PoW and DoC to Asia in Oct/Nov 2017

Curryong · November 12, 2017, 09:21:27 PM

You are out of date, Duch_. C&C are home from their trip, and have participated in Remembrance Day celebrations Sunday. So they forewent their romantic photo op at the Taj! And Yes, Camilla feels the heat and wilted and pulled a few faces. These full on Royal tours aren't such fun as they're painted.

Duch_Luver_4ever · November 12, 2017, 11:28:44 PM

i saw them at the remembrance day service so I knew they were back, I just thought it was interesting it seems noone either in the forum or the press thought about mentioning the Taj Mahal. Maybe they wernt near it on their trip, I didnt bother to check the itinerary, but given that C&C sometimes like to thumb their nose at Diana fans, id have thought theyd have used the trip as an occasion to do so. Perhaps even they realised after the press over Diana's 20th anniversary of her passing it wasnt the best time to do so.

sandy · November 12, 2017, 11:52:31 PM

Who are these "Diana fans?" Maybe non "Diana fans" would not like to see C and C at the Taj Mahal. Or just plain don't care.

I thought of it for about a minute and that was that.

TLLK · November 13, 2017, 01:49:25 AM

Quote from: Duch_Luver_4ever on November 12, 2017, 11:28:44 PM
i saw them at the remembrance day service so I knew they were back, I just thought it was interesting it seems noone either in the forum or the press thought about mentioning the Taj Mahal. Maybe they wernt near it on their trip, I didnt bother to check the itinerary, but given that C&C sometimes like to thumb their nose at Diana fans, id have thought theyd have used the trip as an occasion to do so. Perhaps even they realised after the press over Diana's 20th anniversary of her passing it wasnt the best time to do so.

India was the last two days of the tour and this was Charles' ninth trip to India. He's been to most of their major cities and sites. From what I recall, Charles and Camilla were last in India in 2013 for an official tour. Regarding any side trips, it's about 220km between New Delhi and the Taj Mahal, so it doesn't appear to be a quick "photo op."

I do know that Belgium's Phillipe and Mathilde were the latest royal pair to be photographed on that bench with the Taj Mahal in the background. :crazylove:

amabel · November 13, 2017, 10:14:48 AM

Why would they go to the Taj Mahal?

royalanthropologist · November 13, 2017, 11:10:39 AM

Charles did say when he was younger that he would one day bring his wife to Taj Mahal. I understand he has ever brought Camilla but by the time he and Diana came the marriage was too far gone down the drain for them to appear together.

She used it as a successful photo op and he stayed away on business. There were some poignant PR pictures I think which the press interpreted as Diana saying "I am alone and abandoned". When C&C visited, many wondered whether they would repeat the pose but together. They did not.

I dare say C&C are far too secure in their relationship now to engage in the kinds of antics that C&D did then.

sandy · November 13, 2017, 11:32:04 AM

Diana was not "alone and abandoned." And never would have been had she lived.

She looked great posing in that photo.

royalanthropologist · November 13, 2017, 11:49:29 AM

Wrong.

people.com/royals/the-story-behind-princess-dianas-iconic-1992-taj-mahal-photo/
When Princess Diana visited the Taj Mahal: The story behind THAT photo - Mirror Online

amabel · November 13, 2017, 12:48:54 PM

Quote from: royalanthropologist on November 13, 2017, 11:10:39 AM
Charles did say when he was younger that he would one day bring his wife to Taj Mahal. I understand he has ever brought Camilla but by the time he and Diana came the marriage was too far gone down the drain for them to appear together.

in the kinds of antics that C&D did then.

I shoudlnt' think he's brought Camilla there, no. I dont know for sure, but i doubt it given the fact that Diana DID do her posing and showing herself "alone and deserted by hr husband" at that spot. So i can't see him taking Camilla there and giving the press a chance to go on about it again.

sandy · November 13, 2017, 03:18:48 PM

Quote from: royalanthropologist on November 13, 2017, 11:49:29 AM
Wrong.

people.com/royals/the-story-behind-princess-dianas-iconic-1992-taj-mahal-photo/
When Princess Diana visited the Taj Mahal: The story behind THAT photo - Mirror Online

No right.
By that time they were leading separate lives. Diana was smiling and looked great. She was not in the sackcloth and ashes or in a big black mourning outfit weeping for her husband.

That was also the time she turned her head when Charles tried to kiss her (hardly the signs of a woman pining for her husband). She made it clear how she felt. This was 1992 not 1985!

Maybe it was nostalgic to think of what could have been. But this was 1992 , Diana had said her "life is torture" because Charles increasingly became dismissive and hostile to her. Diana was not the masochist you seem to want her to have been.

Diana was no the pathetic creature royal you keep trying to depict her as. She had her friends, she had her children. She was not tossed out like yesterday's garbage. I think in a way she was needling Charles.

I think Charles would not have wanted to pose with Camilla because it would dredge up the past...again. Camilla's bio by Junor was overkill and reminded people of what happened. I think it would have been foolish for them to even think of doing it.

And the Morton book was going to be out soon after...

royalanthropologist · November 13, 2017, 04:22:14 PM

@sandy you say:

"I think in a way she was needling Charles."

I have always said as much but you keep denying it and now you are just confirming it. Diana's post separation life was dominated by a desire to revenge and upstage. She lived on PR scoops. This was not some independent divorce getting on with her life. It was still the abandoned child whose toy had been taken away and who wanted to smash that toy so that the other person does not get to play with it.

Then you say: "She was not tossed out like yesterday's garbage."

Good one. So Charles did not actually toss her out "like yesterday's garbage"? That is a welcome change in perspectives because all along I thought Diana had been used and dumped. That is what she always told everyone that would listen and some of her fans have continued the trend.

As for the Taj Mahal photo itself, it was a masterpiece in gesture and manipulation. The tilted look , soulful eyes etc. All designed for effect. There was not a single authentic thing about that photo. All of it was staged.

I actually think Charles was wrong to try and kiss Diana at that presentation. When you finish with someone you finish with them completely. No mucking about. He should just have taken the prize and left it at that. Diana was quite right to turn away. There was no affection between them and it was silly to pretend. However, it would have been better if she had not turned up at all. Just end it and move on. Don't turn up and behave like a spoilt brat.

sandy · November 13, 2017, 04:32:55 PM

No I did not deny it. I said during the War of the Wales they did try to upstage the other. Read my posts. I said early on Diana wanted to please Charles by doing well in work and she was popular with his getting jealous. Two different times, royal. Two different attitudes. When I said she did not do it I was referring to the early years. Even her first walkabout the public took to her. I was speaking of Charles being jealous of his own wife who was then barely out of her teens. Please read the posts before jumping to conclusions.

Charles was having his friends leak stories about Diana, he was openly scornful of her and put her down during this time period. He was not exactly Mr Nice Guy to her. He showed bitterness and resentment of her and put her down as having a "little mind."

I was talking about your constant talk about Diana being "bitter" in her later years. Again you are talking another topic. I disagreed with you about Diana being "bitter" she was looking forward to the future. You appear to have wanted her to be a pariah and rejected by all. Yes, like yesterday's garbage.

I did say Diana could not be tossed out by the family, she had two royal sons. You kept saying she was "exiled" or words to that effect.

Charles tossing her aside is a different story, you were talking about the entire family exiling her. Two different topics again.

Diana did not want to go to the event in the first place. She was talked into it. Charles did a lot more than his share of acting like a spoiled brat. His way or the highway.

The royals DO have staged photographs. I would say most of them are. And not "spontaneous." They have PR people. MEghan's showing up at Invictus was pre planned as are other photo ops.

amabel · November 13, 2017, 05:25:58 PM

Do yiou raelly think the RF wanted to keep her as part of their circle, once she had gone as far as she did, in attacking Charles? THEy would not completely "throw her out" because she was still the mother of 2 princes and they did feel at first I think that she had some genuine call for anger at Charles. But when she kept on with the rows and the upstaging and the general hostile attitude, the queen got increasingly fed up and only kept up a minimal contact, for PR purposes. They knew it would look bad if she was never invited to royal events and was only "allowed in" on the rarest of occasions. But as time passed and as the boys grew older, I think that Diana's contacts with the RF would have grown less and less.
She would have been all but "exiled". She was invited fror Christmas, and didn't stay beyond the church appearance.. and in due course I think if she'd been invited at all it would have been like Fergie was....

sandy · November 13, 2017, 05:43:00 PM

Charles attacked her too. In many ways, put downs and admitting to his biographer he never loved her. He was no Mr Innocent in all of this.

Charles did that Dimbleby interview over a year before the Bashir interview and he via the Dimbleby book trashed his own parents.

No, as long as the boys were involved she would not be seen "less and less." William for one thing is a future King. Fergie's children will probably never be used for royal duties in future. Big difference.

amabel · November 13, 2017, 05:47:52 PM

The big difference is that Fergie was caught fooling around very very publicly. and so I think the queen felt that as she had doen that and lost popularity, it wouldn't look bad to sideline her. If Diana had become less popular, and she was going that way, and the boys were growing older and needed to be seen more in the Royal life, rather than private life, Diana would have been only invited to a few big occasions.

sandy · November 13, 2017, 05:57:31 PM

Diana did not become "less popular." As I recall she was very popular. I disagree that she was not "going that way." I think it was more C and C slipping down in popularity.

I think Diana would have been invited to every event involving her royal sons. why wouldn't she be?

SophieChloe · November 13, 2017, 07:27:19 PM

[gmod]Many of these posts have nothing to do with Charles & Camilla visiting Asia :shrug: They are now home and this thread is locked.[/gmod]

Double post auto-merged: November 13, 2017, 11:19:46 PM

Moving forwards towards Charles' Reign : Who was to blame?