Royal Wedding

[Evil DM Mark3]

I am somewhat surprised that there is no thread discussing this, Prince William, second in line to the British Throne, is to be married in 2011.

When I compare his marriage to the marriage of his parents, I have to say that I am very impressed. His father notoriously said, when asked if he was in love "Yes, whatever love means." Unlike Diana, Kate has been exposed to a wide range of public attention and tabloid hounding before the marriage, and I really think they are in a much better position to have a real, stable, marriage.

Here is wishing them all the best!

[Fifty-Eyed Fred]

I assumed it was due to the wedding being about half a year away. :smalltongue:

But yes, William and Kate have not only known each other for a long time, but appear to actually be in love, which is a good, solid reason for a 21st century Royal Wedding, one feels - William has chosen a middle-class woman for his wife instead of an aristocrat or foreign princess, which is the standard practice, after all. I'm sure the country doesn't want another Charles and Diana - I'm convinced William and Kate will avoid it, especially since William is only too aware of the dangers involved.

[Kastanok]

I assumed it was due to the news being a bit of celebrity gossip about people who are entirely irrelevant to the general populace.

I don't know them (personally), I don't really care to know them and whatever they do is really none of my business.

[Edge]

I assumed it was due to the news being a bit of celebrity gossip about people who are entirely irrelevant to the general populace.

I don't know them (personally), I don't really care to know them and whatever they do is really none of my business.

Whilst this is largely true, and I agree with effectively it, you forget that a royal wedding is typically a public holiday. :smallbiggrin:

[Fifty-Eyed Fred]

I hardly consider the Heads of State of 16 countries irrelevant.

[Dogmantra]

I look forward to when I get engaged. I think I'd rather enjoy having my maritial status broadcast as the only item on the news for a good week or two.

[Tirian]

I suspect it gets old before long, especially when a sizable portion of the population doesn't have any particular urge to wish you well.

It is my hope that both William and Charles are dedicated to making sure that Kate doesn't have the same troubles Diana did -- and I think that a big slice of that pie came from INSIDE the palace. And beyond the fact that these are actors in a reality series that's been going on for eight hundred years that I don't follow closely, I wish those two kids well.

[Marnath]

I'm surprised no mention has been made about Prince Charles' remark to Brian Williams during his interview the other night. From what I heard, it's a real firestorm of controversy over there that he responded with "maybe" to "Will Camilla(spelling?) be queen?" Can anyone who lives there explain that one to me?

[Klose_the_Sith]

Whilst this is largely true, and I agree with effectively it, you forget that a royal wedding is typically a public holiday. :smallbiggrin:

*Pokes head in*

Can we claim a public holiday in the colonies too?

Oh wait, damn independence ... :smallamused:

[Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll]

I don't even know if there'll be a holiday here in Canada, and we're still part of the Commonwealth.

[TheBST]

I am somewhat surprised that there is no thread discussing this, Prince William, second in line to the British Throne, is to be married in 2011.

I'm not. Most Brits don't give a toss about the royals.


I hardly consider the Heads of State of 16 countries irrelevant.

Nominally. It's an embarrassing archaism.

[Tirian]

I'm surprised no mention has been made about Prince Charles' remark to Brian Williams during his interview the other night. From what I heard, it's a real firestorm of controversy over there that he responded with "maybe" to "Will Camilla(spelling?) be queen?" Can anyone who lives there explain that one to me?

Camilla isn't the Princess of Wales right now, and according to my sources she would be known as the Princess Consort were Charles to take the throne. I suspect this is out of respect for the public's memory of Diana and seems to be a break with tradition. (Of course, who knows if Charles would take the throne even if he did outlive his mother as opposed to just handing it straight to William.)

[Marnath]

Camilla isn't the Princess of Wales right now, and according to my sources she would be known as the Princess Consort were Charles to take the throne. I suspect this is out of respect for the public's memory of Diana and seems to be a break with tradition. (Of course, who knows if Charles would take the throne even if he did outlive his mother as opposed to just handing it straight to William.)

It's hard to imagine that happening, somehow. Charles outliving his mother that is. I mean, she's been the queen since before my parents were born! It's gonna be weird getting used to refering to the King of England when that happens, for my whole life that's been reserved for talking about people who died centuries ago, ya know?

[CynicalAvocado]

wait, waity katie got engaged? it's funny because i just saw a show about the two (and harry landing a chinook in his girls backyard) last night

[Zevox]

I assumed it was due to the news being a bit of celebrity gossip about people who are entirely irrelevant to the general populace.

I don't know them (personally), I don't really care to know them and whatever they do is really none of my business.
Pretty much this. Heard about it a couple of times on the 'net, but I no more care about it than I do about news of Hollywood celebrities getting married.


I hardly consider the Heads of State of 16 countries irrelevant.
Considering that status is purely symbolic at this point, I would.

Zevox

[Evil DM Mark3]

Considering that status is purely symbolic at this point, I would.

Zevox

It isn't in fact, but I think we ought to avoid going down this line further lest we break forum rules re pollitcs.

[Phaedra]

It isn't in fact, but I think we ought to avoid going down this line further lest we break forum rules re pollitcs.

It is, though. The Queen has titular power on the presumption that she never actually attempts to use it. You can bet that if she actually decided to, for example, refuse the Royal Assent to an Act of Parliament, the rules would be changed pretty quickly.

The Caledonian Mercury (http://caledonianmercury.com/2010/11/16/couple-who-met-at-university-to-marry/0011924) sums up my feelings pretty well. Two people are getting married. Fair play to them, but I don't care any more than I would when two other celebs got married.

I do find it a bit irritating when people mention that William's marrying a "commoner" though. Her parents are millionaires, she went to Marlborough School. It's not like Will's run off with a chav from Tower Hamlets.

[Tirian]

I do find it a bit irritating when people mention that William's marrying a "commoner" though. Her parents are millionaires, she went to Marlborough School. It's not like Will's run off with a chav from Tower Hamlets.

But her behavior is common. That wouldn't get on our nerves, but that's only because we're commoners ourselves. Ms. Middleton seems sufficiently clever as to adopt the fashion of behaving as the nobles do, but even that is a departure from what you or I would think of as being on good behavior all the time.

[_Zoot_]

I'm really happy about it! It is nice to hear some positive news from the Royal Family, too often it is depressing muckups that hurt the public image of the Royal Family...


Of course I say this as a Royalist who really gets annoyed when people here in Australia talk about becoming a Republic... Then again that might just be because the leader of the push to become a Republic suggested last time that people under 30 shouldn't be taken seriously. :smallsigh:

Anyway, I can't figure out why so many British people don't like the Royals (unless it is having the hear about them from those Tabloid things, that would be annoying) they make Britain a HUGE amount of money each year! What's not to love? :smallbiggrin:

[Fifty-Eyed Fred]

Anyway, I can't figure out why so many British people don't like the Royals (unless it is having the hear about them from those Tabloid things, that would be annoying) they make Britain a HUGE amount of money each year! What's not to love? :smallbiggrin:

Agreed. We get a lot of international respect from the presence of the Royal Family as well, which is something a lot of people at home lose sight of. The majority, however, support the monarchy - republicans are merely very vocal. In actuality, the Royals are an asset that we profit from in a multitude of ways, not a hindrance.

As an aside, while the power of the monarch is mostly symbolic, the monarchy does have its impact on government and politics in many small ways. Twice during her reign the Queen has chosen the Prime Minister, for example. I would hasten to add, though, that keeping the position of Head of State away from politicians works very much to our advantage, as does having a continuous presence to represent the nation when governments come and go.

[Evil DM Mark3]

One thing I find slightly annoying is that I am getting married in 2011. The same thing happened to my parents AND my aunt and uncle. Why do the royals keep copying us?

[Syka]

One thing I find slightly annoying is that I am getting married in 2011. The same thing happened to my parents AND my aunt and uncle. Why do the royals keep copying us?

That's actually fairly amusing. :)


As an aside, a couple of weeks ago I actually used Prince William and Kate as an example of why it doesn't matter Oz and I aren't engaged. Now...they are. :smallsigh: At least I can use the "if an eight year courtship is cool with the British Royal family, then why are you not cool with it?" for another 5 years. Then I have to find another couple. >>

[Evil DM Mark3]

That's actually fairly amusing. :)


As an aside, a couple of weeks ago I actually used Prince William and Kate as an example of why it doesn't matter Oz and I aren't engaged. Now...they are. :smallsigh: At least I can use the "if an eight year courtship is cool with the British Royal family, then why are you not cool with it?" for another 5 years. Then I have to find another couple. >>I am fairly certain if you are still happy, content and monogamous after 8 year, engagement will not look like something to avoid. :smallwink:

[Syka]

It's...complicated. Suffice to say the only negative thing we've discovered about being partners is that the term "boyfriend" or "girlfriend" doesn't really encompass our relationship anymore. That's...about it. Otherwise, I couldn't care less. His only hang up is he knows how he gets if he's obligated to do something, and he's scared that would happen. *shrug* I know he wants to be with me, everyone else knows he wants to be with me, and I definitely wouldn't want to push the issue since (as stated above) I don't care.

I just know parental interference from his end will be happening soon, and will get worse as time goes on. >> Thankfully, my mom could also care less. She's got enough with my sisters wedding, and it took her and my dad 7 years to get around to it. :smallwink:

[Mando Knight]

One thing I find slightly annoying is that I am getting married in 2011. The same thing happened to my parents AND my aunt and uncle. Why do the royals keep copying us?

You all share the same wedding planner and don't realize it, maybe? :smalltongue:

[Hazkali]

I do find it a bit irritating when people mention that William's marrying a "commoner" though. Her parents are millionaires, she went to Marlborough School. It's not like Will's run off with a chav from Tower Hamlets.

She is a commoner. "Commoner" is the correct term for anyone who is not a part of the peerage.

Personally, I wish them both well. They look very happy together, and seem to be good people. When the day comes, I'll be proud for Prince William to be my king.

[Marnath]

It's...complicated. Suffice to say the only negative thing we've discovered about being partners is that the term "boyfriend" or "girlfriend" doesn't really encompass our relationship anymore. That's...about it. Otherwise, I couldn't care less. His only hang up is he knows how he gets if he's obligated to do something, and he's scared that would happen. *shrug* I know he wants to be with me, everyone else knows he wants to be with me, and I definitely wouldn't want to push the issue since (as stated above) I don't care.

I just know parental interference from his end will be happening soon, and will get worse as time goes on. >> Thankfully, my mom could also care less. She's got enough with my sisters wedding, and it took her and my dad 7 years to get around to it. :smallwink:

You don't have to have a ceremony, you know. Just because it's tradition doesn't mean you have to do it that way if one or both of you are uncomfortable with the idea.

[Sahune]

I'm an Australian who lived in the the UK for a while, but although I'm all for our country to become a republic I must say that I'm rather happy that the royal family has a major wedding that is built on love and not mere cirumstance. Down with colonialism and all that, but I'm rather pleased that the royal family will have a new addition that isn't likely to devolve into scandal. She's had a hard time in the 1990s the poor dear, and now that everything has settled down (relatively speaking) she has a married descendant to leave her throne to after Charles.

I mean, that Prince Harry. Turning up to a fancy dress party as a German officer with a swastika on his arm? Not the done thing at all.

[Kobold-Bard]

I'm not. Most Brits don't give a toss about the royals.

Nominally. It's an embarrassing archaism.

http://img505.imageshack.us/img505/6355/motivator4197548po4.jpg

Just because they don't use their power, doesn't mean they don't have any.

More importantly this wedding means (hopefully) William will be king instead of Charles: who I dislike for reasons I can't really explain.

[Evil DM Mark3]

Whatever you may think of them, Her Majesty has to be the best example of a constitutional Monarch in the world, saying almost nothing. She also happens to be the leading expert in British policy and Foreign affairs, what with her reading EVERY high classification document that the British Government generated over the last 57 years...

[Lycan 01]

I'm an American myself, and I don't know much about the British government and monarchy. I do find it interesting, though, that Prince William is getting married. "Commoner" or not, they seem to really care about each other, which is good. Prince William himself seems pretty cool, and from what I've gathered he's quite mature and responsible.

Case in point...

Earlier today he apparently flew a helicopter through a storm as part of a mission to rescue a guy having a heart attack off a mountain. (http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20101121/en_afp/britainroyalsmarriagerescue)

Yeah, just randomly came across that a minute ago, and figured it'd be worth mentioning here. :smallconfused:

[Katana_Geldar]

He's a search and rescue pilot in Wales. What's not to like? A prince and a pilot!

[Mando Knight]

He's a search and rescue pilot in Wales. What's not to like? A prince and a pilot!
William is thus the epitome of what it means to be a prince. After all, what's a future head of state if he isn't awesome?

[Katana_Geldar]

Chances are though he's going to look like his dad in 20 eyars, it's already starting to tell with the hairline going up.

[Evil DM Mark3]

Ehe, Charles is not too bad, just a bit wet and an eco-nut with really REALLY bad decision making about his relationships.

[CynicalAvocado]

let's talk about harry. he seems like a.... fun guy

[Evil DM Mark3]

He does seem a little more, gaffe prone, than his brother, but do remember that he fought with the Gurkhas in Afghanistan.

[Kobold-Bard]

let's talk about harry. he seems like a.... fun guy

Ahh, Harry. What a fun monarch he'd be.

[Katana_Geldar]

The really fun guy is Phillip, he's famous for his gaffes.

[Kobold-Bard]

The really fun guy is Phillip, he's famous for his gaffes.

I think he gets a bad deal from the media, he's just an old guy who occasionally forgets stuff isn't politically correct anymore. Everyone does that from time to time, people just think of him as a racist old eccentric so those mistakes get focussed on.

[Klose_the_Sith]

The really fun guy is Phillip, he's famous for his gaffes.

Blaspheme not the divine son of a mountain spirit! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Philip_Movement) >.>

[CrimsonAngel]

I can't remember where I heard about this, but I heard about it!

[SDF]

Not being a subject of the crown (or a subject of anything) it is all celebrity gossip to me. I didn't even know who this Kate girl was, but think it is adorable the wiki has her genealogy listed as if it were important.

[Syka]

Not being a subject of the crown (or a subject of anything) it is all celebrity gossip to me. I didn't even know who this Kate girl was, but think it is adorable the wiki has her genealogy listed as if it were important.

Given she's marrying in to royalty, where genealogy is considered very important, it's not that surprising. It's the 21st century and it's still news that she isn't from the aristocracy (her parents may be rich now, but they are hardly from noble families).

I actually almost feel bad for the media spotlight she's under, but from what I've heard in passing, William and his family have done everything they can to keep her from being harassed. I know absolutely nothing about their relationship other than the photo's I've seen of them (few that they are), they both look sincerely happy. Commoner or not, and Prince or not, if they make each other happy...here's to them. :)


Marnath, it's not the ceremony. My mom is fully aware that, should I get married, I will be eloping to Vegas to be married by an Elvis Impersonator at a drive-thru wedding chapel. No joke. Marriage just kind of...freaks Oz out. As I said, it's the obligation thing. I'm certainly not going to pressure him to do something like that if he doesn't want to, particularly since it's not a huge deal for me. Would I like to? Eventually, there are some nice benefits to it. Do I really care? Not as long as we're happy together. Alan Rickman and his partner are good examples. Never married, no children, still very much together 45 years after they met before either was successful.

[thorgrim29]

Everyone likes the Queen (she is one classy Lady) , but after she dies the royalty will become extremely irrelevant in Canada, and I would venture in most of the commonwealth, seeing as a lot of that respect is for her actions during the London Blitz and the Cold War, things that will hopefully never happen again.

But they sound like decent people, so good luck and happy life to them.

[skywalker]

(Of course, who knows if Charles would take the throne even if he did outlive his mother as opposed to just handing it straight to William.)


http://img505.imageshack.us/img505/6355/motivator4197548po4.jpg

Just because they don't use their power, doesn't mean they don't have any.

More importantly this wedding means (hopefully) William will be king instead of Charles: who I dislike for reasons I can't really explain.

It's highly unlikely they'd go over Charles. In a situation built entirely around tradition, going against tradition... Seems a bit counterproductive.

Not that a ton of people wouldn't appreciate it, but for one thing, I think William would rather prefer seeing dad be king for a while. Even if I'd been told ever since I could remember that I was going to be king one day, I'd want to put it off as long as possible.


let's talk about harry. he seems like a.... fun guy

You know, Harry has really gained a lot of respect ever since he went to fight in the Middle East. Twice.

Me personally, I find it semi-interesting. Like, William and Kate are beautiful young celebrities and their marriage is exciting, plus William is going to be King one day. That's pretty important.

On the other hand, they're not getting married til summer. That means I have a good solid 7-8 months of hearing about "Kate's dress this, Kate's dress that, blah blah blah, the decorations will be peach and lavender, etc, etc." Ugh. Plus, Fox News brought out their "Royal Family correspondent," that ex-butler of Diana's who is such a skeeve, and always pretending to know more about the family than he actually does. Oof.

[comicshorse]

[QUOTE=skywalker;9813556

On the other hand, they're not getting married til summer. That means I have a good solid 7-8 months of hearing about "Kate's dress this, Kate's dress that, blah blah blah, the decorations will be peach and lavender, etc, etc." Ugh. Plus, Fox News brought out their "Royal Family correspondent," that ex-butler of Diana's who is such a skeeve, and always pretending to know more about the family than he actually does. Oof.[/QUOTE]


Oh for the good old days when he would have been hung, drawn and quatered

[Kobold-Bard]

Friday 29th April @ Westminster Abbey.

Now the really important stuff: free bank holiday :smallcool:

[Evil DM Mark3]

It is better than that. This is the Friday after Easter Monday, so both the Monday and Friday of that week will be Bank Holidays.

[Fifty-Eyed Fred]

A 3-day week, then. How 70s.

The wedding's on my flatmate's birthday, as it happens. Coincidence?

[Kobold-Bard]

A 3-day week, then. How 70s.

The wedding's on my flatmate's birthday, as it happens. Coincidence?

Nope. Your flatmate has offended the royals and this is their revenge.

[Evil DM Mark3]

Hang on.

Good Friday to Easter Monday = 4 Day weekend.
3 day work day
Royal wedding to Mayday Bank Holiday = 4 Day weekend.

[Zen Monkey]

We get a lot of international respect from the presence of the Royal Family as well, which is something a lot of people at home lose sight of.

This comment surprised me. I would think that as more and more cultures move away from the idea that someone's lineage could make them a wiser or more just person, that international respect would fade for any group that still followed this school of thought. Granted, I'm speaking from a democratic American perspective, but I find the notion of someone being more fit to govern others as a result of their birthright and genetics to be anywhere from outdated to quaint at best. Besides, we pay more attention to who is filling the role of Britain's prime minister, as he is the one who actually seems to meet with our government and discuss any sort of joint efforts.

[Evil DM Mark3]

Over a fifth of the world's nations are monarchies, and it is not just the fact that they are monarchs. Her Majesty has been a figure on the world stage, operating with the highest level of international information, for an absolute age, and Charles has also been exposed to this and has too been working in this capacity. Prince Charles has addressed assemblies of senior Islamic officials in Saudi Arabia for example, because he is a Royal and has a good basis in Islamic history. Such groups have also refused to talk to presidents. The royal family have 3 useful qualities as ambassadors.

Consistency
Tradition
Reputation


I think my overall point is that they aint broke, make money and are mostly liked overseas, so don't try and fix it.

[Tirian]

Granted, I'm speaking from a democratic American perspective, but I find the notion of someone being more fit to govern others as a result of their birthright and genetics to be anywhere from outdated to quaint at best. Besides, we pay more attention to who is filling the role of Britain's prime minister, as he is the one who actually seems to meet with our government and discuss any sort of joint efforts.

I think it's easy to overstate, but there is some sort of boost there. The pomp and circumstance surrounding the legacy of the royal family would generate a measurable amount of tourism which is beneficial to the average citizen. And while I wouldn't yield my sovereignty to any of them, a lifestyle of wealth and leisure affords members of the royal family with the resources to become knowledgeable authorities on whatever topics are of interest to them, which might generate positive results for all the people of the world (depending on what the topic was).

And I'd challenge you to go ask fifty Americans who the current Prime Minister of the United Kingdom is, because I think you'd find that we aren't as engaged as you hope. My specific predictions are the majority of people who thought they knew would incorrectly name one of the current PM's two predecessors, but a much larger share would be unable to name any of those three.

[Morph Bark]

Given she's marrying in to royalty, where genealogy is considered very important, it's not that surprising. It's the 21st century and it's still news that she isn't from the aristocracy (her parents may be rich now, but they are hardly from noble families).

Someone from royalty should just come for me. My grandmother has managed to get 50000 people into our family tree over the last decade. :smallamused:

[Tirian]

Someone from royalty should just come for me. My grandmother has managed to get 50000 people into our family tree over the last decade. :smallamused:

:smallconfused: We're talking about people were already your ancestors and you just happen to know their names now, right? Otherwise, that is some serious Wilt Camberlain action going on over there. :smalltongue:

[LtPowers]

And I'd challenge you to go ask fifty Americans who the current Prime Minister of the United Kingdom is, because I think you'd find that we aren't as engaged as you hope.

Ask again in a year, when the current PM has been had more time to be in the news. My brain is still stuck on Gordon Brown.


Powers &8^]

[Syka]

I think it's easy to overstate, but there is some sort of boost there. The pomp and circumstance surrounding the legacy of the royal family would generate a measurable amount of tourism which is beneficial to the average citizen. And while I wouldn't yield my sovereignty to any of them, a lifestyle of wealth and leisure affords members of the royal family with the resources to become knowledgeable authorities on whatever topics are of interest to them, which might generate positive results for all the people of the world (depending on what the topic was).

And I'd challenge you to go ask fifty Americans who the current Prime Minister of the United Kingdom is, because I think you'd find that we aren't as engaged as you hope. My specific predictions are the majority of people who thought they knew would incorrectly name one of the current PM's two predecessors, but a much larger share would be unable to name any of those three.

I said Gordon Brown. >>' Not bad, considering he only just stepped down 6 months ago and for the last...yearish? or so I haven't even listened to much news. All I know about the elections that just happened in America is that the Republicans are now a majority. I don't even remember the name of my new Governor, despite the election happening only a couple weeks ago.


I do think the Royal family serves a purpose. As someone else mentioned, the Queen has been heavily involved in international politics for over half a century. That's pretty impressive. The two princes seem to have inherited the philanthropic gene from their parents. Are they figureheads? Yeah. But they are figureheads who do stuff for the good of the people.

[Raistlin1040]

It's David Cameron, isn't it?

I think they're mostly superfluous. They don't REALLY have any power, but they use their positions as internationally recognized figures for good causes, so they're alright with me. William seems like a decent guy too, so I wish him the best.

Syka: That's not entirely accurate either. The Republicans have a majority in the House of Representatives, but the Democrats still have a majority in the Senate. Not a political point, just one made for educational purposes.

[Syka]

Raistlin1040, that's what I mean. :smallsigh: I'm pretty much just completely out of the news loop. I'm surprised that I was that close with the Prime Minister.

[Morph Bark]

:smallconfused: We're talking about people were already your ancestors and you just happen to know their names now, right? Otherwise, that is some serious Wilt Camberlain action going on over there. :smalltongue:

My grandmother went and did a lot of research to find out who was whose father or mather or spouse and all that. In my country they keep very good records of all such kinds of things. Heck, through land ownership documents alone she managed to go back further than my priestly granduncle, and he got up to the 1250s.

In fact, I'm named after the oldest guy he found out about in our ancestral line.

Lots of interesting stuff, really. It's how we got further information on our Spanish and black ancestry.


EDIT: Dunno what you mean by "Wilt Chamberlain action" though, despite vaguely knowing who Wilt Chamberlain is.

[Zen Monkey]

EDIT: Dunno what you mean by "Wilt Chamberlain action" though, despite vaguely knowing who Wilt Chamberlain is.

Wilt Chaimberlain was famous for two things. The first is arguably being the best basketball player in history. The second is his claim to have slept with over 10,000 women. I don't think the rebounding skills were the feat being referenced in this case.

[An Enemy Spy]

I don't live in the UK, and since the monarchy is dead anyway, I just don't care.

[Katana_Geldar]

Well, they will be married in Westminster Abbey. This is going to be HUGE.

[Fifty-Eyed Fred]

I don't live in the UK, and since the monarchy is dead anyway, I just don't care.

It isn't. Hence the possibility of even having a royal wedding.

[_Zoot_]

Well, they will be married in Westminster Abbey. This is going to be HUGE.

Do you think that means that they are going to go for a really traditional wedding? I would love to see that, I can't get enough of the pomp! :smallbiggrin:

[Mercenary Pen]

Well, they will be married in Westminster Abbey. This is going to be HUGE.

However it suggests they aren't expecting as big a turnout as they had for Charles and Diana which was held in St. Pauls Cathedral if I recall correctly...

[Evil DM Mark3]

However it suggests they aren't expecting as big a turnout as they had for Charles and Diana which was held in St. Pauls Cathedral if I recall correctly...True, although that has been the ONLY royal wedding not to happen at Westminster Abbey in 100 years. Plus most of the crowd tend not to be allowed in, what with us commoners not being on the guest list and all.:smallwink:

The abbey has seating for about 2000 and they are already working out how to get giant TV screens set up for people outside.

[skywalker]

Oh for the good old days when he would have been hung, drawn and quatered

Lolwut? Was this supposed to mean I was taking it too seriously, or something?!


And I'd challenge you to go ask fifty Americans who the current Prime Minister of the United Kingdom is, because I think you'd find that we aren't as engaged as you hope. My specific predictions are the majority of people who thought they knew would incorrectly name one of the current PM's two predecessors, but a much larger share would be unable to name any of those three.

I'm with this one. All I could muster was "Gordon Brown... No, he's out... Uh, uh... The new guy's a Tory, I know that!!!"

Honestly, I think if you asked most Americans to name the current PM, they might say "Charles." Because "Prince" starts with the same few letters as "Prime," you see.

[Kobold-Bard]

Lolwut? Was this supposed to mean I was taking it too seriously, or something?!

...

I think they were referring to Diana's butler, not you.

[comicshorse]

I was refering to the butler

[Evil DM Mark3]

I was refering to the butlerOh, that waste of flesh. Remember when he claimed he had not disclosed everything to the Diana inquest, only to get recalled to the inquiry to confess he was boasting and he did know as little as he had said? Man, if it was not so disrespectful it would be funny.

[Kobold-Bard]

Oh, that waste of flesh. Remember when he claimed he had not disclosed everything to the Diana inquest, only to get recalled to the inquiry to confess he was boasting? Man, if it was not so disrespectful it would be funny.

I'm sure this will help make up for it (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4M-vt4sRHFo&feature=related) :smalltongue: