Overshadow her husband

Started by LouisFerdinand, September 06, 2017, 12:59:55 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

LouisFerdinand

Would you say that Camilla has not overshadowed her husband Charles?


TLLK

Yes, she has not overshadowed Charles.

FanDianaFancy

  CPB has  not overshadowed  PC.
The answer is no.

royalanthropologist

Camilla is far too wise and worldly to ever, ever even think of overshadowing her husband (intentional or otherwise). Her trump card has always been that she bolsters and supports Charles. She makes him feel good about himself and would never do anything that annoyed, irritated or undermined him.
"In the past, people were born royal. Nowadays, royalty comes from what you do"...Gianni Versace

sandy

Camilla is no Diana and she is not popular with all to say the least. But she does wear those feathery hats  and the flying saucer hats and had DIana worn them she would have been accused of upstaging Charles.  Diana at age 20 did not get up and say look at me look at me, the public took to her. If she did not have a way with the public or they did not like her she and Charles by extension would have been heavily criticized. Damned if she did and damned if she did not.  She was scared when she got out of the car in Wales (her first walkabout) and she knew what to say and how to act after she got out of the car. When it rained she said she did not want to go back to the car "if they can stand it so can I" was what she said. I don't know why Diana is trashed for being popular. Charles was the one with the issues: he went into the marriage not loving his wife so he got jealous. Serious counseling was needed. So what do you suggest DIana have done? Put a bag over her head or sneer at the people or ignore them. She was trying hard to please  her husband and the royals when she first did appearances. How can one control the situation without ruffling CHarles precious feathers? Diana wanted to support and bolster Charles but his ego did not allow it.  How do you know that Camilla does not "irritate" Charles or get on his nerves. It would be unnatural for married couples NOT to be irritated with each other from time to time. Camilla is no saint she's a human being. Just like Diana was. You make her sound like a Stepford wife. Camilla had to have had backbone to get where she is today. She is not a pushover IMO. And she does have a separate residence a bonus Diana did not get.

Double post auto-merged: September 06, 2017, 01:59:21 PM


Quote from: LouisFerdinand on September 06, 2017, 12:59:55 AM
Would you say that Camilla has not overshadowed her husband Charles?

I would say obviously not. Although Junor did give her a better review than Charles in her book. Camilla was raised to Sainthood CHarles, well not exactly

royalanthropologist

You are quite right that Camilla is no Diana. That is one of the reasons why her marriage to Charles has been far more successful than the one with Diana. It is that difference that Charles likes. He prefers someone who stays in the background and supports him...not a mega star like Diana became. Yes Camilla might irritate him occasionally like most married couples, but not to the extent that he wants to dump her.

I personally don't see Diana being popular as being a negative. Charles was just offended by the rude crowds and stayed away. Most people would that. I can say that I would personally not give the time of day to anyone that indicated to me that they do not want me to come to their side of the walkabout. I too would leave them be so that they could enjoy someone that they really liked.

The Prince of Wales cannot be a supporting act to anyone save the monarch. That is just how it is. If you upstage him, he reacts accordingly because that is how he was raised and that is how his personality is. With Diana, he just stopped engaging with her or even going with her to engagements. Diana could not do much about that because it was not her fault. Of course later on, Diana really did court the crowds, photo ops and press but in the beginning she was just caught up in a situation beyond her control.

Like Mantel said, Diana was in one sense overtaken by the reactions to her. It was the people projecting on her at first rather than she reeling them in.  Campbell is less kind in her assessment because she argues that Diana liked upstaging Charles from the word go. I don't believe that was part of her plan in the beginning. It only came later on when she realized the power she had both in the media and over the masses.

BTW Camilla is no stepford wife as Andrew Parker-Bowles can testify. She is more than capable of looking after herself if need be. You don't get to where she is by being a big softie or being naive.
"In the past, people were born royal. Nowadays, royalty comes from what you do"...Gianni Versace

sandy

So what could Diana have done? She was damned if she did and damned if she didn't.  If Charles did not like Diana's "type" he should have left her alone. It's all on him. The crowds were not rude.  I don't think that's fair. Diana won over the crowds in  Wales and they were not rude. And so why did Charles not blame "the crowds" instead of his wife.  They were the ones who wanted to see Diana. Diana was in a no win situation. Charles should have gotten counseling. Diana could not snub the crowds and say I am nothing go to my husband. It was a really touchy situation. They would think Diana was snubbing them.
Charles is never going to dump Camilla, for one thing he can't afford a second divorce and it would jeopardize his place as future King. And his spin created the great love story so he'd look like a darn fool if he dumped her. Plus she has her own place to retreat to.

Ca. the late eighties and early nineties, Charles could barely contain his contempt of her. I think she felt better without him putting her down.

That's what I said. Camilla is as tough as nails. She is no yes, Charles no Charles type of person. She does know how to manipulate though.

Campbell loathes Diana and is a very iffy source about the royals considering she said the Queen Mum was a cook's daughter and illegitimate. Campbell would say Diana robbed banks if she could get away with it.

royalanthropologist

#7
[gmod]FanDianaFancy has requested her post be removed. It has. So let's move on. Cheers" :thumbsup:[/gmod]

[mod]@royalanthropologist - Sorry if I deleted your post. Moderating takes on a life of it's own :friends: when I'm tired :hug: [/mod]
"In the past, people were born royal. Nowadays, royalty comes from what you do"...Gianni Versace

royalanthropologist

I happen to think that all this talk of "overshadowing" is not particularly helpful to any royal couple. The moment that outsiders pit you against one another is the moment that your relationship sours. That is why I feel that sometimes the royals are best served by not reading polls and opinion pieces in the media. That way, they are not always in competition as to who is more popular or more visible.

Camilla cannot (and would not want) to overshadow her husband. I think the problems that Diana faced in her marriage because of her popularity were a salutary lesson for any royal spouse. The media and public can put you high, but you should always be mindful of the impact on your personal relationships once you become the star of the show. Once your personal relationships are harmed, no amount of public or press intervention can mend them.

Diana once spoke of feeling alone in a crowd. Public acclaim and press popularity are no substitute for a warm and loving romantic relationship.
"In the past, people were born royal. Nowadays, royalty comes from what you do"...Gianni Versace

sandy

Diana said she did not want to overshadow her husband (she was referring to the years early on in the marriage not the last years where things were different). She was in a no win situation. IF she acted too reserved or cold she would have been called "a snob." Or "icy". The public took to her, she did not jump and down saying look at me, she was a natural and the public liked her. Some middle aged people probably had daughters her age or there were people her age who identified with her.  It was not "the media" it was people liking Diana. Diana never told the crowds to "see me" she just did her work. It was damned if she did damned if she didn't. If Charles was discouraged he could not keep his new bride home or  it would be asked if she were sick or was a recluse.

DIana wanted a warm loving relationship. Very much. But Charles marrying her in such a "lukewarm" way and Camilla being around kept the warm relationship from really happening.

Camilla is not as popular as Diana was.  With some. And she was Diana's rival in the marriage. Charles also now has grown children wives and adorable grandchildren and they can overshadow him. But would he indeed mind his own flesh and blood heirs being popular I wonder.

TLLK

QuoteI happen to think that all this talk of "overshadowing" is not particularly helpful to any royal couple.
I agree @royalanthropologist. I've seen this term attached to Maxima, Mary, Rania, Letizia, too and while I don't believe that it has had a negative impact upon their marriages, I do believe that at times their respective royal houses have opted to take measures to ensure that the focus is upon their spouse. IMO this impacted Rania during the Arab Spring of 2011 when she all but retreated from the world stage  to focus mostly upon Jordan.

royalanthropologist

I agree TLLK that it is a pity that those women had to go to extreme measures to nip the press in the bud. The press can spoil your relationship through speculation and innuendo. They are always looking for a snub or a hint of trouble in paradise so that they can relish reporting it.

@sandy. I do believe that in the beginning this was never Diana's fault. She had a warm and welcoming personality. People took to her. I think that later on both parties did not handle the press intrusion and public interest very well. You have to keep the press and even the public away from your marriage if you want to make it work. It cannot become a popularity contest or marriage by public sentiment.

The same applies to the current popularity polls that are designed to isolate Charles from his family. You have to ignore those polls very firmly. I would go even as far as advising William to make a public statement that he would not accept a throne before his father. The queen has done her bit by stating that she will not abdicate, let alone skipping a generation. You have to send a direct message to these people that they are not helping by pitting one family member against another.
"In the past, people were born royal. Nowadays, royalty comes from what you do"...Gianni Versace

sandy

As public figures they could hardly keep the press and public away.

I don't think it necessary for William to make any public statements about the succession.

royalanthropologist

There are countless public figures who do not refer to the press to litigate their marriage. In fact the vast majority do unless you are a reality television star. The press can say what they like but you do not allow them to affect or determine your marriage or relationships. Above all, you do not give them any encouragement as part of a PR game.

I think William needs to release a statement (directly or indirectly) in order to take the wind out of the sails of those who propose that he leapfrogs his father. They seem to assume that they are doing him and the monarchy a favor so he needs to disabuse them quickly and definitively. Otherwise you have this lingering suspicion and lots of innuendo that is uncalled for. 
"In the past, people were born royal. Nowadays, royalty comes from what you do"...Gianni Versace

Curryong

That could backfire though, Royal, knowing what British tabloids are like. I can just see the Fail 'Charles tells William 'Get behind me or else!' The Sun and the Mirror following crocodile-style with articles about the 'The Queen stuck between two Fires', 'What made William speak: Charles fights William for the Throne' and 'Charles threats, William caves '.  to mention the Star and the Globe 'Drunken Camilla determined to get William to speak'. Never underestimate the British tabs ability to twist the story their way!

royalanthropologist

Ha ha. Unfortunately @Curryong is spot on. You are so right that that is what would happen. Perhaps the royal family should just shut up and concentrate on trying to be good people.  :hehe: :teehee: Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
"In the past, people were born royal. Nowadays, royalty comes from what you do"...Gianni Versace

amabel

THat's what they do, if they have any sense.  Public statemetns and appeals to the press are not their way.  Thye know that the press is just there to put out stories, some of dubious accuracy to fill up the papers and make money.  THey don't, for the most part, take it seriously.  It would be ridiculous for William to put out a statement to say that he doesn't want to be king before his father. There's no way he CUOLD be king before him, without Chalres abdicating or giving up his succession rights, which Charles is certainly not going to do. People on this forum seem to take every piece of "journalism" from the Press seriously, and its mostly filler and fluff.