Taking royal pains

I admit to a certain amount of anglophilia.

It may be because as a child I read books ... lots of books, and not picture books or "baby" books as they were termed by my parents in the same breath such books were pronounced verboten.

I won't cop to having read much Austen but I was all about the Bronte sisters ... Charlotte in particular, author of my beloved Jane Eyre, the finest of her novels.

(Jane, in my opinion, remains the greatest heroine in English literature.)

Maybe there's still time for me to become a black-bonneted gothic governess who, against the backdrop of a windswept English moor, falls in love with the darkly handsome and tragically lonely father of her charges!

We shall see. At the very least, a lot can happen in my fertile imagination.

Can You Sail Under The Command Of A Pirate?

That having been said, I wouldn't be true to me bad pirate self were I not willing to play the part of devil's advocate regarding Friday's high-toned and fancy to-do up at the Abbey that, according to some royal watchers, was designed to put the union back into Union Jack.

It's a dirty thankless job but somebody has to do it.

Most people on both sides of the puddle had royal treacle going in by IV drip anyway, if the million vigilant Brits assembled on the streets in London and others -- including countless Americans -- tuning in from around the globe were any indication.

They cannot be trusted.

Holy Hyperbole, Batman

And then there was the gawking gushfest engaged in by every news announcer on every channel that covered the day The Heir To The Throne made an honest woman of his longtime lover, the undeniably gorgeous Waity Katie.

"It was a fairy tale ceremony sure to go down in history!" burbled Alisyn Camerota of Fox News, seemingly unaware of her own perilous penchant for corny cliche.

Martha MacCallum concurred double-positive style, asserting that the event was "royal in the best way of all possible ways!"

There was apparently not enough purple prose in the entire United Kingdom to adequately describe the regal goings-on.

Paul Burrell, Princess Diana's former butler -- who has managed to keep himself quasi-relevant in the nearly fourteen years since her death by, leaky-faucet fashion, releasing dribs and drabs of inside information such as the thread count of the late princess's favorite sheets or the brand of biscuits she enjoyed with her afternoon cuppa -- had tweaked the reverential throb in his voice to just shy of tears.

"I hate to use that word 'fairy tale' but I think we just saw one," he blithered, then embroidered: "We were let in ..."

?????

What I saw was the monarchy using every resource available to keep their loyal subjects at a veddy conveniently comfortable distance.

As per usual.

Then someone invoked the term "Camelot" and I had to hit the mute button lest I spit up.

Camelittle, More Like

People.

Fairy tale?

I hate to be the one to point it out, but all the fairy tales I remember being told were not only total fiction, but they were full of uber-scary characters like warty witches and fangy wolves ready to cook you or eat you or turn you into a green troll or something equally hideous.

In fairy tales people live in shoes and leave breadcrumb trails through the deep dark woods and cohabit with bands of oddly-named homunculi and end up dangling helplessly between the thumb and forefinger of a homely giant with anger issues.

Tortured. Angst-ridden. Allegorical. Darkly violent.

Of course there's that one about the cute (and virtuous) girl who was finally found by her prince even though her wicked stepmother and ugly stepsisters did everything they could think of to thwart the romance, but I don't see the parallel between that story and the current one.

I know I'll get some exasperated eye-rolls on this one -- go ahead, please, please ask me if I care -- but, come on.

Wills and Kate have been playing palace for years. Shackin' is what it's called, y'all.

In addition to being in possession of a pretty face and showgirl figure -- without both of which I promise you she never would've gotten the royal ball rolling in the first place -- the newly-minted Duchess of Cambridge is a very shrewd young woman.

Much has been made of how she hung in there over their nine-year affair, never saying a word against William even when he briefly threw her over.

In that crisis she strategically shortened her hemlines, stepped up stepping out with various blokes, and won him back.

And I suspect the wiles she used to secure his affections (twice), she has employed most assidously throughout the years in order to keep them.

Let's not smarm around! On Friday her well-laid plan came to fruition like, as they say, gangbusters.

Blush? Honey, hush.

And yes, the sequence of all of the above events matters. It matters a great deal.

Oh, I know, I know. Wearing white on the day just means you're a bride. Puh-leeeeeze quit already with all that puritanical nonsense about chastity before marriage.

No! Double triple quadruple no. I am disinclined to acquiesce to that request.

No cause is lost if there is but one fool left to fight for it.

A Hairy Tale

You must remember that, like millions of others, I got up before dawn thirty years ago to watch Lady Diana Spencer get married to His Royal Hiney, Charles, Prince of Wails.

Who could forget that, before she could even pick out the designer for her wedding gown, it was required of Diana that she be examined by the royal gyno to confirm her virginal state?

I'm not necessarily saying there was anything wrong with that. What's wrong is, fast-forwarding three decades, I don't think anybody -- least of all William -- saw any value in the new someday-queen being a virgin.

After all, the monarchy is resting on Kate's thin shoulders, if the sticky-sweet television news announcers can be believed.

A certain percentage of Britons are allegedly tired of the bajillions of dollars those "royals" cost them every year. Imagine that! Working stiffs who balk at financing the excessive habits of their ruling class!

So Wills and his wife are the dream team charged with appealing to the younger generation of British taxpayer. They who will foot the bill, so to speak, for the next half-century.

And we know that set couldn't possibly relate to a bride not "modern" enough to have relinquished her innocence years before she saw fit to settle down.

But they've forgotten something.

For all the royal pains the monarchy -- or anyone else -- takes to destigmatize immorality, that tawdry little arrow never quite reaches its mark.

Boys Will Be Boors

I've heard it said several times this week that Diana's tender age at the time of her marriage -- she was barely twenty -- and the fact that she did not "know" Charles the way Kate knows Wills (I'll say), were to blame for the disastrous sham their relationship turned out to be.

Oh really?

So, it couldn't be because her groom was -- and still is, in my opinion -- a royal cad who didn't have enough honor to tell the truth when he took solemn vows before God and the entire universe?

I wonder if it was because he never gave up his illicit decade-old alliance with his married mistress, Camilla-what's-her-horse-face, who brazenly propositioned him in 1970 thusly: "My great-grandmother was your great-great-grandfather's mistress, so how about it?"

Such subtlety! Such mystique! I am underwhelmed.

When the whole illusion-heavy arrangement fell apart in a shockingly short span of time, the late Queen Mother was quoted as asking whether Diana didn't know that "all men have affairs."

So, Diana's inexperience was inexcusable but Charles's infidelity was understandable?

The "boys will be boys, heh heh" defense ... is that all you've got, your royal lownesses? If you're an heir to a throne you get a pass on being an adulterer, not to mention a pestilent, traitorous, cow-hearted, yeasty codpiece who should by all rights be rotting in the brig?

Or at least the Tower.

And they have the nerve to call other people common.

Let's face it, folks: Not only is the perfidious prince a less-than-classy part of the equation, but as far as the monarchy is concerned, he's never going to bring sexy back.

In addition to being a quart low on character, as a personality he is, shall we say, well south of compelling.

If you get my drift.

I would like to make the case, since nobody else seems willing to, that Diana -- insecure, neurotic, bulimic, spoiled, narcissistic infant terrible she almost surely was -- would perhaps have survived her marriage and even been happy in it, and would have been there on Friday to see her precious son marry, if her own husband had loved her as he vowed to do and had been able to summon the moral courage to be faithful.

Oh Yes She Will, Will ... And So Will You

Before I leave you I must address the subject of obedience.

"She didn't promise to obey!" the press crowed as ecstasy poured from the throats of bells all over England and the newlyweds traversed the mile or so of red carpet to the soaring doorway of Westminster Abbey to be seen for the first time by their subjects.

Leading one to believe knickers would have been in a royal twist on a global scale if Kate had dared to utter that shameful word at the altar.

Hmmmmm.

Raise your hand if you believe Catherine Middleton would be the new bride of Prince William, second in line to the throne of England, if she hadn't at some point made a conscious decision to obey him.

I thought not.

And I hope nobody is naive enough to think that as their fantastic lives unfold, Kate will not continue to obey her husband. Not to mention her grandmother-in-law, who I understand generally gets her way.

Of course she will, Will.

But that's cause for celebration because as it turns out, all happiness is the fruit of obedience.

How could obedience be a bad thing in the closest relationship anyone will ever have on earth?

But the obedience of a wife to her husband isn't of the "when I say jump you say how high" variety. It is the voluntary submission to what you know to be the desires of the one you love and as a result, wish to please.

Truth be known, each partner in a healthy marriage obeys the other. "If ye love me, keep my commandments." (John 14:15)

A man's love for his wife is a picture of Christ's love for His church. The one He loved so much that He gave Himself for it.

The wife's desire to obey is the linchpin of her unconditional commitment to her husband. It helps if she can trust him.

In any case it's not about law and order. It's about love. Not the platonic kind ... the romantic kind.

I just wanted to point that out.

Rumpled Bedding Legitimized (thank you Mr. Sondheim)

I love weddings!

No matter what the circumstances leading to their joining, "husband" and "wife" remain two of the sweetest words in the English language. "Romance" runs a very close third.

"Wedding" is in a class all by itself. Heartstoppingly magical, as it were.

I cried when Kate walked down the aisle. The music! The architecture! The history! The tiara!

Although what passes for fashion in Britain leaves me mostly puzzled and disoriented, I was wild about her dress.

My heart was in my throat when they kissed on the "porch" as TG called it.

As you probably already know, I am an absolute fanatic for traditional marriage. As such, I am thrilled for Kate and William. I wish them a lifetime of delirious joy and marital devotion, with several adorable children thrown in for extra fun.

Because love, marriage, and a satisfying family life are among the best things that could ever happen to anyone.

Congratulations to the happy couple. May they be ever mindful of the vows they took before their Creator and two billion people.

And may God grant them the grace to make it work, whatever the cost, until death parts them.

Comments

[Skunkfeddahs]

I admit it: I did not watch my cousin's royal wedding.

[irene]

I watched much later in the day, just couldn't wake up. But I too wish them well.

['Aunt Amelia']

I didn't watch either. Just pics and a bit of tape, later. :-) Having been around "since the beginning of time," and even being around when "The Little Princesses" were little princesses... And onward through Elizabeth's marriage and coronation and all the *Saga Which Was Princess Margaret Rose*... And falling completely in love with the girl Diana... Watching and reading everything on her marriage and for some years after... Well, I guess I was all Royal-Watching-nessed-Out. :-) But I wish them well.

And since it is now May 1st... Now, on to more close-to-home items.... HAPPY BIRTHDAY to [my 'Grand'] Gabriel Michael and to [your Dear S-I-Law] Joel!

Gentle hugs...

[Debbie]

Love the tea pots and tea cups, I used to collect tea pots.

As to the wedding, I didn't watch. I only looked at the reporting to see her dress, and it was just beautiful

[Donna M.]

I am always entertained by how you pose your prose! Let the record show that we did NOT set our alarm to get up to see the wedding. We set it at the normal time to get up and were "surprised" to see the wedding in progress instead of the normal Fox & Friends show. We grumbled our disappointment and watched a bit while we were in the comfort of our recliners and impatiently waiting for the caffeine to rouse us from our half-awak twilight. To me, it's all a lot to do about something that has no affect on our lives at all. More folks can recite the details associated with "the wedding" than they can about the sordid details of our economy and national debt. Escapism, pure and simple. *yawn* I wish them well too. They certainly have looks and a comfortable lifestyle going for them, so half the battle has already been won. The rest takes character and virtues.

[Donna M.]

And your pictures are quite lovely, my dear!

[Angel]

luved your pics girl!...I loved the whole fairy tale..yes I did! heh Hope ya had a fab weekend!:)

[Donna (Texas)]

Timed it perfectly...Turned on FOX News and there they were at the alter...Nice!
I did like her dress but not so much, the veil...thought her hair needed to be Up...oh well...
hughugs