|
Diana is dead. Their Royal Highnesses , Prince William and Prince Henry
of Wales are both attempting to get on with their lives without their "Mummy"
to emotionally support them. Hidden within the walls of St. James Palace
is a family matter turned public: His Royal Highness, Prince Charles' relationship
with Camilla Parker Bowles. Whenever the subject is broadcasted throughout
the World Media, Prince Charles is repeatedly treated as if he is no better
than the late Duke of Windsor. June Mock implied he might be remembered
as just another His Majesty, King Edward the 8th, the man who gave up theBritish
throne for the woman he loved, Wallis Simpson. The Prince of Wales is not
like the Duke of Windsor and therefore should not be treated in the same
ranks as he. In this essay, I will contrast and compare the two Princes
in order to prove this point.
Prince Charles' private life is of no concern to the minds of the general public. What he does in his private time should only be his business, not for all of the world to speculate about. Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth the Second, as never publically announced her "distaste" for Prince Charles' mistress. On the flip side, Her Majesty, Queen Mary, had a vivid disliking for Wallis Simpson, the love of the life of her first son, Edward. The British Prime Minister at the time, Winston Churchill gave His Majesty, King Edward the 8th an important choice: he can have the throne or the girl, but, not both. He chose to abdicate and be exiled to France to live in peace with his woman. Close to the date that he would have been crowned King, he married Wallis Simpson. He gave up the title of King of the Commonwealth and took over the title of Duke of Windsor and continued his life in a new country. He was once Prince of Wales as Prince Charles is now. They may have the same tipped noses, but, they are completely different individuals with different interests and therefore different private lives. I honestly don't understand why there are people in this world that will allow the past to repeat itself. Camilla Parker Bowles and Prince Charles have had relations since the early 70's. There are only a few reasons why she was not chosen as his bride. One was Camilla's family's past with the Windsor Clan and the other was the fact that his mother seems to desire not to socialize with Camilla. She had a choice in November of 1997 between going to Prince Charles' 50th birthday party (hosted by Camilla) or attend her grandson, Peter's 21st birthday bash. She chose to go to Peter's. Instead, the night before Camilla's gathering, she lit up Buckingham Palace with special lights seen only on Veteran's Day of 1995 and held a special party honouring her son's 50th birthday and all of his achievements. What happened to the Duke of Windsor is now in the past. Let's leave it inthe past and not force Prince Charles into a mold created by the media. Wallis Simpson showed interest in benefitting England as a Queen, but was denied the right because she was divorced. Prince Charles brought to the Commonwealth a beautiful bride who brought shock and tears to the eyes of a nation when she passed away. He produced what is referred to by Royal watchers as "an heir and a spare," his "darling boys," William, 17 and Henry, 15. Wallis Simpson never had children and therefore was as out of the parenting loop as her husband was. Camilla has two children, Tom (Charles' godson), 21 and Laura, 19, who are in frequent contact with his sons, especially in the evenings. Camilla has the ability to bond with Charles by the both of them being able to discuss their children with one another. They both have been divorced as well, which just may be a topic of conversation when they escape to Charles' country home, HighGrove. Their friendship keeps them together. Camilla is not like Wallis and once again we should not be molding someone into a stereotypical place in society. The late Duke of Windsor did not do as much work for charities as Prince Charles does now. Prince Charles involves himself in organizations that make a difference insociety. He founded the Prince's Trust, an organization that benefits young people and he involves himself in political matters such as architecture. The Duke of Windsor did not have these bonds with Great Britain. Charles is a more modern Prince with a girl that happens to be a good friend and confidant to him. I can visualize the two of them talking about matters of the heart over a cup of tea when he is not working, which is not often. If he had intentions on marrying her, he would not have married Lady Diana Spencer and she would not have married Andrew Parker Bowles. Charles is more in touch with the world the way it is now by means of working in his community reaching out towards the common man. There are many important differences between their (Prince Charles' and King Edward's) lives, which set them apart as two very different men. The points of their private lives are of no concern to the general public, the past repeating itself issue, their choice of brides and the respective work they put into their communities, all prove that Prince Charles should not be remembered as just another Duke of Windsor. |
|
June Mock wrote a few other comments that I wish to rebut as well.
The speech the Queen made after the death of her ex-daughter-in-law was not "literal glue" said only the benefit the Monarchy. Prince Charles asked her to come forth and address her subjects about the death of his ex-wife. He supposedly gave her a threat, that if she did not come forth and have a talk with her subjects, he would do so and to boot, apologize for his families lack of outward emotion. Obviously, if people such as June Mock are still debating the Queen's authentically during the speech, then there was no glue applied during that speech to help hold the British Monarchy together. Lessons have been learnt by the Royal Family. Prince Charles is much closer to his young boys. Now when they need to vent out their problems, they really do have someone to turn to when they find themselves in a position that requires a wiser person who understands. Photo opportunities are held for members of the press when Royalty is on tour. This helps ensure that private time between Royal Family members can happen. When a member of the media breaks the promise to leave the Royal party alone, their names are announced through the Queen's Official Press, the Associated Press. This treaty (of sorts) was dramatically implemented in Whistler, British Columbia on Prince Charles' family skiing trip. A group of media filmed an voyage up the ski slopes by the Royal group. They were named and letters by members of the general public were sent to the heads of the organizations that allowed their film crews to tape Charles' private holiday. Nowadays, The Queen spends more time at her Windsor Castle so her grandsons, William and Henry can visit her from Eton College on the weekends for tea. Of course, this is done when the bridge over the Thames from the school to the castle is clear of the paparazzi. I guess Royalty can change, but, the press never will. I liked the ostrich feathers the Queen wore to her youngest son's wedding to Sophie Rees-Jones. The Queen is a very proper lady, going out before nightfall without something on her head would have been an alien concept to her. She merely chose a unobtrusive hair accessory to compliment her outfit for the wedding to confer to her son's wishes. Assigning at least half of the blame on the downfall of the British Monarchy on Camilla Parker Bowles is not fair. Some would argue that Anne's lack of a smile has not helped much nor Edward's less than brilliant military career. Lately, there are those who would even point fingers at the Duke of Edinburgh's latest crass remarks. Prince William is no angel either. The rumours of him being affiliated with smokers, drinkers and drug users are starting to get members of his family and the public a little bit edgy. The three divorces (Anne's, Andrew's and Charles') that raged the family are in a way excusable. In this day and age, no one can expect to stay with their lover for all of eternity. It is sad, but, many marriages fail. Three royal marriages had so much stress from their environments affecting them, it is no wonder the couples decided to live apart. Camilla Parker Bowles sure did not help the Royal relations with the public, but, she does not deserve the weight of the downfall of the British Monarchy on her shoulders. Princes William and Henry should have the right to visit their mother in peace. They should not have a hoard of photographers follow them there and they should go without worrying about how the Windsors and the Spencers are getting along. It should be a private place for them to be alone with their thoughts, so, their grieving process can continue with more ease. I do not quite see why June suggested Anne act happy by putting a smile on her face, if she were to visit the Spencers. Her facial expressions are what makes her unique. It would seem fake if they were otherwise. Any ways, if she does not feel up to visiting, let's just leave her in peace so she can come to terms with her grief privately. The same goes for Queen Elizabeth the Second and her husband, the Duke of Edinburgh. If they desire to visit the site where Diana is buried, the world will watch them enter and leave Althorp. It is not fair to them to have emotionally trying times be forecasted through every newspaper and tabloid that is run from Fleet Street. Princess Diana of Wales' burial area is a special area and it should be treated that way. Thank-you for sharing your time with me. |
