Did he faint.....

merlotgran - my post wasn't posted with any angst, it was all 'said' in a normal, conversational tone of voice - I promise

Well, that's me told then.

Must remember to take Gransnet more seriously.

Making light of anything is just plain silly.

I also went to an all girls school and during my entire school life, I didn't see one person faint. I also ran a Beaver Scout and Scout Troops and several youth clubs for over 20 years and I ran them ragged - none of them fainted either (that includes trekking them over hills with them having to survive for 2 or 3 days with what they are carrying with them). In fact, I've never seen anyone faint!

In answer to the the comment 'do you expect them to stop the proceedings' my answer would be yes - for me, it is highly unusual for a child to faint so it isn't something I would dismiss so lightly. The Queen was reading from a script, it was hardly something she'd spent hours putting together or even putting forward her own opinion. It was just pomp and ceremony and I wouldn't rate that higher than a child's welfare.

As to the comment about the Queen running forward with a bottle of smelling salts, that just plain silly and I've never suggested she should have. My comment was about the overall lack of concern shown by those present (including the Queen) and by that statement I stand.

Mine wasn't a Catholic school, roses. I think it was just the tedium of assembly, having to sit cross-legged on the floor (no chairs for us!).

Stand up, sit down, stand up, sit down etc., plus we were all going through various stages of hormone-related inbalances anyway...

I remember girls fainting in assembly at school, usually because we had morning mass and you could not eat beforehand [so no breakfast until after mass and the assembly.] A Catholic school, naturally, so you would expect cruelty.I always felt a bit wistful about fainting, because I never did it, and they got attention, taken out and fed.Life is so unfair.

merlot said "poor lad. And I said "poor kid". Eventually.

I certainly do, it would have been nice to read some sympathy for him instead of whether or not his faint was for real!. I do however agree with merlotgran that we don't expect the Queen to stop in mid stream when there are people around to attend to this unfortunate young man. As for Diana?!!! Well, if you say so!!

So you stand by what you said, nigglynellie? Oh, well, there's no point trying to reason with someone whose mind is made up.

HollyDaze, If the Queen can keep calm and carry on riding a horse when someone is shooting at her (OK, they were blanks but nobody knew that at the time) she's not going to falter during a speech when there are people all around her more than capable of dealing with a fainting child.

We don't expect the Queen to flap about with a bottle of smelling salts.

I thought I had deleted my first post, but obviously not, and so two appeared when there should only have been one - the second one. apologies for that!

Ana .

Her job on the day was to read the speech. There were dozens of other people around to see to the boy! They don't stop the trooping of the colour if some guardsman keels over, or even an ordinary passing out parade (Ho, Ho). Didn't any of you experience people fainting in assembly at school? Or faint yourself?

Yes, of course they looked after him - can't expect the whole thing to come to a sudden stop because of something like that. He'd probably been standing for too long, or hadn't eaten because of nerves, possibly.

Girls regularly fainted during assembly when I was at school (it was an all-girls school, so I don't know if it happened to boys as well!).

Camilla looked a bit concerned. She's a real granny.

That is the problem I have understanding them - why wouldn't proceedings halt to ensure a young boy is okay? I know some people see it as an important ceremony (maybe I'm just not one of them!) but in the grand scheme of things, it was just a lot of hot air but it would have shown a very humane side to the Queen if she had shown a degree of concern - she is often labelled as cold and distant and I'm afraid that's how she came across.

Now if Diana had been there .....

Not even that really, jingl it seems to be a term for someone who writes a short piece about parliamentary matters.

They would n't stop it just for a lad fainting! They did help him out and look after him though.

jinglbellsfrocks

Hollydaze I'm sure now that he really did faint. Poor kid

Thank you for explaining that.

Then I do feel sorry for him and I am surprised that few people reacted with concern - now that makes me feel sad.

At my daughter's wedding, one of the very young bridesmaids (only 4 years old) tripped and fell - my daughter (along with a couple of other people) went to the little girl and checked she was okay and helped her up - I just see that as a normal reaction when it concerns a child.

nigglynellie

I am not anti-royalty but the fainting was, as I thought (and am still not sure) was a fake kind of ceremony for some unknown purpose - if that is the case, why would you or anyone else feel sorry for him?

If the fainting was real, why did no-one bat an eyelid? If it was real, the words you have chosen to use would be better aimed at those who didn't react in a compassionate way by halting the proceedings to ensure the boy was okay which is what most normal people would do.

Who sneered and ridiculed the boy? If sneering and ridiculing went on, it was at a ridiculous 'tradition' that serves no purpose and most certainly not at the boy.

No. I assume they just send up parliamentary affairs.

Hollydaze I'm sure now that he really did faint. Poor kid.

nigglynellie I don't know what you're talking about. Are you getting a different version of Gransnet to the rest of us?!

I really think you've got the wrong end of the stick here, nigglynellie. Many of us are not anti-Royal, and I can't see any evidence of 'sneering and ridiculing of a young boy'.

As far as I'm aware, a "parliamentary sketch writer" isn't the same sort of things as someone who writes sketches for comedy programmes, but I could be wrong, often am!

I fainted at a friends wedding, 1 month before my own in the very hot summer of 1976, which made me really worry that I would repeat the performance at my own nuptials. Needn't have worried, my wedding day was the day the drought broke, and it pissed down rained heavily.

Anyway, the friends wedding was a Catholic ceremony/service and was very "Ariston", so I think that might have been a contributory factor.

Oh dear, reading the comments on this thread has made me feel both sad and bewildered. While I understand that you good folk are anti royalty and all the trappings that entails, I can't help but feel that the sneering and ridiculing of a young boy (aged 12) who fainted at a public event is a shabby thing to do. I appreciate that this particular 'child' represents everything that a lot of people disapprove of, but that is not his fault, as for him, as for the rest of us, where we are born and who our parents are and how they choose to educate and bring us up is something none of us can help, and surely shouldn't be a reason to be so unpleasant. Instead of snide, unkind remarks I would have though that some sympathy and compassion for this young boy would have been more appropriate.

Now I am totally confused - was it a put up job or not