Jump to content

Type keyword(s) to search

History Talk: The British Monarchy

zxy556575

By zxy556575
in The Crown

formerlyfreedom
Message added by formerlyfreedom

As the title states, this topic is for HISTORICAL discussion stemming from The Crown. It is NOT a spot for discussion of current events involving the British royal family, and going forward, any posts that violate this directive may be removed. Thank you.

  • Reply
  • Start Topic

Recommended Posts

secnarf

secnarf

44 minutes ago, Scarlett45 said:

I’m sure William calls her Kate, just like he did while they were dating. Throughout school her peers called her Kate. 

Im sure “Catherine” was reserved for when she was in TROUBLE with mom&dad. 

In public, he refers to her as Catherine.

No idea what he refers to her as in private.

  • Love 4
  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Minivanessa
Minivanessa

This discussion sparked my interest in Edward and Wallis. Because it's been a long time since I read any books about them, I borrowed a few from our public library. Last evening I plowed through Princ

WatchrTina
WatchrTina

I don't think anyone on this board can really answer that question but the portrayal of Elizabeth so far is in sync with everything I've ever heard about her.  She was a child when King Edward abdicat

monakane
monakane

I'm enjoying the more nuanced portrayal.  I always thought he was a pathetic figure.  I think he clung to "that woman" because he felt unloved.  In the end, it was the best thing that could have happe

Posted Images

LordOfLotion

LordOfLotion

6 hours ago, Violet Impulse said:

I recommend the book The Crown: The Official Companion, Volume 1: Elizabeth II, Winston Churchill, and the Making of a Young Queen (1947-1955) by Robert Lacey. It's very devoted to making clear what is fact and what is dramatic reworking in the first season.

I have this and it's definitely very good for separating fact and show drama. I think the UK edition is supposed to have more color photos from the show. I think it's a good buy either way though.

PeterPirate

PeterPirate

(edited)

From a Washington Post article:  Fact checking ‘The Crown’: Was Jackie Kennedy high as a kite when she insulted the queen?

 

Quote

Robert Lacey, a royal historian who consults with the show, described the process in a fascinating interview with the BBC’s history magazine. “There’s a whole research team of 10 working full time on the series so that every single episode can be based on solid history,” he said.

“Peter Morgan [the writer of The Crown] takes his inspiration from that, then checks the scripts with people like me, as well as with the people who were actually involved in the real events — the best sources of all.” But the buck doesn’t stop with the facts. “From time to time,” Lacey added, “Peter also pushes his imagination to outright invention — what you could call dramatic license, or as I would prefer to put it, dramatic underlining.”

 

It's the "dramatic underlining" that makes it art. 

Edited by PeterPirate
  • Love 2
PinkRibbons

PinkRibbons

As far as Prime Ministers go, I have got to see Margaret Thatcher. Her relationship with Elizabeth is really rather unknown from what I can tell, which leaves room for a lot of interpretation (all I could find was Thatcher essentially saying that everyone made up stories about them not getting along because how could women get along?! and that it was bullshit, they got along fine.) She and Elizabeth were the same age, both women in highly scrutinized positions. I think their relationship will be fascinating.

Seriously though if they go with the pair of hissing cats interpretation I will be so pissed off. Not only is it sexist, it's deeply unoriginal.

  • Love 6
jjj

jjj

On ‎1‎/‎11‎/‎2018 at 5:44 PM, ajsnaves said:

The BBC is airing a documentary about the Coronation on Sunday.  It includes interviews with Her Majesty.  It airs in the US on The Smithsonian Channel. 8pm /7pm Central.  Something to watch before Victoria's season premier

I really enjoyed this show on "The Coronation," especially when the real personality of Queen Elizabeth II would break though.  She learned for the first time in the interview that the most valuable of the Crown Jewels had been pried out of their setting and put in a biscuit tin in case quick transport would be needed (as widely reported last week).  She was not amused.  "Did he [in charge of the Jewels] tell anyone where they were?  What idf he had died in the War?"  "I believe he told the King, ma'am."  She sniffed at this, still not amused.  Or, when asked what her children had done on the day of the Coronation (Charles "went to ten minutes" of the ceremony) while at the palace, she said, "*I* don't know what they did, I wasn't there!"  Then caught herself and said "There were lots of people with them at the Palace, other children, I think."  And clearly not amused at the footage of hew own children playing *under* the Queen Mother's train as it floated behind her going down a hall in the palace.  "Not really what they were meant to be doing, is it?"  But it was marvellous to see her interacting with the two crowns used in the Coronation, and fun to see them handled in such a relatively informal setting, rather than posed for photographs. 

I assume there was a reason they got an American to narrate the Smithsonian version, and I wondered if there is a BBC version that is slightly different -- maybe longer?  (This was 1:15 in length with commercials.)  I would have preferred the British narrator.  One glaring error:  when the narrator said that the Crown Jewels were moved during the war to *one-hundred-year-old* Windsor Castle.  I was so flabbergasted that I listened for that on the repeat, and that's what he said.  Clearly meant to say one thousand years old, but how could no one catch that? 

  • Love 2
jjj

jjj

40 minutes ago, Violet Impulse said:

The BBC version was 59 minutes with no commercials and the narrator was Keeley Hawes (Lady Agnes in the most recent Upstairs, Downstairs).

Thank you!  So, it is slightly longer (there were at least 20 minutes of commercials in the 75-minute Smithsonian version.)  I'd like to hear the BBC version.

It is not online at the Smithsonian Channel site, but might be there eventually.  BBC shows tend to be viewable only in the UK.  It was a very enjoyable 75 minutes, and of course hearing directly from the actual Queen Elizabeth was fascinating.  Apparently, part of what convinced the Palace to agree to the "conversation" (*NOT* an "interview", which she does not grant!), was that it was a shame to have the dramatized version of the Coronation so widely viewed instead of hearing from the Queen herself about the Coronation.  I though one of the best aspect were the sections of interview with one of the maids of honor, and her taking her dress out of its box.  She was respectful but informative about the Coronation (called Prince Phillip "dishy"!), and the dress was beautiful.  I am amazed that they got to keep their dresses.  She still had it in its original box, all surrounded by tissue paper (which is truly amazing in packing clothes for travel, my free tip for the day).   The details on the dress embroidery were amazing. 

1 hour ago, merylinkid said:

Is this on Youtube or something.   I was watching football last night (yes, my life is confusing at times).

  • Love 2
chitowngirl

chitowngirl

(edited)

I liked how the Queen referred to gems as having personalities. "The pearls look sad being stored away, they are meant to be warmed." "This is the first time the diamonds have seen each other since they were chipped apart."

Also-"Is the Crown comfortable?" (Asking about "the little crown" that we see her wear to open Parliament. An emphatic "NO!" was the answer.

Edited by chitowngirl
  • Love 5
Anothermi

Anothermi

(edited)
On 2018-01-11 at 5:44 PM, ajsnaves said:

The BBC is airing a documentary about the Coronation on Sunday.  It includes interviews with Her Majesty.  It airs in the US on The Smithsonian Channel. 8pm /7pm Central.  Something to watch before Victoria's season premier

To add to the comments above, one of my favourite things was seeing glimmers of her sense of joy (and humour) when discussing the jewels and another was getting a glimpse of how she related to the jewels as a piece of history, but with a very personal connection.  She, at one point, waxed anthropomorphic about the pearls that were hanging from the cross piece of the "Imperial State Crown". (It is the crown that she wears on openings of Parliament as opposed to the Saint Edward Crown which is only used during the Coronation and which she last saw 60+ years ago). She spoke of them as being sad, or lonely (definitely paraphrasing here as I can't remember the exact words). The narrator said 2 of those pearls were said to have been from earrings worn by Mary, Queen of Scots & bought by QE I upon Mary's death. QE II bemoaned their current fate - of being relegated to their current position - when they were meant to be earrings for QE I. She clearly loves pearls and felt that they would have been "happier" when worn next to skin as they would come alive. (something to do with the warmth of the skin). I heard that as both a love for pearls and a connection to their life with historical Queens - which she will soon become.

It also was one of the many times that it was made clear that a lot of decisions are made for The Crown that she has no knowledge about or input into, understandably. She frequently phrases her "knowledge" circumspectly with "I guess", "I think" or "supposedly" added on at the end. 

She hadn't seen her own Coronation until this was filmed. I couldn't help but wonder about the feelings that stirred up that she couldn't express.  She did recall one moment (perhaps a logistical glitch that hadn't been taken into account during the 16 month of planning) where the nap of the carpet caught at the nap of her very long train and pulled her to a complete halt. (They clearly overcame that obstacle quite quickly but it was good that she walked so slowly so she didn't get unbalanced by it.)

I too, love the sections with the Maids of Honour ... and their dresses were outstanding.

 

**Thanks to @chitowngirl for posting (while I was still composing this post) the quotes that I couldn't remember.**

Edited by Anothermi
spelling
  • Love 3
chitowngirl

chitowngirl

The St. Edward's Crown, aka The Coronation Crown, weighs 5 pounds. The Imperial State Crown, which is the one she wears when she's opening Parliament, "only" weighs 3 pounds. Either one, worn all day, would be heavy to wear! And you can't turn your head much in case it falls off. I imagine that would be quite the faux pas!

  • Love 4
secnarf

secnarf

17 hours ago, CousinAmy said:

The Documentary is on YouTube - it's the BBC version at 58 minutes. She's a real hoot - funny and charming, and she certainly doesn't speak in that pinched accent that we heard in The Crown! Just a regular, upper-class British accent. I think she is probably quite fun when the family gets together.

Can you post a link? I can only seem to find clips.

  • Love 2
Quiet1ne

Quiet1ne

On 1/7/2018 at 7:04 AM, merylinkid said:

I believe Catherine still uses Middleton officially.   When she and Prince William sued the French papers for publishing nude photos of them, she sued using the name Catherine Middleton and he used William Wales.    So the Middleton use is accurate.   But Kate is a moniker stuck on her by the tabs and never ever used by her  or her family.

I would not read much into that.   French law requires women to use their maiden name when filing lawsuits.  William had to use his legal surname of Mountbatten-Windsor as the French don’t recognize titles. 

  • Love 1
merylinkid

merylinkid

4 hours ago, Quiet1ne said:

I would not read much into that.   French law requires women to use their maiden name when filing lawsuits.  William had to use his legal surname of Mountbatten-Windsor as the French don’t recognize titles. 

Why on earth would the French require someone to use a maiden name?   What if they used their married name all the time?    It's HER name let her decide.   The title thing I get.    I don't think he could file a lawsuit here as Prince William either.   But Catherine could use whatever name she preferred.

merylinkid

merylinkid

Just watched the BBC version of The Coronation on Youtube.   My favorite part was when the guy asks that the Imperial State Crown be moved closer to the Queen.    Curator in white gloves moves it about half an inch closer.   The Queen just grabs it with her bare hands and plants it in front of her laughing "this is what I do with it when they give it to me."   I am sure Mr. White Gloves was having a heart attack but who is going to tell the Queen she can't do that?

  • Love 4
AnnieBeez

AnnieBeez

1 hour ago, merylinkid said:

Just watched the BBC version of The Coronation on Youtube.   My favorite part was when the guy asks that the Imperial State Crown be moved closer to the Queen.    Curator in white gloves moves it about half an inch closer.   The Queen just grabs it with her bare hands and plants it in front of her laughing "this is what I do with it when they give it to me."   I am sure Mr. White Gloves was having a heart attack but who is going to tell the Queen she can't do that?

But she can. She's one of the couple (maybe 3? Queen, jeweler, and __?)of people who's allowed to touch it.

I was disappointed in the special. I think it was a case of already seeing the Queen's segments before watching. 

  • Love 2
Roseanna

Roseanna

On ‎11‎.‎1‎.‎2018 at 10:16 PM, Violet Impulse said:

I recommend the book The Crown: The Official Companion, Volume 1: Elizabeth II, Winston Churchill, and the Making of a Young Queen (1947-1955) by Robert Lacey. It's very devoted to making clear what is fact and what is dramatic reworking in the first season.

Lacey's interpretation is that the Queen Mother and Lascelles deliberately lead Margaret astray by telling only that she wouldn't need the Queen's approval to marry after she was 25 years of age but keeping secret that she would then need Parliament's approval. Their motive was the belief that during two years' separation Margaret would cease to love Townsend. Instead, if she had been told straigtaway, she could have made her decision and been free to find somebody else at 23 (probably meaning that there was then more eligible men to chose).

In the show, the Queen Mother is shown almost non-acting. She only calls Lascelles.

Instead, in the show Elizabeth speaks directly to to Margaret which of course makes a good drama whereas irl she avoided it.         

  • Love 2
PeterPirate

PeterPirate

(edited)
1 hour ago, Crs97 said:

 Dick Van Dyke’s apology; he blames his Irish dialect coach and Julie Andrews :-)

 

https://www.google.com/amp/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5026427/amp/Dick-Van-Dyke-jokes-Cockney-accent-Mary-Poppins.html

Great article.  The Crown gets mentioned too.  

Quote

Dick Van Dyke said he believes he is 'off the hook' for his Cockney accent in Mary Poppins as he was honoured by Bafta Los Angeles at the Britannia Awards.

The star, 91, was celebrated on Friday alongside The Crown's Claire Foy, who was handed artist of the year at the ceremony honouring British talent and Hollywood stars with a 'strong connection' to the UK.

Foy, who will be replaced by Olivia Colman as the Queen in the third series of the Netflix show, was handed her award by John Lithgow - who played Winston Churchill in the series.

She said she the award was a 'huge honour' and praised Van Dyke's accent and told him to ignore the jokes from the ceremony's presenter.

'Dick Van Dyke, as a British person and as the Queen of England, can I just say your accent's perfect so don't listen to Jack Whitehall,' she said.

 

45C1DBD700000578-5026427-image-a-39_1509

 

There's also this tidbit, of which I was unaware.

Quote

But Van Dyke said having a dialect coach 'figuratively handcuffed to me' has caused him to improve for his role in the upcoming Mary Poppins sequel.

Edited by PeterPirate
  • Love 1
ItCouldBeWorse

ItCouldBeWorse

2 hours ago, Crs97 said:

I do find it fascinating that not one member of the British cast or crew thought to mention to him that his accent wasn’t quite authentic.

I found it fascinating that Kevin Spacey made the presentation!

I feel that Aziz Ansari, who won the comedy award, could have made a topical joke if he didn't have to be so careful himself.

  • Love 1
Pallas

Pallas

From the Paterfamilias thread: @AnnaBaptist said,

Quote

Diana went to school, but didn't do well there. Back then in the UK, there were two sets of exams: Ordinary ("O") levels, and Advanced ("A") levels. O levels were usually taken around age 15 or 16 , and covered standard knowledge of a subject, while the A levels, taken around age 18, were (and are) way more difficult and demonstrated higher knowledge of a subject. Charles took and passed two A-level exams and I think five or six O levels. Diana did not take any A-level exams. That was because she flunked all of her O-level exams - TWICE. 

It's common for students not to take A-level exams, but most pass at least a few O levels. To fail every single O level twice is spectacularly bad; "shocking", as people in the UK would say. 

What's also shocking is that during the brief courtship of Charles and Diana in the second half of 1980, no one whose opinion mattered had the wit or will to question this. Of course they weren't looking for intellectual attainment in a royal bride. But while Diana was no prize student nor grind, she was also no dullard. Her flunking every "O" level twice over -- that kind of "shocking" failure at a public life test, as set up and measured by the establishment -- was a signal, a soaring flare.

It was meant to be, I think. It was meant to shock. She was the Princess as performance artist, and again and again in her life, defying expectations was her stock in trade. Her schoolgirl's refusal to measure up to convention, at even the most modest level -- especially, the most modest level -- may have been a singular, willful teenage aristo's "Fuck you very much" to the pedestrian powers that be. I don't need your O levels, and I don't need you.

They should have taken note. Diana had always felt that she was set apart from her peers. She was; she was an original. She was what Uncle Dickie called "a wild spirit," and not despite her canniness or bold manipulations. What she was not, most likely, was cut out for the job of consort. Diana didn't really need a partner, and she wasn't one for teams. She was an Earhart, a solo aviatrix. 

  • Love 8
dubbel zout

dubbel zout

2 hours ago, Pallas said:

It was meant to shock. She was the Princess as performance artist, and again and again in her life, defying expectations was her stock in trade. Her schoolgirl's refusal to measure up to convention, at even the most modest level -- especially, the most modest level -- may have been a singular, willful teenage aristo's "Fuck you very much" to the pedestrian powers that be. I don't need your O levels, and I don't need you.

Or, Diana just wasn't interested in academics. I don't think it was more calculated than that.

  • Love 16
Pallas

Pallas

6 hours ago, dubbel zout said:

Or, Diana just wasn't interested in academics. I don't think it was more calculated than that.

I think there's disinterest in academics, then there's dropping out of secondary school at 16, prior to flunking out. Diana didn't score above an F in any "Ordinary Level," despite having her pick of a score of subjects, which in 1980 included Home Economics, Art, Music and Physical Education (where Dancing and Swimming were two of the six curriculum elements). And taking the tests twice. Nor did she put up with the curriculum of a Swiss finishing school for more than a term. Charles was dating Diana's sister Sarah by that time, and Diana implored that she be allowed to return home. 

Diana's floridly failed schooling reminds me of how many angry adolescents act out, and of the many gestures Diana went on to make within and about her marriage. Maybe not so much calculated as clever, and at the same time, self-destructive. Diana herself implied that she was driven by her sense of her own destiny, for which conventional training seemed to have no purchase. I believe that too. All along, she may have understood what the real test before her was, and left behind the other girls at finishing school when she knew it was time to take the field.  

  • Love 5
dubbel zout

dubbel zout

43 minutes ago, CousinAmy said:

She was a virgin.

Yep. Ludicrously, that still mattered in 1981.

In the letter Prince Philip sent to Charles telling him to fish or cut bait, as it were, if Charles kept dating her without more serious intentions, her reputation would be ruined. If the Prince of Wales didn't want her, who would? So Charles, feeling pressured about that and not being married in general, proposed.

  • Love 2
formerlyfreedom
Message added by formerlyfreedom

As the title states, this topic is for HISTORICAL discussion stemming from The Crown. It is NOT a spot for discussion of current events involving the British royal family, and going forward, any posts that violate this directive may be removed. Thank you.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...