Page 3 of 6

Re: The Royal wedding

Posted: Fri May 18, 2018 6:58 pm
by siam sam
well it has certainly created a wedding fever all over the uk, why for a divorcee looking for another pay packet remember mrs simpson.

Re: The Royal wedding

Posted: Fri May 18, 2018 8:32 pm
by Rosie
Well I shall be watching it. I haven't missed a televised royal wedding yet and I expect this will be the last one in my lifetime.

If I'm not mistaken the first televised royal wedding was Princess Margaret and Antony Armstrong-Jones and I was still at school.

Re: The Royal wedding

Posted: Fri May 18, 2018 10:01 pm
by ralph
Rosie wrote:
Fri May 18, 2018 8:32 pm
Well I shall be watching it. I haven't missed a televised royal wedding yet and I expect this will be the last one in my lifetime.

If I'm not mistaken the first televised royal wedding was Princess Margaret and Antony Armstrong-Jones and I was still at school.
Rosie, unless you are in a very frail state of health, you will see the next one too. Further from the throne, but The Queen's granddaughter Princess Eugeni will marry her boyfriend of seven years standing: Jack Brookbank, at St George's Chapel Windsor Castle on Friday October 12th. I'm sure there will be less fuss over this one, but all the royal family are sure to be in attendance. I expect it will be covered on TV as just a short item in the main news of the day.

Re: The Royal wedding

Posted: Sat May 19, 2018 5:30 am
by Rosie
You are right Ralph others will marry in my lifetime (I hope) but I meant this will be the last one to be fully televised in my lifetime.

I think this will make number five, Margaret, Charles, Andrew, William and now Harry. I don't think either Ann's or Edwards weddings were televised which I believe must set some sort of precedent. The queen's wedding and the coronation were well reported but not televised. I don't remember her wedding but I do remember the coronation.

Re: The Royal wedding

Posted: Sat May 19, 2018 5:54 am
by ralph
siam sam wrote:
Fri May 18, 2018 6:58 pm
well it has certainly created a wedding fever all over the uk, why for a divorcee looking for another pay packet remember mrs simpson.
Sam, bearing in mind that she had a very successful and well paid career, I wouldn't think that money was the main attraction - Harry has far more than that to offer.

As for divorce: In the not too distant past, in general our life spans were shorter, so marriages did not have to last as long as they can now, and the law made it difficult to end marriages. In the US (according to Judge Judy) 52% of marriages end in divorce. Sadly, its part of modern life, but if a marriage isn't working, it is better to end it than to spend what remains of life making each other unhappy. :(

Re: The Royal wedding

Posted: Sat May 19, 2018 5:57 am
by max Headroom
siam sam wrote:
Fri May 18, 2018 6:58 pm
well it has certainly created a wedding fever all over the uk, why for a divorcee looking for another pay packet remember mrs simpson.
It will fail, she's been around.

Re: The Royal wedding

Posted: Sat May 19, 2018 6:24 am
by ralph
Rosie wrote:
Sat May 19, 2018 5:30 am
You are right Ralph others will marry in my lifetime (I hope) but I meant this will be the last one to be fully televised in my lifetime.

I think this will make number five, Margaret, Charles, Andrew, William and now Harry. I don't think either Ann's or Edwards weddings were televised which I believe must set some sort of precedent. The queen's wedding and the coronation were well reported but not televised. I don't remember her wedding but I do remember the coronation.
Rosie, the Coronation ceremony was on TV, but there was much opposition to it being so. The Archbishop of Canterbury was said to be against it on the grounds that it was improper that such a sacred ceremony would be seen by people in pubs and other places of ill repute! I believe Then Queen herself was against it, but probably on more practical grounds. During such a long ceremony, the potential for things to go wrong are great and the thought that every facial expression might be recorded is an added strain.

When I say 'go wrong': e.g. during the procession in The Abbey, one of the Page Boys accidently stood on the Coronation Robe. The Queen feeling the tugging paused long enough for the lad to move off. The heavy gold crown used for the actual crowning, has no obvious front or back, so to make sure he got it right when placing it on The Queen's head, The Archbishop tied a piece of thread to the front to help him. prior to the crowning, someone spotted the thread and removed it, causing him a minor panic as it only fits on the head one way. :shock:

Re: The Royal wedding

Posted: Sat May 19, 2018 9:45 am
by Rosie
ralph wrote:
Sat May 19, 2018 6:24 am
Rosie, the Coronation ceremony was on TV, but there was much opposition to it being so. The Archbishop of Canterbury was said to be against it on the grounds that it was improper that such a sacred ceremony would be seen by people in pubs and other places of ill repute! I believe Then Queen herself was against it, but probably on more practical grounds. During such a long ceremony, the potential for things to go wrong are great and the thought that every facial expression might be recorded is an added strain.

When I say 'go wrong': e.g. during the procession in The Abbey, one of the Page Boys accidently stood on the Coronation Robe. The Queen feeling the tugging paused long enough for the lad to move off. The heavy gold crown used for the actual crowning, has no obvious front or back, so to make sure he got it right when placing it on The Queen's head, The Archbishop tied a piece of thread to the front to help him. prior to the crowning, someone spotted the thread and removed causing him a minor panic as it only fits on the head one way.
You are right of course Ralph but I'm not sure if it was all televised. I don't really remember it as I wasn't all that old and had only just come out of a bit of a long stay in hospital. Also I lived in a small village and just about the whole village turned out for a big party and games etc at the local village hall, I do remember that, and I still have the coronation mug all the kids were given. I don't think we even had a TV then. Oh my, that was a long time ago.

Re: The Royal wedding

Posted: Sat May 19, 2018 4:57 pm
by ralph
Rosie wrote:
Sat May 19, 2018 9:45 am
ralph wrote:
Sat May 19, 2018 6:24 am
Rosie, the Coronation ceremony was on TV, but there was much opposition to it being so. The Archbishop of Canterbury was said to be against it on the grounds that it was improper that such a sacred ceremony would be seen by people in pubs and other places of ill repute! I believe Then Queen herself was against it, but probably on more practical grounds. During such a long ceremony, the potential for things to go wrong are great and the thought that every facial expression might be recorded is an added strain.

When I say 'go wrong': e.g. during the procession in The Abbey, one of the Page Boys accidently stood on the Coronation Robe. The Queen feeling the tugging paused long enough for the lad to move off. The heavy gold crown used for the actual crowning, has no obvious front or back, so to make sure he got it right when placing it on The Queen's head, The Archbishop tied a piece of thread to the front to help him. prior to the crowning, someone spotted the thread and removed causing him a minor panic as it only fits on the head one way.
You are right of course Ralph but I'm not sure if it was all televised. I don't really remember it as I wasn't all that old and had only just come out of a bit of a long stay in hospital. Also I lived in a small village and just about the whole village turned out for a big party and games etc at the local village hall, I do remember that, and I still have the coronation mug all the kids were given. I don't think we even had a TV then. Oh my, that was a long time ago.
It sure does seem a long time ago. I remember a lot of people (not us) bought a TV just to watch the Coronation. They were awful little TV's but they seemed miraculous then. :lol:

Re: The Royal wedding

Posted: Sun May 20, 2018 3:36 am
by sherri
Well, they had beautiful weather for it.
Whoever chose that preacher though should have been shot. The man spent about 20 minutes yelling the same thing over & over. They should have given him 2 minutes, max, if they needed to have him at all. Personally, I don't think they needed to have him at all.

Re: The Royal wedding

Posted: Sun May 20, 2018 4:08 am
by gnads
Oh marvellously spiffing what ... perfect weather and all that pip pip tally ho the fox yoikes. :lol: :P

Re: The Royal wedding

Posted: Sun May 20, 2018 7:32 am
by ralph
sherri wrote:
Sun May 20, 2018 3:36 am
Well, they had beautiful weather for it.
Whoever chose that preacher though should have been shot. The man spent about 20 minutes yelling the same thing over & over. They should have given him 2 minutes, max, if they needed to have him at all. Personally, I don't think they needed to have him at all.
Sherri, I suspect there will be a lot of occasions in the future, when PR try too hard to be 'inclusive' and irritate a great many people - including those they are trying to please. :lol:

Re: The Royal wedding

Posted: Sun May 20, 2018 1:42 pm
by danet
Well that Reverend sure stole the show! Evangelistic style😂 was thinking at first how meaningful it was and then I start to cringe, went on too long and the message is lost. I get a phone text from daughter watching the wedding from the Gold Coast “is he ever going to stop!” 😂 we have been talking about it all day and laughing, I even downloaded the reverends speech to listen to it properly without the cringing!
Anyway, thought the dress was understated. The little bridesmaids and page boys were adorable! Amazing sunny day it was too! Those horses and horsemen/guards looked magnificent. I was pleased for Prince Charles to give the bride away. He was beaming with happiness. The music was beautiful and I loved the Cello playing Ave Maria.
The main important point is as the good reverend ponits out, is the love, and these two really do and I think will for a long time. They will be great embassadors for very worthy causes. Diana’s legacy will live on.

Re: The Royal wedding

Posted: Sun May 20, 2018 6:03 pm
by ralph
danet wrote:
Sun May 20, 2018 1:42 pm
Well that Reverend sure stole the show! Evangelistic style😂 was thinking at first how meaningful it was and then I start to cringe, went on too long and the message is lost. I get a phone text from daughter watching the wedding from the Gold Coast “is he ever going to stop!” 😂 we have been talking about it all day and laughing, I even downloaded the reverends speech to listen to it properly without the cringing!
Anyway, thought the dress was understated. The little bridesmaids and page boys were adorable! Amazing sunny day it was too! Those horses and horsemen/guards looked magnificent. I was pleased for Prince Charles to give the bride away. He was beaming with happiness. The music was beautiful and I loved the Cello playing Ave Maria.
The main important point is as the good reverend ponits out, is the love, and these two really do and I think will for a long time. They will be great embassadors for very worthy causes. Diana’s legacy will live on.
I see that they will be coming over to Sydney in October for The Invictus Games.

Re: The Royal wedding

Posted: Sun May 20, 2018 8:46 pm
by champion.
I dont know what all the fuss was about... :roll:

Image :oops:

Re: The Royal wedding

Posted: Sun May 20, 2018 10:34 pm
by sherri
I would not have minded the preacher or his style if he had actually had any depth or intellect to his speech, but he didn't.
He was supposed (apparently, so I read) to speak for 3 minutes and went on more like 15-20 mins and all he said was love has power over & over. 2 seconds' worth. The speech was rubbish.

The trot around the roads after the service looked very nice, lots of people lined up to give them a wave.

Re: The Royal wedding

Posted: Sun May 20, 2018 10:41 pm
by ralph
sherri wrote:
Sun May 20, 2018 10:34 pm
I would not have minded the preacher or his style if he had actually had any depth or intellect to his speech, but he didn't.
He was supposed (apparently, so I read) to speak for 3 minutes and went on more like 15-20 mins and all he said was love has power over & over. 2 seconds' worth. The speech was rubbish.

The trot around the roads after the service looked very nice, lots of people lined up to give them a wave.
Sherri, you are not supposed to be so honest about the Bishop. You are right of course. :D

Re: The Royal wedding

Posted: Sun May 20, 2018 11:28 pm
by andysfootball
the wedding including the preacher was a house of Windsor master stroke

it brought the royals up to date by 15 to 20 years in one wedding ceremony

son of princess dianna marries an American of coloured ethnicity who is also independent and a femininst

long may the windsors reign over us

Re: The Royal wedding

Posted: Sun May 20, 2018 11:42 pm
by sherri
The preacher's sermon was very poor & lacking in substance, andy.
I don't care whether he was black, white or purple. In fact, I suspect the only reason he was asked to talk at all was because he was black.
To me, that is not up to date at all. In fact it is just another form of racism.

Re: The Royal wedding

Posted: Mon May 21, 2018 12:03 am
by andysfootball
so inviting the bishop and harry marrying someone of mixed ethnicicty and even the gospel singers were all forms or racism

not forgetting they invited Elton just to persecute the poofters as well!

it's taken you a while and been progressive

but you have finally lost your marbles