealous of her publicity instead of a fairytale prince, and he got not the level-headed and acquiescent broodmare that the palace demanded he chose, but a neurotic, self-obsessed halfwit who came to bed smelling of vomit.


(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: poliphilo
2007-02-13 02:13 pm (UTC)
I've always been opposed to "The Firm" and insofar as Di was the Windsors' enemy I supported her. I sort of hoped she'd bring them down.

No, she wasn't a tragic figure. She was, by the end, a hardened campaigner and capable of giving as good if not better than she got. But I do think the Windsors- and Charles in particular- treated her abominably.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: momof2girls
2007-02-13 01:57 pm (UTC)
Plus she's frumpy-looking and has really bad taste in clothes . . .
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: poliphilo
2007-02-13 02:18 pm (UTC)
Tee-hee...

She could be a lovely woman for all I know (though I suspect she's not); what really irritates me is the fickleness and subservience of the British media.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: bodhibird
2007-02-13 02:51 pm (UTC)
My gut feeling is that monarchy, at least in the traditional European style, doesn't really work unless you have a small population with short lifespans and a morality that lets the king be a stallion with all the willing women he can find. A pagan morality, that is.

Yet other European countries retain their royal families and are rather fond of them, without the media circus that the Windsors create. I seem to recall that the Swedish royals mostly live in flats and have respectable day jobs.

Have you seen The Queen? I don't recall if you've reviewed it, and I'm curious about a British subject's reaction to the film (since it *is* about British current events, more or less).
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: poliphilo
2007-02-13 08:22 pm (UTC)
I don't think the British monarchy is a good fit with modern Britain. I'd like to see it scaled back and rejigged on the Swedish model.

I haven't seen the Queen yet. I'll probably wait until it comes out on DVD.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)