The hats are AMAZING!

Marguerite

Active Member
Something I meant to mention - during WWII, George VI was king, with his consort Queen Elizabeth (later the queen Mother). Their two daughters grew up during WWII and did a lot of work for the war effort. During the London Blitz, when many people were leaving London and especially children were being removed, the Queen Mum (or Queen, as she was then) was asked if perhaps it would be wise to send the two princesses to the country, to keep them safer.
"The children won't leave without me," she said. "And I won't leave without the King. And he won't leave London."

So they stayed, and visited bombed out buildings, even after the palace was bombed too. The people of London needed this for morale.

When the war ended and Armistice was declared, the two princesses slipped out and mingled with the crowd, incognito. No security contingent - nothing. They were wearing their uniforms. They would have been late teens/early 20s by then. So our current Queen really understands what it is like to live through war, and got a first-hand experience of the joy of the people when the war ended.

Some republicans were complaining about the cost of the royal wedding, but forgetting a few things:

First, the tourism it has brought in is far more than the cost.

Second, morale - it is always up with such an event.

Third - a lot of the cost was borne by private income of the Queen's and Prince Charles. Charles actually is self-funded, the Duchy of Cornwall brings in a tidy income. And he paid for the second reception.

Not that I'm a monarchist - increasingly, the monarchy is less relevant to us in Australia. But I do wish the couple well.

Marg
 

Hound dog

Nana's are Beautiful
I agree. I don't understand why they were complaining about cost as I'm sure the royal family covered the vast bulk of that themselves. I do think the wedding was needed as a morale boost, though. And while I'm not so big on all the hype, I did enjoy looking at the pics and whatnot of the wedding. Just wish news didn't have to hype things up so bad beforehand.

As to the hats, many were lovely. I wish hats would really come back into fashion here. I wouldn't have a clue how to wear one........but I've always enjoyed pretty hats that top off an elegant outfit. lol
 
N

Nomad

Guest
OMG! I am so out of it.
Just saw Beatrice's hat. OMG! OMG! OMG!
NOW I understand what some of this fuss is about. OMG!
 

Marguerite

Active Member
Beatrice's hat wasn't so bad (she was the one in the blue dress). But Eugenie - that hat was a nightmare! Her dress looked nice, though.

Marg
 
N

Nomad

Guest
I get the two confused.
One looked looked like a circular satellite on or about her forehead.
The other looked like a blue baseball cap with either hair ringlets coming out on the top or perhaps dark brown chocolate balls on her head...sticking out from the center of the hat.
Both win awards in my book for the most frightening hats I probably have seen in a LOOOOONG time.
I vaguely understand it is customary to wear "fancy" hats to the royal wedding.
But is there some purpose to wear unusual or even freakish hats to the royal wedding?
 

Marguerite

Active Member
Not that I can think of, Nomad. I think the aim in weird hats is to be noticed. But if you're already on the radar map, why bother trying to hard to be noticed? We all know who they are, when it comes to the royal family. So it comes down to the designer wanting to be noticed. Mind you, Beatrice's cleavage was definitely noticeable. With the camera on the Queen and Duke of Edinburgh so much, we kept getting an eyeful of Bea's ample bosom.

I think the Queen's hat was lovely. And if she can wear something so tasteful and not obtrusive, what's wrong with all the others?

Marg
 

Star*

call 911........call 911
Okay I have a few corrections -

I said prince Andrew lightly pecked Camilla on the cheek. Not so - my mistake. It was HRH Phillip.

As far as the hats? Witz you'd be interested to know my Mom said the EXACT same thing you did. All the attention on ME please for my ridiculous hat. And what better way for a designer to have his name plastered on the airwaves whether it was good or bad attention? Someone said his name thousands of times in many countries. Eugnie and Beatrice's outfits were NOT befitting Princesses no matter what anyone says. They looked frumpy, dumpy and oddly difficult child in their choice of dress. I'm not too off the map here either I don't think their Mother came without a smidge of GFGness in herself either.

My spoof on Anne? No takers huh? Okay.

My pick on hats? Oddly enough was Annes Daughter Zara - I didn't recognize her with darker hair - but I thought that was one hat by the same designer for all the weirdo hats - that really was tastefully done. It was large, loud, off to one side pinned, black with a large brim but rather pretty. Not gawdy.

As far as revenues? The monies the must have been generated from tourism, commercialism et al had to be so much more than what was paid out. That and I think England needed a party. Goodness knows the US could use one. We've got idiots in Florida spending $14,000 on 'capes' telling people they are "CapeABLE of finding jobs." and the world is worried about a wedding? Right.

My overall thought was this was tastefully done, low-keyed as possible, and very pretty. I'm ashamed for those women that attempted to steal the spotlight - but I'm soooo sorry gals - NOTHING and I mean NOTHING next to THAT bride stole the show like Pilppa's white skin hugging dress -----and her sister and Mother KNEW what it looked like before the eyes of the entire world - so I'm going to say here ---THAT family knows how to advertise it's assests - for the best outcome for it's girls. WOW - if she doesn't have date offers from men around the world that could keep her in love and luxury for the rest of her life and marry her own prince? Yeah - right! Smart family.
 

Star*

call 911........call 911
Well now, she did get the attentions she wanted didn't she? Even a facebook page! Goodness. I wonder exactly what HRM Queen Elizabeth had to say about it? Couldn't have been "Oh what a lovely hat!" Perhaps that explains the sigh upon seeing her Granddaughter. I never really realized what an incredibly hard job being Queen is. Actually I guess I never really considered that Royals would behave in a difficult child fashion - but I guess there's one in every family eh?
My favorite quote: I always thought Beatrice was a dear. Now I see I am wrong she IS a deer.
 

Marguerite

Active Member
I am still fairly certain it was Beatrice in the blue, but as those girls have grown, they have changed and I could be wrong. But that hat - unbelievable.

husband found a good joke last night - Prince William announced he didn't want the usual fruit cake at his wedding. Prince Phillip said, "Too bad, I wouldn't miss this!"

Marg
 

donna723

Well-Known Member
I read something that said she couldn't sit up straight in the car with that hat on, she had to lean over sideways. Reminds me of an old episode of "The Simpsons" when Marge couldn't fit into the car with her hair unless she bent over to one side.
 

AnnieO

Shooting from the Hip
...And now, Marge Simpson's hair bends...

My two favorite hats were: the Queen's. Most definitely a HAT, mind. But simple, matching, and tasteful. And Victoria Beckham's, as it was simple - though it should have been on TOP of her head and not glued to her forehead.

I think Beatrice/Eugenie - the one with the Crayola-"Flesh"-Crayon-Curlicue-Headdress-Mess had the worst hat. HANDS DOWN.
 

Star*

call 911........call 911
Beatrice IS the redhead that resembles her Mother Fergie. Eugnie is the dark-haired princess that sort of resembles her Father. Our generation is not from a culture or an age of hats or social dressing. Pity too. My Mother and Grandmother, and Great Grandmother are all English. Hats, gloves, proper dress - the absolute norm. My Mother can hardly answer the door for a UPS package without being appropriately dressed.

It made me wonder however since everyone is being so down on Beatrice (self included) as to what she was wearing if it was done for attention or really if she felt it was a lovely hat. So I started looking at some pictures of her hats from past engagements and ladies I have to tell you - the kid has NO taste in hats. http://www.bing.com/images/search?q...E3BBE08C0DAAEADAD6960C2&first=211&FORM=IDFRIR

So it COULD be she really felt she was dressed well, and it backfired, or it could be she felt she would get some attention and it backfired in a negative way. After seeing her other outrageous concoctions? I rather doubt it, but not being British, and not being published in any magazines here for my eyes to see, and not being a Beatrice follower like I am the Queen? I really haven't paid attention. Just like not knowing who Princess Zara was. I mean I loved her black hat. While I disliked her Mother's, and her Mother's sour look, poor anti-style taste in clothes; I should have known her, but didn't. So maybe the world is judging the kid a little harshly - after all she IS a Princess - and once you take the hat off? The child IS stunning. So is her sister Eugenie.

Anyway - just my I felt bad for slamming the hat when there was a lovely person under it statement. My apologies Princesses. I really just didn't care for the hat.
 

DDD

Well-Known Member
I'm not in a sweet mood (3rd day with-o a cig) so excuse any rude comments please. It occurred to me that "maybe" the daughter wore that God awful hat as an "in your face" statements because her Mom was invited. DDD
 

Star*

call 911........call 911
Dear SMokeless -

I had considered that too. But then again she had to understand not everyone holds a redneck wedding. They didn't even have BEER at the palace or a mud pit.
 
Top