Where is Lady Louise?!

[mclarek]

She might have been sick or even there...just not in the photos relased to the press. I am sure each christening the child has there own solo photo.  I think Lousie is just adorable and I am sure as she grows we'll see more of her!

Nice to know that Charles and Camilla had Birkhall all to their lonesome, though. What a great big brother.  :shrug:

[sandy]

There were pics of the youngsters Andrew and Edward circulated to the public. I have seen old issues of some of the Royal souvenir pamphlets (I have some of them) and the youngsters were shown. There was a pamphlet commemorating Charles' investiture and Andrew and Edward were there front and center. Edward was about 4 or 5 at the time. And there was that Royal Family documentary with the royals shown in informal settings and the Queen was shown buying her younger sons candy bars and they were seen frolicking around.  THere were plenty of pics of the young Zara, Peter, Bea, and Eugenie and I suspect the cast in her eye causes problems for her parents--it is not healthy for Louise to be sheltered.

[alsgal]

Nice to know that Charles and Camilla had Birkhall all to their lonesome, though. What a great big brother.  :shrug:

Yeah, like what's with that?? That is your brother and your nephew. If not for the love of family, how about how it looks to the paps, and rag mags??? 

[PopppyDaisy]

Hang on a sec we don't even know she wasn't there do we, it's not like any pictures have been released. It's quite likely she was there since it was from what I've seen a private, family affair.

[Inge Jones]

I don't think we're saying she wasn't there, but that we would have expected to see her in a family portrait.

[sandy]

I think she'd be specifically mentioned and her parents would have had her pose for the cameras.

[Trudie]

Sandy's right if she was there the papers would have had a cute little story about her with James.

[Rasta Watermelon]

I think some people are reading more into the fact we don't see Lady Louise in the photo, that has been released for the media. I believe Lady Louise was there, and probably had her photo taken with her baby brother, and parents, but its a private photo for them as a family to enjoy for many years to come.

Also if you read the article in the daily mail, it states that Lady Louise is acting like a caring big sister to her little brother, by giving him kisses and hugs all the time. I can hardly see them not allowing her to be apart of her little brothers special day.

I also think people read too much into the fact that Lady Louise has or had a small problem with her eye. I don't think that her parents are ashamed of her, or thats the reason we don't see many photo's of her. I believe her parents, and they will more than likely do the same with baby james, is to give their children as much of a normal life as they can possibly have in life.

Chances are they wont be in the spotlight, because once Prince William and Harry have children of their own, not many people in the press will be interested in Louise and James. So why put them through the pressure of being in the spotlight while being so young, and then have to spotlight taken away from them as teenagers. That would probably confuse them.

Glad to get that off my chest. :gaah:

Lovely picture of baby James with his Mum and Dad. He looks like a really cute chubby baby, i'm really happy for the couple for getting their wish in having two children. :thumbsup:

[Anyasha]

I remember a picture of little Louise looking out a window at some event HM was doing and for some reason it made me sad...

Prince John the youngest of George V and Mary was kept away and hidden on a separate estate. He was born retarded or autistic

Prince John suffered from epilepsy and near-autism.

[heather]

  She would have been mentioned if she was there....

[PopppyDaisy]

I think she'd be specifically mentioned and her parents would have had her pose for the cameras.

I don't remember the others having (as in her cousins) having official pictures with their siblings.

All it is I think is they want to keep their family as private as possible, as someone else said she was probably there and had pictures with her brother just they were private ones. I don't see any need for them to release pictures of her it's better if they're kept out of the spotlight as much as possible. I thought her eye problem was fixed anyway.

It's more likely she would be mentioned if she wasn't there, they don't need to state that she was there do they. They didn't say in the article James was there yet I'm pretty sure he was...:P

Prince Jhn, what a sad story, I have the wonderful programme the BBC did a few years back 'The Lost Prince' on dvd never fails to make me cry.

[serene grace]

I found this photo of her from last year, in my files... :shrug:

http://timesnews.typepad.com/.shared/image.html?/photos/uncategorized/2007/11/06/countess_wessex_louise.jpg

http://timesnews.typepad.com/.shared/image.html?/photos/uncategorized/2007/11/06/countess_wessex_louise.jpg

[fawbert]

I think Edward and Sophie behave like King George V and Queen Mary hiding a not so perfect child away. This is the choice of ignorant parents who think they are protecting the child.

The stories of Prince John being hidden away are greatly exaggerated. The lad wasn't so backward - he was at prep school at Broadstairs with his brother Henry. Not quite the dribbling retard as portrayed on the telly.

He live at Sandringham doted on by his loving grandmother, Queen Alexandra, and the great grief of the Royal Family at his funeral was widely reported in the Press.


==

[Rasta Watermelon]

In the daily mail there is small bit about Lady Louise.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=560768&in_page_id=1770

[Rasta Watermelon]

Hello magazine has an article of James christening in it this week.

http://www.hellomagazine.com/magazine/

I won't be able to see it until next week, because thats when the new addition hits my local newsagents.

[sandy]

The stories of Prince John being hidden away are greatly exaggerated. The lad wasn't so backward - he was at prep school at Broadstairs with his brother Henry. Not quite the dribbling retard as portrayed on the telly.

He live at Sandringham doted on by his loving grandmother, Queen Alexandra, and the great grief of the Royal Family at his funeral was widely reported in the Press.


==

I thought that the telly did offer a sensitive portrait of him. He wasn't "dribbling retard" he was depicted as a sensitive human being. He had epilepsy and was developmentally disabled. He was raised by his nanny, Lala Bill on another estate and wasn't pictured much with his brothers and sister (when he was a baby and toddler he was pictured).  I think if he lived in this day and age he would be more "mainstreamed" and hopefully would be shown more with his siblings. As a toddler he showed a precocity. He could have been autistic. He couldn't keep up with his siblings in schools. I think he was closest to his brother Prince George.

[Stix Chix]

http://timesnews.typepad.com/.shared/image.html?/photos/uncategorized/2007/11/06/countess_wessex_louise.jpg

she looks so much like the Queen did. :happy: 
Princess Elizabeth

[fawbert]

I thought that the telly did offer a sensitive portrait of him. He wasn't "dribbling retard" he was depicted as a sensitive human being. He had epilepsy and was developmentally disabled. He was raised by his nanny, Lala Bill on another estate and wasn't pictured much with his brothers and sister (when he was a baby and toddler he was pictured). 

He lived at Wood Farm on the Sandringham estate to be close to his grandmother, and was photographed with his brothers and sister until the end of his life.


== 

[Inge Jones]

And Princess Anne, who refused *all* titles for her children unlike the Wessexes, always had her children photographed with the group photos at family events.

[leogirl]

Princess Anne's children do not get titles because they are descended from a female line. Though it is said that HM offered Mark Phillips a peerage on the morning of their wedding. Only male-line get to be Prince and Princess of the United Kingdom. That is why Louise and James are Princess and Prince legally, while Peter and Zara legally have no titles.

Letters patent issued in 1917 (and still remaining in force today) assign a princely status and the style of 'Royal Highness' to all male-line grandchildren of a monarch.

[Inge Jones]

Leogirl that's interesting info but not really relevant to my point though, which is that even those royal parents who wish their children to lead common lives at least make them available for the standard formal family photographs that are given to the press, like the balcony assemblies and the weddings and christenings.

[Stix Chix]

maybe she's just really naughty? :happy:  when William was little his antics at royal events got a lot of press coverage and apparently the Queen wasn't impressed!

[Rasta Watermelon]

maybe she's just really naughty? :happy:  when William was little his antics at royal events got a lot of press coverage and apparently the Queen wasn't impressed!

I remember Prince William's antics at his uncle's wedding to Fergie in 1986.  :teehee:

[Jenee]

I also think people read too much into

Everything!

[PopppyDaisy]

^^

That just about sums it up.

I don't blame people though, we are so interested in the RF and since there lives can be kept under such close cover we have to scrutinise the small snippets we see.  :teehee: