Keeping Royal Secrets

I agree Maizie. I doubt that anyone who keeps a diary with an eye on possible future publication would expect it to be put into the public realm without judicious editing.

Germanshepherdsmum

I agree Maizie. I doubt that anyone who keeps a diary with an eye on possible future publication would expect it to be put into the public realm without judicious editing.

Or they just wouldn't write it in the first place. Unless they had malicious intent...

I’m sure some people write things down in diaries to get them off their chest, vent their anger or frustration, rather than saying something which would cause irreparable upset, and never mean anyone else to read what they’ve written.

What are the most common myths about the monarchy?

I’m sure you are dying to tell us Grany, whether we want to know or not.

The biggest myth is surely that the majority of people hold the same views as Grany?

?Casdon

? Casdon

Casdon
?

MaizieD

Germanshepherdsmum

I agree Maizie. I doubt that anyone who keeps a diary with an eye on possible future publication would expect it to be put into the public realm without judicious editing.

Or they just wouldn't write it in the first place. Unless they had malicious intent...

I've shredded my teenage diaries just in case
?

No idea what's going on here but Casdon's post made me laugh out loud! So neatly done!

The biggest myth about the monarchy is that it's good for this country.

Very wise Calistemon. Could be dynamite in the wrong hands.

A bigger myth is that the Royal family are not good for this country!

Really Aveline? Maybe you can list the good they do for the country.

Uncosted assertions about tourism and inward investment, and anything that couldn't be done by any well off family with time on their hands, don't count.

Tell me about your uncosted assertions first. Of course it's not necessarily a matter of money. My MiL often commented on people who ' Knew the cost of everything but the value of nothing'!

Not for me to prove a negative.

We often get the story of how much tourist revenue they bring in. Just wondering if anybody actually knew how much? Compared to, say, republican France? Or republican Italy?

Maybe the good they do is not monetary. Maybe you can tell me about that.

It is often reported that charities benefit from royal patronage. I don’t know if this is true. I do think that Catherine Kent has done a lot of good, but she works quietly behind the scenes, drawing little or no attention to herself.

www.alliancemagazine.org/blog/giving-evidence-research-shows-no-benefit-from-royal-patronages-for-charities/

That’s very interesting Alegrias.

It is, isn't it maddyone.

I did check out the publication and they don't seem to be biased.

Your comment about Katherine Kent is an interesting one; it seems to me that the good she does is because of who she is, what her character is like, rather than being part of a particular family.

Germanshepherdsmum

Very wise Calistemon. Could be dynamite in the wrong hands.

I think the secret diaries of a teenager have been visited already!

The Embarrassing Diaries of Calistemon aged 15¾ doesn't have quite the same ring to it ?

Catherine Kent no longer takes part in royal life, but continued her charity work privately and without fanfare. She attends occupational royal occasions such as family weddings, but that is all. I watched a documentary about her on Channel 5 at the weekend, and I was very impressed by the good work she carried out for many years after her withdrawal from public life. According to the documentary the royal family were opposed to to her marriage to the Duke of Kent, but she worked very hard after her marriage and participated in many royal duties. I didn’t see the whole documentary and so I missed some important bits of it, but I think she gave up both her title and royal work in order to persue private charity work, including travelling each week to a school in the north east in order to teach music to the pupils. She was an accomplished musician.

Maybe the good they do is not monetary. Maybe you can tell me about that.

Thinking about the benefit of the RF and I think it comes down to the innate conservatism of much of the population.

They like the fact that the monarch is ostensibly non-political, they like the pageantry of state events and things like royal weddings and they like tradition. They like the 'smell of wealth and privilege, too (can't get enough of 'historical' series about the 'upper classes') They can't visualise this being replaced by the substitution of any old person as Head of State. It wouldn't be the same.

And I think it also comes down very much to people's perception of our current monarch who, whatever her family's failings, has been unfailingly dutiful and dignified. This has worked to her advantage because her problems with her family then generated much sympathy for her.

Also, she is so familiar to them; few of the UK population can recall a time when she wasn't queen.

I think this could be very different when she is no longer with us. People are not so enamoured of her successor...

That's a really good post MaizieD.